Search

This paper presents the results of the 2009 excavations at Site 30 in the Timna Valley, Israel. The results, coupled with a suite of 11 new radiocarbon dates, fix the chronology of the site between...

This article deals with the chronology of the locally made Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery in relation to the date of the imported Mycenaean IIIC pottery and the time of the Egyptian withdrawal from southern Canaan. It is suggested that the Trojan Grey Ware unearthed at Lachish Stratum VI and at Tel Miqne Stratum VIIIA is the key for the correct dating of the Philistine Monochrome pottery. The paper also criticizes I. Finkelstein's methodology, which rests partly on conclusions based on negative evidence (the not-found ergo does-not-exist principle). It suggests a revision of the dates of strata at some south and north Palestinian sites.

A collection of seventeen articles by colleagues and former students of Professor J. Maxwell Miller who taught at the Candler School of Theology, Emory University. The papers deal with the history, chronology, geography, archaeology and epigraphy of ancient Israel and its setting in the Levant, and range from broad methodological discussions of historiography to focused analyses of individual texts or historical issues. A review of Miller's career and a select bibliography of his publications are also included.

While the chronological problems in the study of the ancient Near East are as varied and intractable as ever, the work done on resolving (and discovering) these problems provides an excellent laboratory for studying similar problems elsewhere. At the same time some of the work done on chronological (and by inference genealogical) matters in other areas can elucidate patterns and parameters. Five of these are discussed in this paper: synchronisms; father/son succession; generational regnal averages; simultaneity masked as sequentiality; and telescoping. While analyzing work on these issues cannot resolve decisively any particular issue in ancient Near East chronology, it does suggest alternative approaches and hypotheses.

The history of art in ancient South Arabia is a subject which has been almost consistently excluded from general studies of the art of the Ancient Orient. In view of the lack of a clear understanding of the nature and chronology of the art of this comparatively remote area, this situation cannot be regarded as unexpected or inexplicable, even though the art of the Qatabanians, Sabaeans and others was incontestably a part of the art of the other parts of the ancient Near East. While the number of objects of limited types found in collections is fairly large, almost no objects from controlled excavations or of significant content have been in the possession of scholars until very recent years. It was, in fact, almost exactly one decade ago that Dr. Berta Segall first attacked this problem in connection with her study of new materials discovered by expeditions to Yemen, Beihan, and Dhofar during the preceding three years under the sponsorship of the American Foundation for the Study of Man.' Her studies constitute an excellent start for disentangling the complicated relationships which existed between the art of ancient South Arabia and that of other parts of the Near East, especially Syria.2 The most significant positive statement which can now be made is that the direction of the influence was entirely from north to south, for there has not yet been any clear indication that any styles of art were originated in the southern part of the Arabian Peninsula and exported to the centers of civilization in the Fertile Crescent and the eastern Mediterranean region. The subject of this paper provides one more striking example of the course of this influence.