|
(page 2)
A walk through
the town
Above I have
described the buildings recovered from the earliest phase of the Iron Age town
of Jerusalem. But how did this town look? Maybe we should take a walk through
ancient Jerusalem, through the town built by the kings of Judah somewhere in the
10th or 9th century BC.
Envision a group
of travelers, coming from the east, hungry and thirsty after a long journey
through the Judean desert. Their first glimpse of Jerusalem would impress them
greatly. Before their eyes rises the 27 m high stepped stone structure, its
steps invisible under a layer of earth and chalk. This formidable fortification,
guarding the entrance to the spring Gihon, would give them a first idea of the
strength of the town. On top of the hill, casemate walls measuring five meters
wide surround a small town. There probably was a gate nearby through which the
travelers entered the town. Once inside they feasted their eyes on the fine
buildings, constructed of ashlars and proto-aeolic capitals. Going south they
would find markets and inns to eat and rest. If the next day they walked to the
north side of the town, they would pass more markets and caravanserais. Then
they would come to a halt before the "royal" quarter, seat of the king or
governor of the region. A large gate led to a complex of halls and palaces. Of
course they were not allowed to enter. If the famous temple had already been
built, they would certainly visit it, paying respect to the God that resided
there. Finally they walked the street sidling the town walls. This would not
take them long, as the total length of the walls would not exceed 2 km. A very
nice town, they would conclude, and very much like Megiddo and Hazor, which they
had visited before.
The City of
David?
A very nice town,
our imaginary visitors concluded. But who had built it, and when and why?
The Bible
describes how the small fortress of Zion, where the Jebusites resided, was
captured by King David. He transformed it into the capital of his state, a
position it kept during the United Monarchy, roughly the 10th century BC. His
successor King Solomon built several palaces and a grandiose temple. Jerusalem
is described as a beautiful city, capital of a large and wealthy empire. When
the Queen of Sheba saw the affluence of Solomon, it left her breathless.14
None of the
buildings described in the Bible have been traced by archaeological research. No
temple, no palaces, and no "millo house" (even though archeologists sometimes
assume they have found traces of the buildings). That doesn't mean the town was
not there; maybe everything has been eroded away. But neither does it mean that
it was there. Maybe we don't find the grandiose town of the 10th
century BC simply because it was never there.
Or maybe it was a
much more modest town than the Bible describes. What has been found from the 10th
(or 9th) century BC, as described above, are remains of public
buildings and fortifications only. Jerusalem was only a small town then, maybe
12 hectares large, and it harbored certainly no more than 2000 inhabitants.
Maybe the Queen of Sheba would still have enjoyed her visit to Jerusalem, but I
doubt that she would have been greatly impressed.
Or – another
possibility – the town of Jerusalem was founded in the beginning of the 9th
century BC, and Solomon and David had nothing to do with it. If the advocates of
the "low chronology" are right, then most Iron Age towns in ancient Israel have
been built in the 9th rather than in the 10th century. The
9th century would be the period when state formation started, kings
established themselves, the states of Israel and Judah were formed, and
administrative towns such as Hazor, Beersheba, and Jerusalem were built. (In
that case, the Queen of Sheba would have been bitterly disappointed when she
visited Jerusalem in the 10th century).
A new town
Whatever its
dating, a very important aspect of this town is the fact that it was a new
settlement. The above-described town was not a rebuilding or an extension of an
earlier town. Before the 10th century BC no town existed in Jerusalem (except
for the Middle Bronze Age, some 800 years earlier). During the Early Iron Age
(1200-1000 BC), the hill, which is now called the City of David, was mostly
barren. Only a small fortress was located there, near the spring Gihon, the only
available water source then. This isolated fortress defended the spring and
controlled the area.
When the new town
was built on the same hill, no parts of this fortress were used at all. The
stepped stone structure covered all earlier remains. Probably the fortress had
been out of use for some time. Anyhow, a new town was built on a spot where only
ruins of earlier occupation were visible.
This new town was
not a small market town. It did not develop slowly from a small village into a
larger settlement and eventually into a walled town. Already in its earliest
phase Jerusalem shows defensive walls, fortifications, large gates and public
buildings made of ashlars and decorated with proto-aeolic capitals. The town
shows all the characteristics of an administrative center, built by ruler who
wanted to control a large area.
In the ancient
Near East, the building of new administrative centers was a political action.
When a new ruler, or a new dynasty, established itself, a new capital was built.
Also, when new land was incorporated into an existing kingdom, new
administrative centers were built. So we can view the building of this new town
in Jerusalem as the material expression of a new political situation. Some ruler
built an administrative center there. Not a large residential city, but a
modest, heavily fortified town with a palace complex at the northern side. From
here he (always a he) ruled the region, either as king in his own kingdom, or as
governor representing a mightier king.
Capital of the
United Monarchy?
We may thus
conclude that somewhere in the 10th or the beginning of the 9th century BC a
small state was founded of which Jerusalem was the administrative center.
Whether Jerusalem was the capital of a large state is impossible to say.
It certainly was the capital of Judah later in the Iron II period, so maybe it
was the most important town of the state of Judah from the beginning onwards.
But it is doubtful that it was by far the largest, richest, most important town
of the region as the Bible suggests. Megiddo, Hazor, Lachish and Beth Shemesh
all display the same characteristics: mainly public buildings, ashlar masonry,
proto-aeolic capitals, fortifications and not much room for residential areas.
They were as rich or richer than Jerusalem. There is no archaeological or
literary- historical evidence for the United Monarchy.
But neither was
Jerusalem an unimportant, backward settlement in that period, as some
archaeologists maintain. The buildings described above are neither small nor
unimpressive. They make a statement, a clear statement, that says: this is the
central town of a new political entity that came into existence in the 10th or
9th century BC.
Conclusions
|
|
|
|
|
|
-
This town was
very similar to such towns as Megiddo, Hazor, or Lachish in lay-out and
architecture. These towns all date to the 10th or 9th century BC.
Jerusalem was neither more spectacular than these settlements, nor was it
more backwards.
|
|
|
-
It is
impossible to ascertain how large this new entity was. Maybe it consisted
only of a small region around Jerusalem, or maybe Jerusalem was part of a
larger regional state. This state may have included such towns as Lachish,
Beersheba, and Beth Shemesh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1
|
Footnotes
((back)141
Ki 10:4-7.
|
Page 1
|
 |
Look
for academic tools and books for biblical studies at
Dove
Books.
|
Return to Home Page
Return to Articles and Commentary
|