The alleged “anchor point” of 732 BC for the destruction of Hazor V
Abstract: All previous discussions of the chronology of Iron Age Hazor assume as an “anchor point” the destruction of Hazor V by Tiglath-pileser III in 732 BC. Re-examination of Yadin’s case for this date shows that it was merely an assumption on his part. A review of the dating evidence – partly...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. Departamento de Historia. Centro de Estudios de Historia del Antiguo Oriente
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/11997 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | Abstract: All previous discussions of the chronology of Iron Age Hazor assume as an “anchor
point” the destruction of Hazor V by Tiglath-pileser III in 732 BC. Re-examination of
Yadin’s case for this date shows that it was merely an assumption on his part. A review of
the dating evidence – partly historical but principally the input from the independently
dateable archaeological chronologies of Cyprus, Phoenicia, Mesopotamia and Egypt
– suggests that Hazor V fell much later than 732 BC. Consequently both the Yadin
(“high”) and Finkelstein (“low”) models for the chronology of Iron II Hazor are
working from an incorrect baseline. A model is offered here which, while arguing
a shift of the Iron IIA period from the tenth to ninth century BC, does not unduly
compress Strata X-VII, closes the alleged long settlement gap at the site during the
Neo-Babylonian to Early Persian period and resolves numerous dating anomalies
arising from imported finds. |
|---|