Body: | Kuntillet Ajrud Fortress and Ostraca on Pithos Jar:
(Possibly one of Solomon's network of military border fortresses)
Click to View
Introduction document: Solomon's network of military border fortresses
Click to View
Click to View
Click to View
Click to View
Click to View
Click to View
Click to View
Qudeirat
Qedeis
Quseima
Loz
K. Ajrud
Elat
Haseva
Click to View
Introduction:
Dating Kuntillet Ajrud: It may be as early as Solomonic (950 BC) or
as late as Israeli (Samaria period, 830-775 BC)
OLDEST BIBLE TEXT ON EARTH: Numbers 6:24-26
a. Kuntillet Ajrud is probably most famous for the inscription
found there that indicates a period of mixing paganism with pure
monotheistic Judaism: "Amaryau said to my lord. ... may you be blessed by
Yahweh and by his Asherah. Yahweh bless you and keep you and be with you".
b. Founded as a Negev border fortress by Solomon, it was occupied
by the pagan Jews from the corrupt northern tribes whose capital was
Samaria.
c. Notice that they are Jews worshipping YHWH, but then say
that YHWH has a wife! (Consort or Asherah).
d. Most striking is that this pagan inscription contains the
oldest quotation of the Bible on earth from Numbers 6:24-26 "may the Lord
bless and keep you".
e. Although the text is in Phoenician, it predates the famous
silver scroll by 140 years! (See details about the Silver Scroll from Ketef
Hinnom)
f. The Phoenician inscription is not a direct match for the
Torah words in Numbers 6:24, but it is clearly a paraphrase.
"The Arabic name, meaning "hill of the water-source," of a site
located in N Sinai. (Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor Bible
Dictionary, 1991 AD).
Several anomalies that make Kuntillet Ajrud unique include:
no Negevite war pottery has been found to date.
Unusual benches retrofitted inside the triple gate of the original
fortress as a second use as a waiting room of some kind before gaining
entrance. The secondary purpose of this structure is a mystery and some
have concluded it was a spiritual rest stop type of place, but not an
actual temple of worship per se.
The strategic location of Kuntillet Ajrud is located 15 km west of
the ancient Darb el-Ghazza.
Solomon chose to set it west of the trade route to further ensure it
would be protected.
While it is true that no fortresses have been found directly on the
Darb Ghazza trade route, several have found on either side like Kuntillet
Ajrud and Borot Loz ponds. "And above all, south of Qadesh Barnea along
important Darb Ghazza, the main route to the Gulf of Eilat, not even one
fortress has been found" ("Aharoni Fortress" near Quseima, Zeev Meshel,
1994 AD)
A. Date of the fortress at Kuntillet Ajrud: 950 BC or 830-775 BC
1. Archeologist Cohen, who excavated Qudeirat dated Kuntillet
Ajrud to the 10th century BC.
a. Cohen dates the three successive structures from the time of
Solomon.
b. The date for Kuntillet Ajrud is the 10th century BC by Cohen.
c. It has all the basic ear marks of a fortress with many
similarities with, including the corner tower structures.
d. Cohen believed Kuntillet Ajrud had three continuous periods of
occupation by a centralized government under the direction of several kings
of Judah beginning with Solomon.
e. Secondary use of a fortress structure build by Solomon at the
end of the 8th century BC is still a possibility.
2. One of the problems in the dating, is that those who date the
site later are known reductionists, ie they view the monarchy of David and
Solomon as a myth.
a. It is important to keep this in mind because future
excavations and further examinations of the pottery by biblical
conservative archeologists may one day confirm Cohen's original dating of
the site to the time of Solomon.
b. Reductionists Finkelstein and Ussishkin, both of whom view
"David and Solomon as another Bible myth", reject Cohen's view that
this was built by Solomon and therefore date the structure to the 9th
century or later.
c. Having said this, we must take into careful consideration
the facts and details because their dating of the site to the last days of
Elisha may be correct.
3. In support of a date for Kuntillet Ajrud of 830-775 BC or even
later:
a. It is tantalizing to try to date Kuntillet Ajrud, to
pinpoint in whose reign this religious center was established. The pottery
and the form of the script suggests the end of the 9th to the beginning of
the 8th centuries. (Did Yahweh Have a Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev
Meshel, 1979 AD)
b. The date of the site, determined by typological and
paleographic analysis, and by the need to identify an historical period in
which N Israelite influence over Judah was especially strong, points to the
period after the death of Jehoshaphat of Judah (ca. 850 B.C.E.). The reigns
of Jehoram, Ahaziah, and Athaliah (between 850 and 837 B.C.E.) seem
distinct possibilities. However, the period of Joash king of Israel (ca.
801-786 B.C.E.), who captured Amaziah king of Judah, broke down the wall of
Jerusalem, and seized the treasures of the Jerusalem temple and palace (2
Kgs 14:1-16 = 2 Chr 25:1-24) seems especially well suited. This would be
reinforced if the reconstruction of on the top line of the Bes figurine
inscription indeed is a reference to Joash. It may tentatively be suggested
that Joash intended to gain direct access to the Red Sea, and that this was
the reason for the war between the two kings. The victory of Joash is
reflected in the construction of the buildings at Kuntillet Ajrud, and
accounts for the concurrent references to the "Yahweh of Samaria" and the
"Yahweh of Teman"; i.e., Samaria's god (as well as its king) having
dominion over the entire region through which one reached "Teman" (meaning
"the far south"). (Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor Bible Dictionary,
1991 AD)
c. "The enclosure of Kuntillet Ajrud, excavated by Z. Meshel,
is an unusual site, whose nature and function are far from clear. Although
it is located in southern Sinai, the finds from the enclosure indicate
strong cultural connections with the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. The
route and means of these connections are of great importance. Kuntillet
Ajrud is located c. 50 km. south-west of Kadesh-Barnea; hence the
assumption that Kadesh-Barnea served as a central station along the route
from Israel and Judah to Kuntillet 'Ajrud. According to Meshel,
Kadesh-Barnea was a station along Darb el-Ghaza, the road to Eilat which
passed in the vicinity of Kuntillet 'Ajrud. Cohen's conclusion that the
excavations at Kadesh-Barnea attest to settlement continuity from the 10th
to the 5-4th centuries B.C.E. forms the background to the above view.
According to Cohen, it included three successive governmental fortresses
built by the kings of Judah. If that is so, Kadesh-Barnea must have been a
central station on the long route from Israel and Judah to Kuntillet
'Ajrud. The opposite, however, seems to be true. Scholars agree that the
enclosure of Kuntillet 'Ajrud is a single period site dating from the end
of the ninth or the beginning of the eighth century B.C.E. During this
period the site of Kadesh-Barnea was abandoned (E. Ayalon, who studied the
pottery assemblage of Kuntillet `Ajrud, emphasized the absence there of the
pottery assemblages characterizing Kadesh-Barnea22). Hence Kadesh-Barnea
and its fortress were not a factor in developing connections between Israel
and Judah and Kuntillet 'Ajrud beyond the fact that Kadesh-Barnea formed an
oasis along the desert route. This strengthens the conclusion that
Kuntillet 'Ajrud was a unique place, and is a factor that should be taken
into account when the character and function of the site are being
evaluated." (The Rectangular Fortress at Kadesh Barnea, David Ussishkin,
1995 AD)
4. More recent examinations of both Carbon 14 and pottery reading
have dated the site to the period of 830-775 BC.
B. The structure, finds a lack of Negev ware pottery found:
More on Negev Pottery.
"The Western Structure. The walls of structure A are at points
preserved to a height of 1.5 meters. The building itself extends over an
area of approximately 15 x 25 meters. It is rectangular, with four corner
rooms protruding outward (resembling "towers") and with indirect entry from
a small eastern vestibule. The plan initially seems to resemble a small
fortress, similar in appearance to the Israelite citadel-with-towers found
at Kadesh-barnea, Arad, and `Uza. Structure A differs, however, in a number
of important respects: it lacks the casemate walls typical of these
fortresses, and its remains are unusual for a fortress and suggest a
different type of function altogether." (Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel,
Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1991 AD)
"From the court area, one entered the main structure proper by first
passing through a small gate room (locus 5), turning left into a narrow
room divided into two wings, whose walls were surrounded by plastered stone
benches. This "bench room" (locus 6) extends N-S across the entire width of
the building and apparently was the most important part of the site. The
plastered stone benches take up most of the area, with only a narrow
passage remaining between them, suggesting that the main function of the
room is to be associated with the benches, not the passage-way. An
additional function is suggested by the manner in which the wings of the
bench room are connected to the two corner rooms at their respective ends
(loci 7 and 13). These have no usual doorway but instead are connected to
the bench room by very narrow "windows" whose sills are formed by the
lateral benches themselves. By examining these benches it became clear that
they had been constructed in a second phase, thus partially blocking the
small openings that were present in the first phase of the building.
Apparently these openings were merely structural features serving no other
purposes, and the first phase was merely the stage of the building's
construction." (Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor Bible Dictionary,
1991 AD)
What is clear from the drawing below, is that sections 1,2,3 are
part of a gate system for the fortress. In time the security of the
fortress was no longer an issue and the inner gate section became a waiting
area so the benches were installed, as Meshel indicates, as a secondary use
of the structure.
Click to View
Ruins of the site date to the 8th century B.C. (the time of the
Israelite monarchy), and various remains suggest that it served as some
sort of a religious center. Of particular significance are inscriptional
references to "Yah-weh of Samaria and his Asherah" and to "Yahweh of
Teman," which provide important evidence of the complex nature of Israelite
religion during the OT period." (Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor
Bible Dictionary, 1991 AD)
Although it seems unlikely, it is furthermore possible that the two
structures were not contemporaneous and that the E structure slightly
preceded the W one. (Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor Bible
Dictionary, 1991 AD)
Because the site was occupied for a relatively brief time span, the
large mass of pottery discovered there presents interesting analysis. If
the site indeed can be dated to ca. 800 B.C.E., then the pottery corpus
from Kuntillet Ajrud could serve as an important comparative standard for
identifying contemporaneous levels at other sites. (Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev
Meshel, Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1991 AD)
Surprisingly, the site yielded no "Negeb-type pottery" supposedly
associated with the no-madic inhabitants of the area. (Kuntillet Ajrud,
Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1991 AD)
Textile Remains. Kuntillet Ajrtid is unique in that it yields
textile remains from the period of the Israelite monarchy. About one
hundred cloth fragments, almost all of linen (only seven of wool) were
discovered among the ruins. A. Sheffer (1978) details the superior quality
of the threads and the unique characteristics of the fabrics. It has been
noted that, in violation of biblical law (Lev 19:9; Deut 22:9-11), some of
these fabrics were made by combining wool and linen (on one piece red
woolen threads were interwoven with blue linen ones.) (Kuntillet Ajrud,
Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1991 AD)
But since Palmer's day archaeologists have learned a great deal
about pottery dating. After the 1967 Six-Day War we came to the site and by
examining the sherds which lay strewn about we were able to detect Palmer's
error easily and to date the site to Iron Age II or the Israelite period.
This new date identified the site as the southernmost outpost of the Judean
kingdom, and it became a prime candidate for excavation. (Did Yahweh Have a
Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979 AD)
The top of the hill comprising the site is an oblong plateau
extending east-west, with the ruins located at its western end. Wells in
the vicinity in use even today gave the site its ancient importance. The
modern Arabic name Kuntillet Ajrud means "Solitary Hill of the Wells," a
name which accurately reflects its character. The site contains the remains
of only two structures: a main building at the western extremity of the
plateau and a smaller building east of it (see plan). The two buildings are
in very different states of preservation. Almost nothing is left of the
small building on the east, and there is little to say of it. The main
building, whose walls have survived to a height of five feet, measures
approximately 75 × 45 feet, and takes up the whole width of the narrow
plateau. (Did Yahweh Have a Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979
AD)
Tower-like corner rooms (11 and 12) were found in the western
corners of the building. (Did Yahweh Have a Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev
Meshel, 1979 AD)
The relatively well-preserved condition of these tower-like rooms
revealed some interesting construction details: (Did Yahweh Have a Consort,
Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979 AD)
The vessels from Masada date about 800 years later than the storage
jars at Kuntillet Ajrud and the Mishna is still later, but perhaps the
tradition recorded in the Mishna and preserved at Masada is based on a
custom already prevalent in the days of the Monarchy. (Did Yahweh Have a
Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979 AD)
Additional support for the hypothesis of a group of priests living
at Kuntillet Ajrud is the large quantity of finely woven linen fabric found
there. (Did Yahweh Have a Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979 AD)
C. Strategic Location:
"Kuntillet Atrild is located approximately 50 km south of
Kadesh-barnea and about 15 km W of Darb el-Ghazza, a road which since
antiquity has run N-S, connecting Quseima and Kadesh-barnea to Elat and S
Sinai. The isolated hill rises prominently from the broad valley of Wadi
Quraiya (or "wadi of the small building"), which forms a natural W-E route.
See Fig. KUN.01. The top of the hill is a long and narrow plateau, and the
actual ruins are found at its W end. At the foot of the hill there is a
concentration of shallow wells providing one of the few reliable sources of
water in this arid and isolated area. These wells made this site an
important crossroads in the past-a fact also recorded on old maps of the
modern period. The combination of water and crossroads undoubtedly
contributed to the selection of the site for a small settlement."
(Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1991 AD)
Kuntillet Ajrud is located about forty miles south of Kadesh-Barnea
and sits on a hill which rises beside the Wadi Quraiyaa. Old maps reveal
that the site is a crossroads of desert tracks: one leads from Gaza through
Kadesh-Barnea to Eilat; another traverses the Sinai along the Wadi Quraiya;
and a third branches off to the south via Temed, a well-known way station
in later times, to the center of southern Sinai. (Did Yahweh Have a
Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979 AD)
D. Many Ostraca: The inscriptions found at Kuntillet Ajrud: Religious
center:
1. Many ostraca were found at Kuntillet Ajrud, including
pithos jars that were reconstructed.
2. About the ostraca found at Kuntillet Ajrud:
a. In 1975-76 several Hebrew and Phoenician
inscriptions were discovered in a fortress-like structure at Kuntillet
Ajrud (Kuntillet Quraiyah) in the northern Sinai. (A Note on an Inscription
from Kuntillet Ajrud, Debra A. Chase, 1982 AD)
b. The unusual finds (especially the inscriptions and
pictures) testify to the- uniqueness of the site. The subject matter of the
inscriptions, the references to various deities, and the presence of
dedicated vessels all suggest that Kuntillet Ajrad was a religious center;
however, the lack of things usually associated with ritual sacrifice (e.g.,
altars) and the architectural layout of the site indicate that the remains
are not those of a temple. It appears that the site may have served as a
"wayside shrine" that, due to its location, was associated with journeys of
the Israelite kings to Elat and to Ezion-geber, and perhaps also with the
travels of pilgrims to S Sinai. These were able to journey S along the Darb
el-Ghazza from Kadesh-barnea, stopping at the place to make dedications to
Israel's god in the bench room of the main building. The strong N
(Israelite, not Judean) influence in the remains seems to connect Kuntillet
Ajrud with the N kingdom of Israel or with one of the Judean kings closely
aligned with the N kingdom of Israel. This N influence is evident in the
reference to "Yahweh of Samaria," in the Phoenician-style writing, in the
cosmopolitan style and motifs of the decorative and pictorial artwork, in
the pottery types, and in the onomastic conventions (names ending in -yau,
and not -yahu). The site, occupied for only a few years, was likely
inhabited by a small group of priests dispatched from the N kingdom of
Israel with an officer at their head. They were sustained by the various
sacrifices and tithes that were sent as provisions primarily from Judah; in
return, they rendered their cultic services to travelers. (Kuntillet Ajrud,
Ze'ev Meshel, Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1991 AD)
c. When the inscriptions were read, we discovered that
they provided clear evidence that Kuntillet Ajrud was not merely a resting
place for desert travelers but was principally a religious center. (Did
Yahweh Have a Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979 AD)
d. It would be tempting to call the building at
Kuntillet Ajrud a temple, but it bears none of the architectural features
we customarily associate with a temple. The plan of the building does not
contain a holy of holies, nor does it conform to the plan of other temples
known from excavations in the Near East. Moreover, we found the remains of
no cult objects, such as animal altars or incense burners or cult altars.
(Did Yahweh Have a Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979 AD)
e. On the other hand, although the building was
probably not a temple, we think that it was a religious center of some kind
where people deposited their offerings in the bench-room. (Did Yahweh Have
a Consort, Kuntillet Ajrud, Ze'ev Meshel, 1979 AD)
f. The site represents, in our opinion, a religious
center which had some connection with the journeys of the Judaean kings to
Eilat, Ezion-Geber and perhaps even to southern Sinai. The establishment of
this center may have come about through identification of the site with one
of the Israelite traditions concerning Sinai.
3. Translations of the many ostraca found at Kuntillet Ajrud:
a. OLDEST TEXT OF THE BIBLE ON EARTH: Phoenician
inscription on Pithos Jar: "Amariah said to my lord. ... may you be
blessed by YHWH [of Samaria] and by his Asherah. YHWH bless you and keep
you and be with you ... "
i. Notice how the above inscription is very close to the Priestly
benediction of Numbers 6:24-26: "The LORD bless you, and keep you; The LORD
make His face shine on you, And be gracious to you; The LORD lift up His
countenance on you, And give you peace.'" (Numbers 6:24-26)
ii. Most striking is that this pagan inscription contains the
oldest quotation of the Bible on earth from Numbers 6:24-26 "may the Lord
bless and keep you". Although the text is in Phoenician, it predates the
famous silver scroll by 130 years!
iiI. The fact the words in the inscription are different than the
Hebrew words found in Numbers 6:24, do not change the fact that it was a
paraphrase of this most famous Priestly benediction that was widely used.
iV. See details about the Silver Scroll from Ketef Hinnom
b. Pithos Jar inscription: "Utterance of ʾAshyaw the
king: "Say to Yehallel and to Yawʿasah and to [...]: 'I bless you by
Yahweh of Samaria and his asherah!"
c. Door lentil inscription: "and in the (just) ways
of El" ... "blessed be Ba'al in the day of ... " ... "the name of
El in the day of ... "
i. Notice the connection with the Law of Moses and the location
where this inscription was found in situ in the door lentil.
ii. "You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on
your gates." (Deuteronomy 6:9)
d. 10th century BC (time of Solomon) Bowl Rim
inscription: "(Belonging) to 'Obadyau son of 'Adnah, may he be
blessed by Yahwe(h) ..."
Conclusion:
1. The weight of archeological evidence for Kuntillet Ajrud
points to a single occupation site by the northern kingdom of Israel,
dating to 830-775 BC.
a. The emphasis of YHWH of Samaria (the capital city of the 10
northern tribes) is important because the site is located deep inside the
southern Judean kingdom.
b. The mix of paganism and YHWH worship is characteristic of both
Israel and Judah during the period.
c. The reforms to stamp out idolatry by Asa king of Judah and
Jehu king of Israel, were as quickly forgotten as the latter reforms of
Josiah.
d. We can point to the very dominant reign of king Jehu of Israel
during the weak during the tumultuous reign of Queen Athaliah of Judah fit
a date of 830-775 BC perfectly.
2. Regardless of whether or not it was founded as a border
fortress by Solomon around 950 BC, all agree that the many ostraca do date
from the period of 830-775 BC.
3. The oldest text of the Bible every excavated is found on one
of the pithos jars. While it is in Phoenician script, not Paleo-Hebrew and
while it uses different words than in the Torah, it is clearly a paraphrase
of this most famous "priestly benediction" (Num 6:24f) also seen in the
Silver Scroll that dates 130 years later.
By Steve Rudd: Contact the author for comments, input or corrections.
Click to View
Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA
|