The 1998 Preliminary Survey of Khirbet Zeitah el-Kharab (Tel Zayit) in the Shephelah of Judah (original) (raw)
Related papers
Itach, G. 2017. Tel Aphek. Excavations and Surveys in Israel 129
, a salvage excavation was conducted next to Tel Afeq (Permit No. A-7513; map ref. 193837/667671). The excavation, undertaken on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority and financed by the Yakhin Afek Company, Ltd., was directed by G. Itach, with the assistance of Y. Amrani (administration), M. Kunin (surveying and drafting), N. Zak (plans), A. Dagot (GPS), P. Gendelman and H. Torgë (scientific consultation) and A. ʽAzab (IAA Central District Archaeologist). The excavation area was located on the eastern slopes of Tel Afeq (Fig. 1). Extensive archaeological excavations were conducted on the tell in the past, uncovering many finds, dating to the Chalcolithic period, the Early, Middle and Late Bronze Ages, the Iron Age, and the Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, Early Islamic and Ottoman periods
Ariel University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series, Number 1. Ariel University Press, 2017
Mapping and GPS recording of the agricultural system of Tel Hebron and its surrounding slopes was carried out in the context of the 2014 excavations of the tell, as far as the dense occupation of the area allowed. The main body of the agricultural system was partly mapped as part of the previous excavations, primarily for the orientation of the excavation areas (Chadwick 1992). The present mapping was designed to examine the agricultural elements characterizing the hill on which the tell is located, while relating to the subject of historic agricultural landscapes, as defined both in the past and on the basis of more up-to-date studies (Ron 1966; Haiman 2011, 2012; Gadot et al. 2015).
"The Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem is an important historical event. For scholars this date usually marks the end of the period of the monarchy or even the end of the Iron Age, the beginning of the exilic period, etc. For many, this date was regarded as a ‘watershed’ (e.g., Bright 1972, 343). But what was the reality in Judah following the 586 BCE events? The Bible informs us that there were people remaining in the land, but seems to give the general impression that they were relatively few and unimportant. This view seems to have been prevalent in modern scholarship until recently, but is now challenged by scholars who claim that the majority of the population remained in Judah after the Babylonian destructions (mainly in rural sites). The debate that has evolved during the past few years over the issue of the settlement and demographic reality in the sixth century BCE has brought the archaeological evidence to the front. But, as is widely known, as yet no material culture of the ‘Babylonian period’ has been identified, and the debate seems to go on. The present paper aims to tackle the problem from a different direction. After briefly presenting the problem, I will suggest a new method to solve it: since these who claim that Judah was quite densely populated at the time believe that the inhabitants of the region continue to live in their hamlets and villages, an examination of continuity in excavated Iron Age rural settlements might hold the key to solving the issue. The data from various regions will be analyzed and contrasted in light of the new method, and the similarities and differences will then be used to reconstruct the processes the different regions went through during the Iron Age – Persian Period Transition. "