Inscriptions from Kh. Qeiyafa and Tel Lachish to be published soon

Yossi Garfinkel has given an update on inscriptions recently discovered at Khirbet Qeiyafa (2012) and Tel Lachish (2014).

The Qeiyafa inscription found in 2012 dates to the early 10th century BC in Iron IIa. An article on this has been written and accepted for publication. I will name the journal when that detail comes to me.

The inscription from Lachish was located in Level VI (ca. 12th century BC). An article has now been written detailing this inscription and is about to be submitted for publication.

Advertisements

About LukeChandler

Luke holds an M.A. in Ancient and Classical History and has been an adjunct professor at Florida College in Temple Terrace, Florida. Luke and his wife Melanie have five children. He serves as a minister in English and Spanish with the North Terrace Church of Christ and participates annually in archaeological excavations in Israel. Luke also leads tours to Europe and the Bible Lands.
This entry was posted in 2012 Khirbet Qeiyafa excavation, 2014 Tel Lachish excavation, General Archaeology, New Discoveries and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Inscriptions from Kh. Qeiyafa and Tel Lachish to be published soon

  1. Jamal Munshi says:

    “The Qeiyafa inscription found in 2012 dates to the early 10th century BC in Iron IIa.”
    interesting. thanks. looking forward to the article. isn’t 10th century bce a little early for Iron IIA in the Levant?

    • lukechandler says:

      The dating of Iron IIa is the subject of much debate. Some have put it around the turn of the 9th century but others place it around the beginning of the 10th. Recent finds at Khirbet Qeiyafa (excavated 2007 – 2013) suggest a centralized state in the southern Levant around the beginning of C10. Iron II marks the transition toward urbanization. With this in mind, the weight of evidence appears to support a ca. C10 timeframe.

      Thanks for your comment! ~ Luke

    • pithom says:

      Some Tel Aviv archaeologists think Qeiyafa is really late Iron I due to the rarity of red slip-hand burnish. Some Cypriot pots suggest a date in the Iron II. Qeiyafa is pretty much a single-period site, as the main site wasn’t inhabited during the early Iron I or late Iron II.

  2. Jamal Munshi says:

    thank you for the detailed explanation.

  3. Jamal Munshi says:

    i have not kept up with the literature but are garfinkel and ganor’s radiocarbon chrono for kh. qeiyafa still the standard? that was about 5 years ago or so.

  4. lukechandler says:

    The Vol. II report on Qeiyafa came out some 4 months ago and covers finds through 2012. (Vol. I only covered 2007-2008.) Qeiyafa is a site around the Iron I/II transition, so it’s not surprising to see traces of this in the ceramic assemblage. Multiple new C-14 samples have matched the original olive pits, including samples from a burned jar in the the destruction layer. Black juglets were also found, and they are associated with Iron IIa. In addition, over 600 stamped storage jars and two large public buildings point to administration and political centralization in the region. The site is small and clearly not Philistine, so the polity was strong enough to hold off the nearby Philistines for the several years it would have taken to construct the site and its fortifications.

  5. Jamal Munshi says:

    thank you. i downloaded volume II

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s