Talk:Tel Arad

Tel Arad Theories

The Arad Theory

Tel Arad is presently named so from two pieces of pottery found in the 7th century citadel in the time of the Kings of Judah that have implied to some that it must have been the biblically mentioned Canaanite city Arad (Numbers 21). However there are other scholars that debate that those pieces are mistranlated. First, because at the time of the Exodus in approximately 1446 BCE Tel Arad was already deserted for 1,210 years at a time Arad would have been inhabited. Second, over 400 years before the citadel at Tel Arad, according to the Tanakh, Arad was a major urban center in Canaanite times, and was destroyed and renamed Hormah by the Israelites during their sojourn in the southern part of the desert.

As mentioned in the Book of Numbers 21:2-3:

Then Israel made this vow to the LORD: "If you will deliver these people into our hands, we will totally destroy their cities." The LORD listened to Israel's plea and gave the Canaanites over to them. They completely destroyed them and their towns; so the place was named Hormah.

That Arad was said to be not far from Mount Hor and the Red Sea. Therefore, it could not be named Arad over 600 years later. Third, because even the other Arad that was also mentioned in the Book of Judges and the Book of Joshua (that was in a different location) does not apply to this site because 'Tel Arad' still was re-established over 200 years after both those biblically mentions of Arad.

There are a number of serious problems with the above analysis. My suspicion is that the original poster is raising this offense against the identification of Tel Arad (more accurately, Tell 'Urad) with Biblical Arad because he or she knows, as do scholars, that excavations at Tel Arad have demonstrably undermined the historicity of the Biblical story of the Israelite conquests of various Canaanite cities. As discussed in the article, Tel Arad shows no evidence of habitation between roughly 2,600 BCE and 1,000 BCE, whereas the Biblical story of the conquest necessitates that Biblical Arad was an established Canaanite city in either ~1,400 BCE (i.e., the traditional "high date" of the supposed conquests) or ~1,200 BCE (i.e., the "low date" of the conquests). The simple and most widely accepted scholarly solution to this apparent disconnect, of course, is that the stories of the Exodus and Conquest are just that -- stories -- that were constructed, at the earliest, in the 8th-7th centuries BCE, at a time when the Biblical writers knew of the existence of a contemporary Arad and simply extrapolated its existence backward in time for the sake of constructing a literary, not historical, narrative (and given their lack of knowledge about Arad's uninhabited state during the Late Bronze or Early Iron I Age, they can hardly be blamed for the mistake). That the Exodus and Conquest narratives in the Bible are full of 8th-7th century anachronisms is pretty demonstrable evidence of this (and I would point the original poster to any of the several scholarly works by William Dever (and others) dealing specifically with the historicity of the Exodus/Conquest narratives for further information). By simply assuming, a priori, that the Biblical stories must necessarily be true, the original poster is subsequently assuming that all scientific data to the contrary must necessarily be wrong. However, this is fallacious thinking, and should not be taken into account when considering a revision to the article. The excavations at Tel Arad have provided the only data we have on the issue, and as such, it's the excavations that should guide our thinking, not Biblical literalism. Furthermore, arguing for a different location of Biblical Arad on the basis of its supposed proximity to "Mount Hor" and the "Red Sea" (according to the Biblical story) is doubly problematic, since: 1) Mount Hor has never been confidently identified, and; 2) the "Red Sea", as referred to in English translations of the Torah, is not actually referencing the body of water referred to in modern times as the "Red Sea", but rather to the Yam Suph, or "Sea of Reeds", the location and existence of which has also never been confirmed by scientists.--Kglogauer (talk) 08:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

The Citadel of David

The House of Yahweh upon the hill of Tel Arad has sparked a number of questions with many trying to understand why the site has a sanctuary, holy of holies that were built in time of the two greatest kings of Judah. Why does it have records of well known priestly families, and countless amounts of offerings and pottery from the time of its establishment in King David's time to the Roman and Islamic Empires. One conclusion many are being to come to is that this is the tabernacle of David, the hill of Zion, and area of the Jerusalem of the Jebusites. And although it might seem unbelievable the evidence behind the theory is beginning to have allot of weight.

The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus wrote an almost perfect geographic description that fits Tel Arad and also gave a matching explanation of why the citadel dealt with so much food and supplies in pottery. As stated in the 'Wars of the Jews' 5:1: ".. The city was built upon two hills which are opposite to one another, and have a valley to divide them asunder; at which valley the corresponding rows of houses on both hills end. Of these hills, that which contains the upper city is much higher, and in length more direct. Accordingly, it was called the "Citadel," by king David; he was the father of that Solomon who built this temple at the first; but it is by us called the "Upper Market-place." But the other hill, which was called "Acra," and sustains the lower city, is of the shape of a moon when she is horned; over-against this was a third hill, but naturally lower than Acra, and parted formerly from the other by a broad valley."

Archaeology has already substantiated that Tel Arad existed and was inhabited at the time that Josephus would have wrote this. However, this description of the citadel of David could only be on mount Zion and only in Jerusalem. Yet, one fact that is rarely spoken of directly in the Tanakh is that there are two Jerusalems.

The Two Jerusalems

According to the Tanakh, there were two locations called Jerusalem, one inhabited by the Amorites (Joshua 10:5), and the other inhabited by the Jebusites (Joshua 15:63; Judges 1:21). One in the mountains (Joshua 10:6) and the other surrounded by mountains (Psalm 125:2; Nehemiah 8:15). One the Children of Israel conquered when they entered the land of Israel (Judges 1:8) and the other was took by King David some 300 years later (2 Samuel 5:7; 1 Chronicles 11:5). One in the mount of Ephraim (Genesis 33:18; Genesis 14:18; Joshua 18:1; Judges 4:5;) and the other just north of Rimmon which is in the southern part of Judah (and the inheritance of Simeon- Joshua 19:7-8) (Zechariah 14:10; Joshua 15:21-32).

With such clear cut differences between the two Jerusalems the possibility that the House of Yahweh at 'Tel Arad' is the Citadel of David, the Arad Becken is the Jerusalem surrounded by mountains, and not too far north from Mizpe Rimmon does not stray too far from logic. Saverx (talk)

Temple/Sanctuary: new interpretation

Studies in the archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan By Amihay Mazar, Ginny Mathias 2001 p. 175 [1] The present reassessment of the history or' the temple in Arad negates most of the correlations with the biblical account suggested in previous treatments of the site. Arad is not the location of a Canaanite city whose king prevented the early attempt of the Israelite tribes to invade Canaan from the south (Y. Aharoni 1976); no Kenite sanctuary existed in pre-monarchical Arad; the temple of Arad is not similar to the Solomonic temple in Jerusalem; the temple at Arad was not rebuilt six times, with every rebuilding of the fortress; and finally the temple was not demolished in two consecutive phases, illustrating the two reforms by Hezekiah and Josiah. The only correlation that appears to remain valid is the intended dismantling of the temple by King Hezekiah. Dougweller (talk) 18:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

13 years later, and nobody took notice. Has the Mazar & Mathias interpretation been proven wrong, or are we just slow in reacting? Arminden (talk) 20:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

​Hi Doug, nobody paid attention, and it's a shame. Maybe you would like to add that very important material? Be well, to quote our friend David. Arminden (talk) 06:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Tel Arad bedouin village

There is bedouin village in the Negev called (Tel Arad) تل عراد

The unrecognized village Tel Arad is located north-west of the town Arad, with a population of 1700 residents. The original residents of the area were the Jahalin tribe who were transferred by the state in 1948 and reside nowadays in the area of Mishor Edomim. After the establishment of the state of Israel, the state transferred to the area internally displaced people from other areas of the Negev, mostly from the Lakiya area.The archeological site Tel Arad is named after the village.

source: http://dukium.org/maps/?village=%D7%AA%D7%9C-%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%93 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.183.28.112 (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Chalcolithic

Hi all! would this link be a good source for this section of the article? Brand new editor, by the way. If so, I wasn't sure how to reference which section of the article I took the information from. Source: Milesdababy (talk) 18:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

References

Creation of category "EB cities in Southern Levant"

Please see discussion here. Arminden (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Temple offerings 1700 years after Hezekiah? By WHOM?! Troubled editor left several "droppings" in the article.

The following paragraph is both unsourced & sounds highly implausible, unless something very different is meant:

"The citadel and sanctuary were constructed at the time associated in the biblical narrative with King David and Solomon. Artifacts found within the sanctuary of the citadel mostly reflect offerings of oil, wine, wheat, etc. brought there by numerous people throughout the reign of the kings of Judah until the kingdom's fall to the Babylonians. However, during the Persian, Maccabean, Roman, and Early Muslim periods, locals continued to bring these items to the sacred precinct of the upper hill. Markers of these ancient Israelite rituals remain to this day, with broken pottery littering the entire site."

Up until the Crusader period, c. 1100 CE, really? LONG after Israelites gave way to Jews, and a full millennium after the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the move from Temple religion to Rabbinic Judaism? And the offerings were left - where? The temple had been dismantled by King Hezekiah, who ruled around 700 BCE. "Locals" (shorthand for Jews? Or others too?) just left them on the ground? What is the source? Arminden (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

This, and more substandard material, was contributed here 15 years ago by Saverx, who has long given up editing. I don't dare to assess his state of mind & intentions when he went about it. All his material should be very seriously checked. I have nothing against the person, but pls check out his Wiki activity: a big chunk of it was dedicated to writing applications for gaining the role of an admin, w/o previously contributing much, at least not at English Wiki - and what he did contribute, is mostly... outlandish.

I will remove the material placed above, but ALL his edits should be removed. He has messed in major ways with the article. Arminden (talk) 20:52, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Another contribution by Saverx is both unsourced and apparently a work of fantasy. See in this regard also the posting on this page by Dougweller about the 2001 book by A. Mazar & Ginny Mathias. I therefore removed:

"Under the Judaean kings, the citadel was periodically refortified, remodelled and rebuilt, until being ultimately destroyed between 597 and 577 BCE, whilst Jerusalem was under siege by Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II."

How come this whole chunk managed to remain untouched for so long, when other I/P topics are raided on a daily base? Country of miracles, as always. Arminden (talk) 21:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

A 2nd standing stone dedicated to Asherah?

"In the holy of holies of this temple two incense altars and two possible stele or standing stones were found, probably having been dedicated to Yahweh."

Two stones, both laying on the floor. Either both fallen "standing stones" of which one for Asherah (blasphemy!), or one as a table in front of the other one (the more "Bible-conform" view). 2 standing stones, both dedicated to YHWH (current version), is IMHO plain BS. Both interpretations should be mentioned. Major importance re. development of Israelite religion, monotheism. @Davidbena, Dougweller, and Nishidani: Hello fellow travellers. Who has the interest & time to look for reliable sources? Or maybe you know who else to ping? Cheers, Arminden (talk) 07:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tag. "Asherah", in Judaism, stands for a tree that was once used for idolatry. It may also be the specific name of an idol. It is described in the Talmudic tractate Avodah Zarah. As for Tel Arad and its archaeological finds, I have not studied the matter. If I come up with anything, I'll let you know. Currently, I'm busy with another project. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 14:42, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

The source given doesn't dismiss the divine couple theory, but does say that the chemical residues provide an alternative interpretation that the two altars were for burning different substances. The identity of a single divinity is not mentioned. So I'm removing the reference to Yahweh. Zero^talk 11:27, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

A. All I found, with the little time I have, was Leslie J. Hoppe, [Exploring the Biblical Landscape: Tel Arad,] pp.107-111

In 1962, Aharoni made a once-in-a-lifetime discovery during his excavation of the Judahite fortress. He uncovered the remains of the only Judahite temple ever recovered by archaeologists. The temple takes up twenty percent of the fortress’s area in its northwest corner. It is a square structure of 171 feet on each side, laid out on an east-west axis like the temple of Jerusalem. It consisted of three rooms: an entrance hall, the main hall, and the holy of holies. The entrance to the holy of holies was flanked by two twenty-inch-high incense altars. Inside the holy of holies there was found a forty-inch-high red-painted stela (massebah, i.e., a ritual stone pillar).Another smaller stela was found nearby. The function of the stelas is not known for certain. One suggestion is that they represent Yhwh and Asherah, the purported female consort of Yhwh. This, of course, would make the worship at the temple unorthodox. An altar of unhewn stones was found in the entrance hall. It is approximately four feet high, eight feet long, and seven feet wide and was topped by a flagstone of flint. Aharoni maintained that the sanctuary dated to the time of Solomon (late 10th c. B.C.E.), though Herzog reexamined the archaeological data and suggested a ninth-century date.' 'Tel Arad has a unique placed in the history of biblical archaeology because of the Judahite temple found there. Arad’s temple remains the only such structure from the Kingdom of Judah to have been found.' pp.110-111,112

I wouldn't be too put off by Hoppe's religious background, since he has the due qualifications and familiarity with the Hebrew sources.

I've generally avoided reading any wiki articles on places like this, since the lack of quality makes for distress, and lays claims on one's ever shortening time. Since you drew my attention to this, it is one certainly that, thoroughly worked, would merit DYK status. I hope you, or Bolter or both, dig your heels in on it. Nishidani (talk) 15:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Age of the Temple

I recently came across this video which claims that new information became available as to the age of this temple. Is their anyone out there who is an expert in this update the new findings and correct the errors the original archeologists made. This video claims this temple was built by King Ahaz and dismantled by King Hezekiah. Is this information true? If yes can it be added. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDReygTAnqw 68.194.16.238 (talk) 00:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Term "Israelite"

The use of the term "Isralite" in this text is false and based on a modern compilation of different cultures into biblical narrative. In Iron I parts of the Southern Levant was still under the control of the Egyptian Empire, with the 21st Dynasty seated in Zaon (gr. Tanis) in the Nile Delta. The Fall of the 21st Dynasty saw the rise of the Kingdom of Judea in the fortified Hill Country. In Iron II, Arad can be understood as part of the Kingdom of Judah as a refuge. This prompted Shoshenq I to try to claim power in the Southern Levant with his military campaign where former subjects of the Egyptian Empire now dug in. The use of "Isralite" for the "Judahites" would be an insult to the ancient Judahites as they were enemies. The "Isralites" are later incorporated into the Kingdom of Judah following its fall to the Assyrians, as the King of Judah wants to expands his territorial claims and legitimate ruler over northern people of which many had fled into the Judean Hills. Thus, the term "Isralite" is a misnormer which can only be applied to both Judeans and Samaritans (northern Israel) in the very late part of religious reforms in Judah to unite the people. The name Israel oroginally referred to the Jezreel Valley upon which the northern kingdom had its basket of grain.

Raven rs (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)