<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"טקסט בלונים תו";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.a
{mso-style-name:"טקסט בלונים תו";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"טקסט בלונים";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
p.BalloonText, li.BalloonText, div.BalloonText
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text";
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Tzvi Shacham [mailto:shtzvika@netvision.net.il]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, January 20, 2014 8:12 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Etan Ayalon<br>
<b>Subject:</b> FW: [agade] eNOTES: More on dinners at Tel Dan<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
From: <b>Jack Sasson</b> <<a href="mailto:jack.m.sasson@vanderbilt.edu">jack.m.sasson@vanderbilt.edu</a>><br>
Date: 20 January 2014 00:51<br>
Subject: [agade] eNOTES: More on dinners at Tel Dan<br>
To: "The Agade mailing list." <<a href="mailto:agade@listserv.unc.edu">agade@listserv.unc.edu</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
From <<a href="http://asorblog.org/?p=6519" target="_blank">http://asorblog.org/?p=6519</a>>:<br>
[Go there for many figs]<br>
===========================<br>
<br>
New Archaeological Data for the Study of Ancient Israelite Religion<br>
and Society from Tel Dan<br>
By: Jonathan S. Greer<br>
<br>
Not all exciting archaeological discoveries, even those related to<br>
Israelite religion, are made in field. Some come after the end of the<br>
season, in the lab, or even long after the dig has concluded, after<br>
scouring records and analyzing material from storerooms. I have had<br>
the privilege of working with previously excavated material from Tel<br>
Dan (Fig. 1) and recently published an analysis in a new book, Dinner<br>
at Dan: Biblical and Archaeological Evidence for Sacred Feasts at Iron<br>
Age II Tel Dan and Their Significance. I am delighted to share some of<br>
my analysis and conclusions from this publication. These results point<br>
to a remarkable convergence of Biblical and archaeological data.<br>
<br>
The book explores biblical and archaeological evidence for sacred<br>
feasting at Tel Dan and evaluates the historicity, nature, and<br>
significance of these events from the late 10th through mid-8th<br>
centuries BCE. Each data set, biblical and archaeological, is<br>
addressed independently before drawing out the significance of these<br>
(re-)constructed events for the study of ancient Israelite religion<br>
and society. This précis covers some of the significant archaeological<br>
findings from the project.<br>
<br>
The archaeological section is based on my analysis of seven feasting<br>
deposits from the Iron Age II “sacred precinct” (Area T, with its<br>
famous series of altar platforms) at Tel Dan excavated by Avraham<br>
Biran primarily in the 1980s and 1990s (Fig. 2 & 3). These were<br>
identified by carefully working through all extant documentation and,<br>
in consultation with the current project director David Ilan and one<br>
of the longtime Area T supervisors, Ross Vos, noting relatively secure<br>
loci with high concentrations of ceramic and animal bone remains.<br>
Eight such loci were identified throughout the precinct forming seven<br>
distinct concentrations; two were clearly pits and all appear to<br>
represent intentional deposits rather than random scatter. Six of<br>
these are discussed here.<br>
<br>
These six concentrations are located in two separate areas within Area<br>
T, the first clustered in the courtyard around the central altar<br>
structure that is present in all Iron Age II phases of activity and<br>
the second in a specific space of the western chamber complex (Fig.<br>
4). My analysis of the ceramic and animal bone remains from these six<br>
deposits highlighted both similarities and differences, and in many<br>
cases demonstrated significant contrasts between the deposits of the<br>
western chambers and those of the courtyard. The areas were used very<br>
differently, but by whom?<br>
<br>
Similarities among the deposits included the various species<br>
represented by the animal bones – almost entirely sheep, goats, and<br>
cattle – as well as numerous cut marks (Fig. 5) and breakage patterns<br>
(Fig. 6) on the bones associated with eating activities. The ceramic<br>
remains from the deposits, too, include evidence of eating based on<br>
high proportions of cooking pots, as well as other dining vessels<br>
(Fig. 7).<br>
<br>
Together, the faunal and ceramic evidence suggest that each stage of<br>
the foodway process – from animal slaughter and processing, to the<br>
preparation, distribution, consumption, and deposition – took place in<br>
this area. That these activities took place within an area with<br>
religious significance, as demonstrated by architectural features and<br>
cultic paraphernalia, justifies identifying these activities as cultic<br>
feasts on archaeological grounds alone.<br>
<br>
But detailed analyses revealed more subtle variations. Differences<br>
between the two groups of deposits, those of the western chambers and<br>
those of the courtyard, included four statistically significant<br>
patterns of non-random distribution observed in 1) proportions of<br>
different species, 2) right-sided to left-sided portions, 3), painted<br>
to unpainted diagnostic ceramic sherds, and 4) phalanges (“toe bones”)<br>
to meaty long bone fragments (Fig. 8). In the western chambers there<br>
was a higher proportion of sheep/goat remains than cattle, a higher<br>
percentage of right-sided limb portions (Fig. 9), and a greater<br>
proportion of decorative ceramic wares, compared to the deposits of<br>
the courtyard. Most striking was the higher percentage of phalanges in<br>
the western chambers that suggest the processing of animal skins,<br>
since the hooves and the related bones (i.e., phalanges; see Figure 9)<br>
were often left intact in processed skins.<br>
<br>
Each of these four distinctly non-random distributions of faunal and<br>
ceramic remains is curiously congruent with Avraham Biran’s original<br>
association of the western chambers with Israelite priests, when<br>
considered in light of priestly texts from the Hebrew Bible.<br>
<br>
The increased percentages of sheep/goats may be explained by the datum<br>
that in the offerings where the priests received a whole animal for<br>
consumption (certain “sin” offerings; Leviticus 4:22-35; 5:6-10; 6:<br>
18-20; and “guilt” offerings; Leviticus 7:1-7; 14:12-21) the victims<br>
are always sheep or goats. Conversely, there are no such offerings of<br>
cattle in which priests receive the entire animal for consumption. One<br>
may conclude from the biblical texts that in a sacrificial setting the<br>
percentage of sheep and goats consumed by priests would be higher than<br>
that consumed by offerers, just as there is in the western chambers<br>
compared to the courtyard.<br>
<br>
More striking still is the higher percentage of right-sided portions<br>
in the western chambers. In the biblical texts concerning the<br>
“fellowship” offering, the priests are awarded the forelimb (in the<br>
Septuagint) or hind-limb (in the Masoretic Text) of the animal. While<br>
there appears to be evidence of different traditions and development<br>
over time, when a side of the animal is specified (whether forelimb or<br>
hind-limb) it is always the right-sided portion that is given to the<br>
priest (cf. Exodus 29:27-28; Leviticus 7:32-33). The increased<br>
percentage of right-sided limb portions is again consistent with<br>
interpreting the western chambers as the domain of the priests.<br>
<br>
Painted wares may also be viewed as indicating an elevated social<br>
status or having specialized functions. The greater percentage of<br>
painted wares in the western chambers may also strengthen association<br>
with the priests.<br>
<br>
Finally, the association of phalanges with priests makes sense in<br>
light of biblical texts that assign the skin of animals destroyed by<br>
fire in the regular “burnt” offerings (Leviticus 7:8) to the priests.<br>
The percentage of bones associated with skin processing<br>
activities—specifically phalanges attached to the skin—would be higher<br>
in an area used by priests in a sacrificial setting than it would be<br>
in an area used by offerers. This is the situation we have in the<br>
western chambers, as compared to the courtyard.<br>
<br>
As striking as these correspondences are, many questions remain. First<br>
of all, can these archaeological indicators really be identified as<br>
“Israelite,” or rather are they indicative of broader Levantine cultic<br>
practices? Even if they could be identified as Israelite, can ritual<br>
sections of the priestly texts that appear in the later edited forms<br>
of the Hebrew Bible be regarded as applicable to interpreting Iron Age<br>
practices? Above all, what is the significance of these archaeological<br>
and textual correspondences for our understanding of Israelite<br>
religion and society?<br>
<br>
The evidence reviewed here reveals a remarkable “convergence,” to use<br>
William Dever’s term, between the biblical texts and the<br>
archaeological remains from Tel Dan. Overall, as I show in my book,<br>
these data are mutually informative and together tell a story of<br>
Israelite monarchs acting within a traditional Yahwistic religious<br>
framework. These kings used the ancient and powerful practice of the<br>
sacred feast to first unify tribal factions and then reinforce<br>
hierarchies, political and religious developments that mirrored far<br>
larger changes sweeping the region during the first millennium BCE.<br>
<br>
In agreement with Aren Maeir’s recent comments in The Ancient Near<br>
East Today, I suggest that today’s “biblical archaeology” demands a<br>
rigorous, careful examination not only of archaeological remains but<br>
also of the Bible in all its complexity. While I know well that not<br>
all will be convinced by my conclusions, I hope that this study will<br>
be viewed as striving to model for this approach and that will<br>
encourage further efforts to re-integrate archaeology and biblical<br>
studies in a responsible manner.<br>
<br>
Jonathan Greer is Assistant Professor of Old Testament at Grand Rapids<br>
Theological Seminary.<br>
<br>
Acknowledgements:<br>
This work was only possible thanks to the access provided to the<br>
unpublished Tel Dan remains by David Ilan and the cooperation of Ross<br>
Vos. I am further indebted to Brian Hesse (z”l), my animal bone<br>
mentor, and to my Doktorvaters B. Halpern and Gary Knoppers.<br>
<br>
--- You are currently subscribed to agade as: <a href="mailto:shamue@gmail.com">shamue@gmail.com</a>. To unsubscribe send a blank email to
<a href="mailto:leave-34133363-48877603.01cc728351255d814938115247ab3280@listserv.unc.edu">
leave-34133363-48877603.01cc728351255d814938115247ab3280@listserv.unc.edu</a><br>
--- To (re-)subscribe please send a blank email to <a href="mailto:listserv@unc.edu">
listserv@unc.edu</a>, and write (as subject and in first<br>
line): subscribe agade<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>