BiblePlaces Blog - Page 551 of 577

FindaDig.com

I am asked frequently enough where one should volunteer to excavate in Israel. My best answer is that they should look at the January issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, which gives a round-up of the coming summer excavations.

BAR just made it better by putting the “article” online. This allows non-subscribers to easily see the information, and it allows the information to be quickly updated should circumstances warrant (as was already necessary with the Mt. Zion dig).

FindaDig.com is an easy-to-remember website which includes a list of excavations categorized by region, and listing details such as excavation dates, costs, housing, contact info, and application details. It also lists relevant articles in BAR, which any participant should read before the dig.

Overall, it’s a terrific contribution for any interested in biblical archaeology!

So, where should you dig? There are many factors, but if one of my students asked me, I would suggest these first: Gezer, Gath, Zayit, Rehov, and Hazor.

I do find a strange irony that the Gath dig is listed as “Tell es-Safi/Gath,” whereas the Bethsaida dig is listed simply as “Bethsaida.” I don’t think anyone doubts the identification of Tell es-Safi as Gath, but almost no one besides the excavation team believes that et-Tell is really Bethsaida.

Excavations in City of David

Response to Rafi Greenberg – now in English

I’ve just received and posted an approved English translation of Amnon Ben-Tor’s letter to the editor.

See the “Response to Rafi Greenberg” below.

Tagged Analysis

Rabbinic Sources Online

From Arutz-7

The world’s largest electronic collection of Torah literature is now available online – in Hebrew. The Bar Ilan University Responsa Project, launched in 1991 in its CD format, was recently uploaded to the Internet on a platform provided by C.D.I. Systems. (See http://www.responsa.co.il) The virtual library encompasses all major Rabbinic sources representing more than 3,000 years of Hebrew and Aramaic literature. The website includes the Hebrew Bible and its principal commentaries, both the Babylonian and the Jerusalem Talmud with commentaries, Midrashim, the Kabbala’s main book – the Zohar, Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, Rabbi Yosef Karo’s compilation of Jewish Law – the Shulchan Arukh with commentaries, and the collection of over 80,000 Responsa questions and answers on matters of Jewish law. The internet version of the Responsa Project includes a variety of tools and capabilities in its various features of search, navigation of texts, and hypertext links between books in different databases. Parts of the site are free, while full access requires a paid subscription.

Interactive Satellite Map

There’s a new interactive satellite map available for download. B. G. Galbraith created this using a high-resolution satellite photo of Israel and then identifying major biblical sites. Each site is hyper-linked to a page with photos, descriptions, and relevant Scriptures about it. The program is free and may be downloaded here. This is another great tool to learn about the land and the Bible.

Tagged Resources

Response to Rafi Greenberg

I commented previously on a horribly one-sided Haaretz article (or here) on Israeli archaeology in the West Bank. Professor Amnon Ben-Tor, an esteemed archaeologist at Hebrew University, has written a letter in response. This was published in the Haaretz Hebrew edition, but there are no plans to publish it in the English edition. The letter is posted here, but letters to the editor are not archived and will be removed soon. Thanks to Joseph Lauer for passing this on.

Ha’aretz [Hebrew]

December 29, 2006

יום שישי ח’ בטבת תשס”ז

כתם ארכיאולוגי
בתגובה על “ת”פ אלוף מרכז” מאת מירון רפופורט (“הארץ”, 15.12

מירון רפופורט, המצטט את הארכיאולוג רפי גרינברג, כותב מפיו: “מאז 1967 נסקרו כ-5,000 אתרים ארכיאולוגיים בגדה… ארכיאולוגים ישראלים הם שניהלו את הסקרים, והם העדיפו, כמובן, לסקור אתרים החשובים להיסטוריה היהודית ולא להיסטוריה הפלשתינית… הארכיאולוגים הישראלים חיפשו בעיקר את בית ראשון או בית שני… אך טבעי הוא שארכיאולוגים יתעניינו בהיסטוריה של העם שלהם, ככה זה בכל העולם”.
האמירות האלה של גרינברג אינן מבוססות. כל כוונתו של סקר היא לקבוע את המפה היישובית באזור הנסקר בכל תקופה ותקופה, ולכן אין כל אפשרות להעדיף תקופה אחת על רעותה. כל המעיין בנתוני הסקרים העיקריים שנערכו בגדה לאחר 1967 על ידי זרטל, פינקלשטיין ועופר, יראה מיד שמספרם של האתרים שאינם “יהודיים” שנסקרו) כנעניים, ביזנטיים, מוסלמיים) גדול בהרבה מאלה ה”יהודיים”.
אשר לאתרים שנחפרו – גם כאן התמונה דומה: מאז שנת 2000 הוצאו רישיונות חפירה בגדה המערבית ל-147 אתרים, מהם ניתן להגדיר 14 כ”יהודיים” (20%), מספר קטן של אתרים כנעניים, ואילו הרוב המכריע הוא אתרים מהתקופה הביזנטית והמוסלמית.
דברים אלו נכונים גם לחקר האתרים שבתחומי הקו הירוק: האתרים שבהם נערכות חפירות בקנה מידה גדול בשנים האחרונות ובהם עכו, קיסריה, בית שאן, סוסיתא, בית גוברין, מרישה – אף לא אחד מאלו ניתן להגדיר כאתר “יהודי”. בשנת 2006 הוציאה רשות העתיקות 281 רישיונות חפירה: בכ-100 מאלו נחקרו מתקנים חקלאיים שאת “זהותם האתנית” של המשתמשים בהם לא ניתן לקבוע. בין יתר האתרים, כ-60 הם אתרים בני התקופה המוסלמית, 45-50 הם אתרים נוצריים, 35-40 הם אתרים בני התקופות הכנענית והפרהיסטורית ו-25 (פחות מ-10%) הם אתרים שבהם נחשפו שרידים מימי בית ראשון ושני. נתונים אלה כוללים גם את החפירות בירושלים.
את כל הנתונים הללו קיבלתי מקצין המטה לארכיאולוגיה ומרשות העתיקות בתוך פחות מ-12 שעות מאז פנייתי.
טענות מסוג אלה שטוען גרינברג נשמעות כמעט בכל כנס בינלאומי וכן בפרסומים “מדעיים”, ולצערנו התרגלנו כבר לסילופים אלו שכל כוונתם היא לתקוף את ישראל. גרינברג הכתים לא רק את עצמו, אלא את הארכיאולוגיה הישראלית בכללה. מה חבל, שבדומה לאלו שאינם ישראלים, נתן גם גרינברג להשקפתו הפוליטית לסלף את העובדות.

אמנון בן תור
ירושלים

*******************************

The following is an English translation of Dr. Amnon Ben-Tor’s Letter to the Editor published in Ha’aretz [Hebrew] on December 29, 2006. It was translated and is circulated with Dr. Ben-Tor’s permission, and also corrects a numerical typographical error made by the paper.

The letter was written in response to an article published in the Ha’aretz Hebrew Language Edition on December 15, 2006. The article was also published in the December 17, 2006 Ha’aretz English Language Edition under the caption “Buried treasure that’s kept in the dark”. The article is based on claims made by Dr. Rafi Greenberg regarding Israeli archaeology and archaeologists. As is evident from his letter, Dr. Ben-Tor takes strong exception to those claims.

*********************

An Archaeological Stain

In response to “Under Command of the GOC Central Command” by Meron Rapoport (Ha’aretz [December 15, 2006]).

Meron Rapoport, who quotes the archaeologist Rafi Greenberg, writes that he says that “Since 1967, some 5,000 archaeological sites in the West Bank have been surveyed…. the surveys were done by Israeli archaeologists and they naturally preferred sites that are important to Jewish rather than Palestinian history…. Israeli archaeologists have excavated mainly the First Temple and Second Temple periods…. It is natural for Israeli archaeologists to take an interest in the history of their people, … it’s the same everywhere.”

These statements of Greenberg are baseless. The whole purpose of a survey is to determine the map of settlement in the surveyed area in every period, and therefore there is no possibility of preferring one period over another. Anyone who studies the data from the main surveys that were conducted in the West Bank after 1967 by Zertal, Finkelstein and Ofer, will immediately see that the number of the surveyed sites that are not “Jewish” (Canaanite, Byzantine and Muslim) greatly exceed those that are “Jewish”.

The picture is similar with regard to the sites that were excavated. Since the year 2000, excavation permits were issued in the West Bank for 147 sites. Of them, 20 can be classified as “Jewish” (14%), and a small number as Canaanite sites, whereas the vast majority are sites from the Byzantine and Muslim periods.

These facts are also applicable to the examination of sites within the Green Line. Of the sites at which excavations were conducted on a large scale, including Acco, Caesarea, Bet Shean, Sussita, Bet Guvrin, Maresha, not even one could be characterized as a “Jewish” site. In 2006 the Israel Antiquities Authority issued 281 excavation permits: in about 100 of these agricultural installations were studied, about which the “ethnic identity” of their users could not be determined. Of the remaining sites, about 60 are Muslim-period sites, 45-50 are Christian sites, 35-40 are from Canaanite and pre-historic periods, and 25 (less than 10%) are sites at which First and Second Temple period remains were discovered. These data also include the excavations in Jerusalem.

I obtained all of these data from the staff officer for archaeology and from the Antiquities Authority in less than 12 hours from when I approached them.

Allegations of the type made by Greenberg are heard at almost every international conference and also in “scientific” publications, and to our regret we have already become accustomed to these distortions which are only intended to bash Israel. Greenberg did not only stain himself but Israel archaeology in general. What a pity that, like those who are not Israeli, Greenberg too has permitted his political opinions to distort the facts.

Amnon Ben-Tor
Jerusalem

Tagged Analysis

Contextual Reflections: Newsletter

BiblePlaces readers may be interested in signing up for the Contextual Reflections newsletter published regularly by Preserving Bible Times (producer of the Above Israel DVD set). These Reflections are rooted in a strong knowledge of biblical geography and history and are thought-provoking as well. I cited the December issue in the discussion of “No Room in the Inn” and have frequently found the insights to be beneficial and challenging.

The signup sheet is rather intimidating, but you can check what you want. The signup sheet may lead you to believe that you’re in for frequent mailings and sales pitches, but I have found neither to be true. As a subscriber, I get good, helpful content about biblical matters. I recommend it.