Part One:
From Canaanites to Abram
by
Damien F. Mackey
Just how old is the site of Jericho?
Its beginnings are said to have been with the Natufian culture,
"an Epipaleolithic culture that existed from 12,500 to 9,500 BC".
Does early Jericho have any demonstrable relevance to the Genesis record?
Introduction
According to Lorenzo Nigro, in his recent important article on the Jericho site:
TELL ES-SULTAN 2015 A Pilot Project for Archaeology in Palestine
in his Table 1, Jericho’s beginnings were with a late phase of the Natufian culture, which he dates at:
"10500-8500 [BC]".
This culture is thought to have been followed immediately by Pre Pottery Neolithic - A (PPNA), which Nigro dates at:
"8500/8300–7500 [BC]".
Now, Dr. John Osgood, who has argued in his
A Better Model for the Stone Age
that some of these conventional sequences may actually have been contemporaneous:
Wherever a culture is dated as Paleolithic it is generally assumed to pre-date that which is labelled Mesolithic, which is in turn assumed to pre-date that which is Neolithic, which is then usually presumed to pre-date that which is Chalcolithic. Thus the Mesolithic culture in the lowest level of Jericho would be assumed to pre-date the Chalcolithic culture of Eridu in Mesopotamia, despite the fact that the ancients regarded Eridu as the oldest city on earth.
This developmental type concept has rarely been seriously challenged. It is, however, here completely challenged.
In order to understand the significance of the biblical model in relation to the archaeological evidence of the ancient world, let us look at two phenomena as guiding principles:
- The pond ripple effect, and
- The mushroom effect. …. [,]
has provided this standard sequence for Palestine:
New regional models for the stone age
Palestine
The following cultures are recognised for the stone age of Palestine,
- The Lower Paleolithic - Acheulean.
- The Middle Paleolithic - Mousterian.
- The Upper Paleolithic - Aurignacian.
- The Epi Paleolithic, sometimes called Mesolithic.
- Kebaran culture
- Natufian culture
- The Neolithic.
- Neolithic (1) or Pre Pottery Neolithic - A (PPNA)
- Neolithic (2) or Pre Pottery Neolithic - B (PPNB)
- Neolithic (3) or Pottery Neolithic - A (PNA)
- Neolithic (4) or Pottery Neolithic - B (PNB)
- The Chacolithic.
- Wadi Rabah culture
- Esdraelon culture
- Ghassulian culture
We can see from this that, as with Nigro’s sequences, PPNA sits closely to the Natufian culture. Dr. Osgood, however, has suggested that they may have been the same:
- Neolithic.
Neolithic (1) or Pre Pottery Neolithic A of Palestine appears to have been very much the same as the Mesolithic Natufian culture. This is apparent at Jericho from Kenyon's excavations.
[End of quotes]
A Perspective on Early Jericho
I recently wrote to a colleague on my angling for a better perspective for the Flood and Jericho (here slightly modified):
….
Regarding the Alpha and Omega series (a proposed revision from Adam to Jesus Christ), I have stalled on it for some time now because of uncertainties pertaining to matters geological and stratigraphical concerning the Flood.
This is where we badly need those specialists to chime in.
Added to this, ideas have been coming so thick and fast in other areas, further down the line, that it seems that something becomes old shortly after it was new.
Creationists like Drs. John Osgood and Donovan Courville have presumed that the Genesis Flood erased everything before it.
I have baulked at this because, as far as I see it, the rivers of pre-Flood Genesis (for instance) are still discernible. (See articles of mine such as):
Editor Moses Added Vital Geographical Clues for the Genesis Flood and Sodom
I had also believed that we had, in the archaeology of Mesopotamia, an (i) antediluvian, (ii) Flood, and (iii) post-diluvian sequence.
But Anne Habermehl’s thesis (see "Tightening the Geography" above), that biblical "Shinar" was not Sumer (southern Iraq), has really shaken up this erstwhile pleasant scenario.
What, then, about Jericho, the supposed oldest city in the world?
(Though the ancient Mesopotamians regarded their Eridu as that).
Surely Jericho must have straddled the Flood! And so I thought and tentatively accepted into Alpha and Omega that Jericho might have been the city built by pre-Flood Cain as Roy Schulz had proposed (http://www.churchofgoddiaspora.com/pre-flood_world.htm):
Cain's Famous Walled City
At this point Josephus' words about Cain need to be emphasized: Cain "built a city, and fortified it with walls ..." The Bible speaks of this same city: Cain "builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch." (Gen. 4:17) Though in a sense this is getting ahead of the story, it is appropriate at this point to tell of the significance of the famous walled city, Enoch. In recent years, archaeologists made a startling discovery. In their excavations at the site of ancient Jericho (which is adjacent to present day Jericho in Palestine) they were amazed to uncover a big town in an early "pre-pottery Neolithic" state thousands of years -- as they measure time -- before any city of this type should have existed. This vast town existed at a time when only villages of tents or huts should have been in use -- but there it was. It was of large proportion, of great duration -- and had a huge wall around it. When the archaeological findings are correctly interpreted (see the chart on page 80 of the "Bible and the Ancient Near East", edited by G. Ernest Wright), it is evident this city must have existed before the flood.
In short, when the statements of the Bible and Josephus are correlated with the findings of archaeology, there is one logical conclusion: Pre-flood Jericho was the walled city of Enoch which Cain built. Here are some details concerning this city. It occupied an area of not less than ten acres -- large dimensions for that early time, and especially since it was completely surrounded by a great wall. Many thousands of people lived in and around this heavily fortified town -- and it is these fortifications that form the most astonishing feature of this remarkable discovery. These defences are described as "astounding for any period." They consisted of a ditch, wall, and tower. The ditch or moat was some 28 feet wide and six to seven feet deep. Inside this protective ditch the wall itself was built. A remarkable structure over five feet thick and some thirteen feet high. Finally, adjoining the wall was a great circular stone tower (which is still standing to this day) reaching a height of over 26 feet. James Mellaart makes this significant observation: "the prodigious labour involved in the erection of these defences implies an ample labour force, a central authority to plan, organize and direct the work and an economical surplus to pay for it." ("Earliest Civilizations of the Near East", London, 1965, page 36.) Such was the power and authority that Cain had mustered. To recapitulate: early in his life, after having been driven out by God, Cain wandered over many areas of the world. He did not stay in any one place very long. And the children he had over the course of those many decades also were nomads who migrated and engaged in hunting and fishing. The implication in Josephus' account is that Cain did not build this famous walled city until well into his life. Some centuries elapsed before he began this project.
Now take careful note of the location of this city: it was in "Seth's land". That's right -- Cain had dared to come back into forbidden territory. At an earlier time God had said: "this area is for Seth and his family -- the rest of the world is for Cain and his children to wander on." But, as we well know, Cain was not noted for being willing to obey any of God's orders.
[End of quote]
I would now accept, though, that this PPN site belongs to an era much later than the time of the antediluvian Cain. {David Rohl has, for his part, proposed that Cain’s city was Eridu, named after Cain’s grandson, Irad}.
Anyway, as I begin to get a better bead on Jericho, it seems that it is actually a post-Flood site. That its first level is Natufian, which Osgood takes to be Canaanite. Possibly Hivite: Wikipedia: "The Hivites were one group of descendants of Canaan, son of Ham, according to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (esp. 10:17)".
Osgood's next level at Jericho he thinks could have been Hittite (rock-cut tombs). Wikipedia: "In Genesis 23:2, towards the end of Abraham's life, he was staying in Hebron, on lands belonging to the "children of Heth", and from them he obtained a plot of land with a cave to bury his wife Sarah. One of them (Ephron) is labeled "the Hittite", several times. This deal is mentioned three more times (with almost the same words), upon the deaths of Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph".
Then we get to the Neolithic phase that Osgood has connected with Ghassul, which is Abram’s era. See e.g. my:
Narmer a Contemporary of Patriarch Abraham
Dr. Osgood wrote:
Kebaran - Natufian.
Kebaran culture seems to have been a less vigorous culture than Natufian and may have been overwhelmed by the latter.
Neolithic.
Neolithic (1) or Pre Pottery Neolithic A of Palestine appears to have been very much the same as the Mesolithic Natufian culture. This is apparent at Jericho from Kenyon's excavations.
Chalcolithic
A case has already been made for the Ghassul culture to have been Amorite (see 'The Times of Abraham', this volume). Furthermore, it may well have been in Canaan during the Late Neolithic, as suggested by North (Jordan I),8
One thing is clear from the biblical model; all the Stone Age inhabitants of Palestine, unless they happened to be transient cultures passing through to other lands, should be grouped under the label 'Canaanite' according to the biblical tradition of Genesis 10.
A further suggested identification is here made, that is, to equate the most dominant archaeological culture in Palestine of this era, namely, Natufian - PPNA-PPNB (suggestion of continuity after Moore5:16-23), with the Bible's most widespread southern groups - the Hivites (see Genesis 36:2,20; 14:6 Horites = Hivites; also later in Palestine, Genesis 34:2).
PNA appears to be from the north and may indicate a Hittite influence (Genesis 15:20 and 25:9), or the same may be speculated of Proto-Urban Jericho (equivalent to Chalcolithic - see North8) who had rock cut tombs.17:273
It is, however, freely admitted that the last two attempted reconciliations are tenuous and speculative for the most part, but worth investigating.
PNA appears to have arrived from the north; as did Proto-Urban Jericho.
[End of quote]
So - and it needs to be noted that Dr. Osgood does not insist on his Hivite and Hittite identifications ("tenuous" and "speculative for the most part"), but only on the general era - we may perhaps have this biblico-archaeological sequence for early Jericho:
Hivites;
Hittites;
Abram.
According to the Book of Genesis 23:1–20, Sarah, the wife of Abraham, "died in Kiryat-arba; the same is Hebron in the land of Canaan". Abraham the Hebrew (Avraham Ha-Ivri[4]) was tending to business elsewhere[5] when she died, at the age of 127 years,[6] and he "came to mourn for Sarah, and to weep for her." (Genesis 23:2) After a while, he stood up and spoke to the "sons of Heth" and requested they give him a possession as a "burying place", and they offered him his "choice" of their sepulchres. And then in verse 7 he again "stood up" to speak to them. Abraham then requested that Ephron the Hittite, the son of Zohar, give him the cave of Machpelah, in the end of his field, "for as much money as it is worth". (verse 9) After Ephron confirmed that he would give the cave, in verse 11, Abraham further requested that he give him the field for money, in verse 13. Ephron agreed and named a price.
Genesis 23:16 ¶ And Abraham hearkened unto Ephron; and Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver, which he had named in the audience of the sons of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, current money with the merchant. [17] And the field of Ephron, which was in Machpelah, which was before Mamre, the field, and the cave which was therein, and all the trees that were in the field, that were in all the borders round about, were made sure [18] Unto Abraham for a possession in the presence of the children of Heth, before all that went in at the gate of his city.
No comments:
Post a Comment