Skip to comments.Archaeological mystery solved (Sea-Peoples and the Song of Deborah)
Posted on 07/01/2010 8:20:27 AM PDT by decimon
A 3,200-year-old round bronze tablet with a carved face of a woman, found at the El-ahwat excavation site near Katzir in central Israel, is part of a linchpin that held the wheel of a battle chariot in place. This was revealed by scientist Oren Cohen of the Zinman Institute of Archaeology at the University of Haifa. Such an identification reinforces the claim that a high-ranking Egyptian or local ruler was based at this location, and is likely to support the theory that the site is Harosheth Haggoyim, the home town of Sisera, as mentioned in Judges 4-5, says Prof. Zertal.
The El-ahwat site, near Nahal Iron, was exposed by a cooperative delegation excavating there during 1993-2000 from the Universities of Haifa and Cagliari (Sardinia), headed by Prof. Zertal. The excavated city has been dated back to the end of the Bronze Age and early Iron Age (13th-12th centuries B.C.E.). The citys uniqueness - its fortifications, passageways in the walls, and rounded huts - made it foreign amidst the Canaanite landscape. Prof. Zertal has proposed that based on these unusual features, the site may have been home to the Shardana tribe of the Sea-Peoples, who, according to some researchers, lived in Harosheth Haggoyim, Siseras capital city. The city is mentioned in the Bibles narratives as Siseras capital, and it was from there that the army of chariots set out to fight the Israelites, who were being led by Deborah the prophetess and Barak, son of Avinoam. The full excavation and its conclusions have been summarized in Prof. Zertals book Siseras Secret, A Journey following the Sea-Peoples and the Song of Deborah (Dvir, Tel Aviv, 2010 [Hebrew]).
(Excerpt) Read more at newmedia-eng.haifa.ac.il ...
Sea of love ping.
The city is mentioned in the Bibles narratives as Siseras capital, and it was from there that the army of chariots set out to fight the Israelites, who were being led by Deborah the prophetess and Barak, son of Avinoam. The full excavation and its conclusions have been summarized in Prof. Zertals book Siseras Secret, A Journey following the Sea-Peoples and the Song of Deborah (Dvir, Tel Aviv, 2010 [Hebrew]).
Prof. Zertal has proposed that based on these unusual features, the site may have been home to the Shardana tribe of the Sea-Peoples, who, according to some researchers, lived in Harosheth Haggoyim, Sisera's capital city.Thanks decimon. One of *those* topics.
|· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe ·|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· Archaeology · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·
I don’t think the Sea People are particularly “unattested” and the only mention of Sardinans is that the dig was in cooperatiion with researchers from the University of Cagliari, in Sardinia. I swear that is what I read. Go back and take a peek, if you would, and see if I’m imagining that!
“...cooperative delegation excavating there during 1993-2000 from the Universities of Haifa and Cagliari (Sardinia), headed by Prof. Zertal.”
(’: Yes, in this article excerpt, that’s the only mention of Sardinia — but the otherwise unheard-of Shardana have been claimed to have come from Sardinia, along with some other places. :’)
All that spinning round and round. Oi, I’m dizzy.
Thanks for the ping. Interesting analysis.
WENAMUN loves a Woman
Michael S. Sanders, 1998" A camp (was set up) in one place in Amor. They desolated its people, and its land was like that which has never come into being. They were coming, while the flame was prepared before them, forward towards Egypt. Their confederation was the PELESET, THEKER (Tjekker), DENYE(n) and the WESHESH, lands united." (The Sea peoples and Egypt: Alessandra Nibbi p. 65)One other name is also associated with the Sea Peoples of the North, the SHEKELESH.
It is universally agreed that the Peleset can be identified with the Philistines and last week we proposed that the Denyen were in fact the tribe of Dan for obvious reasons. To complete the thesis we must convincingly identify the Theker and the Weshesh, a task that has confounded ALL scholars and Egyptologists until this day.
We will start with the tale of Wenamun who was an elder in the Temple of Amun probably at the time of the Pharaoh Smendes of the XXIst Dynasty. He was sent to obtain timber and it is here we meet the only other reference to the Tjekker in the Egyptian annals." And I arrived at Dor, a Tjekker-town, and Beder its Prince caused to be brought to me 50 loaves..............". (Egypt of the Pharaohs: Sir Alan Gardiner p. 307)As we can see from the map Dor was located on the Western boundary of Manasseh and the Northern Boundary of Dan.
The name of the ruler of the Tjekker. Beder is also interesting in that it is unique in Egyptian records and coincidentally unique in the Biblical account also. A Bezer was a son of Liph, one of the heads of the Tribe of Asher.
There is no evidence that Manasseh was ever connected to the sea so it is not surprising that the Asherites might have controlled the commerce of that city perhaps together with the families of Dan.
We now come full circle because although the tribe of Asher did not drive out the inhabitants of Acco (Judges 1.31) it had been allotted to them and it is perfectly possible to read the name Tjekker as people from the location of Acco.
It is interesting to view the map of Solomon's districts to see how the original tribal divisions had been modified from the initial allocation of the land to the time in which we are dealing.
We must now tackle the problem that has baffled all scholars since the first translations of the relevant texts at Medinet Habu. The identification of the Weshesh.
Not only is there absolutely nothing in any book on the subject, I recently asked every expert in the field worldwide to come up with anything, anything at all on the puzzle. No answer from anyone. Why? Because they are all looking at the Aegean for their answers because of the conventional chronology.
If we look to the shores of Israel just after Solomon's rule, it becomes quite clear.
The suffix esh is merely the Hebrew aish. So we have man or men of "W". But there is no "W" in the Egyptian hieroglyphics of this word, it has been written Weshesh for convenience. It would better have been written Ueshesh or Uashesh." And the sons of Asher , Imnah and Ishvah and Ishvi" ( Genesis 46:17)So you can take your choice Ueshesh the men of Asher or Ishvah or Ishvi.
And we can now even see how these people looked as we previewed last week.
You will not be surprised (although the professional Egyptologists were) to find that unlike the enemies of the Egyptians to the west who were not circumcised (the Egyptians cut off the foreskins of their vanquished as a "head" count) the enemies known as the Sea Peoples WERE circumcised. We now know why.
Further look at the side locks of hair. Do they not remind you of modern orthodox Jews and the commandment to the children of Israel to let their locks grow long.
From left to right1) a Prince of (ht)Only the Shekelesh now need to be identified. The men of Shekel or Sheker (l and r are interchangeable). It is not a great stretch of the imagination (much less imagination than was needed to fit the names into obscure Aegean communities) to see that they were from the tribe of Issachar.
2) a Prince of (imr)
3) a chieftain of (tkry) the Tjekker
4) srdn of the Sea
5) chieftain of the (s)
6) (trs) of the Sea
The figure of the Pelseset (p) is missing. ( The Ancient Near East in Pictures: James B. Pritchard p. 250)
Next week we will see how it defies logic the way the Philistines have been characterized by those adhering to the conventional chronology who maintain that this is the first time they appear in the area (contrary to the Biblical account). They would have you believe that this sea-faring people with all of the Mediterranean to choose from, chose a sanctuary which is the ONLY stretch of coast that does NOT have a natural port.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.