In Palestine, the transition from the end of the Early Bronze Age I to the urban phase of Bronze Age II is extremely sketchy and can be followed in just a few sites such as Ha’Ai/ et-Tell, Tell el-Far’ah (N), Arad and Bab edh-Dhra’, the latter two quite atypical and in now climatically marginal areas. It appears that scattered villages began to be organized into a local network of related settlements based on the exchange of tools and luxury items and gradually
“imploded” into small or medium-sized “towns” around 3000 to 2700 B.C.E.
These in turn developed into larger cities during the third phase of the Early Bronze Age around 2700 to 2400 B.C.E. The main motive for these “implosions”
is still unclear. Until the 1970’s the urban phenomenon was explained along the diffusionist line of argument whereas later it was attributed more to a process of local evolution.10 In our opinion, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
As discussed in Chap. 2, we think that for most people, civilization – i.e. living in crowded towns under rather appalling hygienic conditions and under the thumb of a class of rapacious priests and megalomaniac rulers – was not an attractive option, but developed of necessity dictated by security problems.
The Early Bronze Age of Palestine is divided, as usual, into three parts:
• E.B. I (ca. 3300–3000 B.C.E), as discussed in the previous chapter is a tran- sitional period inclusive of everything that is not Chalcolithic and not yet proper urban Early Bronze Age.
• E.B. II (3000–2700 B.C.E.) is the formative period of the first urban civiliza- tion of Palestine characterized by fortified townships.
• E.B. III (2700–2400 B.C.E.) shows in a few selected sites the mature phase of this culture, as well as the first signs of its disintegration.
The debate about whether the Palestinian Early Bronze Age II “towns” were real cities or just large fortified villages cannot be resolved from the information
10P. Lapp, “Palestine in the Earlly Bronze Age” in:Near Eastern Archaeology in the Twentieth Century:
Essays in Honor of Neslon Glueck, J.A. Sanders (ed.) Garden City, New York. pp. 101–131 (1970).
R. de Vaux, “Palestine in the Early Brone Age” in:Cambridge Ancient History, I.E.S. Edwards, C.J.
Gadd, and N.G.L. Hammonds (eds.), vol. pt. 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 208–237 (1971).
K.M. Kenyon,Archaeology in the Holy Land, 4th ed, W.W. Norton, New York (1979).
R.T. Schaub, “The Origins of the Early Bronze Age Walled Town Culture of Jordan” in:Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I, A. Hadidi (ed.). Department of Antiquities, Amman. pp. 67–75 (1982).
available on this period. The term “city” denotes a stratified society with a so- cioeconomic structure based on division of labor and, above all, of civility and ethos as, for instance observed in the Mesopotamian cities, the Greekpolisor the early medieval cities of Europe, signs of which were not yet observed during this period outside of its original Mesopotamian home province. Evidence for a dense pattern of fortified “towns,” or villages, is found in all parts of the coun- try on both sides of the Jordan. The limited and sporadic excavations, however, provide scant information and, therefore, a quite un-representational picture.
There is evidence of some spacious and well-constructed temples, which, how- ever, lack the monumentality of those of the later ages, and some attempts at water harvesting. The only dominant and recurring feature is the presence of extravagantly massive fortification walls.
It has been claimed that settlements expanded to the mountainous areas, the Shefelah and the valleys of Jezreel, and with this expansion, a transition to a Mediterranean method of agriculture. A. Ben Tor, M. Broshi and R. Gophna claimed that the people of the Early Bronze Age mainly preferred areas within today’s an annual rainfall of more than 300mm.11 However, more than 600 sites from the late Early Bronze Age I and II were discovered in the Negev Highlands and the Uvda Valley, as well as other areas that are now desert.12 U. Avner’s detailed study of the Negev’s arid highlands shows that the number of agricultural settlements in this region reached a peak during the third millennium B.C.E. However, as most of these settlements were small farms, many of which occupied the same sites as the Chalcolithic farms, there is no sequence of layers indicating a settlement gap before or during this peak. On the other hand, one such gap could be observed between the Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age in most urban sites, and another between the Early Bronze Age I and II, starting around 3000 B.C.E. This lapse can be explained by the climate curve of the Soreq Cave, which shows a period of reduced precipitation ca. 3400 after a peak in 3500 B.C.E.
Not all the settlements of the Negev were walled, and most were located on hills near valleys with permanent water resources. Cohen claimed that the population growth of the Negev highlands represented the movement of settlers who could not adapt to the increasing urbanization of northern Israel.
The economy of the Early Bronze settlements in the Negev was based on agriculture, pastoral economy and hunting.13
The best example of an Early Bronze Age township in the south of the coun- try is Arad – a large settlement divided into quarters with an orderly street system and fortified by a modest stone wall and semi-circular towers (Plate 9).
According to the excavator R. Amiran, Arad probably served as a way station on the routes linking the Dead Sea and the southern hills of Judaea with Egypt.
11A. Ben Tor, “The Early Bronze Age” in:The Archaeology of Ancient Israel in the Biblical Period, The Open University of Israel, Tel Aviv. pp. 11–73 (1989).
M. Broshi, and R. Gophna, “The Settlements and Population of Palestine during the Early Bronze Age II–III”BASOR253:41–53 (1984).
12U. Avner, op. cit. (1998).
13R. Cohen, “Ein Ziq”Excavations and Surveys in Israel7–8:57–58 (1989).
Plate 9. Aerial Photograph of partly reconstructed Early Bronze Age city of Arad. (Courtesy Albatros, Tel Aviv)
Amiran attributed the establishment of Arad to metal-hungry colonists from the “Canaanite” north.14In contrast, L.E. Stager, and later I. Finkelstein, sug- gested that a southern, basically nomadic population established the town.
The layout of the dwellings, with a main building and some subsidiary store- rooms surrounding a spacious courtyard betray the heritage of the earlier agro-pastoral village compounds all over the Negev and the Sinai, as do the cooking pots made of clay from southern Sinai.15
However, the abundance of olive pits and grape kernels found in all four lay- ers of Arad attest to an economy based on a Mediterranean type of agriculture,
14R. Amiran, “Arad” inNEAHLvol. 1:75–82 (1992).
“Canaanite” is a term used for the Semitic-speaking population of the Middle/Late Bronze and Iron Age and is inappropriate for the Early Bronze Age third millennium B.C.E. whose ethnic affiliation is unknown and whose culture is profoundly different.
15L.E. Stager, “The Periodization of Palestine from Neolithic through Early Bronze Times” inCOWA, pp. 22–41.
I. Finkelstein, “Living on the Fringe: The Archaeology and History of the Negev, Sinai and Neighbour- ing Regions in the Bronze and Iron Age”Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeology6 (Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, (1995).
Finkelstein cites repetitions of the situation in the Late Bronze/Iron Age, tentatively identified with Edomites and “Amalekites”, and the Nabataeans in the Roman period.
probably geared to exporting olive oil and wine to Egypt, with trade in other commodities a welcome extra. Although Arad is now surrounded by a desert landscape, its earlier thriving success can only be explained by a cooler and wetter climate; and that the transition to drier weather was responsible for its desertion?
The finds of this period consist mostly of a fine and elegant type of pottery also found in Archaic and Old Kingdom tombs in Egypt – particularly at Abydos where this ware, imported from the southern Levant, was found (and from which its name ‘Abydos Ware’ is derived) together with a metallic “combed”
ware. Both pottery types probably served as containers for oil or wine exported from Palestine to Egypt.
The inhabitants of these fortified towns were already then calleda’amuby the Egyptians, derived perhaps from the Semitic ‘amu, meaning ‘people’, or
‘alamu, meaning ‘young man’ or ‘human being’, terms by which these people referred to their kin.16
Unlike other parts of the ancient Near East, but similar to the preceding Early Bronze Age I, very little representational art is reported from this period in the Levant. Whether this lack is derived from religious conceptions or simply because relatively few luxury goods were produced in the Palestinian “cities”
is still an open Question. To us it seems to point to a rather unpretentious or warlike ruling class with no need for elaborate artistic expressions.
The Early Bronze Age III, starting around 2700 B.C.E., is the mature phase of this culture and, in fact, seems to earn the term “civilization.” The process of ‘implosion’ continued, emptying the existing towns and villages of their in- habitants, and concentrating them into some of the largest, truly monumental cities ever seen in this country before the modern era. The rectilinear architec- ture facilitated the agglutinative character of closely packed dwellings behind strong fortification walls. The temples, such as those at Ha’Ai and Megiddo, were also rebuilt on a monumental scale.
Two sites, Beit Yerah/Khirbet Kerak on the shores of the Sea of Galilee in the north, and Tell Yarmut in the south, had become veritable metropolises.
In the latter, the French mission under P. de Miroschedji uncovered densely packed dwellings, small sanctuaries and an intricate palace complex. Built applying a standardized set of measurements, the palace was very similar to a contemporary structure at Byblos and prefigures the later palaces at Ebla and Mari. The city walls are the largest fortifications in Palestine consist- ing of combined systems of massive stonewalls up to 30 to 40 m thick and probably of corresponding height, with a monumental gate. Extravagant far beyond the exigencies of warfare of that period, the fortifications appear to be
“prestige-oriented” or ritual military architecture similar to that seen in later periods (e.g. the walls of Hattusas, capital of the Hittite empire in the Late Bronze Age).17 At the same time, they seem to point to a rise in militarism foreshadowing the events to follow and the collapse of the entire urban system.
16D.B. Redford,Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
p. 32 (1993).
17P. de Miroschedji, unpublished.
When contemplating the contemporaneous and equally massive defense walls at Ha’Ai, a local workman remarked: “These people must have been very much afraid!”18We wonder whom they might have been afraid of and whether this simple question is the key to understanding theraison d’êtreof these cities.
The Early Bronze Age III pottery shows the influx of a peculiar type of pottery known as Kura-Araxes Ware in Transcaucasia and as Bet Yerah/Khirbet Kerak Ware in Palestine. It was probably carried by a small but culturally important group of immigrants from those distant parts and eventually copied locally.
Evidence of this pottery is found continuously from eastern Anatolia to the
‘Amuq Valley in Northern Syria, the Beqa’ Valley in Lebanon and to the Jezreel Valley in northern Palestine. These immigrants might have been itinerant metal workers selling their arsenic copper products for weapons and other types of armory, such as the hoard of Kfar Monash, they might have been warlike invaders trying to subjugate the native population or simply immigrants trying to find a better place to live – we probably shall never know for sure. We tend to favor the third scenario, which conforms to the general theorem already observed in the preceding periods – i.e. that colder and harsher climates in the more northern regions of Eurasia and the mountainous part of the Near East may have pushed some people southward.
Whatever the case, the hypothesis cannot be firmly backed up, as this period is characterized by extreme climatic fluctuations and the accuracy of the paleo- climatic proxy data and the archaeological dating is insufficient. Moreover, contact and trade with Egypt – the life-blood of civilizatory developments and prosperity of the ruling class – seems to have stopped entirely, for reasons not clear for the time being but quite possibly due to the desertification and abandonment of the trade routes and declining crops in Palestine.
Notwithstanding its undoubted local importance and the impressive size of some of its towns and cities, the Early Bronze Age in Palestine never attained the level of organization and sophistication of its neighbors in the great river valleys. Nor did it develop a writing system or even attempted to borrow one from the higher civilizations. At Byblos an attempt was made, probably under Egyptian influence, to develop a local script known as Gublitic, used for a few inscriptions in an unknown, probably non-Semitic language. The fact that the entire culture disappeared without leaving any cultural heritage to its successors marks it as one of the great civilizatory failures in the ancient world.
The effects of serious droughts starting between 2300 to 2200 B.C.E. and lasting for several centuries caused the superstructure of this society to collapse when climate changed for the worst. Arad was deserted already by the onset of the Early Bronze Age III and, like other sites in the southern Levant, shows no evidence of destruction or other catastrophic disasters.
The picture dramatically changes when going northward: All the magnif- icent cities in northern Palestine and southern Syria were burned down in a great fury, not to be resettled until nearly half a millennium later. Remains indicative of similar waves of violent destruction and general upheaval are found in all the sites further north, extending deep into Syria and Anatolia,
18J.A. Callaway,The Early Bronze Age Sanctaury at Ai (et-Tel), Bernard Quaritch, London (1972).
including Byblos on the coast of Lebanon, Hama, and the ‘Amuq sites in Syria.
In Anatolia, all the cities from Troy in the northwest to Beycesultan, Karatas- Semayük and dozens of other contemporary sites in the east and southeast were utterly devastated. But, unlike Palestine, where the cities lay deserted for several centuries, most of the Syrian, southeast Anatolian and northern Mesopotamian sites were immediately rebuilt and resettled, albeit within the framework of a quite different culture, known as the Syrian Early Bronze Age IV, the subject of our next chapter.
At the margins of the highlands of Anatolia in southeastern Turkey, excava- tions at Lidar, Kurban Hoyük, Arslan Tepe, and Tarsus show strong influences from Syria-Mesopotamia. The climate of central and eastern Anatolia with its strong continental conditions of hot summers and very cold winters was not overly conductive to a brilliant flowering of urban civilization. Yet, a network of initially modest city-states centered on fortified towns dominated by palaces and temples following the Mesopotamian example, developed and began to prosper during the second half of the third millennium B.C.E. when the cli- mate showed signs of warming. The culture of Ikiztepe in the north is quite independent and compares well with the development in northwest Anatolia and northern Aegean sites such as Troy I and II and Poliochnoi on Lemnos.
The economy of these city-states was similarly based on agriculture, trade and metalworking in arsenic copper. A characteristic simple painted pottery gave way to wheel-made and burnished ware.
During this time, eastern Anatolia was increasingly drawn into the cultural sphere of the vibrant Transcaucasian Kura-Araxes culture. Compared with its contemporary Near Eastern neighbors it appears quite unusual: a dense pattern of often large but unfortified settlements without any signs of a developed hierarchical structure, such as temples or palaces, nor monumental art of any kind or writing. It appears as steadily growing and expanding from the middle of the fourth to the end of the third millennium B.C.E. without visible evidence of crisis periods or other major disasters. During the earlier and colder periods, the settlements are found in the sheltered valleys whereas in the later and warmer conditions of the second half of the third millennium B.C.E. we find more and more sites in higher altitudes including the Trialeti Plateau, many of which were now fortified with megalithic walls. Its most characteristic pottery was handmade under rather low temperatures, with a greasy high- gloss black on the outside and buff on the inside. By around the 27th century B.C.E. this pottery was found throughout east-central Anatolia, northern Syria and the central valleys of Palestine. We have suggested that tribes practicing relatively advanced metallurgy immigrated into Palestine during this period due to demographic pressure.
Beginning around the middle of the third millennium B.C.E., during the peak of the cold period, pastoral groups from the steppes north of the Black Sea entered Anatolia and Transcaucasia in a constant influx, slowly forming a new elite. Their tombs under artificial mounds known askurganson the Trialeti Plateau in Georgia, at Alaca Höyük, Horoz Tepe, and Mahmutlar contained exquisite arsenic copper and gold artifacts, showing cultural connections with Eurasia and Iran. It is quite possible that these groups were the vanguard of
some Proto-Indo-European speaking people who moved from their Eurasian homeland into the Balkans, Anatolia, Iran and India. As elsewhere around 2400 B.C.E., the first signs of a warming and drying climatic phase were accompanied by the decline, the destruction and the abandonment of some large highland towns.