Qedah, Tell El
1:
QEDAH, TELL EL- (M.R. 203269). A site, located in N Israel between the Sea of Galilee and the Huleh basin, which is certainly to be identified with biblical Hazor. Hazor is first mentioned as the major military power organizing the N coalition against the Israelites (Jos 11:1, 10) and is specifically described as standing on a “mound” (Heb tēl; Josh 11:13). The area was later ascribed to the territory of Naphtali (Josh 19:32, 36). The city’s military strength is again described when Hazor was able to muster 900 chariots of iron in conflicts with Israel in the days of Deborah (Judges 4). Its strategic importance is further demonstrated when Solomon chose to fortify Hazor along with Jerusalem, Megiddo, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15). The environs of Hazor were later targets of a prophetic denunciation by Jeremiah (49:28–33). The name “Hazor” comes from the Hebrew ḥāṣēr, “enclosure,” which aptly describes the site. Tell el-Qedah (Tell Waqqas) is an imposing mound, with a 180-acre Lower City of the Bronze Age and a 30-acre Upper City or acropolis at the S end, which dates to the Iron Age. It is strategically situated at the juncture of the E flanks of the Lebanon range and the W edge of the Jordan Valley (4 miles SW of the Huleh basin), on the N border of Palestine and astride the main route N to Syria and beyond. In the Neo-Assyrian annals documenting troop movements S into Palestine, Hazor is always named along with Abel Beth-Maacah and Dan as prominent fortresses on the N frontier.
———
A. History of Investigations
B. Results of Excavations
1. Early Bronze Age
2. Middle Bronze Age
3. Late Bronze Age
4. Iron Age
5. Persian and Later Occupations
C. Other Sites Named Hazor
———
A. History of Investigations
The mound of Hazor was first investigated in 1928 by J. Garstang, although his soundings remain largely unpublished. It was then excavated in 1955–58 and 1968–72, in a major project carried out by Yigael Yadin and other prominent Israeli archaeologists. Yadin’s principal excavation areas were A, B, BA, G, L, and M in the Upper City; and, in the Lower City, areas C, D, E, F, H, K, N, P, and 210. (The Lower City has its own local strata numbering sequence: 4 = XVII; 3 = XVI; 2 = XV; 1b = XIV; and 1a = XIII.)
B. Results of Excavations
1. Early Bronze Age. The site was first occupied in EB II–III (strata XXI–XIX; ca. 2900–2300 b.c.), followed by a break in the EB IV period (scant material of stratum XVIII; ca. 2300–2000 b.c.).
2. Middle Bronze Age. The beginnings of the urbanized city of the 2d millennium b.c. are already seen in the relatively few structures and tombs of MB I (stratum “Pre-XVII”; ca. 1900–1800/1750 b.c.). One tomb, found only in reconstruction work in 1971–72 in connection with the area L water tunnel, contained more than 150 vessels of this and the beginning of the next stratum.
During the MB II period (stratum XVII; ca. 1800/1750–1650 b.c.) there was a substantial buildup of domestic structures, accompanied by rock-cut cisterns (some with numerous scarabs), a system of underground tunnels (originally tombs?), and intramural jar burials, especially of infants. A large, but only partially cleared, mudbrick palace or citadel was found in area K. A jar inscribed with a personal name is the earliest-known Akkadian inscription found in Israel. Most significant are the area-K and multiple-entryway city gates, and the earliest city defenses in areas C, G, H, K, and P. The latter consisted of varying combinations of earthen embankments (the typical MB glacis), fosses, counterscarps, and massive stone and mud-brick ramparts. All these elements were superbly engineered and adapted to the topography and defense requirements of the differing areas of the 180-acre Lower City, which appears to have been entirely developed (local stratum 4). To this horizon belong the earliest-known references to Hazor in the literary sources—the Brussels Execration texts from Egypt (ca. 1825–1775 b.c.) and several references in the Mari texts (ca. 18th century). The Mari texts mention tin-trading caravans plying the routes between Upper Mesopotamia and Hazor (as well as Dan) in N Palestine. This is the period when true tin-bronze technology came into widespread use in Palestine, and Hazor must have played a significant role in the redistribution of the vital element of tin, which had to be imported. At Hazor itself, a fragment of a cuneiform tablet contains part of a Sumerian-Akkadian lexical text of the Mari period.
The zenith of the Lower City was reached in MB III (stratum XVI = local stratum 3; ca. 1650–1550 b.c.), when a population of ca. 15,000–20,000 would have made Hazor probably the largest Canaanite city-state in Palestine. The inhabitants of stratum XVI reused and augmented all of the above domestic features. The extensive rock-cut tunnels of the previous stratum were reused for storage, reservoirs, and even drainage channels. The underground cisterns were also reused (like Cistern 9012). Particularly significant was the reconstruction of the simple area-K gateway into a monumental three-entryway, towered city gate like those known from Shechem and Gezer, as well as prototypes found throughout Syria and Anatolia at this time. This gate was accompanied by a stretch of casemate city wall, one of the earliest known examples of this type of fortification in Palestine (see others at Ta˓anach and Shechem). The palace-citadel in area A continued. The first temples appeared in stratum XVI: in area A is a rectangular temple with basalt orthostats at the entrance; a double (or “bilobate”) temple is in area F; and in area H is a bipartite temple (the later tripartite “orthostat” temple; below). Stratum XVI ended in a major destruction, as did most sites in Palestine at the end of the MB. These destructions were in connection with Egyptian punitive raids following the expulsion of the Asiatic (or “Hyksos”) princes at the end of the 17th and beginning of the 18th Dynasties (ca. 1540–1500 b.c.). An ephemeral post-destruction stratum, “post-XVI,” consists mostly of burials and some transitional MB III/LB I pottery. It is probably to this horizon that we should attribute the reference to Hazor on the walls of the temple at Karnak, which lists the sites conquered by Thutmose III.
3. Late Bronze Age. The full developed LB I period witnessed the rebuilding of urban Hazor during the early part of the Egyptian New Kingdom (stratum XV; ca. 1500–1400 b.c.). The city gate in area K was reused, as apparently were some of the earlier city walls. The area-A rectangular temple was slightly altered and reused. The area-H bipartite temple from stratum XVI was reused in its basic form, but it was modified to include a forecourt that featured a stone offering table; a semicircular basin and drainpipe system for animal sacrifices; and a potter’s workshop, which was found in situ with many ceramic miniature bowls (votives). Finds of particular significance included bronze figurines; a bronze plaque of a robed priest, which has almost exact Syro-Mesopotamian parallels (one of the finest art objects ever found in Bronze Age Palestine); and a liver model used in divination, which reads in Akkadian (in part): “Ishtar will eat the land; Nergal will . . .; the gods of the city will come back.” A new temple was built in area F—a square, “mazelike” structure that has close parallels with the Mt. Gerizim temple at Shechem and with the Amman airport temple.
During the well-known “Amarna Age” in LB IIA, Hazor reached the peak of its recovery (stratum XIV; ca. 1400–1300 b.c.). One tomb contained large quantities of Mycenaean IIIA pottery imported from the Greek mainland. Some of the fortifications appear to have continued along with the temples. The area-H temple was converted from a bipartite into a tripartite structure, and most of the interior was lined with splendid basalt orthostats in the N Syrian style. The newly built “stelae temple” in area C was especially significant. It consisted of a semicircle of ten (?) small monoliths of dressed basalt, with a basalt statue of a seated king or deity. The center stele has a bas-relief depicting a pair of upraised palms, above which is a disk-within-a-crescent. These symbols are often associated with Ba˓al Ḥarmmōn and the Phoenician goddess Tanit (Asherah of the Canaanite pantheon). Near the temple was found a potter’s workshop for mass-producing votive vessels; a small, well-modeled terra-cotta cult mask; fine cylinder seals of Mitannian (or N Syrian) style; and a splendid silver-plated bronze cult-standard.
A partially cleared structure below the Iron Age “pillared building” (below) suggests an Amarna Age palace. Its ruins included basalt orthostats; stone columns and bases; a staircase; and the forepart of a magnificent basalt lioness. It is possible that these are remains of the palace of Abdi-Tirshi, a king of Hazor in the 14th century b.c., who is mentioned in the Amarna letters. Some idea of the importance of the city, as inferred from these letters, is the fact that he alone of the Palestinian princes styled himself “king.” Abdi-Tirshi presumed to oversee other N cities, seized rival city-states, and connived with the lawless “Habiru” against the pharaoh. An Akkadian fragment from Hazor (unfortunately found out of context) probably belongs to this horizon and concerns litigation over a real-estate transaction, which was brought to the attention of the king of Hazor. Further textual evidence of the importance of Hazor in the LB II period is gained from its mention in topographical lists of Amenophis III (ca. 1400 b.c.), Seti I (ca. 1300 b.c.), and Ramesses II (ca. 13th century b.c.).
The final phase of the Late Bronze Age, LB IIB, is attested by stratum XIII (ca. 1300–1220 b.c.), when Hazor was clearly in decline. While the temples were mostly rebuilt, the area-H temple demonstrates the decline with its misaligned orthostats and generally poor alterations. This phase ended in a massive destruction of the entire Lower City, which was buried under several feet of debris and was never reoccupied. Yadin dated this conflagration to ca. 1250–1230 b.c. on the basis of the presence of Mycenaean IIIB pottery, which ceased to be imported from the Greek mainland by 1220 b.c. Yadin also attributed the destruction to the incoming Israelites under Joshua, who according to Josh 11:10 captured “Hazor . . . the head of all those kingdoms” and killed its king, Jabin. More recently, however, other scholars have pointed out that the destruction was probably too early to allow connection with Israelite invaders (if any) in Joshua’s time. Among the most impressive remains from the stratum XIII destruction are those objects connected with the last phase of the area-H orthostat temple. These include basalt offering tables, altars, and basins; a basalt seated figure of a king or deity; a terra-cotta temple model; ceramic votive vessels; cylinder seals; beads and other jewelry; terra-cotta zoomorphic figurines; a bronze bull (probably an El figurine); and bronze figurines representing other deities.
4. Iron Age. Following the massive destruction of the city, there was only a “squatter occupation,” consisting mostly of huts and rubbish pits among the ruins (stratum XII; early 12th century b.c.). Yadin supposed this to be the early attempt at settlement by the Israelites after their capture of the city. The following phase (stratum XI; ca. 11th century b.c.) exhibits a more permanent settlement, although it has relatively few structures. A somewhat enigmatic installation was interpreted as a bâmah, or “high place.” A hoard of bronzes in an associated votive jar included a lugged ax and a seated bronze El/Baal figure. Both, however, are typically LB in design and may be holdovers from earlier levels, and thus are not characteristically “Israelite.”
Iron Age Hazor really began as an urban center with the Solomonic era (strata Xb–a; mid-late 10th century b.c.). The large Lower City was abandoned from this point on; the new settlement centered on the 30-acre Upper City. Particularly important for this period is a large citadel complex in area B and the casemate defensive wall and splendid four-entryway city gate, both of which were found in area A. The latter was compared by Yadin with the nearly identical walls and gates found at Megiddo and Gezer, thus confirming the historical footnote in 1 Kgs 9:15–17. Hazor, refortified by Solomon as part of his strongly centralized administrative system, probably served as the regional capital of the district.
The late 10th/early 9th centuries b.c. (strata IXb–a) are characterized by a decline, then a destruction about the time of the rise of the Omrides (ca. 875 b.c.; or perhaps associated with the raids of Ben-Hadad of Damascus in the early 9th century; cf. 2 Chr 16:4). During the Omride dynasty, Hazor (stratum VIII) was again a most impressive site. On the acropolis, the principal building was a multiroomed citadel, some 70 by 80 ft. constructed with thick walls and ashlar masonry. Several “Proto-Aeolic” (or palmette) capitals found in stratum VII probably originated here. In area G, solid walls were built over the casemates, but in area A the casemate city walls were reused, with the chambers often used as storerooms. In area A, a large three-room structure (the “pillared building”), with a double row of monolithic columns flanking the center aisle, probably served as a storehouse. The most dramatic change in stratum VIII was the construction of the monumental water system in area L. This consisted of a massive stepped shaft, some 50-ft square and about 100-ft deep, cut through the solid rock; from this vertical shaft branched a domed lateral gallery, which sloped downward for some 80 ft to reach a deep underground spring. The ground-level entrance was guarded by a sort of “gatehouse.” This marvelously engineered water system, comparable in date and function to the one at Megiddo (and perhaps also at Gezer), was probably constructed in anticipation of the Assyrian advance.
During the late 9th century b.c. (stratum VII), the citadel, pillared storehouse, water system, and other features were reused. This stratum ends in a destruction, perhaps related to the Aramean incursions into the N of Israel ca. 810 b.c.
In the early 8th century (stratum VI), Hazor experienced a renaissance. The area-B citadel continued, but other public areas in the Upper City were converted to residences, workshops, and storage facilities. Near the citadel was a two-story house, with a well-preserved staircase, which may have belonged to an important official or an elite family. Another fine house produced an ostracon with the name “Makbiram” and a carved ivory panel. The destruction that ended stratum VI was probably caused by an earthquake in the time of Jeroboam II (ca. 786–746 b.c.).
Hazor, like all major sites in the N, was destroyed by the Assyrians (strata VB–a), in this case undoubtedly by Tiglath-pileser III in 732 b.c. (1 Kgs 15:29). The citadel, which had been reinforced by an added offsets-insets perimeter wall, was completely destroyed. Among the remains were several objects inscribed in Hebrew, including a storejar “belonging to Pekah, semadar” (a kind of wine); another vessel reading “belonging to Delayo”; a bowl inscribed qodeš, “holy”; an ivory pyksis-box; a carved stone ladle with an embossed hand; stone cosmetic palettes; Asherah figurines; and the skeleton of a partly consumed pig.
Stratum IV (late 8th century b.c.) represents the postdestruction period. It was a temporary, unfortified settlement, which Yadin thought was occupied by the returning Israelite survivors of the Assyrian destruction. The main feature excavated in stratum III was an Assyrian-period citadel. There is no 7th–6th century material that might provide a context for the references to Hazor in Jer 49:28–33.
5. Persian and Later Occupations. Hazor’s final days are represented by scattered Persian finds of stratum II (ca. 4th century b.c.), among which were a large citadel on the acropolis, Persian coins, and imported Attic wares. A final, smaller citadel belongs to stratum I (3d –2d centuries b.c.) and may be associated with references in 1 Macc 11:47 to Jonathan’s struggles against the Seleucid king, Demetrius II, on the “plain of Hazor.” The abandoned site, despite its strategic location and formidable appearance, lay neglected until its rediscovery as biblical Hazor in 1875 in the proposed identification of J. L. Porter.
C. Other Sites Named Hazor
Two other sites named Hazor are found in the Hebrew Bible. In Judah, Hazor-hadattah (so LXX, or “New Hazor”; Josh 15:23) may be located at el-Jebariyeh. In Benjamin, a Hazor (Neh 11:33) has been identified with Khirbet Hazzur, 4 miles NW of Jerusalem. See also HAZOR.
Bibliography
Malamat, A. 1970. Northern Canaan and the Mari Texts. Pp. 164–77 in Near Eastern Archaeology in the Twentieth Century, ed. J. A. Sanders. Garden City, NY.
Yadin, Y. 1959–64. Hazor I–IV. Jerusalem.
———. 1969. Excavations at Hazor, 1968–1969:Preliminary Communiqué. IEJ 19: 1–19.
———. 1972. Hazor: The Head of All Those Kingdoms. London.
———. 1975. Hazor: The Rediscovery of a Great Citadel of the Bible. London.
———. 1976. Hazor. EAEHL 2: 474–95.
Yadin, Y., and Shiloh, Y. 1971. Hazor: Notes and News. IEJ 19: 230.
William G. Dever
Freedman, D. N. (1996, c1992). The Anchor Bible Dictionary (5:578). New York: Doubleday.
