Millek - 2018 - Just How Much Was Destroyed. The End of The Late Bronze Age in The Southern Levant

UGARIT-FORSCHUNGEN
Internationales Jahrbuch
für die Altertumskunde Syrien-Palästinas
begründet von Manfried Dietrich und Oswald Loretz †
Herausgegeben von
Manfried Dietrich • Valérie Matoïan • Giovanni Mazzini
Wilfred Watson • Nicolas Wyatt
Band 49
2018
Manfried Dietrich: ugarit@uni-muenster.de
Valérie Matoïan: valerie.matoian@college-de-france.fr
Giovanni Mazzini: giovanni.mazzini@unipi.it
Wilfred Watson: wge.watson@gmail.com
Nicolas Wyatt: niqmad3@gmail.com
Redaktion
Ugarit-Verlag, Salzstraße 45, D-48143 Münster
Für unverlangt eingesandte Manuskripte kann keine Gewähr übernommen werden.

Die Herausgeber sind nicht verpflichtet,
unangeforderte Rezensionsexemplare zu besprechen.
Manuskripte für die einzelnen Jahresbände werden jeweils bis zum 31.12. des vorausgehenden Jahres erbeten.
© 2018 Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel Münster

www.ugarit-verlag.com
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored
in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the publisher.
Printed in Germany
ISBN 978-3-86835-303-7
ISSN 0342-2356
Printed on acid-free paper
Inhalt
Artikel
Johannes Bach
LKA 64: A possible royal song (zamar šarri) celebrating
the Trans-Euphratian victories of Aššurnaṣirpal II’s 9th campaign ................ 1
David Ben-Shlomo
Trade contacts, economy and administration in Iron Age Jerusalem ........... 29
Stefan Bojowald
Zu einer möglichen demotisch–babylonischen Parallele
im ägyptischen pBerlin 13640, 11 ............................................................... 67
Meindert Dijsktra
The stele of Ramesses II from Sheikh Sacad, Syria
(The Stone of Job) rediscovered and reconsidered. ...................................... 71
Betina I. Faist – Josué–Javier Justel, – Ferhan Sakal – Juan–Pablo Vita
Bibliografía de los estudios de Emar (8)....................................................... 95
Israel Finkelstein – Yuval Gadot – Lidar Sapir-Hen
Pig frequencies in Iron Age sites and the biblical pig taboo:
once again ................................................................................................... 109
Gershon Galil
The Formation of the Book of Judges......................................................... 117
Erasmus Gaß
The bloodguilt of Jezreel (Hos 1:4) and the Tel Dan Inscription................ 139
Aaron Greener – Israel Finkelstein – Dafna Langgut
Settlement oscillations along the desert fringes of the Southern Levant:
impact of climate versus economic and historical factors .......................... 165
Robert D. Holmstedt
Clarifying apposition in Ugaritic // the displacement of “parallelism” ....... 197
Valérie Matoïan
Quelques réflexions sur les représentations de suidés à Ugarit ................. 215
vi Inhalt
Jesse Michael Millek

Just how much was destroyed?
The end of the Late Bronze Age in the Southern Levant............................ 239
Juan Oliva
Der hurro-akkadische Brief TT3 aus Qaṭna unter neuem Blick.................. 275
Yitzhak Paz – Itai Elad – Ianir Milevski – Nimrod Getzov
Geometric motifs and a scene on cylinder seal impressions
found in Early Bronze IB towns of the Southern Levant ........................... 285
Michael Pietsch
Beelzebul oder Beelzebub? Text-, religions- und literaturgeschichtliche
Überlegungen zu 2 Kön 1,2–18 .................................................................. 299
Albert Planelles
Marching in front in Ugaritic:
two notes on KTU 1.82 in the light of Ancient Near Eastern literature* .... 319
Madadh Richey
Ugaritic monsters I: The ˁatūku “Bound One” and its Sumerian parallels ...... 333
Oded Tammuz
On ideology and lions: a hypothesis on the authorship of 2 Kgs 17:7–41 .......... 367
Wilfred G. E. Watson
Updates for the Ugaritic lexicon: new meanings and overlooked cognates ....... 379
Nicolas Wyatt
The Baal au Foudre stela and its historical context..................................... 399
Buchbesprechungen und Buchanzeigen ............................................. 409

DIETRICH, MANFRIED / METZLER, KAI A. / NEUMANN, HANS:
Studia Mesopotamica 3 (Sebastian Fink) .................................................. 409
DROß-KRÜPE, KERSTIN / NOSCH, MARIE-LOUISE (Hg.): Textiles, Trade and
Theories. From the Ancient Near East to the Mediterranean. Münster:
Ugarit-Verlag 2016. XVI, 346 S. m. Abb. 8° = Kārum – Emporion –
Forum 2 (Sven Günther). .......................................................................... 410
KÄMMERER, THOMAS R. / ROGGE, SABINE (Hg.):
Patterns of Urban Societies. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag 2013.
XII, 260 S. m. Abb. 8° = Alter Orient und Altes Testament 390/2.
Acta Antiqua Mediterranea et Orientalia 2 (Jan-Waalke Meyer) ............. 415
KOCH, ULLA SUSANNE: Mesopotamian Divination Texts: Conversing with
the Gods. Sources from the First Millennium BCE. Münster:
Ugarit-Verlag 2015. IX, 394 S. 8° = Guides to the Mesopotamian
Textual Record 7 (Nicla De Zorzi). .......................................................... 418
Inhalt vii
KRYSZEŃ, ADAM (2016). A Historical Geography of the Hittite Heartland,

AOAT 437 (João Paulo Galhano) .............................................................. 424
MINUNNO, GIUSEPPE. Ritual Employs of Birds in Ancient Syria-Palestine.
AOAT 402 (Rozenn Bailleul-LeSuer) ....................................................... 428
NEUMANN, GEORG. Altorientalische Siegel und Keilschriftdokumente
im Archäologischen Museum der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität
Münster. Die Stiftung der Sammlung Tono Eitel. Mit Beiträgen
von Ingo Kottsieper, Hans Neumann und Annik Wüthrich,
Münster: Ugarit-Verlag 2016. 217 S. m. Abb. 8° = Altertumskunde
des Vorderen Orients. Archäologische Studien zur Kultur und
Geschichte des Alten Orients 20 (Evelyn Klengel-Brandt) ...................... 431
REICHMANN, SIRJE. Bei Übernahme Korrektur? Aufnahme und Wandlung
ägyptischer Tradition im Alten Testament anhand der Beispiele
Proverbia 22-24 und Psalm 104. AOAT 428 (Stefan Bojowald) .............. 433
SANDOWICZ, MALGORZATA. Oaths and Curses: A Study in Neo- and
Late Babylonian Legal Formulary. AOAT 398 (Bruce Wells) ................. 434
SCONZO, PAOLA. Pottery and Potmarks at an Early Urban Settlement
of the Middle Euphrates River Valley, Syria. Final Reports of the
Syrian-German Excavations at Tell el- ‘Abd. Vol. II, herausgegeben
von Uwe Finkbeiner. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag 2013. XXVIII, 436
S. 227 Pl. 4° = Altertumskunde des Vorderen Orients 16/2
(Jan-Waalke Meyer) .................................................................................. 439
ZWICKEL, WOLFGANG. Settlement History around the Sea of Galilee
from the Neolithic to the Persian Period. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag
2017. X, 400 S. m. Abb. 4° = Ägypten und Altes Testament 86
(Detlef Jericke). ......................................................................................... 443
Abkürzungsverzeichnis ............................................................................ 447

Indizes ............................................................................................................ 455
A. Stellen .......................................................................................................... 455
B. Wörter .......................................................................................................... 461
C. Namen.......................................................................................................... 464
D. Sachen ....................................................................................................... 468
Anschriften der Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter ........................ 473

Just how much was destroyed?
The end of the Late Bronze Age in the Southern Levant
Jesse Michael Millek, Ann Arbor
Abstract
Destruction is an integral part of the end of the Late Bronze Age in the southern
Levant. Once-powerful sites like Hazor and Lachish were burnt and abandoned.
A multitude of other sites have been included in maps and tables describing the
extent of the destruction, but just how much was destroyed? This article examines
62 destruction events to answer this very question. While some sites did suffer
destruction, other destruction events exist only as scholarly citations, and many
others are minor in their extent. This has strong implications on many of the the-
ories for the end of the Late Bronze Age which utilize these destruction events to
explain the transitions from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron I.
Introduction
Within the many theories for the end of the Late Bronze Age, destruction always
plays a crucial role. From the violent path of the Sea Peoples through the Eastern
Mediterranean, to the earthquakes that brought nations to their knees, or the up-
risings spurred on by climate change, each invariably utilizes destruction as part
of the theory. This has led to multiple maps, tables, and paragraphs describing the
multitude of sites destroyed such as Drews’s 1993 map of destruction and subse-
quent chapter detailing destruction throughout the Eastern Mediterranean (Drews
1993) or Dever’s list of sites destroyed in Israel from 1992 (Dever 1992: 100).
This trend has continued into recent scholarship with Cline’s map of destruction
(Cline 2014: 110–111), Kaniewski, Guiot, and van Campo’s map of climate
driven destruction (Kaniewski, Guiot, and van Campo 2015: 370), Stern’s list of
sites violently destroyed by the Sea Peoples, (Stern 2015: 5), Knapp and Man-
ning’s list of sites destroyed throughout the Eastern Mediterranean (Knapp and
Manning 2016: 126–137) or Faust’s list of sites in the Shephelah destroyed and
abandoned at the end of the Late Bronze Age (Faust 2017: 23). While not all
scholars rely on destruction to explain the transition from the Late Bronze Age to
the Iron Age (See for example Yasur-Landau 2010: 221–223, 340) destruction,
either at single site or over multiple sites, is part of the discussion for the end of
the Late Bronze Age. Yet, while these lists and maps abound, what is generally
lacking is an in-depth look at these destruction events, with some exceptions (e.g.
Zuckermann 2007; Kreimerman 2017; Millek 2017).
Often time researchers utilizing multiple destruction events do not state how
much evidence of a destruction event is present in the archaeological record, and
240 Jesse Michael Millek [UF 49
what if anything can be said of the cause based on the archaeological evidence
and not on the theory being presented. As is also often the case, destruction events
which are based on little to no evidence have crept into maps and lists and thus
become a scholarly reality. This was the starting point I took to categorize these
events in the southern Levant in my dissertation (Millek 2016; Millek forthcom-
ing) examining the cited destruction events in the southern Levant from ca. 1200–
1130 BC1. All sites listed or described as destroyed were included regardless of
whether they were a large habitation such as Lachish or Megiddo, or non-habitu-
ation sites such as the Ammon Airport structure, in order to capture the complete
picture of destruction in this transitional period. I examined and categorized 62
such events at 56 sites which I have detailed at length elsewhere (Millek 2016:
200–65; Millek 2017). Here I will present a summary of this work along with the
implications for the theories which utilize destruction events as part of the expla-
nation for the cultural, political, and economic changes at the end of the Late
Bronze Age in the southern Levant2. The main question I will examine is, was
destruction, either at one time or over time, the cause for the transition and the
changes seen in the southern Levant from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age?
1
With Hazor being the major exception to this rule.
2
In working over the material again, some modifications have been made to the
classifications presented in both Millek 2016 and Millek 2017. The classifications for scale
and cause presented here should be followed in the future.
2018] The end of the Late Bronze Age in the Southern Levant 241
Figure 1. “Destruction” events at the end of the Late Bronze Age

Classifying destruction
Scale
All the destruction events presented in this study have been examined under the
same rubric which separates destruction events by two major factors: scale and
possible cause. Unlike other classification systems (Finkelstein 2009; Hasel 2016;
Kreimerman 2017), the scale in this classification system is not based on how
severely a site was damaged. Rather, this scale notes the number of buildings un-
covered from a single stratum, level, or phase which have evidence of destruction
(e.g. burning of an entire building, mudbrick collapse. See Finkelstein 2009: 113;
Kreimerman 2017: 175-178). The scale is broken up into four segments: Partial,
Single Building, Multi-building, and Site-wide. A Partial destruction has been re-
served for excavations, where the description is too vague or the archaeological
record too sparse or disturbed to say what was destroyed. A good example of this
is Ashdod’s Stratum XIV in Area A where a thick layer of ash was uncovered
(Dothan and Freedman 1967: 81; Dothan 1971: 25–26; Yasur-Landau 2010: 220–
221); however, it is unclear what if anything was destroyed (Yasur-Landau 2010:
340; Ben-Shlomo 2011: 202; Millek 2017: 122).
The second scale is a Single Building destruction. This is when only a single
building from a stratum, level, or phase yielded any evidence of a destruction
event. Additionally, when only a single building from a period has been uncov-
ered, the rule in this system is not to magnify the destruction event based on this
one building to the site as a whole. This is the minimalist approach as granted
when only a single building is found from a stratum, it does not mean that more
evidence of destruction might be waiting to be uncovered or was destroyed by
later occupation, this being the maximalist approach to interpreting this destruc-
tion event. However, in the same way, further excavation might show that no fur-
ther parts of the settlement showed any evidence of destruction (see discussion of
Tell es-Safi/Gath below). Thus, to err on the side of caution and not to inflate a
destruction, in these cases, the site will be categorized as a Single building de-
struction acknowledging, that any further excavation can always change the scale
of attribution. Tel Miqne (Ekron) Stratum VIIIB’s destruction is a good example
of this. Only a single storage building dating to the end of the Late Bronze Age
was unearthed and this building was indeed destroyed (Dothan 1998: 151; Kille-
brew 1998: 381; Killebrew 2013: 80–81, 83). However, this does not indicate that
the site as a whole was destroyed until further evidence of such an event is uncov-
ered. Therefore, it is classified as a Single building destruction.
Following a single building destruction is naturally a Multi-building destruc-
tion, where several buildings suffered a destruction event in the same stratum
while other buildings did not. Hazor Stratum XIII and Stratum 1A is a striking
example of this type of destruction. While the monumental structures of the site
were destroyed in an intense fire, structures from Area S in the Lower City were
left abandoned without any evidence of destruction (Ben-Tor and Zuckerman
2008; Zuckerman 2013). Much like the single building destruction, to say that
Hazor was destroyed expands the destruction beyond its archaeological bounds.
Finally, there is a Site-wide destruction. This is reserved only for sites which
yielded evidence of a contemporaneous destruction event found in all areas of
excavations which here can be easily represented by Lachish Level VI, where
destruction was found in every excavated area (Ussishkin 2004b).
Not every destruction will fit neatly into one of these scale attributions and
does require interpretation. This is particularly true when the information about
the destruction is sparse due to the age of the excavation where all relevant infor-
mation might not have been recorded or because the archaeological record is in-
complete due to later building activates, erosion, or modern agriculture and con-
struction activities. Such is the case for Bethel and Tel Dan (See discussion below)
where they could be classified into several different scales, depending largely
whether one interprets destruction from the minimalist perspective or the maxi-
malist perspective. Another example is Aphek Stratum X12 which was only a
single building (Palace VI) when it was destroyed toward the end of the LB IIB.
Given this, it could be classified as a Single Building destruction because there
was only a single building destroyed. However, being the only building on the site
at the time and since it was destroyed, all excavation areas yielded evidence of
destruction and it could be classified as a Site-wide destruction. As with any sys-
tem of classification, be it pottery, jewellery, or buildings, there is still a level of
interpretation that will depend on who is classifying the material as a slight dif-
ference in shape or the layout of a structure might place one object or building
into one or another classification3.
Cause
What or who caused a destruction is the hardest and often times most unanswer-
able question about any destruction event. Many researchers describing destruc-
tion events assume a human cause for the destruction events at the end of the Late
Bronze Age. Knapp and Manning speaking of destruction throughout the Eastern
Mediterranean state, “Although numerous sites were destroyed or abandoned over
at indeterminable but relatively short period of time, we cannot ascertain exactly
who the agents of destruction were in each case (Sea Peoples, Egyptians, Israel-
ites, Aramaeans, Dorian, more pirates generally)” (Knapp and Manning 2016:
137). Or as Kreimerman has most recently described the situation at the end of
the Late Bronze Age in Israel, “It is plausible that the majority of the destructions
in these periods can be attributed to human activity, especially to conflict”
(Kreimerman 2017: 191). However, this approach ignores both natural and acci-
dental causes of destruction (see Millek 2017: 117–118), particularly as destruc-
tions normally considered part of the end of the Late Bronze Age fall within a
century or more of time. Accidental fires and natural destruction events would
have happened and would have been preserved in the archaeological record.
Therefore, rather than assign all destruction events to conflict or human activity,
this classification system only gives a cause if there is enough reasonable evidence
for the cited perpetrator, natural or otherwise. This follows the same type of fo-
rensic fire investigation techniques used by investigators and the judicial system
in the United States, which gives four possible causes: unknown, natural, acci-
dental, or incendiary (Redsicker and O'Connor 1997: 91–93, 121). For this classi-
3
As is the case with the “Ceremonial Palace” at Hazor Stratum XIII which could be called
either a temple (Zuckerman 2006) or a palace (Ben-Tor 2006a).
fication system, incendiary has been changed to human activity. Provided enough
reasonable evidence, natural and human activity destruction events can be further
subdivided. For example, human activity can be divided into warfare or termina-
tion rituals, and following Zuckerman (2007) these can be divided into either a
sacred or desecratory termination ritual.
Destruction at the end of the LBA

No destruction
Reason for
Cited
Site attribution of no Citation
destruction
destruction
‘Afula Dever 1992: No LBA Settlement Dothan 1993: 37; Millek
101 2017: 120
Abu el- Fischer 2014, No physical evidence Fischer 2006: 158, 175–
Kharaz, 570. of destruction 176; Millek 2016: 234
Tell
Abu Ha- Dever 1992: No physical evidence Artzy Personal Commu-
wam, Tell 101 of destruction nication: 04.07.2016
Acco Knapp and Misdated destruction Bell 2006: 137. Millek
Manning 2016: event 2016: 201
130
Amman Mumford 2015: No physical evidence Mumford 2015: 95-96;
Airport 109 of destruction Millek 2016: 201–203
Structure
Ashkelon Knapp and No physical evidence Stager 2008: 257; Millek
Manning 2016: of destruction 2017 122
130
Batash, Dever 1992: No physical evidence Mazar and Kelm 1993:
Tel 101 of destruction 153; Millek 2017: 123
Burna, Faust 2017: 23 No physical evidence McKinny Cassuto and
Tel of destruction Shai 2015
Dor, Tel Stern 2013:5 No physical evidence Stern 2013: 5 Millek
of destruction 2017: 125
ej-Judeideh, Faust 2017: 23 No LBA settlement Gibson 1994: 223
Tell
el-Hesi, Drews 1993: 16 Miss dated Matthers 1989: 59–60;
Tell destruction event Millek 2016: 240
es-Safi, Maeir 2012:18; No physical evidence Maeir Personal Commu-
Tell Gath) 2013: 204 of destruction nication: 06.11.2014
Gerisa, Stern 2013:5 No physical evidence Herzog 1990: 52; Millek
Tel of destruction 2016: 250–251
Harasim, Faust 2017: 23 Misdated destruction Givon 2008: 1766–1767
Tel event
Jemmeh, Drews 1993: 16 Misdated destruction Albright 1932: 74;
Tell event Wright 1939: 460;
Millek 2016: 250
Khirbet Drews 1993: 16 No physical evidence Kochiva 1974: 2–33;

Rabud of destruction Millek 2016: 222
Mevorakh, Stern 2013:5 No physical evidence Stern 1984: 8-9; Millek
Tel of destruction 2016: 232-233
Michal, Stern 2013:5 Site abandoned at Herzog 1993: 1037;
Tel end of 14th cent Millek 2016: 233
BCE
Qubur el- Asscher et al No physical evidence Asscher et al 2015: 79
Walaydah 2015: 79 of destruction
Shiqmona Stern 2013:5 No physical evidence Millek 2016: 229
of destruction
Zayit, Tel Faust 2017: 23 Misdated destruction Tappy 2008: 2082
event
Zera’a, Häser Soen- No physical evidence Soennecken 2017
Tell necken and Viev- of destruction
weger 2016: 126
Zeror, Tel Dever 1992: No physical evidence Ohata and Kochavi
101 of destruction 1964: 284; Millek 2017:
131-132
Figure 2. Sites with no destruction at the end of the Late Bronze Age
Of the 62 destruction events described here, more than a third (23), have yielded
no destruction relating to the end of the Late Bronze Age. Several of these sites
do indeed have destruction events; however, these occurred either before or after
the period under discussion. Such sites include, Tel Zayit and Tel Harasim, both
of which have destruction events dated to the early or mid-13th century BC (Tappy
2008: 2082; Givon 2008: 1766–1767) or Tell Jemmeh whose destruction is dated
to the latter part of the Iron I or the Iron II (Albright 1932: 74; Wright 1939: 460;
Ben-Shlomo, Personal Communication 18.08.2015). Others however, are simply
assumed destroyed or are false citations. Assumed destructions include Tel Dor
which Stern himself states, “The Bronze Age stratum of destruction at Tel Dor
has not yet been reached” (Stern 2013: 5 emphasis my own) or Qubur el-
Walaydah where no evidence of destruction was found, yet a destruction is still
assumed. As the excavators describe it: Stratum 1-5d was abandoned with com-
plete pottery vessels in situ left behind.
There are no signs of burning, but a violent destruction of Stratum 1-5d is pos-
sible. The walls of Stratum 1-5d did not collapse and were still standing after
Stratum 1-5d was abandoned (Asscher et al 2015: 79 emphasis my own)4.
Other sites have been falsely accused of being destroyed when the site was not
even inhabited at the end of the Late Bronze Age. Tel Michal was abandoned at
the beginning of the 13th century (Herzog 1990: 52) is ascribed a destruction by
Stern (2013: 5) or Tell ej-Judeideh which had no Late Bronze Age occupation
(Gibson 1994: 223) is given a destruction by Faust (2017: 23). Others still have
4
In a recent article by Manclossi, Rosen and Lehmann there is no longer mention of a
destruction at Qubur el-Walaydah but an abandonment (Manclossi, Rosen and Lehmann
2018: 2).
been ascribed a destruction based on too little evidence for a destruction event.
The Amman Airport Structure’s Phase 4b (Level 1b) showed evidence of burning
only in a single room (Mumford 2015: 109) while the structure had no further
evidence of destruction. At Tell es-Safi/Gath, some relatively well preserved and
restorable pottery found on the floor of a Late Bronze Age building in Area E
Stratum 4a was called a possible destruction (Maeir 2012: 18; 2013: 204) though
this was later shown not to be the case based on further excavations at the site
(Maeir: personal communication 06.11.2014)5.
Some of these false destruction events may be known for archaeologists of the
southern Levant and do not need to be repeated for their sake, the issue here is
that the transitions at the end of the Late Bronze Age are not a phenomenon solely
of the southern Levant. Thus, these false events have worked their way into other
publications. Cline 2014 along with Knapp and Manning 2016 still list Acco and
Ashkelon as destroyed despite a lack of evidence (Cline 2014: 111; Knapp and
Manning 2016: 130). Knapp and Manning change the possible violent destruction
mentioned by Maeir (2012: 18; 2013: 204) into, at least, a partial destruction of
the site (Knapp and Manning 2016: 131). Kaniewski et al, while writing about
Alalakh in the northern Levant, list Tel Dor as destroyed due to the Sea Peoples
invasion (Kaniewski et al 2011: 2 Fig. 1)6. Thus, these non-destruction destruction
events bear repeating here. While these old, or some time new, lists, charts, tables,
and figures cannot be updated they can at least be corrected for future reference.
The scale of Late Bronze Age destruction
Stratum/
Site Scale Citation
Level/Phase
Achzib NA Partial Prausnitz 1993; Millek 2016
Ashdod XIV Partial Dothan and Freedman 1967; Dothan
1971; Dothan and Ben-Shlomo 2005;
Yasur- Landau 2010; Millek 2017
Beth Mirsim, C2 Partial Albright 1932; 1974; Millek 2017
Tell
Bethel LB II Partial Albright 1934; Kelso 1968; Finkelstein
Phase 2 and Singer-Avitz 2009; Millek 2016
Beth- Stratum Partial Grant 1939; Millek 2017
Shemesh VIB, Level 8
Dan, Tel VIIA1 Partial Ben-Dov 2009
Eton, Tel NA Partial Faust and Katz 2015; Millek 2016
5
In the same volume where Maier claims a destruction for Area E Stratum 4a both Shai,
Uziel, and Maier (2012: 229–30) along with Gadot, Yasur-Landau, and Uziel (2012) make
no mention of a destruction at the end of this stratum, noting only debris. However, in
neither chapter do the authors refute the destruction referred to by Maier (2012: 18) in the
same volume; this event is simply not mentioned.
6
Moreover, they date all of these destructions to 1185 BC. However, Hazor is also
included in this list which was destroyed well before 1185 BC as the time between these
events has been reduced to fit onto a single map. This is an example of the Atlantis Premise
described below.
Gezer XIV Partial Dever et al 1970; Dever et al 1974; De-

ver et al 1986; Millek 2016
Hefer, Tel A/7 Partial Porath and Paley 1993; Millek 2016
Keisan, Tell Stratum 13 Partial Humbert 1993; Millek 2017
Nami, Tel LB IIB Partial Artzy 1990a; 1990b; 1992; Millek 2016
Qashish, Tel VI/V Partial Ben-Tor and Bonfil 1988; Ben-Tor
1993b; 2003a; 2003b; Millek 2016
Umm ad- LB II Partial McGovern 1989; Millek 2016
Dananir
el-Farʿah YR Single Wood 1991; Millek 2016
South, Tell Building
el-Fukhar, Stratum V Single Strange 2015; Millek 2016
Tell Phase 3 Building
el-‘Umeiri, Phase 14 Single Herr 2000; Bramlett 2008; Herr Clark
Tell Building and Bramlett 2009; Millek 2016
Tel Haror B7 Single Oren 1993; Millek 2017
Building
Gezer XV Single Dever et al 1970; Dever et al 1974; De-
Building ver et al 1986; Dever 1993; Millek 2016
Irbid, Tel Phase IIc Single Lenzen and Gorden and McQuitty 1985;
Building Millek 2016
Jaffa RG-3a Single Burke Peilstöcker and Karoll 2017
(Level Building
IVA)
Jaffa RG-4a Single Burke Peilstöcker and Karoll 2017
(Level Building
IVB)
Lachish VII Single Ussishkin 2004b; 2004c; 2004d; Barkay
Area S Building and Ussishkin 2004; Millek 2017
Lachish Fosse Fosse Single Tufnell et al 1940: 19–20; Ussishkin
Temple Temple III Building 2004b; Millek 2017
Megiddo VIIB Single Load 1948; Finkelstein et al 2017; Mar-
Building tin 2017; Millek 2016
Miqne, Tel VIIB Single Dothan 1998; Killebrew 1998; 2013;
(Ekron) Building Millek 2017
Mor, Tel VII Single Barako 2007a; 2007b; Millek 2016
Building
Mor, Tel VI Single Barako 2007a; 2007b; Millek 2016
Building
Zippor, Tel III Single Biran 1993; Millek 2017
Building
Hazor XIII and Multi- Ben-Tor 1998; 2002; 2006; 2013; Ben-
1A building Tor and Zuckerman 2008; Zuckerman
2007; 2013; Millek 2016
Yin’am, Tel XIIA Multi- Liebowitz 2003; Millek 2016
building
Beth-Shean VI, S3, Multi- Yadin and Geva 1986; James and
Stratum 4 building McGovern 1993; Panitz-Cohen and
Mazar 2009; Millek 2016
Aphek X12 Site-wide Gadot 2009; Millek 2017
Azekah, Tel T2-3a Site-wide Kleiman Gadot and Lipschitz 2016;
Webster et al 2017; Lipschits Gadot and
Oeming 2017; Millek 2016
Deir Alla, Phase E Site-wide Franken 1992; Kafafi and Van Der
Tell Kooij 2013; Millek 2016
el-‘Umeiri, Phase 12 Site-wide Herr 2000b; Herr Clark and Bramlett
Tell 2009; Millek 2016
es-Sa’idiyeh, XII Site-wide Tubb 1993; Millek 2016
Tell
Jokneam XIXa Site-wide Ben-Tor 1993a; Ben-Tor Ben-Ami and
Ariella 2005; Millek 2016
Lachish VI VI Site-wide Ussishkin 2004b; 2004d; 2004e; Smith
2004; Millek 2017
Sera’, Tel IX Site-wide Oren 1982; 1993; Millek 2016
Figure 3. Scale of destruction at the end of the Late Bronze Age
Minus the 23 events described above, there are 39 destruction events which have
bene related to the end of the Late Bronze Age in the southern Levant. Given the
vague nature of the dates for some of these events, it is likely that after future
analysis several of them would prove to fall out of the period discussed here (e.g.
Megiddo VIIA as I will discuss below). Of the 39 sites which yielded evidence of
a destruction event, 13 have evidence of a partial destruction. For many of the
sites, it is currently impossible to tell exactly how much was destroyed. This in-
cludes sites like Tell Keisan 13 which yielded very little from the end of the Late
Bronze Age and a single room was found with evidence of destruction (Humbert
1993: 864) or Tell ‘Eton which has meagre evidence for the end of the Late
Bronze Age (Faust 2014: 588) or Tell Hefer Phase A/7 which had some evidence
of destruction (Porath and Paley 1993:612). For other sites including Tel Qashish
Strata V-IV (Ben-Tor and Bonfil 1988: 108; Ben-Tor 1993b: 1200, 1203; Ben-
Tor and Bonfil 2003: 245, 276), Tel Nami during the LB IIB (Artzy 1990a: 34;
Artzy 1990b: 76; Artzy 1992: 24), and Tel Dan Stratum VIIA1 (Ben-Dov 2009:
81, 115, 135, 159), each of these was too disturbed either by later periods of oc-
cupation or because of modern activities. Thus, little can be said about how dev-
astating these events might have been to any given site7.
13 sites have evidence of 16 single building destruction events. Jaffa’s Gate
Complex has been ascribed two destruction events to Phases RG-3a and RG-3a
(Burke Peilstöcker and Karoll 2017), along with Tel Mor Stratum VII’s Building
B and Stratum VI’s Building F (Barako 2007a). Additionally, Lachish Level VII
7
For example, Both Bethel and Tel Dan do have evidence for wider destruction than their
classification as partially destroyed. However, either the documentation describing the
event or the archaeological record itself is too fragmented to come to any certainty as to
their extent.
has traditionally been considered a multi-building destruction event evidenced by

the destruction of a domestic structure in Area S and the Fosse Temple III. How-
ever, as I have suggested in the past, the nature of both of these destruction events
lends themselves to being two separate destructions. The Fosse Temple was likely
ritually terminated perhaps replaced by the Acropolis Temple in Level VI and the
domestic structure of Area S was destroyed by an accidental fire, given that the
main evidence for fire was found in the kitchen (Millek 2017: 127–128 see more
below). As mentioned above, Aphek could be classified as either a Single Build-
ing or a Site-wide destruction. Because it is the only building known for this pe-
riod at the site, it is classified as a Site-wide destruction rather than as a Single
Building.
One site requires some special consideration; this is Megiddo Stratum VII.
Two destruction events have been ascribed to Megiddo Stratum VII generally
consisting of the destruction of the palace in Area AA (For recent discussion and
re-evaluations see: Finkelstein et al 2017; Martin 2017). While Ussishkin has ar-
gued that the palace only suffered one destruction at the end of Stratum VIIA, this
has been convincingly refuted by Mazar (2002), Samet (2009) Finkelstein et al
(2017), and Martin (2017) leaving two destruction events one at the end of VIIB
and one in VIIA. However, as Finkelstein et al and Martin have argued, the date
for the destruction of Stratum VIIA appears to fall well outside of their LB III and
in the early Iron I. The date of this destruction, they argue, probably occurred
sometime in the middle decades of the 11th century BC based on radiocarbon dates
and correlations with recent finds in Area H (Finkelstein et al 2017: 274–275;
Martin 2017: 279–284). Meaning, this destruction is too far outside of the transi-
tion from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age to be considered part of the events
which brought about the transformations in the southern Levant.
This would leave the destruction of the palace during Stratum VIIB dating to
ca. 1185 BC as Martin suggests (2017: 283) with there being little other evidence
of destruction other than in Area K Unit 04/K/57 which was attached to Building
04/K/44. Here, in Unit 04/K/57, a half meter of destruction debris was found on
an earthen floor which was covered by an ash layer. However, no evidence of a
destruction was found in Building 04/K/44, though complete vessels were found
on the floor, which seems to indicate that it was “hastily” abandoned as the exca-
vators argue (Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern 2006: 847-848; Gadot et al
2006: 90-92; Arie and Nativ 2013: 171–174; Martin et al 2013: 153, 160). No
destruction was found in Areas H or F (Finkelstein and Ussishkin 2000: 593–594;
Martin 2017: 279). Because there is little evidence of destruction in Area K, with
only the unit next to Building 04/K/44 showing any evidence of destruction which
could well have been an accidental fire, Megiddo Stratum VIIB is classified as a
Single Building destruction. However, the question that can be asked is, was the
palace in Area AA actually destroyed at the end of Stratum VIIB? As Load de-
scribed it:
“The Stratum VIIB palace obviously suffered violent destruction so extensive

that the Stratum VIIA builders deemed it more expedient to level off the re-
sulting debris and build over it than to remove all of it” (Load 1948: 29).
He goes on to describe the meter and a half of fallen stones over which the Stratum
VIIA pavement was constructed and some charred horizontal lines found, “Here
and there on the walls of the rooms to the north of the court” (Load 1948: 29).
What Load’s account of this destruction is generally lacking is a portrayal of a
destruction. While he notes the large amounts of fallen stones, there is generally
little description of a violent destruction. Rather the assumption is that it was so
badly destroyed, that the following builders did not remove the resulting rubble.
However, this assumption does not equate to a destruction. It is possible that what-
ever shock or crisis which affected Megiddo, suggested by Martin and Finkelstein
et al (Martin 2017; Finkelstein et al 2017. See also Millek 2016: 223–229), caused
the people of Megiddo to decommission the building, and build anew much as
Martin noted for Areas BB and H (Martin 2017). Thus, the “destruction” of the
palace in Stratum VIIB may have been the demolition and reconstruction of the
palace. Rather than remove all remains of the previous palace, the occupants at
Megiddo found it easier simply to level off the structure and build the palace of
Stratum VIIA. A similar situation occurred on Cyprus during the transition from
the LC IIC to the LC IIIA at the turn of the 12th century BC. Kition’s Temple 2
and Temple 3 were dismantled and remodelled with new ashlar masonry building
over the levelled off remains of the two previous temples. However, there was no
evidence of a destruction at Kition, and it seems to be that the two temples were
purposefully rebuilt on a grander scale (Karageorghis and Demas 1985: 25–29,
273–275; Georgiou 2011: 117; Iacovou 2013: 599). Something like this might
have been the case for Megiddo’s palace in the transition from Stratum VIIB to
VIIA. However, this is of course conjecture, and needs further consideration. Nev-
ertheless, if this were the case, it would indicate that there was no violent destruc-
tion of Megiddo during the end of the Late Bronze Age brought on by either man
or nature.
11 sites showed strong evidence for more than a single building destruction.
Hazor, Tel Yin’am, and Beth-Shean, each had evidence for a multi-building de-
struction. As mentioned above, Hazor’s public and monumental structures in Ar-
eas M and A of the Upper City were completely destroyed. However, in Lower
City, the only clear evidence of destruction is the destruction of the temple in Area
H. Both gates in Areas K and P were destroyed in Stratum 1B and fell out of use
in the final stratum of occupation Stratum 1A. In both Areas F and C, there is no
clear evidence of destruction as destruction in Area C was assumed due to the
destruction found in Area H. Moreover, in Area S the domestic structures were
found abandoned with no destruction whatsoever (Ben-Tor and Zuckerman 2008;
Zuckerman 2007; 2013). At Tel Yin’am Stratum XIIA, evidence of destruction
was found in Buildings 1, 2, 6, and 7 with the worst destruction found in Building
1 the largest structure at the site. Buildings 3 Upper, 5, and 8 had no evidence of
a destruction event with no mentioned fire or wall collapse which was seen in the
other structures (Liebowitz 2003: 83–100). Likewise, in Beth-Shean evidence for
destruction was found in the renewed excavations Area S and Yadin’s Stratum 4.
However, no evidence of a destruction was mentioned from the UME reports at
the end of their Level VI and no evidence of a destruction was found in the re-
newed excavation’s Building ND Stratum N-3a which was abandoned. (Yadin
and Geva 1986: 48–51, 89. Mazar 2009a: 15, 17, 30 note 8. Panitz-Cohen and
Mazar 2009: 162).
Seven sites yielded evidence for a site-wide destruction found at: Aphek, Tel
Azekah, Tell Deir Alla, Tell el-‘Umeiri Phase 12, Tell es-Sa’idiyeh, Jokneam,
Lachish Level VI, and Tel Sera’. At Tel Azekah, destruction was found in Areas
S1, S2, W1, and T2 though a complete description of this event has not yet been
published. The skeleton of a young woman was uncovered in the destruction de-
bris of Building T2/F627 (Lipschits, Gado, and Oeming 2012; Metzer 2015: 68,
126–127, 134–136). Tell el-‘Umeiri Phase 12 had its Buildings A, B, and C de-
stroyed by fire where four individuals were crushed underneath falling rubble
(Herr, Clark, Bramlett 2009: 86, 88). Destruction of the possible Egyptian site at
Tell es-Sa’idiyeh Stratum XII was found in Areas AA, EE, KK, and MM. The
buildings and the gate were complete destroyed by fire with the buildings and the
gate were found filled with destruction debris (Tubb 1993). Jokneam’s destruction
at the end of its Stratum XIXa was largely found in Area A4 as the houses were
burned and found filled with brick and stone debris. The evidence is not as strong
in Area A1 where only a “conflagration layer” was uncovered (Ben-Dor 2005:
154, 162, 164). Lachish was destroyed before its 300-year abonnement at the end
of its Level VI. The Pillared Building in Area S was burned and four skeletons
were found in the destruction debris. The Acropolis Temple in Area P was also
thoroughly destroyed (Ussishkin 2004b; 2004d; 2004e; Smith 2004) Finally at Tel
Sera’, Both Buildings 906 and 1118 were destroyed by fire; however, lacking a
complete publication of the site, not much can be said of this event (Oren 1982;
1993).
The causes of LBA destruction
Figure 4. Cause of destruction at the end of the Late Bronze Age
What caused these events is another matter entirely. Of the 39 destruction events
29 do not have a clear cause and remain classified as Unknown while the remain-
ing 10 have at least enough information to propose a possible cause, though of
course these may still be disputed. In some cases, through the process of
elimination, the cause can be narrowed down to at least two of the three possible
options. For example, the Site-wide destructions found at both Lachish VI and
Tell es-Sa’idiyeh were not likely the result of accidental fires. Rather a human or
natural cause would appear a more satisfactory answer. However, in both cases,
there is no strong evidence to suggest either option as neither have evidence for
warfare nor is there enough evidence for a natural cause (Millek 2016: 246–248;
Millek 2017: 127–131). Nevertheless, the majority of destruction events have not
yielded the requisite information to give probable cause. However, for 10 events
there is likely enough information to suggest what might have brought about the
destruction event.
For three sites, an earthquake appears to have caused the destruction based on
typical earthquake damage found within the destruction (Millek 2016: 205–211,
235–237). At Tell Deir Alla Phase E, cracks were found throughout the floors of
the sanctuary and its adjoining rooms which were filled with sherds that matched
others resting on the floor next to the crack. An individual was crushed under a
collapsing roof, and the north wall of the cella broke away sliding down the side
of the tell (Franken 1992: 17–36; Millek 2016: 235–237). At Beth-Shean, the ev-
idence is not as dramatic; however, there are typical signs of an earthquake and
evidence which would suggest against an attack. Burning was only found in do-
mestic structures, which are not typically the focus of an attack. However, burning
was only found in some rooms while others only suffered wall collapse with some
of those walls found tilted and split a typical sign of earthquake damage (Panitz-
Cohen and Mazar 2009: 162). Secondly, the event was apparently sudden as a
grinding stone was found likely in use when Building 2522 was burnt. Carbonized
grain was found near the grinding stones in the building, some between the stones
and some even stuck to the upper stone (Yadin and Geva 1986: 48–51). Moreover,
no evidence of an attack was ever uncovered, and the statue of Ramesses III and
the stelae of Seti I and Ramesses II were found in the Level V Northern Temple
seemingly venerated by the local people without any sign of mutilation (Mazar
2009: 10). This is in stark contrast to the Egyptian statues mutilated in the destruc-
tion of Hazor (Ben-Tor 2006b: 3–14). What this leaves is that an earthquake, not
a violent destruction, was likely the cause of the burning and collapse at Beth-
Shean at the end of its Egyptian occupation.
Of the 39 destruction events, only one has yielded enough evidence to be an
accidental fire. Others would have been accidental in nature; however, given the
present state of research and methodology additional accidental fires would be
difficult to identify. This likely accidental fire was found in Lachish Area S Level
VII as the fire and destruction was worst in Units 3766, 3782 Upper, and 3783 all
of which were either part of a kitchen or housed a tabun (Barkay and Ussishkin
2004: 344, 347, 350, 351). Given that no evidence of a destruction was found in
Area P and that the nature of the destruction of the Fosse Temple III lends itself
to a termination ritual, this leaves an accidental kitchen fire.
The remaining six sites were likely destroyed by human hands with four being
an act of war and two as termination rituals. Aphek, Tell el-‘Umeiri Phase 12, and
Jaffa RG-4a and RG-3a were all likely destroyed in acts of war. At Aphek, the
single building was found burned to the ground and at least six arrowheads were
found in the debris with all but one found scattered outside of the building sug-
gesting an attack on the site rather than having been stored there (Gadot 2009: 67–
68; Millek 2017: 120–122). A similar if not more dramatic situation was found at
Tell el-‘Umeiri Phase 12. Burnt bones from four individuals were found covered in
debris along with all items stored in the structures of Phase 12. Also amongst the
destruction debris were five bronze weapon points and four stone ballista or pound-
ers found within a domestic context suggesting these objects came to reside there
during an attack in which the buildings and all that was within them were destroyed
by outside attackers (Herr 2000: 171–173. Herr Clark and Bramlett 2009: 86, 88).
Jaffa’s gate complex too was likely destroyed twice by attacks on the site. As Burke
et al (2017: 109–116) suggest, in order to bring about the complete destruction of
the gate complex, it would have required a deliberate effort consisting of several
steps to completely destroy the gate. In the destruction of the gate during Phase
RG4a, the excavators found arrowheads and a spearhead suggesting warfare, and in
the final destruction of the gate in RG-3a it was found that doors of the gateway
were closed when they burned (Burke et al 2017: 109–116, 128).
Finally, there are two destruction events which can be classified as termination
rituals. The first is, as Zuckerman (2007) argued, is Hazor Stratum XIII. This was
a desecratory termination given the mutilation of the site’s statuary and the fo-
cused destruction of the site’s monumental buildings. Moreover, no evidence of
warfare or any human victims were found within the destruction (Zuckerman
2007: 24–26). This event could have been part of an act of war, but as there is a
lack of evidence to say it was a siege or that there was a battle in Hazor, it is
classified as a Desecratory Termination Ritual as Zuckerman suggested. The sec-
ond termination ritual was uncovered at Lachish with the end of the Fosse Temple
III. It appears that the Fosse Temple III was ritually terminated as a way to end
the building’s use. All metals had been removed from the building along with any
statues of a god or goddess. The fire appears to have been started in the shrine at
the back the temple where the walls had been turned red like a kiln (Tufnell et al.
1940: 27–28, 42). This implies a deliberate destruction much as Tufnell sug-
gested; however, as I have argued before, it is likely a Sacred Termination Ritual
to end the lifecycle of the building as after this fire was set, the building was left
abandoned and taboo. The inhabitants of Level VI did not dig into the temple to
find treasures, no other building was built on top of it, and it was gradually cov-
ered over with wash from the tel (Tufnell et al. 1940: 28). It may then be no co-
incident that after the Fosse Temple III was terminated, the grand Acropolis Tem-
ple was constructed in Area P Level VI as Ussishkin (1993: 900) suggested pre-
viously.
Discussion
The extent of the damage
The Late Bronze Age is not the only period in the southern Levant which has a
string of destructions associated with it. The Early Bronze Age is given a large
swath of destruction at the end of the EB III (Butzer 1997: 271–272; Richard
2014: 343; Prag 2014: 388; Gallo 2014)8. For the Middle Bronze Age, Burke cites
30 major settlements destroyed at the end of the MB III (Burke 2014: 411; See
8
Though Kennedy has recently argued there is little to no evidence of site-wide
destruction, and the transition appears to be more peaceful and marked by abandonment
not massive destruction (Kennedy 2016: 23).
also Massafr 2014). Thus, the 39 destruction events associated with the end of the
Late Bronze Age are not out of place as transitional periods have generally been
considered times of destruction and abandonment. However, while this number
may appear high the relative amount of damage is low. Of these 39 events, 28 had
evidence for a Partial or Single Building destruction. Meaning, the amount of
physical damage to a large number of sites was relatively low even more so con-
sidering that 23 sites which have been cited as destroyed yielded no evidence of
a destruction.
Stratum/ Approximate date of

Site Scale
Level/Phase destruction
Achzib NA 13th cent. BC Partial
Qashish, Tel VI/V 13 cent. BC
th
Partial
Irbid, Tel Phase IIc 13 cent. BC
th
Single
Building
Umm ad-Dananir LB II 13th cent. BC Partial
Hazor XIII and 1A Mid-13th cent. BC Multi-
building
Beth Mirsim, C2 Second half 13th cent. BC Partial
Tell
Gezer XIV Second half 13th cent. BC Partial
Gezer XV Second half 13 cent. BC
th
Single
Building
Mor, Tel VII Second half 13th cent. BC Single
Building
Yin’am, Tel XIIA Second half 13th cent. BC Multi-
building
Jokneam XIXa Second half 13th cent. BC Site-wide
Zippor, Tel III End of 13th cent. BC Single
Building
Ashdod XIV End of 13th cent. BC Partial
Bethel LB II Phase 2 End of 13th cent. BC Partial
Beth-Shemesh Stratum VIB, End of 13 cent. BC
th
Partial
Level 8
Hefer, Tel A/7 End of 13th cent. BC Partial
Keisan, Tell Stratum 13 End of 13 cent. BC
th
Partial
Nami, Tel LB IIB End of 13th cent. BC Partial
Aphek X12 End of 13 cent. BC
th
Site-wide
el-‘Umeiri, Tell Phase 14 End of 13 cent. BC
th
Single
Building
Tel Haror B7 End of 13th cent. BC Single
Building
Lachish Area S VII End of 13th cent. BC Single
Building
Lachish Fosse Fosse Temple III End of 13th cent. BC Single

Temple Building
Miqne, Tel VIIB End of 13th cent. BC Single
(Ekron) Building
Dan, Tel VIIA1 First half 12th cent. BC Partial
Eton, Tel NA First half 12th cent. BC Partial
el-Farʿah South, YR First half 12 cent. BC
th
Single
Tell Building
el-Fukhar, Tell Stratum V Phase First half 12th cent. BC Single
3 Building
Megiddo VIIB First half 12th cent. BC Single
Building
Mor, Tel VI First half 12th cent. BC Single
Building
Dier Alla, Tell Phase E First half 12th cent. BC Site-wide
Beth-Shean VI, S3, Stratum 4 Mid-12th cent. BC Multi-
building
el-‘Umeiri, Tell Phase 12 Mid-12th cent. BC Site-wide
es-Sa’idiyeh, Tell XII Mid-12th cent. BC Site-wide
Sera’, Tel IX Mid-12 cent. BC
th
Site-wide
Jaffa RG-3a (Level End of 12 cent. BC
th
Single
IVA) Building
Jaffa RG-4a (Level End of 12th cent. BC Single
IVB) Building
Azekah, Tel T2-3a End of 12th cent. BC Site-wide
Lachish VI VI End of 12th cent. BC Site-wide
Figure 5. The timing of destructions at the end of the Late Bronze Age
Moreover, these events have been chronologically squeezed together either on a

map or on a list into a single event giving the impression of a drastic series of
destructions all associated with each other as part of the turmoil and disintegration
of the Canaanite culture palace system. Thus, the destruction of Hazor in ca 1250
BC was the beginning of the travail finally ending with the destruction of Me-
giddo’s Palace in Stratum VIIA in 11th century BC according to Finkelstein’s et
al revised chronology for the site. This is what Puglisi (2013: 178) aptly deemed
the “Atlantis premise” which is the constriction of time placing temporally dis-
placed events together into one cataclysmic event; ergo, what happened to myth-
ical Atlantis. The destruction events are spread out over the course of well more
than a hundred years, and most dates are far from certain9. Four sites have a de-
struction dated to the 13th century BC assumed to be part of the end of the LBA10.
9
All dates are approximate based on the excavators’ estimates for the destruction dates.
10
Achzib, Tel Qashish, Tell Irbid, and Umm ad-Dananir. Grain likely from the destruction
at Tell Irbid has been ¹⁴C dated placing the date of its destruction at the latest to 1260 BC
(Strange 2008: 284).
Hazor’s destruction falls in the mid-13th century BC with six other destruction
events occurring in the mid to late 13th century BC11. 13 destruction events are
considered to take place at the end of the 13th century BC12. Seven sites have a
destruction in the first half of the 12th century BC13. Four sites have destruction
events in the mid-12th century BC14. Finally, four destruction events are given to
the late 12th century BC15. Given the amount of chronological leeway, there is a
great temporal spread for the destruction events over the course of the 13th and
12th centuries BC. However, because these are all associated with the end of the
Late Bronze Age, or with certain other events like the Sea Peoples or an earth-
quake storm, they are correlated together into one historical narrative of the dis-
integration of the Late Bronze Age Canaanite culture. However, in other historical
periods, many of these destruction events would never be associated with one an-
other. Two good examples of this come from both the ancient past and the recent
past.
In the Iron II, Lachish was destroyed in 701 BC by Sennacherib (Ussishkin
1982). This destruction however would not be put together with the 604 BC de-
struction of Ashkelon at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar (Stager 2011) as the his-
torical sources indicate these destruction events occurred because of different em-
pires and peoples even though they are only separated by ca. 97 years not the
possible 120 years between the destruction of Hazor and Lachish Level VI. As a
modern example, the city of Hamburg, Germany suffered a devastating fire in AD
1842, where nearly one third of the city was burned (Braun and Gihl 2012). A
hundred years later, the city was devastated by Allied forces during bombing cam-
paigns in World War II (Bahnsen and Stürmer 2003). For both of these examples,
the original destruction event either that of Lachish or the AD 1842 fire in Ham-
burg did not cause and were not causally related to the destruction some 100 years
later at Ashkelon or the bombing in Hamburg. Both are better understood in their
historical context as one event did not lead to another. In the same way, the de-
struction events in the 13th century BC are only related to the destruction events
in the 12th century BC if one links them under the theme of the collapsing Ca-
naanite culture. However, if this is the case one can look further back in time as
Kreimerman (2017) has done including the destruction events in the LB IIA. Yet
from here, it is not that far of a logical leap to go further back to the dissolution
of the Middle Bronze Age and its 30 destruction events when the peak of the
Canaanite culture in the southern Levant was brought to an end and when the
region was eventually brought under the control of Egypt. This could all be con-
sidered one grand period of transition and breakdown of the Canaanite culture.
However, in doing so the details are lost. By the time Lachish was destroyed in
the second half of the 12th century BC or even further along when the palace in
Area AA at Megiddo was destroyed in the 11th century BC, the destruction of
11
Gezer XIV and XV, Jokneam, Tel Yin’am, Tel Mor VII, and Tell Beit Mirsim.
12
Lachish Level VII in Area S and the Fosse Temple III, Sippor, Aphek, Ashdod, Bethel,
Beth-Shemesh, Tel Haror, Tel Hefer, Tel Miqne (Ekron), Tel Nami, Tell el-‘Umayri Phase
14, and Tell Keisan.
13
Tel Dan, Megiddo VIIB, Tell el-Fukhar, Tel Eton, Tel Mor VI, Tell Deir Alla, and Tell
el-Far’ah (South)
14
Beth-Shean, Tel Sera’, Tell el-‘Umayri Phase 12, and Tell es-Sa’idiyeh.
15
Jaffa RG4a and RG-3a, Tel Azekah, and Lachish Level VI.
Hazor was history. The people of Hazor and those who burned its monumental
structures had died along with their children and children’s children by the time
Lachish was destroyed. Thus, while these events might be part of a general “pro-
cess” of transition it would be hard to argue that destruction in the 13th century
directly influenced destruction at the end of the 12th century.
What is also of interest is that despite the general focus placed on and around
the years between 1200 and 1177 BC, most of the major destruction events hap-
pened after this period. The only major destruction event during this time was at
Aphek and possibly Jokneam and the earthquake at Tell Deir Alla. Hazor’s and
likely Tel Yin’am’s destructions took place well before this time span. Most of
the destruction that is seen during these transitional years were Partial or Single
Building destructions. Not until somewhere in the mid-12th century BC do most
of the major destruction events take place at Beth-Shean, Tell es-Sa'idiyeh, Tel
Sera’, and Tell el-'Umeiri, and in the latter half of the 12th century at Lachish and
Tel Azekah. Thus, during the transition from the LB IIB to the Iron I, there was
in fact little destruction. Moreover, by the time these major destruction events
took place at Lachish, Tel Azekah, Tell es-Sa'idiyeh, and Beth-Shean, the major-
ity of the significant changes which brought about the Iron Age had already taken
place. Philistine material culture was already present in and around the southern
coastal plain. The highlands had already seen an increase in settlement. Beth-
Shean and Jaffa represented the last two remaining Egyptian sites in the southern
Levant, and the Canaanite palace system had already been abandoned by all but a
few settlements. Thus, for the majority of the southern Levant these major de-
struction events postdate the changes that many have argued they caused.
This is also the case in other neighbouring regions around the southern Levant.
In the transition from the LC IIC to LC IIIA on Cyprus there too was little evi-
dence of destruction (Iacovou 2013; Georgiou 2015) as well as a complete lack
of destruction in Lebanon at the same time as no sites have reported a destruction
event in the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron I (Bell 2006: 110,
137; 2009: 32; Sader 2014: 618)16. Thus, given a wider pattern lacking major de-
struction events in the transition from the 13th to the 12th century BC, it is not
unusual that this is the case for the southern Levant as well. This general trend
argues against the theories which utilize destruction to explain the transition from
the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age.
Violent destructions and the historical precedent

Many times, violent destructions are mentioned as an integral part for the transi-
tion which took place. Whether it be the Sea Peoples (Dever 1992: 103–107;
Stager 1995: 332–346; Stern 2013: 5), mercenaries and pirates wielding advanced
military technology (Drews 1993), social uprisings (Liverani 2003: 27–47; Van
De Mieroop 2010: 332–333), and climate change which brought about violent
waves of destruction as beleaguered people became the groups later known as the
Sea Peoples (Kaniewski et al 2010: 212–213; Kaniewski et al 2013: 6–8;
16
Sader mentioned a destruction of Sidon at the end of the 13th century BC. However,
continued excavations at the site have yielded no evidence of a destruction (Claude Serhal
Personal Communication: 11.04.2018). However, excavations at the site continue and this
picture lacking a destruction could be changed by future finds at Sidon.
Kaniewski et al 2015: 375; Langgut Finkelstein and Litt 2013: 161–168). Like-
wise, individual sites are given a destruction by the Egyptians or their neighbour-
ing site(s). To paraphrase an oft used term in the previous decade, all these theo-
ries utilize Agents of Mass Destruction, or AMD for short, to help explain away
the destruction events. However, upon closer examination there is no convincing
evidence for the vast swath of destruction “caused” by any of these AMD.
As Yasur-Landau argued for the Philistine Pentapolis and I have argued for
other sites commonly assumed destroyed by the Sea Peoples (Yasur-Landau
2010: 221–223, 340; Millek 2017), there is no evidence for a vast wave of de-
struction caused by the Sea Peoples in the southern Levant. Of the four excavated
sites of the Philistine Pentapolis, only Tel Miqne (Ekron) shows any real evidence
of a destruction, and again, this was only one storage building. Moreover, at
Aphek, Tell Beit Mirsim, Beth-Shemesh, and Tel Miqne (Ekron), between any
supposed destruction of the site there was an intervening “Canaanite” phase fol-
lowed by a peaceful intrusion of “Philistine” material culture. This is in conjunc-
tion with the lack of destruction at a number of sites claimed to have been de-
stroyed by the Sea Peoples, including: Tell Abu Hawam, Acco, ‘Afula, Ashkelon,
Tel Batash, Tel Dor, Tel Gerisa, Tel Mevorakh, Tel Michal, Tell es-Safi Gath,
Shiqmona, and Tel Zeror. Moreover, at a site like Tel Mor, while Building F suf-
fered a destruction in Stratum VI it was rebuilt in Stratum V only to be abandoned
with no destruction. Only after the site was abandoned did any “Philistine” mate-
rial culture appear at the site (Barako 2007a: 32–33; Barako 2007b: 45–46) This
is only from the archaeological side, as the historical texts from Medinet Habu
written by Ramesses III never mention any destruction in Canaan (See also Ben-
Dor Evian 2015; Ben-Dor Evian 2016; Millek 2016: 65–72). Thus, there is neither
archaeological evidence, nor a historical precedent to suggest that the Sea Peoples
caused a vast amount destruction in the southern Levant.
The same can be said for the other AMD. Drews’s map and list of sites de-
stroyed at the end of the Late Bronze Age is fraught with errors. Acco, Ashkelon,
Tel Gerisa, Tell el-Hesi, Tell Jemmeh, and Khirbet Rabud have no destruction
and only minor evidence of destruction has been found at Ashdod, Tell Beit
Mirsim, and Beth-Shemesh. He equates the destruction of Tell Deir Alla to the
Israelites (Drews 1993: 220) though this is one of the clearest examples of a de-
struction by earthquake one could hope for. This leaves little evidence to support
the Catastrophe Drews proposed for the end of the Late Bronze Age in the south-
ern Levant.
Two other issues surrounding the theories utilizing AMD and violent destruc-
tion are the historical precedents used to claim violence during this era, and the
claim that destructions are likely caused human action. Beginning with the histor-
ical precedents, this period is generally lacking in any that would suggest mass
destruction. As I already noted, the Medinet Habu reliefs and texts mention no
destruction in Canaan and indeed the historicity of the accounts of destruction
caused by the Sea Peoples are dubious. Carchemish shows no evidence of a de-
struction claimed by Ramesses III (Collins 2008: 80), and major sites on Cyprus,
ancient Alashiya, such as Alassa, Kouklia Palaepaphos, and Maroni-Vournes
were abandoned without evidence of destruction while sites such as Kouklia
Palaepaphos and Kition underwent a period of flourish without a destruction
(Georgiou 2015; 2017). Given this it should not be a surprise there was no
destruction in the southern Levant caused by the Sea Peoples. It was assumed that
cultural change and the appearance of locally made LH IIIC:1b pottery was
brought about by a vast destruction event (Stern 2013: 5–6), yet this approach is
not supported by the historical or archaeological evidence.
Likewise, in other Egyptian historical records from the Ramesside period,
there is no evidence to suggest that the Egyptians caused any destruction. As Ha-
sel has pointed out, in Egyptian iconography of the XIXth and XXth Dynasties
cities are besieged, plundered, or described as “carried away;” however, there is
little evidence to suggest the Egyptians ever destroyed the cities they attacked
with only a few mentions that walls or gates were destroyed (Hasel 1998: 241–
254; Hasel 2016: 221). As he summarizes the situation, “The textual and icono-
graphic evidence indicates that Egyptians did not employ wide-scale and total
conflagration of cities. The Egyptian interest was only in subduing them, bringing
them back under the control of Egypt, and taking the plunder, booty, and captives
back to Egypt” (Hasel 1998: 253). This is again the case for the Merneptah Stela.
Recently, Steven Ortiz and Sam Wolff have described further evidence of a de-
struction of Gezer at the end of the Late Bronze Age. They uncovered evidence
of a destruction event which killed at least two adults and a child who were cov-
ered and crushed by destruction debris and they assume that this destruction was
caused by Merneptah17. However, much as Hasel has already pointed out, there is
no record of Merneptah actually destroying Gezer or Ashkelon which too is men-
tioned in the text. Merneptah’s scribes described it as Ashkelon being brought in
and Gezer as captured, but the text does not mention actual destruction but forced
subjugation. Moreover, as Redford has noted about the text in general, “The sort
of triumphal sweep of arms which the above snippet of poetry conjures up is quite
unhistorical, and the passage must be rejected as a reliable source” (Redford 1986:
199). Thus, while Ortiz and Wolff assume Gezer destroyed by the Egyptian, the
text does not rely this message, and as mentioned above, Ashkelon has no evi-
dence of a destruction from this period. Moreover, as they have yet to make men-
tion of any weapons found in the destruction, it is not even certain if this event
was caused by an act of war.
Kreimerman has moved further back in time quoting the Amarna letters as
evidence for destruction occurring in the region where the verb šarāpu (“burn”)
appears. He cites letters EA 53, 62, 147, 174, 175, 185, 186, 189, 250, 306, 363,
and 371 (Kreimerman 2017: 191). There are two issues when utilizing the Amarna
texts as a reference for evidence of destruction at the end of the Late Bronze Age.
First, this too is a manifestation of the Atlantis Premise as the Amarna letters pre-
date the destruction of most sites by some 100 to a 150 years and Lachish Level
VI, and both destruction events at Jaffa by roughly 200 years! The social and
political climate for the end of the Late Bronze Age cannot be judged by these
texts which were themselves already historical during the transition from the Late
Bronze Age to the Iron Age. Egypt had gone through its period of monotheism,
changed dynasties twice, and switched rulers numerous times. Much like the de-
struction of Lachish in 701 BC by Sennacherib cannot be associated with the 604
BC destruction of Ashkelon by Nebuchadnezzar, the reliefs found at Nineveh
17
https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/MAGAZINE-israel-s-pompeii-snapshot-found-
of-3-200-year-old-catastrophe-1.5490997 (Accessed 09.04.2018).
which depict Lachish’s destruction and the Biblical texts which describe it cannot
be used to explain what happened at Ashkelon in 604 BC. The same is true with
the Amarna letters. They describe a time well before any of the events in the tran-
sition from the Late Bronze Age and the Iron Age and thus cannot describe
whether or not there was destruction in the southern Levant.
Nevertheless, even taking the Amarna letters into account still does not show
evidence for destruction. As Kreimerman himself notes, only EA 250 and 306
mention destruction in the southern Levant (Kreimerman 2017: 191). EA 250
mentions that cities have been taken or seized (Moran 1992: 303–304). In EA 306
Šubandu states that, “They have set fire to your cities and your places” (Moran
1992: 344). Thus, out of the 379 letters written over a period of roughly 30 years
from 1360–1330 BC, there are only two recorded instances where destruction
might have occurred in the southern Levant. With all that said, there is no histor-
ical precedent in the southern Levant which would indicate any vast amount of
destruction caused by any of the “usual suspects” such as the Sea Peoples, Egyp-
tians, neighbouring cities, let alone relying on the Biblical texts to justify a theory
for mass destruction by “Israelites.”
This leaves the assumption that destruction must have been caused by violent
and not by natural or accidental means. Kreimerman (2017: 178, 191) has argued
that because buildings in the southern Levant were built of either stone, mudbrick,
or a combination thereof this would leave only the roof to be made of flammable
material leaving it a difficult task to burn a whole city by natural or accidental
means. However, this approach does not consider several crucial factors. The first
is the contents of the building. Buildings of the southern Levant were not devoid
of flammable materials particularly if there happened to be a tabun in the struc-
ture. As Marco (2008: 153) has noted ovens are active continuously, and where
there is an active tabun there is a supply of fire wood to keep it burning throughout
the day. It should perhaps than not be surprising that storerooms and buildings
often caught fire as they were filled with flammable materials particularly if they
stored oil.
The second factor over looked is the climactic and environmental setting.
Wind would have played a crucial role in how a fire could spread and how intense
the fire could be. Ben-Tor and Zuckerman (Ben-Tor 1998: 462; Ben-Tor 2013:
30–31; Ben-Tor and Zuckerman 2008: 4) cite the high winds which prevail in the
region around Hazor as one of the three main factors for the fierce conflagration
which raged throughout the public buildings. A similar story is told by Ussishkin
(2004a: 5) of how on a hot and windy summer day at Tel Lachish in 1973 a single
cigarette butt caught the entire mound ablaze and the fire brigade was called to
keep it from spreading to the nearby forest. Thus, during the dry hot summer
months, fires and more extreme fires can take place and this should be taken into
consideration for each individual site.
Lastly, a major factor which has been overlooked, particularly relating to this
period, is if the city destroyed was in a period of crisis. It should not be surprising
that sites which had major destruction events also were under a period of crisis
beforehand. Hazor, Lachish Level VI, Tel Yin’am, Tell el-‘Umeiri Phase 14, and
Tell es-Sa’idiyeh all have evidence of crisis, partial abandonment, or refuges/
squatters living at the site before their final destruction followed by a period of
abandonment (Zuckerman 2007; Millek 2016; 241–248). When a site is under
crisis and partially abandoned the ability to respond to and act against a fire would
be diminished. This would be especially true if there was a drought when water
may have been a scarce commodity causing hesitation in using it to put out a fire
(see Millek 2017: 117–118 for further discussion). Moreover, in the case of a site
suffering from crisis which then experiences a destruction event, the people will
be less likely or unable to respond and to rebuild. Thus, for these five sites the
question must be asked, was it the destruction or the pre-existing crisis which was
only brought to a close by the destruction that caused the abandonment of the
sites? I would tend to agree with the latter of these two options.
Earthquakes
With all this discussion downplaying AMD as a means to explain away the de-
struction events at the end of the Late Bronze Age, this is not to suppose that other
cataclysmic theories involving natural causes should be put to blame either. Nur
and Cline (Nur and Cline 2000; Nur and Cline 2001; Nur and Burgess 2008) have
put forth that an earthquake storm helped to bring down the civilizations of the
Eastern Mediterranean. The issue with this claim however, is there is only clear
evidence of earthquakes at three sites, and all the sites are within the seismically
active Jordan Rift Valley of the Dead Sea Fault Zone. Earthquakes would have
been known and so would the response to them. Earthquake storms cannot be
counted on as a cause for the end of the Late Bronze Age in the southern Levant
as they did not affect region(s) strongly enough to have caused the sort of changes
which transpired.
Conclusion
When attempting to revise long held theories it is at times as important to state
what one is not arguing as much as what one is arguing. I will briefly present both
beginning with what I am arguing. Based on this survey of 62 cited destruction
events, there is far less destruction than is often assumed. One third of these have
proven to be false destruction events with only 11 sites having evidence for more
than a single building destruction. There is no reliable historical precedent nor
archaeological evidence to support the theory that Agents of Mass Destruction
wreaked havoc on the region and so these cannot explain the transition from the
Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age. Moreover, at formally major sites such as Hazor
and Lachish, pre-existing crisis conditions likely had more of an effect on the
populaces’ ability to respond to the destruction, or being able to stay at the site
rather than the destruction event itself. Additionally, taking the time of the de-
struction into consideration, even with conservative estimates for occurrences
over the course of 70 years still leaves one destruction per every two years with
most of those being minor events. However, the destruction events likely took
place over the course of a 150 years which would further spread out the destruc-
tion events over time.
Many sites continued under a new normal intermingling with different popu-
lations, such as the Sea Peoples wherever their origins may lie. It is also apparent
that individual regions over the course of a hundred years suffered from different
stresses and provided varied responses. For Hazor in the upper Galilee it was
abandonment, for the southern coastal plain it was to intermingle, and for the
Judean highlands it was to repopulate what had not been used in the Late Bronze
Age. Rather than look for a single crisis or set of crises we should start the search
for sub regional and site by site causes for these transitions as each people group
would have been able to better adapt and handle this transitional period as we see
them do. Unfortunately, I cannot say now what exactly those stresses might have
been, but perhaps after going through a detailed reassessment of the existing ar-
chaeological data we may come to find them as changes in climate, political struc-
tures, and economics that would have affected the sites in the southern Levant in
a multitude of ways causing a multitude of reactions. I would argue however, that
destruction events, either at one time or over a period of time were not the cause
for the transitions which took place.
What has happened, is that during a transitional period, destruction events take
on special meaning in the archeologically literature. Therefore, in the transition
from the Early Bronze Age to the Middle Bronze Age or from the Middle Bronze
Age to the Late Bronze Age, there is always a destruction horizon as these events
represent the end of something: a period, a development, a system, a culture, and
often times cause an assumed regression. However, the destruction events which
take place in between these are over looked. Tel Batash suffered four consecutive
conflagrations from the mid-16th century through the 14th century BC and was
abandoned without a destruction at the end of the Late Bronze Age (Kelm and
Mazar 1995: 71). Jokneam as well suffered four destruction events in succession
with only the last one taking place at the end of the LBA, but it was not immune
to destruction before this (Ben-Dor 2005: 164). Kreimerman too has noted 10 de-
struction events in the LB IIA (Kreimerman 2017: 184–185). This is just a sam-
pling to demonstrate that the years before the end of the Late Bronze Age were
not devoid of destruction.
This brings up an important point which is the general a lack of data on how
many destruction events actually took place at any given time in the southern Le-
vant. Because destruction is looked for during transitional phases and placed onto
maps and lists, it is clearer how much destruction might have taken place, but for
non-transitional phases this data does not exist. Moreover, during transitional
phase, destruction is actively looked for. Thus, small amounts of wall collapse,
restorable pottery on a floor, or evidence of burning in a single room, or an as-
sumption that a site was destroyed because of the introduction of new types of
material culture all become site wide destructions as they are associated with the
turmoil of the transition. However, at other more “stable” times this evidence will
not be presented as having regional and wide spread cultural significance as they
are in times of transition.
Here I must also say what I am not arguing. I am not attempting to take vio-
lence or turmoil out of the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age.
There were vast changes which took place over the course of a hundred years or
more as old political institutions came to an end, Egyptian rule over the southern
Levant was withdrawn and new entities such as the Philistines and the Israelites
appeared taking advantage of the situation. Three sites do yield evidence of de-
struction by warfare and one more with violence by desecration. There are likely
to be more than these which we cannot know based on the archaeological material.
However, much of the warfare that took place is likely archaeologically invisible
as it would have taken place in the fields and valleys. The transition would have
been tumultuous, and for some groups the period was a downturn while for others
it was an opportunity. There were winners and losers and different populations
were able to adapt to the stress they faced and stayed at their site while others
chose abandonment. Some merged with different populations in the southern
coastal plain while others sought new places of habitation in the highlands. How-
ever, the questions are not, were these times tumultuous or did warfare occur and
did warfare cause destruction? The answer to both questions is yes. Rather, the
question is, did destruction by warfare, earthquakes, or destruction in general at
one time or over time bring about the transition and the social, political, and cul-
tural changes seen at the end of Late Bronze Age and in the early Iron Age? To
this I would say, no.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Brian Schmidt for his helpful feedback and to Caitlin Dick-
inson who helped me in preparing the maps. The research presented in this article
is part of a larger project “Destruction and the End of the Late Bronze Age in the
Eastern Mediterranean” funded by the German Research Foundation.
Bibliography
ALBRIGHT, W. F., 1934. The Kyle Memorial Excavation at Bethel, BASOR 56: 2–
15.
— 1932. The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim. Vol. 1: The Pottery of the First
Three Campaigns (Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research
12). New Haven.
— 1974. The Archaeology of Palestine and the Bible. Cambridge.
ARIE, E. and NATIV, A., 2013. Part II: Level K-6. In: Finkelstein, I., Ussishkin. D.
and Cline, E. H., eds. Megiddo V. The 2004–2008 Seasons. Vol. 1.
Winona Lake: 165–177.
ARTZY, M., 1990a. Tel Nami 1985/1988. Hadashot Arkheologiyot: Excavations
and Surveys in Israel 9: 22–24.
— ARTZY, M.,1990b. Nami Land and Sea Project, 1985–1988. Israel Explo-
ration Journal 40: 73–76.
— 1992. Tel Nami – 1989/1991. Hadashot Arkheologiyot: Excavations and
Surveys in Israel 12: 24–27.
ASSCHER, Y., LEHMANN, G., ROSEN, S. A., WEINER, S., and BOARETTO, E., 2015.
Absolute dating of the Late Bronze to Iron Age transition and the appear-
ance of Philistine Culture in Qubur el-Walaydah, southern Levant. Radi-
ocarbon, 57(1): 77–97.
BAHNSEN, U., and VON STÜRMER, K. 2003. Die Stadt, die sterben sollte: Hamburg
im Bombenkrieg, Juli 1943. Hamburg.
BARAKO, T. 2007a. Stratigraphy and Building Remains. In: Barako, T. J., ed. Tel
Mor. The Moshe Dothan Excavations, 1959–1960 (Israel Antiquities Au-
thority Reports 32). Jerusalem: 11–42.
— 2007b. Canaanite and Philistine Pottery. In: Barako, T. J. ed. Tel Mor.
The Moshe Dothan Excavations, 1959–1960 (Israel Antiquities Authority
Reports 32). Jerusalem: 43–127.
BARKAY, G. and USSISHKIN, D., 2004. Area S: The Late Bronze Age Strata. In:
Ussishkin, D. ed. The Renewed Archaeological Excavations at Lachish
(1973–1994), Volume I. Tel Aviv: 316–410.
BELL, C., 2006. The Evolution of Long Distance Trading Relationships across the
LBA/Iron Age Transition in the Northern Levantine Coast: Crisis, Con-
tinuity, and Change. A Study Based on Imported Ceramics, Bronze and
Its Constituent Metals (British Archaeological Reports International Se-
ries 1574) Oxford.
— 2009 Continuity and Change: The Divergent Destinies of Late Bronze
Age Ports in Syria and Lebanon across the LBA/Iron Age Transition. In:
Bachhuber, C. and Roberts, R. G. eds. Forces of Transformation. End of
the Bronze Age in the Mediterranean. Proceedings of an International
Symposium Held at St. John’s College, University of Oxford, 25–26th
March 2006. Oxford: 30–38.
BEN-DOR EVIAN, S., 2015. “They were thr on land, others at sea”. The Etymology
of the Egyptian Term for “Sea-Peoples.” Semitica 57: 57–75.
— 2016. The Battles between Ramesses III and the “Sea-Peoples” When,
Where and Who? An Iconic Analysis of the Egyptian Reliefs. In: Zeit-
schrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 143(2): 151-168.
BEN-DOV, R., 2009. Dan III: Avraham Biran Excavations 1966–1999, The Late
Bronze Age. Jerusalem.
BEN-SHLOMO, D., 2011. Early Iron Age Domestic Material Culture in Philistia
and an Eastern Mediterranean Koiné. In: Yasur-Landau, A. Ebeling, J. R.
Mazow, L. B., eds. Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond
(Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 50) Brill: 183–206.
BEN-TOR, A., 1993a. Jokneam. In: Stern, E., ed. The New Encyclopedia of Ar-
chaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 3. Jerusalem: 805–811.
— 1993b. Qashish, Tel. Stern, E., ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeo-
logical Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 4. Jerusalem: 1200–1203.
— 1998. The Fall of Canaanite Hazor – The “Who” and “When” Questions.
In: Gitin, S. Mazar, A, and Stern, E., eds. Mediterranean Peoples in Tran-
sition. Thirteenth to Early Tenth Centuries B.C.E. Jerusalem: 456–467.
— 2002. Hazor – A City State between the Major Powers: A Rejoinder.
Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament: An International Journal of
Nordic Theology 16/2: 303–308.
— 2006a. Ceremonial Palace, Not a Temple. Biblical Archaeology Review
32/5: 8, 78–79.
— 2006b. The Sad Fate of Statues and the Mutilated Statues of Hazor. In:
Gitin, S. Wright, J. E. Dessel, J. P., eds. Confronting the Past Archaeo-
logical and Historical Essays on Ancient Israel in Honor of William G.
Dever. Winona Lake: 3–16.
— 2013. Who Destroyed Canaanite Hazor? Biblical Archaeology Review
39/4: 26–36, 58–60.
— and BONFIL, R., 1988. Tel Qashish, 1984/1985 Seasons. Hadashot Ark-
heologiyot: Excavations and Surveys in Israel 6: 106–108.
— and BONFIL, R., 2003. The Stratigraphy and Pottery Assemblages of the
Middle and Late Bronze Ages in Area A. In: Ben-Tor, A., Bonfil, R. and
Zuckerman, S., eds. Tel Qashish. A Village in the Jezreel Valley. Final
Report of Archaeological Excavations (1978–1987) (Qedem Reports 5).
Jerusalem: 185–276.
— and ZUCKERMAN, S., 2008. Hazor at the End of the Late Bronze Age:
Back to Basics. BASOR 350: 1–6.
— and Ben-Ami, D. and Ariella, L. 2005. Yoqne’am III the Middle and Late
Bronze Ages Final Report of the Archaeological Excavations (1977–
1988). Jerusalem.
BIRAN, A., 1993 Zippor, Tel. In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archae-
ological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. IV. Jerusalem: 1526–1527.
BRAMLETT, K., 2008. Eastern front: The Transjordan Highlands in Late Bronze
Age Hegemonic Conquest (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto) To-
ronto.
BRAUN, H., and GIHL, M., 2012. Der große Hamburger Brand von 1842. Erfurt.
BURKE, A. A., PEILSTÖCKER, M., KAROLL, A., PIERCE, G. A., KOWALSKI, K.,
BEN-MARZOUK, N., DAMM, J. C., DANIELSON, A. J., FESSLER, H. D.,
KAUFMAN, B., PIERCE, K. V. L., HÖFLMAYER, F., DAMIATA, B. N., and
DEE, M. 2017. Excavations of the New Kingdom Egyptian Fortress in
Jaffa, 2011–2014: Traces of Resistance to Egyptian Rule in Canaan.
American Journal of Archaeology, 121/1: 85–133.
BUTZER, K. W., 1997. Sciopolitical Discontinuity in the Near East C. 2200
B.C.E.: Scenarios from Palestine and Egypt. In: Dalfes, H. N., Kukla, G.,
and Weiss, H. eds. Third Millennium BC Climate Change and Old World
Collapse. Berlin: 245–296.
CLINE, E.H., 2014. 1177 B.C. The Year Civilization Collapsed. Princeton, Oxford.
COLLINS, B.J., 2008. The Hittites and their World. Leiden.
DEVER, W. G., LANCE, H. D. and BULLARD, R. G., 1974. Gezer II: Report of the
1967–70 Seasons in Fields I and II (Annual of the Nelsen Glueck School
of Biblical Archaeology/Hebrew Union College 2) Jerusalem.
— and LANCE, H. D. and BULLARD, R. G., 1986. Gezer IV: The 1969–71
Seasons in the Field VI, the “Acropolis” (Annual of the Nelson Glueck
School of Biblical Archaeology/Hebrew Union College 4) Jerusalem.
— and LANCE, H. D. and WRIGHT, G. E., 1970. Gezer I: Preliminary Report
of the 1964–66 Seasons (Annual of the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical
Archaeology/Hebrew Union College 1). Jerusalem.
— 1992. The Late Bronze-Early Iron I Horizon in Syria-Palestine: Egyp-
tians, Canaanites, ‘Sea Peoples,’ and Proto-Israelites. In: Ward, W.A. and
Joukowski, M.S., eds. The Crisis Years: The 12th Century B.C.E. From
Beyond the Danube to the Tigris. Dubuque: 99-110.
DOTHAN, M., 1971 Ashdod II–III: The Second and Third Seasons of Excavations
1963, 1965 Soundings in 1967. (‘Atiqot 9–10). Jerusalem.
— 1993. ‘Afula. In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological
Excavations in the Holy Land, I. Jerusalem and Washington: 37–39.
— and FREEDMAN, D. N., 1967 Ashdod I: First Season of Excavations 1962.
(ʿAtiqot 7). Jerusalem.
DOTHAN, T., 1998. Initial Philistine Settlement: From Migration to Coexistence.

In: Gitin, S. Mazar, A. Stern, E., eds. Mediterranean Peoples in Transi-
tion. Thirteenth to Early Tenth Centuries B.C.E. Jerusalem: 148–161.
DREWS, R., 1993. The End of the Bronze Age. Changes in Warfare and the Ca-
tastrophe ca. 1200 B.C. Princeton.
FAUST, A. and KATZ, H., 2015. A Canaanite Town, a Judahite Center, and a Per-
sian Period Fort: Excavating over Two Thousand Years of History at Tel
‘Eton. Near Eastern Archaeology 78/2: 88–102.
— 2017, Tel ‘Eton and the History of the Shephelah during the Iron Age. In:
Greenspahn F.E. and Rendsburg G. A. eds., Le-ma’an Ziony: Essays in
Honor of Ziony Zevit. Eugene: 21–43.
FINKELSTEIN, I., 2009. Destructions: Megiddo as a Case Study. In: Schloen, J. D.,
ed. Essays in Honor of Lawrence E. Stager. Winona Lake: 113–126.
— and SINGER-AVITZ, L., 2009. Reevaluating Bethel. Zeitschrift Des Deut-
schen Palästina-Vereins, 125(1): 33–48.
— ARIE, E., MARTIN, M.A.S. and PIASETZKY, E., 2017. New Evidence on
the Late Bronze/Iron I Transition at Megiddo: Implications for the End
of the Egyptian Rule and the Appearance of Philistine Pottery. Egypt and
the Levant XXVII: 261–280.
— USSISHKIN D., and HALPERN B., 2006. Archaeological and Historical
Conclusions. In: Finkelstein, I., Ussishkin D. and Halpern B. eds. Me-
giddo IV. The 1998–2000 Seasons (Monograph Series of the Sonia and
Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology, 24) Tel Aviv: 843–857.
— and USSISHKIN, D., 2000. Archaeological and Historical Conclusions.
Finkelstein, I., Ussishkin, D., and Halpern, B. eds. Megiddo III. The
1992–1996 Seasons; Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology
of Tel Aviv University, No. 18. Tel Aviv: 576–605.
FISCHER, P. M., 2006. Tell Abu al-Kharaz in the Jordan Valley. Vol. 2: The Middle
and Late Bronze Ages (Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 39). Wien.
FRANKEN, J., 1992. Excavations at Tell Deir ‘Allā. The Late Bronze Age Sanctu-
ary. Leiden.
GADOT, Y., 2009. The Late Bronze Age (Strata X14–X12). In: Gadot, Y. and Ya-
din, E., eds. Aphek-Antipatris II. The Remains on the Acropolis. The
Moshe Kochavi and Pirhyia Beck Excavations (Monograph Series of the
Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 27). Tel Aviv: 41–72.
— MARTIN. M. and BLOCKMAN. N., 2006 Area K (Levels K-5 and K-4, the
1998-2002 Seasons). In: Finkelstein, I., Ussishkin D. and Halpern B. eds.
Megiddo IV. The 1998–2000 Seasons (Monograph Series of the Sonia
and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology, 24) Tel Aviv: 87–103.
— YASUR-LANDAU, A., and UZIEL, J., 2012. Chapter 12 – The Late Bronze
Age Pottery. In: Maeir, A.M. ed. Tell es-Safi/Gath I: The 1996–2005 Sea-
sons, Part 1: Text. Ägypten und Altes Testament 69. Wiesbaden: 241–
264.
GEORGIOU A., 2011. The settlement histories of Cyprus in the twelfth century B.
C. Cahier du Centre d’Études Chypriotes: 109–131.
— 2015. Cyprus during the “Crisis Years” Revisited. In: Babbi, A., Buben-
heimer-Erhart, F., Marín-Aguilera, B., and Mühl, S. eds. The Mediterranean
Mirror. Cultural Contacts in the Mediterranean Sea between 1200 and
750 B.C. Mainz: 129–145.
— 2017. Flourishing amidst a ‘Crisis’: The Regional History of the Paphos

Polity at the Transition from the 13th to the 12th Centuries BC. In: Fischer,
P., and Burge, T. eds. “Sea Peoples” Up-to-Date: New Research on
Transformation in the Eastern Mediterranean in 13th–11th Centuriese
BC. Wien: 207–228.
GIBSON, S., 1994. The Tell ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded) Excavations: A Reappraisal
Based on Archival Records in the Palestine Exploration Fund. Tel Aviv,
21:2: 194–234.
GIVON, S., 2008. Ḥarasim, Tel. In: Stern, E., ed. The New Encyclopedia of Ar-
chaeological Excavations in the Holy Land Volume V. Jerusalem and
Washington, DC: 1766–1767.
GRANT, E., 1939. Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine). Haverford.
HASEL, M. G., 1998. Domination and Resistance. Egyptian Military Activity in
the Southern Levant, ca. 1300–1185 B.C. (Probleme der Ägyptologie 11,
Leiden, Boston, Köln).
— 2016. The archaeology of destruction: methodological desiderata. In: Ga-
nor, S., Kreimerman, I., Streit, K., and Mumcuoglu, M., eds. From Sha’ar
Hagolan to Shaarayim: Essays in Honor of Prof. Yosef Garinkel. Jerusa-
lem: 205–228.
HÄSER, J., SOENNECKEN, K. and VIEVWEGER, D., 2016. Tall Zira’a in north-west
Jordan between Aram and Israel. In: Sergi, O. ed. In search for Aram and
Israel: politics, culture, and identity. Tübingen: 121–138.
HERR, L., 2000. The Settlement and Fortification of Tell al-‘Umayri in Jordan
during the LB/Iron I Transition. In: Stager, L. E., Greene, J. A. and
Coogan, M. D. eds. The Archaeology of Jordan and beyond. Essays in
Honor of James A. Sauer (Studies in the Archaeology and History of the
Levant 1). Winona Lake: 167–179.
— and CLARK, D. R. and BRAMLETT, K., 2009. From the Stone Age to the
Middle Ages in Jordan: Digging up Tall al-'Umayri. Near Eastern Ar-
chaeology 72/2. 68–97.
— 1990. Tel Gerisa – 1988. Hadashot Arkheologiyot: Excavations and Sur-
veys in Israel 9: 51–52.
— 1993a. Tel Gerisa. In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeo-
— 1993b Michal. Tel In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeo-
HUMBERT, J-B., 1993. Keisan, Tell. In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of
Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. III. Jerusalem: 862–
867.
IACOVOU, M., 2013. Aegean-style Material Culture in Late Cypriot III: Minimal
Evidence, Maximal Interpretation. In: Killebrew, A. E. and Lehmann, G.
eds. The Philistines and Other “Sea Peoples” in Text and Archaeology;
Society of Biblical Literature Writings from the ancient world 15. At-
lanta: 585–618.
JAMES, F. W. and MCGOVERN P. E., 1993. The Late Bronze Egyptian Garrison at
Beth Shan. A Study of Levels VII and VIII. Vol. 1 (University Museum
Monograph 85) Philadelphia.
KAFAFI, Z. A. and VAN DER KOOIJ, G., 2013. Tell Dēr ‘Allā during the Transition
from Late Bronze Age to Iron Age. In: Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paläs-
tina-Vereins 129/2: 121–131.
KANIEWSKI, D. E., PAULISSEN, E. and VAN CAMPO, E. 2010. Late Second–early
First Millennium BC Abrupt Climate Changes in Coastal Syria and Their
Possible Significance for the History of the Eastern Mediterranean. Qua-
ternary Research 74/2: 207–215.
— VAN CAMPO, E., VAN LERBERGHE, K., BOIY, T., VANSTEENHUYSE, K.,
JANS, G., NYS, K., WEISS, H., MORHANGE, C., OTTO, T., and BRET-
SCHNEIDER, J., 2011. The Sea Peoples, from Cuneiform Tablets to Car-
bon Dating. PLoS ONE 6(6): e20232. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0020232
— van Campo, E., and Guiot, J. 2013. Environmental Roots of the Late
Bronze Age Crisis. PLoS ONE 8/8, online article http://journals.plos.
org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0071004 (accessed on
05.12.2016).
— GUIOT, J., VAN CAMPO, E., 2015. Drought and Societal Collapse 3200
Years ago in the Eastern Mediterranean: A Review. Climate Change 6/4,
369–382.
KARAGEORGHIS, V. and DEMAS, M., 1988. Excavations at Maa-Palaeokastro
1979–1986. Nicosia: Department of Antiquities Cyprus.
KELSO, J. L., 1968. The Excavation of Bethel (1934–1960) (Annual of the Amer-
ican Schools of Oriental Research 39). Cambridge.
KENNEDY, M. A., 2016. The end of the 3rd millennium BC in the Levant: new
perspectives and old ideas. Levant, 48:1: 1–32.
KILLEBREW, A. E., 1998. Mycenaean and Aegean-style Material Culture in
Canaan during the 14th–12th Centuries BC: Trade, Colonization, Diffu-
sion, or Migration? In: Cline, E. H. Harris-Cline, D., eds. The Aegean and
the Orient in the Second Millennium. Proceedings of the 50th Anniversary
Symposium, Cincinatti, 18–20 April 1997 (Aegaeum 18). Liège: 159–
170.
KILLEBREW, A. E., 2013. Early Philistine Pottery Technology at Tel Miqne-
Ekron: Implications for the Late Bronze-Early Iron Age Transition in the
Eastern Mediterranean. In: Killebrew, A. E. Lehmann, G. eds. The Phil-
istines and Other “Sea Peoples” in Text and Archaeology (Archaeology
and Biblical Studies 15). Atlanta: 77–129.
KLEIMAN S, GADOT Y. and LIPSCHITS O., 2016. A snapshot of the destruction
layer of Tell Zakariye/Tel Azekah seen against the backdrop of the final
days of the Late Bronze Age. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Ver-
eins 132(2): 105–33.
KNAPP, A. B. and MANNING, S. W., 2016. Crisis in Context: The End of the Late
Bronze Age in the Eastern Mediterranean. American Journal of Archae-
ology 120/1, 99–149.
KOCHAVI, M., 1974. Khirbet Rabûd = Debir. Tel Aviv 1: 2–33.
Kreimerman, I., 2017. A Typology for Destruction Layers: The Late Bronze Age
Southern Levant as a Case Study. In: Cunningham, T. and Driessen, J.,
eds. Crisis to Collapse: The Archaeology of Social Breakdown Aegis 11.
Louvain-la-Neuve: 173-203.
LANGGUT, D., FINKELSTEIN, I. and LITT, T., 2013. Climate and the Late Bronze
Collapse: New Evidence from the Southern Levant. Tel Aviv 40/2: 149–
175.
LENZEN, C. J., GORDON, R. L. and MCQUITTY, A. M., 1985. Excavations at Tell

Irbid and Beit Ras, 1985. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jor-
dan 29: 151–159.
LIEBOWITZ, H. A., 2003. Tel Yin’am I. The Late Bronze Age. Excavations at Tel
Yin’am, 1976–1989. Studies in Archaeology 42). Austin.
LIPSCHITS O, GADOT Y, OEMING M., 2017. Four seasons of excavations at Tel
Azekah: the expected and (especially) unexpected results. In: Lipschits
O, Maeir A. M. eds. The Shephelah during the Iron Age. Recent Archae-
ological Studies. Winona Lake: 1–25.
LIVERANI, M., 2003. Israel’s History and the History of Israel. London.
LOAD, G., 1948. Megiddo II. Seasons of 1935–39 (The University of Chicago Ori-
ental Institute Publications 62) Chicago.
MAEIR, A.M., 2012. The Tell es-Safi/Gath Archaeological Project 1996–2010:
Introduction, Overview and Synopsis of Results. In: Maeir, A.M. ed. Tell
es-Safi/Gath I: The 1996–2005 Seasons Part 1: Text. (Ägypten und Altes
Testament 69). Wiesbaden: 1–88.
— 2013. Philistia Transforming: Fresh Evidence from Tell es-Safi/Gath on
the Transformational Trajectory of Philistine Culture. Killebrew, A. E.
Lehmann, G. eds. The Philistines and Other “Sea Peoples” in Text and
Archaeology (Archaeology and Biblical Studies 15). Atlanta: 191–242.
MANCLOSSI, F., ROSEN, S.A., and LEHMANN, G., 2018. The Decline and Disap-
pearance of Chipped-Stone Tools: New Insights From Qubur el-
Walaydah, a Late Bronze/Iron Age Site in Israel. Lithic Technology: 1–
32.
MARCO, S., 2008. Recognition of Earthquake-related Damage in Archaeological
Sites: Examples from the Dead Sea Fault Zone. Tectonophysics 453:
148–156.
MARTIN, M.A.S., 2017. The Fate of Megiddo at the End of the Late Bronze IIB.
In: Lipshits, O., Gadot, Y. and Adams, M.J. eds., Rethinking Israel –
Studies in the History and Archaeology of Ancient Israel in Honor of Is-
rael Finkelstein. Winona Lake: 267–286.
MATTHERS, J. M., 1989. Excavations by the Palestine Exploration Fund at Tell el-
Hesi 1890-1892. In: Dahlberg, B.T. and O'Connell, K.G. eds., Tell el-
Hesi: The Site and the Expedition, Winona Lake: 37-67.
MAZAR, A., 2002. Megiddo in the Thirteenth-eleventh Centuries BC: A Review
of Some Recent Studies. In: Oren, E. D. and Ahituv, S., eds. Aharon
Kempinski Memorial Volume. Studies in Archaeology and Related Disci-
plines (Beer-Sheva 15) Beer-Sheva: 264–282.
— 2009. Introduction and Overview. In: Panitz-Cohen, N. and Mazar, A.
eds. Excavations at Tel Beth-Shean 1989–1996. Vol. 3: The 13th–11th
Century BC Strata in Areas N and S. Jerusalem: 1–32.
— and KELM, G.L., 1993. Batash, Tel (Timnah). In: Stern, E. ed. The New
Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 1.
MCGOVERN, P. E., 1989. The Baq‘ah Valley Project 1987. Khirbet Umm ad-
Dananir and al-Qesir. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan
33: 123–136.
MCKINNY, C., CASSUTO, D. and SHAI, I., 2015. The Late Bronze and Iron Age Re-
mains After Five Seasons. The Bible and Interpretation April. (Accessed
16.01.2018 http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/2015/04/mck398002.shtml).
MILLEK, J. M., 2016. Collapse and Transitions in Society as a Consequence of
Economic Change? Interregional Exchange as a Resource during the
Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age in the Southern Levant (Ph.D. Dis-
sertation, University of Tubingen). Tubingen.
— 2017. Sea Peoples, Philistines, and the Destruction of Cities: A Critical
Examination of Destruction Layers ‘Caused’ by the ‘Sea Peoples.’ In:
Fischer, P., and Burge, T., eds. “Sea Peoples” Up-to-Date: New Re-
search on Transformation in the Eastern Mediterranean in 13th–11th Cen-
turiese BC. Wien: 113–140.
— Forthcoming. Exchange, Destruction, and a Transitioning Society: Inter-
regional Exchange in the Southern Levant from the Late Bronze Age to
the Iron I. Tübingen.
MORAN, W.L., 1992. The Amarna Letters. Baltimore.
MUMFORG, G., 2015. The Amman Airport Structure: A Re-Assessment of Its
Date-range, Function and Overall Role in the Levant. Harrison, T. P.
Banning, E. Klassen, S., ed. Walls of the Prince: Egyptian Interactions
with Southwest Asia in Antiquity (Culture and History of the Ancient Near
East 77). Leiden: 89–198.
NUR, A. and CLINE, E. H., 2000. Poseidon’s Horses: Plate Tectonics and Earth-
quake Storms in the Late Bronze Age Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean.
Journal of Archaeological Science 27/1: 43–63.
— and CLINE, E. H., 2001. What Triggered the Collapse? Earthquake
Storms. Odyssey 4/5: 31–36.
NUR, A. and D. BURGESS, 2008. Apocalypse. Earthquakes, Archaeology, and the
Wrath of God. Princeton, Oxford.
OHATA, K. and KOCHAVI, M., 1964. Tel Zeror. Israel Exploration Journal 14:
283–284.
OREN, E. D., 1982. Ziglag: A Biblical City on the Edge of the Negev. The Biblical
Archaeologist 45/3: 155–166.
— 1993. Sera’, Tel. In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeolog-
ical Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 4. Jerusalem. 1329–1335.
— 1993a Tel Haror – 1990. Hadashot Arkheologiyot: 97–100.
PALEY, S. and PORATH, Y., 1993 Tel Ḥefer. In: Stern, E., ed. The New Encyclo-
pedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 2. Jerusalem:
609–614.
PANITZ-COHEN, N. and MAZAR, A., 2009. Area S: Stratigraphy and Architecture.
In: Panitz-Cohen, N. and Mazar, A. eds. Excavations at Tel Beth-Shean
1989–1996. Vol. 3: The 13th–11th Century BC Strata in Areas N and S.
PRAUSNITZ, M. W., 1993. Achzib. In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of Ar-
chaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 1. Jerusalem: 32–35.
PUGLISI, D., 2013. The View from the Day After Some Observations on the Late
Bronze Age I Final Destruction in Crete. In: Driessen, J., ed. Destruction.
Archaeological, Historical and Philological Perspectives. Louvain-La-
Neuve: 171–182.
REDFORD, D. B., 1986. The Ashkelon Relief at Karnak and the Israel Stela. Israel
Exploration Journal, Vol. 36, No. 3/4: 188–200.
REDSICKER, D. R. and O’CONNOR J. J., 1996. Practical Fire and Arson Investiga-
tion, 2nd Edition. New York.
SADER, H., 2014 The Northern Levant during the Iron Age I Period. In: Steiner,
M. L. and Killebrew, A. E. eds. The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology
of the Levant c. 8000–332 BCE. Oxford: 607–623.
SAMET, I., 2009. Canaanite Rulership in Late Bronze Age Megiddo (M.A. thesis,
Tel Aviv University) Tel Aviv.
SHAI, I., UZIEL, J., and MAEIR, A.M., 2012. The Stratigraphy and Architecture of
Area E: Strata E1– E5. In: Maeir, A.M. ed. Tell es-Safi/Gath I: The 1996–
2005 Seasons, Part 1: Text. Ägypten und Altes Testament 69. Wiesba-
den: 221–234.
SOENNECKEN, K., 2017. Kulturelle Umbrüche in der südlichen Levante Der Über-
gang von der Bronze- zur Eisenzeit unter besonderer Berücksichtigung
des Tall Zirāʿa (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wuppertal), Wuppertal.
STAGER, L. 1995 The Impact of the Sea Peoples in Canaan (1185–1050 BC). In:
Levy, T. ed. The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. New York:
332–348.
— 2008 Stratigraphic Overview. In: Stager L.E., Schloen, D. and Master,
D.M. eds. Ashkelon 1: Introduction and Overview. Winona Lake: 215–326.
— 2011 Ashkelon on the Eve of Destruction in 604 B.C. In: Stager, L.E.,
Schloen, D., and Master, D. M. eds. Ashkelon 3: The Seventh Century
B.C. Winona Lake: 3–12
STERN, E., 2013. The Material Culture of the Northern Sea Peoples in Israel
(Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Levant 5). Winona Lake.
STRANGE, J., 2008 The Late Bronze Age. In: Adams, R. B. ed. Jordan. An Ar-
chaeological Reader. London: 281–310.
STRANGE, J., 2015. Tall al-Fukhār. Results from Excavations in 1990–1993 and
2002. Vol. 1: Text. Aarhus.
TAPPY, R. E., 2008. Zayit, Tel. In: Stern, E., ed. The New Encyclopedia of Ar-
chaeological Excavations in the Holy Land Volume V, Jerusalem and
Washington DC: 2082–2083.
TUBB, J. N., 1993. Sa’diyeh, Tell-es. In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of
Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 3. Jerusalem: 1295–
1300.
TUFNELL, O., INGE, C.H. and HARDING, L. 1940 Lachish II (Tell ed Duweir). The
Fosse Temple. Oxford.
USSISHKIN, D., 1982. The Conquest of Lachish by Sennacherib. Tel Aviv.
— 1993. Lachish. In: Stern, E. ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological
Excavations in the Holy Land, Vol. III. Jerusalem, Washington: 897–911.
— 2004a. The Expedition at Work. In: Ussishkin, D. ed. The Renewed Ar-
chaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973–1994), Volume I. Tel Aviv:
3–22.
— 2004b. A Synopsis of the Stratagraphical, Chronological and Historical.
— 2004c. Area P: The Late Bronze Age Strata. In: Ussishkin, D. ed. The
Renewed Archaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973–1994), Volume
I. Tel Aviv: 188–214.
— 2004d Area P: The Level VI Temple. In: Ussishkin, D. ed. The Renewed
Archaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973–1994), Volume I. Tel
Aviv: 215–281.
— 2004e Area D: The Bronze Age Strata. In: Ussishkin, D. ed. The Re-
newed Archaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973–1994), Volume I.
Tel Aviv: 282–315.
VAN DE MIEROOP, M., 2010. The Eastern Mediterranean in the Age of Ramesses
II. Oxford.
WEBSTER, L., SERGI, O., KLEIMAN, S., LIPSCHITS, O., HUA, Q., JACOBSEN, G.,
TRISTANT, Y., and GADOT, Y., 2017. Preliminary Radiocarbon Results
for Late Bronze Age Strata at Tel Azekah and Their Implications. Radi-
ocarbon 85, 1–23.
WOOD, B. G., 1991. The Philistines Enter Canaan. Where They Egyptian Lackeys
or Invading Conquerors?. Biblical Archeology Review 17/ 6: 44–52.
WRIGHT, G. E., 1939. Iron: The Date of Its Introduction into Common Use in
Palestine. American Journal of Archaeology 43/3: 458–463.
YADIN, Y. and GEVA. S., 1986. Investigations at Beth Shean. The Early Iron Age
Strata (Qedem: Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology 23). Jerusa-
lem.
YASUR-LANDAU, A., 2010. The Philistines and Aegean Migration at the End of
the Late Bronze Age. Cambridge.
ZUCKERMAN, S., 2006. Where is the archive of Hazor buried? Biblical Archaeol-
ogy Review 32: 28–37.
— 2007. Anatomy of a Destruction: Crisis Architecture, Termination Ritu-
als and the Fall of Canaanite Hazor. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeol-
ogy 20/1: 3–32.
— 2013. Area S: Renewed Excavations in the Lower City of Hazor. Near
Eastern Archaeology 76/2: 94–97.

Millek - 2018 - Just How Much Was Destroyed. The End of The Late Bronze Age in The Southern Levant

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Millek - 2018 - Just How Much Was Destroyed. The End of The Late Bronze Age in The Southern Levant

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

UGARIT-FORSCHUNGEN

begründet von Manfried Dietrich und Oswald Loretz †

Für unverlangt eingesandte Manuskripte kann keine Gewähr übernommen werden.

© 2018 Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel Münster

Jesse Michael Millek

Buchbesprechungen und Buchanzeigen ............................................. 409

KRYSZEŃ, ADAM (2016). A Historical Geography of the Hittite Heartland,

Abkürzungsverzeichnis ............................................................................ 447

Anschriften der Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter ........................ 473

Jesse Michael Millek, Ann Arbor

Figure 1. “Destruction” events at the end of the Late Bronze Age

Destruction at the end of the LBA

Khirbet Drews 1993: 16 No physical evidence Kochiva 1974: 2–33;

The scale of Late Bronze Age destruction

Gezer XIV Partial Dever et al 1970; Dever et al 1974; De-

has traditionally been considered a multi-building destruction event evidenced by

“The Stratum VIIB palace obviously suffered violent destruction so extensive

The causes of LBA destruction

Figure 4. Cause of destruction at the end of the Late Bronze Age

Stratum/ Approximate date of

Lachish Fosse Fosse Temple III End of 13th cent. BC Single

Moreover, these events have been chronologically squeezed together either on a

Violent destructions and the historical precedent

DOTHAN, T., 1998. Initial Philistine Settlement: From Migration to Coexistence.

— 2017. Flourishing amidst a ‘Crisis’: The Regional History of the Paphos

LENZEN, C. J., GORDON, R. L. and MCQUITTY, A. M., 1985. Excavations at Tell

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen