Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Israelites

The Israelites were an ancient Semitic-speaking people who emerged in the southern Levant during the transition from the Late Bronze to Iron Age I (circa 1200 BCE), first attested extrabiblically in the Egyptian Merneptah Stele as a defeated rural or semi-nomadic group in Canaan.^[1] Archaeological surveys reveal their initial material culture in highland villages characterized by four-room houses, collar-rim storage jars, and notably low incidences of pig bones, suggesting dietary distinctions from neighboring Philistine and coastal Canaanite sites that correlate with emerging ethnic boundaries.^[2]^[3] These markers point to an ethnogenesis involving indigenous agrarian and pastoralist elements rather than a massive external migration or conquest, challenging maximalist interpretations of biblical narratives like the Exodus and Joshua's campaigns, which lack corroborating empirical traces such as widespread destruction layers from the proposed 13th-century BCE period.^[4]^[5] By the Iron Age II (10th–6th centuries BCE), Israelite society coalesced into two kingdoms: the northern Kingdom of Israel, centered in Samaria and evidenced by sites like Megiddo with monumental architecture and ostraca, and the southern Kingdom of Judah, bolstered by fortifications, royal seals (e.g., LMLK stamps), and inscriptions referencing the "House of David" as in the Tel Dan Stele.^[6]^[7] The northern kingdom succumbed to Assyrian conquest in 722 BCE, dispersing its population via deportations, while Judah persisted until the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BCE, events confirmed by cuneiform annals and siege ramps at sites like Lachish.^[8] Defining achievements include the codification of Yahwism—a shift toward exclusive worship of Yahweh amid polytheistic surroundings—and contributions to early alphabetic literacy, as seen in proto-Sinaitic and Gezer calendar inscriptions, though scholarly consensus tempers biblical claims of a grand united monarchy under David and Solomon due to sparse 10th-century monumental evidence favoring a chiefdom-scale polity.^[5] Controversies persist over source reliability, with biblical texts blending historical reminiscences and etiological myths, while archaeological interpretations grapple with low-chronology adjustments that compress timelines and highlight gradual state formation over dramatic biblical upheavals.^[4]^[9]

Terminology and Etymology

Definition and Scope

The Israelites constituted an ancient Semitic-speaking ethnic group that emerged in the southern Levant, specifically the central hill country of Canaan, during the early Iron Age around 1200 BCE, amid the societal upheavals following the Late Bronze Age collapse. Archaeologically, they are distinguished by settlement patterns featuring unfortified villages, four-room houses suited for extended family units, collar-rim storage jars, and a notable absence of pig bones in domestic refuse—markers absent or rare among contemporaneous lowland Canaanite and coastal Philistine sites, indicating deliberate cultural differentiation possibly tied to emerging religious taboos.^[10]^[11] This material profile supports models of ethnogenesis through gradual coalescence of pastoralist and agrarian subgroups from local Canaanite stock, rather than external invasion, with genetic studies affirming continuity with Bronze Age Levantine populations while noting minor admixtures.^[12] In scope, the Israelites encompass the tribal societies of the Iron Age I (c. 1200–1000 BCE), characterized by decentralized villages and emerging chiefdoms, transitioning into the monarchic states of the Iron Age II: the northern Kingdom of Israel (c. 930–722 BCE), centered in Samaria with capitals like Shechem and later Samaria, and the southern Kingdom of Judah (c. 930–586 BCE), focused on Jerusalem and Hebron.^[6] The northern kingdom fell to Assyrian conquest in 722 BCE, leading to deportations and demographic shifts that diluted Israelite identity there, while Judah persisted until the Babylonian sack of Jerusalem in 586 BCE, after which exilic and post-exilic communities—primarily Judean survivors—adopted the term "Jews" (from Yehud, the Persian province).^[6] Thus, "Israelite" historically denotes the pre-exilic highland population unified by proto-Yahwistic practices, excluding later diaspora evolutions or modern claimants, with the term's biblical framing as twelve tribes descended from Jacob/Israel serving as etiological lore rather than demographic record, unverified by extra-biblical texts until the Merneptah Stele (c. 1208 BCE), which first attests "Israel" as a defeated people-group in Canaan.^[13]^[14] The designation overlaps with but precedes "Hebrews," an archaic ethnic label possibly denoting social marginality or transhumant origins in early texts, while "Jews" emerged post-586 BCE to specify Judean lineage amid Assyrian resettlement in the north and Persian-era restoration in the south; these distinctions reflect not mere nomenclature but evolving political and cultic identities amid conquests that scattered or assimilated populations.^[15] Empirical data prioritizes archaeological continuity over maximalist biblical chronologies, which posit a united monarchy under David and Solomon (c. 1000 BCE) lacking corroboration in contemporary records beyond local ostraca and seals.^[16]

Etymological Origins

The Hebrew term underlying "Israelites" is Yisra'el (יִשְׂרָאֵל), a name bestowed upon the biblical figure Jacob following his nocturnal struggle with a divine adversary, as recounted in Genesis 32:24–28. This name etymologically derives from the Semitic root ś-r-h (שׂרה), connoting "to strive," "to contend," or "to prevail," compounded with ʾēl (אל), a Northwest Semitic designation for "God" or a chief deity.^[17] Scholarly consensus interprets Yisra'el as "God strives" (with God as the active subject) or "he strives with God," reflecting either divine contention on behalf of the bearer or human persistence against the divine, though the biblical narrative emphasizes the latter through the explanation "for you have striven with God and with humans, and have prevailed."^[18] ^[19] The plural form "Israelites," rendered in Hebrew as Bnei Yisra'el ("sons/children of Israel"), extends this eponymous usage to denote the collective descendants of Jacob, organized into the Twelve Tribes and constituting an ethnic and covenantal entity in ancient Near Eastern contexts.^[20] Linguistically, ʾēl traces to broader Canaanite and Ugaritic theophoric elements, where it functioned as a generic term for divinity rather than the specific Israelite deity Yahweh, suggesting possible pre-Israelite cultural substrates in the name's formation.^[21] Variant scholarly proposals, such as "El rules" or "El persists," invoke alternative parses of the root but lack the narrative and morphological support of the striving interpretation, which aligns with attested Hebrew verbal patterns.^[22] The name's extra-biblical attestation first emerges in Egyptian records, notably the Merneptah Stele (ca. 1208 BCE), where "Israel" denotes a defeated socio-ethnic group in Canaan, employing the determinative for "people" rather than "city" or "land," indicating a non-urban, tribal identity consistent with early highland settlers.^[1] This inscription, from Pharaoh Merneptah's reign (1213–1203 BCE), provides the oldest non-Hebrew reference to the ethnonym, predating Assyrian mentions by centuries and underscoring its antiquity in Levantine nomenclature, though without altering the core Hebrew etymology.^[23] Proposed earlier readings, such as on fragmentary Egyptian topoi from the 14th century BCE, remain speculative and unverified as direct references to Yisra'el.^[24] The term "Israelite" specifically denotes the ancient Semitic-speaking people who traced their descent from the biblical patriarch Jacob, renamed Israel, and who formed the Twelve Tribes settled in the highlands of Canaan during the Iron Age I period (circa 1200–1000 BCE). This usage contrasts with "Hebrew," which appears in biblical texts and ancient Near Eastern records as an ethnic or social label for semi-nomadic groups or outsiders, often applied to the ancestors of the Israelites prior to their national consolidation, such as Abraham's kin in Genesis narratives or slaves in Egypt.^[25]^[26] Extrabiblical evidence, including Egyptian texts referring to "Habiru" (possibly cognate with Hebrew) as marginal laborers or raiders around 1400 BCE, supports this as a broader, non-exclusive descriptor not tied to the specific tribal confederation of Israel.^[27] In distinction from "Jew" (Yehudi in Hebrew), which emerged post-722 BCE following the Assyrian conquest of the northern Kingdom of Israel, "Israelite" encompasses the full pre-exilic population of both the northern Kingdom of Israel and southern Kingdom of Judah. The term "Jew" initially referred to inhabitants of Judah and later, after the Babylonian exile (586–539 BCE), became the standard ethnonym for the surviving Judean community and their descendants, emphasizing continuity through the tribe of Judah amid the loss of the northern tribes.^[28]^[29] Thus, while all Jews descend from ancient Israelites, the reverse does not hold historically, as "Israelite" applies to the earlier, undivided tribal entity before geopolitical fragmentation.^[26] Archaeologically, Israelites are differentiated from Canaanites—the indigenous Bronze Age inhabitants of the region—by distinct settlement patterns and material traits emerging in the central highlands after the Late Bronze Age collapse around 1200 BCE. Canaanite sites featured urban centers with pig consumption, elite architecture, and polytheistic iconography tied to deities like Baal and Asherah, whereas Israelite villages showed no pig bones (indicating dietary taboo), collar-rim jars, four-room houses, and pillared buildings suggestive of egalitarian kinship groups rejecting coastal Canaanite hierarchies.^[30]^[31] The Merneptah Stele (circa 1208 BCE) first attests "Israel" as a non-urban people group in Canaan, implying ethnogenesis from marginalized Canaanite elements or pastoralists like the Shasu, but with ideological divergence toward Yahwistic monolatry over Canaanite pantheons.^[29] This distinction, while culturally continuous in language and pottery, reflects a deliberate social and religious rupture, as evidenced by the absence of Canaanite goddess figurines in early Israelite cultic remains.^[30]

Origins and Early Emergence

Biblical Narrative of Origins

The biblical narrative traces the origins of the Israelites to the patriarch Abraham, whom God calls from Ur of the Chaldeans to migrate to Canaan, promising him numerous descendants who would inherit the land and bless all nations.^[32] This covenant is reiterated to Abraham's son Isaac and grandson Jacob, whose name is changed to Israel after wrestling with a divine being, establishing the foundational identity of the Israelite people as descendants of these figures.^[33] Jacob's twelve sons—Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, and Benjamin—form the eponymous ancestors of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, with Joseph's line later divided into Ephraim and Manasseh to maintain the tribal count at twelve after Levi's priestly designation without territorial inheritance.^[34] Joseph's rise to power in Egypt through interpreting Pharaoh's dreams leads to the migration of Jacob's family there during a famine, initially prospering but eventually facing enslavement under a new pharaoh who fears their growing numbers.^[35] God raises Moses, born to a Levite family and preserved as an infant in the Nile, to confront Pharaoh after a divine encounter at the burning bush, resulting in the Ten Plagues that culminate in the Passover and the Israelites' exodus from Egypt, estimated in the narrative as involving about 600,000 men besides women and children, totaling roughly two million people.^[36] This event, dated internally to 1446 BCE based on chronological anchors like the 480 years from the exodus to Solomon's temple construction in 966 BCE, marks the formative national deliverance.^[37] At Mount Sinai, God delivers the Torah through Moses, including the Decalogue and detailed civil, moral, and ceremonial laws, forging a covenant that defines the Israelites as a "kingdom of priests and a holy nation" bound by obedience to Yahweh, with the tabernacle serving as the portable sanctuary for divine presence.^[38] After forty years of wilderness wandering due to rebellion, marked by events like the golden calf apostasy and the spies' report leading to unbelief, Joshua leads the second generation across the Jordan River into Canaan, initiating conquests such as Jericho's fall through circumambulation and trumpet blasts, thereby fulfilling the Abrahamic land promise as the Israelites establish tribal allotments.^[39] The narrative emphasizes divine election, covenant fidelity, and the transition from familial clans to a confederated tribal entity under theocratic rule, with no centralized monarchy until later.^[40]

Archaeological Evidence for Highland Settlements

Archaeological surveys conducted in the central highlands of Canaan, encompassing the Judean and Samarian hills, document a dramatic rise in settlement activity during the early Iron Age I period (c. 1200–1000 BCE), following the collapse of Late Bronze Age urban centers in the lowlands. Prior to this transition, the region hosted fewer than 20 occupied sites, but by Iron I, over 250 small villages emerged, many unwalled and averaging 1–3 hectares in size, indicating a shift toward dispersed, rural habitation.^[41]^[42] These settlements, identified through surface surveys and excavations by researchers including Israel Finkelstein, reflect a population expansion estimated at 20,000–45,000 inhabitants, sustained by subsistence agriculture rather than trade or elite-driven economies.^[43]^[44] Characteristic material culture distinguishes these highland sites from contemporaneous lowland Canaanite and Philistine settlements. Villages featured clusters of four-room or pillared houses, a architectural type with central pillars supporting roofs and partitioned spaces for domestic functions, appearing consistently across sites like Izbet Sartah and Shiloh.^[45] Pottery assemblages emphasized simple, handmade wares, including collared-rim storage jars suited for grain, with minimal imported or decorated items, signaling local production and limited external contacts.^[46] Subsistence evidence from faunal remains shows a near-total absence of pig bones—comprising less than 1% of assemblages—contrasting sharply with coastal sites where pigs accounted for 10–20% of remains, a pattern corroborated in excavations at highland loci such as Mount Ebal and Giloh.^[3]^[47]^[43] Adaptations to the rugged terrain further highlight the settlers' agrarian focus, with rock-cut cisterns for water storage, terraced slopes for cultivation of olives, grapes, and cereals, and evidence of rotational farming inferred from pollen and seed remains.^[2] No monumental structures or fortifications appear, suggesting egalitarian social organization without centralized authority, though some sites like Shiloh show evidence of cultic activity via altars and votive objects.^[48] These findings, drawn from systematic surveys since the 1960s, provide empirical continuity with later Iron II Judean material culture, supporting interpretations of these highland communities as proto-Israelite despite debates over ethnic labeling.^[44]^[46]

Models of Ethnogenesis: Conquest, Peaceful Infiltration, or Indigenous Development

The scholarly debate on Israelite ethnogenesis centers on three primary models derived from archaeological, textual, and ethnographic data: the conquest model, the peaceful infiltration model, and the indigenous development model. These frameworks attempt to explain the sudden appearance of highland settlements in Canaan around 1200 BCE, coinciding with the transition from the Late Bronze Age to Iron Age I, as documented by over 250 new village sites in the central hill country from the Judean hills to near modern Shechem, housing an estimated population increase from a few thousand to 20,000–45,000 people.^[2]^[49] Key material indicators include the widespread use of plain, handmade collar-rim storage jars, four-room houses suited to agrarian lifestyles, and a notable absence of pig bones in faunal assemblages—contrasting sharply with contemporaneous coastal and lowland sites where pig consumption comprised 10–20% of remains, suggesting deliberate cultural avoidance linked to emerging Israelite identity.^[50]^[51] The Merneptah Stele, dated to circa 1208 BCE and discovered in 1896 at Thebes, provides the earliest extrabiblical reference to "Israel" as a socio-ethnic group ("people," not city) already present in Canaan, implying established roots predating the main settlement surge.^[52]^[1] The conquest model, rooted in the biblical accounts of Joshua's campaigns (e.g., Joshua 6–12), posits a rapid military invasion by external tribes from Egypt or the desert fringes around 1400–1200 BCE, leading to the destruction of Canaanite cities and establishment of Israelite control. Championed by William F. Albright in the 1920s–1930s through correlations of biblical sites like Hazor, Jericho, and Ai with Late Bronze Age destruction layers, this view dominated early biblical archaeology.^[53]^[54] However, excavations reveal no synchronized wave of city destructions matching the biblical sequence and timing; for instance, Jericho's walls collapsed circa 1550 BCE, Ai was unoccupied during the supposed conquest era (1406 or 1230 BCE), and Hazor's major burn layer dates to circa 1230 BCE but lacks evidence of invaders introducing new material culture.^[55]^[56] Continuity in pottery styles, architecture, and subsistence patterns between Late Bronze Canaanite villages and Iron I highland sites further undermines claims of foreign imposition, as does the absence of Egyptian or desert-derived artifacts in early settlements.^[57] While some proponents cite isolated finds like scarabs or destruction at secondary sites, these do not form a coherent pattern supporting mass invasion, leading most archaeologists to reject the model as incompatible with empirical data.^[58] In contrast, the peaceful infiltration model, developed by Albrecht Alt and Martin Noth in the early 20th century, envisions gradual seepage of semi-nomadic pastoralists from the eastern deserts into Canaanite territories over centuries, settling unoccupied highlands without widespread violence. This approach aligns better with the lack of destruction evidence by emphasizing slow acculturation rather than conquest, positing that these infiltrators—possibly akin to Shasu nomads mentioned in Egyptian texts—adopted local agrarian practices while forming distinct villages.^[59]^[55] Proponents argue it explains the Merneptah reference to Israel as a non-urban "people" and the modest scale of highland sites, which show no elite imports or fortifications indicative of sudden demographic shifts. Yet, the model falters on the rapidity of settlement growth—hundreds of sites emerging within decades post-1200 BCE—and the marked cultural discontinuities, such as pig avoidance and simplified pottery, which suggest internal differentiation rather than external migrants blending seamlessly with Canaanites, whose lowland sites retained pig husbandry and urban traits.^[60] Survey data indicate depopulation of urban lowlands alongside highland nucleation, pointing to reorganization of existing populations rather than influx.^[61] The indigenous development model, gaining prominence since the 1980s through scholars like Israel Finkelstein and William Dever, views early Israelites as largely deriving from dispossessed Canaanite elements—farmers, pastoralists, and refugees—who fled collapsing Late Bronze Age city-states amid systemic upheavals like drought, earthquakes, and incursions by Sea Peoples circa 1200 BCE. Finkelstein's surveys highlight continuity: highland settlers reused Canaanite technologies (e.g., terracing, cisterns) but adopted egalitarian village forms and taboos like pork prohibition to forge a new ethnic boundary, possibly as a "peasant revolt" against urban elites as theorized by Norman Gottwald and George Mendenhall.^[49]^[62] Dever refines this as an "indigenous peasant" origin, where marginalized highlanders and lowland migrants coalesced in refuge areas, evidenced by the absence of foreign ceramics or burial shifts and the Merneptah Stele's portrayal of Israel as an entrenched rural entity vulnerable to Egyptian campaigns.^[55]^[63] This model best fits the archaeological profile of rapid, endogenous growth without invasion traces, though minor external contributions (e.g., small Shasu groups) remain possible; genetic studies from Iron Age burials, while preliminary, show Levantine continuity with minimal steppe admixture until later periods.^[64] Contemporary consensus favors this framework, attributing Israelite distinctiveness to socio-economic realignments post-Bronze collapse rather than exogenous migration or warfare.^[57]^[53]

Iron Age Development

Transition from Late Bronze Age Collapse

The Late Bronze Age Collapse, occurring circa 1200 BCE, profoundly disrupted the established urban centers of Canaan, which had been under nominal Egyptian oversight since the 15th century BCE. This systemic breakdown involved widespread destruction of lowland city-states like Hazor, Megiddo, and Lachish, attributed to factors including incursions by Sea Peoples, climatic shifts, and internal revolts, leading to depopulation and abandonment of fortified sites. Egyptian influence waned decisively after Ramesses III's campaigns against invaders around 1177 BCE, creating a power vacuum that allowed for reconfiguration of settlement patterns without centralized authority.^[65]^[66] In the central highlands of Canaan, archaeological surveys document a marked transition during Iron Age I (c. 1200–1000 BCE), with the number of occupied sites rising from approximately 50 in the Late Bronze Age to over 250 small, unwalled villages, indicating a population influx estimated at 20,000–40,000 people. These settlements, such as Izbet Sartah and Mount Ebal, featured egalitarian architecture like four-room houses and simple subsistence economies focused on terraced agriculture and pastoralism, contrasting with the elite-driven palace systems of coastal and valley Canaanites. Material indicators include the prevalence of collared-rim storage jars and a notable absence of pig remains in faunal assemblages, patterns that distinguish these highland groups from contemporaneous Philistine and Canaanite sites.^[67]^[68] The Merneptah Stele, erected circa 1208 BCE by Pharaoh Merneptah, provides the earliest extrabiblical attestation of "Israel" as a socio-ethnic entity in Canaan, described as a non-urban people ("people" determinative used) subdued during campaigns against Libyans and Asiatic foes. This inscription implies the group's presence and organizational capacity by the late 13th century BCE, predating the main highland settlement surge but aligning with nomadic or semi-nomadic precursors like the Shasu bedouins mentioned in earlier Egyptian records from the 14th–13th centuries BCE, some associated with the toponym "Yhw" possibly linked to Yahweh.^[52]^[69] Scholarly interpretations of this transition emphasize endogenous development from marginalized Canaanite elements—such as rural peasants or refugees fleeing urban collapses—rather than large-scale external migrations, supported by continuity in pottery styles and linguistic Semitic roots. While Egyptian texts portray Shasu as disruptive nomads in Edom and the Negev, their integration into highland societies reflects adaptive responses to the collapse's decentralization, fostering the ethnogenesis of Israelites through shared material practices and, per biblical traditions, covenantal ideologies. Debates persist on the scale of violence, with destruction layers at sites like Bethel suggesting localized conflicts, but overall evidence points to opportunistic settlement in depopulated interiors amid the Bronze Age's terminal disorder.^[70]^[42]

Emergence of Distinct Israelite Material Culture

The transition from the Late Bronze Age to Iron Age I, around 1200 BCE, witnessed the rapid proliferation of over 250 small, unwalled villages in the central highlands of Canaan, from the Judean hills to the Samaria region, marking a departure from the urbanized Canaanite centers of the preceding era that had largely collapsed due to invasions, droughts, and internal disruptions.^[71] These settlements, typically 1-3 hectares in size and supporting populations of 100-400 inhabitants each, emphasized agrarian subsistence with terraced farming, cisterns for water storage, and silos for grain, reflecting a pastoral-agrarian lifestyle adapted to the rugged terrain.^[72] Archaeological surveys indicate this settlement surge represented a 400% increase in highland occupation compared to the Late Bronze Age, with minimal continuity from prior lowland urban sites.^[46] A hallmark of this emerging culture was the widespread adoption of the four-room house, a pillared structure consisting of three elongated rooms flanking a central pillared hall and a rear broad room, often with a courtyard, constructed from local stone and mudbrick.^[72] This architectural form first appears in the highlands around 1200 BCE, comprising up to 80% of domestic structures at sites like Izbet Sartah and 'Ai, and persisted through Iron Age II, symbolizing functional division for storage, animal stabling, and family living while embodying social norms of household autonomy.^[73] Scholars note its near-absence in contemporaneous Philistine coastal sites, where Aegean-influenced architecture prevailed, underscoring regional cultural differentiation.^[74] Pottery assemblages show continuity in basic forms from Canaanite traditions but feature distinctive collared-rim storage jars (pithoi) with everted rims and rope-like handles, optimized for grain and liquid transport in highland conditions, comprising 20-30% of assemblages at early Iron I sites such as Shiloh and Mt. Ebal.^[75] These jars, peaking in the 12th-11th centuries BCE, are found predominantly in highland contexts, though not exclusively Israelite, and decline with urbanization in Iron II.^[76] Faunal analysis provides the starkest material distinction: pig remains are virtually absent (<0.1% of identifiable bones) in highland settlements like Tell el-Far'ah and Raddana, contrasting sharply with 10-20% in Philistine sites such as Ashdod and Ekron, where pork consumption aligned with Aegean dietary practices.^[77] This pattern, evident from the 12th century BCE onward, likely reflects deliberate cultural avoidance rather than solely ecological factors, as pigs were viable in similar environments elsewhere in Canaan, supporting interpretations of emerging ethnic boundaries tied to taboo or identity.^[78] Overall, the convergence of these traits—highland isolation, egalitarian simplicity, and dietary markers—signals the ethnogenesis of a distinct group by circa 1150 BCE, though debates persist on whether this arose from indigenous Canaanite reorganization or external elements, with empirical data favoring a mixed pastoral influx into depopulated zones.^[46]^[71]

Debates on the United Monarchy

The historicity and scale of the United Monarchy, described in the Hebrew Bible as a centralized kingdom under Kings Saul, David, and Solomon in the 11th–10th centuries BCE, encompassing territories from the Negev to the Galilee and exerting influence over neighboring regions, remains contested among scholars.^[79] Maximalists argue for substantial alignment with the biblical portrayal of a unified polity capable of monumental construction and regional hegemony, citing artifacts like the Tel Dan Stele (c. 9th century BCE), which references the "House of David" as a dynastic entity defeated by an Aramean king, providing extra-biblical confirmation of David's historical existence and lineage.^[80] They further point to fortified gates at Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer, initially attributed to Solomon's reign (1 Kings 9:15), with recent radiocarbon dating of destruction layers at Gezer supporting an early 10th-century BCE construction phase consistent with Solomonic activity.^[81] ^[82] Minimalists, such as Israel Finkelstein, contend that archaeological data indicate a modest Judahite chiefdom rather than an expansive empire, with significant urban development and administrative complexity emerging only in the 9th century BCE under the northern Kingdom of Israel, post-dating the proposed United Monarchy period.^[83] Finkelstein's "low chronology" posits that 10th-century BCE sites like Khirbet Qeiyafa, featuring a large casemate wall and possible administrative structures, reflect local Judahite initiatives but lack evidence of widespread unification or Solomonic-scale building projects across Israel and Judah.^[84] They argue the biblical narrative, including temple construction and vast tribute (1 Kings 10), was retrojected from 7th-century BCE Judahite ideology to legitimize the Davidic line amid Assyrian threats, with scant 10th-century pottery or inscriptional evidence for a pan-Israelite state.^[85] Excavations at the City of David in Jerusalem reveal a stepped stone structure potentially from the 10th century BCE, interpreted by some as David's palace foundation, bolstered by Iron Age IIA pottery and scarab seals suggesting elite activity, though minimalists date it later and attribute grandeur to Omride-era (9th century) enhancements.^[86] Clay bullae from Khirbet Summeily bear Judahite-style iconography datable to the 10th century BCE, hinting at early administrative reach, yet critics note their scarcity fails to demonstrate control over the northern territories claimed biblically.^[87] No contemporary inscriptions name Solomon or detail a united realm's extent, fueling debate over whether the monarchy was a tribal confederation under David (c. 1010–970 BCE) that fragmented early, rather than a stable empire.^[88] Scholarly consensus eludes the field, with maximalists emphasizing convergence of texts like the Tel Dan reference and structures like Tel Eton's fortifications as indicative of state formation by David's era, while minimalists highlight stratigraphic discontinuities and the dominance of unfortified highland villages in the 10th century BCE as evidence against biblical hyperbole.^[89] This divide reflects broader tensions in biblical archaeology, where empirical data from carbon-14 dating and ceramic typology often yield ambiguous chronologies (±40 years), complicating attributions to specific rulers amid potential biases in interpreting scant remains through ideological lenses favoring or dismissing scriptural reliability.^[90]^[91]

Divided Kingdoms and Imperial Interactions

Kingdom of Israel: Rise, Conflicts, and Fall

The Kingdom of Israel emerged around 931 BCE following the division of the united monarchy after Solomon's death, when the northern tribes rejected Rehoboam's rule and installed Jeroboam I as king. Jeroboam established alternative worship sites with golden calves at Bethel and Dan to deter loyalty to the Jerusalem temple, initiating religious schism and political instability marked by frequent dynastic upheavals. Successive rulers shifted capitals from Shechem to Tirzah before Omri founded Samaria circa 880 BCE, consolidating power and elevating Israel to a regional contender through military campaigns and alliances.^[92]^[93] Under the Omride dynasty, Israel engaged in protracted conflicts with neighboring powers. Omri subdued Moab, as recorded in the Mesha Stele where the Moabite king claims liberation from Israelite oppression after Omri's death. Ahab, reigning circa 874–853 BCE, faced Aramean incursions from Damascus, defeating Ben-Hadad II in battles at Aphek and securing trade concessions, yet participated in the anti-Assyrian coalition at Qarqar in 853 BCE, contributing 2,000 chariots and 10,000 infantry against Shalmaneser III according to the Kurkh Monolith. Relations with Judah oscillated between warfare, such as Baasha's invasions, and temporary pacts, while internal strife peaked with prophetic confrontations against Ahab's Baal cult promoted via his Phoenician marriage. Archaeological finds, including Samaria's ivory-inlaid palaces and ostraca, attest to the dynasty's wealth and administrative reach.^[93]^[94]^[95] Jehu's violent coup in 841 BCE ended Omride rule, with Jehu submitting tribute to Shalmaneser III, depicted on the Black Obelisk as "Jehu, son of Omri" bearing gifts, marking early Assyrian influence. Subsequent kings navigated vassalage and revolts amid weakening Aramean foes, but internal fragmentation—nine dynasties in two centuries—eroded resilience. By 732 BCE, Tiglath-Pileser III extracted tribute and annexed territories, installing Hoshea as puppet ruler. Hoshea's rebellion prompted Shalmaneser V's invasion in 725 BCE, besieging Samaria for three years until its capture in 722/721 BCE by Sargon II, who deported approximately 27,290 inhabitants to Assyria and resettled foreigners, dissolving the kingdom into the province of Samerina. Assyrian annals corroborate the conquest's finality, attributing collapse to rebellion against imperial suzerainty rather than solely internal religious failings emphasized in biblical accounts.^[95]^[96]^[97]

Kingdom of Judah: Independence, Reforms, and Survival

Following the death of Solomon circa 930 BCE, the united monarchy divided, with the southern Kingdom of Judah emerging as an independent entity under Rehoboam, son of Solomon, comprising primarily the tribes of Judah and Benjamin with Jerusalem as its capital.^[98] This schism arose from Rehoboam's refusal to lighten the burdensome labor and taxation imposed by his father, prompting the northern tribes to rebel and install Jeroboam as king of Israel.^[99] Early in Rehoboam's reign (931–913 BCE), Judah faced invasion by Pharaoh Shishak I of Egypt, who plundered Jerusalem and other fortified cities, as corroborated by Shishak's Karnak reliefs listing conquered Judean sites.^[100] Judah maintained its sovereignty amid regional powers but experienced internal religious syncretism under several kings, including idolatry promoted by Rehoboam.^[101] Archaeological evidence from sites like Arad and Beersheba indicates continuity of Judahite material culture, including four-room houses and lack of pig bones, distinguishing it from Philistine or northern Israelite practices, supporting its independent development post-division.^[102] In the late 8th century BCE, King Hezekiah (r. circa 715–686 BCE) initiated centralizing religious reforms, destroying high places, sacred pillars, and Asherah poles throughout Judah, and confining legitimate worship to the Jerusalem Temple, as described in biblical accounts and evidenced by the decommissioning of altars at Arad and possible cultic sites in the Negev.^[103]^[104] These measures coincided with Hezekiah's rebellion against Assyrian overlordship, prompting Sennacherib's invasion in 701 BCE, which devastated much of Judah—evidenced by destruction layers at Lachish and 46 fortified sites—but spared Jerusalem after Hezekiah's tribute payment, as noted in Sennacherib's annals claiming to have "shut up Hezekiah like a bird in a cage" without mentioning the city's capture. This survival contrasted with the northern Kingdom of Israel's fall to Assyria in 722 BCE, allowing Judah to persist as a vassal state.^[105] Subsequent apostasy under Manasseh (r. circa 686–642 BCE) reversed these gains through widespread idolatry, but King Josiah (r. 640–609 BCE) revived reforms circa 622 BCE following the "discovery" of a law book in the Temple, demolishing pagan altars from Geba to Beersheba, executing idolatrous priests, and enforcing Passover observance exclusively in Jerusalem. Archaeological surveys show reduced settlement in rural Judah during Manasseh's era but resurgence under Josiah, with expanded urban activity in Jerusalem and the Shephelah, indicating territorial recovery amid Assyrian decline.^[106] Josiah's campaigns extended Judahite influence northward into former Israelite territory, achieving brief independence before his death at Megiddo against Pharaoh Neco II in 609 BCE.^[107] These reforms and strategic vassalage enabled Judah's endurance against imperial pressures until the rise of Babylon.

Assyrian Conquests and Their Impact

![Black Obelisk depicting Israelite delegation][float-right] The Neo-Assyrian Empire's expansion into the Levant began impacting the Kingdom of Israel under Tiglath-Pileser III (r. 745–727 BCE), who conducted campaigns in 734–732 BCE, conquering territories in Galilee and Gilead, and deporting significant portions of the population to Assyrian provinces such as Halah and the river of Gozan.^[108] These actions reduced Israel's territory and vassalized the kingdom under Assyrian oversight.^[109] King Hoshea of Israel's rebellion against Assyrian tribute prompted Shalmaneser V (r. 727–722 BCE) to besiege Samaria, the capital, for three years starting in 725 BCE.^[110] The siege concluded under Sargon II (r. 722–705 BCE), who captured the city in 722/720 BCE and deported approximately 27,290 inhabitants to regions including Media and Mesopotamia, as recorded in Sargon's annals.^[111] Archaeological evidence from Samaria reveals destruction layers and Assyrian administrative artifacts confirming the conquest and subsequent provincial reorganization.^[112] These deportations fragmented Israelite society, scattering elites, artisans, and farmers across the empire, where many assimilated into local populations, contributing to the historical disappearance of the "Ten Lost Tribes" from distinct records.^[109] Assyria's resettlement policy repopulated Samaria with exiles from Babylon, Cuthah, and other areas, fostering cultural syncretism and the emergence of Samaritan identity, marked by a hybrid material culture blending Israelite and foreign elements.^[110]^[113] The conquests terminated the Northern Kingdom's independence, shifting power dynamics in the region and imposing heavy tribute on the surviving Kingdom of Judah, which faced further incursions under Sargon II and Sennacherib, prompting defensive reforms and fortifications.^[114] Economically, the deportations disrupted agrarian systems and urban centers, leading to ruralization and depopulation in affected Israelite areas, with long-term effects on demographic continuity.^[112]^[115]

Babylonian Conquest and Exile

The Neo-Babylonian Empire under Nebuchadnezzar II asserted dominance over the Levant following the decline of Assyrian power, compelling the Kingdom of Judah to submit as a vassal state after initial campaigns in 605–604 BCE. Judah's king Jehoiakim initially paid tribute but rebelled toward the end of his reign around 601 BCE, prompting Nebuchadnezzar to besiege Jerusalem in late 598 BCE. The siege, lasting several months, culminated in the city's surrender in March 597 BCE, as recorded in the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle (ABC 5), a cuneiform tablet detailing the king's campaigns: "In the seventh year, in the month of Kislimu, the king of Akkad mustered his troops, marched to Hatti-land, and besieged the city of Judah." Jehoiachin (also Jeconiah), Jehoiakim's son and successor, was captured along with his mother, court officials, warriors (7,000 men), and skilled craftsmen (1,000), totaling approximately 10,000 deportees according to biblical accounts in 2 Kings 24:14, though the Chronicle notes the exile of the king without specifying numbers.^[116]^[117] Nebuchadnezzar installed Zedekiah, Jehoiakim's uncle, as a puppet ruler, extracting oaths of loyalty and plundering temple treasures. Zedekiah's subsequent rebellion, influenced by Egyptian overtures and prophetic opposition within Judah, triggered a second Babylonian campaign in late 588 BCE. The prolonged siege of Jerusalem, enduring about 18–30 months amid famine and internal strife, ended with the city's breaching in July 586 BCE; Zedekiah fled but was captured near Jericho, witnessing the execution of his sons before being blinded and exiled to Babylon. Babylonian forces razed the First Temple, burned the city, and demolished fortifications, as corroborated by destruction layers in excavations at sites like the City of David, Mount Zion, and Lachish, where ash deposits, collapsed structures, and arrowheads dated to the early 6th century BCE indicate widespread conflagration and military assault. FTIR spectrometry and archaeomagnetic analysis of debris from elite buildings confirm intense fires consistent with siege warfare, aligning with the timeline of Nebuchadnezzar's operations.^[118]^[119] Deportations followed both sieges, targeting elites, artisans, and military personnel to weaken resistance and bolster Babylonian labor; biblical tallies in Jeremiah 52:28–30 report 3,023 exiles in 597 BCE and 832 in 586 BCE (likely adult males, implying 10,000–20,000 total including families), though Judah's overall population of around 75,000 meant most inhabitants remained in the devastated land or fled to neighboring regions like Egypt. Cuneiform ration tablets from Babylon, such as those listing Jehoiachin and his sons receiving oil allocations, verify the presence of royal exiles, while archival texts from sites like Al-Yahudu reveal Judean communities engaging in agriculture, trade, and land ownership, suggesting adaptation rather than uniform hardship. The exile disrupted Judahite political structures and temple cult but preserved textual traditions through scribal activity, contributing to the compilation of Torah portions; archaeological continuity in rural settlements indicates no total depopulation, challenging narratives of complete national erasure.^[120]^[121]

Post-Exilic Reconstitution

Persian Period: Return and Temple Rebuilding

Following the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus the Great in 539 BCE, the Persian ruler issued an edict in 538 BCE permitting exiled peoples, including the Judahites deported during the Babylonian campaigns, to return to their homelands and restore their religious sanctuaries, as evidenced by the general repatriation policy inscribed on the Cyrus Cylinder.^[122]^[123] This decree aligned with Achaemenid administrative strategy to foster loyalty among subject populations by allowing local cultic practices, though the cylinder itself does not explicitly reference Judahites.^[122] The initial wave of returnees to Judah, organized as the Persian province of Yehud, occurred around 537 BCE under leaders Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel, with biblical accounts reporting approximately 42,360 individuals, though archaeological surveys indicate a modest overall population increase rather than a transformative influx, suggesting many exiles remained in Mesopotamia.^[124]^[125] Upon arrival in Jerusalem, the returnees reestablished an altar for sacrifices by late 537 BCE and laid the Second Temple's foundation in 536 BCE, utilizing returned cultic vessels provided by Cyrus.^[126] Construction soon stalled due to local opposition from neighboring groups, such as Samaritans, who cited Persian regulatory complaints, and internal socioeconomic challenges in the sparsely settled Yehud province.^[127] Work resumed in 520 BCE during the reign of Darius I (522–486 BCE), prompted by prophetic exhortations from Haggai and Zechariah urging prioritization of the temple amid community neglect, and supported by a confirmatory decree from Darius affirming Cyrus's original permission after archival verification at Ecbatana.^[128] The temple was completed and dedicated on March 12, 516 BCE, in Darius's sixth year, lacking the grandeur of Solomon's First Temple but serving as a focal point for renewed Yahwistic worship and communal identity.^[129] Archaeological finds from Persian-period Yehud, including stamped jar handles and modest administrative seals, corroborate a small-scale provincial administration under Persian oversight, with Jerusalem emerging as a limited cultic center rather than a major urban hub. This reconstitution marked a shift from exile-induced disruption to partial autonomy within the empire, though demographic recovery remained gradual.^[130]

Hellenistic Influence and Maccabean Revolt

Following the conquests of Alexander the Great, who subdued the Achaemenid Persian Empire between 334 and 323 BCE and accepted the peaceful submission of Judean leaders in 332 BCE, the region of Judea transitioned into the Hellenistic sphere.^[131] Initially under Ptolemaic Egyptian control from approximately 301 BCE, Judea experienced relative autonomy and cultural exchange, with Greek administrative practices and trade fostering limited Hellenization among urban elites.^[131] Control shifted to the Seleucid Empire after the Battle of Paneion around 200 BCE, during which Antiochus III defeated Ptolemy V, integrating Judea more firmly into Syrian Hellenistic domains.^[131] Hellenistic influence manifested in the adoption of Greek language, philosophy, athletics, and civic institutions by segments of the Jewish population, particularly in Jerusalem, where high priest Jason—appointed in 175 BCE—constructed a gymnasium and encouraged ephebic training, eroding traditional Torah observance among youth.^[132] This cultural syncretism divided Judean society: Hellenizing factions, often priestly and mercantile, sought integration for political and economic gain, while rural and pious groups resisted, viewing Greek practices as antithetical to covenantal fidelity.^[132] Economic pressures from Seleucid taxation and internal rivalries exacerbated tensions, as high priesthood became a purchasable office, with Jason's successor Menelaus (deposed in 172 BCE) allying further with Antiochus IV Epiphanes.^[133] Antiochus IV's reign (175–164 BCE) intensified coercion to unify his empire amid fiscal strains from eastern campaigns and Ptolemaic conflicts. In 169 BCE, after a failed Egyptian invasion, he plundered the Jerusalem Temple treasury, alienating even moderate Jews.^[133] By late 167 BCE, facing reports of Jewish unrest, he decreed the suppression of distinct practices: circumcision was prohibited under penalty of death, Sabbath observance banned, Torah scrolls ordered destroyed, and synagogues closed, culminating in the erection of a Zeus altar in the Temple and sacrifice of swine—acts defiling the sanctuary and sparking widespread martyrdom.^[133]^[134] These policies, enforced by garrisons in Jerusalem and Acra fortress, aimed at eradicating Jewish particularism but ignited rebellion, as traditionalists saw them not merely as cultural imposition but as existential assault on ancestral religion.^[133] The Maccabean Revolt erupted in 167 BCE in Modiin, where priest Mattathias Hasmoneus slew a royal official and apostate Jew enforcing sacrifices, rallying followers to guerrilla warfare in Judean hills.^[135] His son Judas, surnamed Maccabeus ("the Hammer"), assumed leadership, achieving early victories through asymmetric tactics: defeating Seleucid forces at Beth Horon (166 BCE), Emmaus, and Beth Zur, leveraging terrain and fervor despite numerical inferiority.^[135] By December 164 BCE, Judas recaptured Jerusalem, purged the Temple of Hellenistic idols, and rededicated it— an event commemorated as Hanukkah—though Acra remained a Seleucid holdout.^[135] Antiochus IV's death that year prompted a temporary truce under regent Lysias, granting religious concessions, but hostilities resumed as Judas sought political autonomy.^[135] Judas's death at Elasa in 160 BCE did not end the revolt; brothers Jonathan and Simon consolidated gains, exploiting Seleucid civil wars. Jonathan secured high priesthood in 152 BCE amid dynastic strife, while Simon, last surviving brother, expelled the Acra garrison in 141 BCE and negotiated formal independence from Demetrius II, assuming titles of ethnarch and high priest in 142 BCE, founding the Hasmonean dynasty.^[136] This priestly rule, blending theocratic and monarchic elements, restored sovereignty absent since Babylonian exile, expanding territory through conquests into Idumea, Samaria, and Galilee, though later internal corruption and Roman intervention eroded its independence by 63 BCE.^[136] The revolt's success stemmed from Seleucid overextension and Jewish unity against persecution, preserving core religious identity amid Hellenistic pressures.^[135]

Roman Rule and the Jewish Revolts

Roman forces under Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus intervened in Hasmonean civil strife and captured Jerusalem in 63 BCE, incorporating Judea into the Roman sphere as a client kingdom while allowing the high priesthood to retain some autonomy.^[137] ^[138] Pompey's entry into the Temple's Holy of Holies during the siege provoked outrage among pious Jews, though he refrained from looting it, extracting instead a fine of 10,000 talents and tribute from neighboring regions.^[137] This conquest ended formal Hasmonean independence, with Rome installing Hyrcanus II as high priest under Antipater the Idumean as advisor, setting a pattern of indirect rule through local proxies.^[138] In 40 BCE, Parthian invasion briefly restored Hasmonean rule under Antigonus, prompting Roman Senate appointment of Herod, son of Antipater, as king of Judea; he recaptured Jerusalem in 37 BCE after a five-month siege, ruling as a Roman client until his death in 4 BCE.^[139] Herod expanded the Second Temple into a grand complex starting around 20 BCE, fortifying sites like Masada and Herodium, and constructing Caesarea Maritima as a Roman-style port, though his Idumean origins and ruthless suppression of rivals fueled resentment among traditionalist Jews.^[139] Upon Herod's death, his kingdom fragmented among sons Archelaus, Antipas, and Philip; Archelaus's misrule led to his deposition in 6 CE, after which Judea proper fell under direct Roman prefecture from Caesarea, with census under Quirinius sparking early unrest.^[140] Tensions escalated under procurators like Pontius Pilate (26–36 CE), whose introduction of imperial standards into Jerusalem and use of Temple funds for an aqueduct incited protests, and later Gessius Florus (64–66 CE), accused of embezzling 17 talents from the Temple treasury and massacring civilians.^[141] These acts, compounded by heavy taxation, corruption, and Roman insensitivity to Jewish monotheism—such as Caligula's 39–40 CE order to install his statue in the Temple—fostered Zealot and Sicarii factions advocating violent resistance.^[141] The First Jewish-Roman War erupted in 66 CE when Jerusalem mobs expelled the garrison and defeated Roman forces at Beth Horon, leading Nero to dispatch Vespasian with three legions (about 60,000 men) in 67 CE to quell Galilee and Judea.^[142] Vespasian subdued Galilee by 68 CE, but Nero's death shifted focus; his son Titus assumed command in 70 CE, besieging Jerusalem amid internal Jewish factionalism between moderates, Zealots under John of Gischala, and Simon bar Giora.^[141] The city fell after five months, with the Second Temple burned on August 4–5, 70 CE (9th Av), resulting in 1.1 million deaths and 97,000 enslavements per Josephus, though modern estimates suggest 20,000–100,000 fatalities from siege, famine, and infighting.^[142] Roman victory entailed razing Jerusalem's walls, imposing the fiscus Judaicus tax on Jews empire-wide, and establishing the Legio X Fretensis garrison; holdouts at Masada committed mass suicide in 73 CE to evade capture.^[141] A brief diaspora revolt (Kitos War) flared in 115–117 CE amid Trajan's Parthian campaign, with Jewish uprisings in Cyrenaica, Egypt, and Cyprus killing tens of thousands before suppression.^[143] The Bar Kokhba Revolt (132–136 CE) ignited under Hadrian's plans to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina with a Jupiter temple on the Temple Mount and possible ban on circumcision, viewed as cultural erasure; Simon bar Kokhba, proclaimed messiah by Rabbi Akiva, initially seized Jerusalem and 50 forts, minting coins declaring "Freedom of Israel."^[144] ^[145] Hadrian dispatched Julius Severus with 12 legions (120,000 troops), employing scorched-earth tactics that depopulated Judea, killing 580,000 Jews per Cassius Dio alongside uncounted from famine and disease; bar Kokhba died at Betar in 135 CE.^[146] Consequences included renaming Judea to Syria Palaestina, banning Jews from Jerusalem except on Tisha B'Av, and mass enslavement or exile, decisively curtailing Jewish political autonomy for centuries.^[144]

Genetic and Biological Continuity

Ancient DNA Analyses from Levantine Sites

Ancient DNA analyses from Levantine archaeological sites have primarily focused on Bronze Age Canaanite populations and early Iron Age groups, revealing a genetically homogeneous Levantine profile that persisted with minimal disruption into the Israelite period. A comprehensive study of 73 individuals from five sites spanning the Middle Bronze Age (MBA) to Iron Age II (IAII), including Ashkelon, Megiddo, and 'En Esur, demonstrated that Bronze Age southern Levantine populations derived approximately 50% ancestry from local Neolithic farmers, 25% from Chalcolithic Zagros-related sources in Iran, and 25% from Early Bronze Age Caucasus hunter-gatherers or related groups.30487-6) This admixture model, established by the Middle Bronze Age around 2000 BCE, showed little variation across Canaanite groups, indicating regional genetic cohesion despite cultural distinctions.30487-6) [Iron Age](/page/Iron Age) samples from these sites exhibited continuity with Bronze Age profiles, with no significant influx of new ancestries attributable to external migrations during the proposed emergence of Israelite settlements circa 1200–1000 BCE.30487-6) Sequencing of five Bronze Age Canaanite genomes from Sidon (dated 1800–1200 BCE) further corroborated this continuity, estimating that modern Lebanese populations retain about 93% ancestry from these ancient Levantine sources, with the remainder from later Eurasian steppe-related admixture post-Bronze Age collapse.30276-8) These findings align with broader Levantine data, where Iron Age non-Philistine coastal and inland populations lacked the Southern European genetic signal observed in early Iron Age Ashkelon burials (circa 1200 BCE), which showed up to 14% steppe-related ancestry before diluting in subsequent generations.^[12] The absence of distinct genetic markers separating Israelite-associated sites (e.g., Megiddo IA) from contemporaneous Canaanite ones supports models of Israelite ethnogenesis through cultural differentiation within an indigenous Levantine gene pool, rather than large-scale population replacement.30487-6)30276-8) Proximal analyses of Iron Age Levantine DNA, including from First Temple period contexts, confirm this pattern, with principal component analyses placing samples near Bronze Age clusters and modern Levantine groups, including Jewish populations.^[147] Limited sample sizes from explicitly Israelite sites—due to poor preservation in the hot, humid Levant—have constrained resolution, but available data from over 90 Bronze-to-Iron Age skeletons indicate over 50% ancestral contribution from Canaanite-like profiles to contemporary Levantine-descended groups, underscoring long-term genetic stability punctuated by localized admixtures (e.g., Philistine Europeans fading by IAII).30487-6)^[148] These results challenge narratives of disruptive conquests lacking genetic correlates, privileging endogenous continuity shaped by gradual cultural and religious shifts.30487-6)30276-8)

Genetic Links to Modern Populations

Genetic analyses of ancient DNA from Iron Age sites in the southern Levant, such as Megiddo and Ashkelon, demonstrate that populations from this period exhibit an autosomal genetic profile characterized by a mixture of local Neolithic Levantine ancestry and influxes from Iran/Chalcolithic-related sources, forming a distinct cluster that persists in modern Levantine groups.^[147] This Iron Age Levantine profile shows the closest modern affinities to populations like Druze, Bedouins, and Palestinians, with Jewish groups, including Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi, clustering nearby but shifted due to post-exilic admixtures from Europe, North Africa, and the Near East.^[149] Quantitative estimates indicate that Ashkenazi Jews derive 35-55% of their ancestry from Bronze/Iron Age Levantine sources, reflecting partial continuity tempered by diaspora gene flow, while Levantine Arabs retain higher proportions of this component with less external admixture.^[150] Y-chromosome studies further highlight patrilineal links, particularly through haplogroup J1-M267, which predominates in ancient Semitic-speaking groups and is elevated in modern Jewish cohorts at frequencies of 20-40%, compared to 10-20% in non-Jewish Levantines.^[151] The Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH), a specific six-marker STR motif within J1, occurs in 46-56% of self-identified Kohanim (Jewish priestly descendants) across Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and other branches, with a coalescent age estimated at 2,100-3,250 years ago, consistent with a common ancestor during the late Bronze or early Iron Age.^[152] This haplotype's presence in non-Jewish groups like the Lemba of southern Africa at lower frequencies suggests ancient dissemination but reinforces its association with Israelite-era lineages rather than later inventions.^[152] Broader Y-haplogroup distributions among Jews show elevated E-M34 and J2 subclades, aligning with patterns in ancient Near Eastern samples and distinguishing them from host populations in Europe or elsewhere.^[153] The Samaritans, a small community claiming descent from northern Israelite tribes, provide a benchmark for minimal admixture; their Y-chromosomes are nearly identical to Jewish Cohanim lineages, with 80-90% sharing haplogroup J subclades and a most recent common ancestor dated to 2,500-3,500 years ago, supporting biological continuity from pre-exilic Israelite stock despite historical isolation and endogamy.^[154] Autosomal data similarly position Samaritans as outliers with high Iron Age Levantine retention (over 80%), closer to ancient profiles than most diaspora Jews, underscoring how religious practices preserved genetic signals amid regional upheavals.^[155] Overall, these markers affirm that modern Jewish populations retain a substantial genetic substrate from ancient Israelite forebears, with admixture levels varying by subgroup—lowest in Oriental Jews (10-20% non-Levantine) and highest in Ashkenazim—while shared Levantine haplotypes with Arabs reflect a common Canaanite-Israeli base rather than exclusive Jewish provenance.^[151]^[156]

Anthropological and Osteological Evidence

Skeletal remains from Iron Age Israelite sites, primarily in the highlands of Judah and northern Israel, are relatively scarce due to religious sensitivities prohibiting disturbance of burials, extensive looting of tombs, and the perishable nature of many interments in rock-cut caves or pits. The Israel Antiquities Authority maintains an osteological database documenting thousands of bones from various periods, including Iron Age examples from sites like Azor and Tell es-Safi, enabling paleodemographic analyses that reveal patterns such as high infant mortality (often exceeding 30% under age 5) and age-dependent burial practices, where subadults under three years were frequently interred separately from adults, possibly reflecting ritual or practical considerations.^[157]^[158] Osteological examinations indicate physical continuity with Late Bronze Age Levantine populations, with no distinct biological markers separating "Israelites" from Canaanites; average male stature approximated 165-170 cm based on long bone measurements from Judahite tombs, accompanied by enthesopathies (bone spurs from muscle attachments) signaling rigorous agrarian labor such as plowing and terrace farming. Cranial morphology from biblical-period skulls, including those potentially from Iron Age contexts, shows dolichocephalic indices (cephalic index around 70-75), prominent nasal bridges, and robust brow ridges typical of Semitic groups in the region, as reconstructed through cephalometric analysis.^[159]^[160] Facial approximations from such crania depict olive-toned skin, dark hair, and features aligning with modern Levantine populations rather than exogenous invaders.^[161] Pathological evidence from dental and skeletal analyses underscores a subsistence economy reliant on emmer wheat, barley, and olives, with widespread enamel hypoplasia (growth lines indicating childhood malnutrition or disease stress) and moderate dental caries rates (10-20% in adults), higher than in contemporaneous coastal sites but consistent with inland highland sedentism. Burial assemblages from Judahite cemeteries, such as those near Jerusalem, feature secondary manipulation of bones (ossilegium) in multi-chambered tombs by the late Iron II (8th-6th centuries BCE), suggesting emerging familial or kin-group identity in mortuary rites distinct from Philistine incinerations or Phoenician shaft graves, though sharing cave tomb traditions with Canaanites.^[162]^[163] These practices, inferred from bone disarticulation and bench arrangements, imply beliefs in post-mortem persistence without strong evidence of ancestor cults, aligning with biblical prohibitions while reflecting practical reuse of space in densely settled areas.^[164] Comparative anthropology highlights subtle distinctions: Judahite skeletons exhibit fewer porotic hyperostosis lesions (indicating iron-deficiency anemia) than Philistine remains from sites like Ashkelon, possibly linked to dietary taboos avoiding pork, though direct osteological confirmation remains elusive without isotopic data. Overall, the evidence supports an endogenous ethnogenesis from local Canaanite stock, with cultural innovations in settlement and avoidance of pig husbandry manifesting indirectly in health profiles rather than overt skeletal divergence.^[165]^[166]

Scholarly Controversies and Interpretations

Historicity of the Exodus and Patriarchal Narratives

The patriarchal narratives in the Book of Genesis, portraying Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as semi-nomadic figures in Canaan during the Middle Bronze Age (circa 2000–1550 BCE), contain no direct archaeological or extrabiblical textual evidence identifying these individuals by name or confirming their specific migrations and covenants.^[167] Scholars like Thomas L. Thompson have concluded, based on comprehensive analysis of Near Eastern archives and inscriptions, that the narratives cannot be anchored to verifiable historical persons, viewing them instead as later literary constructs reflecting Iron Age Israelite self-understanding rather than Bronze Age events.^[168] ^[169] Elements such as Amorite-style personal names (e.g., Abram resembling common Northwest Semitic forms) and practices like bride-price negotiations or land purchases via silver align with documented Middle Bronze Age customs in Mesopotamia and Canaan, suggesting possible preservation of authentic cultural memories amid legendary elaboration.^[170] A long-standing objection to the narratives' antiquity involves references to domesticated camels as beasts of burden (e.g., Genesis 12:16, 24:10), previously deemed anachronistic since faunal remains and texts indicated widespread camel domestication only from the late 2nd millennium BCE onward.^[171] Recent archaeological data, including Sumerian texts from Nippur (circa 2100–2000 BCE) attesting camel use and Bronze Age petroglyphs in Egypt's Wadi Nasib depicting laden camels, support earlier limited domestication in the Levant and Egypt, potentially contemporaneous with the proposed patriarchal era.^[172] ^[173] While these findings mitigate the anachronism, they do not prove the narratives' historicity, as camel mentions remain sparse in contemporary records compared to their prominence in Genesis. Overall, the absence of monumental inscriptions or settlement disruptions tied to patriarchal figures favors interpretations of the stories as etiologies explaining tribal origins and land claims, with any historical kernel likely distorted by oral transmission over centuries.^[174] The Exodus narrative, depicting the liberation of approximately 600,000 Israelite men (implying 2–3 million total including families and livestock) from Egyptian bondage around 1446 BCE (early date) or 1250 BCE (late date), lacks corroboration from Egyptian annals, which record no slave revolts, plagues, or military pursuits matching the scale described in Exodus 7–14.^[175] ^[176] Extensive surveys of the Sinai Peninsula, including decades of Israeli-led excavations, have uncovered no campsites, pottery sherds, or faunal remains indicative of such a prolonged mass migration, despite the arid environment's preservation potential for transient traces.^[177] The subsequent conquest accounts face similar evidentiary voids: Jericho's walls collapsed circa 1550 BCE (early), predating any plausible Israelite arrival, with the site largely unoccupied during the Late Bronze Age; Ai shows no destruction layer at the relevant time; and Hazor exhibits burning around 1230 BCE but attributable to internal Canaanite conflicts rather than external invaders.^[13] ^[176] Proponents of a historical core invoke indirect supports like the Merneptah Stele (circa 1209 BCE), which names "Israel" as a defeated people-group in Canaan, implying prior settlement, and Semitic 'Apiru laborers in Egyptian texts (15th–13th centuries BCE) as possible analogs for Hebrew slaves, though 'Apiru denotes a social class of wanderers, not an ethnic group.^[178] References to Shasu nomads of "Yhw" (potentially linked to Yahweh) in Ramesside inscriptions (13th century BCE) suggest early Yahwistic elements east of the Jordan, but these reflect gradual pastoralist movements, not a unified exodus.^[179] A smaller-scale departure of Semitic groups, perhaps echoing Hyksos expulsion (circa 1550 BCE) or seasonal migrations, may underlie the tradition, but the biblical portrayal of national deliverance, miracles, and rapid conquest exceeds archaeological patterns of indigenous Canaanite highland emergence around 1200 BCE, characterized by gradual village proliferation without foreign invasion traces.^[180] ^[181] Scholarly assessments, drawing from Egyptology and Levantine stratigraphy, predominantly classify the Exodus as non-historical folklore amalgamating famine memories, liberation motifs, and identity formation, though apologetic interpretations persist by emphasizing absence of disproof for minimal events.^[182]^[13]

Scale and Nature of the United Monarchy

The biblical accounts in 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 Kings describe the United Monarchy as a centralized kingdom uniting the tribes of Israel and Judah under Kings Saul (c. 1020–1000 BCE), David (c. 1000–970 BCE), and Solomon (c. 970–930 BCE), extending from the Negev to the Galilee and involving conquests over Philistines, Moabites, Edomites, and Arameans, with Jerusalem as a fortified capital featuring a royal palace and temple funded by vast tribute and trade.^[79] These narratives portray an administratively sophisticated state capable of large-scale building projects, such as fortified gates at Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer (1 Kings 9:15), and a population supporting an army of 1,300 chariots and 12,000 horsemen under Solomon (1 Kings 10:26).^[91] Archaeological evidence, however, indicates a more modest scale than the biblical depiction, with Jerusalem remaining a small highland settlement of perhaps 5,000–10,000 inhabitants during the 10th century BCE, lacking the monumental architecture expected of an imperial capital until later periods.^[83] The "Large Stone Structure" in the City of David, potentially David's palace, shows Iron Age IIA construction but no clear royal inscriptions or widespread destruction layers aligning with David's campaigns against regional powers.^[79] Extra-biblical confirmation of David exists via the Tel Dan Stele (c. 840 BCE), an Aramaic inscription by an Aramean king boasting victories over the "House of David" (byt dwd), establishing a Davidic dynasty in Judah by the 9th century BCE and supporting David's historicity as a ruler of regional significance.^[183] No contemporary inscriptions mention Solomon, and Philistine sites show cultural continuity rather than the subjugation described in the Bible.^[81] Debates center on chronology and site attributions: Israel Finkelstein's "low chronology" downdates Iron Age IIA pottery and structures (c. 980–900 BCE) to the 9th century BCE, attributing monumental gates at Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer to the Omride dynasty rather than Solomon, portraying the United Monarchy as a loose tribal chiefdom in Judah with limited northern integration.^[83] Critics, citing radiocarbon dating from Rehov and other sites, support a "high chronology" placing these developments in the early 10th century BCE, aligning with Solomonic-era fortifications and suggesting a centralized Judahite polity capable of regional control, though not an empire rivaling Egypt or Assyria.^[81] Recent reanalysis of Gezer's water system and gates using 14C dating favors the 10th century BCE, indicating organized state labor but on a scale consistent with a highland kingdom of 50,000–100,000 people rather than the biblical millions.^[91] The nature of the United Monarchy likely involved a transition from tribal alliances to a dynastic monarchy under David, who consolidated power in Judah and extended influence northward after Saul's fall, fostering administrative innovations like regional governors and a standing army evidenced by scarab seals and early Hebrew script fragments.^[88] Solomon's reign emphasized diplomacy and temple-building, with copper mining at Timna and Ezion-geber supporting Red Sea trade, but economic data from settlement surveys show sparse highland villages and no urban explosion indicative of vast wealth.^[184] Scholarly minimalism, prevalent in much of academia, often dismisses grander biblical elements due to evidential gaps, yet accumulating finds like the Tel Dan reference and 10th-century fortifications substantiate a historical core of united rule over core Israelite territories, albeit as a secondary power in a multipolar Levant dominated by city-states and Egypt's waning influence post-20th Dynasty.^[79]^[183]

Israelite Identity: Ethnic, Religious, or Cultural?

The ancient Israelite identity emerged in the late 13th century BCE, as evidenced by the Merneptah Stele, which records the Egyptian pharaoh's campaign and refers to "Israel" using the hieroglyphic determinative for a people or socio-ethnic group rather than a city or territory, indicating a tribal or kin-based collective already established in Canaan.^[185]^[186] This early attestation supports an ethnic dimension rooted in shared descent and social organization, distinct from surrounding populations like the Canaanites in the lowlands or Philistines along the coast. Archaeological data from Iron Age I highland settlements (c. 1200–1000 BCE) further delineates Israelite ethnicity through material culture markers, including the widespread absence of pig bones in faunal remains—comprising less than 1% of assemblages at sites like Izbet Sartah and Mount Ebal, in contrast to 10–20% at contemporaneous Philistine and Canaanite sites—alongside collared-rim storage jars and four-room house plans.^[3]^[46] These traits suggest a cohesive group identity formed indigenously from local Canaanite elements, possibly augmented by pastoral nomads, rather than through mass external migration, as no evidence supports large-scale conquest or exodus narratives in the archaeological record.^[187] Scholars like William Dever interpret this as an ethnic ethnogenesis via social upheaval, such as a "peasant revolt" model, where marginalized Canaanites coalesced in the underpopulated central hill country, adopting egalitarian village structures and avoiding pork likely for ideological reasons tied to emerging group boundaries.^[55] Religious practices intertwined with this ethnic framework, centered on Yahweh worship, but did not initially define identity in isolation; early Israelite cult sites show continuity with Canaanite forms, such as altars and standing stones, before developing aniconism and centralized temples.^[45] Israel Finkelstein's analysis of settlement surveys posits that the rapid proliferation of over 250 highland villages—housing an estimated 20,000–40,000 people by 1100 BCE—reflected a cultural identity shift among indigenous groups, marked by territorial claims and anti-urban ideology, rather than purely confessional adherence.^[61] Pork avoidance, while potentially symbolic of religious taboo, functioned more as an ethnic boundary marker, persisting even in areas with mixed populations and predating strict Deuteronomic laws.^[188] By the Iron Age II (c. 1000–586 BCE), as kingdoms of Israel and Judah solidified, identity blended ethnic kinship—evident in tribal lists and genealogies—with religious covenantal elements, though intermarriage and cultural assimilation with neighboring groups indicate flexibility beyond rigid descent.^[189] Assyrian inscriptions, such as the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III (c. 841 BCE), depict Israelite delegates with distinct ethnic attire, reinforcing a perceived national-ethnic entity subject to tribute. Scholarly consensus, informed by these empirical traces, views early Israelite identity as predominantly ethnic and cultural, emerging from local Levantine roots with religion serving to reinforce rather than originate group cohesion; claims of purely religious self-definition lack support prior to the Babylonian exile, when textual codification emphasized Torah observance amid diaspora pressures.^[46]^[45] This perspective counters maximalist biblical interpretations favoring exogenous origins, prioritizing archaeological patterns over unverified migratory traditions.

References

[1]
Does the Merneptah Stele Contain the First Mention of Israel?
The Merneptah Stele has long been touted as the earliest extrabiblical reference to Israel.* The ancient Egyptian inscription dates to about 1205 B.C.E. and ...
[2]
Where Did the Early Israelites Come From? - The BAS Library
The origin of early Israelites is debated; some believe they came from the desert east, others from indigenous pastoralists, and some from the steppe lands ...Missing: sources | Show results with:sources
[3]
You Are What You Eat: The Israelite Diet and Archaeology
Nov 14, 2016 · In short: If people didn't eat pork, they likely didn't raise pigs—hence the expected absence in archaeologically excavated contexts of pig ...Missing: avoidance | Show results with:avoidance
[4]
Archaeology, Biblical Research and Ancient Israel | Bible Interp
The stories amalgamated ancient folk traditions, historical sources, and Babylonian mythological stories into an epic narrative of a people brought by God to ...
[5]
History of Ancient Israelite Religion - Biblical Studies
May 26, 2023 · Archaeological discoveries of the nineteenth century and critical approaches to the Hebrew Bible led to the separation of Israelite Religion ...
[6]
Ancient Israel: History of the kingdoms and dynasties formed by ...
Sep 22, 2022 · To reconstruct the history of ancient Israel, scholars turn to archaeological excavations, the Hebrew Bible and other discovered texts.King David · Northern & southern kingdoms · Fall of Judah & Babylonian exile
[7]
The Tel Dan Inscription: The First Historical Evidence of King David ...
The Tel Dan inscription, found in 1993, is the first historical evidence of King David, referencing the "House of David" and proving he was a real person.
[8]
Archaeological Evidence of Kings of Israel and Judah
Jan 7, 2022 · Archaeological evidence confirms the existence of biblical kings of Israel and Judah, with most confirmed by multiple artifacts.
[9]
New Evidence Shows The True Extent of The Biblical Kingdom of ...
May 2, 2018 · A new archaeological study has found evidence supporting the belief that a monarchy just might have united the lands during this important period.<|separator|>
[10]
Israelite Ethnicity in Iron I: Archaeology Preserves What Is ...
Oct 1, 2003 · David's Social Drama: A Hologram of Israel's Early Iron Age. (Social ... Tel Miqne-Ekron: The Iron Age I Philistine Settlement in Canaan.
[11]
Israel's Ethnogenesis - Biblical Archaeology Society
Israel's ethnogenesis is the evolution of self-identity, investigated using archaeological data to trace it to the Iron Age I (12th-11th centuries BCE).
[12]
Ancient DNA sheds light on the genetic origins of early Iron Age ...
The early Iron Age population was distinct in its high genetic affinity to European-derived populations and in the high variation of that affinity, suggesting ...
[13]
The Exodus: Fact or Fiction? - Biblical Archaeology Society
Many scholars agree the Exodus occurred, with evidence supporting a 13th-century B.C.E. event, though some reject the entire story.
[14]
The Ancient Israelites through Archaeology, History and Text
Oct 20, 2017 · Ancient Israelites created monotheism, their writings are in the Bible, and archaeology provides a fuller picture of their history, which is ...
[15]
Israelites or Jews? - TheTorah.com
Sep 30, 2025 · Thus, the terms “Israel” and “Israelites” can and do refer to Jews in the Second Temple period, often in historical, liturgical, and ...
[16]
https://individual.utoronto.ca/mfkolarcik/texts/WDeverArchaeology_ConquestABD.html
[17]
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/3478.htm
[18]
Israel - Etymology, Origin & Meaning of the Name
Israel originates from Hebrew yisra'el meaning "he that striveth with God," derived from Old English and Latin; it denotes the Jewish people and the modern ...
[19]
What does "Israel" mean in Hebrew? - IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
The word YISRAEL (יִשְׂרָאֵל - Israel) is related to the verb liSROT (לִשְׂרוֹת), which in Hebrew means to struggle, to strive, even to exercise influence. In the ...<|separator|>
[20]
Yisra'el Meaning - Hebrew Lexicon | Old Testament (NAS)
the name of the descendants and the nation of the descendants of Jacob. the name of the nation until the death of Solomon and the split.
[21]
Hebrew: Yisra'el - Hadassah Magazine
Jan 4, 2022 · ... Yisra'el, meaning “Let God reign,” with the suffix “el” originally being the name of a Canaanite deity. In Hebrew scripture, Yisra'el is ...
[22]
ישראל - B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum
Feb 1, 2016 · [Jacob's adversary] etymologizes the name Yisra'el as 'he strives with God.' In fact, names with the 'el ending generally make God the subject, ...Meaning of "Israel"Meaning of "Israel" - Page 2More results from bhebrew.biblicalhumanities.org
[23]
Earliest Textual References to Israel - Madain Project (en)
The earliest certain mention of the ethnonym Israel occurs in a victory inscription of the Egyptian king MERENPTAH, his well-known Merneptah Stele or the “ ...
[24]
(PDF) The Earliest Reference to Israel and Its Possible ...
Aug 10, 2025 · Manfred Görg proposed to read the name Israel on a broken Egyptian inscription äm 21687, which is now kept in the storage facilities of the New ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[25]
Hebrews, Israelites & Jews. Are they the same people? - Ron Choong
Jul 7, 2021 · The Old Testament Israelites refer to a people who were never meant to be a racial or genetic pedigree, but anyone who identify with Israel (God ...
[26]
Are they Jews, Hebrews, or Israelites? - Stephen M. Miller
Hebrews in the early centuries, after Abraham. Israelites when they had a country. Jews after they were exiled, a named plucked from the name of their nation: ...
[27]
S01E03 Hebrews Israelites and Jews - Jew Oughta Know
According to the biblical tradition the Hebrews were the direct descendants of Shem, one of the sons of Noah who survived the Flood. The Hebrews come from ...
[28]
Jews vs Israelites vs Hebrews - Shalom Adventure Magazine
Feb 18, 2022 · So, all Jews are Israelites as descendants of Jacob, but anyone born in Israel, even if not Jewish, are considered Israelis. There are also ...
[29]
Who Were the Ancient Israelites? A Brief History - TheCollector
Oct 20, 2024 · The term Israelites refers to the people from the kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the early first millennium BCE. Jew refers to followers of the ...Missing: etymology | Show results with:etymology
[30]
Israelites and Canaanites - The BAS Library
Can the two groups—the Canaanites and Israelites—actually be distinguished in the archaeological record of Iron Age I (1200–1000 B.C., the Biblical period ...Missing: differences | Show results with:differences
[31]
How to Tell a Canaanite from an Israelite - The BAS Library
But despite the most determined search, Israeli archaeologists have not been able to find anything of the Tabernacle or the shrine—or indeed anything cultic at ...
[32]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2012%3A1-3&version=ESV
[33]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2028%3A13-15%2C%2032%3A28&version=ESV
[34]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2035%3A23-26%2C%2048%3A5&version=ESV
[35]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2037%3A%20-50%3A26%2C%20Exodus%201%3A8-11&version=ESV
[36]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%202%3A1-10%2C%203%3A1-10%2C%2012%3A37&version=ESV
[37]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Kings%206%3A1&version=ESV
[38]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2019%3A5-6%2C%2020%3A1-17%2C%2025-31&version=ESV
[39]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2013-14%2C%20Joshua%203%3A14-17%2C%206%3A20&version=ESV
[40]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%207%3A6-8&version=ESV
[41]
Judges, 1200-1000 BCE | Center for Online Judaic Studies
From about 1200 to 1000 B.C.E., about two or three hundred small villages were established in the highlands.
[42]
The origins of Israel in Canaan: an examination of recent theories
Feb 2, 2020 · We begin with the view which adheres most closely to the biblical traditions: that the Israelite tribes entered Canaan by force, acting more or ...Missing: ethnogenesis | Show results with:ethnogenesis
[43]
[PDF] A Sudden Archaeological Breakthrough - LSA Course Sites
Bones recovered from the excavations of the small early Israelite villages in the highlands differ from settlements in other parts of the country in one sig-.
[44]
Finkelstein's "Archaeology of the Israelite Settlement" - jstor
The first surveys of these regions, done in 1968, showed the existence of many small Iron Age I sites which can be related to the Israelite settlement. More.<|separator|>
[45]
Religion, Identity and the Origins of Ancient Israel - Sparks - 2007
Sep 14, 2007 · According to the Bible, early Israel originated as a group migrant slaves who escaped from Egypt, spent an extended time in the wilderness as pastoral nomads.
[46]
[PDF] ISRAELITE ETHNICITY IN IRON I: ARCHAEOLOGY PRESERVES ...
... pork abstinence as an ethnic marker ignores the complexities of the archaeological record. Pig consumption or avoidance was not an exclusive ethnic trait.
[47]
[PDF] Genetics and the Archaeology of Ancient Israel
Jan 12, 2013 · The almost complete lack of pig bones from excavated highland village sites and the Canaanite site of Tel Beth-Shemesh in the northern ...
[48]
Israelite Origins: Working backwards - Biblical Historical Context
Nov 10, 2018 · Israelite origins are linked to the transition between the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age I, with the Iron I period being the early Israelites.
[49]
The emergence of Israel in Canaan, according to archaeology
According to the archaeologist Israel Finkelstein, Israel was, at least in part, an indigenous people. Excavations carried out since 1967 have identified ...
[50]
(PDF) Pig Husbandry in Iron Age Israel and Judah: New Insights ...
This brings us back to where we started – the biblical prohibition of pork consumption. The origin of taboos on pigs is debated. Reasons for its avoidance ...
[51]
Iron Age Pigs: New Evidence on Their Origin and Role in Forming ...
Feb 9, 2016 · Regarding ancient Israel, new studies show that avoiding pork was a widespread phenomenon of much of the Iron Age in both the highland and the ...
[52]
Merneptah Stele: Proving Israel's 3,200-Year Existence
Oct 26, 2018 · The Merneptah Stele (or Israel Stele) is an engraved stone slab which describes Pharaoh Merneptah's military victories in 1207 b.c.e.
[53]
[PDF] THE EMERGENCE OF ANCIENT ISRAEL
The initial model (the Conquest Model) set forth by WF Albright in the 1920s dominated the biblical and archaeology scene until the. 1960s. With the diminishing ...
[54]
[PDF] Theories of the Israelite Occupation of the Land of Canaan - DTIC
The conquest theory involves the massing of the twelve tribes of Israel and their invasion of the Land of Canaan. In this theory, Joshua and his forces attack.
[55]
Archaeology and the Israelite 'Conquest' - University of Toronto
This article summarizes archaeological data on early Israelite settlement, critiques models of Israelite origins, and suggests harmonizing archaeological and ...<|separator|>
[56]
https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/archaeologys-lost-conquest/
[57]
(PDF) Early Israel's Origins, Settlement, and Ethnogenesis by Ann E ...
Scholarly models of Israel's emergence include conquest, peaceful infiltration, and social revolution theories. Archaeological evidence largely contradicts ...
[58]
Top Ten Discoveries Related to Joshua and the Conquest
Nov 12, 2021 · Here are the top ten discoveries that I believe demonstrate the historical reliability of the biblical description of Joshua's conquest of Canaan.
[59]
[PDF] ETHNICITY, ASSIMILATION AND THE ISRAELITE SETTLEMENT
Another model is the 'peaceful infiltration' model which originated from the German scholars Albrecht Alt and Martin Noth in the early 20th century. According ...
[60]
Pig bones in Iron Age 1 Philistia and highlands (prepared by Nathan ...
... it would seem that Canaanites and Philistines were pork eaters, the Israelites were not, and pork consumption (or not) represents an 'ethnic' behaviour.
[61]
(PDF) Finkelstein, I. 1996. Ethnicity and Origin of the Iron I Settlers in ...
early Israel involve the interplay between archaeol- ogy and ethnicity.The first is related to the formation of the early Israelite ethnicity: can we identify a ...
[62]
Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From?
A review of William Dever's, "Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did ... peasant revolt; discusses the archaeological evidence from a variety of ...Missing: origins | Show results with:origins
[63]
WHO WERE THE EARLY ISRAELITES AND WHERE DID THEY ...
... peasant revolt model initiated by Mendenhall and Gottwald. According to Dever, the early Israelites sprang up from various groups of people who went to the ...
[64]
In First, Archaeologists Extract DNA of Ancient Israelites - Archaeology
Oct 9, 2023 · For the first time, ancient DNA has been recovered from the bodies of ancient Israelites living in the First Temple period, Haaretz has learned.
[65]
Israelite Origins: the Late Bronze Age collapse
Mar 20, 2019 · The Late Bronze Age collapse resulted in the disintegration of international trade, the end of dynasties, and an entirely new world order prompted by mass ...
[66]
1177 BC: The Collapse of Civilizations and the Rise of Ancient Israel ...
Jan 6, 2015 · However, it is also clear that at the end of the Late Bronze Age, the earlier Canaanite cities at Ekron and Ashdod were violently destroyed and ...
[67]
Collapse and Rebirth - Biblical Archaeology Society
Jun 26, 2024 · For more on the aftermath of the Late Bronze Age collapse and the emergence of biblical Israel, read the article by Eric H. Cline entitled “ ...
[68]
Late Bronze Age Settlement Patterns in Ancient Israel - Pros Aletheian
Jun 23, 2021 · Prior to the Late Bronze Age, pig bones were ubiquitous throughout Palestine, especially in the rural areas. Dever (2001:113) notes that pork ...
[69]
Exodus: The Name Yahweh in Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts
Mar 8, 2010 · It is generally accepted that the term Shasu means nomads or Bedouin people, referring primarily to the nomadic or semi-nomadic peoples of Syria-Palestine.
[70]
Israel emerged from Canaan, not Egypt - The Hebrew Bible - Weebly
The emergence of early Israel was an outcome of the collapse of the Canaanite culture, not its cause. And most of the early Israelites did not come from outside ...
[71]
Israel's Origins - Associates for Biblical Research
Oct 10, 2007 · Sites typical of the Late Bronze Age - the Canaanite cities - and sites characteristic of the Iron Age - the Early Iron Age villages are now ...Missing: markers | Show results with:markers
[72]
The Four-Room House - World History Encyclopedia
Nov 2, 2014 · The four-room house, also referred to as “Israelite house” and “pillared courtyard house,” emerged in the central highlands of Canaan during the late 13th - ...
[73]
The Four-Room House: Typically Israelite?
Aug 7, 2017 · It has been established that the four-room house is a typical feature of Iron Age Palestine. It has also been argued that the house type is typically Israelite.
[74]
(PDF) Faust, A., and Bunimovitz, S., 2003, The Four Room House
The four-room house – the typical dwelling in the Land of Israel during the Iron Age – has received much scholarly attention.<|separator|>
[75]
[PDF] An Israelite Storage Jar from the Time of Judges
The collar-rim pithos, the most common, first appeared in a few Canaanite locations during the earlier Late Bronze Age, then became quite popular at. Israelite ...
[76]
The Collared Pithos at Megiddo: Ceramic Distribution and Ethnicity
collared-rim jars so typical of Israelite occupation. Its buildings are entirely different, and Megiddo's venerable sacral tradition is unequivocally ...
[77]
Pigs in Space (and Time) - jstor
Did Israelites abstain from pork, or did these who lived in the kingdom of Israel during the Iron II revert to pork consump- tion? Did Canaanites eat pigs? Why ...
[78]
[PDF] Pig Taboos in the Ancient near East
Low frequencies of pig bones (Sapir-Hen 2013: 10). Iron Age I: Northern Israel highland. “Pigs do not appear” (Sapir-Hen 2013: 10). Iron Age I ...<|separator|>
[79]
The United Monarchy Under David and Solomon
A significant academic debate developed over the historical accuracy of the Bible's description of the United Monarchy under David and Solomon.
[80]
The Evidence for King David and an Update on the Tel Dan Stela
Jun 11, 2025 · One of the most revered figures in the Old Testament is David, the second king of the United Monarchy, who ruled from 1009 to 969 BC.
[81]
David and Solomon's Biblical Kingdom May Have Existed After All ...
Nov 15, 2023 · Monumental structures at Gezer have been redated to the early 10th century BCE, which means maybe Solomon built them after all, biblical archaeologists say.
[82]
King David: An Archaeological Biography
Jan 17, 2020 · Many scholars point to the nearly identical gates at Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer as evidence of Solomon's building activity.13 Inscriptions on ...
[83]
[PDF] A Great United Monarchy? Archaeological and Historical Perspectives
A Great United Monarchy? Archaeological and Historical Perspectives*. ISRAEL FINKELSTEIN. Twelve years have passed since I first presented – to the ...
[84]
(PDF) Finkelstein, I. 1996. The Archaeology of the United Monarchy
The article deals with the chronology of the early-Iron II strata in Palestine. A careful examination of the archaeological and textual data indicates that ...
[85]
[PDF] Meet the real King David, the one the Bible didn't want you to know ...
Mar 27, 2019 · Finkelstein and other scholars posit that the stories of the United Monarchy originated in the late 7th century B.C.E., under the Judahite ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[86]
Evidence for Saul, David, and Solomon · Creation.com
Jul 9, 2023 · Discoveries in archaeology confirm the Bible's claims about King David, Solomon, and Israel's united monarchy.
[87]
New Finds Suggest Biblical Kings David and Solomon Actually Existed
Dec 26, 2014 · Six clay seals found at the archaeological site of Khirbet Summeily in Israel offer evidence that supports the existence of Biblical Kings David and Solomon.
[88]
David and Solomon's Kingdom as a State: An Archaeo-Historical ...
Debate has raged over whether the archaeological record of the 10th century BCE in Israel really reflects the existence of such a kingdom as the biblical ...November 2021 | Vol. 9.11 · The Book Of Esther Between... · From Monolatry To Monotheism...<|separator|>
[89]
What is the current scholarly consensus on United Monarchy of ...
Nov 30, 2021 · The consensus is that there is no consensus. Among people who are not experts, the most popular view is that of Israel Finkelstein.A sober archaeological inquiry into the United Monarchy - RedditCan we stop pretending that Israel Finkelstein had the last word on ...More results from www.reddit.comMissing: size | Show results with:size
[90]
The United Monarchy - David and Solomon - The Hebrew Bible
The Tel Dan inscription is now widely regarded as genuine and as referring to the Davidic dynasty and the Aramaic kingdom of Damascus." It is currently on ...
[91]
First Person: Did the Kingdoms of Saul, David and Solomon Actually ...
The kingdoms of Saul, David, and Solomon likely existed, with the kings being historical figures, though not as vast as the Bible describes.
[92]
Omri, King of Israel - Associates for Biblical Research
Archaeological and literary evidence have rounded out our picture of biblical Omri, portraying him as one of the most powerful rulers of Israel.
[93]
The Stela of Mesha - Livius.org
Oct 12, 2020 · There is archaeological evidence that part of the kingdom's heartland was even occupied by Aramaean troops. At the same time, Moab, a vassal ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[94]
The Bible and Archaeology: The Early Kings of Israel - A Kingdom ...
Aug 16, 1998 · Ahab alone is said to have contributed two thousand chariots and ten thousand foot soldiers. Ten lesser kings who took part made important ...
[95]
King Omri: An Archaeological Biography
Mar 6, 2020 · The accompany relief appears to show Jehu bowing before Shalmaneser. In the inscription, Jehu is called, “Son of Omri,” which, in this case, ...
[96]
Shalmaneser V: An Archaeological Biography
Apr 20, 2024 · The conquest of Israel was begun under Shalmaneser, and finished under Sargon. Thus, Shalmaneser is named as the Assyrian king who invaded ...
[97]
The Annals of Sargon: Evidence of Bible Error—or Insight?
Mar 23, 2021 · Sargon's Record. King Sargon ii's reign is dated from around 721–705 b.c.e. No less than eight of his inscriptions proudly boast of his conquest ...
[98]
The Two Kingdoms of Israel - Jewish Virtual Library
The Israelites formed their capital in the city of Samaria, and the Judaeans kept their capital in Jerusalem. These kingdoms remained separate states for over ...
[99]
What is the story of Rehoboam and Jeroboam? | GotQuestions.org
Jun 19, 2025 · Rehoboam and Jeroboam were both kings reigning in Israel's divided kingdom. Rehoboam was one of Solomon's sons and king of Judah in the south.
[100]
Who was King Rehoboam in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org
Jan 4, 2022 · Rehoboam was the son of King Solomon and king of Judah for seventeen years (931–913 BC). Solomon had turned away from God.
[101]
Topical Bible: Summary of Rehoboam's Reign
Rehoboam reigned in Jerusalem for 17 years (1 Kings 14:21). His reign was marked by a departure from the ways of the LORD, as Judah engaged in idolatry and ...
[102]
https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/archaeological-evidence-kingdom-judah/
[103]
Hezekiah's Religious Reform—In the Bible and Archaeology
Aug 16, 2017 · Hezekiah prepared the kingdom of Judah for the Assyrian attack and made sure that taxes and revenues from cultic activities were collected ...
[104]
Hezekiah's Reform: The Archeological Evidence - TheTorah.com
Sep 1, 2022 · He brought all the priests from the towns of Judah [to Jerusalem] and defiled the shrines where the priests had been making offerings—from Geba ...
[105]
Sennacherib's Invasion of Judah - 701 BC
During the period of Hezekiah's reign, Judah made several attempts to rebel against Assyrian domination, including religious reforms - returning to the worship ...
[106]
Archaeological Evidence Behind the Narrative of Josiah's Reform
Jun 10, 2024 · Archaeological evidence cannot distinguish between the reign of Josiah and 587 BCE, or between the reigns of Manasseh and Josiah. Therefore, ...Missing: independence | Show results with:independence<|control11|><|separator|>
[107]
Josiah's Reform | Fuller Seminary
Josiah's reforms begin in the 8th year of the reign, when he was 16 years old, with a personal religious awakening, and a purification of all the land from ...
[108]
Assyrian Empire Builders - Israel, the 'House of Omri' - Oracc
Apr 26, 2024 · From a Judaean perspective, therefore, the Assyrian invasion of Israel was the direct consequence of Judah's vassal treaty with Assyria. In ...Missing: records | Show results with:records
[109]
The Ten Lost Tribes - Biblical Archaeology Society
Dec 4, 2024 · When the Assyrians conquered the Northern Kingdom of Israel, massive deportations carried much of the Israelites away to Assyria.
[110]
Assyrian Deportation and Resettlement: The Story of Samaria
Aug 8, 2019 · In 722 BCE., Assyria conquered the kingdom of Israel, and deported many of the residents of Samaria and its surroundings to other Assyrian provinces.
[111]
The Annals of Sargon II, c. 722 BCE | Center for Online Judaic Studies
Sargon II succeeded Shalmaneser V as king of Assyria during or shortly after the siege of Samaria, which is described in 2 Kings 17-1-6.Missing: records | Show results with:records
[112]
Assyrian conquest and ruralization: unveiling territorial dynamics in ...
May 23, 2024 · Between 732 and 720 BCE the Assyrian conquest of the Kingdom of Israel was completed and the new provinces, Magiddû and Samerina, established.
[113]
Mass deportation: the Assyrian resettlement policy - Oracc
Apr 23, 2024 · The Assyrian resettlement policy divided existing communities into those who had to stay and those who had to leave, according to the needs of the state.
[114]
Sargon II: An Archaeological Biography
Feb 22, 2024 · A powerful king who reigned from ca. 722/721 to 705 BC, expanding the Assyrian empire through conquest.
[115]
Neo-Assyrian Deportation and the Levant - ANE Today
Feb 16, 2021 · Deportation caused significant and often irreparable harm to local societies and economies, impoverishing some places for generations. This was ...
[116]
ABC 5 (Jerusalem Chronicle) - Livius.org
Sep 24, 2020 · The Chronicle Concerning the Early Years of Nebuchadnezzar II (ABC 5) is best known for its reference to the capture of Jerusalem in 597 BCE.Missing: primary | Show results with:primary
[117]
Nebuchadnezzar: An Archaeological Biography
Oct 17, 2019 · The Jerusalem Chronicle confirms numerous details from the Biblical account, as recorded in 2 Kings 24: the siege of Jerusalem, the deposition ...
[118]
How archaeologists reconstructed the burning of Jerusalem in 586 ...
Dec 31, 2023 · Archaeologists have uncovered new evidence in support of Biblical accounts of the siege and burning of the city of Jerusalem by the Babylonians around 586 BCE.
[119]
Evidence of the 587/586 BCE Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem ...
Aug 12, 2019 · The ash deposits, similarly, are not conclusive evidence of the Babylonian attack in themselves but are much more so in the context of other ...
[120]
How Bad Was the Babylonian Exile? - Biblical Archaeology Society
Sep 22, 2016 · Jeremiah 52:28–30 claims that a total of 4,600 Judahites were displaced in the Babylonian Exile. Psalm 137:1–2 poetically recounts the feelings ...Missing: impact | Show results with:impact
[121]
Everyday Life in Exile: Judean Deportees in Babylonian Texts
Jun 7, 2022 · When King Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon conquered the kingdom of Judah in the early sixth century BCE, part of Judean population was deported to Babylonia.
[122]
The Cyrus Cylinder - Biblical Archaeology Society
Mar 17, 2023 · The Cyrus Cylinder is a small barrel-shaped artifact of baked clay. It is inscribed with a text that records the acts of the Persian king Cyrus the Great.
[123]
Discoveries in Biblical Archaeology: Ongoing Saga of Cyrus Cylinder
The Cyrus Cylinder establishes beyond doubt that it was Cyrus' policy to return “them [exiles] to their settlements,” and make “permanent sanctuaries” for the ...
[124]
Jews Return from the Babylonian Captivity | Research Starters
The return from the Babylonian exile was made possible by an edict of Cyrus the Great in 538 b.c.e., which gave evidence of his appreciation for local autonomy ...
[125]
[PDF] Dates - Fall of Israel and Judah, and Return
49,897 Jews returned from Babylon to Jerusalem. • 536 B.C. Built an altar and offered sacrifice in the 7th month. • 535 B.C. Work on the temple began but was ...
[126]
The Persian Period and Return from Exile (538-323): OT History
In 538 Cyrus issued the edict that allowed the Israelites to return home. He not only allowed those who wanted to return to do so, he ordered the rebuilding of ...Missing: evidence | Show results with:evidence
[127]
The Book of Haggai and the Rebuilding of the Temple in the Early ...
The only biblical account of the reconstruction of the temple is found in Ezra 1–6, which states that immediately after Cyrus gave permission for exiles to ...
[128]
Darius I: Worshipper of Ahura Mazda, but Instrument of Yahweh
Sep 9, 2025 · Work resumed and the Temple was completed four years later, in the sixth year of Darius, 516 BC (Ezr 6:15). Construction of Persepolis and Susa ...
[129]
The completion of the Second Temple in Jerusalem
The Temple is finally completed in the sixth year of the reign of Darius I and is dedicated in time for the Passover festival in March 516BC.
[130]
Yehud Medinata - Wikipedia
Archaeology. The results of archaeological excavations and surveys suggest that in comparison to late Iron Age Judah, late Persian period Yehud was a rural ...Background · History · Biblical narrative · Archaeology
[131]
The Emergence of Yehud in the Persian Period - The Gospel Coalition
Carter uses this data to paint a picture of the social conditions in Persian period Yehud, in contrast with the periods before and after this era, e.g. ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[132]
The Land of Israel in the Hellenistic Age | My Jewish Learning
While the Seleucids and Ptolemies battled for control of Palestine, Hellenism--the synthesis of Greek and native Near Eastern cultures--took hold. By Lawrence H ...
[133]
Who Were the Maccabees and What Did They Do?
... Seleucid Empire controlled Judea and promoted Hellenistic (Greek) culture and religion. Some Jews embraced this, but others did not. The Seleucid ruler ...<|separator|>
[134]
Antiochus Epiphanes—The Bible's Most Notoriously Forgotten Villain
Following these atrocities and abominations, Antiochus left his generals in charge of Judea as he went to fight wars in the East against the Parthians. The Jews ...
[135]
Antiochus IV
Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), the king of Syria, captured Jerusalem in 167 BC and desecrated the Temple by offering the sacrifice of a pig on an altar to Zeus.
[136]
The Maccabean Revolt - World History Encyclopedia
Oct 29, 2015 · The Maccabean Revolt of 167-160 BCE was a Jewish uprising in Judea against the repression of the Seleucid Empire.
[137]
Ancient Jewish History: The Hasmonean Dynasty
First led by Mattathias of the priestly Hasmonean family and then by his son Judah the Maccabee, the Jews subsequently entered Jerusalem and purified the ...
[138]
Pompey's Siege of Jerusalem - Livius.org
Sep 23, 2020 · Roman-Jewish Wars: name of several military engagements between the Roman Republic (later: Empire) and various groups of Jews between 63 BCE ...
[139]
Judea Under Roman Rule (63 BCE-66 CE)
Various groups within the thoroughly Hellenized Jewish world responded to the Roman Empire in different ways, with some embracing it while others rejected it.
[140]
The Herodian Period: 37 BCE - 73 CE - Gov.il
Nov 3, 2021 · The Romans, who conquered the kingdom of Judea in 63 BCE, appointed their Jewish ally, Herod, of Edomite extraction, as king of Judea in 37 BCE.
[141]
The Roman Province of Judea - BYU Studies
Invasions of Roman territory, including Judea, by a new Parthian kingdom in what had been the Mesopotamian reaches of the Seleucid empire and civil conflicts ...
[142]
The First Jewish Revolt against Rome | Religious Studies Center
The Roman battering rams failed against the massive stones surrounding the temple. Fire was finally set to the temple gates, leading to the eventual destruction ...
[143]
The First Revolt (66-73 CE) | Center for Online Judaic Studies
According to Josephus, Titus planned to spare the Temple from destruction, but it was nonetheless engulfed in a conflagration and could not be saved. The ...<|separator|>
[144]
Jews Vs. Rome: Rebels With A Cause - Hoover Institution
... Revolt, 116 to 117; and the Bar Kokhba Revolt, 132 to 136. And against whom did the Jews revolt? Only against perhaps the greatest empire in history: Rome.<|separator|>
[145]
The Bar-Kokhba Revolt 132-135 CE) - Jewish Virtual Library
The Bar Kokhba revolt marked a time of high hopes followed by violent despair. The Jews were handed expectations of a homeland and a Holy Temple, but in the ...
[146]
The Bar-Kochba Revolt - World History Encyclopedia
Aug 30, 2018 · In its initial stages, the revolt was surprisingly successful and may have resulted in the destruction of an entire Roman legion. It is possible ...
[147]
Bar Kokhba Revolt: The Third Roman-Jewish War - TheCollector
Nov 24, 2022 · In putting down the Bar Kokhba Revolt, the Romans had suffered extraordinarily high casualties and as a result Jewish political and religious ...
[148]
The Genomic History of the Bronze Age Southern Levant - PMC
We report genome-wide DNA data for 73 individuals from five archaeological sites across the Bronze and Iron Ages Southern Levant.
[149]
Jews and Arabs share over half their ancestry from Canaanites
Jul 10, 2025 · DNA study: Modern Jews and Arabs retain more than half their ancestry from Bronze Age 'Canaanites'. Genome-wide analysis of 93 skeletons from ...<|separator|>
[150]
(PDF) Genetic Proximity of Modern Palestinians and Ashkenazi ...
Oct 14, 2025 · This study adjudicates a specific question in historical population genetics by lever-aging ancient DNA: To what degree do modern Palestinian ...
[151]
Tracing the Roots of Jewishness | Science | AAAS
" Rather, Goldstein says, "Jewish genetic history is a complicated mixture of both genetic continuity from an ancestral population and extensive admixture.
[152]
The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape ...
Altogether, the findings indicated a remarkable degree of genetic continuity in both Jews and Arabs, despite their long separation and the wide geographic ...
[153]
Y Chromosomes Traveling South: The Cohen Modal Haplotype and ...
Interestingly, one of the Lemba clans carries, at a very high frequency, a particular Y-chromosome type termed the “Cohen modal haplotype,” which is known to ...
[154]
The genetic history of the Israelite nation · Creation.com
Aug 13, 2019 · The genetics of Jews today fit biblical expectations and their oral and written history since Old Testament times.<|separator|>
[155]
Genetics and the history of the Samaritans: Y-chromosomal ...
The Samaritans were closely related to Cohanim. This result supports the position of the Samaritans that they are descendants from the tribes of Israel.
[156]
The Genetic History of the Samaritans - 23andMe Blog
Sep 5, 2008 · But according to the authors the Y-chromosome clearly shows that the Samaritans and the Jews share common ancestry dating to at least 2,500 ...
[157]
Ancient DNA Provides New Insights into Ashkenazi Jewish History
Nov 30, 2022 · The largest study to date of ancient DNA from Jewish individuals reveals unexpected genetic subgroups in medieval German Ashkenazi Jews.
[158]
(PDF) Human osteological database at the Israel antiquities ...
The Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) has a department of osteology that is based in Jerusalem and is in charge of the study of past human skeletal remains ...
[159]
The Death of Children in Ancient Israel | Bible Interp
In general, individuals in a given coastal cemetery are buried in a uniform manner. However, when we see a mix of burial styles, it is almost always a child or ...
[160]
Facial image of Biblical Jews from Israel - PubMed
The present report deals with reconstructing the facial shapes of ancient inhabitants of Israel based on their cranial remains.
[161]
"... in their lives, and in their death...". A preliminary study of an iron ...
Aug 5, 2025 · 2001 Human Skeletal Remains from Efrata and Other Bronze Age Sites in Israel, in: R. G. ONEN. , Excavations at Efrata. A Burial Ground from ...Missing: osteology | Show results with:osteology
[162]
Tel Aviv University researcher reconstructs ancient Israelite faces
Jan 18, 2009 · The skulls of a male from the Hellenistic period and a female from the Roman period were reconstructed. Based on its facial reconstruction, the ...
[163]
Azor: Iron Age IB and IIA Graves - ResearchGate
Sep 25, 2025 · V. Eshed wrote the physical anthropology report, Y. Asscher and Y. Maor studied the metal bowl and A. Golani studied the beads. The excavation ...
[164]
Echoes of Ossilegium: A Secondary Mortuary Practice in Iron Age ...
May 23, 2025 · This study directly compares the Iron Age cemeteries of Gibeon, Azor, and Aitun with the Second Temple Period necropoli of Jericho, Jerusalem, ...
[165]
ISRAELITE (IRON AGE II) BURIAL CUSTOMS IN THE JERUSALEM ...
Jun 8, 2017 · Around Jerusalem several cemeteries dating to the Israelite Iron Age II were excavated and each has its own characteristics.
[166]
Victims of the Iron Age Destruction at Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi/Gath
Women in Distress: Victims of the Iron Age Destruction at Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi/Gath ... Marina Faerman is an associate professor (of physical anthropology) at the Faculty ...
[167]
Philistine Cemetery - The Leon Levy Expedition to Ashkelon
From 2013 to 2016, the Leon Levy Expedition to Ashkelon excavated an Iron Age IIA cemetery immediately adjacent to the ancient city.
[168]
The historicity of the patriarchal narratives - Internet Archive
Mar 15, 2022 · The historicity of the patriarchal narratives : the quest for the historical Abraham. by: Thompson, Thomas L., 1939-. Publication date: 1974.
[169]
The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives: The Quest For The ...
30-day returnsFocusing on the patriarchal narratives-the stories of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob-he demonstrates that archaeological research simply cannot historically ...
[170]
[PDF] Thomas L. Thompson The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives
Even literary critical studies of individual traditions within Genesis now accept the basic historicity of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and see the present.
[171]
The historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives (Genesis 44)
The patriarchal stories faithfully reflect customs that were not practiced and institutions that did not exist during later periods, some of which were even ...<|separator|>
[172]
Camels and the Book of Genesis - The Bart Ehrman Blog
But archaeologists have shown that camels were not domesticated in the Land of Israel until centuries after the Age of the Patriarchs (2000-1500 BCE). In ...
[173]
The Date of Camel Domestication in the Ancient Near East
Feb 17, 2014 · Three texts dating to approximately the same period as the Patriarchs attest to domesticated camel use. A Sumerian text found at Nippur from the ...
[174]
Egyptology: Bronze Age Camel Petroglyphs in the Wadi Nasib
Most scholars believe camels were not domesticated until the end of the 2nd millenium BC. Yet evidence now shows camel domestication was widely known ...
[175]
[PDF] The Patriarchal Age: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
Aug 19, 2008 · Most remain convinced that the stories about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob contain a kernel of authentic history. Recognizing the complexity of ...
[176]
Exodus: How Archaeology Challenges the Biblical Account
Mar 3, 2025 · From a scholarly perspective, the lack of archaeological and historical evidence for the specific events described in Exodus challenges its ...
[177]
A Reassessment of Scientific Evidence for the Exodus and Conquest
Aug 5, 2024 · This paper reviews radiocarbon constraints for several important sites, and concludes that the coherence of biblical and archaeological accounts ...
[178]
Exodus and Archaeology - Din - Ask the Rabbi - Dinonline
Mar 20, 2018 · Israeli archeology teams have combed the Sinai desert for decades and have found no evidence of a mass exodus. ... lack of evidence ...
[179]
Top Ten Discoveries Related to Moses and the Exodus
Sep 24, 2021 · The Merneptah Stele is evidence that the Exodus from Egypt, led by Moses, took place in the 15th century BC, as the biblical data indicates.Missing: sources | Show results with:sources
[180]
Pinpointing the Exodus from Egypt | Harvard Divinity Bulletin
New evidence shows that the Israelites actually did come to Egypt during the reign of Ramses II, due to a great famine around 1225 BCE.
[181]
The Exodus Is Not Fiction - Reform Judaism
There is no archaeological evidence against the historicity of an exodus if it was a smaller group who left Egypt.
[182]
Evidence for an Israelite Exodus (?) - Faith - The BioLogos Forum
Jul 6, 2024 · There is archaeological evidence of a major influx of people into Canaan in the 1200's, and this new, primarily highland population seems to ...
[183]
General consensus on historicity of Exodus : r/AcademicBiblical
May 20, 2025 · This book argues that there is no archaeological evidence for the Israelites' presence in Egypt or their mass exodus. The authors suggest that ...Historical accuracy of the exodus? : r/OrthodoxChristianity - RedditIs there archaeological evidence for the Exodus? : r/AcademicBiblicalMore results from www.reddit.com
[184]
The Historical David in Ancient Inscriptions - Apologetics Press
Nov 1, 2024 · The Tel Dan inscription is one of the most significant discoveries in the history of biblical archaeology. It appears to have been authored by ...
[185]
Rethinking the Search for King Solomon | ArmstrongInstitute.org
Surely the archaeological record suggests that the Bible exaggerates the power of the United Monarchy. This is the natural conclusion if we look primarily ...Rethinking Our Approach · Welcome To Timna · Well-Dressed Miners?
[186]
Merneptah Stele: Proof of Ancient Israel's Existence? - Bart Ehrman
Jun 17, 2025 · It provides hard, contemporary evidence that a group called Israel existed in Canaan in the late 13th century B.C.E.
[187]
Stelae and Reliefs of Pharaoh Merneptah, c. 1207 BCE
This stele is sometimes called the “Israel Stele” because it contains the earliest extra-biblical reference to Israel as a people.
[188]
Who Were the Early Israelites, and where Did They Come From?
According to Dever, the authentic ancestors of the Israelite peoples were most likely Canaanites -- together with some pastoral nomads and small groups of ...
[189]
(PDF) Food, Pork Consumption, and Identity in Ancient Israel
Domesticated pigs. The presence or absence of pig bones was taken as an ethnic marker. Photograph courtesy of Marion Streiff.
[190]
Who Were the Israelites and Where Did They Come From?
Dever's theory is that Israel developed around the twelfth or eleventh century from agrarian reformers who moved to the hill country from the declining ...