The Mistress of Stratigraphy Had Clay Feet
Kathleen Kenyon’s Flawed Jerusalem Excavation
Excavations by Kathleen M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967, Volume III—The Settlement in the Bronze and Iron Ages
You have already read your free article for this month. Please join the BAS Library or become an All Access member of BAS to gain full access to this article and so much more.
Footnotes
See Nadav Na’aman, “It Is There: Ancient Texts Prove It,” BAR 10:01. See also Margreet Steiner, “It’s Not There: Archaeology Proves a Negative,” BAR 24:04 and Jane Cahill, “It Is There: The Archaeological Evidence Proves It,” BAR 24:04.
In addition, as Richard Hess recently pointed out, Abdi-Heba’s letters sometimes display “an extraordinary quantity of rhetorical features when compared with the remaining letters in this collection.” This would hardly be expected of the “manager” of an estate.
See Hershel Shanks, “A ‘Centrist’ at the Center of Controversy,” BAR 28:06.
Endnotes
Kathleen Kenyon, Jerusalem—Excavating 3,000 Years of History (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967) and Digging Up Jerusalem (New York: Praeger, 1974).
The project also includes this previously published work: H.J. Franken and M.L. Steiner, Excavations in Jerusalem 1961–1967, vol. 2, The Extramural Quarter on the South-East Hill (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1990). Publication of the coins, inscriptions, seals, flint, some closed pottery groups, human and animal bones, shells, stone weights, hammer stones and figurines have been assigned to specialists in these various fields. Most of the work is “still to be done” and little of it is published.
Steiner makes the same kind of argument with the mention of Jerusalem in “Egyptian Execration” texts from the 19th or 18th century B.C.E., when, again, Steiner finds no evidence for a settlement at Jerusalem. “The mentioning of this name alone cannot be used as ‘proof’ that Jerusalem was an important town then, as the name need not specify a town—it could as easily indicate a region or a tribe.”