THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF SOCIETY IN THE HOLY LAND Edited by THOMAS E. LEVY LEICESTER UNIVERSITY PRESS London |^15 23 THE KINGDOMS OF AMNION, MOAB AND EDOM: THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF SOCIETY IN LATE BRONZE/IRON AGE TRANSJORDAN (CA. 1400-500 BCE) 0ystein S. LaBianco and Randall W. Younker Introduction TTn this chapter our task is to elucidate the nature of I society in central and southern Transjordan during the JL Late Bronze and Iron Ages (ca. 1400-500 BCE). More specifically, our assignment is to offer an anthropological perspective on the nature of the Kingdoms of Ammon, Moab and Edom. According to various ancient texts, including the Old Testament, the Ammonites once ruled the region surrounding Jordan's present-day capital city, Amman; the Moabites controlled the highland plateau east of the Dead Sea; and the Edomites made their home in the territory which extends eastward and westward from Wadi Arabah. As the theme of this volume is the archaeology of society in the Holy Land, and one of its goals is to formulate proposals which may serve to stimulate new lines of inquiry in the 1990s and beyond, we shall not be held back by the inadequacies of much of the archaeological information currently to hand from our area - inadequate in terms of what it can tell us about society in Late Bronze and Iron Age Transjordan. We offer this chapter in the belief that explicitly-formulated proposals based on the limited data we already do have, will spark efforts by ourselves and others to devise new and even better ways to proceed with the process of empirical validation in the future. To indicate where our discussion is headed, we provide here a summary statement of our main proposal: that the political entities which came into prominence in Iron Age Transjordan - namely those of the Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites - were not true nation-states, but rather, are better described as 'tribal kingdoms'. These kingdoms came into existence in a cascading fashion - first Ammon, then Moab and, last of all, Edom. Their emergence is attributable to the operation of several synergistically- related factors. To begin with, there was the expansion of plow agriculture by indigenous tribes in these Trans- jordanian highlands - a development stimulated in part by the collapse of the Late Bronze Age city-state system. To counter mounting threats - especially from the Israelites - to their increasingly sedentary way of life, these tribes were forced to form more permanent cooperating polities than was possible by means of their traditional tribal coalitions. The solution was to establish 'tribal kingdoms' - polities which gave greater permanence to the cooperative networks customarily forged by tribal peoples to counter external threats to their homeland territories. Before delving into the details of this proposal, however, we would like to comment briefly on previous work concerned with the question of the origins and nature of these three kingdoms. Past proposals regarding the origin of the people of Iron Age Transjordan As is well known, all of us who work in Transjordan owe a great debt to the pioneering research of Nelson Glueck (1934, 1935, 1939). On the basis of surface surveys he conducted in central and southern Transjordan in the 1930s, he came to the conclusion that - since there was very little evidence for settled occupation in Transjordan between ca. 1900 and 1300 BCE - the kingdoms of Ammon, Moab and Edom must have emerged rather suddenly towards the end of the Late Bronze Age. He claimed, in fact, that he could define the territories of their respective kingdoms from a string of border forts which he believed had already been built to protect their boundaries by the end of the thirteenth century BCE. Glueck's conclusions were generally accepted by the scholars of his day, and were thus instrumental in shaping the direction of future research. Naturally, one of the first questions these findings prompted scholars to ask was: If there were no Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites in Transjordan prior to ca. 1300 BCE, where did they come from and what caused them to settle in Transjordan at this particular time? The Archaeology of Society in Late Bronze/Iron Age Transjordan (ca. 1400—500 BCE) 401 Figure 1 Map of key archaeological sites in Jordan (drawing by Laura M. Bredall, courtesy of the Horn Archaeology Museum) Probably influenced by the then popular 'wave' hypo- of semi-Bedouins who became known as Edomites, thesis that suggested that cultural changes were the result of Moabites, Ammonites, and Amorites' (Glueck 1971: 153). periodic migrations or invasions (cf. Luke 1965), Glueck, Glueck's lead was generally followed, with variations, by himself, suggested that the ' sparse' Late Bronze II others including Alt (194(3: 215), Noth (1960: 154) and occupation 'gave way early in that period to new waves Landes (1956: 31-5). 402 Part V % Local Kingdoms and World Empires % 0ystein S. LaBianca and Randall W. Younker A challenge to this 'wave hypothesis' was Mendenhall's new theory that a 'peasants' revolt' in Palestine - which he believed was caused by widespread socio-economic collapse towards the end of the Late Bronze Age (Mendenhall 1973: 167, 168; 1983: 94-100) - led to people fleeing across the river to Transjordan and settling down there. Mendenhall believed that these refugees, along with others from Anatolia and southern Syria, became the founders of the kingdoms of Ammon, Edom and Moab. A slightly revised version of this view has recently been presented by Gottwald. His theory puts even greater emphasis on the role of upheavals in the collapsing urban centers of Late Bronze Age Palestine in causing people to migrate to the highlands on both sides of the Jordan river (Gottwald 1979: 429, 433). Mention must also be made of recent proposals by McGovern with regard to Ammon (1981, 1986, 1987); Miller, Worschech and Knauf with reference to Moab (Miller 1992a, 1992b; Worschech 1990; Knauf 1992); and Bartlett and Knauf in the case of Edom (Bartlett 1989; Knauf 1992). To begin with, McGovern follows the lead of Mendenhall and Gottwald in attributing the origin of the highland monarchies of Iron Age Israel and Jordan to the collapse of the Late Bronze Age city-state system. McGovern's (1986) unique contribution is in positing the existence of a Late Bronze Age city-state system in the Amman area of Transjordan. Miller, who has recently concluded a major archaeo- logical survey in the Moab region, seems to depart altogether from proposals based on migration or urban collapse. In his view the origins of the Moabites are to be sought in the preexisting population of the highland plateau of Transjordan (Miller 1992a). Bartlett follows a similar fine of argument for the origin of the Edomites (1989: 64, 65). Worschech and Knauf, on the other hand, seem to be continuing the German tradition of Alt by maintaining a migration hypothesis in explaining the origins of the Moabites and Edomites, respectively. Worschech argues that the land of Moab was occupied by sedentary Emites and nomadic Shasu towards the end of the Late Bronze Age. Another nomadic group, the Shatu, infiltrated the region during the LB/Iron transition, merged with the nomadic Shasu and then displaced the sedentary Emites (Worschech 1990). Knauf basically reverses the Old Testament account by suggesting that the Edomites were indigenous nomads who were later joined by migrating Horite tribes who had fled agricultural lands in Canaan after the collapse of the Late Bronze Age Canaanite city-state system (Knauf 1992: 49). We would refer to Bienkowski's recently published collection of essays by leading scholars on Moab and Edom for an excellent overview of the current state of research on Moab and Edom (Bienkowski 1992a). The food systems as a barometer of local level social organization Conspicuously absent from all the scholarly proposals we have mentioned thus far is any attempt to examine the available data from the perspective of anthropological/ sociological models, to determine what the data can tell us about the nature of local level social organization among the Late Bronze and Iron Age societies of Transjordan. An excellent barometer of such local level social organization is, in our opinion, the local food system. This is because any people living in marginal environments, such as Transjordan, necessarily focus a considerable amount of time and attention on securing their subsistence base. This preoccupation with subsistence is, in turn, reflected in the institutions of that society which are structured in large part to facilitate the procurement of food by men, women and children. Fortunately, not only are many aspects of these institutions, themselves, reflected in the archaeological record (Hopkins 1985: 251-61; Stager 1985), the activities they foster, in terms of obtaining subsistence security, also leave discernible traces and are, therefore, particularly amenable to archaeological reconstruction (LaBianca 1990, 1991). To the extent that these activities involved changes in patterns of land ownership, labor requirements, security arrangements, residential patterns, land use, and diet, they provide a window onto changes over time and space in local level social organization. Pivotal to understanding the dynamic aspects of food systems' variability are the concepts of intensification and abatement. As we have explained elsewhere (LaBianca 1990, 1991), these concepts give an idea of the direction of variability in terms of the extent to which a given region is managed or exploited. Generally, as a region's food system intensifies, its inhabitants tend to become increasingly land- tied, due to increased investment in plow agriculture. Consequently, their residential patterns tend to become more sedentary. Intensification, therefore, is normally accompanied by sedentarization. Abatement is said to occur when a given region's inhabitants diminish their reliance on plow agriculture in favor of livestock production within a given territory or home range. This generally involves adoption of more mobile residential patterns, or nomadization, whereby people, for the sake of their increased investment in range- tied pastoralism, turn to seasonal migration between watering places, ploughlands and pasturelands within a given home range. Regional differences in availability of water Rainfall data published for Jordan clearly show that the certainty of reliable and adequate rainfall for agriculture decreases as one moves from north to south (Howayej 1973; Shehadeh 1985). In the vicinity of Amman, for example, the The Archaeology of Society in Late Bronze/Iron Age Transjordan (ca. 1400—500 BCEj 403 Plate 1 Rabbath-Amman (Qtadel Hill) of Ammon, looking north. Ammon's abundant rainfall seems to have contributed to relatively early and dense settlement in this region in contrast to that of Moab and Edom to the south (photograph courtesy of Richard Cleaves) long-term rainfall average is 500 mm annually, compared with 300-350 mm in Moab and 100-200 mm in Edom. In dry years, a minimum of 200 mm can be counted on in Ammon, whereas in Moab nor Edom dry years may result in significantly less rainfall. Commensurate with these data is the fact that there are between 10 and 15 days per year when rainfall exceeds 10 mm in Ammon, compared with only five to ten such days in Moab and Edom. More important than the annual averages, of course, is the variability of seasonal rainfall; even if a given region gets plenty of annual rainfall, if it falls at the wrong time of the year it does no good (cf. Hopkins 1985; 84-90). The coefficient of seasonal rainfall variation ranges from an average of 36 percent in the northern and central regions of Jordan to 55 percent in the mountains of Kerak and Shoubak. Further south the percentage is even higher (Shehadeh 1985:31). Other data may be brought to bear, but clearly, people in the south could not count on rainfall as a reliable source of water as their neighbors in the north could. Regional differences in settlement and land use Because of these differences in availability of water, and because of related differences in availability of cultivatable soils, wild plants and animals, and pasturage conditions, the ways in which these three homelands historically have been exploited by humans have differed significantly as well. An idea of the historical differences between these three regions when it comes to their land use potential can be inferred from the modern patterns recorded in the Agricultural Atlas for Jordan (Howayej 1973). The picture provided of the land of Ammon, for example, is that of a region well suited to intensive cultivation of fruit trees and cereals, while offering excellent pasturage for cattle, sheep and goats. The land of Moab also offers excellent conditions for production of cereals and pasture animals, and, in the Kerak region, fruit trees are readily produced. In contrast to Ammon and Moab, the land of Edom is primarily suited to pasturing animals and limited production, especially in the Buseirah region, of cereals, olives and grapes. Regional differences in relation to environmental risks It is important to note at this point that the word 'suitable' is a relative term, since, given the necessary technological inputs and political and economic conditions, most of the various crops produced in Ammon, and the crop yields attained there, could well be duplicated in certain regions in Moab and Edom. To begin with, the crucial environmental difference is the quantity of rain available in dry years. Given that 200 mm annual rainfall is considered to be a standard prerequisite for low-input rainfed production of cereals, fruits and vegetables in Jordan, only the land of Ammon offers farmers a dependable supply of rainfall. In other words, in Ammon a minimum of 200 mm can be counted on even in dry years. As noted earlier, this does not hold true for Moab and Edom, where minimum rainfall is less and, therefore, a sequence of three or four dry years can have more devastating consequences for farmers. The consequence of this situation is that to become permanently attached to cultivatable plots of land in order to produce food has always been most risky in Edom, less so in Moab, and least so in Ammon. To understand how people have dealt with such risks in the past, it is necessary to probe deeper into the role of tribalism, on the one hand, and the state, on the other, in structuring options and influencing people's responses at the grass-roots level to changing political and economic influences (cf. Hopkins 1985: 258-60). Tribalism, sedentarization and nomadization Pivotal to understanding the dynamics of tribalism in Transjordan are the processes of sedentarization and nomadization mentioned earlier. This is because there appears to be a direct correlation between fluctuations in food system intensity levels, sedentarization, nomadization, local-level political organization (specifically tribalism) and the larger world system (especially as seen in externally imposed supra-tribal polities). An integral factor in understanding this relationship is, in turn, the age-old notion of 'tribalism' - by which we simply mean strong in-group loyalty based on variously fluid notions of common unilineal descent. As we have examined the oscillations over time in patterns of land use and settlement in central Transjordan, we have come to see tribalism as being the enabling socio-cultural mechanism that has made it possible for small groups of kin to adapt to a succession of variously effective supra-tribal polities. For example, over the past three millennia, the 404 Part V Local Kingdoms and World Empires 0ysfein S. LaBianca and Randall W. Younker indigenous population of Transjordan has had to adapt to a wide range of different types of supra-tribal polities. These included the indigenous Iron Age Kingdoms of Ammon, Moab, and Edom and the late first millennium BC Kingdom of Nabatea. These polities were followed by a succession of externally-imposed government bureau- cracies, beginning with the Persian provincial adminis- tration about 2500 years ago and ending with the Late Ottoman administration in the early twentieth century. Thus, for more than two and a half millennia, Transjordan was 'ruled' - with extremely varying degrees of effective- ness - from Persia, Rome, Constantinople, Damascus, Cairo, Baghdad and Istanbul (LaBianca 1990). Against the backdrop of these transient and mostly externally imposed supra-tribal polities, tribalism has provided a highly resilient and flexible system of local-level political organization by means of which small groups of kin have been able to cope with political and economic uncertainties in an already hazardous natural environment. Based as it is on the principle of unilineal descent, tribalism has provided a system of local-level political organization that has enabled both cultivators and herders to acquire, maintain and defend such ploughlands, pasturelands, habitation sites and water sources as they have needed to maintain their way of life. One way to conceptualize the notion of 'tribe', therefore, is to think of it as a 'unit of subsistence' (Marx 1973). It is possible, in fact, to posit the existence of an axis along which local-level political organization shifted in the past. At one end of this axis is a comparatively rigid system of unilineal descent which typically accompanied increased investment in crops; at the other end is a comparatively loose system of unilineal descent which typically accompanied increased investment in pasture animals. The reason why sedentarization normally leads to development of more rigid lineage, is that as kin-groups begin to expend labor on clearing, terracing, ploughing, planting, watering and guarding particular plots of ploughland, their sense of ownership and investment - along with feelings of in-group loyalty and obligation - are heightened. Such sentiments make it harder for 'outsiders' to be incorporated - hence the tendency towards more rigid lineages as people become more settled and land-tied. The reason why nomadization normally leads to development of looser, more flexible, lineages is that as kin-groups become more dependent on access to widely- dispersed rangeland pastures, cooperative alignments which enable them to reach beyond the social and territorial boundaries of smaller blood-related kin groups offer distinct advantages. By means, therefore, of such processes as 'telescoping', 'fusioning' and 'grafting', pastoral nomads continually generate loose and flexible networks of cooperation and alignments, through which they maintain control over widespread rangeland pastures, watering places, camping sites, storage depots and burial grounds (see Peters 1970 for a good discussion of these processes). Hence the tendency toward more loose and flexible lineages as people become more mobile and range- tied, (cf. Marx 1967: 190, 1973; Lancaster 1981; 35, 151; Hiatt 1984; Eickelman 1989: 89). Most tribes in Jordan are made up of a combination of variously land-tied and range-tied households and kin groups (e.g. Glubb 1938; Hiatt 1984; Van Der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989; LaBianca 1990; cf. Barth 1961). This is because, at any given point in time, a certain amount of sedentarization and nomadization is continually occurring among individual households, depending on personal circumstances and shifts in economic and ecological conditions within the tribe's homeland. Thus, some households may be in the process of becoming more land- tied and settled, others may be in the process of becoming more range-tied and mobile. The greater flexibility of predominantly nomadic tribes - such as Jordan's 'bedouin' tribes - has traditionally made it easier for them to form larger corporate groups than has been the case among predominantly settled tribes (cf. Barth 1961, 1973). This fact, in turn, has given them a political advantage vis-a-vis more land-tied tribes living in hamlets, villages and towns within their territories. In the past, therefore, such settled tribes have frequently been politically enmeshed in various ways under the more inclusive organizational structures of the more nomadic tribes. In the Hesban region, for example, the Beni Sakhr and the Adwan - the politically dominant tribes in this region during the nineteenth century (CE) - were both predominantly nomadic tribes. Within the traditional rangeland of each existed several smaller, more land-tied tribes, whose relationship to these dominant tribes was that of clients or slaves (LaBianca 1990: 51-106). The extent to which a particular tribe includes both land-tied and range-tied households appears to vary over time. For example, when political and economic circumstances make land-tied production of crops more attractive, the center of gravity - in terms of the tribe's social organization - is likely to shift in the direction of clans and lineages bonded by means of more or less rigid lines of descent. However, when circumstances make range-tied production of pasture animals more attractive, the organizational center of gravity is likely to shift in the direction of hierarchically organized groups of kin and non-kin, more or less loosely bonded together via lineal descent through a claimed common ancestor. A consequence of the co-occurrence of the processes of sedentarization and nomadization among Jordan's tribal people is that residential patterns representing different segments along the sedentism-nomadism continuum have coexisted in varying proportions in time and space. At any given point, nomadic, seminomadic, semisedentary, or sedentary groups have lived together in varying ratios (see Gubser 1984: 24-25 for a succinct description of each of The Archaeology of Society in Late Bronze/Iron Age Transjordan (ca. 1400—500 BCE) 405 these terms); what has changed over time and space is the extent to which each has been represented proportionally. The role of supra-tribal polities While there can be little doubt about the fact that tribalism has always played an important role at the local level of Jordanian society - up to and including the present (cf. Gubser 1984; Shami 1984) - what has been its role in facilitating the emergence of various supra-tribal polities in Jordan's past? How, in turn, has the emergence of such polities impacted on tribalism at the grass-roots level? A consideration of these two questions is relevant here. The birth of the modern nation-state of Jordan provides a clue, of sorts, to the role of tribalism in the formation of indigenous kingdoms. In Jordan, as in other countries of the modern Middle East, there are many reminders of the continuing importance of the tribal order. This can be seen, for example, in the fact that tribal law exists side-by-side with civil law and Islamic law. Furthermore, as is well known, King Hussein of Jordan has depended on Transjordan's indigenous tribes and their descendants for his most loyal support since the earliest days of his administration (Glubb 1938). Thus, although an important role was initially played by the British in the establishment of the present-day monarchy, its remarkable persistence and continued popularity is, to a significant degree, attributable to the fact that Jordan's tribal elite coalesced around their new king - seeing his role as that of a sort of 'sheikh of sheikhs'. This ability to coalesce - to unite together into one body - is something which Transjordan's tribes have done for centuries in response to a variety of external threats. What the monarchy did, however, was to give a greater degree of permanence to the common goal of unity for the sake of mutual defense and prosperity. Before the monarchy, alliances among different tribes tended to be impermanent and ever-shifting in response to circumstances; the establishment of the monarchy provided a supra-tribal rallying point for demonstrating unity in the face of western colonial ambition and the threat it presented to the way of life of Jordan's indigenous peoples (Glubb 1938; cf. Bates and Rassam 1983: 259, 261). With the coalescence of tribes around a supra-tribal leader - as in the case of the present-day Hashemite monarchy — centrifugal forces typically come into play which tend to weaken, to some extent, the political power of the traditional tribal order and its elite. This is especially true in the case of predominantly land-tied tribes. This process of depoliticization was partly a result of the » introduction of government representatives and bureau- crats, who gradually became more powerful than traditional tribal leaders, especially in the more settled areas. The modern government of Jordan, to use a contemporary example, has established a large array of ministries, each with its special mandate - defense, agriculture, education, health, forestry, or tourism and antiquities. These ministries have assumed responsibility for setting priorities and instituting changes in how things are done. Ironically, a priority with many of them is to encourage the settlement of nomadic and seminomadic households and tribes. Other priorities might include land registration; the establishment of a standing army; the construction of large-scale water collection and storage facilities; road building; enhancement of commerce and exchange; and similar undertakings for the sake of the common good. A consequence of changes in the extent to which Transjordan has come under the control of supra-tribal powers is that the influence of the tribal order over organization of production in the region has waxed and waned. Thus, during periods of increasing centralized control of production, urban-controlled bureaucracies have arisen to compete with preexisting tribally-based systems of control. When these bureaucratic systems have run out of steam, the tribally based systems have reemerged to take full control again. Consequently, tribalism has coexisted with a succession of competing systems of supra-tribal organization throughout most of Transjordan's history (cf. Bates and Rassam 1983: 258). The spread of supra-tribal systems of organization in Transjordan has historically followed a particular pattern. More often than not, they have progressed from the north to the south and from the west to the east. Thus, in the twentieth century, the northern part of the country was settled before the central part, and the central part before the southern part. Tribalism — more than an evolutionary stage In the Middle Eastern context, the concept of 'tribe' is far broader than is implied by those who would see it as a level of social organization somewhere between a 'band' and a 'chiefdom' (Service 1962; Frick 1985; Renfrew and Bahn 1991: 156). As Khuri (1980: 12) has noted, tribalism is 'not a single phenomenon, an undifferentiated whole, a peripheral social system or simply a stage in the evolution of human civilization'. It is rather, as Bates and Rassam (1983: 258) explain, 'a persistent social and political force bringing together people for many different purposes, and doing so in the context of many different, competing, or alternative principles of alignment'. In fact, they continue, 'what most distinguishes the Middle East politically is the persistence of tribalism coexisting with the state'. It is the unique challenge which marginal environments throughout much of the Middle East present their local inhabitants that has assured a continuing and unique role for tribalism in this part of the world. By marginal, we refer to a unique set of complex environmental conditions that bestow unpredictable, alternating periods of feast and famine in a complex, variegated pattern across the 406 Part V Local Kingdoms and World Empires % 0ystein S. LaBianca and Randall W. Younker landscape. In such environments, the way to endure is to join risk-reducing networks of people that not only enable individuals and families to survive (Hopkins 1985: 251- 61), but, in some cases, to even accumulate a surplus. Predictions regarding Ammon, Moab and Edom The foregoing discussion provides a basis for seven hypotheses regarding the development of society in Ammon, Moab, and Edom during the Iron Age: 1. The ancestral roots of the people of Ammon, Moab and Edom are to be found among peoples who lived in their homelands prior to their sojourn into the light of recorded history. 2. Ammon would have reached a higher level of settlement density, food system intensity, and supra-tribal organiza- tion than Moab, and that Moab exceeded Edom in this regard. 3. Land-tied tribalism would have emerged most fully in Ammon, less so in Moab, and least of all in Edom. 4. As a correlate of the third prediction, range-tied tribalism persisted to the greatest extent in Edom, less so in Moab, and least of all in Ammon. 5. The ideological template of the kingdoms which arose in Iron Age Transjordan was rooted in the network- generating tribalism of the population that brought them into existence. 6. The tribal kingdoms which came into existence in Iron Age Transjordan were not true nation-states as commonly defined by anthropologists. 7. Finally, we would predict that the factors which contributed to the rise of these tribal kingdoms were synergistic in nature in that they included a combination of cooperating external and internal stimuli and develop- ments. Society and societal changes in Iron Age Transjordan We turn next to an examination of the archaeological evidence from Iron Age Transjordan to see which, if any, of the above listed hypotheses find support in the available data. Origins With regard to the ancestral roots of the people of Ammon, Moab and Edom, there are no compelling archaeological reasons for supposing that the Iron Age inhabitants of these homelands originated outside them. To begin with, studies of the material culture from Tell el-Umeiri - an Ammonite site excavated by the Madaba Plains Project under the direction of Larry Herr - point to a process of continuous development between the Late Bronze Age and the Iron Age (Herr 1992). Similar conclusions have been reached by Wimmer (1987a, 1987b) at Tell Safut and McGovern at Umm ad-Dananir (1986, 1987). The situation in Moab is similar. Miller (1992a: 889), for example, states explicitly with regard to Moab that there is no evidence for a cultural break between the Late Bronze Age and the Iron Age. While some excavations in Moab such as Dibon (Winnett and Reed 1964; Tushingham 1972), Balua (Worschech 1986 et al.), have so far failed to turn up evidence for occupation during the crucial LB/Iron I transitional period, others, such as Lehun (Homes Fredericq 1992), Jalul (Younker et al. 1993: 216) and Hesban (Sauer, personal communication) have (Plate 2). As for Edom, it must be admitted that at present the evidence for LB/Iron I occupation is quite sparse (MacDonald 1992a, b). Nevertheless, we agree with Bartlett's assessment that '[i]n the absence of any clear evidence that Edom was resettled by the invasion of foreign groups with new distinctive ways of life, it is easier to believe that the indigenous, if limited, population expanded with improving economic circumstances' (Bartlett 1989: 65). (We might add that while some specialists of the region doubt the evidence for Iron I sedentary occupation in Edom (e.g., Hart 1992; Bienkowski 1992b), others are not so sure (e.g., Sauer 1985, 1986; Finkelstein 1992a, 1992b; Herr, personal communication). Hopefully, future analysis and publication will resolve this dispute.) The one dissenting voice to the story told by these other investigators is that of Knauf, who has most recently argued that Iron Age sedentary occupation in Edom was precipitated by a migration of Canaanite agricultural newcomers (whom Knauf would equate with the Horite tribes of Gen. 36) (1992: 49). But even he acknowledges the contribution of the preexisting population in the region to the mixture of people who eventually became known as Edomites (ibid.). Here we do not necessarily disagree with Knauf (although his specific identity for these people may be debated), for although the majority of the ancestors of the Iron Age Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites apparently came from among populations which had existed in their respective homelands previously, this does not rule out the role of a certain amount of migration. It is, in fact, very likely that these homelands became the end-destination for many individuals and groups of kin displaced by the upheavals of the Late Bronze Age. However, in our opinion, there are no compelling reasons to argue that these refugees supplanted the indigenous tribes as the new masters of Iron Age Transjordan. Ammon most densely settled, Edom least Most scholars working in Transjordan seem to agree that the density of the sites decreases as one moves southward (e.g., Weippert 1979: 26). It would be reassuring if this perception could be confirmed by a comparative analysis of site densities of the Ammon, Moab and Edom regions which have been derived from recent surveys. However, because not all survey methods are uniform and the dating The Archaeology of Society in Late Bronze/Iron Age Transjordan fca. 1400—500 BCE) 407 Plate 2 Lehun of Moab and the Wadi Mujib looking north. Recent excavations there indicate occupation during the LB/lron transition period (photograph courtesy of Richard Cleaves) of surface sherds is difficult, any such analysis would at present yield uncertain results (Miller 1992b: 80). However, if one limits the comparison to fortified settlements, a distinctive pattern emerges (Dearman 1992: 72-3). Ammon appears to have a number of fairly substantial walled settlements with occupational histories that continue from the Late Bronze Age into the Iron Age. These include Umm ad-Dananir (McGovern 1986), Tell Safut (Ma'ayeh 1960: 115; Wimmer 1987a, 1987b), Rabbath-Amman (Ward 1966: 9-15; Bennett 1979: 159; Dornemann 1983: 105-21), Tell el-'Umeiri (Geraty et al. 1986, 1990a,b; Herr et al. 1990; Younker et al. 1990), possibly Tell Jawa (Younker et al. 1990) and Tell Sahab (Ibrahim 1987: 77). The significance of walled settlements lies in the fact that they reflect a more sedentary occupation with more permanent ties to their surrounding ploughland. When one moves into Moab there are no clear LB walled settlements whose occupational history continued into the Iron Age (Dearman 1992: 72). A possible exception may be Jalul, located in the northern half of the Madaba plateau, well north of the Wadi Mujib, where environmental conditions were more conducive to intensive agriculture. Indeed Jalul is closer to the Ammon sites listed above than it is to the Moabite sites south of the Wadi Mujib. The paucity of walled settlements in the heart of Moab, south of the Wadi Mujab on the Kerak plateau, is confirmed by the scarcity of classical tell sites in Moab - since it is the presence of walled settlements which provide the physical structure upon which the tell will form (Dearman 1992: 73). This is not to say there were no sedentary villages in Moab at this time. Surveys clearly show that there were (Miller 1991). However, there is no evidence of interest in protecting long-term agricultural investments such as LB/ Iron I fortified settlements in Ammon imply. In our opinion, Dearman correctly interprets the lack of continually occupied walled settlements in LB and Iron I Moab as reflective of a population whose economy was largely based on range-tied pastoralism. Plate 3 Buseirah in Edom, looking northwest. The excavators of Buseirah, Tawilan and Umm el-Biyara believe that occupation at these settlements began in Iron II, although some scholars believe some Iron I pottery was found as well. Certainly, sedentary occupation appears later in Edom than in Moab and Ammon (photograph courtesy of Richard Cleaves) Finally, in Edom not only are there no clear LB walled settlements that continue into the Iron Age, there are virtually no LB settlements at all. The only exceptions are six sites in the northernmost area of Edom (MacDonald 1992b). The scarcity of settlements, however, does not necessarily mean a lack of inhabitants. More likely, it reflects a shift along the subsistence continuum to a very high degree of pastoral nomadism (LaBianca 1990). Evidence that people did inhabit this region during the Late Bronze Age is provided by contemporary Egyptian literary sources (Kitchen 1992). Land-tied tribalism most prevalent in Ammon Given, as we have seen, that Ammon seems to have been both most densely settled and most intensively cultivated, it is reasonable to infer that here, to a greater degree than in Moab or Edom, the ranks of land-tied cultivators swelled the most. This is not to say, however, that range-tied pastoralists were completely displaced in Ammon - they most surely were not. They continued, no doubt, to coexist and accommodate themselves to the ascent of land-tied tribalism and the new, supra-tribal polity which came to be known as the Kingdom of Ammon. The description we have proposed for the relations between land-tied cultivators and range-tied pastoralists in Ammon during Iron II applies pretty well to Moab also. Using slightly different language, Miller has described it well: There will have been a few modest cities, each with its king who also controlled some of the surrounding countryside. However tribal elders also will have played a role in the political structure, especially among the villages scattered throughout the land. Also from time to time there will have arisen local chieftains who carved out local kingdoms (Miller 1992a: 890). 408 Part V % Local Kingdoms and World Empires * 0ystein S. LaBianca and Randall W. Younker Plate 4 Dibon of Moab, looking east (photograph courtesy of Richard Cleaves) In our opinion, it is also not impossible that during times of severe economic, political, and other challenges, the inherent fluidity which tribal people have in forming networks and cooperative alignments could result in over- arching regional alliances that would encompass the entire territory of Moab periodically and - on even rarer occasions - include neighboring tribal kingdoms such as Ammon and Edom. Such an example may be found in 2 Chr. 20 where the Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites form a common alliance against the Judahite King, Jehoshaphat. Range-tied tribalism most prevalent in Edom As we have seen, Edom also experienced a certain amount of sedentarization of its inhabitants, especially during Iron II. Particularly in the best agricultural areas, communities of tribal settlers came into existence. We know this, for example, from the results of excavations at sites such as Uram el-Biyara, Buseirah (Plate 3) and Tawilan (cf. Bienkowski 1992b). The fact that the land of Edom was a much riskier place for people to settle down and live, however, assured that bedouin tribes would continue to be both proportionately better represented and more influential ideologically in Edom. Practically speaking, what this meant was that the 'safety net' of cooperative alignments and personal connections - which for generations had enabled the bedouin inhabitants of the high-risk Edomite homeland to survive - persisted and prevailed. To a much greater extent than in Moab and Ammon, therefore, the lives of the tribal settlers who succeeded in establishing themselves in Edom were enmeshed in the politics and economics of the bedouin. For this reason Knauf's characterization of Edomite society as 'never more than ... a "tribal state", i.e. a state where a thin veneer of central administration hardly disguised the structure of a society that basically functioned on a level not penetrated by the state' (Knauf 1992: 52) is, in our opinion, essentially accurate. Interestingly, the greater emphasis on network generating range-tied tribalism in the environmentally more severe territory of Edom may receive support from the 'Edomite king list' in Gen. 36. Scholars have long noted that none of the kings in this list was the son of his predecessor, and that each king is attributed to a different city. Moreover, these kings are introduced as 'the kings who reigned in Edom, not Kings of Edom' (Weippert 1982: 155). Regardless of when one would date this text (e.g., Weippert 1982: 155; Knauf 1992: 52), it accurately reflects the proliferation of tribes and tribal chieftains which is typical of an ecologically hazardous region such as Edom. The ideological roots of Transjordan's tribal kingdoms We believe that the ideological roots of the kingdoms which arose in Iron Age Transjordan are to be found primarily within the experience and knowledge of the populations who brought them into existence. In other words, we would argue that the kingdoms which arose in Ammon, Moab and Edom came into existence through the same process of expansion of social networking that in the past had brought tribes and tribal federations into variously transient alignments. Their emergence thus represented a coalescence of land-tied cultivators and range-tied pastoralists for the purpose of collectively defending - now on a more permanent basis - their common home territories. Although it is true that an ancient Near Eastern 'king' (milk, malik, malk, sharru) could include the head of an empire, state or tribe (Knauf 1992: 49), there is evidence that the individuals who appropriated the title generally laid claim to power and influence that surpassed that of mere local bedouin sheikhs or village headmen. To see more precisely what the nature of this difference in power was, we shall take a closer look at the ninth century BCE polity of Mesha of Moab. According to the Mesha Inscription (see Window 2, Figure 2.1 p. 414), Mesha identified himself as Dayboni, that is, a Dibonite. His people were called Dibonites and his place of residence was the city of Dibon (Plate 4). However, he clearly claimed authority beyond the boundaries of his home city and people, for he was not merely the ruler of Dibon or the Dibonites; rather, he was the 'king of Moab'. During times of external threat he could call upon 'men from Moab', that is, individuals beyond his kin circle of 'obedient' or 'loyal' Dibonites. His ability to call up the 'men from Moab' clearly elevated him beyond the level of a local Dibonite sheikh or chief. Even Mesha's enemies, the Israelites, who knew Mesha primarily as a 'cattle magnate' [noged, 2 Kgs. 3: 4), also recognized him as 'king of Moab' (ibid.). It is important to note, however, that none of these activities or achievements (including his claim to have built The Archaeology of Society in Late Bronze/Iron Age Transjordan fca. 1400—500 BCE) 409 water systems and roads) demands a social organization at the level of the state as defined by anthropologists (sec below). Besides the absence of characteristics typical of state level organization (see Renfrew and Bahn 1991: 156- 7 and below), Mesha does not appear to have had jurisdiction over all land that was traditionally considered to be the land of Moab. While part of the reason for this was that aliens clearly occupied some of this land, there is, nevertheless, little evidence that Mesha was active in Moabite land south of Wadi Mujib. Indeed, Miller argues convincingly that only certain areas north of the Wadi Mujib were definitely under Mesha's control. Both Mesha's military campaigns and 'public works' projects are concentrated almost exclusively in this northern region, in and around Dibon and the lands immediately adjacent to it. While it has been suggested that the individual commemorated on the Kerak Inscription, '[kjmshyt, the king of Moab', was Mesha's father and, thus, a pan-Moab dynastic kingdom must have existed, Miller is correct in asserting that there is, in fact, no definite evidence that this individual is the father of Mesha. If [k]mshyt of the Kerak Inscription is not Mesha's father, this inscription could, ironically, actually be used as evidence of a non-Dibonite, Moabite tribal king over the Kerak Plateau. If so, that would mean there could have been several 'Moabite' tribes within Moab. As Miller points out, all we know for sure 'is that a ruler who claimed the title "king of Moab" left an inscription at Kerak' (1992b: 87). In short, everything we currently know about Moab at this time is consistent with the presence of a tribal society. The nature of Transjordan's tribal kingdoms In further support of our claim that the kingdoms which arose in Ammon, Moab and Edom are best understood as 'tribal kingdoms' rather than 'states' we will note the absence of a number of essential features which typify true 'states' as commonly defined by anthropologists. True states are generally understood to be the most complex level of social organization; the role of kinship relations in such a society is diminished, religious and political authority are typically separate, the ruler usually maintains a standing army and a significant amount of the population is settled in urban centers which function within a pronounced settlement hierarchy (cf. Renfrew and Bahn 1991: 156, 157). Such complex societies are characterized by a significant amount of ethnic plurality and social differentiation (Kamp and Yoffee 1980: 87). To illustrate briefly what state-level social complexity might look like 'on the ground' in Syro-Palestine one might examine western Palestine during the Late Bronze Age (but see Falconer 1987). Even a cursory view of the archaeological remains of Late Bronze Age western Palestine shows a considerable variation in size, function and ethnic inhabitation of the numerous settlements there. Some sites such as Megiddo and Hazor appear to be major centers which exhibit fairly sophisticated city planning with special areas set apart for administrative complexes, temples, etc. The fact that the palace is separated from the city's temples suggests the presence of competing centers of authority within the same society. Other settlements such as Aphek, which appear to be 'residencies' for Egyptian governors, testify to additional layers of influence and authority within Canaanite society at large. Isolated temple sites such as Mevorakh and Lachish, reflect a variety of religious practices and beliefs. Other settlements appear to be nothing more than simple agricultural villages which supported the larger centers. Still others, such as Tel Masos, appear to be trading centers with a diverse ethnic composition. This rather complex and sophisticated view of western Palestine's Late Bronze Age society is reflected in Egyptian texts such as the Amarna Tablets. However, this picture of western Palestine stands in contrast to that of the Transjordanian plateau during the Late Bronze Age. In addition to the fact that technical studies on the ceramics at Deir Alia suggest that Transjordan (at least in the north) appears to have developed a unique pottery tradition distinct from that of Cisjordan (Franken 1969; Franken and Power 1971), the variety and complexity reflected in Cisjordan's settlements is lacking to the east. While a great deal of attention has been given to the discovery of LB sites in Transjordan, so far none display the size or complexity of, say, Megiddo or Hazor. In fact, the only significant LB sites are limited to Amman (although little is really yet known about the LB occupation), Safut, Sahab, Umeiri, Jalul, and possibly Jawa (south), mostly in the north of Transjordan. So far, little monumental architecture has been recovered - no palaces, or 'governor's residences', and the only possible temple that has been reported is the enigmatic Amman Airport Structure, an isolated building whose precise origin and function is still a matter of debate (see Wright 1966; Campbell and Wright 1969; Hennessy 1966; Finkelstein 1988: 343; especially intriguing is Finkelstein's resurrection of an idea originally put forward by Campbell and Wright, that this structure served tribal pastoralists). Finally, none of these sites in Transjordan are comparable to the larger sites west of the Jordan river, and were probably self-sufficient in terms of subsistence (see above). The presence of exotic wares - such as Mycenaean and Cypriot pottery which appear in both western Palestine and Transjordan and undoubtedly arrived via trade - does not necessitate the presence of an urban or state society. However, what about the Iron Age, especially the Iron II period, for which archaeological evidence clearly shows a peak in sedentarization (including urbanization) and intensive agriculture? The impressive material remains from this period, especially monumental remains such as 410 Part V Local Kingdoms and World Empires $ 0ystein S. LaBianca and Randall W. Younker Figure 2 Statue of Ammonite King (Iron IIB). More statuary appears in Iron Age Ammon than in any other of the Transjordanian kingdoms (drawing by Laura M. Bredall after the Museum of Tourism and Antiquities, Jordan, courtesy of the Horn Archaeology Museum). Height — .48 meters the Ammonite statuary (Figures 2 and 3), the Balu'a Stele (Figure 4), the Mesha Stele (see Window 2, Figure 2.1), and the 'Warrior Stele' (Figure 5) suggest to many the presence of fully-fledged, albeit minor or secondary, states. Certainly, by the time of the Assyrian period (Iron IIB) it appears that supra-tribal polities had fully developed in each of the Transjordanian tribal territories - that is, within each territory leaders had emerged who were able to build networks that ultimately coalesced all of the related tribes within the traditional territory. Formerly intrusive tribes, such as the Israelites, had by this time either been physically ejected or fully absorbed. Synergism of contributing factors It remains to account for the reasons why these tribal kingdoms came into existence in the first place. We would highlight three causal factors. First, the changes in rural highland regions of Palestine occasioned by the collapse of the Late Bronze Age city-state system (Coote and Whitlam 1987; Dever 1992) would have disrupted the economic networks which the Transjordanian tribes were tied into. While in many ways these tribes were self-sufficient, the presence of items such as cylinder seals from North Syria, Mycenaean pottery, and faience amulets and scarabs from Egypt Figure 3 Statue of Crowned Figure (Ammonite) (Iron IIB). Numerous busts of 'crowned' figures, similar to the head of this statue, have been found in the Amman region. They have generally been interpreted as busts of Ammonite kings, although some scholars have suggested they represent deities (drawing by Laura M. Bredall after the Museum of Tourism and Antiquities, Jordan, courtesy of the Horn Archaeology Museum). Height — .25 meters suggest that they supplemented their wants and needs through a variety of trade networks (e.g., Deir Alia and the Amman Airport Structure). Undoubtedly, the disruption of these external contacts served as a catalyst for local farmers, craftsmen, etc. to fill the vacuum with locally- produced goods and products. Thus, the development was set in motion which led gradually to the intensification of plow agriculture during the Iron Age. Second, the collapse of the lowland cities in adjacent regions such as western Palestine would have produced a number of refugees. Some of these refugees, who are likely to have included traders, craftsmen and farmers, were probably assimilated into the indigenous population of Iron I Transjordan - adding, as it were, a leaven to the mix. Their modifying effect resulted in the opening up of these highlands to wider trade networks and the creation of a market for the exchange of textiles and agricultural products. This situation no doubt increased the momentum of the move towards intensified sedentary agriculture. Third, the arrival around 1200 BCE of the Philistines in Palestine escalated the threat to the region's land-tied settlers. This threat was first felt by the Israelites who, sometime toward the end of the eleventh century BCE, eventually responded to it by appointing a king and The Archaeology of Society in Late Bronze/Iron Age Transjordan (ca. 1400—500 BCE) 41 1 Figure 4 Balu'a stele from Moab (thirteenth—twelfth century BCE) (drawing by Laura M. Bredall after the Museum of Tourism and Antiquities, Jordan, courtesy of the Horn Archaeology Museum). Height = 1.7 meters creating a standing army. The Israelites, in turn, soon embarked on their own conquests, including invasion of the lands of Ammon and Moab. This situation is what seems to have precipitated the formation of supra-tribal polities in Ammon and Moab. The collapse of the Iron Age kingdoms of Transjordan As Sauer has noted, most scholars, following Josephus (Antiquities 10.9.7), assume that Ammon, Moab and Edom were destroyed by the Neo-Babylonians shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem ca. 586 BCE (e.g.,,Landes 1961; cf. Sauer 1986: 18). However, closer analysis of literary sources, as well as new archaeological evidence, suggests these kingdoms actually continued well into the Hellenistic period (Sauer 1986: 18). For example, the Madaba Plains Project Survey (see Window 1 pp. 412-13) has located numerous 'farmstead' sites that appear to have been occupied into the Persian and Hellenistic periods. This has been confirmed by excavations at one of these sites, Rujm Selim (Geraty et al. 1988). Moreover, the recent discovery of several seal inscriptions at Tell el- Umeiri suggest that Ammon was organized as a Persian province, similar to that of Judah to the west (Herr 1992). By the Roman and Byzantine periods, however, the Transjordanian kingdoms do seem to have disappeared from historical accounts. This is not to say that these people completely disappeared. However, it would appear that the tribal polities were completely subsumed by the rise of the Roman Empire. As new tribal configurations emerged to confront the new challenges, the ancient identities of Ammon, Moab and Edom were lost. Figure 5 The Rujm al-'Abd ('Shihan Warrior') stele from Moab (thirteenth-twelfth century BCE). Thought to represent a warrior god. The occurrence of monumental reliefs and inscriptions such as the Rujm al- 'Abd stele, the Balu'a stele and the Mesha Inscription appear to reflect the growing power of Transjordan's tribal kingdoms during the Iron Age (drawing by Laura M. Bredall after Reunion des musees nationaux, Paris, courtesy of the Horn Archaeology Museum. Conclusion Because of Transjordan's inland location, the environ- mental hazards of it being a desert frontier, and its position astride a corridor linking three continents - Europe, Asia and Africa - tribalism has not only survived, but thrived there. Over successive centuries, it has coexisted with supra-tribal polities of various kinds. At times, Transjordanian tribalism has spawned some of these polities - as appears to have been the case with the Kingdoms of Ammon, Moab and Edom. At other times, it has been suppressed under the weight of externally imposed bureaucracies, as in Roman times. Because, however, it is a force that is rooted in the age- old loyalties of family and kin, it has not gone away, instead, it has persisted through the centuries and millennia in Transjordan and throughout much of the rest of the Middle East. It thus represents a powerful example of what Braudel (1972) has called the longue-duree - a deep historical undercurrent which has enabled and facilitated the response of Transjordan's population to ecological, political, and economic uncertainties and changes since the dawn of history. WINDOW 1 412 THE STORY OF THE-MAD ABA PLAINS PROJECT How a team of archaeologists decide where to dig and what to look forwhen theydig are questions many peopleoften ask. How, for example, did the Madaba Plains Project - with its excavations atTell Hesban, Tell el-Umeiri, Tell Jawa, Tell Jalul and several other sites in central Transjordan - end up studying the way of life of the Ammonites? The Madaba Plains Project began with the Heshbon Expedition, an excavation organized by Professor Siegfried S. Horn of Andrews University and Professor Roger S. Boraas of Upsala College. Its original aims were twofold: First, from the perspective of Horn (its director) and his financial backers, to excavate Tell Hesban to see if it was the Heshbon frequently mentioned in Old Testament accounts in connection with the Israelite conquest of Palestine. Second, from the perspective of Boraas, its chief archaeologist, to dig the tell as carefully as possible to attain for central Transjordan a solid stratigraphic and ceramic baseline. These dual aims were at times difficult to harmonize because they called for almost opposing approaches in terms of excavation strategy. Whereas the quest for biblical Heshbon called for rapid removal of layers above the Iron Age, the quest for a multi-period stratigraphic baseline for central Transjordan called for the meticulous peeling away of layers, one by one. These conflicting aims resulted in numerous strategy discussions, both inside and outside the trenches throughout the first three seasons (1968, 1971, 1973). By the end of the third season, however, when it had become apparent that there was not much to be found at Tell Hesban that had direct bearing on the Israelite conquest question, the second aim emerged as the excavation's primary one. When, in 1974, Professor Lawrence T. Geraty, Horn's successor at Andrews, took over as director (1974, 1976), he continued to make systematic excavation of the site - as well as scientific recovery of geological samples, animal bones, and carbonized seeds - a top priority. He also lent full support to ethno-archaeological research in the village of Hesban. In the meantime, however, a search had been launched for other possible sites that might someday be excavated and may turn up information relevant to the conquest question. This hope, along with a desire to trace the remains of the Roman road leading to and from Tell Hesban, led to the start-up in 1973 of the Hesban Regional Survey (1973, 1974, 1976). This survey, which concentrated on the region within ten kilometers of Tell Hesban, ended up locating 148 archaeological sites - representing the entire span of history in the region. As a consequence of the multiple lines of research begun by the Heshbon Expedition - stratigraphic excavations, collection of scientific samples of all kinds, regional survey - a dilemma emerged as plans for final synthesis and publication were being made. This dilemma was how to fit all of these different lines of scientific information together/in a systematic way. It was as a solution to this dilemma that the food systems perspective was proposed. More than anything else, the food system perspective came to serve as an heuristic device for fitting together the data. It is founded on the assumption that all of the things people think and do in their daily quest for food - how they go about producing, Plate 1.1 Tell el-Umeiri in Ammon, looking south. The Madaba Plains (and the border with Moab) lay beyond the tree- lined ridge behind the tell (photograph by Madaba Plains Project) WINDOW 1 processing, storing, distributing, preparing, consuming, and wasting food- are part of a complex unity of purposive, patterned (institutionalized) and interdependent activities. The advantages of this perspective were that, first, it heightened awareness of the fact that almost ail of the data collected in the course of excavation and survey at Hesban and in the vicinity - remains of buildings and walls, broken pieces of pottery, fragments of animal bones, stone tools of various kinds - represented, in one way or another, a daily life activity related to : either producing, storing or preparing food. Second, it focused attention on the Interconnection between what was happening on the tell and what was going on in the surrounding environment. Third, it provided a research question relevant to all periods - namely, how, in the broadest sense, did people go about providing the food and the security they needed to produce, store and distribute it? And fourth, tt provided a sound basis for studying the present as a means to spark insights for use in interpreting the fragmentary archaeological record of the past. One of the most important outcomes resulting from using this : perspective to interpret the data from Hesban and its vicinity was that it brought into focus the dynamic coexistence of both nomadic and sedentary modes of existence in the project area. By focusing research on the quest for food in the broader sense, not just on agriculture - which Westerners tend to associate with settled life — this perspective opened a window on the dynamic shifts over time in the intensity with which people in this region exploited their tand and animals to produce food. Out of this 413 insight evolved research on food system intensification and abatement, and the related processes of sedentarization and nomadization. A major reason for the decision to continue to do fieldwork in the Madaba Plains region in the 1980s and 1990s was to be able to investigate these processes. Another reason was the presence of several sites in the region which had what Tell Hesban did not have - well-stratified layers from the Iron and Bronze ages. The best two candidates were Tell el-Umeiri and Tell Jalui. Excavations at the former were begun in 1984 and at the latter in 1992. In addition, an intensive 'food system survey' in the region surrounding Tel! el-Umeiri has been completed. To return to the original question of how we ended up studying the Ammonites, the answer is that in starting work at Telt el- Umeiri, which happens to be located in the part of Jordan which according to Old Testament accounts is where they lived, we have encountered them. In particular, we identified them through their seal impressions, of which we have found over a dozen containing their script and iconography. This is a happy discovery, for it allows us to study them as a particular example, along with others from other periods, of a people who entered the light of recorded : history, then disappeared, in this chapter we attempt to understand theirsojourn, along with that of the Moabites and the Edomites, in terms of our sedentarization-nomadization model. The sponsors of the excavations at Tell el-Umeiri and Tell Jaiul are Andrews University in consortium with Atlantic Union College, Canadian Union College, and Walla Walla College. -;_ 414 WINDOW 2 ANCIENT AND MODERN TRIBALISM IN TRANSJORDAN Mohammed Jamrah has provided an ethnographic report for the Deir Alia Project in Jordan which describes the people who inhabited this region during the last century {Van Der kooij and Ibrahim 1989: 12, 13). Many aspects of their lifestyle provide a possible model for understanding the ways of life of the ancient Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites. According to the informant, Abu Shihab, the nineteenth century (CE) inhabitants around Deir Aila were tribally organized as the et-Fa'ur tribe. Of interest is the fact that this tribe maintained a mixed residence mode which facilitated their pursuit of a mixed subsistence strategy, for a good portion of the year most of the tribe were tent-dwelling pastoralists who seasonally moved with their herds (sheep, goat, cattle and came!) to new grazing grounds. Nevertheless, they did maintain a few houses (huts) which they lived in for part of the year and built barns and ^Yi^i^M^i^^^f ^^•^•'^ tf*^*fY3 "<•: Figure 2.1 Mesha Inscription (Moabite Stone) — (Iron II, ninth century BCE) (drawing by Laura M. Bredall after Drinkard, courtesy of the Horn Archaeology Museum). Height =1.15 meters The Mesha Inscription (translation by Jackson 1989) 1. I am Mesha" son of Kemosh[yat], king of Moab, the 2. Daibonite, My father ruled over Moab thirty years, and I ruled 3. after my father. I made this high place for Kemosh in Qarhoh. BM [ 4. S" because he delivered me from all the kings, and because he let me 5. prevail over all my enemies, Omri 6. was king of Israel, and he oppressed Moab for many days because Kemosh was angry with his country 7. But I prevailed over him and over his house, and Israel utterly perished forever. Now Omri had taken possession of a[ll the lanjd 8. of Mehadaba. He lived in it during his days and half of the days of his son(s) - forty years; but 9. Kemosh returned it in my days. I built Ba'lma'on and made the reservoir in it; and I buil[t] 10. Qiryaten. Now the Gadites had lived in the land of 'Atarot forever, and the king of 11. Israel had rebuilt 'Atarot for himself. But I fought against the city and took it, and I killed the entire population of 12. the city — a satiation for Kemosh and for Moab. I brought back from there the altar hearth of its DWD and 13. [d]ragged it before Kemosh in Qiryat. I settled in it the Sharonites and the 14. Maharatites. Now Kemosh said to me, 'Go seize Nebo from Israel.' So i 15. went at night and fought against it from the break of dawn until noon. I 16. seized it and killed everyone of [it] - seven thousand native men, foreign men, native women, for[eign] 17. women, and concubines - for I devoted it to 'Ashtar- Kemosh. I took from there th[e ves]- 18. sels of Yahweh and dragged them before Kemosh. Now the king of Israel had built 19. Yahas, and he occupied it while he was fighting against me. But Kemosh drove him out from before me. 20. I took from Moab two hundred men, its entire unit. I took it up against Yahas and captured it 21. to annex (it) to Daibon. I built Qarhoh: the walls of the parks and the walls of 22. the acropolis. I rebuilt its gates, and I rebuilt its towers. I 23. built the palace and made the retaining walls of the reservoi[r for the sprjing insi[de] 24. the city. Now there was no cistern inside the city - in Qarhoh - so I said to all the people, 'Make your 25. selves each a cistern in his house.' I dug the ditches for Qarhoh with Israelite cap- 26. tives. I built "Aro'er and made the highway at the Arnon, [and] -=— 1 27. rebuilt Bet Bamot because it had been torn down. I built Beser — because [it) was in ruins - 28. with fifty Daibonites, for all Daibon was obedient. I rule[d] 29. over] hundreds in the cities which I had annexed to the country. I built 30. [Mehada]ba, Bet Diblaten, and Bet Ba"lma"on, and I took up there the ( 31. ]S'N of the land. And Hawronen lived in it B[ ] WQ[ ] '§[ 32. And] Kemosh said to me, 'Go down, fight against Hawronen.' So I went down[ 33. and] Kemosh [returned it in my days, and "L{"[ ]DH from there 'S 34. ]STSDQ. and l[ WINDOW 2 silos (above and below ground) to store agricultural surplus. They also built a dam and water canals to bring water from the River Zerqa, some 3 km to the east, to Deir Alia to irrigate crops. Their crops included wheat, barley, sesame and doura. The land-owning sheikh hired non-kin migrant workers to help with the crops. Part of the harvest was traded forfruit and other goods from towns on the plateau. An additional point of interest is the fact that the el-Fa'ur migration pattern was restricted to a 7 km circle around Deir Alia. Jn other words this tribe had a restricted territory within which they migrated. The territory, however, included lands next to the river, in the Zor, as well as lands in the foothills. The winters were spent in the Zor, while the hot summers were spent in the foothills above the Wadi Rajib. This restricted vertical migration pattern, combined with the practice of sedentary agriculture, corresponds on a small scale to what Johnson has described as 'constricted- oscillatory nomadism' a variant of 'vertical nomadism', (Johnson 1969: 170-3). Many of the characteristics of the el-Fa'ur tribe appear similar to those reflected in archaeological and inscriptional records of the ancient peoples of this region. For example, in the case of the Moabites the biblical record describes 'king' Mesha as a 'raiser of sheep' (2 Kgs 3: 4), suggesting that pastoralism provided the foundation of the Moabite economy. There was a clear recognition of the existence of Moabite territory (e.g., Num. 21: 13 — 1 5 and 2 Kgs 3: 21, although the precise boundaries of the territory were in constant dispute - e.g. Num. 21: 26-30), and ; that this territory included lands both on the plateau and down in the valley (Num. 22: 1), reflective of constricted-oscillatory, 415 vertical nomadism. At the same time, it is clearthat the Moabites inhabited a number of important sedentary centers such as Dibon (Mesha Inscription [Mi] line 2 - see Jackson 1989 for translation) and Kir Hareseth (2 Kgs 3: 25). Mesha, himself, claimed that he directed the building of a number of projects including water reservoirs, cisterns and roads (Ml lines 23-5), activities not unlike that of the sheikh of the small el-Fa'ur tribe. While Mesha's inscription does not describe agricultural activity, the plains of Moab are well known for their wheat, especially the Madaba Plains region. An Ammonite site, Mtnnith, on the northern portion of this plain, was in fact explicitly noted for its wheat (£2ek. 27: 17). Undoubtedly, grain crops were important in Moab as well. Regardless of the nature of his projects, Mesha appears to have relied on captured slaves for labor, such as the Israelites (Ml line 25) rather than hired migrant workers. As for Moab's actual social organization, there is little direct inscriptional evidence. However, the fact that their cousins to the west, the Israelites, were tribal (see Stager 1985) would suggest that Moab was too. Also, the fact that in the Mesha inscription Mesha refers to himself, as both a 'Dibonite' and a king of Moab (Mi tines 2, 20, 28) suggests that the Moabites were subdivided into local tribal elements analogous to the way the el-Fa'ur tribe is apparently an element of the larger Adwan tribe (Peake 1958: 170). Thus, many factors suggest that the lifestyles of the ancient Transjordanians were not too different from the tribalpeoples who have inhabited Jordan during the last few centuries up to the present. 590 Bibliography Stern, E. 1978. Excavations at Tel Mevorakh (1973-76) Part One: From the Iron Age to the Roman Period. Qedem 9. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University. Stone, E.C. 1987. Nippur Neighborhoods. Studies in Oriental Civilization. 44. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Taylor, J.G. 1988. The Two Earliest Known Representations of Yahweh. In Ascribe to the Lord: Biblical and other Studies in Memory of Peter C. Craigie. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 67 (eds L. Eslinger and G. Taylor). Sheffield: JSOT Press, pp. 557-66. Tappy, R.L. 1992. The Archaeology of Israelite Samaria. Volume 1. Atlanta: Scholars Press. Tufnell, O. 1953. Lachish III: The Iron Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ussishkin, D. 1978. Ecavations of Tel Lachish - 1973-1977, Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv. 5: 1-97. Ussishkin, D. 1982. The Conquest of Lachish by Sennacherib. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, The Institute of Archaeology. Ussishkin, D. 1983. Excavations at Tel Lachish 1978-1983: Second Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv. 10: 97-185. Ussishkin, D. 1988. The Date of the Judaean Shrine at Arad. Israel Exploration Journal. 38: 142-57. Van Beek, G.W. and Jamme, A. 1970. The Authenticity of the Bethel Stamp Seal. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 199: 59-65. de Vaux, Pere R. 1955. Les fouilles de Tell el-Far'ah pres Naplouse - Cinquicme Campagne. Revue Biblique. 62: 541-89. de Vaux, Pere R. 1965. Ancient Israel. Volume 1: Social Institutions. Volume 2: Religious Institutions. New York: McGraw-Hill. Veenhof, K.R. 1972. Aspects of Old Assyrian Trade and its Terminology. Studia et Documenta ad Iura Orientis Antiqui Pertinentia. 10. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Watson, P.J. 1979. Archaeological Ethnography in Western Iran. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology. 57. Tucson: Wenncr-Grcn Foundation for Anthropological Research Inc. and University of Arizona Press. Watson, P.J., LeBlanc, S.A. and Redman, C.L. 1971. Explanation in Archeology: An Explicitly Scientific Approach. New York: Columbia University Press. Whitelam, K.W. 1986. The Symbols of Power: Aspects of Royal Propaganda in the United Monarchy. Biblical Archaeologist. 49: 166- 73. Wilkinson, L. 1990a. SYSTAT: The System for Statistics. Evanston IL: SYSTAT, Inc. Wilkinson, L. 1990b. SYGRAPH: The System for Graphics. Evanston IL: SYSTAT, Inc. Wood, B.G. 1990. The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine. The Ceramic Industry and the Diffusion of Ceramic Style in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 103; Journal for the study of the Old Testament/ American Schools of Oriental Research Monographs 4. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. Yadin, Y. 1965. Note on the Stratigraphy of Arad. Israel Exploration Journal. 15: 180. Yadin, Y. 1969. An Inscribed South-Arabian Clay Stamp from Bethel? Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 196: 37-45. Yadin, Y. 1972. Hazor, The head of all those Kingdoms, Joshua 11:10. With a Chapter on Israelite Megiddo. Schweich Lectures of the British Academy 1970. London: British Academy (Oxford University Press). Yadin, Y. 1974. Notes and News: Megiddo. Israel Exploration Journal. 24: 275-6. Yadin, Y., Aharoni, Y., Armiran, R., Dothan, T., Danayevsky, I. and Perrot, J. 1958. Hazor I: An Account of the First Season of F. xcavations, 1955. Jerusalem: Magnes. Yadin, Y., Aharoni, Y., Armiran, R., Dothan, T., Danayevsky, I. and Perrot, J. 1960. Hazor II: An Account of the Second Season of E.xvacations, 1956. Jerusalem: Magnes. Yadin, Y., Aharoni, Y., Amiran, R., Ben-Tor, A., Dothan, M., Dothan, T, Dunayevsky, I., Geva, S. and Stern, E. 1989. Hazor III-IV, Text (ed. A. Ben-Tor and S. Geva). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society and The Hebrew University. Yellin, J. and Grunneweg, J. 1989. Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis and the Origin of Iron Age I Collared-rim Jars and Pithoi from Tell Dan. In Recent Excavations in Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology (eds S. Gitin and W.G. Dever). Annual of the American School of Oriental Research 49. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, pp. 125-41. Zevit, Z. 1984. The Khirbet el-Qom Inscription Mentioning a Goddess. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 255: 39-47. Zimhoni, O. 1985. The Iron Age Pottery of Tel 'Eton and its Relation to the Lachish, Tell Beit Mirsim and Arad Assemblages. Tel Aviv. 12: 63-90. Chapter 23 Abujaber, R.S. 1989. Pioneers Over Jordan: The Frontier of Settlement in Transjordan, 1850-1914. London: I.B. Tauris and Co. Ltd. Adams, R.McC. 1965. Land Behind Baghdad: A History of Settlement on the Diyala Plains. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Adams, R.McC. 1974. The Mesopotamian Social Landscape: A View from the Frontier. In Reconstructing Complex Societies (ed. C.B. Moore). Supplement to the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research No. 20, pp. 1-20. Adams, R.McC. 1978. Strategies of Maximization, Stability, and Resilience in Mesopotamian Society, Settlement and Agriculture. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 22: 329-35. Adams, R.McC. 1981. Heartland of Cities. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press., Allison, N.E. 1977. A Case of Honor: Arab Christians in a Jordanian Town. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Department of Anthro- pology, University of Georgia. Alt, A. 1940. Emiter und Moabiter. Paldstina Jahrbuch. 36: 29-43. Reprinted in A. Alt, Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel I. Munich: C.H. Beck, pp. 203-15. Alt, A. 1967. The Settlement of the Israelites in Palestine. In Essays on Old Testament History and Religion. Reprint. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Antoun, R.T. 1972. Arab Village: A Social Structural Study of a Transjordanian Peasant Community. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Antoun, R.T. 1979. Low-Key Politics: Local-Level Leadership and Change in the Middle East. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Asad, T. 1973. The Bedouin as a Military Force: Notes on Some Aspects of Power Relations Between Nomads and Sedentaries in Historical Perspective. In The Desert and the Sown: Nomads in the Wider Society (ed. C. Nelson). Berkeley, CA: University of California Institute of International Studies, pp. 61-73. Awad, M. 1970. Living Conditions of Nomadic, Semi-Nomadic and Settled Tribal Groups. In Readings in Arab Middle Eastern Societies and Cultures (eds A.B. Lutfiyya and C.W. Churchill). The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton and Co., pp. 133-48. Barth, F. 1961. Nomads of South Persia. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. Barth, F. 1973. A General Perspective on Nomad-Sedentary in the Middle East. In Desert and the Sown: Nomads in the Wider Society (ed. C. Nelson). Berkeley, CA: University of California Institute of International Studies, pp. 11-21. Bartlett, J.R. 1989. Edom and the F,domites. Sheffield: Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Press. Bartlett, J.R. 1992a. Edom. In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol II (ed. D.N. Freedman). New York: Doubleday, pp. 287-95. Bartlett, J.R. 1992b. Biblical Sources for the Early Iron Age in Edom. In Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 13-20. Bates, D. and Rassam, A. 1983. Peoples and Cultures of the Middle East. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bennett, C. 1979. Excavations at the Citadel (al-Qal'ah), Amman, Jordan. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 23: 151- 9; 161-70. Bennett, C. 1982. Neo-Assyrian Influence in Transjordan. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I (ed. A. Hadidi). Amman: Department of Antiquities, pp. 181-7. Bienkowski, P. 1992a. The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan: A Framework. In Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Bibliography 591 Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 1-12. Bienkowski, P. 1992b. The Date of Sedentary Occupation in Edom: Evidence from Umm el-Biyara, Tawilan and Buseirah. In Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 99-112. Boling, R.G. 1988. The Early Biblical Community in Transjordan. Decatur, GA: Almond. Bowersock, G.W. 1983. Roman Arabia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Braudel, F. 1972. The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Reign of Philip II. Collins: London. Brown, R. 1991. Ceramics from the Kerak Plateau. Archaeological Survey of the Kerak Plateau (ed. J.M. Miller). Atlanta: Scholars Press, pp. 169-280. Campbell, E.F. and Wright, G.E. 1969. Tribal League Shrines in Amman and Shechem. Biblical Archaeologist. 32: 104-16. Cohen, R. and Schlegel, A. 1968. The Tribe as a socio-political Unit: a Cross-cultural Examination. In Essays on the Problem of Tribe (ed. J. Helm). Seattle: University of Washington, pp. 120-49. Cole, D.P. 1973. The Enmeshment of Nomads in Saudi Arabian Society: The Case of Al Murrah. In The Desert and the Soum: Nomads in the Wider Society (ed. C. Nelson). Berkeley, CA: University of California Institute of International Studies, pp. 113-28. Coote, R. and Whitelam, K. 1987. The F.mergence of Early Israel in Historical Perspective. Sheffield: Almond Press. Crone, P. 1980. Slaves on Horses: The Evolution of the Islamic Polity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dearman, A. 1992. Settlement Patterns and the Beginning of the Iron Age in Moab. In Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 65-76. Dever, W.G. 1992. The Late Bronze-Early Iron I Horizon in Syria- Palestine: Egyptians, Canaanites, 'Sea Peoples', and Proto-Israelites. In The Crisis Years: The 12th Century B.C. (From Beyond the Danube to the Tigris) (cds W.A. Ward and M.S. Joukowsky). Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Pub., pp. 99-110. Donner, F. 1981. The F.arly Islamic Conquests. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Dornemann, R.H. 1982. The Beginning of the Iron Age in Transjordan. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan. Vol. 1 (ed. A. Hadidi). Amman: Department of Antiquities of Jordan, pp. 135-40. Dornemann, R.H. 1983. The Archaeology of the Transjordan. Milwaukee, WI: Milwaukee Public Museum. Dostal, W. 1985. Eqalitat und Klassengesellshafr in Sudarabien: Anthropologische Untersuchungen zur sozialen Evolution. Vienna. Eickelman, D.F. 1989. The Middle East: An Anthropological Approach (2nd edn). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Falconer, Steve. 1987. Heartland of Villages: Reconsidering Early Urbanism in the Southern Levant. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona. Finkelstein, I. 1988. The Archaeology of the Israelite Settlement. Israel Exploration Society: Jerusalem. Finkelstein, I. 1992a. Edom in the Iron I. Levant. 24: 159-66. Finkelstein, I. 1992b. Stratigraphy, Pottery and Parallels: A Reply to Bienkowski. Levant. 24: 171-2. Finkelstein, I. and Perevolotsky, A. 1990. Processes of Sedentarization and Nomadization in the History of Sinai and the Negev. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 279: 67-88. Franken, FI.J. 1969. Excavations at Deir Alia, a Stratigraphical and Analytical Study of the Early Iron Age Pottery. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Franken, H.J. and Ibrahim, M.M. 1977-78. Two Seasons of Excavations at Deir 'Alia, 1976-1978. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 22: 57-79. Franken, H.J. and Power, W.J.A. 1971. Glueck's Explorations in Eastern Palestine in the Light of Recent Evidence. Vetus Testamentum. 21: 119. Frick, F.S. 1985. The Formation of the State in Ancient Israel. Decatur, GA: Almond. Fried, M. 1967. The Evolution of Political Society. New York: Random House. Fried, M. 1975. The Notion of Tribe. Menlo Park: Cummings. Geraty, L.T. and LaBianca, 0.S. 1985. The Local Environment and Human Food Procuring Strategies in Jordan: The Case of Tell Hesban and Its Surrounding Region. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan II (cd. A. Hadidi). Amman: Department of Antiquities, pp. 323-30. Geraty, L.T. and Willis, L. 1986. Archaeological Research in Transjordan. In The Archaeology of Jordan and Other Studies (eds Lawrence T. Geraty and Larry G. Herr). Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, pp. 3-72. Geraty, L.T., Herr, E.G., LaBianca, 0.S. and Younker, R.W. 1986. Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-'Umeiri and Vicinity. In Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, Supplement 24: 117-24. Geraty, L.T., Herr, L.G. and LaBianca, 0.S. 1988. The Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1987 Season at Tell el-'Umeiri and Vicinity. Andrews University Seminary Studies. Geraty, L.T. 1990a. Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1987 Season at Tell El-'Umeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, Supplement 26: 59-88. Geraty, L.T. 1990b. A Preliminary Report of the 1987 Season at Tell el- 'Umeiri and Vicinity. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan XXXIII: 145-76. Gerstenblith, P. 1977. The Levant in the Middle Bronze I and its Connections with Mesopotamia and Anatolia: A Study in Trade and Settlement Patterns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures, Harvard University. Glubb, J.B. 1938. The Economic Situation of the Trans-Jordan Tribes. Journal of the Royal Central Asian Society. 25: 448-59. Glucck, N. 1934. Explorations in Eastern Palestine I. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 14. Glueck, N. 1935. Explorations in Eastern Palestine II. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 15. Glueck, N. 1937. Explorations in the Land of Ammon. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 68: 13-21. Glueck, N. 1939. Explorations in Eastern Palestine III. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 18-19. Glucck, N. 1971. The Other Side of the Jordan. Cambridge, MA: The American Schools of Oriental Research. Gotrwald, N.K. 1979. The Tribes ofYahweh. A Sociology of the Religion of Liberated Israel 1250-1050 B.C.E. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis. Gubser, P. 1984. Jordan: Crossroads of Middle Eastern Events. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Gulick, J. 1971. The Arab Levant. In The Central Middle East (ed. L. Sweet). New Haven: HRAF Press, pp. 79-171. Hart, S. 1992. Iron Age Settlement in the Land of Edom. In F,arly F,dom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 93-8. Hennessy, J. 1966. Excavation of a Late Bronze Age Temple at Amman. Palestine Exploration Quarterly. 98: 155-62. Herr, L.G. 1976. The Amman Airport Excavations 1976. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 21: 109-11. Herr, L.G. 1992. Shifts in Settlement Patterns of Late Bronze and Iron Age Ammon. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan IV (eds M. Zaghloul et al.). Amman: Department of Antiquities of Jordan, pp. 175-7. Herr, L.G., Geraty, L.T., LaBianca, 0.S. and Younker, R.W. 1990. The Madaba Plains Project: Three Seasons of Excavation at Tell el-'Umeiri and Vicinity, Jordan. Echoes do Monde Classique/Classical Views. 34 n.s. 9: 129-43. Hiatt, J.M. 1984. Between Desert and Town: A Case Study of Encapsulation and Sedentarization Among Jordanian Bedouin. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania. Hole, F. 1978. Pastoral nomadism in Western Iran. In Explorations in Fthnoarchaeology (ed. R.A. Gould). Albuquerque NM: University of New Mexico, pp. 127-67. Homes-Fredericq, D. 1992. Late Bronze and Iron Age Evidence from Lehun in Moab. In Early F.dom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 187-202. Hopkins, D. 1985. The Highlands of Canaan: Agricultural Life in the Early Iron Age. Series: Social World of Biblical Antiquity 3. Decatur, GA: Almond. Howayej, B. Abu 1973. Agricultural Atlas of Jordan. Amman, Jordan: Ministry of Agriculture, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. 592 Bibliography Hutteroth, W. 1975. The Pattern of Settlement in Palestine in the Sixteenth Century. In Studies on Palestine during the Ottoman Period (ed. M. Ma'oz). Jerusalem: Magnes Press, pp. 2-22. Ibach, R. 1978. An Intensive Surface Survey at Jalul. Andrews University Seminary Studies. 16: 215-22. Ibach, R. 1987. Hesban 5: The Regional Survey. Berrien Springs, MI: Institute of Archaeology, Andrews University. Ibrahim, M. 1972. Archaeological Excavations at Sahab, 1972. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 17: 23-36. Ibrahim, M. 1974. Second Season of Excavation at Sahab, 1973. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 19: 55-61; 187-98. Ibrahim, M. 1975. Third Season of Excavation at Sahab, 1975. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 20: 69-82; 169-78. Ibrahim, M. 1987. Sahab and its Foreign Relations. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan III. Amman: Department of Antiquities, pp. 73-81. Jackson, K.P. 1989. The Language of the Mesha' Inscription. In Studies in the Mesha Inscription and Moab (ed. A. Dearman). Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, pp. 96-130. Johnson, D.L. 1969. The Nature of Nomadism. The University of Chicago: Department of Geography Research Paper No. 118. Johnson, D.L. 1973. Jabal al-Akhdar, Cyrenaica: An Historical Geography of Settlement and Livelihood. University of Chicago: Department of Geography Research Paper No. 148. Kamp, K. and Yoffee, N. 1980. Ethnicity in Ancient Western Asia During the Early Second Millennium B.C.: Archaeological Assessments and Ethnoarchaeological Prospectives. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 237: 85-104. Khun, F. 1980. Tribe and State in Bahrain. Publications of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, No. 14, Chicago, III: University of Chicago Press. Kitchen, K.A. 1992. The Egyptian Evidence on Ancient Jordan. In Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 21-34. Kletter, R. 1991. The Rujm el-Malfuf Buildings and the Assyrian Vassal State of Ammon. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 284: 33-50. Knauf, E.A. 1984. Abel Keramim. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina- Vereins. 100: 119-21. Knauf, E.A. 1988. Midian: Untersuchungen zur Geschischte Palastinas und Nordarabiens am ende des 2. Jahrtausends v. Chr. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Knauf, E.A. 1992. The Cultural Impact of Secondary State Formation: The Cases of the Edomites and Moabites. In Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 47-54. Kohler-Rollefson, I. 1987. Ethnoarchaeological Research into the Origins of Pastoralism. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 31: 535-9. Koucky, A. 1987. Survey of the Limes Zone. In The Roman Frontier in Central Jordan Vol. 1 (ed. S.T. Parker). BAR International Series 340, pp. 41-106. Kupper, J.R. 1959. La Role des nomades dans l'histoire de la mesopotamie ancienne. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient. 2: 113-27. LaBianca, 0.S. 1976. Tell Hesban 1974: The Village of Hesban, An Ethnographic Preliminary Report. Andrews University Seminary Studies. 11: 133-44. LaBianca, 0.S. 1989. Intensification of the Food System in Central Transjordan During the Ammonite Period. Andrews University Seminary Studies. 27: 169-78. LaBianca, 0.S. 1990. Hesban 1: Sedentarization and Nomadization. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. LaBianca, 0.S. 1991. Food Systems Research: An Overview and a Case Study from Madaba Plains, Jordan. Food and Foodways. 4(3+4): 221-35. Lancaster, W. 1981. Changing Cultures: The Rwala Bedouin Today. New York: Cambridge University Press. Landes, G.M. 1956. A History of the Ammonites. Baltimore, MD: Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Johns Hopkins University. Landes, G.M. 1961. The Material Civilization of the Ammonites. Biblical Archaeologist. 24/3: 66-86. Leonard, A. Jr. 1979. Kataret Es-Samra: A Late Bronze Age Cemetery in Transjordan? Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 234: 53-65. Leonard, A. Jr. 1981. Kataret es-Samra: A Late Bronze Age Cemetery in Transjordan. Annual of the Department of Antiquities in Jordan. 25: 179-95. Linder, M. 1992. Edom Outside the Famous Excavations: Evidence from Surveys in the Greater Petra Area. In Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 143-66. Luke, J.T. 1965. Pastoralism and Politics in the Mari Period: A Reexamination of the Character and Political Significance of the Major West Semitic Tribal Groups on the Middle Euphrates, ca. 1828-1758 B.C. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan. Lyall, M.D. 1969. The Bedouin of Southeast Jordan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of New York. Ma'ayeh, F.S. 1960. Recent Archaeological Discoveries in Jordan. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 4-5: 114-16. MacDonald, B. 1988. The Wadi el Hasa Archaeological Survey 1979- 1983, West-Central Jordan. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. MacDonald, B. 1992a. Archaeology of Edom. In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol II (ed. D.N. Freedman). New York: Doubleday, pp. 295-301. MacDonald, B. 1992b. Evidence from the Wadi el-Hasa and Southern Ghor and North-east Arabah Archaeological Surveys. In Early F.dom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 113-42. McGovern, P. 1980. Explorations in the Umm ad-Dananir Region of the Baq'ah Valley. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 24: 55-67. McGovern, P. 1981. The Beq'ah Valley Project. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 25: 356-7. McGovern, P. 1986. The Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Ages of Central Transjordan: The Beq'ah Valley Project, 1977-1981. University of Pennsylvania: The University Museum. McGovern, P. 1987. Central Transjordan in the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages: An alternate Hypothesis of Socio-Economic Transforma- tion and Collapse. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan III (ed. A. Hadidi). Amman, Jordan: Department of Antiquities of Jordan, pp. 267-73. Marx, E. 1967. Bedouin of the Negev. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Marx, E. 1973. The Tribe as a Unit of Subsistence: Nomadic Pastoralism in the Middle East. American Anthropologist. 79: 343-65. Mattingley, G.L. 1983. The Exodus-Conquest and the Archaeology of Transjordan: New Light on an Old Problem. Grace Theological Journal. 4: 245-62. Mattingley, G.L. 1992. The Culture-Historical Approach and Moabite Origins. In Eur/y Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 55-64. Mendenhall, G. 1962. The Hebrew Conquest of Palestine. Biblical Archaeologist. 25: 66-87. Mendenhall, G. 1973. The Tenth Generation: The Origins of Biblical Tradition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins. Mendenhall, G. 1983. Ancient Israel's Hyphenated History. In Palestine In Transition (eds D.N. Freedman and D.F. Graf). Sheffield: Almond Press, pp. 95-103. Millard, A. 1992. Assyrian Involvement in Edom. In Early F,dom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 35-40. Miller, J.M. 1979. Archaeological Survey of Central Moab: 1978. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 234: 43-52. Miller, J.M. (ed.) 1991. Archaeological Survey of the Kerak Plateau. Atlanta, GA: American Schools of Oriental Research/Scholars Press. Miller, J.M. 1992a. Moab. In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol IV (ed. D.N. Freedman). New York: Doubleday, pp. 882-93. Miller, J.M. 1992b. Early Monarchy in Moab? In Early Edom and Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan (ed. P. Bienkowski). Sheffield: J.R. Collis, pp. 77-92. Mittmann, S. 1970. Betrage zur Siedlungs- und Territorialgeschichte des nordlischen Ostjordanlandes. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Bibliography 593 Noth, M. 1935. Die israelitischen Siedlungsgebeite im Ostjordenland. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins. 58: 230-55. Noth, M. 1941. Die israelitischen Siedlungsgebeite im Ostjordenland. Palastinajahrbuch des Deutschen Evangelischen Instituts fur Altertumswissenschafr des Heiligen Landes zu Jerusalem. 37: 66. Noth, M. 1960. The History of Israel. Second edn (Tr. P.R. Ackroyd). New York: Harper and Row. Oakcshott, M.F. 1983. The Edomite Pottery. In Midian, Moab, and Edom: The History and Archaeology of Late Bronze and Iron Age Jordan and North-West Arabia (eds J.F.A. Sawyer and D.J.A. Clines). Sheffield: JSOT Press, pp. 53-63. Oded, B. 1970. Observation on Methods of Assyrian Rule in Transjordania after the Palestinian Campaign of Tiglath-Pileser IU. Journal of Near Eastern Studies. 29: 177-86. Oded, B. 1979. Neighbors on the East. In The Age of the Monarchies: Political History (ed. A. Malamat). Jerusalem: Masada Press Ltd. pp. 247-75; 358-63. Parker,. S.T. 1986. Romans and Saracens: A History of the Arabian Frontier. ASOR Dissertation Series No. 6. Winona Lake, IN: ASOR. Peake, F.G. 1958. History and Tribes of Jordan. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press. Peters, E. 1970. The Proliferation of Segments in the Lineage of the Bedouin of Cyrenaica [Libya]. In Peoples and Cultures of the Middle East. Volume 1: Depth and Diversity (ed. L.E. Sweet). Garden City, New York: The Natural History Press, pp. 361-98. Posener, G. 1940. Princes et Pays d'Asie et de Nubie. Brussels. Prag, K. 1985. Ancient and Modern Pastoral Migration in the Levant. Levant. 17: 81-8. Prag, K. 1987. Decorative Architecture in Ammon, Moab, and Judah. Levant. 19: 121-7. Pritchard, J.B. 1985. Tell Es-Sa'idiyeh: Excavations on the Tell, 1964- 1966. Philadelphia, Penn: University of Pennsylvania. Redford, D.B. 1982. A Bronze Age Itinerary in Transjordan (Nos. 89- 101 of Thutmose Ill's List of Asiatic Toponyms). Journal for the Society of Egyptian Archaeology. 12/2: 55-74. Reifenberg, A. 1955. The Struggle Between the Desert and the Sown. Jerusalem: Government Press. Renfrew, C. and Bahn, P. 1991. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. New York, NY: Thames and Hudson. Rostovtzeff, M. 1928. Syria and the East. In The Cambridge Ancient History: Volume VII, The Hellenistic Monarchies and the Rise of Rome (eds S.A. Cook, F.E. Adcock and M.P. Charlesworth). Cambridge, University Press, pp. 155-96. Rostovtzeff, M. 1932. Caravan Cities. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Rowton, M.B. 1973a. Urban Autonomy in the Nomadic Environment. Journal of Near Eastern Studies. 32: 201-15. Rowton, M.B. 1973 b. Autonomy and Nomadism in Western Asia. Orientalia. 42: 247-58. Rowton, M.B. 1974. Enclosed Nomadism. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient. 17: 1-30. Rowton, M.B. 1976a. Dimorphic Structure and the Problem of the 'Apiru-'Ibrim. Journal of Near Eastern Studies. 35: 13-20. Rowton, M.B. 1976b. Dimorphic Structure and Topology. Oreins Antsquis 15: 17-31. Rowton, M.B. 1976c. Dimorphic Structure and the Tribal Elite. Studia Instituti Anthropos. 28: 219-57. Rowton, M.B. 1977. Dimorphic Structure and the Parasocial Element. Journal of Near Eastern Studies. 36: 181-98. Russel, M.B. 1989. Hesban during the Arab Period: A.D. 635 to the Present. In Historical Foundations. Hesban 3 (eds L.T. Geraty and L.G. Running). Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, pp. 25-35. Sahlins, M. 1968. Tribesmen. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Salibi, K.S. 1977. Syria Under Islam: Empire on Trial 634-1097. Delmar, NY: Caravan Books. Sauer, J.A. 1982. Prospects for Archaeology in Jordan and Syria. Biblical Archaeology. 4SI2: 73-84. Sauer, J.A. 1985. Ammon, Moab, and Edom. In Biblical Archaeology Today: Proceedings of the International Congress on Biblical Archaeology, Jerusalem, April 1984. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 206-14. Sauer, J.A. 1986. Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages: A Critique of Glueck's Synthesis. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 263: 1-26. Service, E. 1962. Primitive Social Organization. New York: Random House. Service, E. 1975. Origins of the State and Civilization: The Process of Cultural Evolution. New York: W.W. Norton and Company. Shahid, I. 1984a. Rome and the Arabs: A Prolegomenon to the Study of Byzantium and the Arabs. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks. Shahid, I. 1984b. Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks. Shami, S.K. 1984. Ethnicity and Leadership: The Circassians in Jordan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley. Shehadeh, N. 1985. The Climate of Jordan in the Past and Present. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan II. Amman, Jordan: Department of Antiquities of Jordan,pp. 25-37. Stager, L.E. 1985. The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 260: 1-35. Swidler, W.W. 1973. Adaptive Processes Regulating Nomad-Sedentary Interaction in the Middle East. In The Desert and the Soum: Nomads in the Wider Society (ed. C. Nelson). Berkeley, CA: University of California Institute of International Studies, pp. 23-41. Thompson, H.O. 1972. The 1972 Excavation of Khirbet el-Hajjar. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 17: 47-72. Thompson, H.O. 1977. The Ammonite Remains at Khirber al-Hajjar. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 227: 27-34. Thompson, H.O. 1989. Archaeology in Jordan. American University Studies: Series 9, History, Volume 55. New York: Peter Lang. Tushingham, A.D. 1972. The Excavations at Dibon (Dhiban) in Moab: The Third Campaign 1952-53. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 40. Van Der Kooij, G. and Ibrahim, M. 1989. Picking Up the Threads. . .A Continuing Review of Excavations at Deir Alia, Jordan. Leiden: University of Leiden. Van Zyl, A.H. 1960. The Moabites. Pretoria Oriental Series, Vol. 3 (ed. A. van Selms). Leiden: E.J. Brill. Wahlin, L. 1992. Back to Settled Life? An Historical Geographical Study of Changing Living Conditions in the 'Allan Area of Jordan, 1867- 1980. Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm University. Ward, W.A. 1966. Scarabs, Seals and Cylinders from Two Tombs at Amman. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. XI: 5- 18. Weippert, M. 1971. Edom: Studien und Materialien zur Geschichte der Edomiter auf Grund schriftlicher und archaologisher Quellen. Unpublished dissertation and Habilitationsschrift, University of Tubingen. Weippert, M. 1979. The Israelite 'Conquest' and the Evidence from Transjordan. In Symposia (ed. F.M. Cross). Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research, pp. 15-34. Weippert, M. 1982. Remarks on the History of Settlement in Southern Jordan during the Early Iron Age. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I (ed. A. Hadidi). Amman: Department of Antiquities of Jordan, pp. 153-62. Weippert, M. 1987. The Relations of the States East of Jordan. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan III (ed. B A. Hadidi). Amman: Department of Antiquities, pp. 97-105. Wimmer, D. 1987a. The Excavations at Tell Safut. In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan III (ed. A. Hadidi). Amman, Jordan: Department of Antiquities of Jordan, pp. 279-82. Wimmer, D. 1987b. Tell Safut Excavations, 1982-1985 Preliminary Report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 31: 159- 74. Winnett, F.V. and Reed, W.L. 1964. The Excavations at Dibon (Dhiban) in Moab. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 36- 37. Worschech, U.F. 1984. Archaologischer Survey der nordlichen Ard el- Kerak 1984. Liber Annuus. 34: 445-7. Worschech, U.F. 1985a. Northwest Ard el Kerak 1983 and 1984: A Preliminary Report. Munich: Manfred Gorg. Worschech, U.F. 1985b. Preliminary Report on the Third Survey Season in the Northwest Ard el-Kerak. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 29: 161-73. 594 Bibliography Worschech, U.F. 1985c. Die Sehburgen am Wadi Ibn Hammad: Eine Studie zu einer Gruppe von Bauten im antiken Moab. Biblishe Notizen. 28: 66-88. Worschech, U.F. 1990. Die Beziehungen Moabs zu Israel und Agypten in der Eisenzeit: Seidlungsarch'dologische und siedlungshistorische Untersuchungen im Kernland Moabs (Ard el-Kerak). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Worschech, U.F., Rosenthal, U. and Zayadine, F. 1986. The Fourth Survey Season in the Northwest Ard el-Kerak, and Soundings at Balu' 1986. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 30: 285- 309. Wright, G.H.R. 1966. The Bronze Age Temple at Amman. Zeitschrift fur die altestimentliche Wissenshaft 78: 350-57. Yadin, Y. 1979. The Transition from a Semi-nomadic to a Sedentary Society in the Twelfth Century B.C.E. In Symposia Celebrating the Seventy-fifth Anniversary of the Founding of the American Schools of Oriental Research (ed. F.M. Cross). Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research, pp. 57-68. Yassine, K. 1988. The Archaeology of Jordan: Essays and Reports. Amman, Jordan: Dept of Archaeology, University of Jordan. Younker, R.W. 1985. Israel, Judah, and Ammon and the Motifs on the Baalis Seal from Tell el-'Umeiri. Biblical Archaeologist. 48/3: 173— 80. Younker, R.W. 1990a. Present and Past Plant Communities of the Tell el- 'Umeiri Region. In Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-'Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies (eds L.T. Geraty, L.G. Herr, 0.S. LaBianca and R.W. Younker). Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University, pp. 32-40. Younker, R.W. 1990b. Towers in the Region Surrounding Tell Umeiri. In Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-'Umeiri and vicinity and Subsequent Studies (eds L.T. Geraty, L.G. Herr, 0.S. LaBianca and R.W. Younker). Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University, pp. 195-8. Younker, R.W. 1993. The Ammonites. In Peoples of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books. Younker, R.W. 1994. Ammonites. In Peoples of the Old Testament World (eds A.J. Hoerth, G.L. Mattingly and E.M. Yamauchi). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, pp. 293-316. Younker, R.W., Geraty, L.T., Herr, L.G. and LaBianca, 0.S. 1990. A Preliminary Report of the 1989 Season of the Madaba Plains Project: The Regional Survey and Excavations at Al Dreijat, Tell Jawa, and Tell el-'Umeiri. Andrews University Seminary Studies. 28/1: 5-52. Younker, R.W., Geraty, L.T., Herr, L.G. and LaBianca, 0.S. 1993. The Joint Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1992 Season, including the Regional Survey and Excavations at Tell Jalul and Tell el'Umeiri (June 16-July 31, 1992). Andrews University Seminary Studies. 31/3: 205-38. Ziadeh, N.A. 1953. Urban Life in Syria under the Early Mamluks. Beirut: American University of Beirut. Oriental Series. Chapter 24 Ackerman, S. 1993. The Queen Mother and the Cult in Ancient Israel. Journal of Biblical Literature 11273: 384-401. Aharoni, Y. and Amiran, R. 1958. A New Scheme for the Sub-Division of the Iron Age in Palestine. Israel Exploration Journal. 8: 171-84. Ahlstrom, G.W. 1993. The History of Palestine from the Paleolithic Period to Alexander's Conquest. Sheffield: Journal of the Study of the Old Testament (JSOT) Press. Avigad, N. 1953. The Epigraph of a Royal Steward from Siloam Village. Israel Exploration Journal. 3: 137-52. Avigad, N. 1986. Hebrew Bullae from the Time of Jeremiah. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Barkay, G. 1992. The Iron Age H—HI. In The Archaeology of Ancient Israel (ed. A. Ben-Tor). New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 302- 73. Barnett, R.D. 1982. Ancient Ivories in the Middle East. Qedem 14. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Bartlert, J.R. 1989. Edom and the Edomites. Sheffield: Journal of the Study of the Old Testament (JSOT) Press. Ben-Tor, A. (ed.) 1992. The Archaeology of Ancient Israel. New Haven: Yale University Press. Bienkowski, P. (ed.) 1992. Fiarly Edom and Moab. The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan. Sheffield: Sheffield University Press. Biran, A. and Naveh, J. 1993. An Aramaic Stele Fragment from Tel Dan. Israel Exploration Journal. 43: 81-98. Bloch-Smith, E. 1992. Judahite Burial Practices and Beliefs about the Dead. Sheffield: Journal of the Study of the Old Testament (JSOT) Press. Coote, R.B. and Whitelam, J.W. 1987. The Emergence of Early Israel in Historical Perspective. Sheffield: Almond Press. Crowfoot, J.W. and Crowfoot, J.M. 1938. Early Ivories from Samaria. London: Palestine Exploration Fund. Da vies, P.R. 1992. In Search of 'Ancient Israel'. Sheffield: Journal of the Study of the Old Testament (JSOT) Press. Dever, W.G. 1969/1970. Iron Age Epigraphic Material from the Area of Khirbet el-Kom. Hebrew Union College Annual. 40-41: 139-204. Dever, W.G. 1985. Syro-Palestinian and Biblical Archaeology. In The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters (eds D.A. Knight and G.M. Tucker). Chico, CA: Scholars Press, pp. 31-74. Dever, W.G. 1987. The Middle Bronze Age: Zenith of the Urban Canaanite Era. Biblical Archaeologist. 50: 148-77. Dever, W.G. 1988. Impact of the 'New Archaeology'. In Benchmarks in Time and Culture. An Introduction to Palestinian Archaeology (eds J.F. Drinkard, G.L. Mattingly and J.M. Miller). Atlanta: Scholars Press, pp. 337-52. Dever, W.G. 1991a. Archaeology, Material Culture and the Early Monarchical Period in Israel. In The Fabric of History, Text, Artifact and Israel's Past (ed. D.V. Edelman). Sheffield: Journal of the Study of the Old Testament (JSOT) Press, pp. 103-15. Dever, W.G. 1991b. Archaeological Data on the Israelite Settlement: A Review of Two Recent Works. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 284: 77-90. Dever, W.G. 1993. Cultural Continuity, Ethnicity in the Archaeological Record, and the Question of Israelite Origins. Eretz-Israel. 24 (the Avraham Malamat volume): 22-33. Dever, W.G. 1994a. From Tribe to Nation: State Formation Processes in Ancient Israel. Nuove fondazioni nel Vicino Oriente antico: realita ed ideologia (ed. S. Mazzoni). Pisa: University of Pisa. Dever, W.G. 1994b. Archaeology and the Current Crisis in Israelite Historiography. Eretz-Israel. 25 (the Yosef Aviram volume) Dever, W.G. 1994c. Settlement Patterns and Chronology in Middle Bronze Age Palestine. Middle Bronze Age and Hyksos Culture: Cultural Interconnections in the Ancient Near East (ed. E. Oren). Dever, W.G. 1994d. Review of E. Bloch-Smith, Judahite Burial Practices and Beliefs about the Dead (Sheffield: Journal of the Study of the Old Testament (JSOT) Press. 1992). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Dornemann, R.H. 1983. The Archaeology of the Transjordan m the Bronze and Iron Ages. Milwaukee: Milwaukee Public Museum. EAEHL Avi-Yonah, M. and Stern, E. (eds). Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Vols. I-IV. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society/Massada Press, 1975-79. Falconer, S.E. 1987. Heartland of Villages: Reconsidering Early Urbanism in the Southern Levant. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Near Eastern Studies, University of Arizona. Finkelstein, L 1988. The Archaeology of the Israelite Settlement. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Flanagan, J.W. 1988. David's Social Drama. A Hologram of Israel's Early Iron Age. Sheffield: Almond Press. Frick, F.S. 1985. The Formation of the State in Ancient Israel. Sheffield: Almond Press. Fritz, V. 1990. Die Stadt in Alten Israel. Munich: Beck. Gottwald, N.K. 1979. The Tribes ofYahweh: A Sociology of the Religion of Liberated Israel 1250-1050 B.C.E. Maryknoll: Orbis. Gottwald, N.K. 1985. The Hebrew Bible. A Socio-literary Introduction. Philadelphia: Fortress. Herzog, Z. 1992. Administrative Structures in the Iron Age; Settlement and Fortification Planning. In The Architecture of Ancient Israel from the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods (eds A. Kempinski and R. Reich). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, pp. 223-30; 231-74. Hestrin, R. and Dayagi, M. 1979. Ancient Seals: First Temple Period. From the Collection of the Israel Museum. Jerusalem: The Israel Museum.