| Revision as of 03:06, 25 January 2017 editKorvex (talk | contribs)396 edits →Possible locations: See Talk Page, all noted material has been published in scholarly articles under the excavation director of Khirbet el-Maqatir, Bryant G. Wood, PhD in Syro-Palestinian Archaeology← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 10:22, 24 December 2024 edit undoSpinoziano (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,268 edits →External links: fix link (dead link) | ||
| (161 intermediate revisions by 68 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{short description|Canaanite city}} | |||
| ], "Joshua Burns the Town of Ai" (1866); '']''.]] | ], "Joshua Burns the Town of Ai" (1866); '']''.]] | ||
| '''Ai''' ({{ |
The '''Ai''' ({{langx|he|הָעַי|translit=hāʿAy|lit=the heap (of ruins)}}; ]: Hai) was a city in ], mentioned in the ]. According to the ], it was conquered by the ], headed by ], during their conquest of Canaan.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Lemche |first=Niels Peter |title=Historical dictionary of ancient Israel |date=2004 |publisher=Scarecrow Press |isbn=978-0-8108-4848-1 |series=Historical dictionaries of ancient civilizations and historical eras |location=Lanham, Md. |pages=50}}</ref> | ||
| The Ai's ruins are commonly thought to be in the modern-day archeological site of ]. ] revealed a large urban settlement dating back to around ], with cycles of destruction and rebuilding until roughly ]. It remained uninhabited until a small village emerged in the ]. In light of these findings, scholars interpret the biblical account of Ai's conquest as an ] explaining the origin of the place name.<ref name=":0" /> | |||
| ==Biblical narrative== | ==Biblical narrative== | ||
| The Ai mentioned by the ] is also mentioned by the ] as having been a religious sanctuary, which it claims was founded by ]; Abraham's ''tent'', i.e. the area he settled, is stated by the Bible to have been between ] and Ai. | |||
| According to ], ] built an altar between ] and Ai.<ref>Genesis 12:8, 13:3.</ref> | |||
| ⚫ | In the ] |
||
| ⚫ | In the ], chapters 7 and 8, the ] attempt to conquer Ai on two occasions. The first, in ], fails. The biblical account portrays the failure as being due to a prior sin of ], for which he is stoned to death by the Israelites. On the second attempt, in Joshua 8, ], who is identified by the narrative as the leader of the Israelites, receives instruction from God. God tells them to set up an ambush and Joshua does what God says. An ambush is arranged at the rear of the city on the western side. Joshua is with a group of soldiers that approach the city from the front so the men of Ai, thinking they will have another easy victory, chase Joshua and the fighting men from the entrance of the city to lead the men of Ai away from the city. Then the fighting men to the rear enter the city and set it on fire. When the city is captured, 12,000 men and women are killed, and it is razed to the ground. The king is captured and hanged on a tree until the evening. His body is then placed at the city gates and stones are placed on top of his body. The Israelites then burn Ai completely and "made it a permanent heap of ruins."<ref>Joshua 8:28 NIV</ref> God told them they could take the livestock as plunder and they did so. | ||
| ⚫ | ==Possible locations== | ||
| ] suggested in 1838 that ] could be the location of the biblical city of Ai, as did ] in 1866, on the evidence of biblical references and nearby ]. This identification was backed by the American scholar ], who further argued in a 1924 paper that the site of et-Tell held the ruins of a great ]ite city. A further point in its favour is the fact that the Hebrew name ''Ai'' means more or less the same as the modern Arabic name ''et-Tell''. Albright's identification has been accepted by the majority of the archaeological community, and today et-Tell is widely believed to be one and the same as the biblical Ai. | |||
| In a study from 2017, Shai Elam compared the ] to the Battle of Ai (which preceded it by about 1,000 years) according to the ]'s interpretation of the book of Joshua, which proves that in the Battle of Ai Joshua also surrounded the enemy's army with a perfect ring (which explains the role of the two ambushers and their position during the battle), in a performance that does not fall short of ]'s tactics.<ref>Shai Elam, going to battle with the interpretation of the Malbiim,''']''', in '''Mishpacha''' magazine, issue 150</ref> | |||
| If et-Tell is indeed Ai, this poses a problem for defenders of the literal historicity of the biblical accounts concerning the origin of ancient ]; the reason for this is that the early dating schemes place the ] from Egypt in 1440 BC and Joshua's conquest of Canaan around 1400 BC, a time at which the ] shows et-Tell to have been completely unoccupied, as it had been for almost 1000 years. The later ] I village appeared with no evidence of initial conquest, and the Iron I settlers seem to have peacefully built their village on the forsaken mound, without meeting resistance.<ref>Mazar, Amichai, ''The Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000-586 B.C.E.'', New York: Doubleday, 1990, pp. 331–332</ref> | |||
| ⚫ | ==Possible locations== | ||
| It has been suggested that this battle may never have taken place, and that its narrative might have "preserved some remote echoes of wars conducted in these places in early Iron Age I." <ref>{{cite book|last=Naʼaman|first=Nadav|title=Canaan in the 2nd millennium B.C.E.|year=2005|publisher=Eisenbrauns|isbn=978-1575061139|page=378}}</ref> Some archeologists and biblical scholars have suggested that the biblical account of the conquest of Ai derives from an etiological myth <ref>{{cite book|last=Gomes|first=Jules|title=The sanctuary of Bethel and the configuration of Israelite identity|year=2006|publisher=Walter de Gruyter & Co|isbn=978-3110189933|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nj09AWrgpnkC&pg=PA102 |page=103}}</ref> – a type of tale which "explains the origin of a custom, state of affairs, or natural feature in the human or divine world."<ref>"myth." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica, 2011. Web. 18 Feb. 2011. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/400920/myth>.</ref> Ancient folk lore contained tales of impressive ruins as well as vague details of their destruction. The destruction of Ai could have been one of these tales which was retold to fit with the Israelite invasion and conquest. Since the ruin was a ruin since c. 2400 BC, a time when Canaan was under ] control, and it remained uninhabited until about 1000 B.C. when the Israelites are thought to have settled there, this means that Ai would have been in ruins for over a thousand years before the biblical account of its destruction. | |||
| ] | |||
| ===Et-Tell=== | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ] (1794–1863), who identified many biblical sites in the Levant on the basis of local place names and basic topography, suggested that '']'' or ''Khirbet Haijah'' were likely on philological grounds; he preferred the former as there were visible ruins at that site.<ref name=Sands/> A further point in its favour is the fact that the Hebrew name ''Ai'' means more or less the same as the modern Arabic name ''et-Tell''. | |||
| Up through the 1920s a "positivist" reading of the archeology to date was prevalent—a belief that archeology would prove, and was proving, the historicity of the ] and Conquest narratives that dated the Exodus in 1440 BC and Joshua's conquest of Canaan around 1400 BC.<ref name=Sands/>{{rp|117}} And accordingly, on the basis of excavations in the 1920s the American scholar ] believed that Et-Tell was Ai.<ref name=Sands>{{cite book|last1= Davis |first1=Thomas W.|title= Shifting Sands: The Rise and Fall of Biblical Archaeology |date= 2004|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=New York|isbn= 978-0-19516710-8}}</ref>{{rp |86}} | |||
| Fourth, ] has proposed that the city somehow angered the Egyptians (perhaps by rebelling, and attempting to gain independence), and so they destroyed it as punishment.<ref>Callaway, Joseph. "Ai." In David Noel Freedman (ed.), ''The Anchor Bible Dictionary'', vol.1, p. 125-130. Doubleday, 1992.</ref> | |||
| However, excavations at Et-Tell in the 1930s, undertaken by ], found that there was a fortified city there during the Early Bronze Age, between 3100 and 2400 BC, after which it was destroyed and abandoned.<ref>{{cite web|last1= Hess|first1=Orna|title=Judith Marquet-Krause|url= https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/marquet-krause-judith |publisher=Jewish Women's Archive |access-date=25 January 2017}}</ref> The excavations found no evidence of settlement in the Middle or Late Bronze Ages.<ref name=Sands/>{{rp|117}} These findings, along with excavations at ], posed problems for the dating that Albright and others had proposed, and some scholars including ] began proposing that the Conquest had never happened but instead was an ]; the name meant "the ruin" and the Conquest story simply explained the already-ancient destruction of the Early Bronze city.<ref name=Sands />{{rp |117}}<ref>{{cite book |last= Gomes |first=Jules|title=The Sanctuary of Bethel and the Configuration of Israelite Identity |year=2006|publisher= Walter de Gruyter & Co|isbn= 978-311018993-3|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=nj09AWrgpnkC&pg=PA102 |page= 103}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last= Naʼaman|first= Nadav |title= Canaan in the 2nd Millennium B.C.E.|year=2005 |publisher=Eisenbrauns|isbn= 978-1-57506113-9|page= 378}}</ref> Archeologists also found that the later ] I village appeared with no evidence of initial conquest, and the Iron I settlers seem to have peacefully built their village on the forsaken mound, without meeting resistance.<ref>{{cite book |last1= Mazar |first1= Amihai |title=Anchor Bible Reference Library: Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000–586 B.C.E.|date=1990|publisher= Lutterworth |location=Cambridge, England|isbn=978-0-71882890-5|edition= 1st}}</ref>{{rp |331–32}} | |||
| Fifth, although most archaeologists support the identification of Ai with et-Tell, there are some opponents, prominently including ], who disagree. The alternative proposal is that the Bible's chronology of events is accurate, and the biblical Ai is at .<ref>Richard S. Hess, Gerald A. Klingbeil, and Paul J. Ray Jr. ''Critical Issues in Early Israelite History''. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2008. p. 230 </ref> Khirbet el-Maqatir has yielded abundant pottery from the 15th century BC as well as having found evidence of destruction by fire in the time of the conquest.<ref>Ibid., pp-231-236</ref> Wood therefore concludes that "A careful analysis of biblical and extrabiblical evidence places... Joshua’s Ai at Khirbet el-Maqatir. These are the only three locations that satisfy the complex matrix of interlocking biblical requirements for the sites. Significantly, prior to the influence of modern scholarship, local tradition placed Ai at Khirbet el-Maqatir, a fact overlooked by previous investigators. Khirbet Nisya may be another location for Ai."<ref>Ibid., p. 239</ref> Khirbet Nisya may also be another possible location for Ai. | |||
| ⚫ | Five main hypotheses exist about how to explain the biblical story surrounding Ai in light of archaeological evidence. The first is that the story was created later on: Israelites related it to Joshua because of the fame of his great conquest. The second is that people of Bethel inhabited Ai during the time of the biblical story and they were the ones who were invaded. In a third, Albright combined these two theories to present a hypothesis that the story of the Conquest of Bethel, which was only a mile and a half away from Ai, was later transferred to Ai in order to explain the city and why it was in ruins. Support for this position can be found in the Bible, the assumption being that the Bible does not mention the actual capture of Bethel, but might speak of it in memory in Judges 1:22–26.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Wright|first1=George Ernest|date=1957|publisher=Westminster Press|location=Philadelphia|asin=B0007DNVKG|oclc=301439730|title=Biblical Archeology}}</ref>{{rp|80–82}} Fourth, ] has proposed that the city somehow angered the Egyptians (perhaps by rebelling, and attempting to gain independence), and so they destroyed it as punishment.<ref>Callaway, Joseph. "Ai." In David Noel Freedman (ed.), ''The Anchor Bible Dictionary'', vol. 1, pp. 125–30. Doubleday, 1992.</ref> The fifth is that Joshua's Ai is not to be found at et-Tell, but a different location entirely. | ||
| ==Archaeology== | |||
| Judith Marquet-Krause, born in ] in the ] was appointed head of a team that excavated et-Tel, approximately two kilometers southwest of ] in the Judea and Samaria region. The excavations ran for three seasons, between 1933 and 1935. Marquet-Krause prepared two preliminary reports while her husband, also an archaeologist, reported on ceramic findings, floor plans and photographs. Evidence indicated that Ai was a fortified city of major significance during the Early Bronze Age, between 3100 and 2400 BCE, when it was destroyed and abandoned. Findings included a temple, clay and Egyptian alabaster vessels, and graves containing important artifacts. Above the ruins of the city, the team found remnants of an unfortified village from the early Israelite period. Although the village had been abandoned, there was no evidence of destruction, fire or conquest.<ref></ref> | |||
| ] writes that "Et-Tell, identified by most scholars with the city of Ai, was not settled between the Early Bronze and Iron Age I.<ref>Van Bekkum, Koert. ''From Conquest to Coexistence: Ideology and Antiquarian Intent in the Historiography of Israel’s Settlement in Canaan.'' Vol. 45. Brill, 2011, pp. 41–42</ref> | |||
| ==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | |||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] for similar tactics | *] for similar tactics | ||
| Line 35: | Line 38: | ||
| ==External links== | ==External links== | ||
| *{{Commons category-inline}} | |||
| * | * | ||
| * by Bryant Wood | |||
| {{coord|31|55|01|N|35|15|40|E|region:PS_type:landmark_source:kolossus-dewiki|display=title}} | {{coord|31|55|01|N|35|15|40|E|region:PS_type:landmark_source:kolossus-dewiki|display=title}} | ||
| {{The Bible and warfare}} | |||
| {{Authority control}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | ] | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| Line 45: | Line 52: | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 10:22, 24 December 2024
Canaanite city
The Ai (Hebrew: הָעַי, romanized: hāʿAy, lit. 'the heap (of ruins)'; Douay–Rheims: Hai) was a city in Canaan, mentioned in the Hebrew Bible. According to the Book of Joshua, it was conquered by the Israelites, headed by Joshua, during their conquest of Canaan.
The Ai's ruins are commonly thought to be in the modern-day archeological site of Et-Tell. Excavations revealed a large urban settlement dating back to around 3100 BC, with cycles of destruction and rebuilding until roughly 2400 BC. It remained uninhabited until a small village emerged in the Early Iron Age. In light of these findings, scholars interpret the biblical account of Ai's conquest as an etiological story explaining the origin of the place name.
Biblical narrative
According to Genesis, Abraham built an altar between Bethel and Ai.
In the Book of Joshua, chapters 7 and 8, the Israelites attempt to conquer Ai on two occasions. The first, in Joshua 7, fails. The biblical account portrays the failure as being due to a prior sin of Achan, for which he is stoned to death by the Israelites. On the second attempt, in Joshua 8, Joshua, who is identified by the narrative as the leader of the Israelites, receives instruction from God. God tells them to set up an ambush and Joshua does what God says. An ambush is arranged at the rear of the city on the western side. Joshua is with a group of soldiers that approach the city from the front so the men of Ai, thinking they will have another easy victory, chase Joshua and the fighting men from the entrance of the city to lead the men of Ai away from the city. Then the fighting men to the rear enter the city and set it on fire. When the city is captured, 12,000 men and women are killed, and it is razed to the ground. The king is captured and hanged on a tree until the evening. His body is then placed at the city gates and stones are placed on top of his body. The Israelites then burn Ai completely and "made it a permanent heap of ruins." God told them they could take the livestock as plunder and they did so.
In a study from 2017, Shai Elam compared the Battle of Cannae to the Battle of Ai (which preceded it by about 1,000 years) according to the Malbim's interpretation of the book of Joshua, which proves that in the Battle of Ai Joshua also surrounded the enemy's army with a perfect ring (which explains the role of the two ambushers and their position during the battle), in a performance that does not fall short of Hannibal's tactics.
Possible locations
_ruins.jpg)
Et-Tell
Edward Robinson (1794–1863), who identified many biblical sites in the Levant on the basis of local place names and basic topography, suggested that Et-Tell or Khirbet Haijah were likely on philological grounds; he preferred the former as there were visible ruins at that site. A further point in its favour is the fact that the Hebrew name Ai means more or less the same as the modern Arabic name et-Tell.
Up through the 1920s a "positivist" reading of the archeology to date was prevalent—a belief that archeology would prove, and was proving, the historicity of the Exodus and Conquest narratives that dated the Exodus in 1440 BC and Joshua's conquest of Canaan around 1400 BC. And accordingly, on the basis of excavations in the 1920s the American scholar William Foxwell Albright believed that Et-Tell was Ai.
However, excavations at Et-Tell in the 1930s, undertaken by Judith Marquet-Krause, found that there was a fortified city there during the Early Bronze Age, between 3100 and 2400 BC, after which it was destroyed and abandoned. The excavations found no evidence of settlement in the Middle or Late Bronze Ages. These findings, along with excavations at Bethel, posed problems for the dating that Albright and others had proposed, and some scholars including Martin Noth began proposing that the Conquest had never happened but instead was an etiological myth; the name meant "the ruin" and the Conquest story simply explained the already-ancient destruction of the Early Bronze city. Archeologists also found that the later Iron Age I village appeared with no evidence of initial conquest, and the Iron I settlers seem to have peacefully built their village on the forsaken mound, without meeting resistance.
Five main hypotheses exist about how to explain the biblical story surrounding Ai in light of archaeological evidence. The first is that the story was created later on: Israelites related it to Joshua because of the fame of his great conquest. The second is that people of Bethel inhabited Ai during the time of the biblical story and they were the ones who were invaded. In a third, Albright combined these two theories to present a hypothesis that the story of the Conquest of Bethel, which was only a mile and a half away from Ai, was later transferred to Ai in order to explain the city and why it was in ruins. Support for this position can be found in the Bible, the assumption being that the Bible does not mention the actual capture of Bethel, but might speak of it in memory in Judges 1:22–26. Fourth, Callaway has proposed that the city somehow angered the Egyptians (perhaps by rebelling, and attempting to gain independence), and so they destroyed it as punishment. The fifth is that Joshua's Ai is not to be found at et-Tell, but a different location entirely.
Koert van Bekkum writes that "Et-Tell, identified by most scholars with the city of Ai, was not settled between the Early Bronze and Iron Age I.
See also
- Battle of Jericho
- Tel Hazor
- Battle of Gibeah for similar tactics
- Archaeology of Israel
References
- ^ Lemche, Niels Peter (2004). Historical dictionary of ancient Israel. Historical dictionaries of ancient civilizations and historical eras. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-8108-4848-1.
- Genesis 12:8, 13:3.
- Joshua 8:28 NIV
- Shai Elam, going to battle with the interpretation of the Malbiim,kolmus, in Mishpacha magazine, issue 150
- ^ Davis, Thomas W. (2004). Shifting Sands: The Rise and Fall of Biblical Archaeology. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19516710-8.
- Hess, Orna. "Judith Marquet-Krause". Jewish Women's Archive. Retrieved 25 January 2017.
- Gomes, Jules (2006). The Sanctuary of Bethel and the Configuration of Israelite Identity. Walter de Gruyter & Co. p. 103. ISBN 978-311018993-3.
- Naʼaman, Nadav (2005). Canaan in the 2nd Millennium B.C.E. Eisenbrauns. p. 378. ISBN 978-1-57506113-9.
- Mazar, Amihai (1990). Anchor Bible Reference Library: Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000–586 B.C.E. (1st ed.). Cambridge, England: Lutterworth. ISBN 978-0-71882890-5.
- Wright, George Ernest (1957). Biblical Archeology. Philadelphia: Westminster Press. ASIN B0007DNVKG. OCLC 301439730.
- Callaway, Joseph. "Ai." In David Noel Freedman (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 1, pp. 125–30. Doubleday, 1992.
- Van Bekkum, Koert. From Conquest to Coexistence: Ideology and Antiquarian Intent in the Historiography of Israel’s Settlement in Canaan. Vol. 45. Brill, 2011, pp. 41–42
External links
Media related to Battle of Ai at Wikimedia Commons- Easton's Bible Dictionary
31°55′01″N 35°15′40″E / 31.91694°N 35.26111°E / 31.91694; 35.26111
| The Bible and warfare | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hebrew Bible battles |
|  | ||||||||||
| Bible Portal | ||||||||||||