Archaeology at Nazareth

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:59 am

Not to mention that Elam which was apparently an Akkadian word (again!) may have been known by that name in 2500 bc but the name remained in usage until Cyrus the Great incorporated the area into Persia around 540 BC. The Hittites, as well, remained a recognizable ethnic group in the ME until the Assyrians did them in, again, well within the historical period when bible tales were assembled.

As for the Canaanites? The Israelites were Canaanites. There is no mystery here and even less proof of any great wisdom in the book of fables.

oldarchystudent · Post by **oldarchystudent** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 4:28 pm

On Stan's advice I went to the website for the dig and sent an email to one of the archaeologists working at the site to ask about the dating techniques. With his permission, here's what he sent in reply"

Hi Jim,

Four 14C dates on charcoal range between 9270±120 and 8650±50 BP uncalibrated; there is also one other clearly aberrant date on bone collagen.

As far as occupation was concerned, it does change through the sequence slightly, but it all has a clear PPNB association (Early through Middle/Late PPNB). It seems to be a cemetery where surrounding agricultural settlements in the Nazareth Hills came to bury their dead and perform associated rituals. There are at least six distinct architectural levels within the 1.0 to 1.5 m thick occupation horizon.

If you would like more information, I would suggest finding Nigel Goring-Morris's new article:

2006, "Life, death and the emergence of differential status in the Near Eastern Neolithic: evidence from Kfar HaHoresh, Lower Galilee, Israel" in Archaeological Perspectives on the Transmission and Transformation of Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean, Oxbow Books.

Best,

John

John K. Williams, Ph.D.
Environmental Scientist I/Cultural Resource Specialist

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:01 pm

Good work, OAS. Solves the problem of dating.

stan · Post by **stan** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:06 pm

I'm glad that worked for you, OAS.

I was not expecting him to say it was only a burial site and not a city.

These recent discoveries just keep pushing everything back.....
it's pretty exciting, but I feel very remote from the people of that place and time.

oldarchystudent · Post by **oldarchystudent** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:15 am

More from Dr. Williams in response to my question about defleshing the skulls before encasing them in clay. this site gets more interesting all the time....

Jim,

The corpses seem to have been delivered to the site in bundles (often in parts; major bones wrapped up), and buried as such under stone and plaster features. So it appears the bodies were initially buried in surrounding agricultural sites (Yiftahel is the closest known site), and were brought to KHH subsequently, presumably after being buried under domestic floors and naturally decaying. Interestingly, however, the Physical Anthropologist working at the site thinks she has found one case of defleshing.

John

I can't believe how generous Dr. Williams is with information on the site. I sent an email to another gentlemen once asking about his site and got nothing back at all. This is great!

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:42 am

Maybe he's just one of those types of people who are delighted whenever someone shows interest in their activities?

oldarchystudent · Post by **oldarchystudent** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:05 pm

Minimalist wrote:Maybe he's just one of those types of people who are delighted whenever someone shows interest in their activities?

Some researchers really support "public" archaeology - involving us amateurs in the process through making the information available and answering questions. It's great when you get to talk to somebody like that.

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:01 pm

Not exactly on point but also about "Nazareth."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,36 ... 30,00.html

This is the kind of attention grabbing headline that drives one up a wall!

Is this where Jesus bathed?

The story talks about the finding of a Roman bath house and immediately jumps to the conclusion that Jesus "bathed' there, which no self-respecting Jew would do in the first place.

Moreover, as Galilee was part of the independent kingdom of Herod Antipas and later Herod Agrippa until 44 AD, the notion of any sort of Roman "garrison" is absurd. If there's any truth to the story, Jesus was dead for 10-14 years prior to the revolts which led to Roman annexation of Galilee.

oldarchystudent · Post by **oldarchystudent** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:11 pm

I remember reading about an excvation where some fishing related artifacts were found, so of course this had to be the house where Jesus recruited the fishermen to be disciples. The dig was sponsored and staffed by a Jesuit college if I remember correctly. People actually believe this sort of thing....

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:14 pm

Hey min, do you think Mohammed actually existed?

oldarchystudent · Post by **oldarchystudent** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:17 pm

Hey GV - do you think you will ever get tired of asking stupid questions, or do you think we're all tired of them already?

Jeeez. Switch to decaf.....

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:28 pm

Oas, it's a legitimate question since there is more proof for the physical life of Jesus Christ then there is for the lives of Mohammed, Plato, Aristotle, Buddha, Menes, you name it, so oas, do you think Mohammed really existed, and how 'bout the others?

oldarchystudent · Post by **oldarchystudent** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:29 pm

Same crap - different shovel. Take a break pal.....

Oh - and thanks for trying to highjack yet another thread......

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:41 pm

Genesis Veracity wrote:Hey min, do you think Mohammed actually existed?

Never gave it any thought.

Like jesus...his followers do the most harm.

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:42 pm

Genesis Veracity wrote:Oas, it's a legitimate question since there is more proof for the physical life of Jesus Christ then there is for the lives of Mohammed, Plato, Aristotle, Buddha, Menes, you name it, so oas, do you think Mohammed really existed, and how 'bout the others?

There is no proof for this particular jesus...although the name was in wide usage....outside of the so-called gospels which are, at best, self-serving documents.