The date of destruction of Gezer Stratum VI.
Abstract
The Hebrew Union College (HUC) excavators of Gezer attributed the destruction of Stratum VI to the 734 BCE campaign of Tiglath-pileser III. They based this on the relief found at Nimrud depicting the event. Various scholars who for numerous reasons wished to lower the date of destruction to the end of the 8th century have subsequently challenged this attribution. This paper, concentrating on evidence revealed in the new Tandy excavations (especially oval storage jars, Phoenician torpedo amphoras and holemouth jars), substantiates the date proposed by the HUC excavators. Its ceramic assemblage, therefore, should be used as a chronological peg for furthering the discussion of the subdivision of ceramic typology within the Iron IIB.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A siege of Gezer by Tiglath-pileser III, dated by textual evidence to 734 BC, is depicted in a palace relief at Nimrud.
“a siege of Gezer (Ga-az-ru) by Tiglath-pileser III, dated by textual evidence to 734 BC, is depicted in a palace relief at Nimrud [34–36].”
From The chronology of Gezer from the end of the late bronze age to iron age II: A meeting point for radiocarbon, archaeology egyptology and the Bible (2023) · cites this paper as [35]
The domestic buildings of Stratum 6 show clear evidence of destruction by fire, and the end of the stratum has been associated with the campaign of Tiglath Pileser III.
“The domestic buildings show clear evidence of destruction by fire, and the end of the stratum has been associated with the historically well-known campaign of the Assyrian monarch Tiglath Pileser III [35, 60].”
From The chronology of Gezer from the end of the late bronze age to iron age II: A meeting point for radiocarbon, archaeology egyptology and the Bible (2023) · cites this paper as [35]
For the date of Stratum 6, the paper must rely for now on the evidence of the pottery and finds [35].
“For the date of Stratum 6 we must rely for now on the evidence of the pottery and finds [35].”
From The chronology of Gezer from the end of the late bronze age to iron age II: A meeting point for radiocarbon, archaeology egyptology and the Bible (2023) · cites this paper as [35]
Cites
Becking, B. (1992) · doi:10.1163/9789004668836 · Cited by 65 · cited 1× · see citing works
“1; Tadmor and Yamada 2011: 146; see Becking 1981–1982: 78–79; Becking 1992: 9–11; Dubovský 2006: 161; Cogan 2015: 98).”
MacGinnis, J. (2013) · Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland · doi:10.1017/s1356186312000454 · cited 1×
“1; Tadmor and Yamada 2011: 146; see Becking 1981–1982: 78–79; Becking 1992: 9–11; Dubovský 2006: 161; Cogan 2015: 98).”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Webster, L. C., Wolff, S. R., Ortiz, S. M., Barbosa, M., Coyle, C., Arbino, G. P., Dee, M. W., Hua, Q., & Jacobsen, G. E. (2023) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0293119 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Wolff, S. R.
- Affiliations
- W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research (IL)
- Corresponding author
- Wolff, Samuel R.
- Venue
- Tel Aviv
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-01-02
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 73-86
- ISSN
- 0334-4355 (ISSN-L)
- 2040-4786
- OpenAlex
- W3165434015
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 12.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Tel Aviv (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient Near East History
- Keywords
- Gezer, Tiglath-pileser III, ceramic chronology, ceramic typology, 8th century BC
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
