Talk:Tel Arad
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tel Arad Theories
The Arad Theory
Tel Arad is presently named so from two pieces of pottery found in the 7th century citadel in the time of the Kings of Judah that have implied to some that it must have been the biblically mentioned Canaanite city Arad (Numbers 21). However there are other scholars that debate that those pieces are mistranlated. First, because at the time of the Exodus in approximately 1446 BCE Tel Arad was already deserted for 1,210 years at a time Arad would have been inhabited. Second, over 400 years before the citadel at Tel Arad, according to the Tanakh, Arad was a major urban center in Canaanite times, and was destroyed and renamed Hormah by the Israelites during their sojourn in the southern part of the desert.
As mentioned in the Book of Numbers 21:2-3:
Then Israel made this vow to the LORD: "If you will deliver these people into our hands, we will totally destroy their cities." The LORD listened to Israel's plea and gave the Canaanites over to them. They completely destroyed them and their towns; so the place was named Hormah.
That Arad was said to be not far from Mount Hor and the Red Sea. Therefore, it could not be named Arad over 600 years later. Third, because even the other Arad that was also mentioned in the Book of Judges and the Book of Joshua (that was in a different location) does not apply to this site because 'Tel Arad' still was re-established over 200 years after both those biblically mentions of Arad.
- There are a number of serious problems with the above analysis. My suspicion is that the original poster is raising this offense against the identification of Tel Arad (more accurately, Tell 'Urad) with Biblical Arad because he or she knows, as do scholars, that excavations at Tel Arad have demonstrably undermined the historicity of the Biblical story of the Israelite conquests of various Canaanite cities. As discussed in the article, Tel Arad shows no evidence of habitation between roughly 2,600 BCE and 1,000 BCE, whereas the Biblical story of the conquest necessitates that Biblical Arad was an established Canaanite city in either ~1,400 BCE (i.e., the traditional "high date" of the supposed conquests) or ~1,200 BCE (i.e., the "low date" of the conquests). The simple and most widely accepted scholarly solution to this apparent disconnect, of course, is that the stories of the Exodus and Conquest are just that -- stories -- that were constructed, at the earliest, in the 8th-7th centuries BCE, at a time when the Biblical writers knew of the existence of a contemporary Arad and simply extrapolated its existence backward in time for the sake of constructing a literary, not historical, narrative (and given their lack of knowledge about Arad's uninhabited state during the Late Bronze or Early Iron I Age, they can hardly be blamed for the mistake). That the Exodus and Conquest narratives in the Bible are full of 8th-7th century anachronisms is pretty demonstrable evidence of this (and I would point the original poster to any of the several scholarly works by William Dever (and others) dealing specifically with the historicity of the Exodus/Conquest narratives for further information). By simply assuming, a priori, that the Biblical stories must necessarily be true, the original poster is subsequently assuming that all scientific data to the contrary must necessarily be wrong. However, this is fallacious thinking, and should not be taken into account when considering a revision to the article. The excavations at Tel Arad have provided the only data we have on the issue, and as such, it's the excavations that should guide our thinking, not Biblical literalism. Furthermore, arguing for a different location of Biblical Arad on the basis of its supposed proximity to "Mount Hor" and the "Red Sea" (according to the Biblical story) is doubly problematic, since: 1) Mount Hor has never been confidently identified, and; 2) the "Red Sea", as referred to in English translations of the Torah, is not actually referencing the body of water referred to in modern times as the "Red Sea", but rather to the Yam Suph, or "Sea of Reeds", the location and existence of which has also never been confirmed by scientists.--Kglogauer (talk) 08:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
The Citadel of David
The House of Yahweh upon the hill of Tel Arad has sparked a number of questions with many trying to understand why the site has a sanctuary, holy of holies that were built in time of the two greatest kings of Judah. Why does it have records of well known priestly families, and countless amounts of offerings and pottery from the time of its establishment in King David's time to the Roman and Islamic Empires. One conclusion many are being to come to is that this is the tabernacle of David, the hill of Zion, and area of the Jerusalem of the Jebusites. And although it might seem unbelievable the evidence behind the theory is beginning to have allot of weight.
The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus wrote an almost perfect geographic description that fits Tel Arad and also gave a matching explanation of why the citadel dealt with so much food and supplies in pottery. As stated in the 'Wars of the Jews' 5:1: ".. The city was built upon two hills which are opposite to one another, and have a valley to divide them asunder; at which valley the corresponding rows of houses on both hills end. Of these hills, that which contains the upper city is much higher, and in length more direct. Accordingly, it was called the "Citadel," by king David; he was the father of that Solomon who built this temple at the first; but it is by us called the "Upper Market-place." But the other hill, which was called "Acra," and sustains the lower city, is of the shape of a moon when she is horned; over-against this was a third hill, but naturally lower than Acra, and parted formerly from the other by a broad valley."
Archaeology has already substantiated that Tel Arad existed and was inhabited at the time that Josephus would have wrote this. However, this description of the citadel of David could only be on mount Zion and only in Jerusalem. Yet, one fact that is rarely spoken of directly in the Tanakh is that there are two Jerusalems.
The Two Jerusalems
According to the Tanakh, there were two locations called Jerusalem, one inhabited by the Amorites (Joshua 10:5), and the other inhabited by the Jebusites (Joshua 15:63; Judges 1:21). One in the mountains (Joshua 10:6) and the other surrounded by mountains (Psalm 125:2; Nehemiah 8:15). One the Children of Israel conquered when they entered the land of Israel (Judges 1:8) and the other was took by King David some 300 years later (2 Samuel 5:7; 1 Chronicles 11:5). One in the mount of Ephraim (Genesis 33:18; Genesis 14:18; Joshua 18:1; Judges 4:5;) and the other just north of Rimmon which is in the southern part of Judah (and the inheritance of Simeon- Joshua 19:7-8) (Zechariah 14:10; Joshua 15:21-32).
With such clear cut differences between the two Jerusalems the possibility that the House of Yahweh at 'Tel Arad' is the Citadel of David, the Arad Becken is the Jerusalem surrounded by mountains, and not too far north from Mizpe Rimmon does not stray too far from logic.
Saverx (talk)
Temple/Sanctuary: new interpretation
Studies in the archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan By Amihay Mazar, Ginny Mathias 2001 p. 175 The present reassessment of the history or' the temple in Arad negates most of the correlations with the biblical account suggested in previous treatments of the site. Arad is not the location of a Canaanite city whose king prevented the early attempt of the Israelite tribes to invade Canaan from the south (Y. Aharoni 1976); no Kenite sanctuary existed in pre-monarchical Arad; the temple of Arad is not similar to the Solomonic temple in Jerusalem; the temple at Arad was not rebuilt six times, with every rebuilding of the fortress; and finally the temple was not demolished in two consecutive phases, illustrating the two reforms by Hezekiah and Josiah. The only correlation that appears to remain valid is the intended dismantling of the temple by King Hezekiah. Dougweller (talk) 18:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Tel Arad bedouin village
There is bedouin village in the Negev called (Tel Arad) تل عراد
The unrecognized village Tel Arad is located north-west of the town Arad, with a population of 1700 residents. The original residents of the area were the Jahalin tribe who were transferred by the state in 1948 and reside nowadays in the area of Mishor Edomim. After the establishment of the state of Israel, the state transferred to the area internally displaced people from other areas of the Negev, mostly from the Lakiya area.The archeological site Tel Arad is named after the village.
source: http://dukium.org/maps/?village=%D7%AA%D7%9C-%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%93 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.183.28.112 (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2014 (UTC)