scholarly journals Between Rocks and ‘High Places’: On Religious Architecture in the Iron Age Southern Levant

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 740
Author(s):  
Diederik J. H. Halbertsma ◽  
Bruce Routledge

In this paper we examine why common methodologies for determining ‘religious architecture’ do not account for the diverse and fluid ways in which religious behavior can be expressed. We focus on religious architecture from the Iron Age Southern Levant highlighting certain sites that ‘fall through the cracks’ of current taxonomies. We propose a different way of approaching evidence for religious practice in the archaeological record, viewing religion as one dimension of social action made visible along a spectrum of ritualization.

Author(s):  
Jeannette Boertien

In the built environment of a past society it is often difficult to distinguish between sacred and profane objects and places. We struggle with the difficult tasks of recovering and understanding the behaviours that took place in domestic and public units. Baking, spinning and weaving can be traced very well in the archaeological record from artifacts such as ovens, spindle whorls, loom weights and other remnants representing a loom. Traces of weaving and baking are often found in domestic context. Weaving and backing for a temple and especially weaving clothes and backing bread for a deity are well-known phenomena in the ancient Near East. But in the archaeology of the Southern Levant weaving and baking in association with a temple or a shrine seems to be overlooked.Khirbet al Mudayna, Tell Deir Alla and Tell es-Saidiyeh, situated in Transjordan, with their huge and concentrated numbers of Iron Age loom weights and distinctive architecture, indicate production for others than the direct inhabitants, suggesting specialization and trade. But who were these others. By comparing the features of the three sites an answer to the above question can be indicated.


Author(s):  
Charlotte R. Potts

Religious Architecture in Latium and Etruria, c. 900-500 BC presents the first comprehensive treatment of cult buildings in western central Italy from the Iron Age to the Archaic Period. By analysing the archaeological evidence for the form of early religious buildings and their role in ancient communities, it reconstructs a detailed history of early Latial and Etruscan religious architecture that brings together the buildings and the people who used them. The first part of the study examines the processes by which religious buildings changed from huts and shrines to monumental temples, and explores apparent differences between these processes in Latium and Etruria. The second part analyses the broader architectural, religious, and topographical contexts of the first Etrusco-Italic temples alongside possible rationales for their introduction. The result is a new and extensive account of when, where, and why monumental cult buildings became features of early central Italic society.


2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Alfsdotter ◽  
Anna Kjellström

During excavations of the Iron Age ringfort of Sandby borg (ad 400–550), the remains of twenty-six unburied bodies were encountered inside and outside the buildings. The skeletons and the archaeological record indicate that after the individuals had died the ringfort was deserted. An osteological investigation and trauma analysis were conducted according to standard anthropological protocols. The osteological analysis identified only men, but individuals of all ages were represented. Eight individuals (31 per cent) showed evidence of perimortem trauma that was sharp, blunt, and penetrating, consistent with interpersonal violence. The location of the bodies and the trauma pattern appear to indicate a massacre rather than a battle. The ‘efficient trauma’ distribution (i.e. minimal but effective violence), the fact that the bodies were not manipulated, combined with the archaeological context, suggest that the perpetrators were numerous and that the assault was carried out effectively. The contemporary sociopolitical situation was seemingly turbulent and the suggested motive behind the massacre was to gain power and control.


2021 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 376-393
Author(s):  
Leticia López-Mondéjar

The aim of this paper is to analyse some strategies of power, social control and legitimation during the Iberian Late Iron Age (6th–1st centuries BC). It addresses how the Iberian elites exploited the domain of the ‘outside’ to legitimise and to retain their status. A diachronic approach is presented seeking to analyse the role of the outside realm throughout all the examined period and the variety of its expressions within the Iberian societies. In particular, the paper focuses on the south-east of Spain, an area with a rich archaeological record which, however, have never been approached from this view.


Author(s):  
Kathryn Howley

After the end of the 25th Dynasty in 664 bce, Kushite kings no longer had territorial control over Egypt. Nevertheless, reflecting the long history of interaction between the two lands, Kushite presence in Egypt continued. This article discusses evidence for Kushites in Egypt from the beginning of the 26th Dynasty to the end of the reign of Augustus, and argues that the continuing presence of Kushites in Egypt was largely driven by the shared religious practice of the two cultures. The differing cultural backgrounds of the two lands, in particular their incompatible views of territorial borders, meant that religious interaction often went side by side with political conflict. This conflict produced a unique religious architecture in the frontier region in which the two-way, entangled nature of interaction between Kushite and Egyptian culture can be seen.


Author(s):  
Charlotte R. Potts

This book began by stating that histories of religious architecture can be accounts of both buildings and people. This particular history, focused on the archaeological evidence for the development of cult buildings in early central Italy, has reconsidered traditional narratives about the form and function of Etrusco-Italic religious architecture and proposed an alternative reconstruction of how their architects and audiences may have interacted with one another in Rome, Latium, and Etruria between the ninth and the sixth centuries BC. Comparison with the construction of monumental temples elsewhere also indicated that settlements including Rome, Satricum, Pyrgi, and Tarquinia can perhaps be considered part of a network of Archaic Mediterranean settlements with material, commercial, and religious connections, and that monumental architecture may have been a mechanism for successful social interaction. This study has therefore supported the suggestion that the physical and social fabric of ancient communities were closely linked, and that regional studies of Latium and Etruria may furthermore benefit from being set in Italic and Mediterranean contexts. This concluding chapter briefly recapitulates the arguments made in the main body of the book and the significance of each of those arguments for studies of ancient architecture and society. It also assesses how these findings relate to broader debates about Archaic Italy. Finally, it acknowledges the limitations of this analysis and highlights opportunities for future research. Part I of this book demonstrated that ancient religious architecture was a protean phenomenon. Three chapters analysed the ambiguous evidence for Iron Age sacred huts, the range of different buildings types associated with ritual activities in the seventh century BC, and the emergence of a separate architectural language for religious buildings during the Archaic period. Detailed analyses of foundations and roofs revealed that as changes in technology and society led to the widespread use of more permanent building materials, the physical fabric of central Italic settlements was also increasingly marked by the use of particular architectural forms and decorations to differentiate cult buildings from other structures, setting them apart in a form of architectural consecration.


Author(s):  
Dennis Harding

Archaeological investigation is sometimes likened to opening a window on to the past. The problem is that, except in cases of unexpected and sudden disaster, for example where a shipwreck has been preserved untouched or a town was engulfed by volcanic ash, the archaeologist never examines a site as it was in its living heyday, only as it was after it had been abandoned, leaving only what survives of what its occupants chose to leave behind. Burials likewise represent only what communities chose to deposit for whatever reason, modified by taphonomic factors that determine the state of surviving evidence. Other ephemeral forms of disposal, and any elaborate or protracted rituals that preceded the final act of deposition that did not involve substantive structures, will pass unremarked in the archaeological record. It has been suggested in Chapter 1 that human remains may have been buried either in a dedicated cemetery where the dead were segregated or confined, perhaps in the equivalent of consecrated ground, or integrated within the environs of settlements, whether as complete or near-complete bodies or as fragmented parts or individual bones. A third option, of course, and one which would certainly contribute to the difficulty of tracing a regular burial rite archaeologically, would be segregated burial on an individual basis rather than in a community group, however small or selective. The concept of a cemetery assumes a degree of social cohesion in Iron Age practice which may not have been universal. An obvious question must be why should there have been these alternatives, and what might have governed the decision as to which alternative should be adopted? Ethnographic analogies suggest that the spirits of the dead could have been regarded as malevolent, more especially during the interim phase between death and completion of decomposition. So it might make sense to consign the dead directly to a dedicated cemetery that was detached from the settlement, or to confine them initially within a secure location, such as a hillfort, for excarnation or interim burial, before final disposal.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document