|
< Back to the Current Issue of BAR  Talkback Add Your Comment
Nebi Samwil
Where Samuel Crowned Israel’s First King
 On Tuesday morning, June 7, 1099, the knights of the First Crusade caught their first glimpse of Jerusalem—from a height near the campsite where they had spent the night. The Crusaders called the hill Mons Gaudii—Mount Joy, or Montjoie in Norman French. The Holy City had finally come into view only after a long, grueling and bloody three-year military campaign.
It was from here that pilgrims for centuries thereafter would dismount, display their crosses and walk to Jerusalem.
A 12th-century pilgrim named Theodoric describes the scene at Nebi Samwil, just a few miles from the Holy City:
Footnote ArticlesMizpah: Newly Discovered Stratum Reveals Judah’s Other Capital, by Jeffrey R. Zorn Additional Reading from the BAS LibraryBackward Glance: A Legacy of Publication, by Jeffrey R. Zorn The Rugged Beauty of Crusader Castles, by Adrian Boas When Crusader Kings Ruled Jerusalem, by Jack Meinhardt
Nebi SamwilI read Yitzhak Magen’s article on Nebi Samwil with great interest, but only partially agree with his identification of the site as Mizpah of Benjamin. As Director of the Badč Museum of Biblical Archaeology at Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, California, I am in charge of the collection from the excavations at Tell en-Nasbeh. Nasbeh is the primary rival for identification with Mizpah of Benjamin. Biblical historians studying the texts related to Mizpah of Benjamin argue over the historic value of the passages mentioning the settlement in Joshua, Judges, and 1Samuel. Some view these texts as reflecting premonarchic historiography, others view them as post-exilic retrojections. Therefore basing any argument about the identification of Mizpah on the presence or absence of Iron I archaeological materials is tricky. Biblical historians do, however, recognize the historic value of texts relating the fortification of Mizpah by king Asa (1Kgs 15:16-22; 2; 2Chr 16:6) and the importance of Mizpah during the Neo-Babylonian period (2Kgs 25; Jer 40-41). Thus any archaeological site in the region of Benjamin identified as Mizpah of the Iron II-Babylonian periods should, in theory, have a wall around the settlement and a stratum dated to the Neo-Babylonian period. The offset-inset wall surrounding Nasbeh is unparalleled in the region of Benjamin, and has been shown through excavations of similar defensive networks to date typologically to the Iron IIB-IIC period. Nebi Samwil has no city wall from the late Iron Age. The research of Jeffrey Zorn has demonstrated that Nasbeh has a significant settlement in the Neo-Babylonian period (BAR 23.5, 1997:28-38), a phase that is not found at Nebi Samwil. The text that has confused scholars for decades is the detail in 1Maccabees 3:46 that places Mizpah of Benjamin “opposite Jerusalem.” As Magen and others have noted, this is a perfect fit for Nebi Samwil. Nebi Samwil has significant domestic remains from the Hellenistic period, a phase almost completely missing from Tell en-Nasbeh. Thus I propose that Nasbeh is the Mizpah of the Iron II-Babylonian period, and Nebi Samwil is the Mizpah of the Hellenistic period. The name and traditions of this important settlement in Benjamin moved a few kilometers to the south as peoples resettled during these turbulent times. Further details are found in my entry on “Mizpah, Mizpeh,” forthcoming in The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Aaron Brody Robert & Kathryn Riddell Associate Professor of Bible and Archaeology Director of the Badč Museum of Biblical Archaeology Pacific School of Religion Berkeley, CA 94709 e-mail: abrody@psr.edu • • • • • • • Bad EnglishI have just finished reading Magen's article about Nebi Samwil, and was disappointed at the lack of editorial quality. The caption under the photograph on p. 45 reads: "In a small vault... lays the purported tomb of the prophet Samuel." I can still hear my primary school teacher saying "Lays what? An Egg?" Has American English lost the transitive value of 'lay' (to put or place an object' vs. the intransitive 'lie'?(--Here lies BAR). This is below par for a quality magazine. • • • • • • • Uppsala MapIn the northeast quadrant of the Uppsala map there appears a building with a tower that seems to be emitting flames. Does anyone know what this is supposed to be? • • • • • • • Albright's OpinionDr. Magen says that Albright believed Samwil was Mizpah even after Nasbeh's excavation. Bade excavated Nasbeh from 1926-1935, yet Dr. Magen's endnotes #4 & #5 cite a 1923 article by Albright. Please help me to understand how this is possible. I would also like to hear Dr. Magen's opinion of the famous Jaazaniah seal found at Nasbeh. Does he believe it has no relevance to the Biblical association of Jaazaniah with Mizpah? I would also like to know when Dr. Magen's final report will be published documenting all of his finds. In any event, thanks for this terrific preview in BAR! • • • • • • • MSH HandlesDear Dr. Magen, Hi!!! Does this mean that the thirty MSH Handles found at Tell en-Nasbeh proves that this site is Mozah and not Mizpah? With Much Gratitude, Sincerely Yours, Michael Welch, Deltona, Florida • • • • • • • MAPSWhy can't you use real maps with all the geological features that are on real maps? Go to google maps and see a real map. • • • • • • • |
 BAR VoicesHershel ShanksSteve MasonJeffrey R. ZornThe Economic Downturn Hits Biblical Archaeology Leonard J. GreenspoonThe Bible in the News: A Load of Biblical Bull[ion] FREE Downloadable E-BooksIsrael: An Archaeological Journey
From Babylon to Baghdad: Ancient Iraq and the Modern West
Exploring Jordan: The Other Biblical Land
Island Jewels: Understanding Ancient Cyprus and Crete
The Olympic Games: How They All Began
The Dead Sea Scrolls—What They Really Say
Real or Fake? Forgery Conference Report |
||||||||||
INFORMATION |
PUBLICATIONS |
FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER |
