Sub-Dividing the Iron Age IIA in Northern Israel: A Suggested Solution to the Chronological Debate

Abstract

In an earlier paper we discussed the 'high/low' chronology dispute as it relates to the archaeology of southern Palestine and suggested a solution that assigned two sub-phases to the Iron Age IIA. Here we suggest a similar solution for the northern regions of the country.

Using the assemblages of Jezreel as a typological starting point we examine the artefacts and stratigraphy of several key northern sites. We maintain that northern Israel went through different social processes during the Iron Age IIA than did its neighbours to the south and that its Iron Age IIA chronology should be divided into three sub-phases: the Early Iron Age IIA, dated to the second half of the 10th century BCE, and the Late Iron Age IIA, with two sub-phases—the main phase, which dates to the first two-thirds of the 9th century, and the final phase, which dates to the last third of the 9th century.

This observation should solve the on-going debate between the 'low' and 'high' chronologies. The different routes to statehood of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah undoubtedly stem from the variegated environmental and social setting of the two regions.