© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2011 DOI: 10.1163/156852011X567382

Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 54 (2011) 62-86 brill.nl/jesh

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West: Olive Oil Production as a Test-Case

Avraham Faust*

AbstractThe 7th century BCE in Philistia and Judah is characterized by economic prosperity, which is usually regarded as resulting from the “Assyrian Peace”, and from a policy of the Assyrian empire that aimed at maximizing production. The large center for the production of olive oil that was unearthed at Ekron in southern Israel is regarded as the best example of this policy. The present paper questions this scholarly consensus regarding the role of Assyria in the economy of the southern Levant, through a closer look at the olive oil industry in the region.

RésuméAu viie siècle avant J.-C., la Philistie et Juda affichaient une grande prospérité économique, généralement considérée comme liée à la « paix assyrienne » et à une politique assyrienne encourageant la production agricole. Le vaste centre de production d’huile d’olive mis au jour à Éqrôn est regardé comme le meilleur exemple de cette politique. En étudiant de plus près l’industrie de l’huile d’olive au Levant méridional, le présent article remet en cause le consensus scientifique relatif au rôle de l’Assyrie dans l’économie de la région.

KeywordsAssyria, Israel, Phoenicia, economy, Olive oil

The Assyrian Empire had expanded significantly in what is called “The Assyrian Century”. Assyria conquered most of the southern Levant during the last third of the 8th century, and during most of the 7th century the area was pacified, resulting in what is usually called “The Assyrian Peace”. The large center for the production of olive oil that was built at Ekron at

*) Avraham Faust, The Institute of Archaeology, The Martin (Szusz) Department of Land of Israel Studies and Archaeology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel, fausta@mail.biu.ac.il.

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 63

this time is usually regarded as evidence of the heavy involvement of the Assyrian Empire in the economy of the region. Much of the economic prosperity and settlement expansion which are typical of this period are attributed to its involvement and interests. It is the aim of the present arti-cle to reexamine the nature of the Assyrian Empire’s involvement in the region and the role this empire played in the economy of the southern Levant, through the prism of Iron Age olive oil production.

The Assyrian Involvement in the Southern Levant: The Consensus

It is commonly agreed that the Assyrians had significant economic inter-ests in the southern Levant, and this, as a consequence, brought about a period of stability and peace, and led to economic development which also resulted in settlement expansion, for example, into the Judean Desert and the Negev. There is multiple evidence for this economic prosperity. The most famous example is the large center for the production of olive oil, unearthed in Ekron. In the 7th century Ekron expanded dramatically, reaching a size of over 75 acres. It was a well-planned and fortified site in which industrial, domestic and elite areas of occupation have been identi-fied. Although only 4% of the site was excavated, some 115 olive oil instal-lations were discovered, and the annual production capacity is estimated to have been at least 500 tons. Gitin (1998: 276), the excavator, therefore suggested that Ekron was the largest known ancient industrial center for the production of olive oil (see also Eitam 1987; 1996).

Gitin (1995: 61ff.) explained the reasons for the economic prosperity:

(I)ts genesis was an ideology of empire based on the mercantile interests of the Neo-Assyrian kings [. . .]. The policy resulted from the empire’s need for an increasing sup-ply of raw materials and manufactured goods, especially luxury items, as well as for new sources of silver for use as currency. The effect was the formation of a new super-national system of political control in the eastern Mediterranean basin which pro-duced the pax Assyriaca, 70 years of unparalleled growth and development, and an international trading network which spanned the Mediterranean, stimulating Phoeni-cian trade and colonization in the west.

Regarding Ekron, he adds that “this huge 7th century BCE city, with its well-developed town plan and industrial center, resulted from the same Neo-Assyrian interests that produced new urban and commercial centers and a new economic exchange system throughout the Mediterranean

64 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

basin”. Moreover, Gitin suggested that Ekron “demonstrates the phenom-enon that characterized Neo-Assyrian economic policy”, adding that “this is a prime example of the innovative Assyrian policy of industrial speciali-zation and mass production which concentrated large-scale industrial activity in one center”. According to this view Ekron was an example for the accomplishment of the “long-standing Assyrian goal of urbanization of its territories” (Gitin 1989: 48). Finkelstein and Singer-Avitz (2001: 253) suggested that Ekron was “upgraded into an important regional centre” by Sargon II.

Another area in which evidence for prosperity was found is the Negev, especially the Beersheba and Arad valleys, where settlement in the 7th cen-tury prospered (e.g., Na’aman 1987; Finkelstein 1994; Faust 2008, with many references) and evidence for trade was abundant, including the large-scale importation of cedars (Lipschits and Biger 1991: 172; see also Faust and Weiss 2005, and references). Na’aman (1995: 114) explained the phe-nomenon as follows: “(T)he prosperity of the southern frontier of the kingdom of Judah is the direct result of the pax Assyriaca and the growth of the Arabian caravan trade that stemmed from the economic activity of the Assyrian empire” (see also Na’aman 1987; 1995: 113).

The same is true for Edom, where the surge in settlement in the late Iron Age and even the formation of the Edomite state were attributed to Assyr-ian activities and interest. Thus Knauf argued (1995: 98) that “the sudden onset of settlement activity indicates that the factors that constituted the market emerged suddenly, in connection with the establishment of the pax assyriaca: the state . . .; the Edomite copper industry . . .; and Edomite par-ticipation in long-distance trade . . .”. Finkelstein (1995: 137) also attributed the late Iron Age settlement peak at Edom to Assyria: “Iron Age occupa-tion at Edom reached its peak in the 8th-7th centuries BC, possibly as a result of Assyrian activity in the region”. Na’aman (1993: 118) too, attrib-uted the prosperity in Edom to the Assyrian involvement in the Arabian trade and perhaps also in the copper mining, and suggested that deportations (the topic of his research), “when combined with planned development, could create settlement growth and economic prosperity” (emphasis added). He added (Na’aman 1995: 114) that “the pax Assyriaca and the economic prosperity brought about, for the first time in history, the emergence of a territorial kingdom in this remote arid zone” (see also Gitin 1997).

Finkelstein and Ussishkin (2000: 602) summarized the overall trend: “It seems that southern Palestine was the focus of Assyrian economic activity in

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 65

the region, which included the foundation of central emporia and overland trade with Arabia, Transjordan and Egypt” (for the importance of economic considerations in the Assyrian policy, see also Na’aman 2001: 275). Buni-movitz and Lederman (2003: 3) agreed with this interpretation:

(H)istorical and archaeological research over the last few decades highlight the great economic interest of the Neo-Assyrian Empire in the Philistine coast and in the hin-terland for the purpose of international trade. Assyria’s interest in this region is dove-tails with the findings of excavations at sites along the southern Coastal Plain and in the Shephelah—particularly at Tel Miqne/‘Ekron and Ashkelon, two members of the famous Philistine pentapolis—indicating the tremendous prosperity of Philistia under Assyrian rule during the 7th century BCE.

This commonly held view has been of great influence to other scholars, who do not deal specifically with the region. Van De Mieroop (2007: 252; emphasis added), for example, wrote that “in the Philistine area, for exam-ple, Assyria’s influence changed the production of olive oil from a cottage indus-try to a centralized system that guaranteed supply to Assyria. Thus the empire cannot be considered as driven by mere desire to acquire territory. It was a structure that aimed at maximizing resources for its core”. And elsewhere he added (Van De Mieroop 2007: 259): “(S)ometimes the production of certain goods, such as olive oil in the Philistine areas, was reconstructed in order to increase supply”.

This view is not shared by all scholars, however. Elat (1978: 87, 88) has claimed long ago (before the important discoveries at Ekron were made) that the Assyrians did not initiate the trade, and Stager (1996) attributed the prosperity in Philistia to the period of the Egyptian hegemony over Philistia and Judah (see Gitin’s 2003 Reply). Na’aman recently claimed that although the “stability produced by the pax Assyriaca” and “the new eco-nomic opportunity created by the empire”, along with “the results of Sen-nacherib’s campaign against Judah in 701 BCE” were the reasons behind Ekron’s prosperity, it was not the “result of a deliberate imperial policy of economic development of its vassals” (Na’aman 2003: 81, see also 87). Schloen (2001: 146) wrote that the Assyrians were not interested in the economic development of the territories they occupied, but only in what they could confiscate or tax (see discussion on pp. 141-147). Weiss and the present author (Faust and Weiss 2005) recently suggested that the prosper-ity of Philistia and Judah resulted from the prosperous Phoenician maritime trade, which “consumed” all the surpluses produced in these polities.

66 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

Olive Oil production in Ancient Israel during the Iron Age

There is no doubt that the 7th century BCE olive oil production center that was unearthed in Ekron is the largest one known to date in the ancient Near East. We should note, however, that it was neither the only center for the production of olive oil, and nor the earliest one. Iron Age settlements in which more than a few scattered installations for the production of olive oil were excavated are well-known and the earliest ones seems to date to the 9th-8th centuries BCE. These settlements include the following:

Kh. Rosh-Zayit : The site is located in the western Galilee. After the destruction of the Phoenician fort in the early 9th century, a village was established at the site, and a relatively large number of installations for the production of olive oil were uncovered (Gal and Frankel 1993; Gal and Alexandre 2000: 164-167, 178, 200). The excavators raised the possibility that olive oil was produced at the site even earlier, but this is not supported by the evidence (Gal and Alexandre 2000: 178). The oil presses went out of use in the late 8th century (along with the village itself ), probably during the cam-paign of Tiglath-pileser III in 734/733 BCE (Gal and Alexandre 2000: 178, 201).

Shiqmona: The excavator noticed that in the 8th century (the excavator attributed this stratum to the time of Jeroboam II), “(t)he excavated area was completely occupied by three olive presses”, adding that “Shiqmona in this era was probably a center for the production of olive oil on an almost industrial scale” (Elgavish 1994: 64).

Beit Aryeh (Kh. Khadash): This small village is located in western Samaria. About 33 installations, mainly for the production of olive oil, were identified in its survey (Eitam 1992a; 1992b), and a number of them were later excavated in salvage excavations that were carried out at the site (Riklin 1997). The village seems to have been founded during the Iron Age II (most likely 9th or 8th century BCE) and ceased to exist in the late 8th century BCE (Riklin 1997: 19).

Kh. Kla: This village, located in western Samaria, was mainly surveyed, and only small-scale excavations were carried out there. Two concentrations of oil presses were identi-fied, one of which was excavated. Twenty-nine olive presses (and two wine-presses) were found (Eitam 1981: 17). It appears that the site was destroyed in the late 8th century, probably in the course of the Assyrian campaign (Eitam 1987: 24-26).

Concentrations of olive presses were also surveyed in the region, for exam-ple at the following five sites, all located in the same area as Beit Aryeh and Kh. Kla.:

Kh. Banat Barr : This is a very large village in western Samaria. During the survey dozens of rock-cut olive presses were identified, in a number of concentrations (Eitam 1980; 1987: 24; Kochavi 1989).

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 67

Kurnet Bir e-Tel: A concentration of ten rock-cut olive presses was identified in the survey at the site (Finkelstein, Bunimovitz and Lederman 1997: 447).

Deir el-Mir: A large village in western Samaria. A few concentrations of olive presses were identified (The Sharon Survey 1973; Eitam 1987: 24).

Sheikh Isa: a large concentration of Iron Age rock-cut olive presses was identified at the site (the Iron II is the major period of occupation at the site, see Finkelstein, Bunimo-vitz and Lederman 1997: 389; the olive presses were observed during a visit to the site by the author on 3 August 2008).

Kh. Tibna: A large concentration of Iron Age rock-cut olive-presses was identified at the site (Finkelstein, Bunimovitz and Lederman 1997: 367; many installations were observed during the author’s visit to the site on 3 August 2008).

Although the last five sites were only surveyed, they seem to “date to the 9th-8th centuries, largely to the latter” (Eitam 1979: 153; see also Eitam 1983: 26). Eitam (1983: 26) notes that settlement in the surveyed sites “dwindles or even completely ceased in the 7th century BCE”. This is cor-roborated by the better data from excavations—when examining the destruction or abandonment dates of the excavated sites, e.g., of Beit Arye and Kh. Kla, it is clear that the phenomenon of large-scale olive oil pro-duction in Samaria should be dated to the 9th-8th centuries BCE, and it did not continue to the 7th century (see, e.g., Riklin 1997: 19; Eitam 1980: 96).1

Tell Beit Mirsim: About 13 installations for the production of olive oil were found in the two neighbourhoods excavated at the site. They are dated to the 8th century (Eitan-Katz 1994: 30-33).

Beth Shemesh: About 20 installations for the production of olive oil were unearthed at the site (though they were not concentrated in any particular area). They were dated to the 8th century (Eitan-Katz 1994: 24-29). Other 8th-century installations for the production of olive oil were found by the new expedition (Bunimovitz and Lederman 2000: 255; 2008: 1648; Greenhut 2006: 161), and the excavators concluded that “it is apparent that the production of olive oil [. . .] was an important component in the economy of Beth-Shemesh on the eve of Sennacherib’s campaign”, adding that “this

1) Some of the presses may have been used to a limited extent afterwards. Eitam (1980: 96) writes that in some sites he surveyed settlement possibly continued “after its amputation or depletion, in the seventh century”. Interestingly, the excavated sites did not continue to exist, and it seems that this was also the fate of at least most of the surveyed sites. For pos-sible, though limited, continuity, see also Dar 1986: 40 (although at this site there were only one or two olive presses—one of them very large).

68 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

industry came to an end in 701 when the town was abandoned” (Bunimovitz and Lederman 2008: 1648).

Ekron: This was the largest center for the production of olive oil known to date in the ancient world (Gitin 1989; 1998; above). It clearly functioned during part of the 7th century.2

Tel Hadid: Some 25 olive presses, dated to the 7th century BCE, were excavated in salvage excavations carried out at the site (Brand 1998).

The Economy of the Oil Presses

The economic systems in which the presses functioned can be divided into three different types (see extended discussion in Faust 2007; forth-coming a).

1) The concentration of olive presses in villages such as Beit Aryeh, Kh. Kla, Kurnet Bir e-Tel, as well as in the largest site of Kh. Banat Barr and probably also at Kh. Rosh-Zayit functioned in what can be regarded as the traditional lineage economy of ancient Israel (the biblical mishpahah). Each concentration of installations seems to have been operated and used by one lineage. At times, there was only one lineage at a village, but in some cases there were as many as four or five, each with its own production facilities (on the economy and society of those rural settlements, see Faust 2000; 2005; 2007; forthcoming a; forth-coming c). It is clear, however, that these villages produced surpluses, and that they were part of a larger economic system (Faust 2007: 50-51).

2) The olive presses found at Tell Beit Mirsim and Beth Shemesh, and probably also the similar (but less numerous)3 installations uncovered in Hazor (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. XXVI; Ben Tor 1992: 254-256), Shechem (Campbell 1994: 41-43; 2002: 271-273), and 9th century

2) Tel Batash (Kelm and Mazar 1987; Mazar 1997: 262-263), where a few installations were found, might have been part of the Ekron phenomenon, and the relatively small number of installations that were unearthed could have resulted from the limited extent of the excavations which prevented us from understanding the scope of the phenomenon. Still, the number of installations uncovered is too limited to discuss the site here. I would like to stress, however, that it fits nicely with the general pattern observed. 3) The smaller number of installations likely resulted partially from the relative (un)impor-tance of this economic activity, but probably also from the somewhat limited scale of the excavations.

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 69

Shikmona (Elgavish 1994: 59-61) reflect installations that were used by a single family, whether nuclear (most likely) or extended, and pro-duced its livelihood (or part of it).4 Those were private installations which functioned within the urban economic system, and part of the oil was exchanged for other goods or products or paid as tax (Faust 2007). The large number of installations uncovered at Beth Shemesh and Tell Beit Mirsim does not reflect a different economic system, rather it shows the importance of olive oil production in the economy of the those cities.

3) The olive presses found in the much larger concentration of installa-tions at Ekron and Tel Hadid were no doubt part of a royal economy, which was oriented directly toward larger markets and were most prob-ably a result of a higher level of organization than those of types 1-2 (Faust and Weiss 2005; Faust 2007: 46-49).

The Development of the Olive Oil Industry through Time and Space

It is important for our purposes that we can easily identify a spatial and temporal pattern in the distribution of the various types of installations’ concentrations. When examining the emergence and development of cent-ers for the production of olive oil, it becomes clear that the earliest ones are those found in the kingdom of Israel. Here, the earliest appearance of cent-ers, even if as part of a lineage economy, is no later than the 9th century BCE (e.g., at Kh. Rosh Zayit), and they existed until the Assyrian cam-paigns of the last third of the 8th century. The same is true regarding the many private installations excavated in the kingdom of Israel, and which existed until its destruction toward the end of the 8th century BCE.

The many installations for the production of olive oil that were found in various sites in the Kingdom of Judah, mainly in the Shephalah, seem to have been slightly later, and are mainly dated to the 8th century, probably to its later part or even after the destruction of the kingdom of Israel.5 These installations went out of use when the settlements were themselves

4) Tel Qiri (Portugali 1987: 134-136), too, cannot be viewed as a center for the production of olive oil, and it will not, therefore, be discussed here.5) At Beth Shemesh, for example, the majority of the olive oil installations were found in the final level that was destroyed by Sennacherib in 701 (Bunimovitz and Lederman 1997: 30; 2008: 1648).

70 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

destroyed toward the very end of this century (probably in 701 BCE; see also Finkelstein and Na’aman 2004; Blakely and Hardin 2002).6

The large concentrations of olive presses at Ekron and Hadid are dated to the 7th century BCE. Those were most likely a result of royal activity, which is, as we have seen above, usually attributed to the Assyrians, either because of the need to produce more olive oil to supply “hungry” Mesopo-tamia (which lacked suitable condition to produce olive oil; cf., Barstad 1996: 70-71, regarding Assyria’s successor Babylonia) or due to their wishes to enhance the region’s economy.

The earlier “centers” (for the production of olive oil) were therefore erected in the kingdom of Israel, and the technology of oil production (or, more likely, the relevant changes in the economy), gradually drifted south-ward and was also adopted in the kingdom of Judah, and (perhaps later) also in Philistia despite the technical differences between the installations (for which see Mazar 1997: 263). In the latter, however, the technology was employed on a much larger scale than before.

It is important to note that at the time when the large centers of olive oil production were established in Philistia, those in the kingdom of Israel were already destroyed and did not function anymore (Figure 1).

This observation is crucial for understanding the reasons for the devel-opment of the large centers for the production of olive oil in Philistia.

The Olive Oil Industry—An Assyrian Enterprise?

It seems that attributing the emergence of the large olive oil production centers to the Assyrians and Assyrian imperial interests runs against the data we possess. If the Assyrians had been interested in increasing olive oil production, they could be expected to have restored the large oil industry that existed in the Galilee and in Samaria during the 8th century BCE, as this was much more in their interest than developing Ekron for a number of reasons.

Firstly, the olive oil industry in the north had already existed, and if there were people who stayed there after the Assyrian conquest they had the skills and knowledge to restart it. The geographical conditions were,

6) The kingdom of Judah prospered in the 7th century, but the Shephalah, in which this industry appeared to have been concentrated, was still desolate as a consequence of Sen-nacherib’s campaign, and much of it was transferred to Philistine control (e.g., Blakely and Hardin 2002; Finkelstein and Na’aman 2004; Faust 2008, with references).

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 71

after all, favorable. Secondly, the conditions in the Galilee and Samaria are more suitable for olives than those of the coastal plain (including the inner coastal plain). This is why it is sometimes assumed that Ekron had to import some of its olives, as it was on the edge of the olive growing area (Eitam and Shomroni 1987: 49; Eitam 1996: 184). Moreover, the Galilee and Samaria, unlike Ekron, were Assyrian territory. These regions were part of the Assyrian Empire, and the Assyrians would get all the “profits” and not only part of it as tribute. Finally, if, olive oil was indeed trans-ported to Mesopotamia, as it has been suggested, (e.g., Van de Mieroop 2007: 252; see also Barstad 1996: 70-71), the Galilee and Samaria were nearer, and transportation from there would have been less costly (but see below).

That the Assyrian empire did not rebuild the olive oil industry in the Galilee and Samaria, which were now Assyrian provinces, indicates that the Assyrians were not interested in maximizing productivity in the region.

Figure 1: the distribution of olive oil production centers in time and space (rounded dates).

Legend: 1 = Israel; 2 = Judah; 3 = Philistia.

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

123

72 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

East or West: the Orientation of the 7th Century Economic System

An examination of the larger economic system in which 7th century Ekron was embedded reveals that Assyria was not the major factor in its develop-ment. First of all, Assyria was too far away to have made transportation over land economically viable; the long distance simply made it too expen-sive (see also Machinist 1992: 76). The available data on importation of wine to Assyria, for example, indicates that it came from much nearer loca-tions, and whenever possible was transported by river (Liverani 1992: 158, fig. 22; Yamada 2000: 270-271, 416; see also Oppenheim 1967: 244). What the Assyrians wanted from the Levant were luxury objects (Tadmor 1975: 37; Elat 1978: 30-31; 1991: 21-22; Mitchel 1997: 187; Schloen 2001: 146-147, note 17). The local rulers exchanged their surpluses, mostly agricultural products, for such items, and those were then paid as tribute to Assyria. It is quite clear, therefore, that olive oil and other agri-cultural products were not transported to Assyria.

Furthermore, one should note that the entire economic system of the 7th century BCE was directed toward maritime trade, and not toward Mesopotamia (Faust and Weiss 2005; forthcoming). The entire system in which Ekron was embedded and which incorporated Philistia and Judah was oriented toward the sea. Ashkelon was at the center of the system and Ekron (as well as Tel Hadid) were only in the second “circle” (for the sites, see Figure 2. For the circles, see Faust and Weiss 2005). This also explains why Ekron, although located on the edge of the olive producing areas of Samaria and the Shephalah (Eitam and Shomroni 1987: 49; Eitam 1996: 184), became the center of olive oil production; it was located nearer to the center of the economic system and closer to the sea.

There is no doubt that the Phoenicians had a major role in this trade. They were at the peak of their commercial success, and were responsible for the majority of the Mediterranean maritime trade at the time, includ-ing the transportation of commodities to and from Ashkelon, as was recently demonstrated by Master (2003; also Faust and Weiss 2005; Faust and Weiss forthcoming).

Discussion: Seventh Century Olive Oil Industry and the Economic Interests of the Assyrian Empire

The fact that the olive oil industry that was concentrated in the kingdom of Israel was destroyed by the Assyrians and did not recover strengthens the

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 73

conclusion that the Assyrians were interested neither in the olive oil indus-try, nor in its product.7 Moreover, the mere fact that the new large centers for the production of olive oil that were later built (along with the eco-nomic systems in which they were embedded) were mainly concentrated outside the new Assyrian provinces, in the semi-autonomous regions to the south (Tadmor 1966: 87; 2006: 253; Ephal 1979: 86),8 again argues against the Assyrians’ involvement.

The olive oil industry in the Galilee and Samaria prospered when these regions were part of the kingdom of Israel and prior to its annexation by the Assyrians. When it became Assyrian territory these sites appear to have become ruins. And the entire prosperity of the 7th century, which is usu-ally attributed to the Assyrians, was in reality beyond the Assyrian frontier. It is the semi-independent status of these areas, and the fact that they were not Assyrian territory that allowed them to prosper, despite the heavy trib-ute they had to pay.

Interestingly, the entire prospering system of Philistia and Judah, and all its components,9 ceased to exist in the late 7th (or early 6th) century, when it was conquered by Assyria’s successor, the Neo-Babylonian Empire.10 This clearly demonstrates that the Mesopotamian empires were not interested in economic development. They came to sack and to take tribute, but they did not invest with the aim of extracting more tribute later. As Grayson (1991: 216-217) phrased it: “The Assyrian view of the economy of the empire was simplistic: the ruled territories were there to supply the central state with as much wealth and labour as could be squeezed out of them, and no thought was given to long-range schemes and profits”. The areas

7) The fact that Judah’s olive oil industry was not restored after 701 could have been explained as resulting from the Assyrian empire preference of the Philistine cities, and is therefore irrelevant for the present discussion. 8) I do not wish to discuss the status of each polity in relation to Assyria, and whether it became a province for some of the time or not (see Na’aman 2001). What is important is that, as a whole, the regions discussed here were semi-independent during the 7th century. 9) This includes not only Philistia (e.g., Ashkelon and Ekron), but also Judah, most of whose territories also prospered in the 7th century BCE (Finkelstein 1994; Faust 2008; Faust and Weiss 2005).10) Mazar 1990: 548-549; Stager 1996; Stern 2001. For Ekron, see Gitin 1995: 74-75; 1998: 276; Dothan and Gitin 1993. For a more general assessment, see Stager 1996; Faust forthcoming b; contra Barstad 1996; 2003; Lipschits 2005.

74 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

that were annexed by the Assyrians (and later by the Babylonians) became or remained poor and desolate. The prosperity, as seen in the olive oil industry, was always outside of the borders of the empire.

Notably during much of the 7th century the Assyrians were heavily engaged elsewhere (e.g., von Soden 1985: 58-59; Kuhrt 1995: 499-501), and it is therefore doubtful if they even had time and energy for economic investment in the Southern Levant. It seems, furthermore, that such was never their goal. The Assyrians never realized, or did not mind, that they might benefit from investing in the economy of the conquered territories (Grayson 1991: 216; Schloen 2001: 146; see also Postgate 1979: 214). The way governors were appointed and ruled meant that the conquered terri-tories were heavily exploited (Grayson 1995: 963) and were “economically depressed” (Grayson 1991: 216). This is true of the Assyrian provinces proper, and it is evident that the Assyrians did not invest outside these territories.

The Causes of the Prosperity

This is not the place for a detailed discussion (see Faust and Weiss 2005; Faust and Weiss forthcoming), but it appears that the causes for the pros-perity in the semi-independent states in the south should be sought in the west (i.e., the sea). The flourishing Mediterranean trade had an impact on all the areas near the shores, including areas that were far less developed than Philistia and Judah (e.g., Iberia, see Aubet 2001; various papers in Bierling and Gitin 2002; see also Buxo 2008). The Mediterranean trade developed significantly since the beginning of the first millennium BCE, and already in the 9th century it reached Iberia and North Africa.11 During the 8th-7th centuries the maritime international trade reached a new peak, and many Phoenician (and Greek) colonies were established throughout the Mediterranean, and even beyond (Aubet 2001; Boardman 1999). The evolving economic system influenced the entire region, politically, socially and economically, and turned the Mediterranean into a single world system

11) E.g., Nijboer and van der Plicht 2006: 31, 33-36; see also Gonzalez de Canales, Serrano and Llompart 2006; Nijboer 2004: 536-537, 539; Docter, Niemeyer, Nijboer and van der Plicht 2004; Docter et-al., 2006; Aubet 2001: 372-381.

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 75

(e.g., Sherratt and Sherratt 1993; Faust and Weiss forthcoming). The Phoenicians transported products and raw materials throughout the Med-iterranean and were the major driving force in this economic development (see also Markoe 2000; Aubet 2001 and references). The economic forces of demand and supply influenced the development across the Mediterra-nean, and those forces influenced the local economies of Judah and Philis-tia too (and perhaps even Edom). Ashkelon was the major port in this area, and was therefore the main gate through which the region interacted with the Mediterranean system, and through which it was integrated into it. Ashkelon was therefore the central site of the local economic system which incorporated Philistia and Judah (Faust and Weiss 2005; Faust and Weiss forthcoming; see also Master 2003). The fact that these regions were not destroyed and annexed by the Assyrians allowed them to be integrated into the flourishing international maritime trade and the Mediterranean eco-nomic system.

The Assyrian Contribution to the Economy of the 7th Century

But were the Assyrians completely irrelevant for our description of the 7th century economic system? Assyria was the military super-power of the time after all, ruling (directly and indirectly) the entire region, and it is unlikely that they were not involved in the economic development that took place in the region, even if just outside of their “nominal” border. Indeed, it appears that the Assyrians were indirectly connected with the economic developments through several mechanisms.

First of all, the Assyrians enabled the prosperity and the development of the 7th century production centers and trade simply by not destroying them and by ruthlessly pacifying the other polities in the region they created a period of relative stability. Should they have conquered the poli-ties discussed here and destroyed them, however, nothing would have developed.

The regions discussed here (Philistia, Judah and also Phoenicia and per-haps even Edom) were not annexed and did not become provinces. It is highly unlikely that this was accidental. Perhaps the Assyrians, from expe-rience, realized that it is better for them not to annex some regions, such as Phoenicia (Frankenstein 1979: 286; Van de Mieroop 2007: 252; see also Elat 1978: 34). Such realization might have prevented Philistia from

76 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

becoming part of the Assyrian province system, and perhaps also influ-enced the fate of Judah after the 701 campaign (see below).12

The Assyrians also destroyed the kingdom of Israel, and by doing so, helped the southern states since they eliminated the larger centers of olive oil production. Furthermore, it is possible that a few refugees with expert knowledge of the olive oil industry found refuge in Philistia (cf. Gitin 1989: 61*; 2002: 116), hence helping the new industry.

The Assyrian demand for tribute and taxes indirectly forced the surviv-ing states (or rulers) to improve their economies in order to pay the Assyr-ians and at the same time maintain their quality (or standards) of life (see already Bedford 2005: 72-73; Hopkins 1997: 29; Sherratt and Sherratt 1993: 366; 370; Frankenstein 1979: 273). But viewing this as an incentive to the economy is a dubious perspective. This is like comparing Assyria to a bully who comes to prospering stores, demanding “protection” money. The large sums this bully takes forces the owners to work harder in order to be still profitable and to maintain their standard of living, and it is pos-sible, as a result, that they will have to look for new costumers. But can we credit the bully for the development of the economy? Probably not (for an extended discussion, see Faust and Weiss forthcoming).

Although the Assyrian empire benefited from the economic prosperity in the south, which was possible only because of the semi-autonomous status of the relevant regions, it did not invest in this prosperity. As long as those polities paid their tribute, they apparently were allowed to organize their economies independently. As Grayson (1991: 216) wrote: “(I)t never occurred to the crown to replace its heavy-handed technique with attempts to encourage local initiative and industry”. Schloen (2001: 146) added: “[T]here is no evidence that Assyrians understood or were concerned with

12) The status of Tyre and entire Mediterranean economic system in relation to Assyria will be discussed in details elsewhere (Faust and Weiss forthcoming). It is interesting to note, however, that it appears that as far as the Assyrian empire was concerned, Phoenicia and Philistia/Judah had a similar status, although Phoenicia was much more important eco-nomically. The similar status can be seen not only by the treatment by the Assyrian empire, but also by the fact that all those semi-independent states were devastated when the Neo-Babylonian empire continued the process of expansion. All those polities were destroyed in the time of Nebuchadnezzar; the Philistines’ cities were destroyed in the clos-ing years of the 7th century (e.g., Stager 1996; Stern 2001), Judah was devastated in the early years of the 6th century (e.g., Stern 2001), and Phoenicia suffered greatly as a result of the Babylonian siege of Tyre, and the latter appears to have lost its hegemonic status in the Mediterranean—never to recover (e.g., Aubet 2001: 346; Mata 2002: 192; Cunliffe 2001: 275).

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 77

the economic development of the territory they ruled, except in the most rudimentary sense of making it easy for themselves to tax or confiscate its wealth”.

Conclusion

The economic prosperity of Philistia and Judah during the 7th century BCE, and especially the large olive oil industry of Ekron, are viewed by many scholars as examples for the economic prosperity brought about by the Assyrians and as evidence for the Assyrian Empire interests in the econ-omy of the region. A detailed examination of the development of the olive oil industry, however, shows that this view requires revision. The olive oil industry prospered in the Kingdom of Israel, in the Galilee and Samaria, until the Assyrian conquest. After the annexation of the area by the Assyr-ians, the industry was left in ruins.

At this time an even more elaborate system13 evolved at Philistia, just outside the borders of the Assyrian Empire. This prosperity is connected with the Mediterranean economy, but it should be stressed that only the regions that were outside direct Assyrian control prospered, and the Assyr-ian provinces were in a deep recession. Apparently, the Assyrians did not make any effort to assist in the recovery of these regions, nor did they attempt to restore the economic activity there. They sacked the regions, and continued to tax them, only caring to take what could be taken easily and immediately. They did not waste time, money and effort in order to maximize their profit, and did not invest in the conquered regions.14

Interestingly, a similar situation was observed in Transjordan. Here, when describing the history of Tall Zira‘a, Vieweger and Haser (2007: 165) observe that “everything changed dramatically with the Neo-Assyrian occu-pation of the eighth century BCE; the cities of northern Transjordan ceased to exist. Tall Zira‘a also lost its urban character in this period. While the Kingdoms of Ammon and Moab further south flourished under Assyrian

13) The differences were probably a result of both the different social structure (in Israel the economy was to a large extent still operated by the traditional lineage groups, while in Philistia it was a state endeavor; Faust 2007) and the scale of the macro economy, i.e., the development of the Mediterranean economy in the 7th century, which might also have influenced the former issue, i.e., social structure at Philistia.14) As a matter of fact, the society in these regions was devastated, and recovery could not have been expected in a short period of time. The society in these regions should be viewed as a post collapse society (Tainter 1999; Faust 2004; forthcoming b).

78 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

control, northern Gilead became a rural backwater”. What northern Tran-sjordan (Biblical Gilead) and northern Cisjordan (the former kingdom of Israel) had in common was that both regions became Assyrian provinces. The southern states on both sides of the Jordan, which were not part of the Assyrian Empire, by contrast, were not devastated and could repair the damages brought about by the Assyrian campaigns of the 8th century BCE. They could participate in the maritime trade and prospered as a result. The Assyrian provinces were too devastated and could not take part in the 7th-century prosperity. Interestingly, once the next Mesopotamian empire (the Neo-Babylonian) annexed Judah and Philistia at around 600 BCE, they were destroyed and also wiped off the international trade map of the time.

It is true that the Assyrians greatly benefited from this prosperity through taxation and tribute. They did not, however, generate it, nor did they plan it or invest in it. In a sense, the prosperity was due to the market forces of the 7th century, and not to any pre-planned state enterprise as far as the southern states were concerned. The Assyrians helped principally by not destroying, and indirectly perhaps also by demanding tribute which forced the local rulers to find additional sources of income (Bedford 2005: 72-73; Hopkins 1997: 29).

Prosperity in the southern Levant was always outside the borders of the Assyrian Empire, and whenever a new prospering region was conquered, prosperity ceased. In some cases it moved farther away, but it always remained outside the Empire’s borders. The economies of Phoenicia, Phil-istia and Judah prospered during the seventh century BCE not due to Assyria, but in spite of it.

Bibliography

Aharoni, Y. 1979. The Land of the Bible—a Historical Geography. London: Burns and Oates.

Aubet, M. E. 2001. The Phoenicians and the West. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Auld, G., and M. Steiner. 1995. Jerusalem I, from the Bronze Age to the Maccabees. Cam-

bridge: The Lutterworth Press.Bar-Adon, P. 1989. Excavation in the Judean Desert. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority

(Hebrew).Barstad, H. M. 1996. The Myth of the Empty Land. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.——. 2003. After the “Myth of the Empty Land”: Major Challenges in the Study of Neo-

Babylonian Judah, in Judah and Judeans in the Neo-Babylonian Period, eds Oded Lip-schits and Joseph Blenkinsopp. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns: 3-20.

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 79

Figure 2

HazorGalileeH. Rosh-Zayit

Shiqmona

DorTel Qiri

Megiddo

Samaria

Deir el-MirKh. Banat Barr

Beit AeyeTel Hadid

Ekron

Ashkelon

Lachish

Tel ‘EtonTell Beit Mirsim

Tel Beersheba

0 5 10Kilometers

Arad

Tel Batash JerusalemBeth-Shemesh

HebronEn Gedi

Sheikh IsaKh. Tibna

Kh. KlaKurnet Bir et-Tell

Shechem

Samaria

Judah

Negev

Phili

stia

80 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

Bedford, P. R. 2005. The Economy of the Near East in the First Millennium BC. In The Ancient Economy: Evidence and Models, eds Joseph G. Manning and Ian Morris. Stan-ford: Stanford University Press: 58-83.

Beit Arieh, I. 1999. Tel ‘Ira, A Stronghold in the Biblical Negev. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.Ben-Tor, A. 1992. Notes and News: Tel Hazor, 1992. Israel Exploration Journal 42: 254-

260.Bierling, M. R., and S. Gitin, eds. 2002. The Phoenicians in Spain: An Archaeological Review

of the Eight-Sixth Centuries BCE. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.Blakely, J. A., and J. W. Hardin. 2002. Southwestern Judah in the Late Eighth Century

BCE. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 326: 11-64.Boardman, J. 1999. The Greek Overseas: Their Early Colonies and Trade. London: Thames

and Hudson.Brand, E. 1998. Salvage Excavations near Tel Hadid—A Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv: Insti-

tute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University (Hebrew).Broshi, M. 1990. On Trade in Antiquity—Several Methodological Remarks. In Commerce

in Palestine Throughout the Ages, eds Benjamin Z. Kedar, Trude Dothan and Shmuel Safrai. Jerusalem: Yad Ben Zvi: 195-201 (Hebrew).

Bunimovitz, Sh. and Z. Lederman. 1997. Six Seasons of Excavations At Tel Beth-Shemesh—A Border Town in Judah. Qadmoniot 113: 22-37 (Hebrew).

——. 2000. Tel Beth-Shemesh, 1997-2000. Israel Exploration Journal 50: 254-258.——. 2003. The Final Destruction of Beth Shemesh and the Pax Assyriaca in the Judean

Shephela. Tel Aviv 30: 3-26.——. 2008. Beth-Shemesh. In The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the

Holy Land, Vol. 5 (supplementary volume), ed. Ephraim Stern. Jerusalem: Israel Explora-tion Society and Biblical Archaeology Society: 1644-1648.

Buxo, R. 2008. The Agricultural Consequences of Colonial Contacts on the Iberian Penin-sula in the First Millennium BC Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 17: 145-154.

Cahill, J. M., 2001. Jerusalem at the Time of the United Monarchy: The Archaeological Evidence. In New Studies on Jerusalem, Proceedings of the 7th Conference, eds Avraham Faust and Eeyal Baruch. Ramat-Gan: Rennert Center, Bar-Ilan University: 21-27 (Hebrew).

Campbell, E. F. 1994. Archaeological Reflections on Amos’s Targets. In Scripture and Other Artifacts, eds Michael D. Coogan, et-al. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press: 32-52.

——. 2002. Shechem III: The Stratigraphy and Architecture of Shechem/Tell Balatah (volume I: Text). Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research.

Cunliffe, B. 2001. Facing the Ocean: The Atlantic and its Peoples 8000 BC-AD 1500. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dar, Sh. 1986. Hirbet Jemein—a First Temple Village in Western Samaria. In Shomron Studies, eds Shimon Dar and Zeev Safrai. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad: 13-73 (Hebrew).

Delgado, A. and M. Ferrer. 2007. Cultural Contacts in Colonial Settings: The Construc-tion of New Identities in Phoenician Settlements of the Western Mediterranean. Stan-ford Journal of Archaeology 5: 18-42.

Diakonoff, I. M. 1992. The Naval Power and Trade of Tyre. Israel Exploration Journal 42: 168-193.

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 81

Docter, Roald, F., et al. 2006. Carthage Bir Massouda: Second Preliminary Report on the Bilateral Excavations of Ghent University and the Institut National du Patrimoine (2003-2004). BABesch 81: 37-89.

Docter, R. F., H. G. Niemeyer, A. J. Nijboer, and J. van der Plicht. 2004. Radiocarbon Dates of Animal Bones in the Earliest Levels of Carthage. Mediterranea I: 557-577.

Dorsey, D. A. 1991. The Roads and Highlands of Ancient Israel. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Dothan, T. and S. Gitin. 1993. Miqne, Tel (Ekron). In The New Encyclopedia of Archaeo-logical Excavations in the Holy Land, Vol. 3, ed. E. Stern. New York: Simon & Schuster: 1051-1059.

Eitam, D. 1980. The Production of Oil and Wine in Mt. Ephraim in the Iron Age. Unpub-lished MA thesis, Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University (Hebrew).

——. 1979. Olive Presses of the Israelite Period. Tel Aviv 6: 146-155.——. 1981. Kh. Kla, Hadashot Arkheologiyot 77: 16-17 (Hebrew).——. 1983. “And Oil Out of the Flinty Rock”. Qadmoniot 61: 23-27 (Hebrew).——. 1987. Olive Oil Production During the Biblical period. In Olive Oil in Antiquity,

eds. Michael Heltzer and David Eitam. Haifa: University of Haifa, Israel Oil Industry Museum and Dagon Museum: 16-36.

——. 1992. Khirbet Khaddash—Royal Industry Village in Ancient Israel. In Judea and Samaria Research Studies: Proceedings of The First Annual Meeting—1991, eds Zeev H. Ehrlich and Yaakov Eshel. Jerusalem: Reuven Mas: 161-182, (Hebrew).

——. 1996. The Olive Oil Industry at Tel Miqne-Ekron in the Late Iron Age. In Olive Oil in Antiquity—Israel and Neighboring Countries from the Neolithic to the Early Arab Period, eds David Eitam and Michael Heltzer. Padova: Sargon srl: 167-196.

Eitam, D. and A. Shomroni. 1987. Research of the Oil-Industry During the Iron Age at Tel Miqne. In Olive Oil in Antiquity: Israel and neighbouring countries, eds M. Heltzer and D. Eitam. Haifa: University of Haifa, Israel Oil Industry Museum and Dagon Museum: 37-56.

Eitan-Katz, H. 1994. Specialized Economy of Judah in the 8th-7th Centuries BCE. Unpublished MA thesis, Tel-Aviv University (Hebrew).

Elat, M. 1977. Economic Relations in the Lands of the Bible, c. 1000-539 BC. Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute (Hebrew).

——. 1978. The Economic Relations of the Neo-Assyrian Empire with Egypt. Journal of the American Oriental Society 98: 20-34.

——. 1990. The International Trade in the Land of Israel under Assyrian Rule. In Com-merce in Palestine Throughout the Ages, eds Benjamin Z. Kedar, Trude Dothan and Shmuel Safrai. Jerusalem: Yad Ben Zvi: 67-88 (Hebrew).

——. 1991. Phoenician Overland Trade within the Mesopotamian Empires. In Ah Assyria . . . Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Hayim Tadmor, eds Michael Cogan and Israel Eph’al. Jerusalem: The Magness Press: 21-35.

Elgavish, J. 1994. Shiqmona, on the Seacoast of Mount Carmel. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad (Hebrew).

Ephal, I. 1979. Assyrian Domination in Palestine. In The Age of the Monarchies: Political History (a volume in the World History of the Jewish People), ed. Avraham Malamat. Jerusalem: Massada: 276-289.

82 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

Fantalkin, A. 2001. Mezad Hashavyau: Its Material Culture and Historical Background. Tel Aviv 28: 3-165.

Faust, A. 1997. The Impact of Jerusalem’s Expansion in the Late Iron Age on the Forms of Rural Settlements in its Vicinity. Cathedra 84: 53-62 (Hebrew).

——. 2000. The Rural Community in Ancient Israel during the Iron Age II. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 317: 17-39.

——. 2003. The Farmstead in the Highland of Iron Age II Israel. In The Rural Landscape of Ancient Israel, eds Aren M. Maeir, Shimon Dar and Zeev Safrai. Oxford: British Archaeological Report 1121: 91-104.

——. 2004. Social and Cultural Changes in Judah during the 6th Century BCE and their Implications for our Understanding of the Nature of the Neo-Babylonian Period. Ugarit Forschungen 36: 157-176.

——. 2005. The Israelite Society in the Period of the Monarchy: An Archaeological Perspective. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi (Hebrew).

——. 2007. Private, Communal and Royal Economy in Iron Age II (The Period of the Monarchy). Jerusalem and Eretz-Israel 4-5: 41-58 (Hebrew).

——. 2008, Settlement and Demography in seventh Century Judah and the Extent and Intensity of Sennacherib’s Campaign. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 140: 168-194.

——. forthcoming a, Households Economies in the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. In Household Archaeology in the Bronze and Iron Age Levant, eds A. Yasur-Landau, J. Ebeling and L. Mazow,. Leiden: Brill.

——. forthcoming b, Judah in the Neo-Babylonian Period: The Archaeology of Desolation. Atlanta: Society for Biblical Literature.

——. forthcoming c, The Archaeology of the Israelite Society, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.Faust, A. and E. Weiss. 2005. Judah, Philistia and the Mediterranean World: Reconstruct-

ing the Economic System of the Seventh Century BCE. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 338: 71-92.

——, forthcoming, Between Assyria and the Mediterranean World: The Prosperity of Judah and Philistia in the 7th Century BCE in Context. In Interweaving worlds: systemic interactions in Eurasia, 7th to 1st millennia BC, eds Toby Wilkinson, Susan Sherratt and John Bennet, Oxford: Oxbow.

Finkelstein, I. 1994. The Archaeology of the Days of Menasseh. In Scripture and Other Artifacts, Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Honor of Philip J. King, eds Michael D. Coogan, J. Cheryl Exum, and Lawrence E. Stager. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press: 169-187.

——. 1995. Living on the Fringe. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.Finkelstein, I. and L. Singer-Avitz. 2001. Ashdod Revisited. Tel Aviv 28: 231-259.Finkelstein, I. and D. Ussishkin. 2000. Archaeological and Historical Conclusions. In

Megiddo III, eds Israel Finkelstein, David Ussishkin and Baruch Halpern. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University: 576-605.

Finkelstein, I., Z. Lederman, and Sh. Bunimovitz. 1997. Highlands of Many Cultures: The Southern Samaria Survey, 1. Tel-Aviv: Monographs Series of the Institute of Archeology, Tel Aviv University.

Finkelstein, I. and N. Na’aman. 2004. The Judahite Shephelah in the Late 8th and Early 7th Centuries BCE. Tel Aviv 31: 60-79.

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 83

Frankenstein, S. 1979. The Phoenicians in the Far West: A Function of Neo-Assyrian Imperialism. In Power and Propaganda: A Symposium on Ancient Empires, ed. Mogens Trolle Larsen. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag: 263-294.

Gal, Z. and Y. Alexandre. 2000. Horbat Rosh Zayit, an Iron Age Storage Fort and Village. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.

Gal, Z. and R. Frankel. 1993. An Olive Oil Complex at Hurvat Rosh Zayit. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 109: 128-140.

Gitin, S. 1989. Tel Miqne-Ekron: A Type-Site for the Inner Coastal Plain in the Iron Age II Period. In Recent Excavations in Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology (AASOR 49), eds Seymour Gitin and William G. Dever. Winona Lake: ASOR/Eisenbrauns: 23-58.

——. 1995. Tel Miqne-Ekron in the 7th Century BCE: The Impact of Economic Innova-tion and Foreign Cultural Influences on a Neo-Assyrian Vassal City-State. In Recent Excavations in Israel: A View to the West, ed. Seymour Gitin. Dubuque: Archaeological Institute of America: 61-79.

——. 1997. The Neo-Assyrian Empire and its Western Periphery: The Levant, with a Focus on Philistine Ekron. In Assyria 1995, Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Sympo-sium of the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, eds Simo Parpola and Robert m. Whiting. Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project: 77-103.

——. 1998. The Philistines in the Prophetic Texts: An Archaeological Perspective. In Hesed Ve-Emet, Studies in Honor of Ernest S. Frerichs, eds Jodi Magness and Seymour Gitin. Atlanta: Georgia: 273-290.

——. 2002. The Four-Horned Altar and Sacred Space: An Archaeological Perspective. In Sacred Time, Sacred Space: Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, ed. Barry M. Gittlen. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns: 95-123.

——. 2003. Neo-Assyrian and Egyptian Hegemony over Ekron in the Seventh Century BCE: A Response to Lawrence E. Stager. Eretz Israel 27: 55*-61*.

Gonzales de Canales, F., L. Serrano, and J. Llompart. 2006, The Pre-colonial Phoenician Emporium of Huelva ca 900-770 BC. BABesch 81: 13-29.

Grayson, A. Kirk. 1991. Assyrian Civilization. In The Assyrian and Babylonian Empires and Other States of the Near East, for the Eighth to the Sixth Centuries BC (Cambridge Ancient History, 3/2), eds John Boardman, I.E.S. Edwards, E. Sollberger and N.G.L. Hammond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 194-228.

——. 1995. Assyrian Rule of Conquered Territory in Ancient Western Asia. In Civiliza-tions of the Ancient Near East, vol. 1, ed. Jack M. Sasson. Peabody: Henderickson: 959-968.

Greenhut, Z. 2006. Production, Storage and Distribution of Grain during the Iron Age and their Linkage to the Socio-Economic Organization in Israel. Ph.D. dissertation, Tel Aviv University. (Hebrew)

Greenhut, Z., and A. De Groot. 2002. A Bronze and Iron Age Village West of Jerusalem. Qadmoniot 123: 12-17 (Hebrew).

Hopkins, D. C. 1997. Agriculture. In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, vol. 1, ed. Eric M. Meyers. New York: Oxford University Press: 22-30.

Kelm, G. L., and A. Mazar. 1987. Seventh Century BCE Oil Presses at Tel Batash, Biblical Timnah. In Olive Oil in Antiquity: Israel and Neighbouring Countries from Neolithic to Early Arab Period, eds Michael Helzer and David Eitam, Haifa: University of Haifa, Israel Oil Industry Museum and Dagon Museum: 121-125.

84 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

Knauf, E. A. 1995. Edom: The Social and Economic History. In You Shall not Abhor an Edomite for He is Your Brother: Edom and Seir in History and Tradition, ed. Diana Edel-man. Atlanta: Scholars Press: 93-117.

Kochavi, M. 1989. The Identification of Zeredah, Home of Jeroboam Son of Nebat, King of Israel. Eretz Israel 20: 198-201 (Hebrew).

Kuhrt, A. 1995. The Ancient Near East, c. 3000-330 BC. London: Routledge.Lernau, H. and O. Lernau. 1992. Fish Remains. In Excavations at the City of David 1978-

1985, Volume III (Qedem 33), eds Alon De Groot and Donald T. Ariel. Jerusalem: the Hebrew University: 131-148.

——. 1989. Appendix E: Fish Bone Remains. In Excavations in the South of the Temple Mount, the Ophel of Biblical Jerusalem (Qedem 29), eds Eilat Mazar and Benjamin Mazar. Jerusalem: the Hebrew University: 155-161.

Liphschitz, N. 1989. Appendix C: Dendroarchaeological Studies 150: The Ophel ( Jerusa-lem) 1986. In: Excavations in the South of the Temple Mount, the Opehl of Biblical Jerusalem (Qedem 29), eds Eilat Mazar and Benjamin Mazar. Jerusalem: the Hebrew University: 142-143.

Liphschits, N. and G. Biger. 1991. Cedar of Lebanon (Cedrus Libani) in Israel during Antiquity. Israel Exploration Journal 41: 167-175.

Lipschits, O. 2005. The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: Judah Under Babylonian Rule. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.

Liverani, M. 1992. Studies on the Annals of Ashurbanipal II; 2: Topographical Analysis. Roma: Università di Roma La Sapienza.

Machinist, P. 1992. Palestine, Administration of (Assyro-Babylonian). In Anchor Bible Dic-tionary, vol V, ed. David N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday: 69-81.

Markoe, G. E. 2000. Phoenicians. University of California: Berkeley and Los Angeles.Masters, D. 2003. Trade and Politics: Ashkelon’s Balancing Act in the Seventh Century

BCE. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 330: 47-64.Mata, D. R. 2002. The Ancient Phoenicians of the 8th and 7th Centuries BC in the Bay of

Cadiz: State of Research. In The Phoenicians in Spain: An Archaeological Review of the Eight-Sixth Centuries BCE eds Marilyn R. Bierling and Seymour Gitin. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns: 155-198.

Mazar, A. 1990. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000-586 BCE. New York: Doubleday.

——. 1997. Tel Batash I (Qedem 37). Jerusalem: The Hebrew University.Mieroop, M. van de. 2007. A History of the Ancient Near East, ca. 3000-323 BC. Oxford:

Blackwell.Mitchel, A. J. 1997. Contested Peripheries: Philistia in the Neo-Assyrian World System,

PhD dissertation, UCLA.Na’aman, N. 1981. Economic Aspects of the Egyptian Occupation of Canaan. Israel Explo-

ration Journal 31: 172-185.——. 1987. The Negev in the Last Century of the Kingdom of Judah. Cathedra 42: 3-15

(Hebrew).——. 1991. The Kingdom of Judah Under Josiah. Tel Aviv 18: 3-71.——. 1993. Population Changes in Palestine following Assyrian Deportations. Tel Aviv

20: 104-124.

The Interests of the Assyrian Empire in the West 85

——. 1995. Province Systems and Settlement Patterns in South Syria and Palestine in the Neo-Assyrian Period. In Neo-Assyrian Geography, ed. Mario Liverani. Roma: Stampa a cura di Sargon, srl, Padova: 103-115.

——. 2001. An Assyrian Residence at Ramat Rahel? Tel Aviv 28: 260-280.——. 2003. Ekron Under the Assyrian and Egyptian Empires. Bulletin of the American

Schools of Oriental Research 332: 81-91.Nijboer, A. J. 2004. La cronologia assoluta dell’èta del Ferro nel Mediterraneo, Dibattito

sui metodi e sui resultati, Mediteranea I: 527-556.Nijboer, A. J., and J. van der Plicht. 2006. An Interpretation of the Radiocarbon Determi-

nations of the Oldest Indigenous-Phoenician Stratum thus far, Excavated at Huelva, Tartessos (South-West Spain). BABesch 81: 31-36.

Oppenheim, A. Leo. 1967. Essay on Overland Trade in the First Millennium BC Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21: 236-254.

Portugaly, Y. 1987. Construction Methods, Architectural Features and Environment. In Tel Qiri (Qedem 24), eds Amnon Ben-Tor and Yuval Portugaly. Jerusalem: 132-138.

Postgate, J. N. 1979. The Economic Structure of the Assyrian Empire. In Power and Propa-ganda, ed. Mogens Trolle Larsen, Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag: 193-221.

Redford, D. 1992. Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton: Princeton Univer-sity Press.

Reich, R. 1984. The Identification of the ‘Sealed karu of Egypt’. Israel Exploration Journal 34: 32-38.

Riklin, Sh. 1997. Beit Aryeh. ‘Atiqot 32:7–20 (Hebrew).Safrai, Z. 1994. The Economy of Roman Palestine. London: Routledge.Sass, B. 1990. Arabs and Greeks in Late First Temple Jerusalem. Palestine Exploration Jour-

nal 122: 59-61.Schloen, D. 2001. The House of the Father as Fact and Symbol. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.Sharon Survey. 1973. Archaeological Survey of Israel: the Sharon. Hadashot Arkheologiyot

(Archaeological News) 47: 26-28 (Hebrew).Shaw, J. W. 1989. Phoenicians in Southern Crete. AJA 93/2: 165-183.Sherratt, S. and A. Sherratt. 1993. The Growth of the Mediterranean Economy in the Early

First Millenium BC. World Archaeology 24/3: 361-377.Shiloh, Y. 1987. South Arabian Inscriptions from the City of David, Jerusalem. Palestine

Exploration Quarterly 119: 9-18.Silver, M. 1985. Economic Structures of the Ancient Near East. London: Croom Helm.Soden, W. von. 1985. The Ancient Orient: An Introduction to the Study of the Ancient Near

East. Grand Rapids: W.G. Eerdmans.Stager, L. E. 1976. Farming in the Judean Desert During the Iron Age. Bulletin of the

American Schools of Oriental Research 221: 145-158.——. 1996. Ashkelon and the Archaeology of Destruction: Kislev 604 BCE. Eretz Israel

25: 61*-74*.——. 2001. Port Power in the Early and the Middle Bronze Age: the Organization of

Maritime Trade and Hinterland Production. In Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse, ed. Samuel R. Wolff. Atlanta: ASOR: 625-638.

86 A. Faust / JESHO 54 (2011) 62-86

Stern, E. 2001. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, vol. II, The Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian Periods (732-332 BCE). New York: Doubleday.

Tadmor, H. 1966. Philistia Under Assyrian Rule. Biblical Archaeologists 29: 86-102.——. 1975. Assyria and the West: The Ninth Century and Its Aftermath. In Unity and

Diversity: Essays in the History, Literature, and Religion of the Ancient Near East, eds H. Goedicke and J.J.M. Roberts. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press: 36-48.

——. 2006. Assyria, Babylonia and Judah: Studies in the History of the Ancient Near East. Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute and Israel Exploration Society (Hebrew).

Tainter, J. A. 1999. Post-Collapse Societies. In, Companion Encyclopedia of Archaeology, vol. II, ed. Graeme Barker. London: Routledge: 988-1039.

Vieweger, D. and J. Haser. 2007. Tall Zira’a: Five Thousand Years of Palestinian History on a Single-Settlement Mound. Near Eastern Archaeology 70: 147-167.

Weiss, E. and M. Kislev. 2004. Plant Remains as Indications for Economic Activity: a Case Study from Iron Age Ashkelon. Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 1-13.

Yadin, Y. et al., 1961. Hazor III-IV (Figures). Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society.Yamada, Sh., 2000. The Construction of the Assyrian Empire: A Historical Study of the Inscrip-

tions of Shalmaneser III (859-824 BC) Relating to His Campaigns to the West. Leiden: Brill.