The Philistines and Their Material Culture in Context: Future Directions of Historical Biblical...

Historical Biblical Archaeology

and the Future

The New Pragmatism

edited by

Thomas E. Levy

Equinox Publishing Ltd . e~ulnox

London Oakville

PENNSTAIT HARRrSBURG lIBRARYMIDDLETOWN, PA 17057

9 The Philistines and their Material Culture in Context

Future Directions of Historical Biblical

Archaeology for the Study of Cultural

Transmission

Ann E. Killebrew

Abstract

This paper reviews different methodological and theoretical approaches to culture transmission in general and as applied to the Philistines in particular. Recent archaeological evidence is then summarized that challenges simplistic 20th-century Eurocentric hyper-diffusionist migration interpretations and linear narratives that portray the Philistines as a group of 'Mycenaean' refugees fleeing the Greek mainland and/or the western Aegean. New directions for future research regarding the transmission of Aegean-style material culture in the eastern Mediterranean are proposed and their implications for the biblical Philistines. In this way, this paper contributes to efforts to forge a more pragmatic historical Biblical Archaeology for the southern Levant.

The Philistines, well known in biblical lore as one of ancient Israel's most treacherous enemies, have fascinated biblical scholars, archaeologists and the general public for well over a century. During the . 20th century, the search for the Philistines centered on mounds associated with the Philistines in the biblical account-Tel Miqne (Ekron), Tell es-Safi (Gath), Ashdod, Ashkelon and Gaza.1 At these five sites, often dubbed the 'Pentapolis' cities, an especially elegant Aegean-style material culture was uncovered that scholars have unanimously attributed to the Philistines. This incongruity of the

1. The identifications of Tel Miqne (Khirbet el-Muqanna) with biblical Ekron (Dothan and Gitin 2008), Tel Ashkelon (Tell el Khadra) with biblical Ashkelon (Avi-Yonah and Eph'al 1993; Stager 2008) and Tel Ashdod (Isdud) with biblical Ashdod (M. Dothan 1993) are accepted by most scholars and confirmed byexcavations at these sites. Recent excavations at Tel es-Safi (Maeir 2008b) also seem to confirm its identification with Gath. Several sites have been suggested as the location of biblical Gaza, including Tell el-'Ajjul and Tell Harube, the latter situated under the modern city of Gaza. Most scholars today accept the largely unexcavated Tell Harube as the location of ancient Gaza (see, e.g., Albright 1938; Kempinski 1974; Ovadiah 1993).

THE PHILISTINES AND THEIR MATERIAL CULTURE 157

biblical depiction of the Philistines as uncouth and uncivilized with the discovery of a very sophisticated culture has served to increase popular fascination and scholarly interest in these vilified people. The/publication of T. Dothan's 1982 now classic book, The Philistines and their Material Culture, represented the first comprehensive study of the Philistines and remains the major reference work on the topic until today. As outlined by Dothan in her book and expanded upon in later publications, the Philistines emerged from the ruins of the Bronze Age and arrived in the southern coastal plain of Canaan, bringing with them a distinctive Aegean-style culture. The hallmark of Philistine material culture is its ceramic assemblage. In its earliest stratigraphic phase, these vessels are characterized by their fine ware and monochrome paint decoration, somewhat misleadingly designated as 'Mycenaean I1IC'.2 Associated with these decorated vessels are Aegean-style plain wares, comprising mainly bowls, kraters and cooking pots and smaller numbers of jars and jugs. Other aspects of Philistine material culture, including cultic objects, architectural features, cuisine, and crafts and technology, also display Aegean-style features. Remarkably, this early phase of Philistine material culture representing their initial settlement in the 12th century BCE has been found only at the five Pentapolis cities mentioned in Josh. 13 :2-3, lending credence to the historical relevance of the biblical account. Bichrome pottery, a later development of the decorated monochrome Mycenaean mc assemblage, is characterized by its painted black and red decoration that incorporates both Aegean-style and 'Levantine' features. This pottery has been found throughout the southern coastal plain and corresponds to a period of expansion of Philistine settlement and influence during the 11th century BCE, a development that is also reflected in the biblical text describing the Philistines initial victories against the Israelites.3 Armed with this evidence and building on earlier research (see, e.g., Dothan and Dothan 1992: 3-11 for a history of research), Dothan (1982; see also Dothan and Dothan 1992) argued that the appearance of this new Aegean-style material culture excavated at the Pentapolis cities represented a migrating group of west Aegean peoples fleeing destruction and chaos on the Greek mainland during the final years of the 13th and early 12th centuries BCE. In spite of a plethora of recent archaeological discoveries in the eastern Mediterranean that indicates a far more complex scenario of cultural transmission leading up to the appearance of Aegean-style material culture in the east, the majority of scholars continue to endorse the model of a unidirectional mass-migrations of 'Greek' or western Aegean peoples to explain the appearance and diffusion of Aegean-style culture in the east in general and at Philistine sites in particular.4 In nearly all

2. The use of 'Mycenaean IIIe' is misleading when used in the Philistine context because the term refers to a very specific category of Mycenaean-style pottery that does not always accurately reflect the development of this Aegean-style in the east. As I have discussed elsewhere, the decorated Philistine repertoire most closely resembles the Aegean-style pottery produced on Cyprus, specifically Decorated Late Cypriot III and White Painted Wheelmade III wares that are wheel-made with a light fabric decorated with a dark matt paint (see Killebrew 1998b: 395 for a discussion of these terms).

3. See, e.g., the biblical accounts of their encounters with Samson (especially Judg. 15-16) and Saul (especially 1 Sam. 31). According to the Bible, their influence began to decline during the reign of King David. (e.g. 2 Sam. 5-8). For overviews of the biblical evidence regarding the Philistines, see e.g. Dothan 1982: 13-21; Singer 1994; Ehrlich 1996; and Machinist 2000 who review the evidence sequentially as related in the biblical account. See Finkelstein (2002) who categorically states that the biblical narrative of Philistine-Israelite encounters represents a late monarchic 7th-century BeE reality with little relevance to historical reconstructions of earlier periods, a view that in my opinion does not adequately represent the complexity of the biblical account.

4. See, e.g., Barako 2003; Dothan 1989, 1995, 1998,2000,2003; Dothan and Zukerman 2004; Mazar 1985, 1988; Stager 1995; Yasur-Landau 2003a, 2003b, 2005. In most of these works, 'Aegean' is synonymous with the Greek mainland, Crete or the west Aegean islands. Noteworthy is the continued neglect of archaeological evidence from the east Aegean and the western and southwestern coasts of modern-day Turkey, in spite of considerable new data from these regions. See Silberman (1998) regarding the Eurocentric focus of research into Philistine origins and also Chami (2007) for a discussion of how modern Western preconceptions of race

158 HISTORICAL BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE FUTURE

treatments of the early Philistines, the focus largely has been placed on origins, diffusion and acculturation, or inter-group and vertical (e.g. hierarchical or linear) transformation, with little consideration for processes that involve intra-group and horizontal transmission. Similarly, overly simplistic analyses of the literary transmission of the Philistines in the biblical text continue to characterize much of the recent scholarly investigations. In what follows, I review methodological and theoretical approaches to culture transmission in general and as applied to the Philistines in particular. The recent archaeological evidence is then summarized that challenges simplistic 20thcentury Eurocentric hyper-diffusionist migration interpretations and linear narratives that portray the Philistines as a group of 'Mycenaean' refugees fleeing the Greek mainland and/or the western Aegean. I conclude with suggestions for new venues of future research regarding the transmission of Aegean-style material culture in the east and its implications for the biblical Philistines. In this way, this paper contributes to efforts to forge a more pragmatic historical Biblical Archaeology for the southern Levant (see Levy, this volume).

Approaches to Cultural Transmission and Change and Biblical Archaeology

During the first six decades of the 20th century, culture-historically oriented views of the nature of culture and its transmission dominated anthropological and archaeological thought (see, e.g., Lyman, O'Brien and Dunnell 1997 for an overview). These scholars, whose interests generally focused on tracing histories and origins of specific nations or ethnic groups, employed diffusion and migration, two often overlapping mechanisms to explain the transfer of culture traits and ideas from one society to another. Migration can be defined as a specific type of diffusion characterized by the arrival of a new group and material culture that replaces or overwhelms an indigenous people, usually via conquest and/or colonization. Diffusion, in its broadest sense, encompasses all external processes that spread cultural traits, including migration (see, e.g., stimulus, or trans-cultural, diffusion as developed by Kroeber 1940). But in some scholarly traditions, diffusion is differentiated from migration and refers specifically to less direct mechanisms of transmission such as trade, imitation, colonialism or imperialism. Several theoretical models dominated cultural diffusion literature during this period. Heliocentric diffusion, or hyper-diffusionism, advocates that similar cultures originated from one center and that technological innovation happened once. A second view proposes that cultures originate from several cultural 'hearths', hubs or culture circles (kulturkreise). An additional approach, often termed evolutionary diffusionism, posits that societies and cultures are influenced from the outside but share traits that create conditions where similar innovations develop independently, resulting in parallel evolution (see, e.g., Shennan 1996; Trigger 2006: 211-313 for an extensive bibliography and history of research regarding diffusionist and migration traditions in archaeological and anthropological research).

Beginning in the 1960s, these notions of cultural diffusion came under assault by anthropologists and archaeologists trained in the social sciences. With few exceptions, such as Biblical Archaeology that remained closely affiliated with classical or biblical academic traditions, culture-historical explanations of material culture change fell out of favor and largely disappeared from mainstream archaeological literature during the final decades of the 20th century. These increasingly assertive intellectual challenges to traditional humanities-based approaches to the past gave rise to a 'new' or 'processual' archaeology that placed a premium on the importance of environment, functionality and scientifically based measureable models, systems or universal paradigms for interpreting the

shaped diffusionist reconstructions in Mrica. A similar Eurocentric bias in favor of the west Aegean evidence may be a result of historical events of the past centuries in the region.


past. A key tenet of processual archaeology was the rejection of diffusion and migration as means of cultural change. Rather, it attempted to address broader mechanisms of cultural transmission, such as learning frameworks and intergenerational transmission approaches to explain material culture patterns. Research questions that targeted mechanisms responsible for the transmission of cultural continuity were preferred over more traditional investigations of cultural origins and methods of diffusion (see, e.g., Trigger 2006: 314-85 for an overview).

Despite the fact that migration and diffusion had fallen out of favor as key factors of cultural transmission in most anthropological and archaeological circles, this conceptual approach remained a primary paradigm and concern in Biblical Archaeology. Especially in recent studies of the Philistines, these mechanisms of cultural change continue to playa key role. In particular, the view of a unidirectional diffusion via migration from the west Aegean and acculturation or assimilation studies dominates the majority of publications on the topic. Only recently have scholars begun to challenge this century-long paradigm of a direct unidirectional link between Mycenaean Greece/west Aegean and Philistine cultures (see, e.g., Killebrew 1998a, 1998b, 2000, 2003; 2005: 197-245; 2007, 2008; Killebrew and Lev-Tov 2008; see also, e.g., Maier 2008a). With the notable exception of E.S. Sherratt's insightful study of economic systems and its impact on cultural transmission at the end of the Late Bronze Age in the eastern Mediterranean, few studies have departed from the diffusionist frameworks regarding our understanding of the Philistines (see, e.g., Sherratt 1992, 1998,2000, 2003; see also Bauer 1998).

During the past decade, there has been a renewed interest in the mechanisms of both intra- and inter-group transmission. This revival is in part inspired by the social sciences that traditionally have focussed on modes of transmission and processes rather than the more narrowly defined concerns of cultural change resulting from diffusion and migration. Cultural transmission, the preferred term in most literature, is a broader and more complex approach that considers innovation, evolution, environment, economy, diffusion, migration and learning modes. Culture is interpreted as 'transmittable' via a variety of directions-i.e. vertically, horizontally or obliquely. Thus cultural transmission by definition is conceived as being three-dimensional rather than linear, the latter a feature that characterizes many culture-historical approaches (see, e.g., Shennan 1996; Clarke 2005a, 2005b; Phillips 2005; Eerkens and Lipo 2007; O'Brien 2008; Stark, Browser and Horne 2008 for treatments of the topic). Considered in light of recent discoveries in the eastern Aegean and northern Levant, this expanded tool kit for investigating cultural transmission is an especially suitable framework for re-examining the Philistine phenomenon. Before discussing new directions for the study of Philistine material culture, I will briefly review the major salient features of their material culture within its broader eastern Mediterranean context (for general summaries see Killebrew 2005: 209-20 and Maeir 2008a).

Characteristics of Early Philistine Material Culture

During the past three decades, large-scale excavations at three sites-Tel Miqne-Ekron, Ashkelon and Tell es-SafilGath-have added tremendously to our understanding of the Philistines (see Dothan and Gitin 2008 [Ekron]; Maeir 2008b [Gath]; Master 2005; Stager 2008 [Ashkelon] for recent summaries and updated bibliographies). The material culture uncovered at these three sites, considered together with the findings from Ashdod and Gaza, displays similar non-indigenous, AegeanstyleS features that characterize Philistine sites. These new traits are evident in several categories of

5. I use the term 'Aegean-style' to characterize Philistine material culture, in contrast to 'Aegean' or 'Mycenaean', which was the dominant adjective used in scholarly literature. By adding the word 'style' to 'Aegean,' my intention is to emphasize the complexity of the development and transmission of this particular


material culture, including ceramic vessels, cultic practices, architectural features, cuisine and various industries and technologies (see Killebrew 2005: 197-246 for a detailed discussion and comprehensive bibliography; for an updated general survey, see Maeir 2008a).

Pottery The locally produced Iron I Philistine pottery repertoire includes decorated fine and undecorated plain wares as well as cooking vessels that are distinguished from indigenous assemblages by their shape, decoration, fabric and formation techniques (for recent studies of aspects of this assemblage, see, e.g., Killebrew 1999, 2000; 2005: 219-30; Dothan and Zukerman 2004; Yasur-Landau 2005; Ben-Shlomo et at. 2008). Remarkably, while most research continues to highlight the connections between mainland Greece/west Aegean connections, features of the earliest monochrome and undecorated plain wares from Philistine sites find their closest parallels in shape, decoration and technology with Cypriot and Cilician assemblages (e.g. Killebrew 1998a, 1999,2000; 2005: 230; 2007). Although several ceramic studies have begun to address issues of cultural transmission beyond diffusion (e.g. Yasur-Landau 2005; Uziel2007) vis-a.-vis specific features of the Philistine ceramic assemblage, still lacking is a more comprehensive diachronic and synchronic study of this Aegeanstyle repertoire that addresses both intra-regional and inter-regional developments.

Cult Several features of Philistine material culture associated with cult represent a clear break from longterm indigenous traditions, including lion-headed cups, incised bovine scapulae and female figurines. Lion-headed cups make their first appearance in the southern Levant during the Iron I period, especially at sites associated with the Philistines. The stylistic inspiration of these vessels is usually traced to rhyta from Bronze Age contexts on mainland Greece and Crete (Dothan 1982: 231; Barako 2000: 523). However, as pointed out by Meiberg (in press), several morphological and functional features of these vessels distinguish them from west Aegean examples. The closest comparisons with the Philistine rhyta are those from Bronze Age Anatolia and North Syria where these vessels have a longstanding tradition.

Incised bovine scapulae are another class of artifacts associated with cultic practices. Numerous examples have been recovered from Iron I and early Iron lIA levels associated with the Philistine settlements (see, e.g., Dothan 1998: 155; Zukerman et at. 2007) and at other sites along the southern Levantine coast (see, e.g., Tel Dor: Stern 1994: 96, fig. 409; 2000: 199, fig. 10.6). Most examples of incised scapulae ate known from Cyprus, where they have been found in cultic contexts at several Late Cypriot IlIA sites (Webb 1985). Although their function remains a mystery, two possibilities have been suggested: either they were used for divination (Webb 1985: 324-28) or as parts of musical instruments (Karageorghis 1990: 159).

Nicknamed 'Ashdoda' in honor of the site where she was first discovered, these distinctive female figures are one of the hallmarks of Philistine cult. They are usually compared to similar

material culture style that spread, either via trade, imitation, emulation, migration or other means of transmission, over a large area of the Aegean and later in several regions in the Levant during the Late Bronze Age and early Iron Ages. In using the word 'Aegean' in its geographical sense, I include all regions bordering on the Aegean Sea. Unfortunately, the term 'Aegean' as used by most scholars usually refers to cultures associated with the west Aegean mainland and islands, reflecting a Eurocentric view of the Aegean Sea. Greek and 'Greek-style' material culture is one of many cultural styles and ethnic groups inhabiting the Aegean Sea region from earliest times to the present. My use of the term 'Aegean-style' refers to the predominant material culture style in the Aegean that developed as a result of multi-directional influences and contacts between the various groups and cultures situated at many sites along the shores of the Aegean Sea during the final decades of the Late Bronze Age and continuing into the early Iron Age.


Mycenaean female figurines known from the west Aegean (see Dothan 1982: 234; Yasur-Landau 2001: Table 1). However, no less significant sources of inspiration are figurines found on Cyprus in Late Cypriot IIC-I1IA and earlier contexts, while I. Singer (1992: 432-50) suggests these figurines should be identified with the Anatolian mother goddess KubabaiKybele (also see Morris 2001 for a discussion of Late Bronze Aegean east-west interactions and Anatolian contributions to Greek religion). I contend that Ashdoda is best understood as a hybridization of Aegean, Anatolian and Cypriot styles and influences (see Killebrew 2005: 217-18 for a summary; see also Mazar 2000 for a general discussion of Philistine cult, including temple architecture).

Architectural Features Over the past few decades extensive architectural remains have been uncovered at Philistine sites. Hearths are one of the most distinctive elements of Philistine architecture, a feature unknown in the southern Levant prior to the appearance of this Aegean-style culture. Hearths first appear in Asia Minor and on Crete. During the second millennium BeE, they are well documented in Asia Minor, in the east and west Aegean, on Cyprus and in Cilicia, and later at Philistine sites, hinting at the complex multi-directional nature of Late Bronze Age cultural interaction (see Karageorghis 1998; 2000: 266, for a general discussion; Barako 2001: 14-15 Table 2). Although most literature has emphasized the comparison of hearths on the Greek mainland (e.g. Dothan 2003: 196-201), the closest parallels to the more modest circular, rectangular or square domestic hearths typical in Philistia are found on Cyprus (Killebrew 2005: 210-16),

Crafts and Technology: Textile and Ceramic Production Two Aegean-style classes of artifacts found at Philistine sites and associated with a professional textile industry include stone or terracotta bathtubs and spool-shaped ceramic weights. Stone and terracotta bathtubs are documented from second-millennium sites in the Aegean. In later contexts these tubs appear on Cyprus during the Late Cypriot lIC and IlIA periods. Typically these installations have been interpreted as bathtubs for bathing, or for use in purification rites (for a detailed discussion, see Karageorghis 2000: 266-74; Dothan 2003: 202). More recently, L. Mazow (2007) has presented convincing evidence that at least some of these tubs were used either for scouring or fulling wool. Further evidence for a significant textile industry is attested to by increasing numbers of Aegean-style non-perforated reel or spool-shaped 100m weights found at Tel MiqneEkron and Ashkelon (see Yasur-Landau 2009). In addition to non-indigenous textile manufacturing techniques, pottery technology associated with the Aegean-style Philistine assemblage also represents a break from centuries-long local Bronze Age pottery production practices. These changes are evident in clay selection and preparation, vessel formation techniques and firing temperatures (see, e.g., Nissenbaum and Killebrew 1995; Killebrew 1996; 1998b: 397-401).

Cuisine The dramatic leap in the quantities of pig bones is one of the most noteworthy changes that marks the transition from the Late Bronze to Iron I levels at Philistine sites. This rise in the role of pork in the Philistine diet is accompanied by a marked increase in the consumption of beef. In the earliest Iron I phases at Tel Miqne-Ekron, pig bones make up at least 13% of the assemblage, increasing in percentages through the 11 th century. This phenomenon is matched at other Philistine sites and indicates the maintenance of clearly defined boundaries for at least two centuries. The appearance of Aegean-style table wares and cooking pots also signals significant changes in dietary practices. Most scholars have traced these dietary practices to the west Aegean. However, it should be noted that pork consumption was widespread in the Bronze Age Aegean, Anatolia and Europe. What can be concluded with certainty is that a well-defined cultural boundary existed between what can be


called Indo-European vs. Semitic areas of influence, indicating the intrusive character of the Philistine Iron I diet (see Killebrew and Lev-T ov 2008 for a recent analysis and relevant bibliography; see also Hesse 1986; Hesse and Wapnish 1997).

Mention should also be made of an exceptional find of a dog burial from an early Iron Age level at Ekron. The placement of the dog's head between its hind legs and cut marks on its neck vertebrae suggest that the animal had been sacrificed. This discovery brings to mind Anatolian rites where a puppy, kid and piglet were sacrificed to cure epidemics. Dog consumption is also known from several sites in Bronze Age Greece but was not practiced during the Bronze Age southern Levant (see Killebrew and Lev-To v 2008: 344-45 for a discussion and relevant bibliography; see also Stager 1991 regarding later dog burials). These new data concerning Philistine material culture, taken together with the older datasets, provide new avenues for interpreting the Philistine phenomena.

Beyond Diffusion and Migration

As outlined above, Philistine material culture is one of the best documented and most distinctive Iron Age cultural assemblages in the eastern Mediterranean. Carefully excavated stratigraphic sequences and detailed typologies provide an excellent database from which to embark on new directions in Philistine research. However, still lacking is an adequate understanding of the complex mechanisms and processes involved in the transmission of Aegean-style culture during the final decades of the Late Bronze Age leading up to the Philistine phenomenon. Unfortunately much past and present research on the topic remains mired in hyper-diffusionist and unidirectional migration models to explain the transmission of Aegean-style material culture, both in the Late Bronze and early Iron Ages, as outlined above.

Following I. Rouse (1986: 11-14), I suggest two types of diffusion-stimulus and complex-as approaches that can be used to clarify diffusionist aspects of the cultural transmission of Aegean· style culture. During the closing decades of the Late Bronze, prior to the appearance of the Philis· tines, west Aegean-style material culture manufactured in production centers outside of the Greek mainland spread in popularity throughout the Aegean and eventually to Cyprus. Often ignored in many of the studies of the diffusion of Aegean-style material culture is the multi-directional sharing of cultural features and the impact of hybridization and cross fertilization between cultures located on the Aegean coasts (see Maran 2004 for one of the few studies of multi-directional cultural interchange in the Late Bronze Age Aegean; see also Mountjoy 1998 and 1999 regarding regional variations of Mycenaean pottery in the Aegean). This more gradual transmission of culture, an aspect of which can be termed stimulus diffusion, represents both external and internal transference and transmission of information, ideas or elements of material culture. Although small-scale migra· tion doubtlessly played a role, additional factors were crucial in the cultural transmission and interactions between cultures of the Aegean. These mechanisms could include other forms of human contact (e.g. intermarriage), gift exchange and trade, imitatiOn/emulation/learning, ideology and agency, or the impact of individual action. How and why this transmission occurred has yet to be adequately investigated, in part due to a priori notions and biases regarding spheres and direction flows of cultural transmission during the 14th through early 12th centuries BeE.

Complex diffusion, which best describes the transmission of the initial phase of Philistine material culture in the southern coastal plain, is not common and is difficult to prove in the archaeological record. Complex diffusion refers to transference of a complete set of traits and ideas to another culture or region during a relatively short period of time and is usually a result of large-scale population movements, migrations, conquests, colonization and the forced displacement or transfer of populations. As outlined above, the initial appearance of Philistine material culture includes the wholesale transfer of an entire complex of Aegean-style material culture to the southern Levant and


can best be understood as a result of well-planned colonization and migration (see Dommelen 1997: 306 regarding colonization, and Killebrew 2005: 197-202; 2007). Although the early Philistine material culture appears suddenly and full-blown at the Pentapolis cities, recent excavations at Ashkelon, Tel es-Safi/Gath and Tel Miqne-Ekron illustrate the existence of inter-site variations, reflecting the complexity of scenarios and means of transmission of Aegean-style material culture at each of these sites. Although initially useful to conceptualize cultural processes at work, the concepts of assimilation, acculturation and creolization models today do not adequately address the mechanisms at work in the cultural transmission of later phases of Philistine material cultures (see, e.g., Stone 1995). In recent years, several publications have begun to explore internal mechanisms of cultural transmission and the exchange of information in Iron Age Philistia and in neighboring regions (e.g. Yasur-Landau 2005 and Uziel2007). However, these studies are hampered by their limited scope and a priori presumptions of a unidirectional west Aegean transmission of Aegeanstyle material culture and of the Philistines in particular.

We are now well positioned to embark on new avenues of inquiry regarding the biblical Philistines. These include research questions relating to cultural and economic interaction between the urban Philistine centers, the surrounding countryside and neighboring regions. Thus far little is known regarding the workings of regional markets and exchange systems during much of the Iron Age in Philistia and elsewhere. Mechanisms of internal cultural transmission have largely been ignored in Philistine research. These could include human cognitive structures, learning modes involved with production or acquisition, experimentation, copying error and innovation, or the consideration of both external and internal transmission processes responsible for stylistic variations of material culture (see, e.g., Eerkens and Lipo 2007; Stark, Bowser and Horne 2008 for an overview and case studies). The impact of demography and population numbers on transmission and cultural diversity or the potential impact of individuals involved with production has also not been investigated (see, e.g., Henrich and Boyd 1998; Lipo 2001; Henrich 2004). An understanding of the mechanisms responsible for the transmission of general structures versus specific features of material culture could be especially effective in the analysis of Philistine and other Aegean-style pottery assemblages (see, e.g., Washburn 2001; Mesoudi and Whiten 2004). These suggestions represent just a small sampling of possible future research directions that incorporate both external and internal modes of cultural transmission in the study of the Philistines and their material culture that will lead to a more pragmatic historical Biblical Archaeology.

References

Albright, W.F. (1938) The Chronology of a South Palestinian City, Tell el-'AjjuL American Journal ofSemitic Languages and Literature 60: 337-59.

Avi-Yonah, M., and Y. Eph'al (1993) Ashkelon. In Stern 1993: 121-30. Barako, T.J. (2000) The Philistine Settlement as Mercantile Phenomenon? American Journal of Archaeology

104/3: 513-30. -(20Ot) The Seaborne Migration of the Philistines (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University). -(2003) One if by Sea ...Two if by Land: How did the Philistines Get to Canaan? One: By Sea. BAR 29/2: 26

33,64,66. Bauer, A.A. (1998) Cities of the Sea: Maritime Trade and the Origin of Philistine Settlement in the Early Iron

Age Southern Levant. Oxford Journal ofArchaeology 17: 149-67. Ben-Shlomo, D., L Shai, A. Zukerman and A.M. Maeir (2008) Cooking Identities: Aegean-Style Cooking Jugs

and Cultural Interaction in Iron Age Philistia and Neighboring Regions. American Journal ofArchaeology 112: 225-46.

Chami, F.A. (2007) Diffusion in the Studies of the Mrican Past: Reflections from New Archaeological Findings. African Archaeological Review 24: 1-14.


Clarke, J. (ed.) (200Sa) Archaeological Perspectives on the Transmission and Transformation ofCulture in the Eastern Mediterranean (Levant Supplementary Series 2; Oxford: Oxbow Books).

-(2005b) Cultural Transmissions and Transformations. In Clarke 2005a: 1-6. Dever, W.G., and S. Gitin (eds.) (2003) Symbiosis, Symbolism, and the Power of the Past: Canaan, Ancient

Israel, and their Neighbors from the Late Bronze Age through Roman Palaestina. Proceedings of the Centennial Symposium W.F. Albright Institute ofArchaeological Research and American Schools ofOriental Research jerusalem, May 29-May 31,2000 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns).

Dommelen, P. van (1997) Colonial Constructs: Colonialism and Archaeology in the Mediterranean. World Archaeology 28: 305-23.

Dothan, M. (1993) Ashdod. In Stern 1993: 103-19. Dothan, T. (1982) The Philistines and their Material Culture Uerusalem: Israel Exploration Society). -(1989) The Arrival of the Sea Peoples: Cultural Diversity in Early Iron Age Canaan. In Recent Excavations in

Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology, edited by S. Gitin and W.G. Dever (AASOR 49; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns): 1-14.

-(1995) Tel Miqne-Ekron: The Aegean Affinities of the Sea Peoples' (Philistines') Settlement in Canaan in Iron Age I. In Gitin 1995: 41-59.

-(1998) Initial Philistine Settlement: From Migration to Coexistence. In Gitin, Mazar and Stern 1998: 148· 61.

-(2000) Reflections on the Initial Phase of Philistine Settlement. In Oren 2000: 145-58. -(2003) The Aegean and the Orient: Cultic Interactions. In Dever and Gitin 2003: 189-213. Dothan, T., and M. Dothan (1992) People ofthe Sea and the Search for the Philistines (New York: Schribner). Dothan, T., and S. Gitin (2008) Miqne, Tel (Ekron). In Stern 2008: 1051-59. Dothan, T., and A. Zukerman (2004) Preliminary Study of Mycenaean mc: Ib Assemblages from Tel Miqne·

Ekron and Ashdod. BASOR 333: 1-54. Eerkens, J.W., and c.P. Lipo (2007) Cultural Transmission Theory and the Archaeological Record: Providing

Context to Understanding Variation and Temporal Changes in Material Culture. journal ofArchaeological Research 15: 239-74.

Ehrlich, C.S. (1996) Philistines in Transition: A History from 1000-730 RGB. (Leiden: E.]. Brill). Finkelstein, I. (2002) The Philistines in the Bible: A Late-Monarchic Perspective. jSOT 27: 131-67. Gitin, S. (ed.) (1995) Recent Excavations in Israel: A View to the West (Dubuque, Iowa: KendaIVHunt). Gitin, S., A. Mazar and E. Stern (1998) Mediterranean Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Early Tenth

Centuries BeE Uerusalem: Israel Exploration Society). Hesse, B. (1986) Animal Use at Tel Miqne-Ekron in the Bronze Age and Iron Age. BASOR 264: 17-28. Hesse, B., and P. Wapnish ( 1997) Can Pig Remains be Used for Ethnic Diagnosis in the Ancient Near East? In

The Archaeology of Israel: Constructing the Past, Interpreting the Present, edited by N.A. Silberman and D.B. Small OSOTSup 239; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 238-70.

Henrich, ]. (2004) Demography and Cultural Evolution: Why Adaptive Cultural Processes Produced Maladaptive Losses in Tasmania. AmAnt 69: 197-221.

Henrich,]., and K. Boyd (1998) The Evolution of Conformist Transmission and Between-Group Differences. Evolution and Human Behavior 19: 215-42.

Hitchcock, A., R. Laffineur and J. Crowley (eds.) (2008) DAIS The Aegean Feast, Proceedings of the 12th International Aegean Conference, University of Melbourne, Centre for Classics and Archaeology, 25-29 March 2008 (AEGAEUM 29; Liege; Universite de Liege).

Karageorghis, V. (1990) Miscellanea from Late Bronze Age Cyprus. Levant 22: 157-59. -(1998) Hearths and Bathtub in Cyprus: A 'Sea Peoples' Innovation? In Gitin, Mazar and Stern 1998: 276-82. -(2000) Cultural Innovations in Cyprus Relating to the Sea Peoples. In Oren 2000: 255-79. Kempinski, A. (1974) Tell el-'Ajjul-Beth-Aglayim or Sharuhen? IEj 24/3-4: 142-52. Killebrew, A.E. (1996) Pottery Kilns from Deir el-Balah and Tel Miqne-Ekron. In Retrieving the Past: Essays in

Honor of Gus W. Van Beek, edited by J.D. Seger (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns): 135-62. -(1998a) Aegean and Aegean-Style Material Culture in Canaan during the 14th-12th Centuries BC: Trade,

Colonization, Diffusion or Migration? In The Aegean and the Orient in the Second Millennium: Proceedings of the .Hyh Anniversary Symposium Cincinnati, 18-20 April 1997, edited by R.L. Laffineur and G.


Emanuele Greco (Aegaeum 18; Annales d'archeologie egeenne de I'Universite de Liege et UT· P ASP; Austin: University of Texas at Austin): 159·71.

-(1998b) Ceramic Typology and Technology ofthe Late Bronze II and Iron I Assemblages from Tel MiqneEkron: The Transition from Canaanite to Early Philistine Culture. In Gitin, Mazar and Stern 1998: 379405.

-(1999) Late Bronze and Iron I Cooking Pots in Canaan: A Typological, Technological and Functional Study. In Archaeology, History and Culture in Palestine and the Near East Essays in Memory ofAlbert E. Glock, edited by T. Kapitan (ASOR Books 3; Atlanta: Scholars Press): 83-126.

-(2000) Aegean-Style Early Philistine Pottery in Canaan during the Iron I Age: A Stylistic Analysis of Mycenaean IIIC:1b Pottery and its Associated Wares. In Oren 2000: 233-53.

-(2003) The Southern Levant during the 13 'h_12th Centuries BeE: The Archaeology of Social Boundaries. In Identifying Changes: The Transition from Bronze to Iron Ages in Anatolia and its Neighbouring Regions: Proceedings ofthe International Workshop Istanbul, November 8-9,2002, edited by B. Fischer, H. Genz, E. Jean and K. Koroglu (Istanbul: Turk Eski~ag Bilimleri Estitiisu); 117-24.

-(2005) Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity: An Archaeological Study of Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, and Early Israel, 1300-1100 R c.E. (Society of Biblical Literature Archaeology and Biblical Studies 9; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature; Leiden: Brill).

-(2007) The Philistines in Context: The Transmission and Appropriation of Mycenaean-Style Culture in the East Aegean, Southeastern Coastal Anatolia and the Levant. In Cyprus, the Sea Peoples and the Eastern Mediterranean: Regional Perspectives of Continuity and Change, edited by T.P. Harrison. Special issue of Scripta Mediterranea XVII-XVIII: 81-103.

-(2008) Aegean-Style Pottery and Associated Assemblages in the Southern Levant: Chronological Implications Regarding the Transition from the Late Bronze II to Iron I and the Appearance of the Philistines. In Israel in Transition: From Late Bronze II to Iron lIA (c. 1250-850 BeE): The Archaeology, edited by L.L. Grabbe (European Seminar in Historical Methodology 7; London: T. & T. Clark): 54-71.

Killebrew, A.E., and J. Lev-Tov (2008) Early Iron Age Feasting and Cuisine: An Indicator of Philistine-Aegean Connectivity. In Hitchcock, Laffineur and Crowley 2008: 339-46.

Kroeber, A.L. (1940) Stimulus Diffusion. American Anthropologist 40/1: 1-20. Laffineur, R., and R. Hagg (eds.) (2001) Potnia; Deities and Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age: Proceedings of

the 8th International Aegean Conference/8e Recontre egeenne intemationale, GOteborg, GOteborg University, 12-15 April 2000 (Aegaeum 22; Liege: Universite de Liege).

Lipo, C. (2001) Science, Style and the Study ofCommunity Structure: An Example from the Central Mississippi River Valley (BAR International Series 918; Oxford: British Archaeological Reports).

Lyman, R.L., M.J. O'Brien and R.C. Dunnell (1997) The Rise and Fall ofCulture History (New York: Plenum Press).

Machinist, P. (2000) Biblical Traditions: The Philistines and Israelite History. In Oren 2000: 53-83. Maeir, A. (2008a) Aegean Feasting and other Indo-European Elements in the Philistine Household. In

Hitchcock, Laffineur and Crowley 2008: 347-52. -(2008b) Zafit, Tel. In Stern 2008: 2079-81. Maran, J. (2004) The Spreading of Objects and Ideas in the Late Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean: Two

Case Examples from the Argolid of the 13th and 12th Centuries B.C. BASOR 336: 11-30. Master, D. (2005) Iron I Chronology at Ashkelon: Preliminary Results of the Leon Levy Expedition. In The

Bible and Radiocarbon Dating: Archaeology, Text and Science, edited by T.E. Levy and T.F.G. Higham (London: Equinox): 337-48.

Mazar, A. (1985) The Emergence of Philistine Culture. IE] 35: 95-107. -(1988) Some Aspects of the 'Sea Peoples' Settlement. In Society and Economy in the Eastern Mediterranean

(c. 1500-1000 RC.): Proceedings ofthe International Symposium Held at the University ofHaifa from the 28th ofApril to the 2nd ofMay 1985, edited by M. Heltzer and E. Lipinski (Orientalia lovaniensia analecta 23; Lenven: Peeters): 251-60.

-(2000) The Temples and Cult of the Philistines. In Oren 2000: 213-32. Mazow, L.B. (2007) The Industrious Sea Peoples: The Evidence of Aegean-Style Textile Production in Cyprus

and the Southern Levant. In Cyprus, the Sea Peoples and the Eastern Mediterranean: Regional Perspectives


ofContinuity and Change, edited by T.P. Harrison. Special issue of Scripta Mediterranea XVII-XVIII: 291322.

Meiberg, L. (In press) Philistine Lion-Headed Cups: Aegean or Anatolian? In The Philistines and Other 'Sea Peoples', edited by A.E. Killebrew and G. Lehmann (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature).

Mesoudi, A., and A. Whiten (2004) The Hierachical Transforamtion of Event Knowledge in Human Cultural Transmission. Journal of Cognition and Culture 4: 1-24.

Morris, S.P. (2001) Potnia Aswiya: Anatolian Contributions to Greek Religion. In Laffineur and Hagg 2001: 423-34.

Mountjoy, P. (1998) The East Aegean-West Anatolian Interface in the Late Bronze Age: Mycenaeans and the Kingdom of Ahhiyawa. Anatolian Studies 48: 33-67.

-(1999) Regional Mycenaean Decorated Pottery (Rahden, Wesrf.: M. Leidorf). Nissenbaum, A., and A.E. Killebrew (1995) Stable Isotopes of Carbon and Oxygen as a Possible New Tool for

Estimating Firing T emperamres of Ancient Pottery. Israel Journal of Chemistry 35: 131-36. O'Brien, M.J. (ed.) (2008) Cultural Transmission andArchaeology: Issues and Case Studies (Washington, DC:

SAA Press). Oren, E. (ed.) (2000) The Sea Peoples and their World: A Reassessment (University Museum Monograph 108;

University Museum Symposium Series 11; Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania). Ovadiah, O. (1993) Gaza. In The New Encyclopedia ofArchaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 2, edited

by E. Stern Gerusalem: Israel Exploration Society): 408-17. Phillips, J. (2005) A Question of Reception. In Clarke 2005: 39-74. Rouse, I. (1986) Migrations in Prehistory: Inferring Population Movement from Cultural Remains (New Haven:

Yale University Press). Shennan, S. (1996) Culmral Transmission and Culmral Change. In Contemporary Archaeology in Theory: A

Reader, edited by R.W. Preucel and I. Hodder (Social Archaeology Series; Oxford: Blackwell): 282-96. Sherratt, E.S. (1992) Immigration and Archaeology: Some Indirect Reflections. In Acta Cypria: Acts of an

International Congress on Cypriote Archaeology Held in GOteborg on 22-24 August 1991, Part 2, edited by P. Astrom Gonsered: Astroms): 315-45.

-(1998) 'Sea Peoples' and the Economic Structure of the Late Second Millennium in the Eastern Mediterra· nean. In Gitin, Mazar and Stern 1998: 292-313.

-(2000) Circulation of Metals and the End of the Bronze Age in the Eastern Mediterranean. In Metals Make the World Go Round: Supply and Circulation ofMetals in Bronze Age Europe, edited by C. Pare (Oxford: Oxbow Books): 82-98.

-(2003) The Mediterranean Economy: 'Globalization' at the End of the Second Millennium B.C.E. In Dever and Gitin 2003: 37-62.

Silberman, N.A. (1998) The Sea Peoples, the Victorians, and Us: Modern Social Ideology and Changing Archaeological Interpretations of the Late Bronze Age Collapse. In Gitin, Mazar and Stern 1998: 268-75.

Singer, I. (1992) Towards the Image of Dagon, the God of the Philistines. Syria 69: 431-50. -(1994) Egyptians, Canaanites and Philistines; The Period of the Emergence ofIsrael. In From Nomadism to

Monarchy: Archaeological and Historical Perspectives of Early Israel, edited by I. Finkelstein and N. Na'aman Gerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi): 282-338.

Stager, L. (1991) Why Were Hundreds of Dogs Buried at Ashkelon? BAR 17: 26-42_ -(1995) The Impact of the Sea Peoples in Canaan (1185-1050 BeE). In The Archaeology of Society in the

Holy Land, edited by T.E. Levy (New York: Facts on File): 332-48. -(2008) Tel Ashkelon. In Stern 2008: 1578-86. Stark, M.T., B.J. Browser and L. Horne (eds.) (2008) Cultural Transmission and Material Culture: Breaking

Down Boundaries (Tucson: University of Arizona Press). Stern, E. (1994) Dor, Ruler ofthe Sea: Twelve Years ofExcavations at the Israelite-Phoenician Harbor Town on

the Carmel Coast (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society). Stern, E. (ed.) (1993) The New Encyclopedia ofArchaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 1, edited by E.

Stern (Jerusalem; Israel Exploration Society); -(2008) The New Encyclopedia ofArchaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 5: Supplementary Volume

(Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society).


Stone, B.]. (1995) The Philistines and Acculturation: Culture Change and Ethnic Continuity in the Iron Age. BASOR 298: 7-32.

Trigger, B.G. (2006)A History ofArchaeological Thought (2nd edn; New York: Cambridge University Press). Uziel, J. (2007) The Development Process of Philistine Material Culture: Assimilation, Acculturation and

Everything in between. Levant 29: 165-73. Washburn, D.K. (2001) Remembering Things Seen: Experimental Approaches to the Process of Information

Transmittal. Journal ofArchaeological Method and Theory 8: 67-99. Webb, J.M. (1985) The Incised Scapulae. In Excavations at Kition V: The Pre-Phoenician Levels, Part II, edited

by V. Karageorghis; Nicosia: Department of Antiquities, Cyprus): 317-28. Yasur-Landau, A. (2001) The Mother(s) of all Philistines? Aegean Enthroned Deities of the 12th-IIth Century

Philistines. In Laffineur and Hligg 2001: 329-43. -(2003a) One ifby Sea... Two ifby Land: How Did the Philistines Get to Canaan? Two: By Land. BAR 29/2:

34-39,66-67. -(2003b) The Many Faces of Colonization: Twelfth Century Aegean Settlements in Cyprus and the Levant.

Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 3: 45-54. -(2005) Old Wine in New Vessels: Intercultural Contact, Innovation and Aegean, Canaanite and Philistine

Foodways. Tel Aviv 32: 168-91. -(2009) Behavior Patterns in Transition: Eleventh-century B.C.E. Innovation in Domestic Textile Production.

In Exp/oring the Longue Duree: Essays in Honor ofLawrence E. Stager, edited by]. David Schloen (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns): 507-16.

Zukerman, A, L. Koiska-Horwitz, J. Lev-Tov and A.M. Maier (2007) A Bone of Contention? Iron lIA Notched Scapulae from Tell es-Safi/Gath, IsraeL BASOR 347: 57-81.

The Philistines and Their Material Culture in Context: Future Directions of Historical Biblical...

Documents

Transcript of The Philistines and Their Material Culture in Context: Future Directions of Historical Biblical...