Re: N. Feig on Nazareth
- I think the archaeological evidence is clear that there was a village
on this site dating at least to the early Roman period and habitation
as far back as the Bronze Age.
rene joseph salm wrote:
> I thought Xtk readers would be interested in a summary of the results of--
> Nurit Feig's very informative article "Burial Caves at Nazareth" (Atiqot
> 10, 1990, 67-79). This evidence confirms prior evidence in this Xtk
> The post "Nazareth: Sundry" (Apr 17, 6pm) itemized comprehensive pre-1980
> oil lamp results. This pre-1980 evidence came from only two tombs with
> datable artifacts (out of 24-- the rest of the tombs having been
> extensively robbed/violated in the course of time), one excavated by E.
> Richmond in 1931 (reported in QDAP), and the other by B. Bagatti in the
> course of the 50's and 60's (Tomb 70. reported in "Excavations in
> Nazareth 1969).
> Based on Rosenthal and Sivan's study (Qedem 8) the following was
> -- Not one of the 27 oil lamps from the Nazareth site can with certainty
> be dated earlier than 100 CE.
> In 1980-81 Ms. Feig excavated five tombs on the eastern slope of the
> Nazareth valley, opposite what Bagatti called the "Antique Village" (which
> is 300-400 m distant).
> Feig's evidence includes several pots/jars, 17 oil lamps, as well
> as the characteristics and dating of the tombs themselves.
> As regards the 17 oil lamps and pottery, the particulars are:
> 1 lamp : I CE (end) or II CE (wheel-made)
> 6 lamps: Mid-I CE to mid-II CE (wheel-made, similar to 3 lamps
> found in Bagatti Tomb 70)
> 4 lamps: I CE or II CE (3 mould-made, 1 wheel-made) 'Herodian' type
> 4 lamps: II CE or III CE (also 2 jars and 2 pots)
> 1 lamp : "Roman"
> 1 lamp : III CE to V CE
> Feig's overall conclusion (p.79):
> "From these facts and from the findings it is possible to relate the use
> of these caves to a period of time between the middle of the first century
> CE (Cave M) to the third century CE (Cave D)."
> This concludes the dating of all 44 oil lamps (and miscellaneous pottery)
> found at the three principle sites at ancient Nazareth. One site is
> located in Nazareth "center" (Bagatti tomb 70), one 250 m to the south
> (Richmond), and one ca.350 m to the east (Feig).
> The Nazareth evidence in general suggests the beginnings of a settlement
> between ca. 50 CE and 100 CE.
> The preponderance of evidence points to II CE and thereafter.
> There is no pre-Jesus evidence for habitation or funerary use at the
> Nazareth site.
> -- Rene
taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon
- In a message dated 5/5/99 2:57:37 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> Subj: Re: N. Feig on NazarethHorsley agrees that there was a substantial settlement at Nazareth during the
> Date: 5/5/99 2:57:37 PM US Mountain Standard Time
> From: jkilmon@... (Jack Kilmon)
> Sender: owner-crosstalk@...
> To: rsalm@... (rene joseph salm)
> CC: crosstalk@...
> I think the archaeological evidence is clear that there was a village
> on this site dating at least to the early Roman period and habitation
> as far back as the Bronze Age.
first century. We have discussed this before. There is other evidence than