James M. Weinstein

Bio: James M. Weinstein is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Bronze Age & Chronology. The author has an hindex of 6, co-authored 9 publications receiving 265 citations.

The Egyptian Empire in Palestine: a Reassessment

Abstract: The beginning of the Late Bronze Age witnessed the rise of the Egyptian empire in Western Asia. Much has been written about the Palestinian segment of this empire, with Egyptian control in this area often being seen as a more or less continuous military, political, and economic domination throughout the Late Bronze Age. W. F. Albright expressed this viewpoint clearly in his classic work, The Archaeology of Palestine:

Egyptian Relations with Palestine in the Middle Kingdom

Abstract: Traditional studies of Egypt's relations with Palestine in the Middle Kingdom (1991-1786 B.c.) have usually concluded that there was a significant and extensive Egyptian presence in Palestine at this time; many scholars have followed the lead of W. F. Albright, who argued for a Middle Kingdom political or military empire in the Southern Levant.' Such archaeological and historical data as the Story of Sinuhe, the Execration Texts, the Nesumont and Khusobk stelae, the Djehutihotep statuette from Megiddo, and numerous Middle Kingdom antiquities found in Palestine have often been quoted as evidence either for this empire or at least for a strong Egyptian commercial or diplomatic presence in Palestine in the 12th Dynasty.2 It is my conviction that no such empire existed, and the supposedly close political and economic relations have been much exaggerated. The primary data for this study will be the Egyptian imports and Palestinian copies of Egyptian objects which have been found in Middle Bronze IIA burials and occupational deposits.3 While there has been considerable disagreement among scholars regarding the absolute chronology of the MB IIA Period, it now seems likely that this period encompasses most of the 12th Dynasty,4 while the semi-nomadic MB I Period is

Radiocarbon Dating of Palestine in the Early Bronze Age

Abstract: Early Bronze Age chronology in Palestine rests upon three relatively independent considerations. First, there is the archeological stratigraphy of the period itself, structured into a comparative sequence whose nomenclature varies, but upon whose substance there is general agreement (Wright: 1937, 1958,. 1961; De Vaux: 1971). Second, datable foreign synchronisms are established through literary sources, art, imported objects, architectural parallels, and pottery analysis (Kantor: 1965; Albright: 1965; Hennessy: 1967). Egyptian synchronisms are most important in the present chronologies, but there are supporting connections with Syrian and Anatolian sites. And third, an increasing number of radiocarbon dates has become available in recent years, presenting us with the potential for an absolute chronology independent of foreign synchronisms. Until recently the most controversial issue was that of a "high" or "low" chronology in dating the beginning of Dynasty 1 in Egypt. Most Egyptologists favor the high chronology, beginning the Ist Dynasty ca. 3100 B.C. (Hayes 1970: 174-80). On the other hand, Palestinian archeologists have generally followed the low chronology of Albright, beginning the Ist Dynasty ca. 2900 B.C. (Albright 1965: 50). A major factor influencing widespread adoption of the low chronology was the apparent lack of enough stratified historical evidence to fill in EB I and III, the two problem periods. Two developments within the last decade alter the rather settled status of Early Bronze Age chronology and require a review of present evidence. First, excavations at Jericho, Ai, and Bab edh-Dhra have produced considerably more stratified historical evidence to fill in the time-span of the period, making the low chronology an option rather than a necessity. Accordingly, while Lapp (1970: 123-24) follows a "moderately low chronology" of Albright, Hennessy (1967: 85-90) prefers a higher chronology by 100 years and Callaway (1972: 116) adopts a mediating position, JAMES M. WEINSTEIN The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19174

The Chronology of Palestine in the Early Second Millennium B. C. E.

Abstract: Four major chronological schemes-the ultra-high, high, middle, and low-exist for the early second millennium B. C. E. in Palestine. Those schemes differ primarily in their dating of the MB IIA and ...

The Significance of Tell Areini for Egyptian-Palestinian Relations at the Beginning of the Bronze Age

Abstract: blage of Egyptian and Egyptianizing pottery as well as several ostraca, one inscribed with the name of King Narmer. Most of these finds came from Area D on the "high" terrace. In 1960, at the conclusion of the excavations in this area, Yeivin offered the following evaluation of the stratigraphic evidence: 1. The Egyptian and Egyptianizing pottery appears in Area D only in Stratum V (1960a: 196). 2. Stratum V should be dated to early Dynasty I on the basis of a sherd inscribed with Narmer's name that was found in this level (1960a: 201). 3. "It seems that the assemblage in question can only be explained as a result of an Egyptian invasion and probably short-lived domination of southern Canaan" (1960a: 200), which should be dated to the early First Dynasty (1960a: 201). Yeivin's views have been accepted by Hennessy (1967: 26-27, 34, 61, 85-86), Lapp (1970: 121-23), and Gophna (1972; 1976a; 1976b: 9), among others.' Hennessy relied heavily on Yeivin's interpretation in his own analysis of the foreign relations and relative chronology of Palestine during "Proto-Urban" times, although he diverged from Yeivin in the dates assigned to the Palestinian materials. Lapp debated "between considering the Egyptian intrusion at Gath [the Philistine city with which Tell Areini was formerly identified] a raid or a conquest" and concluded that the latter was the most probable explanation for the Egyptian finds. Gophna has argued that Tell Areini provides evidence for both an invasion and subsequent control of southern Palestine by the Egyptians. In addition, he considers the occurrence of large quantities of Egyptian "kitchenware" as well as "commercially imported pottery" at Tell Areini an indication that an Egyptian colony may have been located here during the First Dynasty. Opposition to Yeivin's interpretation of the data has come from several quarters. For example, Ward (1963: 13-15; 1969: 215-21) believes that it is wrong to postulate an invasion (instead of commercial contacts), on the basis of the Egyptian pottery and ostracon of King Narmer in Stratum V, especially if-as Yeivin (1960a: 200) claimsthere is no other disruption in the material culture from Strata VI through IV. Ward also points out that Yeivin's explanation was influenced by Yadin's (1955) dubious interpretation of several items on the Narmer Palette. Another dissenter has been Amiran (1974: 8-11), who interprets the marked increase in both quantity and geographical distribution of Egyptian artifacts in Palestine at the beginning of dynastic times as expanded trade which perhaps grew out of the rise of urbanization in the two countries. Most recently, Helck (1979: 361-62) has expressed his criticism of Yeivin (as well as Lapp and Gophna) in terms of the military and economic situation in Egypt during the First Dynasty, contending, inter alia, that Egypt was not in a position to extend its rule to southern Palestine at the beginning of Dynasty I since it was barely in control of the Eastern Delta at this time.2 This writer's interest in Tell Areini stems from a

Chronology of the Early Bronze Age in the Southern Levant: New Analysis for a High Chronology

Abstract: The chronology of the Early Bronze Age (EBA) in the southern Levant and the synchronization between the sites, considering seriation and radiocarbon dates, have shown large inconsistencies and disagreement. We have assembled 420 14C dates, most of them previously published and a few provided directly by the excavators. The dates have been re-evaluated on the basis of their archaeological context and using analytical criteria. Bayesian modeling has been applied to the selected dates in relation to the given seriation of the EBA subperiods (EB I, II III, IV). Sites with 2 or more sequential subphases were individually modeled in order to define the transitions between the subperiods. The new chronology indicates that the EB I–II transition occurred site-dependently between 3200–2900 BC, with EB II–III around 2900 BC, and EB III–IV ~2500 BC. DOI: 10.2458/azu_js_rc.v54i3–4.16403

Climate Changes during the Holocene and their Impact on Hydrological Systems

Abstract: Preface Acknowledgements 1. Climate changes in the Levant during the Late Quaternary 2. Climate changes during the Holocene in Europe 3. Climate changes during the Holocene in East Asia (China, Korea and Japan) 4. Climate changes during the Holocene in Africa 5. Climate changes over Western USA and Mexico during the Holocene 6. General conclusions References.

Heartlands and Hinterlands: alternative trajectories of early urbanization in Mesopotamia and the Southern Levant

Abstract: Comparative rank-size analyses reveal highly variable courses of urbanization in ancient Mesopotamia and the southern Levant during the fourth through early second millennia B.C. While traditional rank-size methods do not consider the effects of archaeological sampling, we propose a revised approach based on Monte Carlo simulation, which incorporates site-recovery rates and demonstrates the advantages of “full-coverage” survey. We highlight the rapid development of urban primacy in southern Mesopotamia’s heartland (Adams 1981) and the more static rural integration of the Diyala hinterland (Adams 1965). In contrast, Bronze Age urbanization in the southern Levant describes a mosaic of urban and rural systems following independent trajectories. We call for greater attention to small sites, which often define the shape of rank-size distributions. Our approach illuminates modest cases of urbanization in terms of structure, rather than simply of reduced scale, and avoids a tendency to categorize such cases as derivative.