Some Things To Note On the Macalister and Duncan Plans of Field 5

Watch the “Palace of David” video before reading the below remarks.

Firstly, in this plan, the eastern part of the plan should be erased and not considered, as it does not correspond to reality. Secondly, it should be noted that, as in the case of E. Mazar’s excavation, little Late Iron II pottery was found in the M&D excavations, suggesting, as is said by Josephus, a mass removal of Iron II remains in the area of the Akra by Simon the Hasmonean.

Image 1 (plan of “Jebusite” stratum):

Note that the westernmost of the “Jebusite” walls uncovered by M&D is parallel to Wall 107 West and perpendicular to Wall 20/27. This supports the TAU reconstruction of the Large Stone Structure’s plan.

Image 2 (plans of “Hebrew” and “Jebusite” strata):

Note the existence of a corner around the cistern just to the NE of the Hasmonean ritual bath. The combination of this fact and the existence of the “Jebusite” “Inner Wall” noted above is very strong evidence for the TAU reconstruction of the LSS’s plan. Also, note the large elevation differences along the course of Wall 107 pointed out on Page 5 of Finkelstein 2011-if that is not proof of the TAU reconstruction of the LSS’s plan, I don’t know what is. Note that the Early Byzantine “Davidic Wall” follows a completely different course from the “Jebusite” “Inner Wall”. It is difficult to see how Amihay Mazar confused these two features; yet, amazingly enough, he did.

Image 3 (plan of “Hebrew” stratum):

Note the little NE wall, in the areas of Walls 21, 107, 22, and 24. Though the excavators claim that the Hasmonean ritual bath (labeled by them the “stepped cistern”) “cut through” the “Davidic wall” and did not cause any visual unsightliness as it was underground during its period of use, it is clear the “Davidic Wall” was actually built after the disuse of the ritual bath, and was built during the Early Byzantine period as part of the “House of Eusebius”. The Herodian vaulted chamber is not shown as part of M&D’s plans. It was apparently located below the Early Byzantine “staircase” below the “Millo Tower”. A curious Early Byzantine painted figure was found at the join between the “Millo Tower” and the “Davidic wall”.

Image 4 (plans of “Hebrew” and “Herodian” strata):

In the Herodian period, a domestic quarter sprung up to the S. of Eilat Mazar’s excavation area. According to M&D, the floor of the house just to the W. of the House of Eusebius is four feet lower than that of the House of Eusebius, thus suggesting it is Herodian.

Image 5 (plan of “Herodian” stratum):

Numerous cisterns were found to date to this period.
Image 6 (plans of the “Herodian” and “Roman” strata):

The “Roman” period of the excavators is the 4th-5th C AD (the Early Byzantine period). The “Millo Tower” and “Davidic Wall” in reality date to the excavators’ “Roman” period.
Image 7 (plan of the “Roman” stratum)

Several beautiful mosaics were found in the “House of Eusebius“. Numerous lamps were also found to date to the Byzantine period.

Author: pithom

An atheist with an interest in the history of the ancient Near East. Author of the Against Jebel al-Lawz Wordpress blog.

One thought on “Some Things To Note On the Macalister and Duncan Plans of Field 5”

Read the Comment Policy Before Commenting.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: