Download this PDF file - University of Alberta - Journal Hosting

44JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURESthe Babylonians. It is not correct in places and areas where there are nosigns of destruction.The changes in this local material culture between the 7 th and the5 th centuries were probably small and gradual, and there are noarchaeological tools to distinguish and define those changes. The modelthat I am offering, as theoretical as it is, suggests that archaeologiststake this continuation as a possible option, at least in some areas. I hopethat future excavations will find the site that will demonstrate thiscontinuation in a clear stratigraphical sequence, and will make thistheory into an archaeological reality.A support for this model can be found in the similarity in shape,form and other characteristics of some pottery types of the late IronAge and the Persian period. If we were dealing here with other, more“neutral” transitional periods such as the beginning of the Early Bronzeperiod, the transition to the Middle Bronze or to the Late Bronzeperiod, the assumption of some continuity in forms would beinterpreted as a common archaeological method. It is hard for me tounderstand the attempt of Prof. Master to explain that continuity hasnothing to do with continuous potting traditions in the highlands,especially since we now have other examples for this same continuity.Such an example is the continuation in using stamp impressions on jarhandles as part of the local administration. It is becoming clearer nowthat the early types of the Yehud stamp impressions, dating to the end ofthe 6 th and to the 5 th centuries BCE, preserve some of the phenomenathat characterized the 'private' stamp impressions of the Late Iron Age(in form, decoration, etc.) as well as those of the mwṣh stampimpressions, usually dated to the 6 th century BCE. Bigger changesoccurred at the end of the 5 th or the beginning of the 4 th centuries BCE,and were probably slow and gradual. 35Daniel Master's cautiousness and his unwillingness to go beyondthe similarities and conclude from them that there probably wascontinuity of life in Judah, in contrast to my attempt, is an example ofconcentrating on the half empty cup. The consequence of thisapproach, however, is much wider, since by taking this view he issupporting the historical interpretation of two different periods with agap in between. I am not sure that this is really what he means. Myarchaeological view stands: If the researcher looks for signs ofcontinuation, he might find it, but if he will ignore the possibility ofsuch continuity, he will never have the chance to find it.For me, the most important historical conclusion from thearchaeological material is not new. Other scholars also pointed to thefact that after the destruction of Jerusalem there was a sharp decline inurban life, which is in contrast to the continuity of the rural settlementsin the region of Benjamin and in the area between Bethlehem and Beth-35 See Vanderhooft, D.S. and Lipschits, O., “A New Typology of theYehud Stamp Impressions.” TA (forthcoming); Lipschits, O. and Vanderhooft,D. forthcoming. Yehud Stamp Impressions of the Fourth Century BCE: ATime of Administrative Consolidation? Lipschits, O., Knoppers, G., andAlbertz, R. (eds.). Judah and the Judeans in the 4 th Century BCE. (Winona Lake,Ind.: Eisenbrauns), forthcoming.