Introduction
The monumental Middle Bronze Age gate, complete with two well-preserved mudbrick towers, represents one of the crowning architectural achievements of Canaanite Gezer. The gate, the defensive wall, the grand watchtower, the row of standing stones, and the massive rock-hewn water system illustrate a flourishing MB II society at Gezer. While Irish archaeologist R.A.S. Macalister uncovered all these features in the early 1900s, archaeological and anthropological questions remain. Macalister’s primitive techniques left a confusing chronology and so damaged the site that later archaeologists have struggled to untangle the true construction dates of many of Gezer important architectural features.
Joe Seger, director of Hebrew Union College excavation (HUC), took a conservative approach when he investigated the gate a second time. Seger confirmed measurements and descriptions from …show more content…
Early on, the TGWS team isolated an area of unexcavated material below the gate passageway at the north end (city side) of the gate. The area was spared from Macalister’s primitive trenching method and lay just beyond to extent of the HUC excavation. The discovery an unexcavated area provided an opportunity for renewed study of the gate’s construction and dating. The preliminary findings point to the possibility of an earlier start date for construction. The hypothesis of this research proposes that construction date of the Canaanite gate at Gezer should be revised to the Middle Bronze IIB, rather than MB IIC. In the discussions of construction dating, the research will explore the possibility the construction proceeded in two distinct phases—the first in MB IIB and second in MB IIC. In addition, the research hypothesizes that the infant jar burials represent a unique, previously unknown, cultic practice related to the city
The monumental Middle Bronze Age gate, complete with two well-preserved mudbrick towers, represents one of the crowning architectural achievements of Canaanite Gezer. The gate, the defensive wall, the grand watchtower, the row of standing stones, and the massive rock-hewn water system illustrate a flourishing MB II society at Gezer. While Irish archaeologist R.A.S. Macalister uncovered all these features in the early 1900s, archaeological and anthropological questions remain. Macalister’s primitive techniques left a confusing chronology and so damaged the site that later archaeologists have struggled to untangle the true construction dates of many of Gezer important architectural features.
Joe Seger, director of Hebrew Union College excavation (HUC), took a conservative approach when he investigated the gate a second time. Seger confirmed measurements and descriptions from …show more content…
Early on, the TGWS team isolated an area of unexcavated material below the gate passageway at the north end (city side) of the gate. The area was spared from Macalister’s primitive trenching method and lay just beyond to extent of the HUC excavation. The discovery an unexcavated area provided an opportunity for renewed study of the gate’s construction and dating. The preliminary findings point to the possibility of an earlier start date for construction. The hypothesis of this research proposes that construction date of the Canaanite gate at Gezer should be revised to the Middle Bronze IIB, rather than MB IIC. In the discussions of construction dating, the research will explore the possibility the construction proceeded in two distinct phases—the first in MB IIB and second in MB IIC. In addition, the research hypothesizes that the infant jar burials represent a unique, previously unknown, cultic practice related to the city