A Nazareth archaeology report

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

A Nazareth archaeology report

Post by StephenGoranson »

In 'Atiqot 98 (2020):
The Settlement History of Nazareth in the Iron Age and Early Roman Period (Pp. 25–92)
Yardenna Alexandre
Keywords: Lower Galilee, biblical sources, New Testament, Jesus, First Jewish Revolt, Jewish population, ritual purity, Jewish priestly courses
A small-scale excavation carried out next to the Franciscan Church of the Annunciation compound in Nazareth exposed the remains of three building strata: Stratum III, from Iron IIA–B (tenth–early eighth centuries BCE); Stratum II, from the late Hellenistic to the Early Roman period (late second century BCE–first third of the second century CE); and Stratum I, from the Crusader to Mamluk periods (twelfth–fifteenth centuries CE). The late Hellenistic to Early Roman-period dwelling incorporated a three-level complex of subterranean pits or silos. Within the pits, many potsherds were discarded, perhaps attesting to the Jewish practice of ritual defilement of ceramic vessels that were rendered impure. Similar findings were documented at other Jewish villages of the Early Roman period in Galilee.


Faunal Remains from Nazareth (Pp. 93–102)
Nimrod Marom
Keywords: Lower Galilee, zooarchaeology, age at death, producer economy, consumption waste, butchery waste
The salvage excavations at Nazareth uncovered a faunal assemblage dating from Iron Age II (Stratum III), the late Hellenistic–Early Roman (Stratum II) and Crusader–Mamluk (Stratum I) periods. The assemblage is dominated by sheep and goats, with lower frequencies of cattle. The faunal remains demonstrate tentative evidence for a simple village economy throughout its stratigraphic sequence.
Japhethite
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 2:39 am

Re: A Nazareth archaeology report

Post by Japhethite »

Thats interesting. I had read claims that Nazareth wasn't a city/polis at the time of Jesus and doesn't have a synagogue, and I had thought maybe Nazareth of Jesus was Nabratein in upper Galilee not the commonly assumed "Nazareth" in lower Galilee. How much evidence is there now that it was a city then?
"Community Fluoridation" = compulsory Mass Medication.
Steven Avery
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: A Nazareth archaeology report

Post by Steven Avery »

Interesting.

There is also interest in Har Nitai (or possibly Arbel) as the site of the real Nazareth.
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: A Nazareth archaeology report

Post by davidmartin »

Reading this doesn't make it seem like a city just a small rural hamlet
There's some assumptions in the report i'd like to know more about
They found oil lamps produced in Judea which was claimed were brought back from visits to the temple, but it could just as easily be that's where most of the lamps for sale in Galilee came from?

Another interesting thing I learned was the village was quite secluded with hills around it and not by any road but it was only a few miles from larger towns (Cana)
It does sound like a reasonable candidate for Nazareth
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: A Nazareth archaeology report

Post by davidmartin »

i forgot to add, what of the Roman Baths found there?
This might make/break this place as 'Nazareth'...

OK i did some checking, these baths do appear Roman. When constructed? Not yet known

If they were indeed there at the time of Jesus it would explain why the pharisees might say nothing good can come from there!

EDIT - I found out there was other bath-houses found in the country so this wouldn't be the only one
What might make Nazareth notable was it's small size with a bath-house right in the middle as a focal point
It also seems there was a Roman garrison stationed in the area as well maybe this adds some colour to the stories in the gospels, maybe not
Post Reply