Shechem of Abimelech

 

by

 

Damien F. Mackey

 

 

 

“MB IIC at Shechem was a major destruction,

so almost certainly it was the city of Abimelech”.

 

 

 

 

Back in 1988, I, then following a pattern of biblical archaeology different from the one that I would embrace today, had raised this query about the city of Shechem to Dr. John Osgood: https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j03_1/j03_1_124-127.pdf

“Techlets”, EN Tech. J., vol. 3, 1988, pp. 125-126:

 

…. I think too that Shechem might be a problem in your scheme of things. From the Bible it would seem that Shechem was a small settlement at the time of Abraham, but a city at the time of Jacob. It seems to me that according to your scheme Shechem would be the same size in Jacob's time as in Abraham's. Correct me if I am wrong. Also Prof. Stiebing, who has criticised at various times the schemes of all revisionists (see Biblical Archaeological Review, July/August 1985, pp. 58-69), raises the problem of the absence of LBA remains at Samaria as regards the EBA Conquest Reconstruction.

 

Looking back now on Dr. Osgood’s reply to this, his view on Shechem, at least, makes perfect sense to me.

He seems to have arrived at a proper overview of the archaeology of Shechem, from Abraham to Jeroboam I (and beyond). Here is what Dr. Osgood wrote on pp. 126-127:

 

W. Ross in Palestine Exploration Quarterly (1941), p.22-27 reasoned, I believe correctly, that the Bethel of Jeroboam must be Shechem, since it alone fills the requirements. The Bethel of Jacob, and of Joshua-Luz, was found on the border of Benjamin, so it is this Bethel around which our argument must revolve. The question is whether Beiten is this Bethel and hence Et Tell is Ai, or whether we look for another.

 

Another location may be needed, but it does not particularly affect the revised chronology I have presented.

 

Beiten did appear to have some EB occupation, but the findings were not up to the expectation of the Judges 1 narrative. Major occupation with the MB I culture began and continued thereafter. It is Et Tell, however, which I feel should have some comment.

 

If the MB I people were the Israelites, then Et Tell in isolation would fit the narrative extremely well. It shows termination of occupation at the end of EB III, and no reoccupation until Iron II (perhaps Aiath in Isaiah 10:28; see also the exiles in Ezra 2:28). Its topography fits the story of Joshua, with a northern Wadi a small distance away enabling Joshua to draw the people out of the city, and a close western slope near the city where the ambush could hide, yet quickly enter the city as needed. I am not entirely convinced with the arguments I have seen rejecting it on either excavation details or topography, although I sense that geographical argument may carry more weight. In any case, those who have rejected it on excavation grounds have done so on the basis of an end of LB conquest, which is here rejected.

 

Whatever may be the truth of the identities of Ai and Bethel, at this point in time it does not materially affect the chronology here espoused.

 

Shechem: This is no problem to the revised chronology presented here, since the passage concerning Abraham and Shechem, viz. Genesis 12:6, does not indicate that a city of any consequence was then present there. On the other hand, Jacob's contact makes it clear that there was a significant city present later (Genesis 33 and 34), but only one which was able to be overwhelmed by a small party of Jacob's sons who took it by surprise.

 

I would date any evidence of civilisation at these times to the late Chalcolithic in Abraham's case, and to EB I in Jacob's case, the latter being the most significant.

 

The Bible is silent about Shechem until the Israelite conquest, after which it is apparent that it developed a significant population until the destruction of the city in the days of Abimelech. If the scriptural silence is significant, then no evidence of occupation would be present after EB I until MB I and no significant building would occur until the MB IIC.

 

Shechem was rebuilt by Jeroboam I, and continued thereafter until the Assyrian captivity.

 

Moreover, Shechem was almost certainly the Bethel of Jeroboam, during the divided kingdom. So I would expect heavy activity during the majority of LB and all of Iron I.

 

This is precisely the findings at Shechem, with the exception that the earliest periods have not had sufficient area excavated to give precise details about the Chalcolithic and EB I. No buildings have yet been brought to light from these periods, but these periods are clearly represented at Shechem.

 

MB IIC at Shechem was a major destruction, so almost certainly it was the city of Abimelech. The population's allegiance to Hamor and Shechem could easily be explained by a return of descendants of the Shechem captives taken by Jacob's son, now returned after the Exodus nostalgically to Shechem, rather than by a continuation of the population

through intervening periods (see Judges 9:28, Genesis 34).

 

For Jeroboam's city and after, the numerous LB and Iron I strata are a sufficient testimony (see Biblical Archaeology, XX, XXVI and XXXII).