Talk:Tel Arad

message: The Arad Theory
Tel Arad is presently named so from two pieces of pottery found in the 7th century citadel in the time of the Kings of Judah that have implied to some that it must have been the biblically mentioned Canaanite city Arad (Numbers 21).  However there are other scholars that debate that those pieces are mistranlated.  First, because at the time of the Exodus in approximately 1446 BCE Tel Arad was already deserted for 1,210 years at a time Arad would have been inhabited.  Second, over 400 years before the citadel at Tel Arad, according to the Tanakh, Arad was a major urban center in Canaanite times, and was destroyed and renamed Hormah by the Israelites during their sojourn in the southern part of the desert. 
As mentioned in the Book of Numbers 21:2-3:
Then Israel made this vow to the LORD: "If you will deliver these people into our hands, we will totally destroy their cities." The LORD listened to Israel's plea and gave the Canaanites over to them. They completely destroyed them and their towns; so the place was named Hormah.
That Arad was said to be not far from Mount Hor and the Red Sea.  Therefore, it could not be named Arad over 600 years later.  Third, because even the other Arad that was also mentioned in the Book of Judges and the Book of Joshua (that was in a different location) does not apply to this site because 'Tel Arad' still was re-established over 200 years after both those biblically mentions of Arad.  
:There are a number of serious problems with the above analysis. My suspicion is that the original poster is raising this offense against the identification of Tel Arad (more accurately, Tell 'Urad) with Biblical Arad because he or she knows, as do scholars, that excavations at Tel Arad have demonstrably undermined the historicity of the Biblical story of the Israelite conquests of various Canaanite cities. As discussed in the article, Tel Arad shows no evidence of habitation between roughly 2,600 BCE and 1,000 BCE, whereas the Biblical story of the conquest necessitates that Biblical Arad was an established Canaanite city in either ~1,400 BCE (i.e., the traditional "high date" of the supposed conquests) or ~1,200 BCE (i.e., the "low date" of the conquests). The simple and most widely accepted scholarly solution to this apparent disconnect, of course, is that the stories of the Exodus and Conquest are just that -- stories -- that were constructed, at the earliest, in the 8th-7th centuries BCE, at a time when the Biblical writers knew of the existence of a contemporary Arad and simply extrapolated its existence backward in time for the sake of constructing a literary, not historical, narrative (and given their lack of knowledge about Arad's uninhabited state during the Late Bronze or Early Iron I Age, they can hardly be blamed for the mistake). That the Exodus and Conquest narratives in the Bible are full of 8th-7th century anachronisms is pretty demonstrable evidence of this (and I would point the original poster to any of the several scholarly works by William Dever (and others) dealing specifically with the historicity of the Exodus/Conquest narratives for further information). By simply assuming, a priori, that the Biblical stories must necessarily be true, the original poster is subsequently assuming that all scientific data to the contrary must necessarily be wrong. However, this is fallacious thinking, and should not be taken into account when considering a revision to the article. The excavations at Tel Arad have provided the only data we have on the issue, and as such, it's the excavations that should guide our thinking, not Biblical literalism. Furthermore, arguing for a different location of Biblical Arad on the basis of its supposed proximity to "Mount Hor" and the "Red Sea" (according to the Biblical story) is doubly problematic, since: 1) Mount Hor has never been confidently identified, and; 2) the "Red Sea", as referred to in English translations of the Torah, is not actually referencing the body of water referred to in modern times as the "Red Sea", but rather to the Yam Suph, or "Sea of Reeds", the location and existence of which has also never been confirmed by scientists.--Kglogauer (talk) 08:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Tel Arad Theories

message: Studies in the archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan By Amihay Mazar, Ginny Mathias 2001 p. 175 
The present reassessment of the history or' the temple in Arad negates most of the correlations with the biblical account suggested in previous treatments of the site. 
Arad is not the location of a Canaanite city whose king prevented the early attempt of the Israelite tribes to invade Canaan from the south (Y. Aharoni 1976); no Kenite sanctuary existed in pre-monarchical Arad; the temple of Arad is not similar to the Solomonic temple in Jerusalem; the temple at Arad was not rebuilt six times, with every rebuilding of the fortress; and finally the temple was not demolished in two consecutive phases, illustrating the two reforms by Hezekiah and Josiah. The only correlation that appears to remain valid is the intended dismantling of the temple by King Hezekiah.
Dougweller (talk) 18:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: 13 years later, and nobody took notice. Has the Mazar & Mathias interpretation been proven wrong, or are we just slow in reacting? Arminden (talk) 20:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Doug, nobody paid attention, and it's a shame. Maybe you would like to add that very important material? Be well, to quote our friend David. Arminden (talk) 06:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temple/Sanctuary: new interpretation 

message: There is bedouin village in the Negev called (Tel Arad) تل عراد 
The unrecognized village Tel Arad is located north-west of the town Arad, with a population of 1700 residents. The original residents of the area were the Jahalin tribe who were transferred by the state in 1948 and reside nowadays in the area of Mishor Edomim. After the establishment of the state of Israel, the state transferred to the area internally displaced people from other areas of the Negev, mostly from the Lakiya area.The archeological site Tel Arad
is named after the village.
source: http://dukium.org/maps/?village=%D7%AA%D7%9C-%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%93  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.183.28.112 (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tel Arad bedouin village 

message: Hi all! would this link be a good source for this section of the article? Brand new editor, by the way. If so, I wasn't sure how to reference which section of the article I took the information from.
Source: http://oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/opr/t393/e6
Milesdababy (talk) 18:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Chalcolithic

message: Please see discussion here. Arminden (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creation of category "EB cities in Southern Levant" 

message: I recently came across this video which claims that new information became available as to the age of this temple. Is their anyone out there who is an expert in this update the new findings and correct the errors the original archeologists made. This video claims this temple was built by King Ahaz and dismantled by King Hezekiah. Is this information true? If yes can it be added. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDReygTAnqw 68.194.16.238 (talk) 00:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age of the Temple 

message: The use of the term "Isralite" in this text is false and based on a modern compilation of different cultures into biblical narrative. In Iron I parts of the Southern Levant was still under the control of the Egyptian Empire, with the 21st Dynasty seated in Zaon (gr. Tanis) in the Nile Delta. The Fall of the 21st Dynasty saw the rise of the Kingdom of Judea in the fortified Hill Country. In Iron II, Arad can be understood as part of the Kingdom of Judah as a refuge. This prompted Shoshenq I to try to claim power in the Southern Levant with his military campaign where former subjects of the Egyptian Empire now dug in. The use of "Isralite" for the "Judahites" would be an insult to the ancient Judahites as they were enemies. The "Isralites" are later incorporated into the Kingdom of Judah following its fall to the Assyrians, as the King of Judah wants to expands his territorial claims and legitimate ruler over northern people of which many had fled into the Judean Hills. Thus, the term "Isralite" is a misnormer which can only be applied to both Judeans and Samaritans (northern Israel) in the very late part of religious reforms in Judah to unite the people. The name Israel oroginally referred to the Jezreel Valley upon which the northern kingdom had its basket of grain.
Raven rs (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Term "Israelite"