Credo interessanti queste considerazioni sulla difesa pratica del territorio medio orientale dell'età del Ferro II, perché i principi che le sottendono possiedono alcune evidenti analogie con le condizioni orografiche della Sardegna (anche se il periodo storico è piuttosto posteriore all'epoca di edificazione delle Torri Sarde).
Geographical Factors in the Defense of Judah and Israel
I began with two basic questions:
1) how, in military terms, did fortifications work? and
2) where were they placed and in response to which circumstances?
My goal was to reach an understanding of the function of fortified sites both on a regional and inter-regional level. Assessing defensive networks and answering the preceding questions, however, required broader considerations, such as where people want to go and where they can not go. Also, what kind of enemy is being defended against? When all of these questions were considered in conjunction with the topography and the type and distribution of fortified sites, it was possible to address their defensive function and strategy.
The initial step in assessing defensive networks was the definition of specific types of fortified sites. I defined three broad categories of sites based largely on the functional role they would have played in a defense network:
cities,
fortresses, and
towers.
The first two types are considered “active” in the defense network; they could stop the movement of invading forces.
The third type had a more “static” function in that they were mainly for relaying communications as opposed to stopping an enemy’s progress.
It became clear that the varied topography in both Israel and Judah made any singular defensive strategy difficult to implement.
Preparations and precautions for defending mountainous terrain were different than those for defending plains or more open territory.
This reality is borne out by both types of fortified sites within each region and in their distribution. Nevertheless, there does appear to be a common approach to defensive networks in both Judah and Israel. This even appears to be true earlier in the Iron IIA in the tenth century according to the traditional chronology.
What also became clear in my study was that there is a difference between defending access through a region and access to a region.
- When defense through a region is desired, fortified sites are located on the topographical (which often equates to “geological”) borders of that region.
- Yet, when defense to a region is desired, fortified sites are more evenly dispersed.
In general, the strategy of defense in the Northern Kingdom was against access through its territory while Judah’s strategy, with the exception of the Negev, was against access to its heartland.
Defense of the Negev actually led to the development of a specific type of fortified site, the rectilinear fortress, which was developed to control a region devoid of cities or enemies with advanced weaponry. In the north, no such settlement type appears. Instead, when Israel expanded, it moved into occupied territory and appropriated existing cities for defense. This strategy, while influenced by geography, also better addressed the more formidable military capabilities of Damascus.
In addition to my research on defensive networks, I was also able to complete two other research projects. The first was an excavation report on Jacob Kaplan’s Areas B, D, F, and G at Jaffa, which will appear in the second volume of the History and Archaeology of Jaffa Series. The second was an article on the Iron IIA quarries at Khirbet Qeiyafa, which will appear in the second excavation report for that site.
~~~
All content provided on this blog
is for informational purposes only. The American Schools of Oriental
Research (ASOR) makes no representations as to the accuracy or
completeness of any information on this blog or found by following any
link on this blog. ASOR will not be liable for any errors or omissions
in this information. ASOR will not be liable for any losses, injuries,
or damages from the display or use of this information. The opinions
expressed by Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and
do not reflect the opinions of ASOR or any employee thereof.