Crisis in motion: the final days of Iron Age I Megiddo

Abstract

The destruction of Iron I Megiddo in the early 10th century BCE was a momentous event in the history of the southern Levant. It marked an abrupt break in the long cultural development of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. Despite extensive field research, essential questions related to this event remain unanswered, especially regarding the processes that took place in the city immediately before its destruction. In this article, findings from recent excavations in the south-eastern sector of the mound, where a detailed Iron I stratigraphic sequence was explored, are reported. In addition, finds from two nearby areas previously excavated were re-evaluated, focusing mostly on contextual aspects of the osteological data. This study sheds light on the deterioration of the city in the decades preceding its final demise, and suggests that the event was caused by human agents rather than a natural disaster. It also hints that in its last days, Megiddo may have been besieged, which explains the peculiar re-appearance of intra-mural burials at the site. The case of Iron I Megiddo provides a high-resolution snapshot of actions taken by the inhabitants of a Near Eastern city on the eve of a major crisis.

Keywords:

• Megiddo
• Iron I
• destruction
• crisis behaviour
• territorial kingdoms

Introduction

At the end of the Late Bronze Age, in the 12th century BCE, eastern Mediterranean societies experienced a series of disruptive events leading to the gradual collapse of the old socio-political and economic orders. Scholars tend to agree that the crisis was a multi-faceted process stemming from a major climate event, long-standing weaknesses of political entities, over exploitation of human resources and migrations of groups from the west (see, e.g., Cline 2014; Knapp 2021; Millek 2020; for Canaan, see Langgut et al. 2013). Still, in the lowlands of the southern Levant, the material culture and geographical disposition of the Iron I city-states were very similar to those of the Late Bronze II–III. The decisive cultural change, which marked the beginning of a new era, occurred only in the Iron I/II transition (e.g., Faust 2021; Finkelstein 2003; Gilboa et al. 2014; Lehmann 2021: 295–99; Mazar 2020: 85–86). Radiocarbon dates from well-stratified sites place this transition, which includes the destruction of nearly all cities in the region, in the 10th century BCE (Finkelstein and Piasetzky 2009; in press; Lee et al. 2013; Mazar 2020: 83–85; Toffolo et al. 2014).

At Megiddo, one of the most investigated sites in the Ancient Near East, the Iron I/II transition is marked by a fierce conflagration that consumed the city of Stratum VIA. Remnants of this event were unearthed in all sectors of the mound (Arie 2011: 89–94; Ussishkin 2018: 309–15), including on the lower terrace (Ilan et al. 2000: 97–99). Current work at the site involves a detailed investigation of the stratigraphic sequences and ceramic typologies, a robust radiocarbon dating programme and the integration of cutting-edge micro-archaeological techniques: it established Megiddo as a key site for understanding this turning point in the history of the Levant. And yet, critical questions relating to the destruction of Stratum VIA remain unresolved, especially regarding events and processes that took place in the city before its destruction, and whether clues for the upcoming crisis can be identified in the material culture of the site prior to its devastation.

This article looks to shed light on these issues by presenting the results of three excavation seasons (in 2012, 2014 and 2016) carried out in Area Q, located in the south-eastern sector of Megiddo (Figs 1–2). In addition, the finds from two nearby areas, which had been excavated in the past — Area CC of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (hereafter, OI) and Area K of Tel Aviv University — with a special focus on contextual aspects of the osteological data, are re-evaluated. The broader implications of the finds for the study of the Iron I/II transition at Megiddo and beyond are then discussed.

Figure 1 Aerial view of Megiddo, looking north, indicating the excavation areas discussed in the article (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Figure 2 Aerial view of Squares H–I/4–5 in Area Q at the end of the 2016 season, looking north (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

The destruction of Stratum VIA

Stratum VIA at Megiddo, the best example of an Iron I city in the southern Levant, was first encountered by Gottlieb Schumacher in the early 20th century. Schumacher labelled its ruins as his ‘fourth stratum’ and gave it the title die brandschicht, i.e., the burnt layer (1908: 75–90). It was further investigated by the OI, especially in Area AA near the city gate and Area CC in the southern sector of the site (Esse 1992; Harrison 2004; Loud 1948: 33–45, 105, 114–16). In the Hebrew University excavations, led by Yigael Yadin, Stratum VIA remnants were found mainly in probes dug below Palace 6000 of Stratum VA–IVB (Yadin 1970: 69–70, 77–79; Zarzecki-Peleg 2016: 13–51; for a history of research of the old excavations, see also Esse and Harrison 2004: 1–6). Over the last three decades, the current Tel Aviv University expedition exposed the remains of Stratum VIA in eight additional areas (e.g., Gadot et al. 2006).

The cumulative exposure of Stratum VIA across the mound revealed the remains of a prosperous city that represents the ‘swan song’ of the southern Levantine 2nd millennium BCE material culture (Finkelstein 2003). It was destroyed by a fierce conflagration, followed by a short gap of occupation, radical change in material culture and a cessation of activity in the lower settlement (for domestic and cultic continuity until this event, see Martin 2022; Kleiman et al. 2017: 24–25, 40–44). The destruction debris of Stratum VIA — one of the most reliable stratigraphic anchors at Megiddo (Table 1) — is characterized by a massive accumulation of burnt mudbrick collapse, sometimes over 1 m thick, with restorable vessels and ash debris (Finkelstein 2009: 115–16; Loud 1948: 33–37; for the pottery, see Arie 2006; 2013; see, e.g., Fig. 3).

Table 1 Stratigraphic correlation between excavated areas at Megiddo

Str.	Schumacher’s stratum	AA	BB	CC	DD	6000	F	H	K	M	Q
VIIA	Part of the fourth stratum (including the Südliches Burgtor in Area CC)	+	+	+	—	—	↓? F-7	H-12 H-11	K-6 Gap?	↓? M-6	↓? Q-9
VIB		+	+	↓?	+	+	F-6	H-10	K-5	M-5	Q-8
VIA		+	+	+^†	+	+	↓ F-5^†?	↓ H-9	↓ K-4^†	↓ M-4	Q-7b Q-7a^†
Total destruction, possibly a short gap of occupation; dramatic change in the layout of the city and its material culture;
VB ↓	Part of the fifth stratum ↓	+ ↓	+ ↓	+ ↓	+ ↓	+ ↓	Gap	H-8 ↓	K-3b ↓	M-3 ↓	Q-6b ↓

Note: Remains of the Stratum VIA destruction were also exposed in the less-investigated Areas V and W. Areas with skeletal remains in full articulation in Stratum VIA contexts are marked with a † sign, and architectural/cultural continuity is expressed by a ↓ sign. In the OI’s final report (Loud 1948), the end of Temple 2048 was correlated with Stratum VIIA. Mazar (1985: n. 6), followed by others (e.g., Arie 2006: 239; Ussishkin 1995: 256), argued, however, that the pottery, which originated from its floor, dates to Stratum VIA.

Figure 3 A typical accumulation of the destruction debris of Stratum VIA. The black line at the bottom of the debris signifies the floor; Square I/2 in Area Q, looking north (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

The Iron I stratigraphic sequence in Area Q

Area Q features a stratigraphic sequence of more than ten layers and sub-phases, covering the era from the end of the Late Bronze Age to the Iron IIB (Figs 1–2; Table 2). Previous studies of the finds concentrated on the Iron II strata, mainly from the northern part of this area (see list of references in Homsher and Kleiman 2022). In 2012, the excavation was extended to the southern part of the area (Squares H–I/1–4), where a heavy rainstorm had exposed the ruins of the Iron I city. The original objectives were to: 1) re-study the destruction of the city using a variety of micro-archaeological approaches (Forget and Shahack-Gross 2016; Forget et al. 2015; Shahack-Gross et al. 2018); and 2) re-examine the date of Schumacher’s Südliches Burgtor (Homsher and Finkelstein 2018), a monumental structure erroneously interpreted as a gate complex (Schumacher 1908: 77–80). These excavations also revealed five short-term phases, radiocarbon dated from the late 12th century to the 10th century BCE, providing unique snapshots of the events leading up to the destruction of the Iron I city.

Table 2 The stratigraphic sequence in Area Q

Phase	Level	OI’s stratum	Ceramic phase	Main remains
1	Q-9	VIIA	Late Bronze III	Südliches Burgtor’s eastern wall; a few restorable vessels on floors
2	Q-8	VIB?	Early Iron I	Südliches Burgtor’s eastern wall reused; wall stabs
3	Q-7b	Not detected	Late Iron I	Südliches Burgtor’s eastern wall reused; Buildings 14/Q/53 and 14/Q/145
4	Q-7a	VIA	Late Iron I	Südliches Burgtor’s eastern wall reused; Building 14/Q/53 reused; Wall 16/Q/4 of Building 14/Q/145 reused; Building 16/Q/48; total destruction
5	Q-6b	Not detected or VB	Early Iron IIA	Squatters’ activity on the ruins of Level Q-7a

Phase 1, Level Q-9: partial destruction in the Late Bronze/Iron Age transition

The events associated with the end of the Late Bronze Age at Megiddo have been discussed extensively (e.g., Ussishkin 1995). New evidence from the current excavations in Areas H and K (Arie 2022; Martin 2022, respectively), as well as a re-evaluation of the data from Area AA (Finkelstein et al. 2017: 263–64), shed light on the events. These studies demonstrate that the destruction of the Late Bronze III city (Stratum VIIA) in the second half of the 12th century BCE was partial and did not lead to radical changes in either the spatial organization of the settlement or its material culture (as already hinted by Engberg 1940; see also Esse 1992: 84, n. 21; Ussishkin 1995: 260–61). To date, signs of destruction were documented mainly in the area of the palace in Area AA and partially in Area M (Level M-6, see Finkelstein 2013a: 234), as well as in the domestic quarter in Area K (Level K-6, see Arie and Nativ 2013).

In Area Q, current excavations reached the Late Bronze III (Level Q-9) only in limited probes dug below the floors of Level Q-8 in Squares I/1 and I/2 (Fig. 4). A few complete vessels found on beaten-earth surfaces to the east of the Südliches Burgtor suggest a small-scale disturbance (Fig. 5). Due to the limited assemblage and exposure, it is difficult to securely date this phase. Based on a preliminary review of the pottery, Homsher and Finkelstein (2018: 305) suggested correlating Level Q-9 with Level H-11 of the Late Bronze III, or the beginning of the Iron I (for Level H-11, see Arie 2022: 97–109; Finkelstein et al. 2017: 267–69).

Figure 4 Plan of Level Q-9 of the Late Bronze III (this phase was revealed only in limited probes below the floors of Level Q-8) (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Figure 5 Restorable vessels on the floor of Level Q-9. On the left, the eastern wall of Schumacher’s Südliches Burgtor; looking north (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Phase 2, Level Q-8: recovery in the Iron I

More apparent, but still restricted in extent, are the remains of Level Q-8 (Fig. 6). In Squares I/1–3, the finds associated with this phase were limited to two ashy surfaces between the floors of Levels Q-9 and Q-7b (Fig. 7). One of these surfaces abuts the eastern wall of the Südliches Burgtor, indicating the continuing function of this monumental building at the beginning of the Iron I, corroborating the results of the OI excavations in nearby Area CC (see below). Fragmentary remains of domestic structures belonging to this phase were exposed in Squares H/4–5, c. 15–20 m to the east of the Südliches Burgtor. The floors associated with these buildings include patchy phytolith surfaces and dark grey ash layers found c. 45 cm below the floors of Level Q-7b. A few restorable jars were found in these structures, testifying to another small-scale disturbance. The pottery of Level Q-8 is generally similar to that of Levels Q-7b and Q-7a, suggesting its possible correlation with Stratum VIB of the OI, which was allegedly absent from the nearby Area CC (Harrison 2004: 19; Loud 1948: 113).

Figure 6 Plan of Level Q-8; shaded walls signify elements built in a previous occupational phase and reused (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Figure 7 Floor 14/Q/106 of Level Q-8 below remains of Level Q-7, looking north (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Phase 3, Level Q-7b: new architecture towards the end of the Iron I

Level Q-7b portrays a substantial change in Area Q. It is represented by the construction of Building 14/Q/53, apparently an eastern expansion of the Südliches Burgtor (Figs 8–9) and Building 14/Q/145 further to the east. The remains of the former structure suggest the existence of a sizable unit that measures about 7.5 × 8.0 m. It consists of three large and at least partially paved rooms, constructed in lesser quality compared to the massive walls of the Südliches Burgtor. The new addition nearly doubled the size of the previous structure and could be considered part of an ad-hoc defence system. The remains of Building 14/Q/145 in Squares H–I/4 represent a small structure, of which only one wall, a semi-circular fire installation and a beaten-earth floor survived. Exceptional finds in this context were three carefully cut, small octagonal stone pillars, arranged as an equilateral triangle; the tops of all three were cut intentionally (Kleiman et al. 2017: 26; see Fig. 9: a–b). Possible parallels to these pillars can be found in the Level VI temple, in Area P, at Lachish, where they are assumed to have functioned as part of two adjoining cult niches (Arie 2016; Ussishkin 2004: 231–38, pl. 6.29). At Megiddo too, these finds seem to be part of a small shrine, although no other strong indication of cult-related activity was traced here (but for broken basalt stelae reused in Level Q-7a, see below).

Figure 8 Plan of Level Q-7b; shaded walls signify elements built in a previous occupational phase and reused (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Figure 9 a) Two of the three octagonal stone pillars of a possibly small shrine in Square I/4 after the 2014 season (Building 14/Q/145), looking east (courtesy of the Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology); b) combined 3D model of Squares I/3–4 in Area Q, after the exposure of the third octagonal pillar in the 2016 season (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

The separation of the ceramic assemblages of Level Q-7b and Q-7a was difficult as some of the structures associated with the former phase continued to function through both levels, until the destruction of the city (e.g., Building 14/Q/53). Still, there is enough evidence to assign Level Q-7b to the late Iron I, probably a short while before the destruction of Stratum VIA.

Phase 4, Level Q-7a: another change and fierce destruction

In the last phase before the destruction of the city, designated Level Q-7a, a large stone-paved structure (Building 16/Q/48) was constructed above the remains of the building with the octagonal pillars (Building 14/Q/145), an action that represents a significant change in the area (Fig. 10). The new structure includes a c. 80-cm-wide wall, which was preserved to a length of almost eight metres. On both sides of this wall, stone pavements were laid. The eastern one included broken basalt slabs laid over a 30–50-cm-thick fill (e.g., Fig. 11:a).¹ These slabs may represent parts of broken stelae originating from a small Level Q-7b shrine (most likely Building 14/Q/145). Large quantities of mudbricks were found in Squares H/4–5, arranged in piles along what could be the northern wall of the structure. They may be understood as building materials collected in preparation for new construction. Both the construction technique and orientation of Building 16/Q/48 differ from the remains associated with Building 14/Q/53 of Level Q-7b. The eastern expansion of Schumacher’s Südliches Burgtor continued to function, but the pavement in its south-eastern room was replaced by a beaten-earth floor on which a small installation was built (Locus 12/Q/210). Some of the features associated with the previous phase were still visible in Level Q-7a, for example, the upper part of at least two of the three octagonal stone pillars.

Figure 10 Plan of Level Q-7a; shaded walls signify elements built in a previous occupational phase and reused (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Figure 11 a) The pavement of the new Level Q-7a building erected above Building 14/Q/145, looking north-east; note the third pillar of Building 14/Q/145 on the right side of the photo; (b) one of the broken stelae, which originated from the pavement of Building 16/Q/48 (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Level Q-7a ended in the massive conflagration of Stratum VIA (Fig. 12). It includes burnt reddish mudbricks, charred beams and charcoal, and collapsed architecture. In Square I/2, the destruction debris reached more than a metre. Preliminary geoarchaeological analysis of the burnt bricks from the destruction indicates that they were exposed to up to 700–800 °C (Forget et al. 2015; see also Forget and Shahack-Gross 2016).

Figure 12 A view of the destruction of the Level Q-7 (Stratum VIA) city in Squares H/4–5, looking south-east (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Phase 5, Level Q-6b: post-destruction gap and revival

Following the destruction of Stratum VIA, the settlement may have been abandoned for a few decades at the very end of the Iron I. Two pieces of evidence support this possibility: 1) radiocarbon determinations, which indicate that sites in the eastern sector of the Jezreel/Beth-she’an Valley were destroyed later than Megiddo VIA and Yokne‘am XVII, but still within the late Iron I (Finkelstein and Piasetzky 2009: 266–67); and 2) the pottery of Yokne‘am XVI and possibly other sites in the north (e.g., Tel Kinrot), which hint at a post-destruction phase still within the Iron I (Arie 2011: 275; Münger et al. 2011: 87).

At any rate, Megiddo recovered in the early Iron IIA (Level Q-6b). The earliest activity that can be attributed to this period is represented by meagre architectural remains constructed directly above the ruins, with little continuity from the previous settlement (Homsher and Kleiman 2022: 122–27; Kleiman 2022: 937, e.g., fig. 23.41: 5, 9). The only exception here was a stone monolith that towered above the ruins and may indicate evidence of a ruin cult (Kleiman et al. 2017: 26; Fig. 13).

Figure 13 A stone monolith erected in Level Q-6b above the ruins of the Iron I destruction, looking north (courtesy of the Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology).

Other relevant finds from Area Q

Beyond architectural remains, several additional finds illuminate the ongoing processes leading up to the destruction of Stratum VIA: 1) human remains documented in Building 16/Q/48; 2) a hoard of metal items near the eastern wall of the Südliches Burgtor, within Building 14/Q/45; and 3) faunal remains associated with Levels Q-7b and Q-7a, which reveal the subsistence economy of the local residents shortly before the destruction.

Human remains in Building 16/Q/48

Fragmentary remains of a young adult, probable female (Fig. 14:a; for additional details, see Supplemental Material 1), were exposed in Baulk H­–I/4 on a floor to the north-east of Building 16/Q/48 of Level Q-7a, directly below the destruction debris (Locus 16/Q/79). The individual was found oriented on a south–north axis, with the head in the north, but the exact body position was difficult to determine due to fragmentation.

Figure 14 Remains of an individual found in Locus 16/Q/79: a) schematic diagram that shows which skeletal elements were recovered (in grey); b) in situ photo of the individual’s right pelvis and femoral head; c) proximal ends of right (on left) and left (on right) radii, showing differential size and colouration; and d) left (on left) and right (on right) fourth metacarpals, showing differential size and colouration (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

All skeletal elements show evidence of burning; the range of colour being grey, white, blue and pink. The cranium was mostly grey (medium-high temperature), the bones of the axial skeleton were yellow-white (low temperature), while the bones of the appendicular skeleton (limbs) were yellow-white to grey (medium/high temperature) (Delvin and Herrmann 2015; Symes et al. 2015). One warp-fractured long-bone fragment was blue (high temperature), and the right temporal showed portions of pink discolouration (medium temperature) near the zygomatic process (Delvin and Herrmann 2015) (Fig. 15). A fragment of an un-sideable humeral head had a stark colour differentiation on its articular surface (Fig. 15), and colour differences were seen throughout the articulated proximal femur and right os coxa (Fig. 14:b), reflecting burn patterns consistent with the ‘tissue-shielding’ of a fleshed human body (Symes et al. 2015: 36, 54–55). The signs of warping, shrinkage and surface cracking were most pronounced on the right skeletal elements (Fig. 14:c–d), and indicate that the bone experienced prolonged heat damage in excess of 700 °C (Ubelaker 2009). Warping, irregular splitting and fractures most commonly occur in fleshed bodies (Baby 1954; Ubelaker 2009; Whyte 2001). Bone shrinks when heat denatures proteins in bone tissue (Symes et al. 2015: 46), and the degree to which bone shrinks increases exponentially at around 650 °C (Shipman et al. 1984).

Figure 15 Additional images of the individual illustrating variations in burning colour: a) warped long-bone fragment burned to a blue colour; b) right temporal burned to a pink colour; and c) unsided humeral head showing a stark contrast between grey and light brown colours, indicating differential burning temperatures from tissue shielding. (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition).

Bones from the individual and sediments above and below the skeleton were analysed by Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectrometry to refine burning temperature estimates and confirm the depositional relationship between the destruction and the individual. FTIR is well established as a means of estimating firing temperature based on changes to clay minerals (Berna et al. 2007; Forget et al. 2015: 81 and references therein) and calcite (Regev et al. 2010), and has been used extensively at Megiddo to study destruction processes (Forget et al. 2015; Regev et al. 2015; Shahack-Gross et al. 2018). FTIR is also commonly used to explore bone properties, including diagenesis, preservation and burning (Ellingham et al. 2015; Weiner 2010). Bone samples for FTIR analysis were assigned burn codes following Stiner et al. (1995), and both bone and sediment samples were analysed between 4000 and 400 cm^-1 at a 4 cm^-1 resolution using a Thermo Scientific Nicolet iS5 spectrometer at the Laboratory for Sedimentary Archaeology, University of Haifa (details in Supplemental Material 2). The bone mineral spectra corroborate the macroscopic analysis, indicating that some bones were unburnt (or heated to temperatures below 200 °C) and others were exposed to higher temperatures (>600 °C) (Fig. 16, more details in Supplemental Material 2). This is consistent with the tissue shielding identified macroscopically. The clay minerals in sediments above and below the skeleton were exposed to temperatures of 700–800 °C and ∼600 °C respectively, similar temperatures to the bones, demonstrating that the body was burnt in situ. This provides strong evidence that this individual was burnt — and likely died — in the destruction event.

Figure 16 Infrared spectra of bones and sediments from the Megiddo Level Q-7 destruction. Splitting factor (Weiner and Bar-Yosef 1990) and FW 85% ratios (Dal Sasso et al. 2018) are presented, as is the interpretation of temperature exposure.

A cache of metal objects in Locus 12/Q/76

In 2012, a hoard of metal objects was discovered near the eastern wall of the Südliches Burgtor (Level Q-7a; Fig. 17). It included two stacked bronze bowls, beside which eight or nine iron blades were found (some of them are bimetallic; see details in Hall 2021). Bronze scale pans, jewellery and other items were found inside the bronze bowls, the outer of which contained remains of textile on its exterior. It appears that both the bowls and the blades were wrapped in textiles before final deposition. Was this hoard buried in a ritual deposit, intended for permanent deposition, or as a cache for temporary storage with the intent of future retrieval? There are several reasons to suggest that this was a foundation/building deposit (see also Bjorkman 1994: 7–8): 1) the hoard itself contained a bird’s beak, which is best explained as an apotropaic offering; 2) bimetallic knives, such as those uncovered in the hoard, are often found in association with ritual contexts (Dothan 2002: 14–17; Mazar 1985: 6–8, fig. 2). However, the fact that the items were arranged neatly and buried in a textile may point to the non-ritual status of the hoard, i.e., its burial with the intention of future retrieval. One way or another, a substantial number of examples of non-ritual hoarding activities in Stratum VIA exist at Megiddo (Hall 2016: table 5.1; 2021: table 1). The rise in hoarding at Megiddo before destruction events seems to represent ‘crisis behaviour’ (more below), which was spurred by the instability of the inhabitants’ socio-political and economic surroundings. Crisis hoards are found elsewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean, especially prior to the Late Bronze Age collapse, and are representative of a response to the failure of the socio-political systems (Knapp et al. 1988).

Figure 17 The cache from Locus 12/Q/76, which contained iron blades placed beside two stacked bronze bowls filled with additional items (courtesy of the Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology).

Faunal remains of Level Q-7

A total of 280 animal bones (macrofauna) were retrieved from the floors of Levels Q-7b and Q-7a. Identification of fragments to skeletal elements and the lowest taxonomic level was achieved using the comparative collections stored at the Zooarchaeology Laboratory and at The Steinhardt Museum of Natural History of Tel Aviv University. All skeletal fragments were recorded, i.e., epiphysis as well as diaphysis. Long-bone fragments were coded according to the completeness of five morphological zones (proximal and distal epiphysis, proximal and distal diaphysis and mid-shaft diaphysis). Other bone fragments were coded according to their percentage of total completeness of element. Quantifying species and body parts frequencies were based on NISP (Number of Identified Specimens).

The assemblage is dominated by caprines (sheep (Ovis aries) and goats (Capra hircus); 80% of the assemblage; identification based on morphological criteria following Zeder and Lapham 2010), followed by cattle (Bos taurus; 18%) and supplemented with pig (Sus scrofa) and game animals (NISPs in Fig. 18). Unlike the situation in Levels H-9 and K-4 of the same late Iron I horizon (Sapir-Hen et al. 2016: table 1), the caprine assemblages include a higher representation of goats to sheep (a ratio of 3:1). The age profile of these caprines, based on epiphyseal fusion (following epiphyseal fusion sequences of Zeder 2006), shows a focus on young and young-adult animals; very few animals were kept beyond three years (table 4 in Supplemental Material 3). This low frequency of older animals implies that caprines were probably mainly exploited for their meat, and not kept for their secondary products. Skeletal elements frequencies of the caprines (table 5 in Supplemental Material 3) indicate that the upper parts of the fore and hind limbs are highly represented, more than the lower parts of these limbs and extremities, suggesting a higher presence of parts that are rich in meat, although all body parts are represented to some extent. Unfortunately, although cattle constitute 18% of the assemblage, the small sample did not allow for the analysis of age profiles and body parts. Still, there is a representation of young-adult and adult animals (table 6 in Supplemental Material 3).

Figure 18 Distribution of animal species in Levels Q-7b and Q-7a.

The profile of caprines and cattle exploitation for Level Q-7 resembles the contemporaneous assemblage from Area H (Level H-9) and differs from the one found in Area K (Level K-4), located only a few metres away from Area Q. A previous study demonstrated that the people of Areas H (near the palace and city-gate) and K (in the south-eastern sector of the site) had differential access to animals and their products (Sapir-Hen et al. 2016). The inhabitants of Area H were provisioned with good cuts of caprine meat (meat-rich parts of young animals) and were not engaged in agriculture, while the lower-status inhabitants of Area K raised and consumed their own livestock. The observation that the access to animals in Area Q is similar to that in Area H is supported by other finds, showing a similar public-related function of the two areas at the end of Iron I. However, a notable difference between Areas Q and H is the preference for goats over sheep in Area Q. Among the two caprine species, sheep are considered more expensive (Redding 1981; 2010) and were preferred by the elites of the southern Levant (Sapir-Hen forthcoming; Sapir-Hen et al. 2022). Possibly, the higher frequency of goats, the less expensive caprine species that is also more reliable and less sensitive to disease (Redding 1981; 1984), fits other clues for ‘crisis behaviour’ observed in the south-eastern sector of the mound. It is acknowledged, nonetheless, that the interpretation of this specific pattern is more difficult than other lines of evidence presented here.

Relative and absolute dating of Levels Q-9 to Q-6b

A preliminary review of the pottery suggests that Level Q-9 belongs to the Late Bronze III (Homsher and Finkelstein 2018: 305) and that Levels Q-8 to Q-7a belong to the Iron I (see, e.g., Fig. 19). Sealing the sequence from above is the ceramic assemblage of Level Q-6b, which exhibits distinctive characteristics of the Iron IIA traditions, such as red slipped and hand-burnished vessels (Kleiman 2022: 937).

Figure 19 Selected Iron I vessels from the destruction of Level Q-7a.

In terms of absolute chronology, eight short-lived samples from Levels Q-9 to Q-6b were selected for radiocarbon dating (Table 3; Fig. 20; Boaretto 2022). All originated from secure contexts, although in two of them, the possibility of contamination, due to their proximity to the edge of the mound (RTD-8047 and RTD-8050), is noted. These radiocarbon determinations were modelled previously by Boaretto (2022) as part of the entire sequence of Area Q (Levels Q-9 to Q-2), and two outliers were identified: Sample RTD-7645 (from Hoard 12/Q/76) and Sample RTK-6753. Level Q-5, which seals the sequence dealt with here, dates to c. 900 BCE and represents the early days of the late Iron IIA (Kleiman et al. 2019; ‘middle Iron IIA’ in Finkelstein and Kleiman 2019). When placed in a Bayesian model, the results span about two centuries, from c. 1100 to the late 10th century BCE (Boaretto 2022; Finkelstein and Piasetzky in press). As for the destruction of Stratum VIA, a radiocarbon study published a few years ago, which was based on a larger quantity of samples, suggested that the event occurred in the range of 985–935 BCE (Toffolo et al. 2014). A more recent model puts it in the early 10th century BCE (Finkelstein and Piasetzky in press). This means that Levels Q-8 to Q-7a are squeezed into about a century, between the early 11th and early 10th centuries BCE.

Figure 20 The Area Q radiocarbon sequence (based on the data reported in Boaretto 2022: table 41.1).

Table 3 Radiocarbon dates from Level Q-9 to Q-6b (Boaretto 2022: table 41.1)

Lab #	Locus	Uncal. BP	1σ	2σ	Comments
RTK-6753	12/Q/120	2700 ± 45	895 (68.2%) 810	970 (0.3%) 965 930 (95.1%) 800	Level Q-6b; floor material; olive pit
RTD-8053	14/Q/163	2824 ± 21	1000 (40.1%) 970 960 (28.1%) 935	1040 (0.9%) 1035 1030 (94.5%) 915	Level Q-7a; floor material; olive pit
RTD-8052	14/Q/145	2843 ± 22	1040 (2.6%) 1040 1030 (54.1%) 975 960 (11.6%) 940	1085 (2.5%) 1065 1050 (92.9%) 920	Level Q-7b; floor material; olive pit
RTD-8046	14/Q/79	2834 ± 22	1015 (46.6%) 970 960 (21.6%) 935	1050 (95.4%) 920	Level Q-7b; floor material; olive pit
RTD-8047	14/Q/83	2818 ± 22	1000 (36.2%) 970 960 (32.0%) 935	1026 (95.4%) 910	Level Q-8; floor material, but possible contamination; olive pit
RTD-8049	14/Q/106	2843 ± 21	1040 (58.5%) 975 955 (9.7%) 940	1080 (1.8%) 1065 1060 (93.6%) 920	Level Q-8; floor material; olive pit
RTD-8050	14/Q/108	2851 ± 22	1050 (68.2%) 976	1110 (1.7%) 1100 1090 (93.7%) 930	Level Q-9; floor material, but possible contamination; olive pit
RTD-7645	12/Q/76	2928 ± 20	1195 (36.5%) 1145 1130 (20.7%) 1110 1100 (8.9%) 1085 1060 (2.1%) 1060	1210 (95.4%) 1050	Hoard 12/Q/76; three samples; bone

The evidence from adjacent areas

An overview of the remains associated with Stratum VIA across the mound is provided elsewhere (Arie 2011: 89–95; Esse and Harrison 2004; Finkelstein 2009: 115–16; Finkelstein et al. 2017; Homsher and Finkelstein 2018: 297–99). Here only remains exposed immediately to the east and west of Area Q are discussed.

The Oriental Institute’s Area CC

In Area CC of the OI’s expedition, finds associated with the Iron I were exposed under the residential quarter associated with Stratum V of the Iron IIA (Harrison 2004; Lamon and Shipton 1939: 3–4, fig. 5). No remains were assigned to Stratum VIB, although small-scale changes in the domestic architecture of Stratum VIA were noted (Harrison 2004: 19; Loud 1948: 113). This area is also the location of the Südliches Burgtor mentioned above. Some of the massive walls of this structure were preserved to a height of more than a half-metre. Homsher and Finkelstein (2018) discussed the history of the Südliches Burgtor in detail and concluded, primarily based on the new evidence from Area Q, that the earliest possible date for its construction was around the Late Bronze III, and that it functioned until the destruction of Stratum VIA. The latter observation corresponds to Schumacher’s description of a thick accumulation of yellowish-red burnt bricks with burnt wood and ash (1908: 80; see also the Iron I ceramic finds in Taf. XXII), as well as to the attribution of the structure to Strata VII and VI in Megiddo II (Loud 1948: 409–10; see also Harrison 2004: 9). As most of the structure was excavated at the beginning of the 20th century, it is difficult to reassess its function, but it may have been another temple in the city (details in Homsher and Finkelstein 2018).

Similar to other areas at Megiddo, this residential quarter was utterly destroyed at the end of the Iron I. This is evident in the wealth of finds, the high number of skeletons found within the ruins and the piles of burnt debris (Harrison 2004: 20, 23; for the accumulation of debris in this area, see also Sections P–Q and R–S in Lamon and Shipton 1939: fig. 35). An exceptional phenomenon observed here is the burials of individuals prior to the destruction of the city (see, e.g., Fig. 21; and description in Harrison (2004: 20); for a full list and re-evaluation, see Table 4). These are the first intramural burials observed in the city since the beginning of the Late Bronze Age when this characteristic Middle Bronze Age practice ceased (Martin et al. 2022a: 32; 2022b; for earlier intramural burials in Area CC, see Cradic 2018: 196–97, table 3). P. L. O. Guy (in a letter from Guy to H. Breasted quoted in Harrison 2004: 8–9) and Finkelstein et al. (2000: 260), raised the possibility that the burials in Area CC were either cut into the destruction debris of Stratum VIA, or belonged to an earlier phase in the Area CC sequence (see also Cline 2011: 60; Gadot and Yasur-Landau 2006: 586; Kreimerman 2021: 236). A fresh look at photos published by Harrison (2004) after the publication of Megiddo III refutes this interpretation and indicates that these burials predate the destruction of Stratum VIA (see more below). The sudden reintroduction of intramural burials at the site, nearly half a millennium after they had decidedly gone out of fashion, is an important clue as to what was happening in the city prior to its destruction.

Figure 21 Burials in Square Q/10 (Locus 1770) in Area CC (Harrison 2004: fig. 73). Note the relationship between the skeletons on the right, with respect to architecture and the smashed pottery (courtesy of the Institute for the Study of Ancient Cultures of the University of Chicago).

Table 4 Human remains and burials in Stratum VIA contexts

Context	Context	Description	References
Area F, Sq. AZ/70, L. 94/F/42 (Level F-6 or F-5)	Burial	Adult (?) in a pit burial; right lateral extended (?); heavily disturbed; three complete vessels encircled the skull; for complete vessels near this find, see Ilan et al. (2000: fig. 11.1: 1–3); the dating of this burial to Level F-5 cannot be excluded	Ilan et al. (2000: 95–96); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area F, Sq. AY/67, L. 96/F/48 (Level F-5)	Unclear	A single bone of a sub-adult (proximal phalanx); for a shallow bowl with ‘stones of unusual shape and colour’ and complete vessels from this context, see, e.g., Ilan et al. (2000: fig. 11.2: 1, 3–4, 6, 9); in light of the unique items found here, the possibility that this context represents another pre-destruction burial in Area F cannot be excluded	Ilan et al. (2000: 98); Nagar (2006: table 22.1)
Area H, Sq. F/6, L. 06/H/49 (Level H-9)	Unclear	A single possible sub-adult bone, seemingly in the debris above the floor; for complete vessels found near this find, see Arie (2013: figs 12.91–12.94) (this context is part of Locus 08/H/37)	Sameora and Adams (2022: table 14.1); E. Arie, personal communication
Area K, Sq. M/9, L. 98/K/40 (Level K-4)	Burial	Human (unknown age) in a pit burial with crossed hands; its skull covered intentionally by a krater (for this vessel, see Arie 2006: fig. 11.30: 7); in the original publication, it was argued that this burial post-dates the destruction, but a pre-destruction date for it cannot be excluded	Arie (2006: 196–197); Cline (2011: 60); Gadot and Yasur-Landau (2006: 586); Gadot et al. (2006: 101)
Area K, Sq. M/9, L. 00/K/77 (Level K-4)	Unclear	A single bone of an adult (lower third molar); for complete vessels near this find, see Arie (2006: fig. 13.68) (this context is part of Locus 98/K/45)	Nagar (2006: table 22.1)
Area K, Sq. N–O/9, L. 98/K/100 (Level K-4)	Burial	Sub-adult in a pit burial, lateral extended; skull encircled by three small stones and covered by unidentified vessel; for complete vessels near this find, see Arie (2006: fig. 13.56–13.57) (this context is part of Locus 98/K/70)	Gadot and Yasur-Landau (2006: 591); Sameora and Adams (2022: table 14.1)
Area K, Sq. N–O/11, L. 04/K/38 (Level K-5 or K-4)	Burial	Sub-adult in a pit burial, right lateral flexed; for two vessels were exposed near this find, see Arie (2006: figs 13.51: 11, 14); in the original publication, it was stated that ‘the burial is assigned here to Level K-5 although theoretically it could just as well have been dug from Level K-4’ (Gadot et al. 2006: 92)	Gadot et al. (2006: 92); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1); Sameora and Adams (2022: table 14.1)
Area K, Sq. O/9, L. 98/K/35 + 64 (Level K-4)	Burial?	Skeletal remains of three individuals: two sub-adults and one adult (cranial fragments, teeth, postcranial bones); in the original locus card, it was stated that some of the bones were found within a tabun (Locus 98/K/64), raising the possibility of at least another burial here; for complete vessels near this find, see Arie (2006: fig. 13.56–13.57) (this context is part of Locus 98/K/70)	Gadot and Yasur-Landau (2006: 591); Nagar (2006: table 22.1); unpublished data
Area K, Sq. O/10, L. 00/K/10 (Level K-4)	Unclear	Fragmentary skeletal remains of a sub-adult and adult (upper deciduous molar, lower limb and pelvis); in an unpublished field photo, it can be seen that the adult had an articulated left leg and foot; for complete vessels near this find, see Arie (2006: figs 13.53–13.55)	Gadot and Yasur-Landau (2006: 591); Nagar (2006: table 22.1); unpublished data
Area K, Sq. O/10, L. 98/K/34 + 43 (Level K-4)	Unclear	Fragmentary skeletal remains of a female adult (teeth, postcranial bones); for complete vessels near this find, see Arie (2006: figs 13.53–13.55) (this context is part of Locus 00/K/10)	Gadot and Yasur-Landau (2006: 591); Nagar (2006: table 22.1)
Area K, Sq. O/10–11, L. 98/K/125 (Level K-4)	Unclear	Fragmentary skeletal remains of an adult (postcranial bones); for complete vessels near this find, see Arie (2006: figs 13.53–13.55) (this context is part of Locus 00/K/10)	Gadot and Yasur-Landau (2006: 591); Sameora and Adams (2022: table 14.1)
Area K, Sq. O/11, L. 00/K/11 (Level K-4)	Burial?	A single bone of an adult (upper premolar); according to the excavators, this context belongs to a pre-destruction phase; no complete vessels were found in this room (this context is part of Locus 98/K/66)	Gadot and Yasur-Landau (2006: 591); Gadot et al. (2006: 98); Nagar (2006: table 22.1)
Area K, Sq. P/11, L. 00/K/15 (Level K-4)	Unclear	A single bone of an adult (proximal phalanx, upper limb); for complete vessels near this find, see Arie (2006: fig. 13.63) (this context is part of Locus 98/K/46)	Gadot and Yasur-Landau (2006: 591); Nagar (2006: table 22.1)
Area Q, Sq. H–I/4, L. 16/Q/79 (Level Q-7a)	Collapse	Juvenile (?); burnt; no clear offerings were observed in the vicinity of the individual	Reported here for the first time.
Area CC, Sq. Q/8, T. 1775 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Adult, probably male, in a pit burial, supine extended, possibly shrouded; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 76); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. Q/9, T. 1758 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Adult in a pit burial, supine extended, likely shrouded; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 75); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. Q/9, T. 1776 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Sub-adult in an ovoid (?) storage jar; remains appear disarticulated; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph; the individual was found near a collared-rim pithos	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 77); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. Q/10, T. 1770 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Adult in a pit burial; supine extended, likely shrouded; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph; the individual was found near a collared-rim pithos	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 73) (upper part of the photo); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. Q/10, T. 1770 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Adult in a pit burial; supine extended, likely shrouded; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph; the individual was found near a collared-rim pithos	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 73) (central part of the photo); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. Q/10, T. 1828 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Adult in a pit burial; supine extended, likely shrouded; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 70); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. R/9, T. 1764	Burial	Described by the OI’s excavators as ‘flexed burial’; three complete vessels in this locus	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 10) (but no photograph)
Area CC, Sq. R/9, T. 1765 (Str. VIA)	Collapse?	Adult; disturbed; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 85) (left part of the photo); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. R/9, T. 1765 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Human, possibly sub-adult, covered by large fragments of collared-rim pithos, left lateral extended; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph	Harrison (2004: 20, figs 85–86); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. R/9, T. 1763 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Adult in ovoid storage jar, upper body prone, folded over the lower body, knees flexed; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 87); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. R/9, T. 1766	Burial	Described by the OI’s excavators as a ‘full-length open burial’	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 10) (but no photograph)
Area CC, Sq. R/10, L. 1745 (Str. VIA)	Collapse	The upper half of adult; the individual most likely perished in the destruction	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 83)
Area CC, Sq. R/10, T. 1768	Burial	Described by the OI’s excavators as a ‘sherd-covered burial’; a storage jar and a few small finds were exposed in this locus (bronze ring, borer, cone-shaped game piece)	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 10) (but no photograph)
Area CC, Sq. R/10, T. 1782	Burial	Described by the OI’s excavators as a ‘flexed burial’	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 10) (but no photograph)
Area CC, Sq. R/10, T. 1836 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Adult in pit burial, supine extended, likely shrouded; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 84); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)
Area CC, Sq. S/9, T. 1767	Burial	Described by the OI’s excavators as a ‘full-length open burial’; several complete vessels were exposed in this locus	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 10) (but no photograph)
Area CC, Sq. S/10, L. 1769 (Str. VIA)	Collapse	Adult, supine, with legs haphazardly positioned	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 94)
Area CC, Sq. S/10, L. 1778 (Str. VIA)	Burial	Juvenile, supine extended, likely shrouded; no clear offerings can be observed in the published photograph	Harrison (2004: 20, fig. 95); Lehmann and Varoner (2018: table 1)

Notes: In this table, all the skeletal remains associated with Stratum VIA have been listed (based on Harrison 2004: 20; Nagar 2006: table 22.1; Sameora and Adams 2022: table 14.1). Several new observations have been added. Skeletal remains in Loci 04/K/8, 04/K/24, 04/K/52, 04/K/55, 04/K/104 and 04/K/120 in Area K (Sameora and Adams 2022: table 14.1) were excluded as they are not associated with secure Iron I contexts.

The Tel Aviv University’s Area K

Remains of a domestic courtyard house belonging to Level K-4 were exposed in Area K, situated c. 30 m to the east of Area Q (Arie 2006; Gadot and Yasur-Landau 2006: 586; Gadot et al. 2006). The finds included large quantities of restorable vessels within and below a thick layer of burnt destruction debris. Essentials for the current discussion are the following finds:

• a human skeleton in the western courtyard of the house (Square M/9; Locus 98/K/40). A nearly complete krater covered the skull of this individual (Arie 2006: 196–97; Gadot and Yasur-Landau 2006: 586; Gadot et al. 2006: 101; see also Harrison 2004: 8–9).

• remains of a child in the south-western room of the house (Baulk N–O/9; Locus 98/K/100). The skull of this individual was encircled by three small stones (Sameora and Adams 2022: table 14.1).

• a child burial in the northern part of the area (Baulk N–O/11; Locus 04/K/38; Fig. 22). In the original report, this find was associated with Level K-5 (Gadot et al. 2006: 92), as it was found on top of one of the walls of Level K-6 (Wall 04/K/7; for the association of this burial with Level K-4, see below).

Previous studies assumed that the first individual mentioned above (Burial 98/K/40) was interred after the destruction of the settlement, presumably by people who returned to the site (Arie 2006: 196–97; Gadot and Yasur-Landau 2006: 586; Gadot et al. 2006: 101). In retrospect, no evidence of a pit cut through the destruction debris, or any other clue of post-destruction activity was found here, and thus, the possibility that this individual was buried before the event must be considered.² In contrast, Burial 98/K/100, the second burial listed above, was clearly found below the collapse, meaning that the child must have been buried before the destruction of Stratum VIA.³ As for Burial 04/K/38, it is reasonable to argue that it was dug from the floor of Level K-4 down, an option which was already raised by the excavators (Gadot et al. 2006: 92). Other skeletal remains that likely belong to pre-destruction burials were found in additional contexts in Area K (e.g., Loci 98/K/64 and 00/K/11; see details in Table 4), but were not well preserved. All of this means that, along with individuals trapped in the destruction of Stratum VIA, several burials preceding the event can be discerned in Area K, a trend that aligns with the evidence from Area CC described above.

Figure 22 Skeletal remains in articulation in Baulk N–O/11 (Locus 04/K/38) in Area K. Note that the initial exposure of the individual was under Locus 04/K/26 (courtesy of the Megiddo Expedition, previously unpublished photo).

Discussion

Summary of the archaeological data

The picture which emerges from the south-eastern sector of the mound fits well with the finds from other parts of the site (e.g., Areas AA and H), but also presents several distinct local trends. Most important is the phenomenon of pre-destruction burials, documented in Areas CC (15 individuals) and K (3–5 individuals), which has not been observed in the northern sector of the mound (details in Table 4).⁴ Most of the buried individuals were placed in an extended supine position in shallow pits (see especially, Harrison 2004: fig. 73); the position of the clavicles and the tight placing of the ankles suggest that some of them were buried in shrouds (Duday et al. 2009). Similar to earlier Bronze Age mortuary traditions in the southern Levant (Martin et al. 2022b: 244), the pre-destruction burials in Stratum VIA were interred along the axes of wall foundations (Harrison 2004: fig. 10), indicating purposeful placement prior to the coverage of the architecture by debris. This evidence makes a strong case against identifying these burials as dug into the ruins after the destruction. All this suggests a unique behaviour, distinctive to the south-eastern sector of Megiddo.

Another distinct phenomenon documented in the south-eastern sector of the mound is that of individuals, including children and women (i.e., families), who were trapped beneath the collapse: two or three skeletons in Area CC, up to five in Area K and one in Area Q (Fig. 23). Each individual is characterized by atypical body position, similar to those found in association with the Late Bronze III destruction at Tel Azekah in the Judean Shephelah (Berendt et al. 2021; see also the review in Kreimerman 2017). At least in the case of the Area Q individual, the bones are unequivocally burnt, as indicated by colour, morphology and FTIR analysis. In contrast, excavations of Iron I contexts in the northern sector of the mound resulted in only a single bone fragment, probably of a child (Area H, see Sameora and Adams 2022: table 14.1). However, this fragment may be a relic related to earlier burial activities (e.g., Cradic 2018; Martin et al. 2022b) and/or later disturbances. In theory, one could argue that the exposure of Stratum VIA in the south-eastern sector of the mound was more extensive than in the north (especially in light of the large extent of Area CC), and that is why clear evidence for trapped individuals was only found there. However, the consistent discovery of skeletal remains in all three areas excavated in this sector vis-à-vis the absence of such finds elsewhere in the city, especially in the widely-exposed Area AA,⁵ is significant and important for the reconstruction of the events preceding the destruction of the Iron I city. According to one possible scenario, in the final days of Stratum VIA, the city’s population concentrated in the south-east, perhaps because this was the highest point in the town (Homsher and Kleiman 2022: 119, table 5.1).

Figure 23 Distribution of skeletal remains in Iron I Megiddo.

Excavations in Area Q also suggest that the crisis was not limited to the final days of Stratum VIA, but may have begun a few decades earlier, as evidenced, for instance, by rapid architectural changes in the vicinity of monumental buildings. In particular, two crucial architectural transformations are noted: 1) the expansion of the Südliches Burgtor to the east (Building 14/Q/53); and 2) the establishment of a small shrine near it (Building 14/Q/145) and its quick decommission in favour of a larger structure (Building 16/Q/48), the construction of which was never completed; no other structure in Stratum VIA was discovered in such a state (Fig. 24). Another piece of evidence that might be related to the city’s crisis is the peculiar preference for goats over sheep, as observed in the faunal remains of Area Q.

Figure 24 Evidence for the fierce conflagration of Stratum VIA at Megiddo; areas with evidence for burials/human remains under collapse are indicated. Though the stratigraphic situation in Area BB is fuzzy, signs of a violent event were found there too.

Crisis behaviour in Iron I Megiddo?

Over the years, scholars have remained undecided regarding the cause of Megiddo VIA’s destruction. Some scholars theorized devastation by a natural disaster, i.e., an earthquake (e.g., Gadot and Yasur-Landau 2006: 583; Kempinski 1989: 89–90; Lamon and Shipton 1939: 7; Marco et al. 2006: 572; Mazar 2007: 85; Cline 2011 with references to earlier studies). One of the main arguments in favour of this scenario has been the alleged absence of evidence for weapons (e.g., arrowheads or slingstones) in Stratum VIA (Cline 2011: 65; Fiaccavento 2014: 222), similar to the cases of Stratum III at Lachish (Gottlieb 2004) or Stratum II at Beersheba (Gottlieb 2015). A review of the registration records published in the final reports reveals, nonetheless, that more than 20 arrowheads were found in Stratum VIA (Blockman and Sass 2013: 889, fig. 15.8: no. 405; Harrison 2004: 85–86; Gadot and Finkelstein 2000: 626, without illustrations) along with more than 100 slingstones (Sass and Cinamon 2006: 398, nos 688–690; Blockman and Finkelstein 2006: 449–54, without illustrations). Furthermore, the majority of destructions in the southern Levant during the Bronze and Iron Ages, including those unanimously assumed to be destroyed by a human agent, did not produce similar evidence to that of Lachish and Beersheba (Kreimerman 2016: 234–35), for instance, Stratum XIII at Hazor (Zuckerman 2007) or Stratum IV at Tel Rehov (Mazar 2020: 126). Lastly, it can be emphasized here that Marco et al. (2006), who noted several possible indications of an earthquake in the finds from Stratum VIA (e.g., titled walls in Area K), ultimately defined the physical evidence as inconclusive (see also P. L. O. Guy cited in Harrison 2004: 9; Mazar 2022: 10).

Other scholars argued that the destruction of Stratum VIA was caused by a human agent (e.g., Albright 1936: 28–29; Arie 2011: 388–90; Finkelstein 2003: 78–89; 2013b: 34–36; Harrison 2004: 108; Watzinger 1929; Ussishkin 2018: 309–315, who stressed the total devastation of the city, something that is unlikely to happen in the case of an earthquake or an incident). The main argument against this model has frequently been the absence of clear signs of ‘crisis behaviour’ in the archaeological record of Stratum VIA (e.g., Arie 2011: 388). This term refers, inter alia, to a situation in which people react to a ‘deeply felt frustration or basic problem with which routine methods, secular or sacred, cannot cope’ (La Barre 1971: 11; see also Driessen 1995: 65; Zuckerman 2007). Crisis behaviour may be detected in architectural changes (Driessen 1995; Ikehara 2021), anomalous burial practices (Tamorri 2019) and hoarding (Fokkens 1997; Hall 2016; Knapp et al. 1988). In terms of architecture, unfinished building projects may signal socio-political breakdowns (Ikehara 2021). Monuments abandoned in the process of construction likewise hint at social and political unrest, or simply, the loss of control over the workforce. Abandonment may also reflect economic instability, with leaders unable to organize labour efficiently. In terms of priorities, in the lead-up to a crisis, leaders would likely abandon monumental building projects in favour of the construction of defensive works. Quick architectural changes and poor construction techniques may also point to crisis behaviour, wherein buildings are constructed hastily, signalling a lack of support from the ruling authorities (Driessen 1995: 67–76; Zuckerman 2007: 11). In the case of burials, deviant/anomalous practices include the deposition of bodies outside of formal cemeteries, sometimes due to the lack of physical access (Tamorri 2019: 92). A dearth of grave goods associated with burials may also be a sign of economic depression or socio-political crisis. Regarding hoarding, some scholars see the increase in the number of hoards as a ‘failure of confidence’ in the ruling systems (Knapp et al. 1988: 258). At Megiddo, most non-ritual hoards are dated to the Late Bronze III and late Iron I, periods that saw partial or total destruction events (Hall 2016: 112).

All the above-mentioned characteristics of ‘crisis behaviour’ can be observed in Stratum VIA in the south-eastern sector of the mound:

1. Rapid changes in public architecture, including the enlargement of a monumental building (Schumacher’s Südliches Burgtor) using inferior construction techniques, the possible establishment of a small shrine next to it, and the quick decommissioning of the structure in favour of a much larger building, the construction of which was never completed (a distinct case in the architecture of Stratum VIA).

2. Abandonment by most of the local residents, as evident in the small number of people caught in the collapse (no more than ten individuals in all excavated areas across the site) and the possible concentration of the population in the inner, highest part of the settlement.

3. Pre-destruction intramural burials, suggesting the necropolis was inaccessible (for the finds from the necropolis, see Guy and Engberg (1938); and Arie (2011: 103–05)).

4. Caching of luxurious objects, e.g., the hoard in Area Q, possibly reflecting the abandonment of the town by individuals/families with economic means (as evidenced by the lack of grave goods discovered in the burials).

5. Clues for preference of goats in the faunal remains from Area Q, which are considered to be cheaper, more reliable and less sensitive to disease than sheep.

These points demonstrate that the crisis that befell Megiddo in the early 10th century BCE was anticipated by the local residents and that the agent of destruction of the city was human. Moreover, the available evidence hints that this was probably the culmination of a process which included a siege, rather than a sudden and unexpected military attack.

The destruction of Megiddo in historical context

The devastation of Megiddo VIA is ultimately one of many destruction episodes which characterized the Iron I/II transition in the southern Levant (Mazar 2022: 10–11) and were often linked in the literature to historical or allegedly historical events (Fig. 25). Over the years, several historical scenarios have been offered for the Megiddo destruction, among them a long-term conflict with the neighbouring city of Ta‘anach (e.g., Knauf 2000, but see Arie 2011: 388), the military campaign of Shoshenq I (e.g., Finkelstein 2002: 120–22; Watzinger 1929), an early Israelite conquest (e.g., Harrison 2004: 108; Kochavi 1989: 15; Maisler 1951: 23; Mazar 1980: 46–47), or a Philistine territorial expansion (e.g., Albright 1936: 28–29). According to a more nuanced model, which underscored the radical changes that occurred in the city following the destruction, Megiddo was destroyed during the expansion of the highlanders into the valley, a development that soon brought about the emergence of the Kingdom of Israel (Arie 2011: 388–90; Finkelstein and Piasetzky 2007: 257–58). Memories of these events may have been embedded in pre-Deuteronomistic biblical texts, first and foremost the saviours’ story (and song) in Judges 4–5 and the Saul narrative in 1 Samuel (e.g., Arie 2011: 391–90; Finkelstein 2017; see also Engberg 1940: 6–7).

Figure 25 Late Iron I destructions in the southern Levant. A few of these sites, e.g., Shiloh, were devastated slightly earlier, in the middle Iron I, while other sites, e.g., Khirbet Qeiyafa and Tel Miqne/Ekron (Stratum IV), were destroyed a bit later, in the Iron I/II transition.

Summary

In this article, new evidence concerning the period preceding the destruction of Iron I Megiddo (Stratum VIA) has been presented. It has been suggested that the deterioration of the city accelerated in its final days. In the years preceding this event, rapid architectural changes occurred in the area of the Südliches Burgtor. Especially noteworthy is the extension of this monumental structure to the east. Next to it, a small cult-related building, with an installation made of three octagonal pillars, was constructed. In the next phase, this structure, which may have included basalt stelae, was decommissioned (and the stelae broken) in order to clear a space for a much larger building that was never completed. Another important piece of evidence for the crisis that plagued the city in this period is the intramural burials identified in Areas CC and K, which clearly preceded the destruction. They may indicate that access to the necropolis of the town was impossible, perhaps due to a siege.

From a broader perspective, the major difference between the destruction of Megiddo at the end of the Late Bronze Age (Stratum VIIA) and the one at the end of the Iron I (Stratum VIA) should be stressed. The former event was clearly the result of geopolitical changes, i.e., the gradual retreat of Egypt from Canaan in the late 12th century BCE; it was partial and was not accompanied by a radical transformation in material culture. The latter, in contrast, represents total devastation and was followed by radical changes in material culture that encompassed all aspects of life, and marked the shift in the southern Levant from the city-states of the Bronze Age to the territorial kingdoms of the Iron Age.

Acknowledgements

The Megiddo Expedition is conducted under the auspices of Tel Aviv University. Consortium members are George Washington University, Vanderbilt University, The University of Oklahoma, the Jezreel Valley Regional Project (JVRP), Fuller Theological Seminary and Loyola Marymount University. The Expedition is directed by Israel Finkelstein, Matthew J. Adams and Mario A. S. Martin. The expedition is currently supported by the Dan David Foundation, The Shmunis Family Foundation, the Katzman Family Foundation, Jacques Chahine and Mark Weissman. The 2012–2016 seasons in Area Q were supervised by Robert S. Homsher, assisted by Margaret C. Cohen, Jonathan David, Zachary C. Dunseth, Charles Friedman, Nicholas Kraus and Assaf Kleiman. Registration was co-ordinated by Jen Thum and Erin Hall. The 2008–2012 seasons were supervised by Norma Franklin, assisted by Ian Cipin, Jonathan David and Philippe Guillaume. Registration was co-ordinated by Jen Thum.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article can be accessed here: https://doi.org/10.1080/00758914.2023.2230039.

Notes

1 In earlier reports, these remains are described as a platform (Homsher and Kleiman 2022: 120; Kleiman et al. 2017: 26), but further analyses suggest that this is part of a distinct structure, built over the remains of Building 14/Q/53. In addition, further investigation shows that the pavement exposed in Square I/3 (Locus 12/Q/137) and assigned to Level Q-6b must be associated with Building 16/Q/48 of Level Q-7a.

2 We do not exclude the possibility of squatters’ activity after the destruction of Stratum VIA (e.g., Cline 2011: 60; Gadot and Yasur-Landau 2006: 586; Gadot et al. 2006: 100–01), but only reject the idea that such actions involved the burials of individuals in Area K and CC (and elsewhere at the site). After all, and as mentioned above, no clear pits were marked on the plans and sections of Square M/9 in either Level K-4 (Gadot et al. 2006: fig. 7.7) or K-3b (Lehmann et al. 2000: fig. 6.5; for the section drawing, see Arie and Nativ 2013: fig. 3.25). The same holds true also for a section of Area CC published in Megiddo I (Lamon and Shipton 1939: fig. 35).

3 According to the field records, the locus above the Burial (98/K/93) also contained material from the collapse. Understanding the exact relations between the human remains (165.92–165.80 m) and the nearest floor (c. 165.95 m.a.s.l.) is a bit complicated, as this area experienced architectural changes that included the raising of surfaces, cancellation of pillars and addition of partitions (Gadot et al. 2006: 97). And yet, we assume that the individual was most likely buried in a shallow pit in the ground, similar to some of the burials exposed in Area CC (e.g., Fig. 21). The possibility that the deceased, who was clearly treated after his death, as evidenced by the three stones that encircled his head, was left on the floor of the building is improbable in our view.

4 Excluding the necropolis of the city (Guy and Engberg 1938), the only other burial associated with an Iron I context was found in Area F (Ilan et al. 2000: 95–96). It was assigned by the excavators to Stratum VIB based on pottery typology, but attributing it to a later date within the Iron I is also possible (see also Finkelstein et al. 2000: 257–60).

5 Due to its public/palatial elements, Area AA was probably less populated than the domestic areas of Megiddo (e.g., Areas CC or K). And yet, the fact that the entrance to the city, as well as its royal sector, were abandoned on the eve of destruction is itself further evidence of the crisis.