Tell Megiddo: a patch of land abandoned to obscurity for centuries and yet associated with the ultimate battle of good and evil in the Bible. What happened there? Who lived there and how did it gain its reputation as an epic battlefield? In this study, I will examine its long history of occupation, conflicts, and excavations, with special emphasis on Iron Age settlements. Then I will conclude with a few ideas about how the archaeological study of the site might inform our understanding of the Hebrew Bible as well as Christian ministry.
Geographical Setting and Water Sources
Originally called Tell el-Mutasellim (“the hill of the governor”), Tell Megiddo lies on the western side of the Jezreel Valley near Mt. Carmel.1 The thirteen-acre site,2 hiding within it the remains of cities from a six-thousand-year range, was over one hundred feet when discovered.3 Its position on two important roads, one from Jerusalem to Phoenicia and one from Egypt to Damascus and Mesopotamia,4 made it an important site for military control of the region5 and access to the fertile Jezreel Valley.6 Battles were fought there by almost every ancient empire in the area because, as fifteenth-century BCE Pharaoh Thutmose asserted, “the capturing of Megiddo was ‘like the capturing of a thousand cities.’”7
Besides its strategic location, the site was fertile and had abundant water.8 A spring was accessed through Late Bronze or Early Iron Age structures with stone stairways, funnel shaped shaft, and a sloping rock tunnel leading down to a chamber with a large water hold in the floor.9 The Chicago expedition team that discovered the structure found that it still held drinkable water which was replenished when drawn, signifying that it was of the “general subterranean water table.”10 The underground water tunnel was used for over a thousand years,11 giving the city access to spring water even when under siege.12
History of Excavation
Archaeology still in its nascent years, Gottlieb Schumacher of the German Oriental Society set out with his team in the years 1903-1905 and dug a giant trench across the entire site, along with several smaller trenches.13 While the method quickly exposed large buildings,14 it also missed smaller objects, and later excavators complained that he “had destroyed almost as much as he recovered.”15
Twenty years later, James Henry Breasted of the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago sent a team with rotating directors Fisher, Guy, and Loud to look for both Solomon’s city and that captured by Egyptian Pharaoh Thutmose III in 1479 BCE.16 The team excavated the entirety of Strata I-III and dug to the bedrock in some areas, uncovering the entire occupation history of the tell, all while innovating new archaeological technology.17 They were more careful than Schumacher, dividing the area into 25-meter numbered squares, digging thin layers and sifting and documenting everything.18 This project was immensely fruitful, but cut short due to finances, conflicts, and World War II.19
Seeking answers from the earlier dig, especially concerning the Iron Age stratigraphy, Yigael Yadin of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem led excavations in the 1960s and 70s.20 His team found structures seeming to match Solomon’s city21 and his work led to the re-dating of some structures. Beginning in 1992 and still in progress, Finkelstein and Ussishkin of Tel Aviv University and Halpern of Pennsylvania State University have led expeditions with a focus on resolving dating disputes and discovering details of ancient occupations.22
History of Occupation
There are at least 20 ancient cities inside the mound, built on top of each other from ca. 7000 to nearly 300 BCE.23 Stratum XX, at the bedrock, reveals Neolithic and Chalcolithic pottery and stone and brick fireplaces, floors, and walls.24 At Stratum XIX of Early Bronze I, it developed into a large unfortified city with mudbrick buildings, pits, ovens, and Chalcolithic pottery.25 Temples sprung up with hunting scenes which are “some of the earliest examples of local art in the ancient Near East,”26 and their location determined the “sacred area” of future Bronze Age temple constructions.27 At Strata XVIII-XV of Early Bronze II-III was found a smaller fortified city with a huge stone city wall, a round stone altar with bones and sherds, and three uniform temples likely for three different deities.28
Strata XIV-X represent occupation moving into the Middle Bronze Age, with finds such as a large mudbrick city wall and red burnished Syrian-style pottery.29 Strata XI and X represent the Hyksos period when Canaanites held rule in Egypt, ca. 1720-1550, with finds such as Hyksos scarabs, daggers, spearheads, weapons, a novel chariot, and a temple with figurines of Canaanite god Resheph, Egyptian statuettes, and clay liver omens for divination.30 The temple was rebuilt later and lasted into the Iron Age and destruction at Stratum VIA.31 Tombs also become more plentiful in the MB layers, pointing to ancestor worship.32
Strata VIII and VII represent Canaanite occupation in the 15th-12th centuries BCE, with several buildings, imported pottery, a four chambered gate, and a palace.33 Here were found shells, perfume jars, jewelry, gold, lapis, serpentine objects, and carved ivory (some with hieroglyphics and designs from the 18th Dynasty).34 The collection of ivories is “considered one of the most important archaeological finds in Israel.”35
When Canaanites sought to resist the rising New Kingdom of Egypt, Pharaoh Thutmose III destroyed Megiddo’s city ca. 1468 or 1479 BCE,36 his description of the battle being the “earliest account of a major war in antiquity.”37 However, the city continued to have material wealth and only experience weak domination from Egypt.38 The Tel el-Amarna Letters between Canaanite prince Biridiya and pharaohs Amenhotem III and IV show that Megiddo still held some status under Egyptian rule, which lasted until the destruction of Stratum VIIA in the 12th century BCE.39
The city remained occupied in the Iron Age, its rule shifting through the hands of Canaanites, Israelites, and Assyrians in Strata VI-III, as we’ll explore in depth in the next section. Finally, Stratum II and I show domestic occupation under the Neo-Babylonian and Persian Empires, the town decaying until its fall into obscurity in the mid-fourth century BCE.40 Only small towns to the south, cemeteries, and a fortress for the road junction would be present after the Persian period.41
Iron Age Occupation and Special Finds
Strata VI through III represent Megiddo’s Iron Age occupation which begins with ambiguity and mixed occupation in the transition from the Canaanite to the Israelite period.42 Megiddo likely came under Israelite reign late in David’s time, ca. 990.43 Dating of Strata is also in dispute, and despite over a century of eager excavations seeking Solomon’s city at Megiddo, it hasn’t definitively been identified.44
Level VI, mostly Canaanite though Finkelstein thinks it might be from Solomon’s time, reveals an impressive city “worthy of mention in both the biblical and Egyptian accounts.”45 Finds in this level include a giant underground grain silo, pins, arrows, amulets, figurines, stone bowls, scarabs, Philistine bichrome pottery, and a ten-inch bronze Canaanite statuette of a sitting deity with cone-shaped cap, likely representing El.46 The Tel Aviv team found a clay bowl with another clay bowl and a small vessel nested within which contained gold and silver earrings, a ring with a fish carving, valuable stones, and beads from about 1100 BCE. One of the earrings is shaped like a basket with an ostrich and eight other animals; nothing like it has been found in the Mediterranean.47
VIA was destroyed by fire, possibly corresponding with the 11th-century Canaanite-Philistine city David conquered, though Finkelstein dates it in the mid-tenth century.48 The burnt city was discovered with many artifacts in situ, including twenty-seven bronze objects such as bowls, platters, axes, and spears, all piled in the open as if someone had bundled and dropped them when fleeing.49 VB seems to be the first Israelite city, with distinctive pillared housing.50 It may be from the time of David or Solomon, though it’s impoverished rather than showing signs of Solomon’s fortifications.51
Alternately, Solomon’s city may include buildings on top of this level and below IVA’s city wall.52 The Chicago team assigned remains in strata VA, IVB, and IV to Solomon’s time, and Albright combined VA and IVB into a single city level, which some scholars date to Solomon. However, others date VA/IVB to David and IVA to Solomon, and some date VA/IVB to Omri and Ahab (9th century BCE).53
The disputed Level VA/IVB is a rich city with three palaces, an administrative building, domestic buildings, a sanctuary, and a postern. The buildings have Proto-Ionic capitals on pillars and ashlar masonry, which was used extensively under Solomon and matches that of his palace as described in 1 Kings 7:9-12.54 The lack of domestic quarters or temples in this level point to the town not being independent but ruled, possibly by Solomon.55
Schumacher, who discovered Palace 1723, found two seals inscribed in Hebrew in its compound, one reading “(belonging) to Asaph” and the other “(belonging) to Shema, Servant of Jeroboam,” likely referring to royal Israelite officials. The Shema seal could have been from the time of Jeroboam II (784-748 BCE) or Jeroboam I (928-907 BCE).56 It was “the first artifact recovered from an archaeological dig to be associated directly with an ancient Israelite king.”57 Stratum VA/IVB seems to have been destroyed by fire but it’s unknown when and by whom.58
An extant stele fragment from Pharaoh Sheshonq’s conquest of Megiddo ca. 930 BCE would have been helpful in solving the dilemma, but unfortunately it was discovered in Schumacher’s dump heap rather than in situ.59 It’s possible Shishak took over and completed Stratum VA/IVB and made it an administrative center in the 10th century, though his conquest may have instead been at level VIA.60
Deepening the mystery, Stratum IVA also showed signs of Solomon, though some date it later, to Ahab and Omri or even Jeroboam II.61 Noteworthy are a chambered city gate similar to those at Hazor and Gezer, thick city wall, military commander’s building with a shrine, hewn stones and cedar beams matching Solomon’s Jerusalem building projects, tunneled water system, and a compound of stables.62 The Chicago team made headlines when said they found “Solomon’s Stables” in 1928, seemingly matching 1 Kings 9:15-19.63 They had stone hitching posts, plastered center aisles, cobblestone side aisles, and large stalls which each could hold 10 or 12 horses.64 While some have debated whether the structures were storehouses, markets, or barracks, the Tel Aviv excavation found similar structures nearby which added weight to their being stables.65 Ahab was known by Assyrian king Shalmaneser III to have thousands of chariots, adding evidence to this layer being from his time.66 If dated to the ninth-century, this may be the stratum where Ahaziah king of Judah died at the hands of Jehu’s soldiers.67
Megiddo was likely conquered in 734 BCE by Tiglath-Pileser III of Assyria, “perhaps rather easily since there are few, if any, signs of destruction at the end of Stratum IVA.”68 Megiddo then became the capital of an Assyrian province, according to the Annals of Tiglath-Pileser III.69 Stratum III witnesses the city under Assyrian rule. This layer has large private dwellings arranged in blocks with parallel streets, a new two-chamber city gate, and public buildings with Assyrian architecture.70 Artifact finds include a stone seal with a Gilgamesh scene, a surprising 1588 BCE Spanish dollar of Philip II, scarabs, arrowheads, and a large flint collection.71
It was possibly in this stratum where Josiah met his end in 609 BCE, having encountered Necho at Megiddo while the Pharaoh was on his way to help Assyria against Babylon at Carchemish.72
Connections with the Hebrew Bible and Christian Ministry
The excavations at Tell Megiddo show us that Solomon’s building projects and city fortifications may not have been as straightforward as they seem in the Scriptures. In fact, the Tel Aviv team believes that the major rebuilding of Megiddo happened during the time of the northern Kingdom and not under the united monarchy: Israel’s prosperity and resources were greater than that of Judah, “Solomon’s constructions” at Gezer, Megiddo, and Hazor were in the northern Kingdom’s territory, and the Assyrians recognized Israel as a formidable force rather than Judah. This would mean that the kings of the north were slandered by the southern scribes while Judah’s kings were glorified.73 What would this mean in a ministry and Bible study context? At the very least, biblical literalism would need to be held with question, and we’d need to diligently question the histories, motivations, and theological perspectives offered in the texts.
There are a dozen other mentions of Megiddo in the HB, most of them involving battles with major figures such as Joshua, Deborah and Barak, Gideon, Saul, Jonathan, Ahaziah, and Josiah.74 As did the ancient world surrounding it, Israel associated this location with warfare and struggle for control. The Song of Deborah associates the land with victory and praise for the Lord. In contrast, in Zecharaiah 12:10-14, the coming mourning of Jerusalem when looking upon “me, on him whom they have pierced,” (v. 10) is compared to that of Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. For believers in Jesus, the imagery of desolation from this passage and the excavated destruction layers add to our understanding of the anguish and guilt at having crucified God himself.
The death of Josiah, “the last righteous king of the lineage of David,” was especially important to the Isrealites, signaling the shifting of hope to a messiah who would bring justice and restoration. This event’s location at Megiddo served to connect its long history as a battlefield of empires with a metaphysical importance which carried over into its setting for the battle to end all battles in Revelation 16:16.75 As the crucifixion and Zech. 12 demonstrate the battle for our souls, the battle of Revelation represents the physical battle in which God will finally prevail, setting up an earthly kingdom as was expected in the Israelite messianic hope. With every bygone empire having sought to triumph over Megiddo in order to take control of the ancient world, Armageddon (Har-Megiddo) is an apt location for the prophetic battle in which God’s Empire ultimately triumphs and reclaims the world.
Bibliography
Cline, Eric H. Digging Up Armageddon: The Search for the Lost City of Solomon. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2020. EPUB.
DeVries, Carl E. “Megiddo.” In The New International Dictionary of the Bible, edited by J. D. Douglas and Merrill C. Tenney, 637-38. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1987.
Ha’aretz. “Megiddo Dig Unearths Cache of Buried Canaanite Treasure.” Israel Faxx 22 (May 2012). http://bi.gale.com.georgefox.idm.oclc.org/global/article/GALE%7CA290305505/
ced129d3da422f93960eecdad48cd32e? u=newb64238.
Halpern, Baruch. “Megiddo.” In Oxford Encyclopedias of the Bible, edited by Baruch Halpern. Oxford Biblical Studies Online, http://www.oxfordbiblicalcstudies.com/article/opr/t998/e14.
Lapp, Nancy L. “Megiddo.” In Harper Collins Bible Dictionary, edited by Mark Alan Powell, 619-22. New York: HarperCollins, 2011.
“The Megiddo Expedition.” Last modified May 29, 2020. Tel Aviv University. https://megiddoexpedition.wordpress.com
Silverman, Neil A., Israel Finkelstein, David Ussishkin, and Baruch Halpern. “Digging at Armageddon.” Archaeology 52, no. 6 (November / December 1999): pp. 32-39.
Tappy, Ron. “Megiddo.” In The Oxford Companion to the Bible, edited by Bruce M. Metzger and Michael D. Coogan. Oxford Biblical Studies Online, http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com.georgefox.idm.oclc.org/article/opr/t120/e0477.
Ussishkin, David. “Megiddo.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, edited by Eric M. Meyers. Oxford Biblical Studies Online, http://www.oxfordbiblicalcstudies.com/article/opr/t256/e695.
1. David Ussishkin, “Megiddo,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, ed. Eric M. Meyers, Oxford Biblical Studies Online, 1.http://www.oxfordbiblicalcstudies.com/article/opr/t256/e695.
2. Ron Tappy, “Megiddo,” in The Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. Bruce M. Metzger and Michael D. Coogan, Oxford Biblical Studies Online, 1. http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com.georgefox.idm.oclc.org/
article/opr/t120/e0477.
3. Eric H. Cline, Digging Up Armageddon: The Search for the Lost City of Solomon (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2020), loc. 17.
4. Nancy L. Lapp, “Megiddo,” in Harper Collins Bible Dictionary, ed. Mark Alan Powell (New York: HarperCollins, 2011), 619.
5. Ussishkin, 1.
6. “The Megiddo Expedition.” Last modified May 29, 2020. Tel Aviv University. https://megiddoexpedition.wordpress.com.
7. Cline, loc. 49.
8. Neil A. Silverman, Israel Finkelstein, David Ussishkin, and Baruch Halpern, “Digging at Armageddon,” Archaeology 52, no. 6 (November / December 1999): 34.
9. Cline, loc. 247-48, 267.
10. Cline, loc. 268.
11. Cline, loc. 262.
12. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 39.
13. Cline, loc. 84.
14. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 33.
15. Cline, loc. 116.
16. Cline, loc. 29, 555.
17. Cline loc. 28-30, 122-23.
18. Cline, loc. 89, 118, 121.
19. Cline, loc. 550.
20. Cline, loc. 555, “Megiddo Expedition”.
21. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 34; Ussishkin, 8.
22. Ussishkin, 2; Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 34; Cline, loc. 27.
23. Cline, loc. 18; Halpern, 1.
24. Cline, loc. 495; Ussishkin 2.
25. Lapp, 620.
26. Lapp 620
27. Ussishkin, 3.
28. Ussishkin, 3.
29. Cline loc. 499-500.
30. Cline, loc 436, 501, 511.
31. Cline, loc. 430, 440.
32. Baruch Halpern, “Megiddo,” in Oxford Encyclopedias of the Bible, ed. Baruch Halpern, Oxford Biblical Studies Online, 1. http://www.oxfordbiblicalcstudies.com/article/opr/t998/e14.
33. Cline, loc. 440-41, 501-502; Ussishkin, 4.
34. Cline, loc. 459-63.
35. Ha’aretz, “Megiddo Dig Unearths Cache of Buried Canaanite Treasure,” Israel Faxx 22 (29 May 2012): 1. http://bi.gale.com.georgefox.idm.oclc.org/global/article/GALE%7CA290305505/ced129d3da422f93960eecdad
48cd32e? u=newb64238.
36. Halpern, 2; Ussishkin, 6; Lapp, 621.
37. “Megiddo Expedition”.
38. Lapp, 621.
39. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 34.
40. Cline, loc. 122, 129; Ussishkin, 14.
41. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 36, 39; Cline, loc. 129.
42. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 35.
43. Halpern, 2.
44. Cline, loc. 554.
45. Cline, loc. 554. 381.
46. Cline, loc. 356-67, 421-22; Ussishkin, 8.
47. Ha’aretz, 1.
48. Ussishkin, 7-8; Halpern, 2.
49. Cline, 373-78.
50. Halpern, 2; Cline, 380.
51. Cline, 380; Ussishkin, 8.
52. Ussishkin, 9.
53. Ussishkin, 8-9; Cline, loc. 553.
54. Ussishkin, 9-10; Halpern, 2.
55. Halpern, 3.
56. Ussishkin, 12.
57. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 33.
58. Ussishkin, 12.
59. Cline, loc. 90.
60. Halpern, 2-3.
61. Cline, loc. 190, 439; Lapp, 622.
62. Cline, loc. 554; Ussishkin, 11, 13.
63. Cline, loc. 183.
64. Cline, loc. 185-86.
65. Cline, loc. 188; Ussishkin, 13.
66. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 38-39.
67. Ussishkin, 12.
68. Cline, loc. 359.
69. Lapp, 620.
70. Lapp, 622; Ussishkin, 14.
71. Cline, loc. 125.
72. Ussishkin, 14.
73. Silverman, Finkelstein, Ussishkin, and Halpern, 38.
74. Cline, loc. 49; “Megiddo Expedition”; Carl E. DeVries, “Megiddo,” in The New International Dictionary of the Bible, ed. J. D. Douglas and Merrill C. Tenney (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1987), 637.
75. “Megiddo Expedition”.
biblebookworm 