[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]When ASOR was established in 1900, our office was one large room in a Jerusalem hotel. During the past 118 years, we have dramatically expanded our scholarly capacity and public outreach—both abroad and in North America. By 1925, we built a permanent home in Jerusalem. Yet in North America, we moved frequently, from one host institution to another. Now, it is time for ASOR to establish an independent headquarters to serve our broadened constituencies. Our goal is to raise $1.5 million to purchase an enduring home for ASOR in the Washington, D.C. area—a location that is of greatest strategic benefit to our mission.
Why Washington. D.C.? A home for ASOR in the Washington, D.C. area will facilitate our engagement with federal agencies and Washington-area higher-education associations that foster the scholarship of our 2000 dues-paying members and 72 member institutions. This home will enhance our communication with government partners, Washington-based international organizations, and foreign embassies that support our members’ and our cultural heritage teams’ overseas research. This home will strengthen ASOR’s interactions with colleagues in other learned societies that are Washington-based and will provide ASOR with a national and international platform from which to launch improved outreach programs that will increase public understanding of the Near East and wider Mediterranean.
The ASOR Board of Trustees has identified Alexandria, VA—a hub of non-profits with easy access to downtown Washington—as a location where we can find an office building within our price range.
How Can You Help? Between February and November 2018, we raised $750,000 in gifts and pledges to support the purchase of our new home, and generous end-of-the year (2018) donations have now brought that total up to $929,600. With the help of loyal friends and members like you, we know we can keep this momentum going and raise our total goal of $1.5 million over the next four years — or even sooner! Naming opportunities exist at the following levels:
Naming of building = $1,000,000
Naming of conference room or floor = $300,000 – $500,000
Naming of an individual office (sizes vary) = $100,000 – $200,000
Name recognition on smaller office spaces = $25,000 – $99,999
Name on plaque recognizing major donors = $10,000 or more
Name on a plaque recognizing all donors at “brick” level or higher = $250 or more
Please give generously today![/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496684098866{margin-right: 5px !important;margin-bottom: 20px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 30px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_wp_posts title=”BROWSE THE NEWS ARCHIVE” number=”4″][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496684008271{margin-right: 10px !important;margin-bottom: 30px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 30px !important;padding-right: 20px !important;padding-left: 20px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_column_text]Tweets by ASOResearch [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
STEINMETZ FELLOWSHIPS FOR ACTIVE/RESERVE MILITARY OR VETERANS
Established in 2019 through an annual gift from Charles Steinmetz, these fellowships support the participation of U.S. military personnel or veterans in archaeological excavations. One fellowship for $2,000 will be awarded in 2019.
Applicants must be U.S. active or reserve military or veterans. Membership in ASOR is not required to apply, but the successful applicant will be asked to join ASOR at the Associate Membership level (only $40) or higher.
Preference will be given to individuals that have not received support through the ASOR excavation fellowship program or other funding sources for the summer of 2019. Additional preference will also be given to applicants who would not usually receive funding (for airfare, lodging or a stipend) from the excavation. Preference is also given to applicants who have not received ASOR funding for excavations in the past three years.
Applications must include the contact information for the director of the excavation project.
Upon completion of the field season, a report of 250-350 words and three appropriate photos (500 dpi resolution or higher) on site must be submitted to the ASOR office by August 15, 2019. Reports and photos should be sent via email with “ASOR Veteran Fellowship report” in the subject line. More information will be available after the recipients have been notified.
Fellowship recipients will be required to sign a waiver indicating that ASOR is not responsible for any injuries they might sustain during their time at the excavation in which they participate. They will also be required to sign a release of rights to ASOR for the inclusion of their report and photographs in one of ASOR’s publications.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496684098866{margin-right: 5px !important;margin-bottom: 20px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 30px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_wp_posts title=”BROWSE THE NEWS ARCHIVE” number=”4″][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496684008271{margin-right: 10px !important;margin-bottom: 30px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 30px !important;padding-right: 20px !important;padding-left: 20px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_column_text]Tweets by ASOResearch [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
THE THINGS I LEARNED AT DOR: ONE LOCUS CLOSES AND ANOTHER LOCUS OPENS
Evan McDuff, 2018 Eric and Carol Meyers Excavation Fellowship Recipient
Here I am sampling phytoliths from one of the many phytolith layers uncovered below Monument B. Photo credit to Erin Brantmayer
This past summer, I had the opportunity to participate in an archeological excavation at Dor, Israel thanks to funding from ASOR and the generous Eric and Carol Meyers Excavation Fellowship. Tel Dor is situated on the Israeli coast halfway between Haifa and Caesarea. Unlike the sandy shores to the south, the area of Dor is characterized by rocky outcrops, which form some of Israel’s finest natural harbors. These harbors played a large role in the maritime trade of the Levant throughout the ages and had a large impact on human activity and culture at the site.
During this summer’s excavation we focused on the area designated as D1, located at the summit of the southern-most outcrop of the site. The main interest in D1 was a Hellenistic monumental complex dominated by two side-by-side temples. The two temples, designated Monument A to the south and Monument B to the north, were thought to be contemporary to each other. It appears, however, based on construction techniques that Monument B is slightly younger then Monument A. Both monument A and B were partially excavated in 2005 and 2006. Thus, our goals this season were to excavate around and within these temples in order to fully understand their chronological relationship to each other and the surrounding complexes of the Hellenistic and Roman periods.
With my task of recording elevations I became proficient in the use of both the total station and the dumpy level. Photo credit to Kathryn Elizabeth Spillman Joseph.
In my time at Dor, sandwiched between Monument A and Monument B, I came to learn many things both academic and personal. I learned practical skills needed for Hellenistic and Roman archaeology like the basics of pottery identification. I learned silly but useful facts, like how giving features names, like Ramona, Mortimer, and Genie, makes talking about stratigraphy much easier and far funnier. Silly things aside, I learned that during an excavation, adaptability is the key to success. Previous to the start of the Dor season I was poised, with my experience in zooarchaeology and archaeobotany, to act as the site’s Registrar of Organic Materials, though this position would never fully come to fruition. Early in the season it became apparent, with an utter lack of botanicals and an only slight scattering of animal bones, the position would be unnecessary. I remained on staff and took on the responsibilities of an Assistant Area Supervisor. Though I was disappointed that I would not be working in my area of specialization, my new position awarded me certain opportunities that I would otherwise have been without.
The sun sets on Tel Dor on the second to last day of excavation. Photo credit to Erin Brantmayer.
The crux of this tale is that people are going to give you jobs or tasks you do not necessarily want, especially on a dig. It behooves you to take these opportunities in stride and learn what you can. In my case, as a student aspiring to pursue academic archaeology it benefited me greatly to gain experience in managing excavation personnel and teaching students the practical and theoretical idiosyncrasies related to archaeological investigation. The Dor 2018 excavation season thoroughly exercised and developed these managerial skill sets, as much of my time was spent working with and managing students and volunteers. Likewise, I was responsible for teaching my charges proper excavation techniques, informing them about site history and stratigraphy, and answering their questions. In many ways I became a better teacher and a better excavator because of my experience at Dor.
Aside from my managerial tasks, I was assigned dominion over taking and keeping track of the daily elevations including all locus openings and closings. It doesn’t sound hard, but with the amount of architecture that we had, loci were opening and closing faster then one could say ‘I have found another wall.’ In tandem with being in charge of elevations it was my duty to assist in the creation of the daily and final top plans and to input elevations into these. This task was far outside my area of expertise and comfort zone, as it required a keen understanding of stratigraphy, phasing, and Photoshop, all of which I lacked. Eventually though, I came to grasp these concepts and in all learned a substantial amount about the practical execution of archaeology.
My summer at Dor was far from the way I imagined it would be, and honestly this is not a bad thing. Though I did not expect to be an Assistant Area Supervisor, the experience helped me developed a skill set I did not even know I needed or wanted to develop. I gained valuable experience in running an excavation and honed my skills as an excavator, archaeologist, and teacher. I learned if you roll with the punches and learn what you can from an experience you will, likely, come out better for it. All in all, the food was good, the archaeology was fascinating, and the people were beyond amazing. In the end I learned so much and I had an experience I am not soon going to forget.
For more information about the excavation at Tel Dor, please see the excavation’s website.
Evan McDuff is currently a master’s student in Ancient Greek and Roman Studies at Brandeis University. His research focuses on studying ancient Mediterranean food ways through the study of zooarchaeology, archaeobotany, literature, and art. His master’s thesis centers on the use of phytoliths in the study of Roman culinary spices and and the Roman-Indian trade of pepper.
[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]When ASOR was established in 1900, our office was one large room in a Jerusalem hotel. During the past 118 years, we have dramatically expanded our scholarly capacity and public outreach—both abroad and in North America. By 1925, we built a permanent home in Jerusalem. Yet in North America, we moved frequently, from one host institution to another. Now, it is time for ASOR to establish an independent headquarters to serve our broadened constituencies. Our goal is to raise $1.5 million to purchase an enduring home for ASOR in the Washington, D.C. area—a location that is of greatest strategic benefit to our mission.
Why Washington. D.C.? A home for ASOR in the Washington, D.C. area will facilitate our engagement with federal agencies and Washington-area higher-education associations that foster the scholarship of our 2000 dues-paying members and 72 member institutions. This home will enhance our communication with government partners, Washington-based international organizations, and foreign embassies that support our members’ and our cultural heritage teams’ overseas research. This home will strengthen ASOR’s interactions with colleagues in other learned societies that are Washington-based and will provide ASOR with a national and international platform from which to launch improved outreach programs that will increase public understanding of the Near East and wider Mediterranean.
The ASOR Board of Trustees has identified Alexandria, VA—a hub of non-profits with easy access to downtown Washington—as a location where we can find an office building within our price range.
How Can You Help? Between February and November 2018, we raised $750,000 in gifts and pledges to support the purchase of our new home, and generous end-of-the year (2018) donations have now brought that total up to $910,000. With the help of loyal friends and members like you, we know we can keep this momentum going and raise our total goal of $1.5 million over the next four years — or even sooner! Naming opportunities exist at the following levels:
Naming of building = $1,000,000
Naming of conference room or floor = $300,000 – $500,000
Naming of an individual office (sizes vary) = $100,000 – $200,000
Name recognition on smaller office spaces = $25,000 – $99,999
Name on plaque recognizing major donors = $10,000 or more
Name on a plaque recognizing all donors at “brick” level or higher = $250 or more
Please give generously today![/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496684098866{margin-right: 5px !important;margin-bottom: 20px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 30px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_wp_posts title=”BROWSE THE NEWS ARCHIVE” number=”4″][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496684008271{margin-right: 10px !important;margin-bottom: 30px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 30px !important;padding-right: 20px !important;padding-left: 20px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_column_text]Tweets by ASOResearch [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Pp. 228–237: “Reuse and Recycling in the Temple of Millions of Years of Thutmosis III (Luxor, Egypt): Archaeological Evidence of a Pottery Workshop,” by Juan Jesús Padilla Fernández, Linda Chapon, and Francisco Contreras Cortés
Archaeological excavations carried out during seasons 2013 and 2014 in the Temple of Millions of Years of Thutmosis III shed light on a set of material elements linked to the production process of ceramics. Among these elements are a kiln and possible decanting sink structures. Long after the sacred precinct had been abandoned, changes seem to have occurred in the ideological and ritual conceptions of the Theban Mountain situated on the west bank of Luxor. These changes led to the reutilization in more recent times of still-visible mud-brick structures, but with different functions and uses.
Click here to access the above article on The University of Chicago Press Journals (ASOR membership with online access and/or subscription to UCP Current Content required).
Pp. 239–243: “New Fragments of “Nectanebo the Falcon” from the Temple of Behbeit el-Hagar,” by Mahmoud A. Emam and Ehab Abd el-Zaher
Two new fragments (no. 456 and Hor.Behbeit.4) presenting the lower part of two unfinished Horus statues in the form of a falcon embracing the king between his claws were discovered recently during irrigation works in the western side of the temple of Behbeit el-Hagar in 2009. The authors present a full description of the two newly discovered fragments and propose their dating to the reign of King Nectanebo II (360–342 B.C.E.) by comparing them with two other statue bases of the falcon Horus dated to the same king that are apparently from Behbeit el-Hagar. The strong relations between King Nectanebo II and the god Horus in Behbeit are in evidence.
The author describes the recent, renewed vandalizing of the site of Khirbet el-Lauz in the West Bank. In doing so, he stresses the role of the general public in protecting the archaeological resources located in Area C, as well as the importance of raising awareness among the school students to engage them in safeguarding the archaeological sites, and offers some recommendations for reducing the looting of antiquities in the Palestinian Territories.
Click here to access the above article on The University of Chicago Press Journals (ASOR membership with online access and/or subscription to UCP Current Content required).
Pp. 244–249: “Khirbet el-Lauz Revisited: Lessons from the Renewed Destruction of a Vulnerable Heritage Site,” by Salah Hussein Al-Houdalieh
Click here to access the above article on The University of Chicago Press Journals (ASOR membership with online access and/or subscription to UCP Current Content required).
Pp. 250–258: “Archaeological Excavations at Khirbet Beit Bassa, Palestine,” by Ibrahim Mohammad Abu Aemar
Khirbet Beit Bassa is located about three kilometers southeast of Bethlehem city on a hilltop that in every direction overlooks other archaeological sites.The results of surveys and archaeological excavations conducted at the site indicate that it was inhabited during the Roman, Byzantine, and early Islamic periods, and for a time in the Ottoman period. The architectural remains that have been discovered during various archaeological activities at the site include a subterranean rock-cut tomb, ground graves, a wine press, residential structures, cisterns, and a khan. Over recent decades, many parts of the site have been exposed to destruction and vandalism resulting mainly from the looting of antiquities by local groups, by urban development such as the construction of new roads and houses, and through agricultural activities in which tractors were used for plowing. This study focuses on presenting the results of archaeological excavations that the author conducted at the site, mainly in 2009 and 2010.
Click here to access the above article on The University of Chicago Press Journals (ASOR membership with online access and/or subscription to UCP Current Content required).
Pp. 259–268: “Between Destruction and Diplomacy in Canaan: The Austrian-Israeli Expedition to Tel Lachish,” by Katharina Streit, Lyndelle Webster, Vanessa Becker, Ann-Kathrin Jeske, Hadas Misgav, and Felix Höflmayer
The transition from the Middle to the Late Bronze Age in the southern Levant is marked by violent destructions of most major cities. The prevalent historical narrative connects these events with the expulsion of the Hyksos, the reunification of Egypt, and the end of the Second Intermediate period. However, current radiocarbon evidence indicates that the destruction of the Middle Bronze Age cities began around 1600 B.C.E., about half a century before the defeat of the Hyksos under King Ahmose. Aiming to test this chronological question, which could again open up the discussion regarding the underlying cause for the Middle Bronze Age destruction layers, excavations have been renewed at Tel Lachish. In the course of the first two seasons by the Austrian-Israeli Expedition, substantial remains from the Middle and Late Bronze Age have been uncovered. This report highlights the potential of further excavations at Lachish and summarizes the preliminary results of the project and its excavation strategies.
Click here to access the above article on The University of Chicago Press Journals (ASOR membership with online access and/or subscription to UCP Current Content required).
Pp. 269–275: “A Second Cult Room at the Lachish Gate?,” by Elad Liraz
Recently, a cult room was excavated in the southern side of the Level III gate structure of Tel Lachish. Within it, a desecrated double four-horned altar was found together with a stone privy, which led the excavators to suggest that this cult room was canceled during the religious reforms of King Hezekiah. The author proposes that a second, twin cult room existed in a parallel location on the northern side of the gate structure, containing similar elements, and that this room underwent the same process of desecration, probably during King Hezekiah’s reforms.
Click here to access the above article on The University of Chicago Press Journals (ASOR membership with online access and/or subscription to UCP Current Content required).
Pp. 276–299: “Pigs in Space (and Time): Pork Consumption and Identity Negotiations in the Late Bronze and Iron Ages of Ancient Israel,” by Avraham Faust
Pork consumption and avoidance became a major issue in the study of ancient Israel in the 1980s. Initial works associated massive consumption of pork with the Philistines and its avoidance with the Israelites, and despite the doubts cast by some later studies, the topic is still closely associated with the study of Iron Age ethnic identities. The extensive data that has accumulated over the years, however, show that the distribution of pork-consuming communities in space and time is not random and, when examined in tandem with the wider social background of this era, can reveal a great deal about Iron Age group interactions and boundary maintenance. It appears that the arrival of the Philistines was a watershed as far as pork consumption was concerned, and in subsequent centuries pork consumption and avoidance correlate closely with the changing strategies of boundary maintenance used by the different groups residing in the region.
Click here to access the above article on The University of Chicago Press Journals (ASOR membership with online access and/or subscription to UCP Current Content required).
[/vc_column_text][mk_divider][vc_column_text]To view the entire issue on The University of Chicago Press Journals, click here.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496684098866{margin-right: 5px !important;margin-bottom: 20px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 30px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_wp_posts title=”BROWSE THE NEWS ARCHIVE” number=”4″][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496684008271{margin-right: 10px !important;margin-bottom: 30px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 30px !important;padding-right: 20px !important;padding-left: 20px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_column_text]Tweets by ASOResearch [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]As many ASOR members know, the 2007 ASOR decision to continue to hold our annual meeting just prior to the SBL meeting and in the same city needs a fresh look. Although our meetings have been successful, the combined SBL-AAR meeting has grown and swallowed up prime hotel space, and we have been pushed increasingly to and beyond the outskirts of the meeting cities. In order for the Board to make an informed decision regarding this at their April 2019 meeting, ASOR Member input is need NOW.
We now face uncertainty about when and where the ASOR Annual Meeting will be held in the future. The Ad Hoc Committee on the Annual Meeting was formed to provide a recommendation to the Board. It must be understood that the Board is empowered to make this decision – and intends to do so at its Spring 2019 meeting. Thus, it is now time to provide the input necessary to create a decision that is in the best interests of the membership. It is YOUR meeting we need YOUR input…. Again.
The Ad Hoc Committee (Gary Arbino, Chair: garyarbino@gs.edu ) has sought input from individual members (via a 2016 ASOR Member Survey, a November 2018 Forum and Straw Poll -results below, and personal email comments) and continues to solicit feedback from a variety of constituencies (including, exhibitors and booksellers, Overseas Center Directors, those with insights from other learned societies’ meetings, ASOR leadership, and foreign attendees). The seven-person Committee has members from a diversity of opinions on the issue and ranges from Early Career Scholars to Senior Professors. Committee members are Arbino, Kent Bramlett, Bill Caraher, Sidnie Crawford, Erin Darby, Karen Rubinson, and Eric Welch.
We want to make sure that EVERY member has a chance to be heard on the issue. To that end in the coming weeks we will be posting a second Membership Survey. We encourage ALL ASOR members to read and respond to this survey. The only way we get a broad picture of membership needs and desires is to hear from members.
Thank you in advance for your thoughtful participation.
Earlier Results:
In 2016 a survey of the entire ASOR membership was sent out; we received about 240 responses (about 12% of the membership; 2/3 of respondents regularly attend the Annual Meeting and about ½ of respondents had been members of ASOR 10 years or less). The results showed that 25% of respondents said they prefer to meet with SBL, while 33% preferred to not meet with SBL (42% were in the middle). Other questions were asked regarding the dates and days of the meeting and whether ASOR should try and meet with another learned society. For most, a change in the November date (59%) or days of the week (71%) would make NO difference to their attendance. Most respondents were ambivalent about ASOR meeting conjointly, but of those giving a preference for the second organization, 71% chose AIA.
At the most recent Annual Meeting a forum was held on the matter and a Straw Poll was taken. Many helpful comments were made. The Straw Poll consisted of 4 main options (1: Stay with SBL however possible; 2: Spilt from SBL in terms of cities but not dates; 3: Spilt entirely from SBL cities, possibly meeting at other dates; 4: Alternate between meeting in SBL city and meeting elsewhere), with sub-options in each. Respondents (about 120; roughly 9% of attendees) were asked to rank their choices.
First rank votes fell out as follows: #1 – 45; #2 – 9; #3 – 44; #4 – 20. This illustrates the split of opinions held by ASOR members. Details of the rankings provide additional insights.
Of those who wanted to stay with SBL (both city and date AKA first option), the second most popular option was alternating years and meeting “close enough” to SBL. Generally, those who ranked the first option (stay with SBL) the highest also ranked the third option (total split) the lowest. The stay with SBL option received both the most first place rankings as well as the most fourth place rankings.
Of those who ranked the second option highest (Split from SBL in terms of city but not dates), the first option (stay with SBL) was ranked the lowest. These people also wanted to split to a different city, but generally had no preference whether that city was near or far to SBL city.
Those who rated the third option (full split) the highest tended to vote the first option (stay with SBL) the lowest. Even though they ranked staying with SBL low, they would prefer earlier days of the week if ASOR stayed with SBL. They were also interested in meeting with another group/society and had a number of comments.
Those who rated the alternating year option the highest were all over the place in terms of what their second choice would be and/or which option they considered the worst.
