Arti-Facts

A Rejoinder to "Was the Siloam Tunnel Built by Hezekiah?"

In an article entitled "Was the Siloam mouth of the Tyropoeon Valley, Kenyon dis­ used efficiently unless they could be cap­
Tunnel Built by Hezekiah?" published in covered Iron Age II deposits extending over tured, stored, and distributed. While Warren's
the September 1996 issue of ΒA, John Roger- 1.25 m in depth, covering a network of partly Shaft provided access to the waters of the
son and Philip Davies argue that the Siloam rock-hewn and partly stone-built plaster- Gihon as they gushed forth and flowed into
Tunnel and its accompanying inscription do lined tunnels (1965:16). Because these Iron its feeder channel, it provided no means
not date to the time of Hezekiah in the eighth Age II deposits lay directly atop quarried of using the Gihon's excess waters. Both the
century BCE. They base their argument on bedrock and because she did not find archi­ Siloam Channel and the Siloam Tunnel were
three sets of evidence: the history of the tectural remains other than the network of designed to capture, store, and distribute
Gihon water systems and the line of the city tunnels associated with them, Kenyon con­ the excess waters of the Gihon. Because the
walls; biblical references to the Gihon water cluded that these Iron Age II deposits did earliest of these two systems—the Siloam
systems; and the genre and paleography of not evidence a fortified settlement on the Channel—was a partly open, partly closed
the Siloam inscription. In a rejoinder solicited western hill (1974:93,146, fig. 26,158). channel that ran outside the line of the city's
by ΒA and published in the December 1996 Like Kenyon, Shiloh found Iron Age II fortification wall, it served no strategic func­
issue, Ronald S. Hendel demonstrates that material deposited above bedrock on the tion and, as asserted by Rogerson and Davies,
Rogerson and Davies' paléographie argu- southeastern slope of the western hill in Area it is "unlikely to have been constructed [or
ments are deeply flawed. Rogerson and H—the only area that he excavated on the used] in times when there was even a threat
Davies' historic arguments that the Siloam western hill (DeGroot and Michaeli 1992:35, of war" (1996:138). However, once the threat
Tunnel cannot date to the time of Hezekiah 49, fig. 27,51). Due, however, to the nature of war arose, there also arose the urgent need
because the Siloam Pool lay outside the of archaeological accumulation in Jerusalem, to construct a strategic water supply system
bounds of the fortified city during the Iron where builders of all periods sought to found designed to capture, store, distribute, and
Age II and because as long as Warren's Shaft their structures on bedrock and in so doing conceal the excess waters of the Gihon. The
lay inside the bounds of the fortified city often damaged and/or destroyed remains Siloam Tunnel answered this need.
Jerusalem did not need an additional strate- of earlier periods, Shiloh rejected Kenyon's Rogerson and Davies' arguments con­
gic water supply system, are equally flawed conclusion and accepted the sparse—but cerning the history of the Gihon water systems
and equally deserve a rejoinder. incontestably p r e s e n t — r e m a i n s of the and the line of the city walls bespeak their
In support of their argument that the Iron Age II as evidence that the western hill unfamiliarity with the archaeological record,
Siloam Pool lay outside the bounds of the was both occupied and fortified at that time the nature of archaeological accumulation
fortified city during the Iron Age II, Roger- (1984:25, 72, fig. 34). in Jerusalem, and the natural characteristics
son a n d Davies assert that K e n y o n ' s Rogerson and Davies argue that the of the Gihon spring that s p a w n e d the
"excavations on the south-eastern slope of Siloam Tunnel was not needed as a strate­ need for the city's three subterranean water
the western hill yielded no Iron II relics," gic water supply system as long as Warren's supply systems. Finally, BA's readers should
and that "Shiloh's.. .excavations were unable Shaft lay inside the bounds of the fortified know that—although not generally avail­
to provide any either" (1996:141). These city because "it seems...rather excessive able p r i o r to Rogerson a n d D a v i e s '
assertions not only misrepresent but actu- to assign both Warren's Shaft and Hezekiah's publication—the most recent evidence sup­
ally misstate the evidence because, contrary Tunnel to Judean kings. After all, if in Hezekiah's porting the Siloam Tunnel's traditional date
to Rogerson and Davies' assertions, Kenyon time there already existed a perfectly safe comes from a stalactite removed from its
found remains dating to the Iron Age II on water supply.. .why would he need to build ceiling which produced a radiocarbon date
the southeastern slope of the western hill another one, especially one which went calibrated to the eighth century BCE (Gil
and in the lower reaches of the Tyropoeon underneath the city and came out the other 1996:22).
Valley, and Shiloh found remains dating side?" (1996:142, italics in original).
to the Iron Age II on the southeastern slope The answer to their query lies in the Bibliography
of the western hill. nature of the Gihon which is a syphon-type
Following each of her first four seasons karst spring, fed by groundwater that gushed DeGroot, A. and Michaeli, D.
of excavation, Kenyon published accounts intermittently through cracks in a cave floor 1992 Area H: Stratigraphie Report. Pp.
of finding Iron Age Π material on the bedrock (Gil 1994:27; Simons 1952:163). Because the 35-53 in Stratigraphical Environmental
in Site F—located at the southeastern cor­ frequency and force of the Gihon's outflow and Other Reports, edited by D. T.
ner of the western hill (1962:84-85; 1963:19; varied with the season of the year and the Ariel and A. DeGroot. Excavations
1964:11; 1965:16-17, fig. 2). Moreover, at the annual precipitation, its waters could not be at the City of David 1978-1985:

1841 Biblical Archaeologist 60:3 (1997) Arti-Facts

 Directed by Yigal Shiloh, vol. 3. Hendel, R. S. Rogerson, J. and Davies, P. R.
Qedem 33. Jerusalem: Institute of 1996 The Date of the Siloam Inscrip­ 1996 Was the Siloam Tunnel Built by
Archaeology, Hebrew University. tion: A Rejoinder to Rogerson and Hezekiah? Biblia! Arclmeologist 59:138-
Davies. Biblical Archaeologist 59:233- 49.
Gil, D. 37.
1994 How They Met: Geology Solves the Shiloh, Y.
Mystery of Hezekiah's Tunnelers. Kenyon, Κ. M. 1984 Excavations in tlie City of David 1:1978-
Biblical Archaeology Review 20 (4):20- 1962 Excavations in Jerusalem, 1961. Pales­ 1982: Interim Report of the First Five
33,64. tine Exploration Quarterly 94:72-89. Seasons. Qedem 19. Jerusalem: Insti­
1996 The Geology of the City of David 1963 Excavations in Jerusalem, 1962. Pales­ t u t e of Archaeology, H e b r e w
and its Ancient Subterranean Water­ tine Exploration Quarterly 95:7-21. University.
works. Pp. 1-28 in Various Reports, 1964 Excavations in Jerusalem, 1963. Pales­
edited by D. T. Ariel and A. DeG­ tine Exploration Quarterly 96:7-18. Simons, J.
root. Excavations at the City of David 1965 Excavations in Jerusalem, 1964. Pales­ 1952 Jerusalem in the Old Testament. Lei­
1978-1985: Directed by Yigal Shiloh, tine Exploration Quarterly 97:9-20. den: E. J. Brill.
vol. 4. Qedem 35. Jerusalem: Insti­ 1974 Digging Up Jerusalem London: Ernest
t u t e of Archaeology, H e b r e w Benn. fane M. Cahill
University. City of David Archaeological Project
Institute of Archaeology
Hebreiv University of Jerusalem

Spirit Houses
From January 17th to August 31st, 1997 and perspectives. The exhibit empha­
the Centre de Cultura Contemporania de sized the enduring magical and religious
Barcelona presented the exhibit Spñrit-Houses quality of architectural plans and mod­
(5500 BCE to 300 CE): The Earliest Models in els by examining the early use of models
History. This exhibit explored representa- in the cult of the dead as dwellings for
tions of a r c h i t e c t u r e from t h e ancient the soul and, for the later technical draw­
Mediterranean both as architects' models ings, the tendency to attribute architecture
and magicians' or priests' equipment. to divine or royal inspiration rather than
Spirit-Houses was the first exhibition the architect or craftsperson. Spirit-
devoted to the plans and models of antiq- Houses offered us a window, not only
uity. It showcased approximately one hundred on where and how people of the ancient
pieces, almost all originals, representing Mediterranean lived, but also the image
votive objects as well as some of the few pre- those people had of their built environ­
served documents created by architects. The ment.
exhibition included a selection of works from Coinciding with this exhibit. The
the four main interactive cultures of the Centre de Cultura Contemporania de
ancient Mediterranean: Egypt, Mesopotamia, Barcelona also organized a seminar dur­
Greece, and Rome. The objects were arranged ing February and May 1997 entitled The
according to culture, function (civil, mili- Models of Architects of Antiquity, under
tary, a n d religious), a n d typology. The the direction of exhibit curator Pedro
exhibition was completed by some images Azara.
of architecture in the arts of the past.
Model of a tower dating to the ca. 1600-
Spirit-Houses traced the development 1200 BCE from the middle Euphrates region Centre de Cultura Contemporania
and use of models and plans from the ear- of Syria (59.5 χ 30 χ 38 cm). de Barcelona Press Dossier, adapted
liest three-dimensional models in stone and
clay of houses, granaries, and temples to
architects' plans and models similar to those
of today, including orthographic projections
 ^ s
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.