|
Late Bronze Age Settlement Patterns
What do these modern ruins indicate? In using the above
surveys to determine Late Bronze Age settlement patterns, the
first step is to classify the sites. For the Karak Plateau, this
has already been done, as the surveys mentioned above classified
the sites when they reported them. Several assumptions must be
made, however, concerning these classifications. It is often
difficult to determine, for instance, what type of ancient
settlement the modern remains indicate. For this study, it was
assumed that ruins and modern settlements indicate ancient
settlements, while sherd scatters represent nomadic encampments
or other temporary occupation. Individual building remains were
not included as settlements, because they probably indicate
ancient watchtowers, agricultural buildings, and other edifices
that were not occupied as dwellings except for short periods of
time. Although this may not be accurate for all the buildings
discovered in the surveys, the buildings for which this is an
inaccurate classification should be few enough that the study
will not be adversely affected. A final assumption is that the
amount of Late Bronze Age pottery found at a particular site is
a relative indicator of the size of that site in that period.
What were the Late Bronze Age settlement patterns on the
Karak Plateau? In plotting the Late Bronze Age sites on a
map, only the ruins and settlements will be included, since they
are the only categories that indicate long-term occupation.
Neither buildings nor sherd scatters will be mapped.
The map below, produced using a GIS, shows the locations of the
Late Bronze Age settlements and ruins on the Karak Plateau.
 As is evident from the map, the
Late Bronze Age on the Karak Plateau is represented by quite a
number of sites. Sixty-seven sites included pottery from this
period. When compared with the preceding Middle Bronze Age
(2100-1550 B.C.), which only had twenty-six sites, the Late
Bronze Age is seen to be a time of expanded settlement in this
region. It is likely that the increase from the Middle to Late
Bronze Age was accomplished through steady growth of sites, as
all but six of the settlements in the Middle Bronze Age
continued to be occupied in the Late Bronze Age. Settlement
density declines after this period, with the following Iron I
era having only forty-eight settlement sites.
The second thing to notice about the settlements is that they
are the densest in the central and southern parts of the
plateau. It is unclear why this is the case, since the soil in
the northern part of the plateau is more fertile. This indicates
that some factor other than fertility was dictating the choice
of sites. This factor may have been political. As noted above,
this period saw Egypt controlling the areas to the west of the
Jordan and some parts to the east of Jordan north of the Karak
Plateau, but whether or not Egypt controlled the Karak Plateau
is unclear. The only evidence for an Egyptian presence on the
plateau comes from Balu’a, a site in the north. It may be that
people were settling in the south in order to avoid coming under
the control of the Egyptians. This is only a theory, however,
and cannot be proven. The final thing to
notice is that the majority of the settlements in the Late
Bronze Age were small. Of the sixty-seven sites, only nineteen
have more than five pieces of pottery from this period. It is
likely therefore that most of the sites were merely villages,
and probably few of them had any fortifications whatsoever. By
contrast, Balu’a, which is the largest site in this period,
yielded two-two pieces of Late Bronze Age pottery.
The volute capitals of Mudaybi<sup>c</sup>
|
