Places

a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

Azotus

Alternative names: Tell Ashdod, Ashdod

Place description

Ancient Ashdod (Mesogaius Azotus) is located about 7 km south of the modern city of Ashdod, and about 4 km east of the Mediterranean coast. The site has both an acropolis (ca 80 dunams; 20 acres) and a lower city (ca 280 dunams; 70 acres). The Arab village Isdud, inside which the remains are located, preserves its name. Nine seasons of excavations were carried out between 1962 and 1972 (first by Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, The Pittsburgh Carnegie Museum, and the Israel Department of Antiquities, led by D. N. Freedman, J. Swauger and M. Dothan). The excavations uncovered remains dating from the Middle Bronze Age to the Byzantine period (Dothan 1993). Babylonians destroyed the important Philistine city of Ashdod at the end of the Iron Age. During the Persian period, there was animosity between Judah and Ashdod, although some men of Judah were marrying Ashdodite women, who spoke their own distinctive dialect (Neh 13:23-24; Lemaire 1995). The discovery of fourth century BCE coins inscribed with the full name of “Ashdod” proves that a mint operated in the city during the Persian period: it seems that coins with the letters “a” (), aleph) and “sh” (#, shin) have simply shortened the name “Ashdod” (Meshorer 1989; Gitler 2000). A large public building from the Persian period was unearthed, possibly an administration center for the city. From the same period, a mixed assemblage of pottery vessels was found containing both local and imported ware (Attic ware), Persian style jewelry, and an Aramaic ostracon dated to the beginning of the fourth century BCE, recording a quantity of wine sent by a certain Zebadah (Naveh 1971). Because Ashkelon is not mentioned in Nehemiah, scholars tend to conclude that the southern coastal plain of the Persian satrapy of Abar Nahara belonged to the district of Ashdod. In all other sources dating to the Persian period, however, it is the name Ashdod that is missing, so it does not seem justified to consider Ashdod as having supremacy over Ashkelon, especially at the end of the Persian period, as is borne out by the coins from Ashkelon (Stern 1983: 243-44; Lemaire 1994). Ashdod minted coins only during the Persian period, and not during the Hellenistic period. The city is mentioned twice in Hellenistic sources. Judah Maccabee fought against Ashdod and its villages, destroying their altars and idols (1 Macc 5:68). Jonathan, his brother, led a campaign in 147 BCE against Apollonius, the representative of Demetrius II, at Ashdod (1 Macc 10:80-85); after Jonathan had captured Jaffa, Apollonius tried to ambush him as he was traveling to Ashdod (on the geography, see Bar Kochva 1975). The ambush was unsuccessful, and Jonathan pressed on to Ashdod, captured it, and destroyed its villages. Many residents of the city took refuge in the temple of Dagon, but Jonathan burnt it to the ground (see also Ant. 13:99-100). After this victory the district of Ekron was annexed to Judea (1 Macc 10:89; Ant. 13.102). When Ptolemy VI Philometor, with the help of Alexander Balas, led his military campaign along the coast, the citizens of Ashdod complained about Jonathan’s excessive brutality. Ptolemy, however, did not respond to their complaints, possibly out of fear of Jonathan’s military power (1 Macc 11:4-7; Ant. 13:103-105). The sources suggest the city was severely destroyed, although it was not set on fire, possibly because Jonathan’s ultimate aim was the destruction of the Temple of Dagon (Kasher 1990: 39-94). John Hyrcanus ruled in Gezer, on the border of Ashdod’s territory (1 Macc 14:34); during his campaign against Cendebeus, he burnt the towers and fortifications in Ashdod’s district (1 Macc 16:10). Nevertheless, Ashdod continued to exist as one of the Hasmoneans’ strongest opponents, despite its military defeats. Ashdod was a minor city compared to Ashkelon, Gaza, and even Yavneh-Yam: there was little maritime activity, the city did not mint any coins in the Hellenistic period, no important personalities are known to have come from Ashdod (as they did from Ashkelon), and Ashdodites are not known in other parts of the Mediterranean world. Nevertheless, 1 Maccabees suggests that it ruled over a relatively large territory. Excavations at Tell Ashdod exposed a well-planned Hellenistic city, including a central building that may have served as the city’s agora. Large storage jars were found in its central hall, where cultic vessels in one corner implied cultic activities. These second century BCE discoveries come from a stratum of ash, most likely a destruction layer. The latest coin discovered at Ashdod was dated to 114 BCE, during the rule of Antiochus II (Dothan and Freedman 1967: 17-24). Ashdod seems to parallel other cities along the coast, such as Yavneh-Yam, with destruction layers related to the rule of John Hyrcanus, though no campaign is mentioned in the historical sources (see Finkielsztejn 1998; Safrai 2000). If the final conquest of Ashdod came under John Hyrcanus, it would be evidence of the Hasmoneans’ enduring determination to control the city. In any case, the city appears in the list of cities captured by Janneus (Ant. 395.13); it is mentioned as one of the cities rehabilitated after Pompey’s conquest (War 1.156; Ant 14.75) and then rebuilt by Gabinius (War 1.165-166; Ant. 14.87-88). The archaeological evidence, however, suggests that the city was not rebuilt until the days of Herod the Great, so that it seems that the earlier reconstruction was more political propaganda than reality. The city was apparently ceded to Herod the Great in 30 BCE; this is not explicitly stated but is deduced from Herod’s will, by which Ashdod was bequeathed to his sister Salome (War 2.98; Ant. 17.189). It is also assumed that on Salome’s death the city was given to Livia, Augustus’ wife, though Josephus does not mention Ashdod specifically (War 2.167; Ant 18.31). Herodian Ashdod generally preserved the layout of the Hellenistic city. One should note the rich ceramic assemblage, especially the eastern terra sigillata ware and Megarian bowls (Dothan and Freedman 1967: 24-27). Vespasian conquered Ashdod during the first revolt and posted a permanent garrison there (War 4.130). Either the city had previously been conquered by the Jews or its Jewish population constituted an apparent danger (Schürer-Vermes 2.109). According to the excavators, the destruction layer of the Herodian city was connected with Vespasian’s conquest, after which the city declined, while Ashdod-Yam took on increasing importance. Like other coastal cities, the inland city of Ashdod built a port city on the coast, Ashdod-Yam (Azotus Paralios), mentioned in a number of sources from the late Roman and Byzantine periods (Avi-Yonah 1976: 34). There are two relevant ancient sites. To the north is Tel Mor, situated on the northern banks of Nahal Lachish (117.136), Ashdod’s extension to the sea from the Middle Bronze Age until the end of the Iron Age. Excavations in the late 1950s and early 1960s reveal that the city fell at the end of the Iron Age, together with Ashdod, at the hands of the Assyrian king Sargon II. The latest remains on Tell Mor date to the Hellenistic period: a large building on the eastern slope of the tell and an industrial installation to extract purple dye from murex shells, which operated from the beginning of the third century until the second half of the second century BCE (Dothan 1973). Jonah’s Hill (en-Nabi Yonas), another site on the southern banks of Nahal Lachish, has remains from the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman periods. There is also a small fort from the Persian period just north of Nahal Lachish, dated to the fifth century BCE (Porath 1974). On the coast south of Ashdod is the site of Ashdod-Yam, with the fortress Qal‘at el-Minat Isdud at its summit (114.131), where excavations were carried out in 1965-1968 (Tel Aviv-Jaffa Museum of Antiquities, led by J. Kaplan). Only remains from the Iron Age were uncovered (Kaplan 1969), but the archaeological survey conducted north of the fortress showed that the site expanded in the late Roman and Byzantine periods, when the inland site of Ashdod was losing importance. The historical sources demonstrate that Ashdod-Yam reached its peak during the Byzantine period, as the Madaba map also suggests. Its central feature was the fortress that, according to the excavations recently carried out, dated to the early Islamic period, though some evidence of the Byzantine settlement was also found (Nachalieli et al. 2000).