The Byzantine-Islamic Transition in Palestine: An Archaeological Approach

Abstract

The Byzantine-Islamic Transition in Palestine: An Archaeological Approach by archaeologist Gideon Avni is a valuable contribution to the history of the archaeology of the transition from the late Byzantine to Early Islamic periods (sixth through eleventh centuries) in Israel, Palestine, and Jordan. Avni's book consolidates the vast body of currently available archaeological evidence to transform previous narratives of the period that appear in multiple fields of scholarly endeavor.Based on archaeological data from excavations after 1980, Avni convincingly argues that the area's material culture reliably demonstrates that the Byzantine–Islamic transition was a slower and more gradual process than previously thought. It was not a scenario of violent conquest, one of “smoke and fire.” The conquests were thought to be violent and followed by periods of rapid decline and dramatic change. Avni points out that much of the previous historical and archaeological scholarship paints a picture of decline and change, relying on textual sources, which project a different perspective than the material record. He further demonstrates the significance of regional distinctions, and the diversity of population and settlement types in the Byzantine and later Islamic provinces in what is today Israel, Palestine, and Jordan.Avni likens his process to a jigsaw puzzle (p. vii) with archaeological pieces from all over the region ultimately creating an image of an eastern Mediterranean culture in gradual transformation from the Byzantine apogee of the early sixth century through the Early Islamic period, ending in decline and abandonment in the eleventh century. While the textual evidence presents a different scenario of violent decline and change through conquest, the archaeological evidence leads to the notion that the period was one “in which political and religious tolerance set the tone for the relationships between various ethnic communities in Palestine” (p. vii).The “Prologue: Four Eyewitness Accounts versus ‘Arguments in Stone’” refers to a small selection of sources discussing the value of historical contemporary sources. Avni demonstrates how, for a variety of reasons, the archaeological record deviates from the views expressed in the texts.Chapter 1, “Shifting Paradigms for Byzantine-Islamic Transition,” sets the stage and methodology utilized in examining the book's central thesis. Avni establishes the following three paradigms for the period of transition: “thundering hordes,” “decline and fall,” and “intensification and abatement,” citing the scholarly sources. The last paradigm dominates his argument for Israel, Palestine, and Jordan. He then discusses the role of both previous and current archaeological research from all excavations, including salvage excavations and regional surveys; the “road map” created by the record; the role that it plays in historical discourse; and the basis for “establishing an accurate chronology” by examining pottery, glass, and coins. Avni states his premise as follows: The present study attempts to evaluate the longue durée transformation of Palestine and Jordan between the sixth and eleventh centuries on the basis of the results of hundreds of excavated and surveyed sites throughout the region. These data suggest that the Byzantine-Islamic transition in Palestine was a slow process characterized by regional and demographic diversity that impacted differently on large cities, towns, villages, agricultural hinterlands, and nomadic settlement…. From a thriving hub of Christianity and a major destination for Christian pilgrims, with settlements stretching to the remote corners of the desert, Palestine in the eleventh century became a land in crisis. Many sites were deserted or reduced to rubble and the population declined. While scholars are in agreement about the beginning and end of the process, the precise chronology and the reasons for the change have been the subject of debate. (p. 25)In Chapter 2 “From Polis to Madina: The Evolution of Large Urban Communities,” the author first establishes the relevant models for settlement modification during the late Byzantine–Early Islamic periods. He argues from the point of view of Hugh Kennedy's seminal article (1985) and further substantiates his claims with supporting evidence in an examination of contemporary historical sources (e.g., the writings of Julian of Ascalon and the Geniza documents).The urban centers examined are within the sixth-century Byzantine orbit—Caesarea Maritima, the capital of Palaestina Prima; Beth Shean, the capital of Palestina Secunda; Tiberias, which replaced Beth Shean as the Arab capital of Jund al-Urdunn province; and Gerasa, one of the largest cities of Byzantine and Early Islamic Jordan. All of these cities have been extensively excavated. Urban roles went from “Byzantine monumentality” to “Early Islamic functionality” with change from “public to private initiatives in the economy.” The paradigm in this instance was one of “intensification and abatement.”Chapter 3, “A Tale of Two Cities: Jerusalem and Ramla in the Early Islamic Period,” consists of an examination of two major case studies, Jerusalem and Ramla. The significance in the selection of these two large and important cities is for comparative purposes: Jerusalem, the historically established Romano/Byzantine politico-religious urban center, and Ramla, built as a new Muslim capital city.Jerusalem faced the same challenge as Caesarea, the main Byzantine commercial and administrative center of the region, to re-invent itself in the form of a newly established Muslim city. In my estimation, one of the greatest values of this section is in the definition of the Byzantine Christian areas of the city, their continuous occupation, and evidence of new Christian monumental construction throughout the Persian and Arab conquests and settlement in the city. Also defined is the resettlement of Jews in the city during the Early Islamic period. Not clearly addressed is whether Jerusalem became the administrative center in the region during the Early Islamic period (in the seventh century) although a body of scholarship exists on the subject. Comparative examination of Ramla also raises this question.Ramla was a new city in the eighth century and was built as the administrative capital of the Arab province of Jund Filastin “ostensibly to replace Caesarea” as the capital of the region. In Ramla, one finds a new concept of orthogonal urban planning, differing from the Roman pattern and varying greatly from the pattern of other early Islamic cities, such as the organic plan of Fustat (Early Islamic Cairo), and the round Sasanian-derived plan of the new Abbasid capital of Baghdad. The hinterland around Ramla witnessed the maintenance of agricultural villages that formerly supported the nearby Byzantine city of Lodh-Diospolis as well as the emergence of entirely new agricultural villages surrounding the large urban center of Ramla.Chapter 4, “The Changing Land: Settlement Patterns and Ethnic Identities,” addresses rural settlement including marginal seasonal encampments by region and larger urban centers, such as Shivta and ‘Avdat, which were the provincial outposts of the Byzantine Empire. The analysis is organized according to geographic region and type of settlement, and demonstrates continuity of settlement activity with Christians and Muslims living and praying in the same centers. The archaeological record clearly documents the economy and patterns of trade. Avni also demonstrates comparative similarities with Syrian sites.The agrarian areas of Palestine and Jordan witnessed the same pattern of “intensification and abatement,” but with more variability in time and place between the eighth and eleventh centuries. “In contradiction to previous approaches that claimed major decline in agrarian society in Palestine and neighboring regions, the picture emerging from archaeological excavations indicated continuity of settlements with minor regional variations” (p. 288).Chapter 5, “The Transformation of Settlement and Society: A Synthesis,” explores the agents of change: the Persian and Arab conquests; the Umayyad-Abbasid transition and frequent regime change between the ninth and eleventh centuries; military land and sea raids; earthquakes and plagues; environmental and climatic factors; and long-term changes in religious affiliation and their impact on settlement and society. Records and archaeological evidence show that there were massacres that produced mass graves and other adverse effects, but the record of material culture in architecture, coinage, etc. demonstrate a continuity or rapid recuperation—thus, no massive destruction of monuments and urban centers.Chapter 6, “Conclusion,” briefly summarizes settlement change in Palestine and Jordan between the sixth and eleventh centuries. Avni states that the “paradigm of long-term intensification and abatement of settlements, spanning over half a millennium, gives new meaning to cultural and religious changes in the Near East. It paints a much milder picture of the interaction between ethnic communities during this significant period in its history” (p. 353). The archaeological evidence demonstrates that the sixth century shows a rural and urban society at its apogee with decline setting in by the mid-eleventh century as well as a society in economic recession and physical stagnation. The situation was aggravated by a series of natural calamities ultimately resulting in collapse.Finally, as an art historian in the field of Islamic art who has clearly entered the domain of archaeology and resided at times and worked in the region over the past thirty years, I would like to address some scholarly issues outside the realm of archaeology that are relevant to this discussion. Since 1980, there have been great strides in historical and art historical scholarship on the debate of the legacy of material culture of the region of Palestine, Jordan and Bilad al-Sham or Greater Syria, and south Arabia during the Early Islamic period. Avni proposes that the earlier historical dialogue in scholarship often ignores material culture from archaeological excavations and that the pre-1980 archaeological record often relied on historical textual evidence, which did not necessarily correspond with the evidence provided by material culture. However, what is not discussed is that scholars from other disciplines, not formally trained as archaeologists, have successfully entered the field of archaeology. For example, Oleg Grabar, an art historian of the Islamic period, is on record as excavating multiple palaces in Bilad al-Sham or Greater Syria; and Ken Holum, one of the excavators of Caesarea, is an historian of Late Antiquity. These scholars contribute skills from their own fields of specialization to the discipline of archaeology.Also, scholars from other disciplines not engaged in excavations strongly rely on the archaeological record to substantiate their claims. For example, Yuri Stoyanov, an historian of the Byzantine period, utilizes the more recent post-1980 archaeological record in his argument that the Byzantine urban structure of Jerusalem remained largely intact after the Persian conquest (2011). Thus, there has been a shift in recent times in non-archaeological fields toward dependence on the record of material culture provided by archaeology.There is ongoing research in multiple disciplines dispelling another myth concerning the Arab conquest—that it was a culture of tent-dwellers with no architectural tradition that arrived in “thundering hordes” in the region of Palestine and Jordan and was entirely dependent on the architecture of the conquered region for its inspiration. That myth has been successfully challenged by both archaeologists working in Israel, Palestine, Jordan, and Arabia (many cited by Avni) and art historical scholarship beginning in the 1980s.Avni referenced mainly early art historical documents, but would have been assisted by the more recent scholarship of art historians. For example, on the origins of the early mosque and palaces, there are Finbarr Flood's major book on the Great Mosque of Damascus (2000); Estelle Whelan's article on the origin of the mihrab (1985); Flood's article on the history of the mihrab (1992); and Nuha Khoury's articles, which address the origin of the mihrab and palace in the Early Islamic seventh century (1993; 1998).That being said, the archaeological scholarship of Avni, Steve Rosen, and Uzi Avner on the material culture of the pastoral and urban sites of the Byzantine frontier provide evidence for a more complete picture of the same subject. That this work has not entered the dialogue of art historians up until now is clear in its absence from Flood's and Khoury's scholarship on the origin of the mihrab. All of this speaks to fostering interdisciplinary scholarly collaboration for those working on the material culture of the region.Concerning the Early Islamic period of the seventh century, Jeremy Johns stated that “the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence” (2003: 416) during the Early Islamic period in the seventh century. Avni's book The Byzantine-Islamic Transition in Palestine begins to fill some of the gaps in that “absence of evidence” for the Early Islamic period.I would like to end with a quote from the preface of Avni's book, which seems particularly pertinent in fostering collaborative research efforts and echoes my personal sentiments: “While addressing one of the most significant political and religious changes in the history of the Near East, in which a new reality was gradually created, one cannot avoid the analogy with recent events in this turbulent region, longing for political and religious tolerance that will replace the smoke and fire that has been spreading throughout it in modern times” (p. vii).