Busayra 1997 Overview

Busayra Excavations by Crystal M. Bennett 1971-1980
Piotr Bienkowski

Crystal-M. Bennett undertook excavations at Busayra for a total of 44 weeks from 1971-4 and in 1980. She cited four main reasons for excavating the site (see Bennett 1973;1974;1975; 1977;1983 for preliminary reports; Bienkowski 1990:101-5; 1992:101-4 for overview):

1. Its probable identification with biblical Bozrah.
2. Passages in the Old Testament Book of Numbers 20: 14-21 recount that the king of Edom refused passage through his land to the Israelites coming from Egypt. The generaIIy accepted date for this - for those who accept it at all - is c. 12 i0 BC. Bennett wanted to establish the chronology of Busayra to determine if, as a possible capital and residence of a king of Edom, it might have been occupied in the thirteenth centurv BC, as partial verification of the biblical story.
3. Busayra seemed the most likely site to provide a good chronological sequence for the archaeology of Edom.
4. Busayra's proximity to the important mining district of Faynan, the main copper production centre of the southern Levant.
Bennett's areas of excavation were chosen to investigate visible wall lines apparently belonging to major buildings and to the probable perimeter wall. She excavated four main areas on the upper part of the site. Area A was the central and highest point (the so-called 'acropolis'), with walls built of huge stones suggesting the presence of an important -structure. Area B was a cut from the perimeter wall on the west side of the site towards Area A. The original purpose of Area C, on another high point to the south, was to investigate any defences on the approach to Area A from that direction, but the excavations uncovered another major building. The original aim of Area D, where structures were visible on a lower terrace east of Area A, was to link it up with Area A; indeed, the intention was to have a continuous cut linking Areas D, A and B, but this was not achieved (Figure 1.3). Area H, on a lower terrace, consisted of two small squares cut across the north-west corner of the perimeter wall.

Three other small areas were started but were either abandoned or insufficiently recorded to enable their publication. Square E1 was laid to the north-west of Area A Wall 46 to investigate if there was a staircase up to the 'acropolis',- this turned out not to be the case, and the only result was the clearance of Wall 92 which abutted Wall 46 (see Figure 4.2). Nevertheless, there is considerable confusion regarding Square E1. Bennett's personal excavation diary refers to a burial cave in Square E1, some objects were registered as coming from ‘E1 cve’, and there are photographs showing bones in a cave, labelled ‘E1’. However, the site notebook for Square E1 does not mention a burial cave, nor is there any formal written or drawn record of its location and nature in the excavation archives.

An Area F was apparently planned or begun in the vicinity of Square A4.1, but there is no written or drawn record; one small bag of pottety is labelled 'Area F'. Three small squares were excavated in 1973 in Area M, east of the wall of the mosque within the village, south-east of the main excavations (Bennett 7975: 1-2). The area was never related to the main plan. The mosque contains the tomb of a Muslim holy man, Nabi Sheed, and is a minor pilgrimage site. One of the squares encountered the disused village cemetery, and was abandoned. The other squares revealed some plastered stone walls and surfaces associated with Roman pottery, but no meaningful plan, but also deposits containing Iron Il, Byzantine and lslantic pottery. The area was initially chosen for excavation because of the discovery, among building rubble adjacent to the tomb of Nabi Sheed, of an inscribed Nabataean altar (cf. Chapter 11). The main significance of Area M is that it indicates that settlement in the Iron Il and Nabataean/ Roman periods extended to the south-east, under the modern village.

In summary, Bennett's excavations at Busayra uncovered part of a substantial administrative centre dominated by two large buildings and fortified by a town wall. Her initial objectives were only partially fulfilled. Nothing was found to prove or discount Busayra's identification with biblical Bozrah. No occupation was found dating to the thirteenth century BC. Evidence for a chronological sequence was limited: the earliest and major use of the site was in the late Iron II / Persian period, possibly extending into the Early Hellenistic period (c. late eighth to third centuries BC), with some re-use in the Nabataean/ Roman period (c. first century BC to fourth century AD). The excavations produced only a limited stratigraphic and ceramic sequence for the late Iron II / Persian period. The importance of Faynan in the Iron II period has only recently been investigated by independent fieldwork (cf. Barker et al. 1997;1998;1999; 2000; Fritz 1994;1996; Levy, Adams and Shafiq 1999), and its relationship with Busayra has not yet been established.