Some of the more singular archeological finds in the twentieth century were made by Dame Kathleen Kenyon. Kathleen Kenyon was born into the bosom of the English scholarly community and with all the aid that influence and connexions could supply became one of the foremost excavators in Great Britain. Even though Miss Kenyon was purported to be a Christian. she did non reason for the scriptural history position when citing her diggings.

She believed that archeology was needed to turn out the historicity of the Bible ; but more significantly. that archeology was needed to help us in the reading of the “older parts of the Old Testament. which from the nature of their beginnings can non be read as a straightforward record ( Kenyon. 266 ) . Remembered for her significant parts to the field of archeology Miss. Kenyon brought with her refined versions of the digging method pioneered by Mortimer Wheeler.

There's a specialist from your university waiting to help you with that essay.
Tell us what you need to have done now!

order now

Along with inventing field methods that strengthened the scientific discipline. Kathleen shaped the subject of archeology with her part to establishments. preparation of future archeologists and publications. Another of import facet of Kathleen Kenyon’s archeological calling was her function as a instructor. From 1948 to 1962 she lectured in Levantine Archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology. University College London.

Kenyon’s instruction. complemented by her diggings at Jericho and Jerusalem ( which in turn formed her ‘field school’ ) . helped to develop a coevals of archeologists. who went on themselves to learn in Britain. Australia. Canada. the United States. Denmark and elsewhere. Thesis Statement While Miss Kathleen Kenyon is considered one of the first influential female archeologists in the twentieth century. her bossy and perchance cocksure features may hold overshadowed her bequest to the field of archeology.

I will reason that while her decisions were non ever correct. Miss Kenyon did assist to popularise and well lend to the scientific discipline. Early Life Kathleen Kenyon was eldest girl of the outstanding scriptural bookman and British Museum manager Sir Frederick Kenyon. who was besides connected to the Institute of Archaeology. the Palestinian Exploration Fund. the British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. and the British Academy. Born on January 5. 1906. she possessed the same sense of order and captivation with item as her male parent.

Because of the privileged fortunes of her birth and early childhood. Kathleen was brought up in day-to-day contact with the archeological constitution of the late Victorian epoch in England and must hold been familiar with the outstanding antiquaries of the clip. Kathleen was enrolled into the St. Paul’s Girl’s School – the most distinguished girl’s school in London in 1919. It is possible that the instruction that she received at ( SPGS ) afforded her the chance to believe outside the kingdom of matrimony and maternity.

Even though SPGS’s end was to fix the pupils as future married womans and female parents. the instruction was geared toward acquiring scholarships to Oxford and Cambridge and was fundamentally indistinguishable to that of the boys’ course of study. Kathleen had received legion books from her male parent. i. e. . Atlass. Shakespeare. novels. Bibles. etc. in his effort to excite her rational development. As a consequence Kathleen was a good pupil and left SPGS with the Mary Wilson History Prize in 1925 and upon graduation a scholarship to Somerville College. Oxford.

Kathleen did non major in archeology at Oxford but concentrated on Modern History. which emphasized English Constitutional history ; covering Europe from the early Middle Ages to the modern period. By her concluding twelvemonth. the Oxford University Archaeological Society needed to pull more female members and Kathleen became campaigner for president in November. 1927. This assignment was influenced by the obvious fact that her male parent was the Director of the British Museum and co-president of the Somerville College Archaeological Society.

At this point in her matriculation. the principal of Somerville College became more vested in Kathleen’s hereafter. Margaret Fry would maneuver Kathleen off from the traditional female naming of going a instructor and would act upon Kathleen to prosecute archeology as a calling. Prosecuting Archaeology Kathleen’s foremost archeological experience was in the Great Zimbabwe in Southern Rhodesia as a lensman where she was joined by Gertrude Caton-Thomson. This expedition had been made possible by her father’s facilitation and connexions along with Margaret Fry’s persuasion.

As she would turn out utile on this digging. being both hardworking and dependable. her responsibilities would spread out beyond taking images to supervising the workers helping at the site. After she returned to England. at the completion of the Zimbabwe expedition. Kathleen joined Sir Mortimer Wheeler’s staff at his digging at Roman Verulamiun ( St. Albans ) . North of London. While there she would analyze Wheeler’s method of stratigraphic digging. Wheeler’s findings were based on the construct developed by geologist William Smith where stuffs accumulate on a site through a sequence of beds that explain the historical timeline ( stratigraphy ) .

Kathleen would encompass this technique and finally polish it. Kathleen’s archeological accomplishments increased during the 1930’s and 1940’s while working along with John and Grace Crowfoot. She was instrumental in lending to the initiation of the University of London’s Institute of Archaeology. Kenyon was a lector in Palestinian Archaeology and actively combined seminar and schoolroom direction with existent work in the field. She conducted diggings at Sutton Walls in England and Sabratha in Libya and served as the first Secretary and as moving Director during these war old ages. She was associated ith the Institute from 1935 to 1962.

She besides. in 1951. began functioning as Honorary Director of the British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. The Jericho Excavation In 1949 British Archaeologist John Garstang. who had earlier began diggings at Jericho. asked Kathleen to reexamine his findings. Determining that Garstang’s work needed alteration she began in 1951 to utilize the more refined version of digging method which had been pioneered by Wheeler. This method now called “The Wheeler-Kenyon system” involves delving within a series of 5?5 metre squares set within a larger grid.

This leaves a ( 1 meter broad ) freestanding wall of Earth known as a baulk on each side of a unit. These perpendicular pieces of Earth allow archeologists to compare the exact birthplace of a found object or characteristic to next beds of Earth ( “strata” ) . Kenyon’s method. which resembled a checker board with walls between the squares. revealed “layers of time” at the given site. This system may be thought of as a perpendicular as opposed to a horizontal attack which significantly improved the ability to day of the month findings and provided a step of control of the site anterior to all-out digging and glade.

This methodological analysis besides required really close supervising as each bed of dirt had to be documented. These attempts were backbreaking and forbearance and diligence were necessary for all involved. Kathleen’s squad dug thru bed after bed of ancient metropoliss until they found one bed that had thick walls. had been burned by fire and had immense measures of nutrient that was undisturbed. The importance of the nutrient that they found is that in the ancient universe nutrient was really valuable. All nutrient had to be manus processed and one of the most of import things looted from a conquered metropolis would be its nutrient militias. but non at this bed of Jericho.

She besides uncovered the first walled metropolis full with houses and courtyards dating back to the Neolithic. Toward the terminal of the 1953 season. her and her squad found a human skull modeled with plaster to resemble an existent. populating human being. complete with eyes made out of shells. Kathleen’s application of the Wheeler-Kenyon method led her to differ with decisions back uping the Biblical narratives sing Jericho. Kathleen stated that she had non found anything which proved habitation of Jericho during the clip of Joshua and that Garstang’s day of the months were incorrect.

While her grounds yielded violent devastation by fire. her reading was that this happened before the Israelites captured Jericho. These tax write-offs sparked the beginning of the overturning of Biblical Archaeology and its readings which had great influence during the early and mid-twentieth century. Skeptics would allow her findings as absolute cogent evidence that Joshua and the Battle of Jericho did non go on back uping the minimalist school that believe the Old Testament Historical history to be exaggerated. The City of David

By 1958. Kathleen had concluded her diggings in Jericho. Fresh from those feats. she turned her attending to Jerusalem from 1961 to 1967 and concentrated her attempts in and around the metropolis. peculiarly in the oldest portion of the ancient country known as the Hill of Ophel or the ‘City of David’ . South of the Temple Mount. “Perhaps the most superb of her many achievements in seven seasons of diggings in Jerusalem has been Miss Kenyon’s elucidation of the defences of this spring on the eastern side of the eastern-ridge.

She has besides established to the satisfaction of about all bookmans that this metropolis. limited to some 11 estates. stopped on the North well before the country of the present walled metropolis and Temple Mount. This was the Jerusalem of the Jebusites and King David. King Solomon extended the metropolis to the North. He built the Temple on a platform in the country of the present Temple Mount. and connected the new Temple country with the old Davidic metropolis by walls on the E and West. ” She was able to unearth much of the construction of the monolithic ‘Stepped Stone Structure’ – the largest Iron Age building in Israel.

Some bookmans have stated that her expedition in Jerusalem was thought to be a failure. but Kathleen‘s achievements were greatly overshadowed by the unstable political environment and business of Palestine. The 1967 Six-Day War put an terminal to the undertaking and this would be her concluding digging. Her Legacy One ground for Kathleen Kenyon’s celebrity. every bit good as her permanent influence on the subject. was the fact that Jericho became the preparation land for a whole coevals of younger archeologists. therefore spreading her methods.

From 1962 to until her retirement in 1973. Kathleen Kenyon served as rincipal at St. Hugh’s College in Oxford. In 1973. because of her many achievements and parts. Queen Elizabeth II named Kathleen Mary Kenyon DBE ( Dame of the Order of the British Empire ) . the female version of knighthood. Dame Kathleen Kenyon so concentrated on printing her work on Jericho and Jerusalem. Many plants were edited and published after her decease in 1978. Miss. Kenyon’s repute is besides based on her diggings at three of the most of import sites in the Holy Land ( Samaria. Jericho. and Jerusalem ) .

Hershel Shanks. laminitis and editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review provinces: “As a field archaeologist—as an expert in unearthing techniques—she likely has no equal. As a historiographer and an translator of archeological informations she is one of the most well-thought-of voices in academe. ” Her function in developing a stronger archeological methodological analysis and in both technique and ceramics influence the pattern to this twenty-four hours. Wheeler’s ( 1954 ) Archeology from the Earth and Kenyon’s ( 1961 ) Get downing in Archaeology were among the first of publications to shy away from informal archeological recordings and advocate stratification analysis.

She suggested that “strata” be separated and numbered and that interfaces between sedimentations of stratigraphic digging. which had antecedently been ignored. be taken into history. While the Wheeler-Kenyon method. used throughout the Middle East. is doubtless an everlasting part to the betterment of archeological techniques ; nevertheless. it besides has some restrictions. at least one of which may be illustrated by illustrations from her book. In these illustrations. Miss. Kenyon and her co-workers erred in construing the grounds. as shown by subsequently Israeli diggings. because of what might be characterized as a methodological false belief.

Her diggings near the Temple Mount. in the Armenian Garden. the Herodian platform. Josephus’ Third Wall. colony of the eastern inclines of Mount Zion to call a few. have all been affairs of scholarly difference. Mr. Shanks besides states: “She ( Miss Kenyon ) is besides frequently at dunces with Israeli archeologists. The most permeant and relentless difference between Miss Kenyon and Israeli archeologists concerns the countries of Jerusalem which were settled during the assorted post-Solomonic periods of the city’s history.

Miss Kenyon argues strongly for what might be called the minimalist place: The metropolis remained a little colony until the first century A. D. The Israelis contend the metropolis expanded to next countries during the period of the Judean monarchy. ” Larry G. Herr. Director of the Madaba Plains Project summarizes the slightly assorted nature of Kenyon’s bequest: for all the positive progresss. there were besides defects: “Kenyon… did non capitalise to the full on ( the ) deduction of her stratigraphic techniques by bring forthing concluding publications quickly.

Indeed her method of excavation. which most of us have later adopted. causes a proliferation of venue that excavators frequently have trouble maintaining consecutive long plenty to bring forth coherent published stratigraphic syntheses. Furthermore. her insisting that digging proceed in narrow trenches denies us. when we use the Jericho studies. the assurance that her venue. and the clayware assemblages that go with them. represent apprehensible human activity forms over coherently connected populating countries.

The single beds. insufficiently exposed horizontally. merely can non be interpreted believably in footings of map. This farther makes publication hard. both to bring forth and to use” . In the early 1980s. as the publication of her natural information became public. reinterpretation became the order of the twenty-four hours. Some bookmans are still re-explaining her findings and seting new day of the months on events at Jericho. Conclusion – Rewriting History

Based on Kenyon’s decisions. Jericho has become the parade illustration of the troubles encountered in trying to correlate the findings of archeology with the Biblical history of a military conquering of Canaan. Scholars by and big have written off the Biblical record as so much folklore and spiritual rhetoric. And this is where the affair has stood for the past 25 old ages. Bryant G. Wood. archeologist and editor of “Bible and Spade. ” discovered that Kenyon had falsely dated her discoveries. The conquering of Jericho really took topographic point in the 1400s BC.

During this clip. Joshua was surely at that place. Wood demonstrated that the carbon-14 datings. stratigraphy. clayware. and other groundss. including fallen walls. give archeological verification to the Bible history in Joshua 6. Mr. Wood besides states: “Despite my dissensions with Kenyon’s major decision. I however applaud her for her careful and conscientious field work. It was she who brought order to the baffled stratigraphic image at Jericho. Her thoroughgoing digging methods and elaborate coverage of her findings. nevertheless. did non transport over into her analytical work. ”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *