Free The Myth of Nazareth: The Invented Town of Jesus by Rene Salm Page A

“Hellenistic” shards Bagatti claims invariably belong either to the Iron Age or to Roman times.
     
    • E . Related to the preceding is the following overall summary by Bagatti:
     
We have met with only few traces of the Hellenistic period, but there are many elements of the Roman period.
     
    The location in the concluding remarks of Excavations in Nazareth assure that this sentence has been widely read. Also in the same vein is a 1977 assessment by Bagatti ( EAEHL , “Nazareth,” p. 921):
     
Potsherds from the Israelite, Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine periods and the Middle Ages were also found.
     
    The above statement would correspond to the evidence in the ground if the word “Hellenistic” were removed.
     
    • F.   “Hellenistic” occurs in passing in the opening sentence of “The Necropolis of Nazareth,” also from Bagatti’s Excavations (p. 237):
     
The necropolis of the Bronze Period was found, at least in part, in the zone of our excavations and also during the construction of shops near the Tiberias road. That of the Iron Period, as those of the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine periods, are all outside the Franciscan area.
     
    Coherent with the evidence found in them, the kokh tombs at Nazareth (discussed above) must themselves be dated to Roman times. In short, there was no Hellenistic necropolis at Nazareth.
     
    • G. Finally, mention can be made of two Hellenistic claims published in short reports authored by Yardenna Alexandre. During May 1998 a small excavation was conducted c . 100 m NW of the Church of St. Joseph. A brief report (unsigned) was published in Hadashot Arkheologiyot. [287] The pertinent sentence reads: “Sherds from the Iron Age, Hellenistic , Roman, Byzantine, Mamluk and Ottoman periods were found on the bedrock” (emphasis added). No description, itemization, or diagram is furnished and the number and nature of these shards is not known. In a personal communication to this author the archaeologist wrote that the finds were minimal and that she has nothing to add beyond the published report. Given the lack of even rudimentary information on the shards, we must consider this an unsubstantiated Hellenistic claim.
    Ms. Alexandre conducted another excavation in 1997–98 in the Fountain Square and adjacent St. Gabriel’s Square of Nazareth (next to Mary’s Well). This excavation was under the auspices of the Israel Antiquities Authority and Government Tourist Ministry, in the context of the Nazareth 2000 development program (an ambitious initiative designed to stimulate tourism). According to personnal correspondence with the archaeologist, a short report on this excavation is scheduled for publication in Hadashot Arkheologiyot . Ms. Alexandre graciously shared an advance copy of the report with me. Unfortunately, it again lacks specificity as regards description, itemization, or illustrations of discrete finds, which constitute the requirements of verification, so important in this context. Ms. Yardenna writes:
 
The main excavations were carried out under the modern 1960s concrete Fountain House, which was demolished with the aim of reconstructing the ruined Ottoman stone Fountain House. The archaeological remains exposed dated from the Roman, the Crusader, the Mamluk and the Ottoman periods.  From the Roman period part of a covered dressed stone channel was exposed, as well as some wall stubs and Middle Roman pottery.
 
    As we shall see in subsequent chapters, these results accord perfectly with the settlement of Nazareth in Middle Roman times. However, in the final sentence of the report, Ms. Alexandre adds:
 
Some fragmentary stone walls and floors were cut by the vaulted reservoir, thus indicationg that there was some occupation here in the Hellenistic, Crusader and Mamluk periods.
 
    It is a mystery how the archaeologist can date “fragmentary stone walls” to Hellenistic times, particularly since the associated pottery was later Roman at the earliest (see