Fortifications, tunnels in Middle Bronze Age Levant explored

AMMAN — Regarding fortifications in the Middle Bronze Age Levant (2,600 BC-1,500 BC), there are features like two tunnels, an upper and a lower tunnel. They are found at Tell Ajjul on the Mediterranean coast.

The so-called Upper Tunnel measures over 150 m in length ranging from 1.35 to1.85 m high and 0.84 to 1.35 m wide, while the Lower Tunnel, substantially shorter, was only about 30.5 m in length, said Professor Aaron Burke from The University of California, Los Angeles.

Burke added that British archaeologist Flinders Petrie (1953-1942) had suggested that the tunnels were onlyused for LB I burials based on the pottery fromTombs 168 and 194, recovered from the Upper Tunnel

"However, since only two tombs were added, and they were not located at one or the other ends of this tunnel, which might have indicated a progression of use, their excavation for this purpose seems unlikely. In both tombs the only published, datable pottery included two Egyptian drop-shaped vessels of  the Late Bronze Age date," explained Burke.

The professor noted that without first-hand examination of the vessels a more precise date is not possible, butthe Upper Tunnel seems to have gone out of use bythe LB II.

Although Petrie had also suggested that the tunnels were dug from both ends, this cannot be verified and we can only add that the Lower Tunnel was clearly begun from the fosse on the northern side of the causeway.

"The main argument against the use of the tunnels as part of a mortuary complex is that only two tombswere dug into the walls of the Upper Tunnel duringthe entire Late Bronze Age, which would not account for the considerable effort undertaken to excavatet hem," said Burke.

In an effort to understand the function of these tunnels, another British archaeologist Olga Tufnell (1905-1985) has stated that they were “irrigation systems” comparing them to the Iranian qanats, suggesting that they predated the fosse.

This claim does not, however, make sense of the location of the entrances of the tunnels or the course of theUpper Tunnel, explained Burke, adding that it also does not explain where the water was to be conducted.

Since one can neither determine that the fosse was filled with water nor that one end of these tunnels ever connected to a source of water, it seems impossible to assert that these tunnels were dug for this purpose.

"In light of the lack of consensus regarding thefunction of these tunnels, it is possible that these tunnels represent an altogether different phenomenon.Several lines of evidence lead to the suggestion that these tunnels may date to the end of the Middle Bronze Age and thus relate to the Egyptian siege attested in 'The Autobiography of Ahmose son of Abana'," the professor outlined.

Burke continues that this argument begins with the almost certain identification of ‘Ajjul as Sharuhen, which has been previously asserteddue to its size, geographical position and material culture. The length of the siege, three years,suggests that no serious effort was made to enter thetown during that time.

"Instead, it is most probable that the Egyptians hoped to starve the inhabitants out. These tunnels also do not represent an Egyptian effort to enter the town. Further evidenceof this comes from the Lower Tunnel, which wasbegun from the fosse and dug eastward terminating after only 30.5 m," Burke elaborated

Also, the attackers would most certainly have faced a slaughter in the fosse from archers on the wall above if they were forced into the fosse from this tight passage," he added.

Therefore, considering that on the other end of this siege some effort was surely expended during thecourse of three years to secure supplies and assistance in the struggle against the Egyptians, these tunnels may be identified as the primary means of ingress and egress at that time, the professor said.

Such an effort would have been aided because the surface of the area to the northeast of the site was pocked with Middle Bronze Age tombs that would probably have kept the Egyptian encampments outside this area, as well as the obviousneed to stay outside the range of archers on the town wall, Burke speculated.

Both tunnels led out the northeast sideof the site from the causeway towards the nearest major settlement, Gaza, which was only 6 km away on the road leading north along the coast. Although it wouldhave seemed prudent to have begun such an effort from inside the settlement, tunneling below the fosse,it must be remembered that the water table at ‘Ajjul was rather high, as attested even during Petrie’s excavations,and this would have hampered any effort to dig from within the town below the fosse to the other side.

"The next favourable location for a tunnel would have been outside the town walls but as close as possible to a gate, which corresponds to the location of the Lower Tunnel," Burke said, noting that work here would mostlikely have been done at night where several workers could slip out the gate and down to the outer face of the fosse to work on its excavation.

For this reason, a new tunnel, the Upper Tunnel, would have been undertaken in anattempt to thread between the “Hyksos” cemetery tothe north and the EB IV Cemetery 100–200 (“Copper Age” cemetery) to the south.

"Evidence from theUpper Tunnel also attests to multiple places along its course where, evidently, 'arrangements for blocking' were put in place during its use and ventilation shafts were added," he noted.

"The shafts shown in theillustrations seem to have been on the west end of the tunnel, which would make sense since these would have kept the source of airprogressing along with the diggers excavating eastward," Burke underlined.

These two pieces of evidence not only argue against the use of this tunnel for water management since air is not needed to conduct water, but also against its use as a catacomb, Burke concluded.