The site sets no cookies and runs no analytics or advertising. It can keep only two things in this browser: your decision here, so that you are not asked again, and, if you allow it, your reading adjustments (text size, contrast, spacing, underlined links and reduced motion) for your next visit.
Without this, adjustments apply to the current page only and reset when you move to another page. No name, identifier, timestamp or page list is stored, and nothing is sent to the server.
The decision itself is always stored, as one key in the browser’s local storage (atiqot.consent.v1), even when you choose not to save adjustments. You can change it at any time in the reading and privacy tools or through the link at the bottom of every page. Operational cookies of the hosting or security provider are outside the site’s control.
The whole scheme with this period marked; the periods before and after are its neighbours in the row. Boundaries follow the sources and are not to scale.
A large Late Bronze Age clay jar that the museum records as "Canaanite" and "Levant" with no findspot. A pointed base and two handles: a form made for storage and transport, which says something about the vessel before anyone knows where it came from.
A small seal-amulet of glazed steatite that the museum records "From Canaan, Levant" and dates by an Egyptian dynasty. Place, dating scheme and culture are three separate questions here.
ca. 1640-1550 BCE
Dated to this period by its source record.
Trails · Museums
Where the period’s objects lead
Trails that pass through an object of this period, and the museums that display its objects according to the records. Every chain is documented and labelled as such.
What attests to trade and what only looks like it: a jar from the Levant, two vessels from Cyprus, ivory from Nimrud and ivories from Jerusalem. Six steps, each with what its record knows and what it does not.
Display status is what the public record said on the day it was checked; confirm on the museum's site before visiting.
Three broad phases within one period
The Bronze Age is presented here as approximately 3300-1200 BCE. Regional timelines distinguish Early, Middle and Late Bronze phases, with boundaries that vary by place and classification. The term describes a long archaeological framework, not a single state, a uniform population or exclusive use of metal. Sources for the range and divisions: 1, 2.
This classification helps compare reports, but it is only a starting point. Two layers both labelled “Bronze Age” may be separated by many centuries. Connecting them requires a subphase, the basis of the date and a location. When those details are missing, postpone the comparison rather than building a trade narrative on a broad period name.
A city is more than its walls
Urban evidence invites consideration of shared needs: movement, storage, manufacture, waste disposal and separation of spaces. An impressive wall is only one part of that system. Try reading a site plan from an entrance to a house, and from the house to a working area. Which routes are possible, who might use them, and do they remain open after repairs or rebuilding?
These are research questions, not a reconstruction of a particular city. They help avoid inserting a “palace” or “temple” where a plan cannot support the identification. Building size can justify comparison; by itself it cannot name an institution, establish a public function or identify an owner.
Different evidence for distant connections
The Met's Late Bronze chronology points to the Amarna letters and connections among eastern Mediterranean centres. This is a different category of evidence from an imported object. A letter documents particular communication. A vessel found far from its production place demonstrates movement, but alone identifies neither its carrier nor the transaction. Source 2.
The museum jar shown on the home page is a dated Levantine comparison, not a find from the excavations discussed in the library. Use it for an exercise: separate what the photograph reveals from what the collection record supplies. Material, date and origin require documentation; the colour of a photograph cannot establish them.
Change at the period's end
A chronological boundary is a navigation aid, not the moment all objects were replaced. Ask what actually changed at a site: settlement layout, vessel form, building sequence or distribution. Change in one does not require change in all. Continue with the Iron Age and materials guides to examine continuity and difference through defined questions, without assuming a single explanation for the whole Near East.
Photograph of the object: Scarab with a crocodile-headed figure Base of a scarab seal from Canaan, ca. 1640-1550 BCE, with a crocodile-headed figure. Glazed steatite museum comparison; The Met, 10.130.398. No specific findspot is stated.The Metropolitan Museum of Art · 10.130.398 · Gift of Helen Miller Gould, 1910 · CC0 · Source · CC0 1.0
Source
Sources and further reading
The research and references behind this page. Rights to external content remain with their owners.
The Met's timeline lists Hazor among the city-states established in the southern Levant around 1800-1600 BCE. What that sentence tells us, and what it does not.
A date connects a question, a sample and a method. A guide to reading ranges, comparisons and the strength of a chronological claim.
4 min read, approximately
Editorial link.
Reading, accessibility & privacy tools
Adjust the reading experience to suit you. These tools complement your browser and device accessibility settings. Changes apply to this page; they are kept for another visit only if you allowed that in the privacy dialog.
Your choices apply to this page only. Moving to another page restores the defaults.