Repurposing religious artifacts as bricks was not rare in the ancient world, but this particular case in Tel 'Eton may support the historicity of a biblical tale
Current section
Repurposing religious artifacts as bricks was not rare in the ancient world, but this particular case in Tel 'Eton may support the historicity of a biblical tale
09:33 AM • June 16 2026 IDT
When the Assyrians came in 701 B.C.E., Jerusalem was spared under circumstances that remain highly suspicious to this very day. One theory is that the local vassal ruler, Hezekiah, had rebelled on rumors after hearing regional scuttlebutt that the overlords had weakened. Upon being proved wrong, the king may have bribed Sennacherib and the Assyrians richly with Temple treasure to stanch their wrath. But the other cities of the kingdom of Judah were not so fortunate.
Among the casualties of the howling Assyrian forces, though apparently under the later ruler Sagron II, may have been the Israelite city at Tel 'Eton, also known as 'Aaton, in southern Israel, which has been undergoing excavation by Prof. Avraham Faust of Bar-Ilan University since 2006. The tel houses the ruins of a fortified city that emerged in the Canaanite period, the Early Bronze Age, which thrived into the Israelite period in the Iron Age – until the Assyrians arrived.
That was sad for the inhabitants because the Assyrians largely destroyed the city, Faust and his team revealed over years of work.
Now he and the team report in the Jerusalem Journal of Archaeology on the fate of what they believe was a sacred standing stone about 1.4 meters (4.6 feet) tall, that had once stood proud in the inner sanctum of a large building in 'Eton, dubbed "the governor's residency," which they suggest is associated with nothing less than religious reforms pursued by that same king, Hezekiah.
The archaeologists date the house to about the 10th century B.C.E, the Israelite period. The standing stone inside one of its rooms weighed about 750 kilograms, or 1,650 pounds and had been placed during the earliest phase of the building. It would have been visible to anyone entering the building or in its courtyard, the archaeologists say. Standing stones were common and had been for thousands of years; most were actually smaller than this beast; and Faust and the team could think of no other purpose the stone might have played, supporting their conclusion that it was a ritual item.
But at some point before the end of the eighth century B.C.E., meaning before the Assyrians stormed in, the standing stone was pushed over. It had stood for about 200 years, the archaeologists deduce. Then it wound up on its side and broken into two parts, which may have happened during "decommissioning," Faust tells Haaretz by telephone. The fragments were then left almost in situ (in place) and reused in a stone platform erected around them.
How do we know it fell before the Assyrians arrived? Like Hezekiah's alleged reforms, the alleged Assyrians also destroyed places of worship, though for different reasons. The reform was before the Assyrians, Faust contends – and the house and platform in which the stone was rehoused show evidence of the Assyrian violence.
Thus the poor standing stone was reduced from a conduit to the gods, likely Yahweh, to flooring and not by the Assyrians. The burning question is, by who?
A standing stone is an idol, though to be clear, the team is not saying this one dated to the early Canaanite phase of the city. Israelite households in the Iron Age did not yet shrink at worshiping other deities, though soon enough Jews would come to deplore other peoples' stones as vile pagan icons.
And since the standing stone had been scorned before the Assyrians arrived, and having no other explanation in hand – the team suggests this ex-idol may be no less than evidence of King Hezekiah's alleged reform to purify the nascent religion of Judaism, chiefly by eradicating idolatry, which was legion in Jewish households of the Iron Age, and by centralizing worship in Jerusalem.
The historicity of Hezekiah's story remains one of the most debated questions in Jewish history: did it happen, and did he actually change religious practices in Judah? Now the team proposes to, possibly, have a piece in hand of the reform in the field.
"In the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, Hezekiah son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign" – 2 Kings 18.
How was this identified as a standing stone? When they started to excavate the platform of stones, he explains, they realized it was not the original floor, and thought it was dense remains of a collapsed wall. To get to the original floor (as archaeologists do), they had to remove the collapse. But while the other stones were perfectly easy to remove, after documentation, a snag arose with this stone – it was too big to move even though it had been broken.
"So what we wanted to do was break it," Faust shares, but happily for posterity they didn't do that. In short, its identification as a standing stone is based on its dimensions, a lack of alternative explanations and the rich history of worshiping erect rock, or at erect rock, in the Middle East, including by Israelites.
The standing stone had been built in the largest and one of the innermost rooms of the building, though when, we don't know. How do we know it was pushed over before the end of the eighth century B.C.E. and that the spirit of Hezekiah hovered over the move?
Hezekiah "did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, just as his father David had done. He removed the high places, smashed the sacred stones and cut down the Asherah poles" – 2 Kings 18:3.
This one was not smashed. Does that imply the biblical verse is untrue? Maybe its decommissioning was more a question of time and place than monarchic decrees?
Firstly, the historicity of the bible in general and of Hezekiah's story are two different things. Secondly, the story of Hezekiah, his rebellion against the Assyrians and his later capitulation, and his religious reform may be largely true, with some embellishment or inaccuracies.
"Even if historical sources describe something that happened, they never describe accurately," Faust says. "Every writer has an interest, whether he's aware of it or not. In this case [of the purported reforms], other parties might describe things otherwise." A story can be largely right with some blurring of details; its' a matter of resolution, he adds. A cautious reading may result in no contradiction.
As for the standing stone – we cannot say it was desecrated per se, for instance by followers of the reform. Faust stresses that there are any number of cases where objects with sacred association were "cancelled" by incorporation into later buildings, without necessarily being desecrated first. In ancient Be'er Sheva, an altar had been dismantled and its ashlar stones, some even with horns, were reused in a public building. Arad is also home to an Iron Age temple, from the 10th century B.C.E. that some archaeologists suggest was desacralized and buried in the course of Hezekiah's reform in order to force the people to worship in Jerusalem. The dating however is heatedly debated.
Moving from the desert to Lachish in what is today central Israel, archaeologists found what they believe is a cultic space that had been cancelled and desecrated too by having a toilet built on top, that may never have been used but if the interpretation is right, the point was clear.
Not all agree to any of the above, including whether the item at Lachish had been a toilet and whether the building it graced had been a shrine. Other items at Lachish ostensibly supporting the Hezekiah reform were broken altars, horns removed, since the king reportedly did not approve of Yahweh worship beyond Jerusalem. Again, there is no agreement on the finds at Lachish.
But cancelling former sacred items was clearly de rigueur when a new religion emerges or conquers and Faust suggests that the fallen standing stone may have been cancelled by being relatively respectfully laid on its side, which is how it broke, while not being smashed into pieces.
Does that sound emotionally inconsistent? Possibly, but he can easily posit a scenario where the commander orders the standing stone to be smashed to smithereens and the local who actually had to do the job had previously worshiped it, or at it, and therefore did not smash. Then the item was reused like the horns of the altar in Be'er Sheva.
Faust is particularly fond of this sidelined standing stone because, he explains, evidence for religious reform is usually sought in temples, shrines, that sort of thing. But first of all, how many temples were there in the Iron Age; hence interpretation relies on very few sites; and here he suggests evidence of religious reform 2,700 years ago in a house. The "governor's" house to be sure, some sort of big major house but not a shrine. Understanding religious development in ancient Judah requires looking beyond temples, he sums up.
Does the stone resolve the debate over the historicity of Hezekiah's reforms? No but it may shed light on a period of flux in Judah.
After the Assyrian assault, Tel 'Eton would be abandoned for hundreds of years. The mound would only be resettled in about the fourth century B.C.E. A village and a fortified structure were erected on the top, but within a century it would be abandoned once and for all.
A small plane crashed on Loop 20 in Laredo, Texas, late on Tuesday night, killing one, with five others hospitalized for smoke inhalation.
According to a Qatari report, the talk of an approaching agreement between Washington and Tehran was accompanied by a media campaign against Qatar.
The funding assistance brings Canada’s total contribution to $500 million for the Palestinian territories.
While the prime minister, Likud, and the coalition bloc are in decline and the opposition gains ground, Netanyahu remains the favorite for suitability as prime minister, according to the poll.