Domestic Architecture, Ancient Israel (Biblical Studies)

Introduction

Since the advent of agriculture, all humans have lived in built environments, and traditional societies typically produce living spaces that exhibit considerable uniformity. Domestic architecture, ancient Israel refers to the typical structures that housed most Israelite families in the Iron Age (ca. 1200–587 BCE). Although some house forms that existed in the pre-Israelite periods continued into the Iron Age, mainly in enclaves of non-Israelites, one house form came to dominate in settlements identified as Israelite. This type is called by various names. It was first identified as a rectangular space divided into three longitudinal spaces and, at the back, one horizontal space, creating four rooms; it was thus designated a “four-room house.” However, as more excavated examples became known, it became clear that this house type had many variations, some having fewer than four rooms and many, especially when second stories are taken into account, having considerably more. Thus, because a row of pillars typically separates two of the longitudinal spaces, they are sometimes called “pillared” houses. Either way, the location of courtyard space in these buildings is not clear. The function of these structures was not only to provide shelter from the elements or from enemies; it was also the workspace for many of the activities that were essential for the survival of the agriculturalists who comprised the great majority of the Israelite population. Houses served as places to sleep and eat and also to carry out basic economic functions: preparing food, making and using essential household items (e.g., textiles, pottery, baskets), and storing provisions and implements. They also were the settings for religious activities and local social and political interactions. In addition, the organization of space in a dwelling probably embodied and communicated cultural values.

General Overviews

Very little information about Israelite dwellings appears in biblical texts. Thus the remains of dwellings, which are commonly found in archaeological investigations, are the most important source of information. The typical Israelite dwelling is described as an architectural type in Braemer 1982, Hardin 2010, Netzer 1992, and Wright 1985; Clark 2000 reconstructs the amount of labor required to build one. Holladay 1992 and Holladay 1997 describe the dwelling and also include a consideration of the functions of household space. Faust 2013 adds suggestions about the social meaning of spatial arrangements. Many of the sources in Israelite Dwellings: Identification and Origins also contain general descriptions of the Israelite dwelling.

Braemer, Frank. L’Architecture domestique du Levant à l’Age du Fer. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations 8. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les civilisations, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Comprehensive corpus of dwellings known up to 1982 and a suggested typology, with variants of the four-room house considered discrete types. Written mainly for architectural specialists and amply illustrated with plans and diagrams. Also see Israelite Dwellings: Identification and Origins.
Find this resource:
Clark, Douglas R. “Bricks, Sweat and Tears: The Human Investment in Constructing a ‘Four-Room’ House.” Near Eastern Archaeology 26 (2000): 34–43.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Well-illustrated description of the construction materials and elements (walls, roof, floors) of the four-room house; also discusses the considerable labor expenditure required to build one. Available online.
Find this resource:
Faust, Avraham. “Domestic Architecture. Bronze and Iron Age.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Bible and Archaeology. Vol. 1. Edited by Daniel M. Master, 301–310. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Describes the four-room house, reviews past interpretations, and focuses on the social aspects, including family structure and size, social class, and meaning, of this type. Also see Ancient Israel.
Find this resource:
Hardin, James W. “The Iron Age Pillared Dwelling.” In Lahav II, Households and the Use of Domestic Space at Iron II Tell Halif: An Archaeology of Destruction. By James W. Hardin, 44–55. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Introduction to the plan, origin, construction, components, and design of the “pillared house,” the typical Israelite dwelling.
Find this resource:
Holladay, John S. “Four-Room House.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East. Vol. 2. Edited by Eric M. Meyers, 337–342. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Shows how the design and layout of the four-room house reflects the agrarian economy, ethnicity, and social structure of ancient Israel.
Find this resource:
Holladay, John S., Jr. “House, Israelite.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 3. Edited by David Noel Freedman, 308–318. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Detailed description of the typical Israelite dwelling and its structural components and one of the first studies to consider functional and socioeconomic aspects of Israelite dwellings. See also Household Economy and Israelite Dwellings: Identification and Origins.
Find this resource:
Netzer, Ehud. “Domestic Architecture in the Iron Age.” In The Architecture of Ancient Israel: From the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods. Edited by Aharon Kempinski and Ronny Reich, 193–201. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Architectural description of the four-room house as well as the few examples of another type, the larger courtyard house, which probably developed from Canaanite prototypes and may have served administrative purposes. Suggests that courtyard space was on the second story.
Find this resource:
Wright, G. H. R. Ancient Building in South Syria and Palestine: Text. Vol. 1. Handbuch der Orientalistik 7. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1985.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
See pp. 86–87 and 293–297. Situates the “Israelite house” in a discussion, by a leading archaeological architect of the last generation, of architectural forms at Iron Age sites in Palestine.
Find this resource:
Israelite Dwellings: Identification and Origins

The remains of dwellings are commonly found in archaeological investigations, but the interest in monumental architecture (palaces, fortifications, temples) meant that they were often overlooked as important sources of information about life in biblical antiquity. That began to change in the 1970s, when researchers became particularly interested in the four-room house, the dominant house type in ancient Israel. They now seek to understand its origins and relate it to ethnicity, with many scholars, like Shiloh 1970, Shiloh 1973, and Finkelstein 1988 (and also Faust 2006 and Faust 2013, both cited under Houses and Meaning: Ancient Israel), arguing that it is uniquely Israelite. A few others, like Fritz 1977 and Wright 1978, propose that it developed from types known in other cultures, and Braemer 1982 suggests that it was non-Israelite because it existed well beyond Israel’s borders. Closely tied to the question of how it originated is the identification of the functions that this particular house type served. Both Holladay 1992 and Stager 1985 link it to the needs of Israelite agriculturalists as do the sources in Household Economy.

Braemer, Frank. L’Architecture domestique du Levant à l’Age du fer. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Disputes the idea of the four-room house being Israelite and suggests its origins are from areas north of ancient Israel. Also see General Overviews.
Find this resource:
Finkelstein, Israel. “Early Israelite Architecture.” In The Archaeology of the Israelite Settlement. Translated by Daniella Saltz. By Israel Finkelstein, 237–269. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1988.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that the four-room type originated in Iron I rural communities in the hill country and spread from there to the rest of the region, including non-Israelite areas.
Find this resource:
Fritz, Volkmar. “Bestimmung und herkunft des Pfeilerhauses in Israel.” Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 93 (1977): 30–45.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Based on work in northern Negev sites, suggests the four-room house originated in the spatial organization of nomadic tents.
Find this resource:
Holladay, John S., Jr. “House, Israelite.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 3. Edited by David Noel Freedman, 308–318. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
According to ethnographic analogies, proposes that this type originated to serve the needs of Israelite agrarians and endured throughout the Iron Age. See also General Overviews and Household Economy.
Find this resource:
Stager, Lawrence. E. “The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 260 (1985): 1–35.
DOI: 10.2307/1356862Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Seminal work describing form, construction, and function of the pillared house as the standard Israelite dwelling. Draws on ethnography, relates house clusters to the biblical bêt’āb (“father’s household”); doubts the pillared house is exclusively Israelite but emerged in early Iron Age, perhaps from Canaanite antecedents, to meet agricultural needs. Available online. See also Household Economy and House Form and Family Size.
Find this resource:
Shiloh, Yigal. “The Four-Room House: Its Situation and Function in the Israelite City.” Israel Exploration Journal 20 (1970): 180–190.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Differentiates “four-room” residential structures from larger pillared buildings serving administrative purposes and rejects outside origins. A seminal article in the study of Israelite dwellings. Available online.
Find this resource:
Shiloh, Yigal. “The Four-Room House: The Israelite Type-House?” In Eretz Israel 11. Dunayevsky Memorial Volume. Edited by Nahman Avigad, et al., 277–285. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1973.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In Hebrew. Describes the variations and versatility of the four-room house and its subtypes, suggests that the basic plan is found in royal buildings as well as ordinary dwellings, and considers it a new architectural concept that can be attributed to the Israelites.
Find this resource:
Wright, G. Ernest. “A Characteristic North Israelite House.” In Archaeology in the Levant: Essays for Kathleen Kenyon. Edited by Roger Moorey and Peter Parr, 149–154. Warminster, UK: Aris & Phillips, 1978.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Identifies four-room buildings as dwellings, suggests that they were a northern type, and proposes that they were Phoenician in origin.
Find this resource:
House and Household

Houses are one component of a complex entity known as the “household,” a term that encompasses not only the dwelling itself but also other items of material culture (artifacts and installations), its land and animals, the people (kin and sometimes others) who inhabited it, their activities, and their values. The household is the basic unit of society and is the primary setting for many activities, including economic and religious ones. The dwelling itself, along with some of its artifacts and installations, is usually the most enduring component of ancient societies. The excavation of houses is thus a major source of information about an ancient society. However, the excavated remains must be interpreted for them to provide information about household members and activities. Ethnographic analogies are important resources for interpreting households, and archaeology that incorporates the insights of ethnography is called household archaeology.

Ethnographic Analogies

Many archaeologists are interested in the human dimension of households; they want to know what activities people carried out in the various spaces of their dwellings. They assume that excavated materials have behavioral correlates. Archaeologists may discover the remains of Israelite dwellings, but determining how its spaces were used is largely dependent on observations made by ethnographers who study traditional societies living in the same general geographic area and using technologies similar to those of the ancient populations. The study of traditional societies with an eye to understanding ancient ones is called ethnoarchaeology, and their findings shed light on Israelite dwellings as social spaces, that is, households. Carter 1997 provides a brief overview of the value and difficulties of ethnoarchaeology. Despite the drawbacks noted in Kramer 1979b and Watson 1979, such as the assumption of a degree of continuity in practices over many thousands of years, ethnoarchaeology is invaluable for at least suggesting possible ways household space was utilized. Yanagisako 1979 shows the importance of looking at social aspects of dwellings, and Blanton 1994 is influential in emphasizing the social meaning of a house’s features by drawing on ethnographic research. Kamp 1995 and Kramer 1979a provide examples of ethnography especially relevant to understanding the four-room house and thus the economic and social dynamics of Israelite households.

Blanton, Richard E. Houses and Households: A Comparative Study. New York: Plenum, 1994.
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4899-0990-9Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Uses cross-cultural materials and communication theories for considering key features of dwellings, such as size, use of space, and decoration, in relation to social behavior. An influential work in many aspects of the study of the household by archaeologists and anthropologists. See also Houses and Meaning.
Find this resource:
Carter, Charles W. “Ethnoarchaeology.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East. Vol. 2. Edited by Eric M. Meyers, 280–284. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A succinct and clear overview of the methods of ethnoarchaeology along with some examples of its use for studying the biblical world.
Find this resource:
Kamp, Katherine A. “Towards an Archaeology of Architecture: Clues from a Modern Syrian Village.” Journal of Anthropological Research 49 (1995): 293–318.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Drawing on the ethnoarchaeological study of a Syrian village, this study proposes eight principles for analyzing excavated dwellings of the past.
Find this resource:
Kramer, Carol. “An Archaeological View of a Contemporary Kurdish Village: Domestic Architecture, Household Size, and Wealth.” In Ethnoarchaeology: Implications of Ethnography for Archaeology. Edited by Carol Kramer, 139–163. New York: Columbia University Press, 1979a.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Classic study of a village in western Iran that is often used for interpreting the archaeological remains of domestic architecture in southwest Asia, including ancient Israel.
Find this resource:
Kramer, Carol. “Introduction.” In Ethnoarchaeology: Implications of Ethnography for Archaeology. Edited by Carol Kraemer, 1–20. New York: Columbia University Press, 1979b.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Introduction, presenting the assumptions, objectives, problems, and prospects of ethnoarchaeology, to an anthology of ethnoarchaeological case studies and methodological considerations.
Find this resource:
Watson, Patty Jo. “The Idea of Ethnoarchaeology: Notes and Comments.” In Ethnoarchaeology: Implications of Ethnography for Archaeology. Edited by Carol Kraemer, 277–287. New York: Columbia University Press, 1979.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Comments on how the essays in this volume contribute relevant cross-cultural data and also stresses the need to test the claims made on the basis of analogies with observed ethnographic data.
Find this resource:
Yanagisako, Sylvia Junko. “Family and Household: The Analysis of Domestic Groups.” Annual Review of Anthropology 8 (1979): 161–205.
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.an.08.100179.001113Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A pioneering examination of the household, rather than the family or kinship group, as the basic social unit; influenced the emergence of households as a focus of archaeological investigation. Available online for a fee or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Household Archaeology

The term “household archaeology” was coined over thirty years ago by Wilk and Rathje 1982. Although it is understood in varying ways by anthropologists, as Routledge 2013 makes clear, it can be understood at its simplest to mean the study of household behaviors and relationships using archaeological materials and ethnographic analogies. As explained in the general discussions in Hardin 2011 and Tringham 2001, it does not refer to excavation itself but rather to the interpretive processes that help researchers use physical remains to reconstruct other aspects of an ancient society. Parker and Foster 2012 provides an introductory overview to the authors’ collection of papers on various aspects of household archaeology in the ancient Near Eastern world. Household archaeology is relatively new in the archaeology of ancient Israel itself, as noted in Yasur-Landau 2010. Brody 2009 and Hardin 2010 (which also provides a general introduction) are excellent examples. Other examples appear in House Form and Family Size, House Form and Use of Space, Houses and Religion, and Houses and Meaning.

Brody, Aaron J. “‘Those Who Add House to House’: Household Archaeology and the Use of Domestic Space in an Iron II Residential Compound at Tell en-Naṣbeh.” In Exploring the Long Durée: Essays in Honor of Lawrence E. Stager. Edited by J. David Schloen, 44–56. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Example of household archaeology, with careful analysis of the structure and its artifacts, which provide data for understanding social and economic functions.
Find this resource:
Hardin, James W. Lahav II, Households and the Use of Domestic Space at Iron II Tell Halif: An Archaeology of Destruction. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An introduction to the household as a built environment and to household archaeology in Palestine as well as a detailed case study of an 8th-century BCE Israelite dwelling. Also see House Form and Use of Space.
Find this resource:
Hardin, James W. “Understanding Houses, Households, and the Levantine Archaeological Record.” In Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond. Edited by Assaf Yasur-Landau, Jennie R. Ebeling, and Laura B. Mazow, 9–25. Culture & History of the Ancient Near East 50. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Surveys the emergence of household archaeology first in New World research and later in Levantine scholarship, with special attention to the way archaeological remains can form the basis for learning about household activities.
Find this resource:
Parker, Bradley J., and Catherine P. Foster, eds. New Perspectives on Household Archaeology. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A collection of conference papers that focus on household archaeology in the Middle East and provide many examples of methodological advancements and outcomes.
Find this resource:
Routledge, Bruce. “Household Archaeology in the Levant.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 370 (2013): 207–219.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This sophisticated review article considers the various methodological and conceptual problems involved in the study of domestic space in archaeological contexts. Available online for a fee or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Tringham, Ruth. “Household Archaeology.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Neil J. Smelser and Paul B. Baltes, 6925–6928. Oxford: Pergamon, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Overview of the emergence of household archaeology and its value for reconstructing household activities and recognizing social inequalities; notes its important potential for gender analysis.
Find this resource:
Yasur-Landau, Assaf. “Under the Shadow of the Four-Room House: Biblical Archaeology Meets Household Archaeology in Israel.” In Historical Biblical Archaeology and the Future: The New Pragmatism. Edited by Thomas E. Levy, 142–155. London: Equinox, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A survey of household archaeology using case studies, one of which is ancient Israel.
Find this resource:
Wilk, Richard R., and William L. Rathje. “Household Archaeology.” American Behavioral Scientist 25 (1982): 617–639.
DOI: 10.1177/000276482025006003Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Highlights the archaeological investigation of the household as a way to infer the nature of the social group occupying a domicile and thus bridge the gap between material remains and theories of culture. Available online for a fee or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Household Economy

Most ancient Israelites—whether they lived in rural hamlets or fortified towns (sometimes called cities in the Hebrew Bible) or anything in between—were self-sufficient agrarians. A household’s land and dwelling were thus the locale for virtually all of the processes necessary for producing the food, textiles, and other items necessary for daily life. Dar 1996, Faust 2011, Holladay 1992, and Stager 1985 discuss aspects of the agrarian functions of households. Borowski 1987 describes the household economic activities performed mainly by men outside the dwelling; Meyers 2002 reports on the most important economic activity, performed mainly by women in ancient Israel, taking place in or near the dwelling, and Hendon 2004 considers the social meaning of women’s economic activities in the household.

Borowski, Oded. Agriculture in Iron Age Israel: The Evidence from Archaeology and the Bible. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Overview of agricultural practices that produced food for Israelite households.
Find this resource:
Dar, Shimon. “The Relationship between the Dwelling Place and the Family in Ancient Israel.” Eretz Israel 25 (1996): 151–157.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Physical and functional analysis of domiciles as a way to understand the economic activities of the extended family occupying the dwellings.
Find this resource:
Faust, Avraham. “Households Economies in the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah.” In Household Archaeology in the Bronze and Iron Age Levant. Edited by Assaf Yasur-Landau, Jennie Ebeling, and Laura B. Mazow, 255–273. Culture & History of the Ancient Near East 50. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examines the archaeological evidence for household installations related to food production and relates them to family units.
Find this resource:
Hendon, Julia A. “Living and Working at Home: The Social Archaeology of Household Production and Social Relations.” In A Companion to Social Archaeology. Edited by Lynn Meskell and Robert W. Preucel, 272–286. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Shows that the household, because it is the main economic unit, is also the basic arena for the creation of social identities and relationships and thus has the potential to reveal aspects of gender and agency.
Find this resource:
Holladay, John S., Jr. “House, Israelite.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 3. Edited by David Noel Freedman, 308–318. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Detailed description of the typical Israelite dwelling and its structural components; relates them to economic and socioeconomic functions of Israelite dwellings. See also General Overviews and Israelite Dwellings: Identification and Origins
Find this resource:
Meyers, Carol. “Having Their Space and Eating There Too: Bread Production and Female Power in Ancient Israelite Households.” Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women’s Studies 5 (2002): 14–44.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Highlights a major household activity (carried out by women): transforming grains, the mainstay of the household economy, into edible form.
Find this resource:
Stager, Lawrence E. “The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 260 (1985): 1–35.
DOI: 10.2307/1356862Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Relates the standard Israelite dwelling to its agricultural functions in food-processing and stabling animals. Available online. See also Israelite Dwellings: Identification and Origins.
Find this resource:
House Form and Family Size

The people occupying a dwelling constitute the human dimension of households. The four-room house has long been considered the living space of Israelite families, but whether those families were nuclear (consisting of parents and unmarried offspring) or extended (consisting of parents, unmarried daughters, and married sons with their wives and children) is a matter of ongoing debate. Brody 2011, Faust 2000, Routledge 2009, Schloen 2001, and Stager 1985 provide different perspectives on the size of families occupying Israelite houses. The number of occupants in a dwelling is typically determined using methods established in Naroll 1962 and LeBlanc 1971. However, as Kamp 2000 shows, house size may not be the only determinant.

Brody, Aaron J. “The Archaeology of the Extended Family: A Household Compound from the Iron II Tell en-Naṣbeh.” In Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond. Edited by Assaf Yasur-Landau, Jennie R. Ebeling, and Laura B. Mazow, 237–254. Culture & History of the Ancient Near East 50. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An analysis, using ethnoarchaeological models, of room-use functions of a four-room house compound and showing that extended families lived in larger as well as smaller settlements.
Find this resource:
Faust, Avraham. “The Rural Community in Ancient Israel during Iron Age II.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 317 (2000): 17–39.
DOI: 10.2307/1357482Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Uses house size and other factors related to agriculture and compared with biblical/historical data to suggest that the houses in rural villages were occupied by extended families, represented by the biblical term bêt’āb (“father’s household”). Available online.
Find this resource:
Kamp, K. “From Village to Tell: Household Ethnoarchaeology in Syria.” Near Eastern Archaeology 63 (2000): 84–93.
DOI: 10.2307/3210745Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
On the basis of ethnoarchaeological data, establishes that house size may be related to the size of the village and thus would does not necessarily coincide with family size. Available online.
Find this resource:
LeBlanc, Stephen. “An Addition to Naroll’s Suggested Floor Area and Settlement Population Relationship.” American Antiquity 36 (1971): 210–211.
DOI: 10.2307/278676Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Refines Naroll’s work by arguing that the function of spaces as well as the floor area must be considered. Available online.
Find this resource:
Naroll, Raoul. “Floor Area and Settlement Population.” American Antiquity 27 (1962): 587–589.
DOI: 10.2307/277689Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Provides an objective way, based on the floor area of dwellings, to estimate number of occupants of a house. This article has been the basis for demographic analysis of Israelite houses and settlements. Available online.
Find this resource:
Routledge, Bruce. “Average Families? House Size Variability in the Southern Levantine Iron Age.” In The Family in Life and Death: The Family in Ancient Israel: Sociological and Archaeological Perspectives. Edited by Patricia Ducher-Walls, 42–60. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 504. London: T&T Clark, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Disputes simple equation of house size with family size in ancient Israel and suggests wealth or class difference as possible factors in house size variability.
Find this resource:
Stager, Lawrence E. “The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 260 (1985): 1–35.
DOI: 10.2307/1356862Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that the four-room house was occupied by a nuclear family and that a cluster of those domiciles formed a compound housing an extended family, the biblical bêt’āb (“father’s household”). Available online. See also Household Economy and Israelite Dwellings: Identification and Origins.
Find this resource:
Schloen, J. David. “Demography and Domestic Space in Ancient Israel.” In The House of the Father as Fact and Symbol: Patrimonialism in Ugarit and the Ancient Near East. Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Levant 2. Winona lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Technical discussion of Israelite domiciles, relating variations in house size to life-cycle shifts and density of population in relation to settlement size and clan structures; emphasizes dominance of joint (extended) families. For scholars and advance students.
Find this resource:
House Form and Use of Space

Archaeological data recovered from dwellings can be analyzed to determine the range of activities of Israelite families that took place in or near the dwellings. Kent 1984 and the edited volumes, Kent 1984 and Kent 1987, provide methodological discussions and ethnographic studies that inform the identification of household activity areas. Brody 2009, Hardin 2010, and Singer-Avitz 2011 provide excellent examples of the analysis of domestic space at Israelite sites.

Brody, Aaron J. “‘Those Who Added House to House’: Household Archaeology and the Use of Domestic Space in an Iron II Residential Compound at Tell en-Naṣbeh.” In Exploring the Long Durée: Essays in Honor of Lawrence E. Stager. Edited by J. David Schloen, 44–56. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Sophisticated analysis of several four-room houses, based on artifact and pottery distribution, showing variability in the function of household space.
Find this resource:
Hardin, James W. Lahav II, Households and the Use of Domestic Space at Iron II Tell Halif: An Archaeology of Destruction. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Determines what activities, both economic and religious, were carried out in the various rooms of a late 8th-century BCE dwelling by analyzing the artifacts and also the micro-artifacts recovered from the rooms of a pillared building. Also see Household Archaeology.
Find this resource:
Kent, Susan. Analyzing Activity Areas: An Ethnoarchaeological Study of the Use of Space. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1984.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Although its focus is the New World, its hypothesis that activity areas can be identified by careful attention to the content and location of artifact assemblages is relevant across cultures, as is the fact that household space is rarely mono-functional.
Find this resource:
Kent, Susan, ed. Method and Theory for Activity Area Research: An Ethnoarchaeological Approach. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The contributions to this book focus on methodological issues as well as the theoretical and conceptual ones that are part of the consideration of economic and other aspects of household space.
Find this resource:
Kent, Susan, ed. Domestic Architecture and the Use of Space: An Interdisciplinary Cross-Cultural Study. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The relationship between the built environment (i.e., the dwelling) and human behavior is explored from an anthropological perspective in nine archaeological and ethnographic case studies.
Find this resource:
Singer-Avitz, Lily. “Household Activities at Tel Beersheba.” In Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond. Edited by Assaf Yasur-landau, Jennie R. Ebeling, and Laura B. Mazow, 275–301. Culture & History of the Ancient Near East 50. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Uses the spatial distribution of artifacts in domestic structures to identify spaces for consumption and production, posits female activity areas, and suggests possible wealth differentials.
Find this resource:
Houses and Religion

The biblical emphasis on the religious activities at the tabernacle and temple belie the importance of religious activity in individual households and local communities. The household was the primary arena of religious activity for most ancient Israelites, and ritual behaviors of various kinds took place in the dwelling as shown in Albertz 2008, Meyers 2010, and Nakhai 2011. Moreover, Ackerman 2008 and Meyers 2005 indicate that, unlike in the national cult, women had prominent roles in household religion.

Ackerman, Susan. “Household Religion, Family Religion, and Women’s Religion in Ancient Israel.” In Household and Family: Religion in Antiquity. Edited by John Bodell and Saul M. Olyan, 127–158. The Ancient World: Comparative Histories. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2008.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Considers evidence for the role of women in religious activities of the extended families occupying Israelite dwellings.
Find this resource:
Albertz, Rainer. “Family Religion in Ancient Israel and its Surroundings.” In Household and Family: Religion in Antiquity. Edited by John Bodell and Saul M. Olyan, 89–112. The Ancient World: Comparative Histories. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2008.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Uses literary and also archaeological sources to reconstruct domestic cult, which is considered popular religion as opposed to official religion.
Find this resource:
Meyers, Carol. Households and Holiness: The Religious Culture of Israelite Women. Facets. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Integrates ethnographic, archaeological, and textual data to reconstruct the household religious practices—mainly in relation to problems of pregnancy and childbirth—of Israelite women.
Find this resource:
Meyers, Carol. “Household Religion.” In Religious Diversity in Ancient Israel and Judah. Edited by Francesca Stavrakopoulou and John Barton, 118–134. London: T&T Clark, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Examines the variety of religious behaviors associated with the household: regular religious activities (seasonal, monthly, daily), life-cycle celebrations, and occasional practices dealing with special problems.
Find this resource:
Nakhai, Beth Alpert. “Varieties of Religious Expression in the Domestic Setting.” In Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond. Edited by Assaf Yasur-Landau, Jennie R. Ebeling, and Laura B. Mazow, 347–360. Culture & History of the Ancient Near East 50. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Using archaeological data, identifies two kinds of household religious acts: those related to economic processes, and those related to reproduction and health.
Find this resource:
Houses and Meaning

The idea that structures have cultural meaning as well as pragmatic functions has been part of the scholarship on dwellings since the latter part of the 20th century, when anthropologists began using philosophical theories about space in their ethnographic and archaeological research. Theoretical works on the meaning of space have been influential in biblical studies and in the analysis of Israelite dwellings. Among them are the works of philosophers like Lefebre 1991 and Bourdieu 1977 (also an anthropologist and sociologist) and the publications of anthropologists, notably Blanton 1994, Pearson and Richards 1994, and Rapoport 1982. But Douglas 1972 has some cautionary words. These works are mainly for advanced students and scholars.

Blanton, Richard E. Houses and Households: A Comparative Study. New York: Plenum, 1994.
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4899-0990-9Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Uses nonverbal communication theory and comparative data to determine the “indexical communication” of a domicile, that is, what a building’s features convey about its inhabitants. See also Ethnographic Analogies.
Find this resource:
Bourdieu, Pierre. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 1977.
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511812507Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Densely argued philosophical and sociological presentation, drawing on ethnographic work to illustrate theoretical propositions, such as that structures can instantiate cosmic space and determine behaviors. English translation of Esquisse d’une theorie de la pratique, first published in 1972.
Find this resource:
Douglas, Mary. “Symbolic Orders in the Use of Domestic Space.” In Man, Settlement, and Urbanism: Proceedings of a Meeting of the Research Seminar in Archaeology and Related Subjects Held at the Institute of Archaeology, London University. Edited by Peter J. Ucko, Ruth Tringham, and G. W. Dimbleby, 513–522. London: Duckworth, 1972.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that symbolic aspects of house architecture and decoration may be difficult to determine from archaeological remains and also warns that a house’s size may not be a good index of wealth.
Find this resource:
Lefebre, Henri. The Production of Space. Translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Argues that space is not an inert and neutral entity, but rather an ongoing production of spatial relations. Lefebvre’s approach, first published as La Production de l’espace in 1974, is situated within post-structuralist or post-modern critical discourse.
Find this resource:
Pearson, Michael Parker, and Colin Richards. “Ordering the World: Perceptions of Architecture, Space, and Time.” In Architecture and Order: Approaches to Social Space. Edited by Michael Parker Pearson and Colin Richards, 1–37. London: Routledge, 1994.
DOI: 10.4324/9780203401484_chapter_1Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Introductory chapter in a collection of archaeological and ethnographic examples; invokes spatial theory in considering architecture as a medium for representing and ordering the lives of a structure’s inhabitants.
Find this resource:
Rapoport, Amos. The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Non-Verbal Communication Approach. Beverley Hills, CA: SAGE, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Investigates the cognitive dimension of architectural design and its relation to behavior by using symbolic interactionist theory.
Find this resource:
Ancient Israel

Thus far the work of Faust (Faust 2006; Faust 2013) and Bunimovitz and Faust (Bunimovitz and Faust 2003) dominate the integration of theoretical works on the meaning of space into analyses of Israelite domiciles. Maier 2013 responds to their work with cautionary words. Schloen 2001 hints at the possibilities of philosophical theory in this first volume of a two-volume work, with the anticipated second volume likely to expand on the interpretation of Israelite structures.

Bunimovitz, Shlomo, and Avraham Faust. “Building Identity: The Four Room House and the Israelite Mind.” In Symbiosis, Symbolism and the Power of the Past: Ancient Israel and Its Neighbors from the Late Bronze Age through Roman Palestineae. Edited by William G. Dever and Seymour Gitin, 411–423. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Considers the four-room house a predominantly Israelite form expressing Israelite egalitarian values and thus structuring Israelite identity. A similar paper in Near Eastern Archaeology 66 (2003): 22–31 is available online
Find this resource:
Faust, Avraham. “The Four-Room House.” In Israel’s Ethnogenesis: Settlement, Interaction, Expansion, and Resistance. By Avraham Faust, 71–84. London: Equinox, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Assuming the four-room house to be an indigenous Israelite type, Faust links it to an egalitarian ideology and also claims that it enabled Israelites to maintain the purity laws of Leviticus.
Find this resource:
Faust, Avraham. “Domestic Architecture. Bronze and Iron Age.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Bible and Archaeology. Vol. 1. Edited by Daniel M. Master, 301–310. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Includes an overview of the several social and religious values conveyed by four-room houses. Also see General Overviews.
Find this resource:
Maier, Aren. Review of Avraham Faust, The Archaeology of Israelite Society in Iron Age II (Translated by Ruth Ludlum; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012), Review of Biblical Literature 9 (2013): 24.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Offers a critique of some of Faust’s ideas about family size, ethnicity, economic egalitarianism, and biblical purity laws in relation to the four-room house.
Find this resource:
Schloen, J. David. “Demography and Domestic Space in Ancient Israel.” In The House of the Father as Fact and Symbol: Patrimonialism in Ugarit and the Ancient Near East. Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Levant 2. Winona lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Situates the Israelite pillared dwelling as a “text” for understanding the “patrimonial” social system of ancient Israel.
Find this resource:
Comparative Data

The extent to which the four-room or pillared house is unique to the Israelites can be seen by looking at the domestic structures of the peoples who preceded the Israelite emergence in Palestine as well as those who succeeded the Israelites. It is also informative to compare the four-room house type occupied by ordinary Israelites with the dwellings of the elites.

Earlier and Later Domiciles

The dwellings of the Canaanites, who preceded the Israelites in Palestine and from whom at least some of the Israelites were descended, are presented in Ben-Dov 1992, Daviau 1993, and Oren 1992. Holladay 1997 describes pre-Israelite dwellings as well as non-Israelite ones contemporary with ancient Israel. Galor 2003, Hirschfeld 1995, Richardson 2004, and Stern 2001 consider post-Israelite domestic structures from the Persian to Byzantine periods.

Ben-Dov, Meir. “Middle and Late Bronze Dwellings.” In The Architecture of Ancient Israel from the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods. Edited by Aharon Kempinski and Ronny Reich, 99–104. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Describes the typical dwelling of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages in Palestine (ca. 2000–1200 BCE) and elsewhere: the “courtyard house,” which featured a fairly large enclosed courtyard with adjoining or surrounding rooms.
Find this resource:
Daviau, P. M. Michele. Houses and Their Furnishings in Bronze Age Palestine: Domestic Activity Areas and Artifact Distribution in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. JSOT/ASOR Monograph Series 8. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Identifies five activities (food preparations and consumption, storage, pottery production, and textile production) that took place in domestic structures by focusing on the artifacts discovered in various parts of Palestinian houses in the second millennium BCE.
Find this resource:
Galor, Katharina. “Domestic Architecture in Roman and Byzantine Galilee and Golan.” Near Eastern Archaeology 66 (2003): 44–57.
DOI: 10.2307/3210931Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Shows the variability in house forms and considers technical aspects and spatial uses of domestic structures. Helpful illustrations, including reconstructions of dwellings. Available online.
Find this resource:
Hirschfeld, Yizhar. The Palestinian Dwelling in the Roman and Byzantine Period. Jerusalem: Franciscan Printing Press and Israel Exploration Society, 1995.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Uses ethnographic data collected in a survey of traditional 20th-century Palestinian houses (which show considerable continuity of building style from antiquity to the present) to reconstruct building techniques and the use of space in Roman and Byzantine period dwellings.
Find this resource:
Holladay, John S., Jr. “House: Syro-Palestinian Homes.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East. Vol. 3. Edited by Eric M. Meyers, 94–114. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Very detailed description of house types in Palestine from the Early Bronze Age (ca. 3300 BCE) to the end of Iron II (ca. 580 BCE), with many diagrams and extensive bibliography. Includes the four-room house and also house plans of other peoples in Palestine in the Iron Age.
Find this resource:
Oren, Eliezer D. “Palaces and Patrician Houses in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages.” In The Architecture of Ancient Israel from the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods. Edited by Aharon Kempinski and Ronny Reich, 105–120. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Considers domiciles of the wealthy (a large interior courtyard with flanking or surrounding rooms) in Palestine and Syria from ca. 2000 to 1200 BCE to be larger versions, with variations and elaborations, of the courtyard houses of ordinary people.
Find this resource:
Richardson, Peter. “Towards a Typology of Levantine/Palestinian Houses.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 27 (2004): 47–68.
DOI: 10.1177/0142064X0402700104Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Draws on earlier typological studies of houses in the Levant as well as on Greek and Roman materials to propose a comprehensive typology of rural and urban dwellings. Available online for a fee or by subscription.
Find this resource:
Stern, Ephraim. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible. Vol. 2, The Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian Periods (732–332 B.C.E.). Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: Doubleday, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Contains a brief description of the residential structures of the Persian period, probably Mesopotamian in origin and introduced in the late 8th century BCE.
Find this resource:
Elite Domiciles

Certain buildings served as dwelling places for high-ranking humans or for deities. Those housing the elites were administrative centers as much as homes, and the needs of governance determined the layout and symbolism of its architectural forms. The palaces and residencies of the royal elites and the governors of towns or districts, examined by Reich 1992, Mazar 1990, and McCormick 2002, thus differed significantly from the domiciles of ordinary Israelites: they were much larger, they occupied the most desirable location in a settlement, and they used more costly and elaborate building materials. Sacred structures too were residences, as indicated by biblical terminology: the tabernacle is called a place for God to “dwell” (Exodus 25:8), the Jerusalem temple is called “the house of the LORD” (e.g., 1 Kings 3:1), and the main central space of the temple (e.g., 1 Kings 6:17; NRSV “house”) is called the hêkāl, a word meaning “large house” or “palace.” The tabernacle is described in Friedman 1992 and Homan 2002, which see some historicity in the biblical accounts, and in George 2009, which argues for conceptualizing it as space rather than place. Mazar and McCormick also look at temples, as do Meyers 1992 and Roberts 2009, with Monson 2006 comparing the Jerusalem temple to a contemporary Syrian one.

Friedman, Richard. “Tabernacle.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 6. Edited by David Noel Freedman, 292–300. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Provides a detailed description based on biblical texts and also argues for possible historicity.
Find this resource:
George, Mark K. Israel’s Tabernacle a Social Space. Ancient Israel and Its Literature 2; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Describes the tabernacle and its furnishings as presented in the Hebrew Bible and then proceeds to analyze it by drawing on the spatial poetics of theorists, especially Lefebvre. For scholars and advanced students.
Find this resource:
Homan, Michael. M. To Your Tents, O Israel: the Terminology, Function, Form, and Symbolism of Tents in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 12. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2002.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A detailed study of the tabernacle, using archaeological and comparative ancient Near Eastern evidence as well as the biblical description and suggesting elements of historicity.
Find this resource:
Mazar, Amihai. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: 10,000–586 B.C.E. New York: Doubleday, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
See pages 463–530. Includes general descriptions, with photos and plans, of the archaeological remains of royal architecture at six Israelite sites (Jerusalem, Ramat Rahel, Samaria, Hazor, Megiddo, and Lachish) and of temples at three Israelite sites (Dan, Beersheba, and Arad).
Find this resource:
McCormick, Clifford Mark. Palace and Temple: A Study of Architectural and Verbal Icons. Beihefte Zur Zeitschrift Fur die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 313. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002.
DOI: 10.1515/9783110907940Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Presents the architecture of two major Near Eastern buildings—the Jerusalem temple, known only from texts; and Sennacherib’s palace, known mainly from archaeology—through the lens of built-environment studies, focusing on the role of these buildings as communicative icons.
Find this resource:
Meyers, Carol. “Temple, Jerusalem.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 6. Edited by David Noel Freedman, 350–369. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Considers the material, symbolic, and political aspects of the Jerusalem temple, known only from biblical texts.
Find this resource:
Monson, John. “The ‘Ain Dara Temple and the Jerusalem Temple.” In Text, Artifact, and Image: Revealing Ancient Israelite Religion. Edited by Gary Beckman and Theodore J. Lewis, 273–299. Brown Judaica Studies 346. Providence, RI: Brown Judaic Studies, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Presents the many details (size, date, plan, decoration) of a Syrian temple that are parallel to the Jerusalem temple as described in 1 Kings 6 and considers the conceptions of deity conveyed by decorative aspects of both buildings. Abridged version: “The New ‘Ain Dara Temple: Closest Solomonic Parallel,” Biblical Archaeology Review 26 (2000): 20–35, 67.
Find this resource:
Reich, Ronny. “Palaces and Residencies in the Iron Age.” In The Architecture of Ancient Israel: From the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods. Edited by Aharon Kempinski and Ronny Reich, 202–222. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
By drawing extensively on archaeological materials presents the palaces and other larger administrative-residential structures of ancient Israel and explains how they were constructed. Technical descriptions with illustrations.
Find this resource:
Roberts, J. J. M. “Temple, Jerusalem.” In The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Vol. 5. Edited by Katharine Doob Sakenfeld, 494–509. Nashville: Abingdon, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A detailed description of the Jerusalem temple according to biblical sources but also considering its features to be in the tradition of Syro-Palestinian and Phoenician sacred iconography.