Col. (Ret.) David G. Hansen, Ph.D.
Immediately north of Jerusalem, the inheritance given to the tribe of Benjamin was in the heart of Israel (Jos 18) and the site of many events from Joshua through 2 Chronicles. Today the region of Benjamin is in the West Bank and at the heart of political controversy.
Photo taken on December 11, 1917, as General Allenby walks into the Old City. Approaching the Jaffa Gate, he dismounted his horse and entered on foot as a sign of respect to Jerusalem and its history.
While the battle-scarred landscape of First World War Europe is well known to the Western world, few are familiar with military action in WWI Palestine. Late in October 1917, the British army under General Sir Edmond Allenby moved north from Egypt along the Mediterranean coast and broke the German-Turkish army line at Beersheba. Within two months, Allenby successfully maneuvered his army north to Jaffa, then east into the mountains and finally south to conquer Jerusalem.
BSP 13:1 (Winter 2000) p. 4
The British army first broke the German-Turkish front line south of Gaza in November 1917. With winter rains stopping military activity, just as it did in ancient Israel, the winter 1917–1918 front line stretched from Jaffa (Tel Aviv) on the coast, across the Benjamin plateau and north of Jerusalem to the Jordan River Valley.
However, the inevitable winter rains arrived and after several unsuccessful attempts by the Turkish army to retake Jerusalem around Christmas, both sides prepared defensive lines and waited for the winter to end. Winter in Palestine generally means rain, not snow. The rainy season can last well into April, and then the beautiful spring season begins: “See! The winter is past; the rains are over and gone” (Sg 2:11).
The two armies were entrenched in the center of the country, the Biblical territory of Benjamin. Separated by a few hundred yards of steep ravines and inhospitable terrain, about 16 km (10 mi) north of Jerusalem, hostilities ceased and encampments were established. Like the region’s armies have done for millennia, they waited for the cold winter rains to end. Both armies prepared defensive positions with front lines on the most defensible terrain of Benjamin’s small plateau. With its deep canyons that serrate the land west toward the Mediterranean and east to the Jordan, it made a naturally defendable buffer zone.
The British (west) and German-Turkish (east) front lines in February 1918. ABR excavation site Khirbet el-Maqatir is on the British front line, while Mukmas (Biblical Michmash) is on the German-Turkish front line.
The British army, commanded by General Allenby, had 69,000 soldiers. The two Turkish armies totaling 28,000 Turkish and German troops were commanded by German General Erich von Falkenhayn and, later in the winter, by German General Liman von Sanders.
The Land of Benjamin 1918
The fighting front remained quiet in the early weeks of 1918, as the two forces waited. The Turkish military, now under the command of von Sanders, anticipated Allenby’s upcoming spring offensive to be through the Jordan Valley to the east. Yet, in a brilliant deception operation, Allenby planned to attack along the Mediterranean coast on the west. To succeed, he had to conceal any movements signaling his Mediterranean attack and his lack of preparation in the Jordan Valley and Jericho.
The east end of the front lines had been established in December. The Turkish forces were on hills overlooking the Jordan Valley, controlling roads toward Jericho. To ensure success of his plan, Allenby needed to straighten his defensive line and push these Turkish forces from the hills around the small Palestinian town Mukmas. A series of attacks were scheduled to accomplish the adjustment during February 1918. The official British account of this action was one short aesthetic sentence:
On the 14th of February [1918] the preliminary advance was carried out, the 60th Division occupying Mukmas, while the 53rd captured the village of Deir Dibwan on its left flank (Falls 1930: 306).
(article continued on page 6)
BSP 13:1 (Winter 2000) p. 5
The modern Palestinian village of Mukmas, almost 11 km (7 mi) north of Jerusalem, preserves the name and location of the Biblical city of Michmash. In the days of Saul, the Philistines occupied the city and were defeated by the Israelites after a surprise attack by Saul’s son, Jonathan (1 Sm 14). In 1918, the German-Turkish army occupied the Arab village and were also defeated by a surprise British attack.
Eleventh century BC battle of Michmash and Geba between the Israelite and Philistine armies. Jonathan, son of Saul, and his armorbearer undertook a clandestine mission from the Israelite camp at Geba, down into the Wadi Suweinit between the rocks of Senah and Bozez, and surprised the Philistine garrison at Michmash. In 1918, following the Biblical account, the British unit retraced the route taken by Jonathan and his armorbearer to surprise and defeat a German-Turkish army.
The deep Wadi Suweinit through which both Jonathan and the British surprised their enemies. Biblical Michmash (modern Mukmas) sits on the valley’s north side (just out of the photo on the left). Bozez (“slippery”) to the north and Seneh (“thorny”) to the south, major rock outcrops facing each other across the valley, marked the path which Jonathan and his armorbearer took in surprising the Philistine garrison at Michmash (1 Sm 4:4–14). These two features, not visible in this photo, are around the bend to the left in the valley.
BSP 13:1 (Winter 2000) p. 6
Major Vivian Gilbert (1934: 183), a British officer in the 60th Division, included this description of the engagment at Mukmas in an account of his military service:
Mickmash [sic] was on a rocky hill. The brigade outpost line was on a chain of hills, too, and between us and the enemy ran a deep valley. A frontal attack was decided upon; that is, supported by artillery and machine guns, the brigade was to advance down into the valley just before dawn, and take Mickmash [sic] from the front.
He left unstated that a frontal attack would probably result in many British casualties. Gilbert also recalled that the brigade major thought the name Mukmas seemed vaguely familiar. Reading his Bible the evening preceding the attack, he found it in 1 Samuel 13–14. At Michmash, Jonathan and his armorbearer crept through a gorge to surprise a small Philistine garrison. Now, the Turks were camped at the exit of the very same canyon through which Jonathan made his surprise appearance, in front of a small mound just below Mukmas, Biblical Michmash.
British scouts were immediately dispatched. They located the canyon and a passage through the gorge, probably the same one Jonathan used. The route was of sufficient size for a single British company to pass through and attack the small Turkish outpost guarding the approaches to Michmash. Gilbert (1934: 186) wrote:
We climbed the hillside, and just before dawn, found ourselves on the flat piece of ground [before Michmash]. The Turks who were sleeping awoke, thought they were surrounded by the armies of Allenby and fled in disorder. We killed or captured every Turk that night in Mickmash [sic]; so that, after thousands of years, the tactics of Saul and Jonathan were repeated with success by a British force.
Both the Turks and Philistines decided to establish a fortified base at Michmash in the center of the Benjamin plateau. From here they could control the watershed road, for millennia the main artery through the country’s mountainous spine north and south. Michmash also provided access to roads east to Jericho and west to the Aijalon Valley and Mediterranean plain. In Biblical times Benjamin’s critical territory fell between the powerful tribes of Judah (south) and Ephraim (north).
Benjamin’s tribal borders are demarcated in Joshua 18:11–20. For this article, the northern boundary is of greatest interest. From the Jordan River just north of Jericho to the hill country, its western extension was on a hill south of lower Beth-horon overlooking the Aijalon Valley. Along this northern border are the Biblical locales of Jericho, Ai, Beth Aven, Bethel, and upper and lower Beth-horon. Rasmussen (1989: 98) notes the list of Benjamin’s cities in Joshua 18:21–28 seems to divide into eastern and western groupings, approximately along the line of the watershed road.
Allenby’s recognition in 1918 of Michmash’s dominant position central in the Benjamin plateau was undoubtedly the same evaluation that prompted the Philistines to occupy the village approximately 1050 B.C. Herzog and Gihon (1997: 98) pointed to Michmash’s critical location in ancient times, noting Saul established geopolitical and military control over all of the important and defensible part of the country.
There is no doubt that the battle of Michmash was one of the most decisive in Israelite history and that it was Jonathan’s “two-man action” which paved the way for the victory that gave Saul the necessary respite from his most dangerous enemies and enabled him to establish a unified royal dominion over most of both Cis- and Trans-Jordan.
Khirbet el-Maqatir on ancient Benjamin’s northern border has been a strategic location for millennia. ABR’s Bryant Wood has directed five seasons of excavation at the site. The site housed a Late Bronze Age fortress, Iron Age settlement, Hasmonean fortress and Byzantine monastery over the past four millennia.
BSP 13:1 (Winter 2000) p. 7
The Land of Benjamin in Geology and Geography
The Benjamin plateau’s Cenomanian limestone soil is highly resistant to weathering, but when it does erode, steep-walled canyons and fertile terre rosa soil are formed. Highly conducive for agriculture, the region is even more important as the geographic “center of gravity” for an occupying military force to control the country. Defined by military strategist and philosopher Carl von Clausewitz (1976: 595–96) as “the hub of all power and movement, on which everything depends,” the center of gravity “. .. is the point against which all our energies should be directed.”
The Benjamin plateau is a narrow tableland with steep gorges on the east and west. It is longitudinally bisected by the “watershed” road following the mountain spine north and south of the plateau. East-west latitudinal roads are guarded on both sides by difficult approaches and deep gorges. Fortified locations protected or warned of invasions: Michmash defended access from the east; Ai warned of approaches to Bethel, guarding the northern approach and a major road intersection; Gibeon sheltered routes from the west coming up the Beth-horon ridge from the Aijalon Valley. For millennia, international traffic from Transjordan to the Mediterranean coastal highways passed back and forth along the narrow, but convenient, ridges of Benjamin.
Lower than the hills north or south, this plateau was destined to be the scene of numerous battles throughout history. G. Adam Smith (1966: 198) concluded that Benjamin:
became the site of more fortresses, sieges, forays, battles, and massacres than perhaps any other part of the country. A desolate and fatiguing extent of rocky platforms and ridges, of moorland strewn with boulders, and fields of shallow soil thickly mixed with stone, “a true border” more fit for the building of barriers than for the cultivation of food.
Monson (1988: 22) agreed about its military significance and observed that:
the Land of Benjamin was not an imperial battlefield. However, when outside armies had to quell revolts in the hills they could drive a wedge into the heart of the hill country by occupying this relatively small area.
The Land of Benjamin in the Bible
The road from Bethel east toward Jericho is described in the Bible as “the way of the border” (1 Sm 18:13 NKJV) and, if not a textual error, marked the boundary between Benjamin and Ephraim. Benjamin’s road network and location were coveted by the powerful tribes both north and south. Controlling Benjamin allowed them to break out of their hill country heartlands, reach the imperial highways and tap the lucrative trade routes. The northern border is delimited in Joshua 18:11–13, and it followed a series of hills and valleys (wadis) north of Michmash.
Along this northern border is a small hill overlooking a three-road junction. One road leads southeast to Michmash and then Jericho; another continues east one mile to et-Tell (generally accepted as Ai), the modern Palestinian town Deir Dibwan, and on to Jericho; the third road heads through the small Palestinian village of Beitin (perhaps Beth Aven; see Wood. Bible and Spade, Fall 1999) less than a mile away and then to the modern city of El Bireh near the modern city of Ramallah. El-Bireh is at the intersection of several other highways and could well be ancient Bethel (see Livingston, Bible and Spade, Fall 1998).
The Arabic name for the small hilltop on the northern border of Benjamin at the junction of the three roads is Khirbet el-Maqatir. ABR’s Bryant Wood has directed excavations here, and believes it is the site of ancient Ai (see Bible and Spade. Winter and Fall 1999), the outpost captured by Joshua after he defeated Jericho (Jos 7 and 8).
Beyond the Philistines, the Benjamin plateau has been the focus of military activity for millennia. The Assyrians conquered the northern kingdom of Israel about 722 BC and made a border between their province of Samaria and the nation of Judah along the same roads, ridges and valleys of northern Benjamin. Both Israel to the north and Judah to the south occupied Benjamin at various times when there was a need to establish a geographical buffer between them. The Romans recognized the area’s importance,
A bullet and cartridge case found in the ABR excavation at Khirbet el-Maqatir. The author notes Maqatir’s strategic location in both ancient and modern times.
and improved roads leading to and through it so they could quickly and efficiently support their garrisons in the province. In AD 1899, while campaigning near Gaza, Napoleon was asked if he was going to conquer Jerusalem. The famous French tactician declined the opportunity, declaring the ascents from the Mediterranean coast into the land of Benjamin were too dangerous and he did not want to hazard his army there (Herzog and Gihon 1997: 215).
Recent military activity on the Benjamin plateau can be verified by the 20th century AD ordnance recovered by the ABR excavation. The slopes of Khirbet el-Maqatir have numerous foxholes and fighting positions dug into the rocky ground which indicate the hill may have served as a mortar, tank or light artillery, position. From its height, one can easily see Jerusalem to the south, El-Bireh (Bethel?) to the west and the Michmash area to the southeast. Just a few hundred yards north is the hill Jebel Abu Ammar, from which one has a commanding view in all directions.
Khirbet el-Maqatir’s geographical distinctions and location along Benjamin’s northern border has resulted in the little hill
BSP 13:1 (Winter 2000) p. 8
seeing considerable military action through the centuries. That it sits on a ridge line marking the border between societies, coupled with the historical events that occurred around it, attest to the site’s strategic importance. Evidence of the conflicts that have swirled around the hill has been recovered in ABR’s excavation. From Late Bronze Age sling stones (about 1400 BC) to 20th century AD rifle cartridges and bullets, they have been found within yards of each other.
The Land of Benjamin Today
Today, Khirbet el-Maqatir’s critical location places it in the center of another dispute. It is part of the so-called “West Bank,” the region occupied by Israel following the 1967 War. Recent negotiations (September 1995) between the Palestinian Authority and Israel have resulted in dividing the West Bank into three “zones.” In Zone A the Palestinian Authority has responsibility for civil administration and security. In Zone B the Palestinian Authority is responsible for civil administration, while Israel oversees security matters. Zone C is exclusively Israeli controlled. As might be expected, based on its location and history, Khirbet el-Maqatir is in Zone C. The strategic importance of the Benjamin plateau continues with new players and different scenarios.
The land of Benjamin is unique in Israel’s topography and geography, shaping the events of history. Understanding the plateau’s significance is important for Bible students. This is where patriarchs camped, prophets lived, kings reigned, Jesus walked, the disciples taught, Crusaders fought, and modern armies campaigned. The tiny hill of Khirbet el-Maqatir on Benjamin’s northern border has experienced most of that history. Much of that history still lies buried under the surface. Bryant Wood and ABR are working to uncover that history with an emphasis on understanding the Biblical site of Ai. Evidence uncovered to date is encouraging, and you can follow the excitement of the search in future issues of Bible and Spade.
Bibliography
von Clausewitz, C.
1976 On War, ed. and trans. by M. Howard and P. Paret. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Falls, C.
1930 Military Operations in Egypt & Palestine: From June 1917 to the End of the War, vol. 2. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office.
Gilbert V.
1934 Romance of the Last Crusade. New York: Appleton-Century.
Herzog, C. and Gihon, M.
1997 Battles of the Bible, 2nd ed. Mechanicsburg PA: Stockpile Books.
Livingston, D. P.
1970 Location of Biblical Bethel and Ai Reconsidered. The Westminster Theological Journal 33:20–44.
1971 Traditional Site of Bethel Questioned. The Westminster Theological Journal 34: 39–50.
1998 Locating Biblical Bethel. Bible and Spade 11: 77–84.
Massey, W. T.
1920 Allenby’s Final Triumph. New York: E. P. Dutton
Monson, J. M.
1998 Regions on the Run: Introductory Map Studies in the Land of the Bible. Rockford IL: Biblical Backgrounds.
Rasmussen, C. G.
1998 NIV Atlas of the Bible. Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan.
Smith, G. A.
1966 The Historical Geography of the Holy Land, rev. 1931. Great Britain: Fontana Library Edition, Lord Balerno.
Wood, B. G.
1999a The Search for Ai: Excavations at Kh. el-Maqatir. Bible and Spade 12: 21–30.
1999b Beth Aven: A Scholarly Conundrum. Bible and Spade 12:101–108.
1999c Kh. el-Maqatir 1999 Dig Report. Bible and Spade 12: 109–14.
Notes
1. An excellent discussion of Allenby’s classic 1917–1918 military deception operation is in Massey (1920), pp. 95–118. The official British report is in Falls (1930), vol. 2, pp. 461–67.
2. See, for example, Wood 1999a and 1999c.
3. This identification is controversial; however, D. Livingston has persuasively argued that the traditional site for Bethel at Beitin has been misidentified, and Bethel is modern El-Bireh. This author agrees with Livingston that ancient Bethel was located at modern El-Bireh (Livingston 1970, 1971, 1998) and with Wood who argued that modern Beitin is the site of ancient Beth Aven (Wood 1999b).