Brit-Am Research Sources
(August 11, 2020, 21 Av, 5780)
Contents:
1. Bronze age tin from Israeli shipwrecks was mined in Britain
2. Isotope systematics and chemical composition of tin ingots from Mochlos (Crete) and other Late Bronze Age sites in the eastern Mediterranean Sea: An ultimate key to tin provenance?
3. The Zionism Of Winston Churchill by Saul Jay Singer
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1. Bronze age tin from Israeli shipwrecks was mined in Britain
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/bronze-age-tin-from-israeli-shipwrecks-was-mined-in-britain/4010404.article
BY TOM METCALFE, 26 SEPTEMBER 2019
Extracts:
Ingots of tin found in bronze age shipwrecks off the coast of Israel were smelted in the south-west of England, suggesting an ancient trade route existed between the two regions.
The researchers analysed tin and lead isotopes and trace elements in 27 ingots from archaeological sites in Israel, Turkey and the Greek island of Crete, dating from about 3200 years ago. The ancient tin, formed into bars and plates, was probably destined for making bronze, a technology that powerfully influenced the development of ancient cultures. Many of the ingots were recovered from ancient shipwrecks, including a wreck off the Carmel coast, a few miles south of Haifa in Israel, and two wrecks just off of Haifa itself.
The research suggests that the ore for the ingots was mined in Europe, and not in central Asia as previously thought, and that ancient tin ore mines in Devon and Cornwall are their likely source. 'The lead and the tin isotope composition of the Israeli tin match the isotope systematics of British tin ores,' explained the lead author of the study, Daniel Berger from the Curt Engelhorn Centre for Archaeometry in Germany.
The chemical composition of the Israeli ingots also matched tin ingots found in a UK bronze age shipwreck near Salcombe in Devon, which were almost certainly smelted from ores mined nearby, Berger tells Chemistry World. The team found that the tin ore in the ingots formed about 291 million years ago - ruling out sources in Anatolia, central Asia and Egypt, which formed much earlier or later. But the timing matches tin ores found in Europe. Berger adds that the ingots found in Crete and Turkey could have a different provenance to the Israeli ingots, but extensive corrosion made definite conclusions impossible.
Making bronze lifted humanity out of the stone age. There was also a relatively brief copper age before ancient metalworkers learned that adding tin to copper formed bronze, a much harder and stronger metal. Bronze was extensively used in the ancient near east from about 5300 years ago, for weapons, tools, jewellery and objects like pots and cups.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2. Isotope systematics and chemical composition of tin ingots from Mochlos (Crete) and other Late Bronze Age sites in the eastern Mediterranean Sea: An ultimate key to tin provenance?
D Berger et al, PLoS One, 2019, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218326
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218326
Extracts:
Abstract
The origin of the tin used for the production of bronze in the Eurasian Bronze Age is still one of the mysteries in prehistoric archaeology. In the past, numerous studies were carried out on archaeological bronze and tin objects with the aim of determining the sources of tin, but all failed to find suitable fingerprints. In this paper we investigate a set of 27 tin ingots from well-known sites in the eastern Mediterranean Sea (Mochlos, Uluburun, Hishuley Carmel, Kfar Samir south, Haifa) that had been the subject of previous archaeological and archaeometallurgical research. By using a combined approach of tin and lead isotopes together with trace elements it is possible to narrow down the potential sources of tin for the first time. The strongly radiogenic composition of lead in the tin ingots from Israel allows the calculation of a geological model age of the parental tin ores of 291 - 17 Ma. This theoretical formation age excludes Anatolian, central Asian and Egyptian tin deposits as tin sources since they formed either much earlier or later. On the other hand, European tin deposits of the Variscan orogeny agree well with this time span so that an origin from European deposits is suggested. With the help of the tin isotope composition and the trace elements of the objects it is further possible to exclude many tin resources from the European continent and, considering the current state of knowledge and the available data, to conclude that Cornish tin mines are the most likely suppliers for the 13th - 12th centuries tin ingots from Israel. Even though a different provenance seems to be suggested for the tin from Mochlos and Uluburun by the actual data, these findings are of great importance for the archaeological interpretation of the trade routes and the circulation of tin during the Late Bronze Age. They demonstrate that the trade networks between the eastern Mediterranean and some place in the east that are assumed for the first half of the 2nd millennium BCE (as indicated by textual evidence from Kaltepe/Kane, and Mari) did not exist in the same way towards the last quarter of the millennium.
The latter also applies to a group of 15 tin ingots recovered in four campaigns from an alleged shipwreck at the coast of Hishuley Carmel, Israel (Figs 1 and 4A), together with two oxhide copper ingots and several stone anchors [23-27]. Because the archaeological context was missing, the exact dating of the finds is uncertain, but 'Cypro-Minoan' symbols inscribed on the surface of several ingots suggest a LBA date of around 1300 BCE [23-24; 26]. For the same reason, Maddin et al. [21] and Stech-Wheeler et al. [28] assigned two rectangular tin ingots found off the Israeli coast near Haifa to the LBA (Fig 4B, 8251 and 8252). Their hypothesis was questioned by Artzy [29], however, who reported on two very similar ingots from Israel (in the literature the place where they were found is mistakenly called Dor or Atlit) with 'Cypro-Minoan' inscriptions (Fig 4B, CMS 6). The upper surface of one of the ingots carries the conjectured head of Arethusa (a Greek fountain goddess); therefore, in her opinion, all four objects should be dated to the 5th century BCE. However, careful inspection on the Arethusa head by one of the authors (EG) suggested that this image is a random metal spill and was not produced on purpose. In addition, recent investigations (unpublished information) proved the four ingots to belong to the same assemblage. They are the remains of a set of originally 30 rectangular tin ingots (with trapezoidal cross section) that was found in the 1970s by a fisherman (Adib Shehade) offshore Kfar Samir, Israel (Table 1) [30]... Further inquiries revealed that the ingots were retrieved some 60 metres north of another underwater site (the Kfar Samir north), which yielded several broken copper (oxhide) and lead ingots [25]. ...
(a) Tin ingots from Hishuley Carmel, part of them with Cypro-Minoan marks; numbering corresponds to the original sample designation in Table 3. (b) Three out of 30 tin ingots from Haifa with Cypro-Minoan inscriptions with their original label from the literature. Scale applies to all ingots on the figure (photos: E. Galili, Fig 4A modified and reprinted from [26] under a CC BY license, with permission from the International Journal of Nautical Archaeology, original copyright 2013).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218326.g004
In addition to these 45 raw products, another ten tin ingots exist from an off-shore site near Kfar Samir in Israel (called Kfar Samir south). They are also thought to belong to the LBA, and to date from ca. 14th -13th century BCE [25; 27; 34]. They were salvaged together with Egyptian stone anchors, bronze objects, a bronze sickle sword and five lead ingots during an underwater survey of a shipwreck just 900 metres north of the Hishuley Carmel and 550 metres south of the 'Haifa' site (Fig 1). As with the anchors, some of the ingots have inscriptions. The cargo assemblage of this wreck is assumed to be of Egyptian provenance [34], whereas the Hishuley Carmel objects may be associated with Cyprus or the Syro-Palestinian coast [24, 35]. In summary, presently some 215 tin ingots weighing almost one and a half tons are known from BA or presumed BA contexts. In this paper we investigate this material group with the most modern scientific facilities in order to elucidate their history and the provenance of the tin.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
3. The Zionism Of Winston Churchill
by
Saul Jay Singer
https://www.jewishpress.com/sections/features/features-on-jewish-world/the-zionism-of-winston-churchill/2020/07/22/
Extracts:
After conquering the Ottoman Turks in Eretz Yisrael, Britain was awarded the Mandate for Palestine by the League of Nations. Pursuant to that award, it appointed Herbert Samuel (1870-1963) as the first High Commissioner of Palestine (1920-25), making him the first Jew to rule the Land of Israel in 2,000 years.
In that capacity, he extended an invitation to Winston Churchill (1874-1965), then the United Kingdom's Colonial Secretary, to visit Eretz Yisrael to see the land and discuss developing problems there, particularly the Arab desire to deport all Jews.
During his (only) visit to Eretz Yisrael, Churchill also participated in a palm tree-planting ceremony at the new Hebrew University in Jerusalem at which Chief Rabbis Avraham Isaac Hacohen Kook and Yaakov Meir presented him with a Torah scroll. ...Speaking on that occasion, he stated:
# Personally, my heart is full of sympathy for Zionism. This sympathy has existed for a long time, since 12 years ago, when I was in contact with the Manchester Jews. I believe that the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine will be a blessing to the whole world, a blessing to the Jewish race scattered all around the world, and a blessing to Great Britain. I firmly believe that it will be a blessing also to the inhabitants of this country without distinction of race and religion. #
Churchill, who saw the dark side of extremism within Islam and was already distrustful of Arab nationalism, could not help but contrast the overwhelming love extended to him by Jewish throngs everywhere he went with the hostility with which he was received by the Arabs, who held violent demonstrations against the British Mandate and screamed calls to murder Jews.
En route to Lydda after leaving Jerusalem, Churchill visited Tel Aviv and was most impressed by what he observed. He also visited the city of Rishon LeZion, about which he later effusively wrote:
# From the most inhospitable soil, surrounded on every side by barrenness and the most miserable form of cultivation, I was driven into a fertile and thriving country estate where the scanty soil gave place to good crops and cultivation, and then vineyards and finally to the most beautiful, luxurious orange groves, all created in 20 or 30 years by the exertions of the Jewish community who live there."
# I defy anybody, after seeing work of this kind, achieved by so much labor, effort and skill, to say that the British Government, having taken up the position it has, could cast it all aside and leave it to be rudely and brutally overturned by the incursion of a fanatical attack by the Arab population from outside.
As Colonial Secretary (1921-22), Churchill was responsible for determining the future status of the Jewish national home in Eretz Yisrael, and after inspecting the agrarian, technological, and urban successes of the Zionist enterprise throughout the land during his visit there, he became convinced that the establishment of a Jewish state had great value not only to Britain, but to civilization in general.
In a historic rejoinder to Musa Kazim el Husseini, the former mayor of Jerusalem, a relative of the Jew-hating Mufti Haj-Amin el-Husseini, and a prominent Arab leader, Churchill wrote:
# You have asked me in the first place to repudiate the Balfour Declaration and to veto immigration of Jews into Palestine. It is not in my power to do so, nor, if it were in my power, would it be my wish. The British Government have passed their word, by the mouth of Mr. Balfour, that they will view with favor the establishment of a National Home for Jews in Palestine, and that inevitably involves the immigration of Jews into the country. Moreover, it is manifestly right that the Jews, who are scattered all over the world, should have a national center and a National Home where some of them may be reunited. And where else could that be but in this land of Palestine, with which for more than 3,000 years they have been intimately and profoundly associated? We think it will be good for the world, good for the Jews and good for the British Empire. #
# The British Government have promised that what is called the Zionist movement shall have a fair chance in this country, and the British Government will do what is necessary to secure that fair chance. You can see with your own eyes in many parts of this country the work which has already been done by Jewish colonies; how sandy wastes have been reclaimed and thriving farms and orangeries planted in their stead.#
In his 1921 'Report on the Middle East Conference,' Churchill predicted that if the Jews continue their work in building a Jewish state, Eretz Yisrael would become 'the biblical promised land, a land flowing with milk and honey, in which sufferers of all races and religions will find a rest from their sufferings.'
Many British parliamentarians, objecting to Churchill's strong Zionist positions, endeavored to rescind the Balfour Declaration. In 1922, some two-thirds of the House of Lords voted for rescission, declaring that a Jewish homeland was unacceptable 'to the sentiments and wishes of the great majority of the people of Palestine.'
In a speech before the House of Commons on July 4, 1922, which many critics characterize as one of the celebrated orator's greatest speeches, Churchill passionately argued the Zionist cause, concluding, 'If, over the portals of the new Jerusalem, you are going to inscribe the legend, 'No Israelite need apply,' then I hope the House will permit me to confine my attention exclusively to Irish matters.'
Due to Churchill's efforts, the House of Commons voted overwhelmingly, by a vote of 292-35, to set aside the decision of the House of Lords and to continue British policy as per the Balfour declaration.
Characterizing Zionism as 'an inspiring movement' and describing himself as 'an old Zionist,' Churchill expended efforts on behalf of Jews and Israel that were exceptional, sincere, and persistent, leaving behind a long record of activism for Jewish causes.
As early as 1904, he promoted the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Eretz Yisrael as the only solution to Russian pogroms against Jews. Running for a seat from Manchester North West, which had a large Jewish immigrant population, Churchill became intimately familiar with Jewish interests and formed a strong bond with British Jews.
He attacked his government for its Aliens Bill, which sought to severely limit Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe, and he was later a lone voice taking on virtually his entire government in opposing Britain's infamous White Paper (1939). he called it 'a plain breach of a solemn obligation' which greatly reduced the number of Jews permitted to immigrate to Eretz Yisrael.
As prime minister of England during World War II, Churchill battled anti-Zionist British officials and frequently intervened to ease the escape of Jewish refugees from Europe and to allow those reaching Eretz Yisrael to remain there. Among other things, he instructed Royal Navy vessels not to intercept ships suspected of bringing in illegal Jewish immigrants (1939-40); successfully pressured the Franco regime to reopen its border to Jewish refugees fleeing the Reich (April 1943); and indefatigably fought hostility within the British military establishment to create the Jewish Brigade (1944).
He actively urged FDR to support the creation of a Jewish state in Eretz Yisrael, reminding him, 'I am strongly wedded to the Zionist policy, of which I was one of the authors.'
After the war, Churchill sought to arm Jews in Eretz Yisrael against the Arabs, and he worked hard to fashion a postwar regional settlement that would include a Zionist state, which he was prepared to impose on the Palestinian Arabs by force, if necessary. Even after the bombing of the King David Hotel on July 22, 1946, which he unambiguously condemned, he argued that British promises had generated great optimism amongst the Jews of Eretz Yisrael and that the government's betrayal had understandably caused great resentment.
His faith in the future of a Zionist state bordered on the messianic, as he declared 'Jerusalem must be the [Jews'] only ultimate goal. That it will someday be achieved is one of the few certainties of the future.'
After Israel's War of Independence, Churchill pronounced the Jewish state a great event in world history and sought to push the British government to adopt a more pro-Israel foreign policy. Characterizing Jews as 'the sons of the prophets dwelling in Zion,' he considered the establishment of Israel as 'one of the most hopeful and encouraging adventures of the 20th century.'
When the British government initially refused to recognize Israel, Churchill bitterly criticized it in a speech to the House of Commons in which he maintained that 'the coming into being of a Jewish State in Palestine is an event in world history to be viewed in the perspective not of a generation or a century, but in the perspective of a thousand, two thousand or even three thousand years.'