A place identified since the nineteenth century
Shiloh is commonly identified with Khirbet Seilun (Tel Shiloh), in the central hill country north of Bethel. Edward Robinson proposed the identification in 1838, and the location matches Judges 21:19.
Biblical context · Approved edition
Shiloh and the ark in the days of the judges
The tent of meeting stood at Shiloh during the period of the judges. There Hannah prayed, there Samuel grew up, and from there the ark went out to the battle in which it was captured. We will first observe the sacred text and then the site of Khirbet Seilun, its excavations and the debate about where the Tabernacle stood.
By the end: you will be able to distinguish what the sacred text affirms, what the excavations at Shiloh show and what remains a proposal about the location of the sanctuary.
- Passage
- 1 Samuel 1:1–3 and 3:1–4:11, with Joshua 18:1
- Central question
- What does the account affirm about Shiloh and the ark, and what can the excavations at Tel Shiloh contribute?
- Estimated reading time
- 10–12 minutes
- Status
- Approved for publication · version 1.0
First, look at the sacred text
Observe before reconstructing
Read Joshua 18:1, 1 Samuel 1:1–3 and 1 Samuel 3:1–4:11 and follow the movement of the account: what is set up at Shiloh, who goes there, how does God speak to Samuel and what happens to the ark?
Compare with a guided observation
| Element | What the passage tells us |
|---|---|
| The sanctuary | The whole congregation of Israel assembles at Shiloh and sets up the tent of meeting there (Joshua 18:1). |
| The pilgrimage | Every year Elkanah goes up from his city to worship and sacrifice at Shiloh, where Hophni and Phinehas, the sons of Eli, serve as priests (1 Samuel 1:3). |
| Hannah’s prayer | Hannah prays in bitterness before the Lord and vows to dedicate to him the son she asks for; later she gives Samuel to serve at Shiloh (1:9–11, 24–28). |
| A time of silence | The word of the Lord was rare; the lamp of God had not yet gone out, and Samuel was lying down in the temple, where the ark was (3:1–3). |
| The call | The Lord calls Samuel and speaks to him; Samuel grows, none of his words fall to the ground, and the Lord appears again at Shiloh (3:10, 19–21). |
| The ark in battle | After a defeat by the Philistines, the elders bring the ark from Shiloh; Israel is defeated again, the ark is taken and Hophni and Phinehas die (4:3–11). |
| Ichabod | Eli’s daughter-in-law names her son Ichabod, saying, “The glory has departed from Israel,” because the ark of God has been taken (4:21–22). |
The text calls the sanctuary at Shiloh both the “house” or “temple” of the Lord, with doors and a doorpost (1:9; 3:3, 15), and the “tent of meeting” (2:22). It does not say where in the town it stood or narrate what happened to Shiloh after the battle; Psalm 78:60 and Jeremiah 7:12–14 recall that.
Degrees of certainty
What can be recognized and what remains open
Archaeology helps when three things are kept apart: the site that can be studied, the excavators’ interpretations and the sanctuary Scripture speaks of.
An Iron Age I village destroyed by fire
The Danish excavations (1926–1932) and those of Israel Finkelstein (1981–1984) documented pillared buildings with large storage jars, destroyed in a fierce fire. Many date that destruction to around the middle of the eleventh century BC and link it with the Philistine war of 1 Samuel 4.
Where did the Tabernacle stand?
The summit of the hill, the northern terrace or scarp and, more recently, structures uncovered by the ABR team have all been proposed. None of these proposals is proven: a tent of skins and fabric leaves hardly any trace, and the summit was heavily disturbed by later building.
How to interpret the cultic finds
The altar corners of 2019, the animal bones and the cultic vessels are interpreted in different ways. ABR links them with the Tabernacle; other archaeologists ask for full publication before conclusions are drawn. When Israel arrived at Shiloh is also debated, depending on the date given to the Exodus.
Three complementary lenses
How to read the account and the site
These three lenses do not compete with each other: they answer different questions and must keep different degrees of certainty.
Theological reading: prayer, the word and the departing glory
What it contributes
It brings to the fore that God hears the prayer of a humiliated woman, speaks again through Samuel in a time of silence and refuses to be manipulated: the ark carried into battle like a charm does not guarantee victory.
Which details it helps explain
Hannah’s prayer and vow (1 Samuel 1:10–11), the lamp that had not yet gone out (3:3), Samuel’s call (3:10) and the name Ichabod (4:21–22). Psalm 78:60 says that God “forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh”, and Jeremiah 7:12–14 holds up Shiloh as a warning to those who trusted in the temple in Jerusalem.
Which limit must remain
The theological reading does not indicate where on the hill the sanctuary stood or date its destruction.
Related readings: source 1.
Tel Shiloh: the village of Eli’s time
What it contributes
It places the account in a concrete location: a hill in the hill country of Ephraim, surrounded by fertile valleys, which was Israel’s central sanctuary in the twelfth and eleventh centuries BC and was destroyed around 1050 BC.
Which details it helps explain
A walled Canaanite town of the Middle Bronze Age; a large deposit of cultic animal bones documented by Finkelstein; in Iron Age I, pillared buildings with collared-rim jars, destroyed by fire; and later occupation down to Roman, Byzantine and medieval times. The site was excavated by a Danish expedition (1926–1932, led by Hans Kjær, and 1963), by Israel Finkelstein (1981–1984) and, since 2017, by the Associates for Biblical Research under the direction of Scott Stripling.
Which limit must remain
The remains show a real village destroyed by fire, but they bear no written name linking them to Eli, to Samuel or to the battle of Ebenezer.
Related readings: source 1 and source 2 and source 3 and source 4.
The site of the Tabernacle: proposals and debate
What it contributes
It explains why there are several proposals. Since the nineteenth century Charles Wilson and others have pointed to a level terrace on the northern scarp; ABR considers the summit or the northern slope and, since 2017, has presented finds that it links with the sanctuary.
Which details it helps explain
In 2019 three corners of a horned altar came to light beside a monumental Iron Age building: one had been reused in a Roman wall and another lay in a destruction layer. There are also ceramic pomegranates, a cultic chalice, storage jars and many animal bones, with very few pig bones in the Israelite levels. The archaeologist Aren Maeir cautions that most of this has not been published in detail and that neither the ark nor the Tabernacle has been found.
Which limit must remain
These proposals are one team’s interpretations, disputed by other specialists: no location of the Tabernacle has been demonstrated.
Related readings: source 5 and source 6 and source 7 and source 8.
Comparison of lenses
What each approach answers and leaves unanswered
| Approach | Basis | Main contribution | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Theological reading | The sequence and motives of 1 Samuel 1–4, with Psalm 78 and Jeremiah 7. | Shows God who hears, calls and refuses to be manipulated. | Does not locate the sanctuary or date its destruction. |
| Tel Shiloh | The Danish, Finkelstein and ABR excavations. | Gives the account a real setting and documents a village destroyed by fire. | The remains do not name the people in the account. |
| Site of the Tabernacle | Northern terrace, summit, altar corners and animal bones. | Explains the current proposals and their arguments. | No location is proven and the finds are disputed. |
Criterion: the sacred text, the data from the site and the proposals about the sanctuary are presented as different levels of evidence.
What you can now recognize
What archaeology contributes to the Shiloh account
Khirbet Seilun was an Iron Age I village with large storerooms that ended in destruction by fire, and its identification with Shiloh is widely accepted. But neither the exact site of the Tabernacle nor the interpretation of the recent cultic finds is settled, so they should be presented as proposals, not as proven discoveries.
The centre of the account lies in what God does: he hears Hannah, speaks to Samuel and will not be used as a charm. When the glory departs from Shiloh, the problem is not the place but the unfaithfulness of the people. Archaeology illuminates the setting; the sacred text defines the message.
Return to the sacred text
What does this add to my reading?
1. A rare word
According to 1 Samuel 3:1–10, what was the spiritual situation at Shiloh, and how does Samuel respond once he understands who is calling him?
See a guided answer
The word of the Lord was rare and visions were not frequent, but “the lamp of God” had not yet gone out. Guided by Eli, Samuel answers: “Speak, for your servant hears.” The account presents the call as a new beginning that depends on God’s initiative.
2. Where did the glory go?
In 1 Samuel 4:21–22, what does the name Ichabod mean, and how is it related to the loss of the ark?
Return to 1 Samuel 4:21–22See a guided answer
Ichabod can be understood as “Where is the glory?” or “No glory”. His mother explains it: “The glory has departed from Israel,” because the ark has been taken. Psalm 78:60–61 and Jeremiah 7:12–14 read that moment as judgement: God forsook Shiloh because of his people’s unfaithfulness.
Result of the journey: you can now recognize the central message of the account, place it prudently at the site of Tel Shiloh and explain fairly why the location of the Tabernacle is still debated.
Key terms
Brief glossary
- Khirbet Seilun / Tel Shiloh
- Site in the central hill country, north of Bethel, commonly identified with biblical Shiloh.
- Ichabod
- Name of Eli’s grandson (1 Samuel 4:21); understood as “Where is the glory?” or “No glory”.
- Iron Age I
- Archaeological period of roughly 1200–1000 BC; broadly corresponds to the period of the judges.
- Collared-rim jar
- Large storage vessel typical of the hill country in Iron Age I; several complete examples were found at Shiloh.
- Horns of the altar
- Projections at the four corners of an altar (Exodus 27:2); three fragments of this kind were found at Shiloh in 2019.
Editorial record
Scope and review
- Responsible person
- Jose A Bejarano V
- Version
- 1.0 · trilingual edition
- Last reviewed
- Approved for publication by the responsible editor on 27 September 2026
- Method
- A guided reading that distinguishes the sacred text, the historical and archaeological context and theological interpretations.
About the images: the illustrations are conceptual visual aids; they do not constitute historical, archaeological or geographical evidence.
Sources for further study
Works consulted
- Encyclopaedia Britannica: “Shiloh” — Shiloh as Israel’s central sanctuary in the period of the judges (twelfth–eleventh centuries BC) and its destruction around 1050 BC.
- Israel Finkelstein, Biblical Archaeology Review (1986): “Shiloh Yields Some, But Not All, of Its Secrets” — the director of the 1981–1984 excavations sums up what they clarified and what they left open.
- I. Finkelstein et al., Tel Aviv 12 (1985): “Excavations at Shiloh 1981–1984: Preliminary Report” — academic report: the Danish expedition, the Iron Age I pillared buildings, the storage jars and the fire.
- Associates for Biblical Research: “Research and Reports on Shiloh” — history of the excavations (Danish, Finkelstein, ABR since 2017) and a summary of the finds.
- Scott Stripling y Suzanne Lattimer, Popular Archaeology (2017): “Go Now to Shiloh” — introduction to the ABR project, the northern scarp proposal and the open questions.
- Associates for Biblical Research: “Horns of an Ancient Altar Discovered at Shiloh, Israel” — the three altar corners found in 2019 and the context in which they appeared.
- The Times of Israel (2020): “At Shiloh, archaeologist finds artifacts hinting at biblical Tabernacle” — interview with Scott Stripling on animal bones, ceramic pomegranates and the possible site of the Tabernacle.
- Aren M. Maeir (Universidad Bar-Ilan), blog del proyecto de Tell es-Safi/Gath (2026): “No! The ark of the covenant, or the Tabernacle, have NOT been found at Shiloh” — an archaeologist’s critical assessment of how the Shiloh finds have been presented.