Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan: Volume 2: The Iron Age Artefacts (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

EXCAVATIONS AT TALL JAWA, JORDAN CULTURE AND HISTORY OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST EDITED BY B. HALPERN, M. H. E. WEIPPER...

Author: P. M. Michèle Daviau | Paul-Eugène Dion | David Hemsworth | Neil Mirau | David S. Reese

237 downloads 910 Views 3MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

EXCAVATIONS AT TALL JAWA, JORDAN

CULTURE AND HISTORY OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST EDITED BY

B. HALPERN, M. H. E. WEIPPERT TH. P.J. VAN DEN HOUT, I. WINTER VOLUME 11/2

EXCAVATIONS AT TALL JAWA, JORDAN Volume II: The Iron Age Artefacts BY

P.M. MICHÈLE DAVIAU WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY

PAUL–EUGÈNE DION, DAVID HEMSWORTH, NEIL MIRAU & DAVID S. REESE

BRILL LEIDEN BOSTON • KÖLN 2002 •

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Daviau. Paulette M. Michèle: Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan / by P.M. Michèle Daviau. With contributions by Paul-Eugène Dion ..... – Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : Brill Vol. 2 The iron age artefacts. – 2002 (Culture and history of the ancient Near East ; Vol. 11) ISBN 90-04-12363-6

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data also available

ISSN 1566-2055 ISBN 90 04 12363 6 © Copyright 2002 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands

Frontispiece

title

Seated female figurine (TJ 1119), painted ceramic.

iii

This page intentionally left blank

title

v

CONTENTS Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii List of Illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xviii List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxiii Chapter 1. The Site and Its Artefacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Excavations at Tall Jawa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Excavation Strategy and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Artefacts of Daily Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 1 2 3 4 6

Chapter 2. Artefact Classification and Typology . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Registration Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Classification System for the Tall Jawa Objects . . . . . . . Annotation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Curating the Artefacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Artefact Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. Adornment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Jewellery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. club-shaped bone pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. shell pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. glycymeris pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. conch shell pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. small anchor-shaped pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. large anchor-shaped pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. rectangular limestone pendants . . . . . . . . . . . 4. natural stone pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d. reworked ceramic pendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. irregularly-shaped ceramic pendants . . . . . . . 2. Beads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. disc-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. spherical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19 19 20 20 22 23 23 23 23 26 26 27 27 30 30 30 31 32 32 32 33 33 34 34 35

vi

contents

3. barrel-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4. biconical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 5. cylindrical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 b. glass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 1. spherical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2. cylindrical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 c. faience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 d. shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 1. cowries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2. conus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3. fossil sea urchin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 3. Earrings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 a. lunate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 b. mulberry cluster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 4. Fibulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 a. bow-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 1. ribbed bow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2. rivetted flat bow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 b. violin bow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 5. Rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 B. Cosmetic Related Artefacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 1. Cosmetic Dishes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 a. tridacna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 b. aspatharia/unio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 2. Cosmetic Palettes and Mortars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 II. Art and Religious Symbolism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 A. Figurative Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 1. Anthropomorphic Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 a. female figurines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 1. seated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 2. standing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 a. female figurines (upper torso) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 b. naked female figurines (lower torso) . . . . . . . 59 3. pillar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 a. pillar with figure in relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 b. unidentified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 4. figurine moulds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 b. male figurines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 1. ceramic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 2. stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

contents 3. unidentified . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. appliqués . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Zoomorphic figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. figurines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. protome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. spouted vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. headless body fragments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. legs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Decorative Fragments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Model Shrines: wall and façade fragments . . . . . . . . . 2. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Capitals and attachments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III. Communication and Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Inscribed Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Ostraca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Seals ..................................... 1. Stamp Seals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. scarabs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. scaraboids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Cylinder Seals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Coins ..................................... D. Scale Weights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. Craft and Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Piercing and Drilling Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Awls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Bow drill bits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Bow drill sockets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. pestle-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. roller-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Cutting Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Iron knife blades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Lithic tools and weapons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. blades and flakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Scraping Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Scrapers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Chisels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii

68 69 69 70 71 73 73 78 79 80 80 82 82 84 84 84 85 85 85 87 89 89 89 90 91 91 92 93 93 94 95 95 97 97 98 98 98 99 99 99

viii

contents

D. Sharpening Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Whetstones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E. Fashioning Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Pecking stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Grinding and Crushing Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. industrial grinders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. rectangular . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. oval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. anchor-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. industrial millstones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. large pounders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d. oversize quern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Polishing Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. small polishing stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. rectangular . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. irregularly-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. medium size polishing stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Burnishing Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. shells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. glycymeris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. other shells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F. Natural resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Stone Raw Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Shells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Metal resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. Potter’s wheel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Lower potter’s wheels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Upper potter’s wheels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. Cultic or High Status Containers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Ground Stone Bowls and Trays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Round and Oval Bowls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. flat base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. round base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. disc base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d. ring base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e. low-footed tripod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Rectangular Stone Trays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Large Stone Tray/Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

101 101 102 102 103 103 103 104 104 104 104 105 106 106 106 107 107 108 108 108 108 108 109 110 110 111 111 112 112 114 116 116 117 117 117 117 118 119 120 121

contents C. Alabaster Jug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI. Food Processing Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Crushing Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Mortars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. small mortars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. flat/rounded base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. tripod foot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. low foot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. high foot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. oval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. small spouted mortars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. medium mortars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. flat/rounded base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. semi-round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. oval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. rectangular . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. refashioned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. trapezoidal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d. large mortars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. boulder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. oval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. triangular . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Pestles ..................................... a. conical pestles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. truncated cone pestles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. cylindrical pestles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d. anchor-shaped pestles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. small . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. medium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e. pyramidal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. small . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. large . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f. irregularly-shaped pestles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Grinding Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Hand Grinders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ix

122 122 124 124 125 125 125 127 127 128 128 129 129 130 130 131 131 132 132 132 133 134 134 134 135 136 136 137 138 139 140 140 141 141 141 142 142 143 143 144

x

contents

b. oval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. square/rectangular . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. miniature grinders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. cuboid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. loaf-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. standard size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d. anchor-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e. irregularly-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f. uniquely-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Loaf-shaped Millstones: upper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. half oval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. hemispherical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. trapezoidal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d. triangular . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Loaf-shaped Millstones: lower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Saddle Querns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Hammering Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Pounders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. miniature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. standard size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Working Surfaces/Anvils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D. Stone Troughs/Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. small troughs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. basins/bowls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. large limestone basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII. Leisure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Toys ........................................ 1. The Buzz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Gaming Pieces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Astragali . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Ceramic gaming pieces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. undecorated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. decorated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Gaming Boards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII. Military Defence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Arrowheads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Lanceolate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Elliptical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Linear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Lozenge-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Pointed ovate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

145 145 146 146 146 146 148 148 149 149 150 151 152 152 153 153 155 155 157 157 159 160 160 161 161 162 162 162 164 164 165 165 166 166 167 167 169 170 170 171 172

contents 6. Triangular . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Javelin Points. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX. Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Jar Stoppers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Stone and Ceramic Stoppers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. mushroom-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. upright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. inverted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. lentil-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. disc-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Ceramic Stoppers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. Reworked Body Sherds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. Reworked Body Sherds with Handle . . . . . . . . . . . c. Reworked Base Sherds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X. Textile Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Spinning Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Spindles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. undecorated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. decorated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Spindle Whorls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. bone/ivory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. convex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. plano-convex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. cylindrical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. hemispherical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Weaving Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Loom Weights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a. doughnut-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. cylindrical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. anchor-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d. ring-shaped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Spatulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Sewing Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Needles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI. Weighing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Unperforated Grooved Weights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Perforated Weights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Small stone rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Medium and large rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

xi

173 173 173 174 175 175 175 176 176 176 177 178 179 179 180 180 180 181 182 183 184 188 189 189 190 190 190 191 191 194 196 196 197 198 201 201 201 202 202 203 204

xii

contents

a. medium basalt rings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b. large limestone rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Limestone discs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Small discs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Medium and large discs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D. Tether stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Natural stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Slab-shaped stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XII. Miscellaneous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Small Finds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Bone objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Stone objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Large Finds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Limestone object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Basalt object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

204 205 206 207 207 208 209 209 210 210 210 210 211 211 211

Chapter 3. The Ostracon from Building 800 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 Paul-Eugène Dion Chapter 4. Shells and Fossils from Tall Jawa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 David S. Reese Chapter 5. Analysis of Iron Projectile Points from Tall Jawa 292 Neil A. Mirau Chapter 6. Functional Analysis of Food Preparation Tools: The Use of Chert Spheroids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 P. M. Michèle Daviau Chapter 7. Implications for Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314 P. M. Michèle Daviau Chapter 8. Multimedia Information Systems in Archaeology: The Tall Jawa Artefact Database on CD-ROM . . . . . . . . . . . 317 David Hemsworth Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361 CD-ROM Artefact Database and Illustrations

contents

xiii

PREFACE This volume is one in a series of reports on six seasons of archaeological excavation (1989-1995) at Tall Jawa in central Jordan. Volume I contains the full stratigraphic and architectural study of the principal Iron Age occupation levels (Daviau, in preparation/ a). Volume II, presented here, consists of a functional and formal typology of all major artefact classes along with a number of specialized studies. The typology is accompanied by a database on a CD-ROM, which contains the complete list of all registered Iron Age artefacts along with their illustrations. During the 1989 and 1991 seasons, when excavation and survey at Tall Jawa was an integral part of the Madaba Plains Project Hinterland Excavations, the Iron Age artefacts were excavated, registered, and drawn by members of the Madaba Plains Project. Finds from subsequent seasons (1992-1995) were registered, drawn and studied by Tall Jawa team members and by interested scholars, some of whom also participated in the annual field seasons. In the first season (1989), Elizabeth Platt, object registrar of the Madaba Plains Project, set the model for artefact registration, and this method continued to be employed in 1991 under the supervision of Margaret Judd. During the subsequent years, the Tall Jawa Project used a modified version of the Madaba Plains Project registration forms, so that a full scale drawing could accompany each record. Object registrars for these field seasons included M. Judd, Deborah Beal, and Ryan DeFonzo, each of whom contributed improvements to our system which facilitated entry into a database catalogue. In similar fashion, the system for registering reworked sherds used by Gloria London, ceramic technologist for the Madaba Plains Project, was redesigned for inclusion in the object database. Beginning in 1991, Laurie Cowell assumed responsibility for ceramic technology; her duties included the registration of all reworked sherds, along with documentation of potter’s marks and evidence of forming techniques. Initial identification of objects on the basis of class and type was the work of Madaba Plains Project directors during the 1989 field season. In the following seasons, this responsibility devolved upon M. Daviau and Nazmieh Rida Tawfiq (representative from the

xiv

preface

Department of Antiquities), who assisted in the identification of objects and their use, and made a significant contribution to our understanding of Ammonite material culture. Registration of each item was followed by drawing and photography in camp during the field season. Numerous students and research assistants were responsible for the artistic representation of artefacts. Chief among these were the object registrars themselves, along with A. Barker, M. Beckmann, G. Braun, S. Clara, D. Flores, D. Foran, A. Galea, T. Van Nes, A. Tempest, H. Wilson, and J. Witmer. Object photographers for the 1989 season consisted of members of the Madaba Plains Project photographic team. In 1991, M. Ziese, S. Hunter, and the Director served as photographers. In subsequent seasons, the Director and members of the Tall Jawa Project were responsible for photography, especially S. Force (1993), K. Gerlach (1994), T. Hellum (1993, 1994), S. Hunter (1992), R. Mittelstaedt (1995), J. Radko (1992), and P. Silver (1995). The tasks of database entry and scanning of illustrations were carried out by M. Alder, P. Bailey, S. Nicholson, G. Parsons, M. Short, H. Todd, B. Trussler and J. Witmer. In addition, J. Haxell converted the illustrations in the text into Word format, and E. Kirby, P.-E. Dion and J. Palmer assisted the author with the review of the CD-ROM multimedia programme. Pamela Schaus, Cartographer (Wilfrid Laurier University) prepared the map of the ‘Amman region, and Nigel Pereira and Stephanie Feltham prepared the illustrations of the Iron Age buildings. Sources of funding included the Ontario Work Study Programme, Wilfrid Laurier University Undergraduate Research Grant Programme, and grants to Graduate Student Research Assistants. I am deeply grateful to the student assistants and scholars who contributed to the study of this corpus, especially to Margaret Judd and Martin Beckmann for their preliminary studies of the objects (both were research assistants at Wilfrid Laurier University); to Bruce Zuckermann (West Semitic Research) and James Henderson (Applied Photographic Research), who prepared enhanced photographs of Ostracon TJ 1071, and to Paul-Eugène Dion (University of Toronto) for his study of the text (Chapter 3); to Edward Kott, Department of Biology (Wilfrid Laurier University) for initial identification of marine shells and to David S. Reese for his final analysis of the shell and fossil material (Chapter 4); to Michael Kretsch, Department of Chemistry (Wilfrid Laurier University), who supervised the

preface

xv

first experimental cleaning of iron arrowheads, to Michael Fuller (conservator, Joseph Schneider Haus, Kitchener, ON) who cleaned and conserved three metal points that are now in the National Museum in ‘Amman, to Neil Mirau, University of Lethbridge, who arranged for analysis of iron arrowheads by R. P. Wilson at the Agat Laboratories, University of Alberta (Chapter 5), to Brendon Paul who assisted David Hemsworth in the programming of the Multimedia Information Systems, and to William Pratt of the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) who made available comparative material from the museum’s collections. Christopher J. Simpson, Piotr Bienkowski, Jean-Claude Margueron, Frank Braemer, Larry G. Herr and Douglas Clark offered suggestions and support regarding the function of certain finds and the preparation of this publication. Although I hope that other scholars will undertake further study of these artefacts, this presentation is offered as an initial study and analysis, and its limitations are my own. Finally, this work is dedicated with love and appreciation to the memory of my mother, Florence Edna Daviau, and to her siblings, Noëlla Rose Beauparlant, Leonard Lawrence Beauparlant and Joseph Alderick Beauparlant, who taught me the value of the innumerable tools employed in the daily tasks of men and women. P. M. Michèle Daviau February 4, 2001

This page intentionally left blank

contents

xvii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1.1 Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11

Map of the ‘Amman region, showing the location of Tall Jawa Building 300, Stratum VIII, Field E Building 700, Stratum VII, Field D Building 800, Stratum VII, Field C-west Building 910, Stratum VIII-VII, Field C-east Building 905, Stratum VII, Field C-east Building 102, Stratum VIII, Field A Building 113, Stratum VIII, Field A Building 200, Stratum VIII, Field B Building 204, Stratum VIII, Field B Building 900, Stratum VII, Field C-east

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.14 2.15 2.16 2.17 2.18 2.19 2.20 2.21 2.22 2.23

Club-shaped Bone Pendants Glycymeris Shell Pendants Conch Shell Pendants Small Anchor-shaped Pendants Large Anchor-shaped Pendants Rectangular Limestone Pendants Natural Stone Pendants Irregular-shaped Ceramic Pendants Disc-shaped Stone Beads Spherical Stone Beads Barrel-shaped Stone Beads Biconical Stone Beads Cylindrical Stone Beads Spherical Glass Beads Cylindrical Glass Beads Faience Beads Cowrie Shell Beads Conus Shell Beads Fossil Sea Urchin Beads Lunate Earrings Mulberry Cluster Earrings Ribbed Bow Fibulae Riveted, Flat Bow Fibula

list of illustrations

xviii

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

2.24 2.25 2.26 2.27 2.28 2.29 2.30 2.31 2.32 2.33 2.34 2.35 2.36 2.37 2.38 2.39 2.40 2.41 2.42 2.43 2.44 2.45 2.46 2.47 2.48 2.49 2.50 2.51 2.52 2.53 2.54 2.55 2.56 2.57 2.58 2.59 2.60 2.61 2.62 2.63

Violin Bow Fibula Rings Tridacna Cosmetic Dishes Cosmetic Palettes and Mortars Seated Female Figurines Standing Female Figurines (upper torso) Naked Female Figurines (lower torso) Pillar Figurines Figurine Moulds Ceramic Male Head Stone Male Figurines Unidentified Anthropomorphic Figurines Appliqués Zoomorphic Figurines Zoomorphic Protome Zoomorphic Vessels Headless Zoomorphic Fragments Model Shrines Fragments Ceramic Model Columns Capitals and Attachments Scarabs Scaraboids Cylinder Seals Scale Weights Awls Bow Drill Bits Pestle-shaped Bow Drill Sockets Roller-shaped Bow Drill Sockets Iron Knife Blades Lithic Blades and Flakes Lithic Points Scraping Tools Chisels Whetstones Pecking Stones Rectangular Industrial Grinders Oval Industrial Grinders Anchor-shaped Industrial Grinders Industrial Millstones Large Pounders

list of illustrations Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

2.64 2.65 2.66 2.67 2.68 2.69 2.70 2.71 2.72 2.73 2.74 2.75 2.76 2.77 2.78 2.79 2.80 2.81 2.82 2.83 2.84 2.85 2.86 2.87 2.88 2.89 2.90 2.91 2.92 2.93 2.94 2.95 2.96 2.97 2.98 2.99 2.100 2.101 2.102 2.103

Oversize Querns Round Polishing Stones Rectangular Polishing Stones Irregular-shaped Polishing Stones Medium Size Polishing Stones Burnishing Tools Glycymeris Shell Tools Other Shell Tools Stone Raw Material Metal Resources—Lead Ingot Lower Potter’s Wheel Upper Potter’s Wheel Flat Base Bowls Round Base Bowls Disc Base Bowls Ring Base Bowls Low-footed Tripod Bowls Rectangular Stone Trays Small Round Mortars Small Mortars with Low Tripod Foot Small Mortars with Tall Tripod Foot Small Oval Mortars Small Mortars with Spout Medium Size Round Mortars Medium Size Semi-round Mortars Medium Size Oval Mortars Rectangular Block Mortars Refashioned Rectangular Mortars Medium Size Trapezoidal Mortars Large Round Mortars Large Oval Mortars Large Triangular Mortars Conical Pestles Truncated Cone Pestles Cylindrical Pestles Small Anchor-shaped Pestles Medium Anchor-shaped Pestles Small Pyramidal Pestles Large Pyramidal Pestles Irregular-shaped Pestles

xix

list of illustrations

xx

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

2.104 2.105 2.106 2.107 2.108 2.109 2.110 2.111 2.112 2.113 2.114 2.115 2.116 2.117 2.118 2.119 2.120 2.121 2.122 2.123 2.124 2.125 2.126 2.127 2.128 2.129 2.130 2.131 2.132 2.133 2.134 2.135 2.136 2.137 2.138 2.139 2.140 2.141 2.142 2.143

Round Hand Grinders Oval Hand Grinders Miniature Cuboid Hand Grinders Miniature Loaf-shaped Hand Grinders Standard Size Rectangular Hand Grinders Anchor-shaped Hand Grinders Irregular-shaped Hand Grinders Unique-shaped Hand Grinders Half Oval Loaf-shaped Millstones–upper Hemispherical Loaf-shaped Millstones–upper Trapezoidal Loaf-shaped Millstones–upper Triangular Loaf-shaped Millstones–upper Loaf-shaped Millstones–lower Saddle Querns Miniature Pounders Standard Pounders Working Surfaces/Anvils Small Stone Troughs Stone Basins/Bowls The Buzz Astragali Undecorated Ceramic Gaming Pieces Decorated Ceramic Gaming Pieces Gaming Boards Lanceolate Points Elliptical Points Linear Points Lozenge Points Pointed Ovate Points Triangular Points Javelin Points Mushroom-shaped Stopper (upright) Mushroom-shaped Stopper (inverted) Lentil-shaped Stoppers Disc-shaped Stoppers Reworked Body Sherds Reworked Body Sherds with Handle Reworked Base Sherds Spindles Decorated Spindles

list of illustrations Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

2.144 2.145 2.146 2.147 2.148 2.149 2.150 2.151 2.152 2.153 2.154 2.155 2.156 2.157 2.158 2.159 2.160 2.161 2.162 2.163 2.164 2.165 2.166

Ceramic Spindle Whorls Bone/Ivory Spindle Whorls Convex, Ring-shaped Whorls Plano-convex Whorls Cylindrical Whorls Hemispherical Whorls Doughnut-shaped Loom Weights Cylindrical Loom Weights Anchor-shaped Loom Weights Fired Clay Loom Weights Bone Spatulae Needles Unperforated Grooved Weights Small Stone Ring Weights Medium Stone Ring Weights Large Stone Ring Weights Small Stone Discs Medium and Large Stone Discs Natural Tether Stones Slab-shaped Tether Stones Bone Objects Stone Objects Large Finds

Fig. 3.1:1 Fig. 3.1:2 Fig. 3.1:2

Aramaic Ostracon TJ 1071 Aramaic Ostracon TJ 1071 (detailed views) Aramaic Ostracon TJ 1071 (enhanced views)

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

Shell Shell Shell Shell Shell Shell Shell Shell Shell

4.1:1 4.1:2 4.1:3 4.1:4 4.1:5 4.1:6 4.1:7 4.1:8 4.1:9

Fig. 5.1:1 Fig. 5.1:2

TJ TJ Sh TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ

2225 2124 09 2230 2228 463 005 553 1247

Metal Point TJ 453 Metal Point TJ 520

xxi

list of illustrations

xxii

Fig. 5.1:3

Metal Point TJ 525

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

6.1:1 6.1:2 6.1:3 6.1:4 6.1:5

Chert Chert Chert Chert Chert

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

8.1: 8.2: 8.3: 8.4:

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

8.5: 8.6: 8.7: 8.8: 8.9: 8.10:

Main screen of the Tall Jawa information system File submenu Copy to ClipBoard submenu One field from the registration portion of the database Record control object Artefact Image control object Search controls area Accessing the Control Panel Accessing Add/Remove Programs Removing Arch2000

Spheroid Spheroid Spheroid Spheroid Spheroid

TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ

036 048 062 073 074

list of illustrations

xxiii

LIST OF TABLES Table 1A. Overview of the Stratification Table 2A. Iron Age Artefacts in the National Museum, ‘Amman Table 2B. Iron Age Ceramic Vessels not included in Artefact Analysis Table 2C. Food Processing Tools Table 4A. Marine Shells Table 4B. Fresh Water Shells Table 4C. Fossils Table 4D. Additional Tall Jawa Shells and Fossils Table 6A. Stone Tools by Room and Locus Table 6B. Absolute and Relative Frequencies of Room 102+202 Artefact and Pottery Types Table 6C. Degree of Similarity between Room 102+202 Artefact Types and Model Paradigm for Food Preparation Table 6D. Absolute and Relative Frequencies of Room 106 Artefact and Pottery Types Table 6E. Degree of Similarity between Room 106 Artefact Types and Model Paradigms for Food Preparation and Storage combined Table 6F. Botanical Analysis, Tall Jawa, Field A Table 6G. Botanical Analysis, Tall al-‘Umayri Table 8A: List of Fields in each Record of the Database

the site and its artefacts

1

CHAPTER ONE

THE SITE AND ITS ARTEFACTS P. M. Michèle Daviau Introduction Modern excavations of ancient sites on the central Jordanian plateau were initially designed to study the Iron Age and Roman period remains which were easily recognizable on the landscape and which Nelson Glueck had identified in his survey of eastern Palestine undertaken in 1933. The excavations by Harding (1951),1 Bennett (1977), Dornemann (1965-1967) and Humbert and Zayadine (1988-1991) at the Citadel of ‘Amman, identified as the ancient capital of the Ammonite kingdom, and the subsequent work at Hesban (Boraas and Horn 1968-1978), Dibon in Moab (Winnett and Reed 1950-1952; Tushingham 1952-53), and at Buseirah in Edom (Bennett 1971-1974) each sought to locate and identify an Iron Age culture that was known from ancient texts, such as the Hebrew Bible and the Annals of the Assyrian Kings. Beginning in the 1980s, excavation projects had more sophisticated research objectives, although it was clear that the characteristics of the kingdoms of Ammon, Moab and Edom remained largely unknown. Since the location of the principal city of the kingdom of Ammon is undoubtedly modern ‘Amman, pottery and artefacts from high status tombs in this region have served as the basis for the characterisation of Ammonite culture (Dornemann 1983:178). At the same time, the extent and population density of this small kingdom remain unclear. Excavations at settlement sites within a 12-15 kilometre radius of ‘Amman, such as Sahab (Ibrahim 1974, 1975), Tall al- ‘Umayri (Geraty et al. 1989; Herr et al. 1991) and Tall Jawa on the south, as well as at Safut (Wimmer 1987) and sites in the Baq‘ah Valley (McGovern 1986) on the north (Fig. 1.1), are now 1 All references are included in the final bibliography, except those directly related to specialist reports, such as Dion (Chapter 3), Reese (Chapter 4), and Mirau (Chapter 5).

2

chapter one

adding to our understanding of the cultural characteristics that can be attributed with some degree of certainty to the Ammonites. More recent survey work east and south of Madaba (Daviau 1997; Younker et al. 1993; 1996) has made it possible to distinguish between Ammonite and Moabite potting traditions, although it is not certain that the political border in the Iron Age was the same as the cultural one. Only the study of artefacts from all of these sites will reveal the degree of shared technologies and the distinctive cultural features of Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites.

Excavations at Tall Jawa Tall Jawa (PGE 2382, PGN 1408)2 is located directly south of ‘Amman, west of Sahab and southeast of Tall al-‘Umayri. The tell sits on the south edge of the Balqa hills, looking out over the Madaba Plain to the southwest. Its prominent position, which nineteenthcentury explorers could easily recognize, marked it as a site occupied in antiquity. In this century, Alois Musil (1901) and Albrecht Alt (1932) visited Tall Jawa in their investigation of sites in the region between ‘Amman and Hesban. These scholars recognized Tall Jawa as an Iron Age town even before Glueck assigned a date to the ceramic material that he recovered from the tell’s surface. It was not until the Madaba Plains Project Hinterland Survey in 1984 (Boling 1989:98; figs. 8.56, 57) that Tall Jawa (Site 29) came under the purview of a project with a regional focus that was designed to locate as many sites as possible in the face of rapid urban growth, and to select certain of these sites for long term study. Excavation at Tall Jawa began in 1989 under the direction of Younker and Daviau (Younker et al. 1990; Daviau 1993c:23) as part of the Madaba Plains Project Hinterland Excavations. Daviau served as field director for the 1991 season,3 and then became the Senior 2 The Palestine Grid is only one of several locational grids in use in Jordan; see the Jordan Archaeological Database & Information System (JADIS, 1995) for the full range of geographical coordinates. In a previous publication (Daviau 1991:145), which followed Boling (1984:143), the coordinates had been given in reverse order. 3 As an integral part of the Madaba Plains Project, the first season of excavations was sponsored by Andrews University, Atlantic Union College, Canadian Union College, Wala Wala College and Wilfrid Laurier University. After the Gulf War in 1991, the Madaba Plains Project excavation was cancelled, except for the

the site and its artefacts

3

Researcher and Director of an independent excavation project for the last four seasons (1992-1995). The Tall Jawa Project, formally organized in 1992, was sponsored by Wilfrid Laurier University and funded in part by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Excavation Strategy and Results The first excavation area (Field A) opened on the tell consisted of a trench of 4 squares running south to north (A1-A4) across the line of the casemate wall, and one square (A13) east of Square A3. The research objective of this strategy was to expose the stratigraphic history of the site and identify its periods of use. The ceramic evidence of both Glueck (1934:4) and Boling (1989:144) indicated occupation during the Early Bronze Age, but this was not born out by finds in Field A. Instead, the ceramic and architectural remains pointed to an Iron Age I settlement that was later fortified and rebuilt in Iron II (Daviau 1992:147).4 In view of the good preservation of the fortification walls, which were visible at ground level around the entire tell, and of the quality of the finds from the first season, a long term excavation project was planned. The research design consisted of the definition of a fortified town situated on the southern perimeter of the Ammonite heartland and the characterization of Tall Jawa’s fortification system and domestic architecture. New excavation areas were opened in 1991 to study the construction of the casemate walls to the west (Field B) and east (Field C) of the trench in Field A. Horizontal exposure was also expanded inside the wall system (Daviau 1992: fig. 2). The same strategy was implemented in following seasons until modern construction brought the excavations to an end in 1995. The earliest remains in Field A indicate that there was a limited settlement during Iron Age I (Stratum IX), and that Tall Jawa saw its floruit during the middle and late Iron Age II (9th-7th centuries team from Wilfrid Laurier University under the supervision of Daviau. A full six week season was carried out, during which time the team lived at the American Center of Oriental Research (ACOR) in ‘Amman. 4 One sherd was initially identified as Middle Bronze Age but must now be re-examined in view of the total lack of occupation during that period and the subsequent discovery that most of the Iron Age II structures were founded on bedrock.

4

chapter one

BC).5 Altogether, 9 different structures were exposed, 4 of which are known to have been founded on bedrock (B300, Fig. 1.2; B700, Fig. 1.3; B800, Fig. 1.4; B910, Fig. 1.5; reused as B905, Fig. 1.6). In the case of Building 300, the entire plan was not recovered although there was complete exposure of 12 rooms. This made it possible to determine the function and arrangement of these rooms within a given architectural space (Daviau, in preparation/a). The ceramic and artefactual evidence indicates that the buildings in Fields A (B102, Fig. 1.7; B113, Fig. 1.8), B (B200, Fig. 1.9; B204, Fig. 1.10), and E (B300) were contemporary (Stratum VIII), and were somewhat earlier than the buildings in Fields C (B800; B900, Fig. 1.11; B910) and D (B700; Stratum VII; Daviau 1997a, 1997b). Greater chronological precision will only be possible with the full publication of ceramic corpora from sites with more refined stratigraphic sequences, such as ‘Amman, Tall al-‘Umayri and Tall Jalul (Younker et al. 1996:7073). Although there are certain ceramic forms and artefacts, appearing only after the spread of Assyrian influence in the late eighth- to seventh-centuries, that clearly distinguish Stratum VII from Stratum VIII (Daviau 1997a:28-29), many artefacts were similar in their basic characteristics throughout the Iron Age and show only the variations expected for hand made items undergoing developmental change. In this study of the small finds from all six seasons, chronological significance is indicated only when the frequency or formal traits of an object type warrant explanation. Stratigraphy Floor levels were reached in both Stratum VIII and Stratum VII buildings. In certain cases, such as B300 in Field E (Daviau 1996:88) and B800 in Field C-west, these floors were sealed by superimposed surfaces or collapsed ceilings.6 The artefacts distributed on such floors serve as the model for identifying the primary classes and secondary types of Iron Age objects. This was especially important in the excavation of Field D, where the walls of an original Stratum VII Building (B700) were reused in the Umayyad Period (Stratum III). 5 For a complete discussion of the chronological implications, see Daviau, in preparation/a and /b. 6 For a presentation of the excavations, stratigraphy, architecture and artefact distribution, see Daviau, in preparation/a.

the site and its artefacts

5

In this building, some of the Iron Age collapse, rich in artefacts and pottery, was left undisturbed in ground floor rooms (Daviau and Tempest, in preparation).7 At the same time, the contents of several other rooms had been disturbed in modern times, giving the impression that Iron Age debris had been dumped into the ruined structure. The full implications of the Iron Age material in Building 700 were not appreciated until the final season (1995), when deep probes through this debris revealed the lowest floors covered with Iron Age pottery and artefacts still in situ. This volume contains a study of all artefacts judged to be part of the Iron Age occupation at Tall Jawa. Due to the collapse of upper storey rooms, the later Umayyad occupation, and the recent use of the tell for agriculture, a certain amount of contamination and displacement has occurred. Nevertheless, with the exception of Building 700, rooms in all other buildings were surprisingly well preserved and the position of artefacts was relatively secure, providing sufficient evidence for clustering objects in activity sets or tool kits, and locating various work areas within the domestic space. Such analysis also contributed to the understanding of the objects themselves and facilitated their classification.8 Table 1A: Overview of the Stratification STRATUM

FIELD PHASE(S)

PERIOD

IA-IB II III IV V VI VII VIIIA VIIIB IX X XI

1-2 pottery only 3/structures pottery + artefacts pottery only 4/coin + burial 5/structures 6/reuse 7/casemate wall + structures 8/solid Wall 9/destruction debris pottery only

modern Ayyubid-Mamluk Umayyad Byzantine Roman Persian Late Iron II Middle Iron II Middle Iron II Early Iron II Iron I Late Bronze (?)

7

A study of the Umayyad building with its pottery and objects is in prepara-

tion. 8 In the discussion of stratigraphy and buildings at Tall Jawa, each artefact is listed with its associated pottery. There is also a detailed study of the activity areas and artefact clusters in Building 300 by Daviau and Judd (Daviau, in preparation/a).

6

chapter one Artefacts of Daily Life

The excavation strategy employed at Tall Jawa was designed to expose the fortifications and the structures inside the Iron Age settlement, in order to determine its character. This strategy resulted in the recovery of several thousand artefacts used in typical domestic activities and in the defence of the town. Although high status items were present, they constitute a small percentage of the registered finds, while agricultural tools seemed to be missing altogether.9 Of greater significance is the large numbers of artefacts associated with food processing and textile production. The repertoire of ground stone tools for processing food stuffs and for craft related activities is outstanding for its diversity and quality, and reveals a variety of production techniques,10 as well as the intentions of the craftsmen. The position of Tall Jawa in relation to the capital city and the location of excavation areas within the site may account for the small number of Iron Age seals (3), measuring weights (3?) and ostraca (1) recovered during 6 seasons. In contrast, a good number of artefacts including figurines and vessels, similar to those commonly found in tombs, were present in the domestic buildings. This may suggest an active domestic cult, rather than the scattered remains of a major shrine or temple. In this volume, only the figurines and fragments of ceramic artefacts (zoomorphic vessels, shrine model fragments, etc.) are presented; the ceramic vessels associated with these figurines have been studied separately (Daviau, 2001a). Although there were no bronze weapons in this collection, iron weapons were present in significant numbers. Bronze appears to have been used exclusively for bow drill bits. Jewellery appears to be of copper rather than bronze, while knives like weapons were of iron. The identification and function of certain artefacts remains tentative although their association with a meaningful corpus offers strong evidence for their intended use. The case of chert balls as hammer stones or pounders can only be settled on the basis of the archaeological record and on analogy (Chapter 6). Other stone objects remain a mystery and have been classified as “Miscellaneous.” 9 This is not surprising since few such tools are illustrated in the published reports of contemporary sites; for instance, only a handful of sickles is listed for Hazor (Yadin et al. 1958, 1960, 1961) and for Tel Michal (Muhly and Muhly 1989). 10 For a discussion of formation procedures (progressive lithic reduction), see Wright (1992:53-57; fig. 1).

the site and its artefacts

7

In the discussion of each class that follows (Chapter 2), function is suggested along with suitable criteria for assigning each artefact to a specific type within its class. Although this is primarily a functional and secondarily a formal typology, many artefacts made by hand cannot be assigned to a formal type with the same certainty as a ceramic vessel. Nevertheless, the fact that ground stone tools in particular were formed in a variety of shapes, each of which would require a different method of utilization, strongly suggests that we should recognize these differences in our typology. Reworked sherds are a special kind of artefact that seems to appear in both artefact and ceramic studies. Although their technology will be discussed in our study of the ceramic materials from Tall Jawa, reworked sherds are also included here in several classes of artefacts since they were closely associated with both spindle whorls and gaming pieces. In fact, some sherds appear to be blanks, undrilled or unfinished whorls. Larger sherds could have been used as stoppers, although there was only a small number that could be assigned to this class with certainty. All reworked sherds are included in this volume in the comprehensive database (CD-ROM).

8

chapter one

. Figure 1.1. Map of #Amman region, showing location of Tall Jawa (P. Schaus)

the site and its artefacts 9

Figure 1.2. Building 300, Stratum VIII, Field E

10

chapter one

Figure 1.3. Building 700, Stratum VII, Field D

the site and its artefacts

Figure 1.4. Building 800, Stratum VII, Field C-west

11

12

chapter one

Figure 1.5. Building 910, Stratum VIII-VII, Field C-east

the site and its artefacts

Figure 1.6. Building 905, Stratum VII, Field C-east

13

14

chapter one

Figure 1.7. Building 102, Stratum VIII, Field A

the site and its artefacts

Figure 1.8. Building 113, Stratum VIII, Field A

15

16

chapter one

Figure 1.9. Building 200, Stratum VIII, Field B

the site and its artefacts

Figure 1.10. Building 204, Stratum VIII, Field B

17

18

chapter one

Figure 1.11. Building 900, Stratum VII, Field C-east

artefact classification and typology

19

CHAPTER TWO

ARTEFACT CLASSIFICATION AND TYPOLOGY P. M. Michèle Daviau with Margaret Judd and Martin Beckmann Introduction The collection and registration procedures for small finds and large objects vary according to the theoretical interests of the excavator. In the case of Tall Jawa, the artefacts from the 1989 season were identified and chosen for registration by a team of Madaba Plains Project directors. For the most part, those items that were intact or almost complete were registered leaving aside badly broken or frequently occurring types. In this way, 80 artefacts from Tall Jawa were registered while 88 items, listed on locus sheets, remained unregistered. In the case of spindle whorls, these items were set aside for later analysis.1 In 1994, the spindle whorls and fragments thereof were returned to the Tall Jawa collection at Wilfrid Laurier University; they were registered as artefacts and added to the database, which now contains 120 objects from the 1989 season.2 The reworked sherds from Tall Jawa (1989), also a special category of small finds, were studied by London along with sherds from Tall al-‘Umayri. Those from Tall Jawa are currently at Wilfrid Laurier University and are included in the Tall Jawa database. Beginning with the 1991 season, artefacts were identified and chosen for registration by the object registrar under the direction of Daviau.3 The expansion of excavation to Fields B, C, D and M, the latter located 300 m south of the tell, meant that artefacts and 1 At the time of writing, the analysis of the Madaba Plains Project spindle whorls by D. Irvin was still in preparation with the result that our understanding of functional variation related to fibre types remains incomplete. 2 In the summer of 1997, two additional spindle whorls (TJ 2=U1614, 27=U1821) were added to the Tall Jawa collection. 3 The 1991 season was conducted under the joint sponsorship of the Madaba Plains Project and Wilfrid Laurier University. For details of excavation history, see Chapter 1: Introduction.

20

chapter two

samples recovered in the 1991-1995 seasons were associated with occupation from both the Iron Age (Strata VIII, VII) and the late Byzantine-early Islamic periods (Strata IV, III).4 Registration Procedures During the 1989 season, all artefacts from Tall Jawa were registered by E. Platt according to the registration procedures of the Madaba Plains Project and assigned a number within the running list (i.e. U 1774). In 1991, the Tall Jawa Object Registrar, M. Judd, registered 133 objects, using a new numbering system, beginning with TJ 101. However, the Madaba Plains collection system continued to be used in the field; each object was tagged and assigned a field number. In camp, the objects were washed (except for metal, bone, faience, etc.) and then identified and classified by Daviau. Such items were then recorded in the registry book, labelled in permanent ink, drawn and photographed. Record sheets were made in triplicate for the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, Andrews University and Wilfrid Laurier University. Beginning in 1992, when the Tall Jawa Project became independent from the Madaba Plains Project, a new registration form was designed and used in all subsequent seasons. While all ceramic vessel sherds were registered as pottery samples, certain vessels also received an object number (Table 2B). These included intact or fully restorable vessels which are not discussed here. Other vessel types, such as zoomorphic vessels, protomes, fragments of rhyta or elements attached to ceramic models are included among the artefact categories listed below. Classification System for Tall Jawa Objects Beginning in 1991, an object classification system was designed primarily on the basis of function and secondarily on the basis of formal distinctions within each functional class. The characteristics of each functional class were primarily determined by inference based on archaeological parallels and analysis of artefact assemblages (Daviau 1993a), and this classification was further refined in light of experimental archaeology and ethnographic analogy. While some 4 All objects, features, mosaic tesserae, coins, and glass will be presented in Daviau and Tempest, in preparation.

artefact classification and typology

21

ethnographic analogies are drawn from Watson’s work in Iran (1979), other comparisons are derived from personal observations by Judd5 among the Bedouin of Jordan and from our own Canadian culture. Formal types were identified on the basis of attribute clustering (Spaulding 1982:6) whereby two or more attributes occur together and are not random (Hodson 1982:23; Joukowsky 1980:295). These attribute clusters, usually based on nominal, mutually exclusive variables, are treated as elements of a cultural pattern reflecting conscious choices made by the ancient crafts people (Spaulding 1982:6). In this way, the formal types are derivative of the functional class of which they form discrete examples. For each class, the criteria used to justify the attribute cluster are specified and discussion follows concerning the suitability of these criteria. At the same time, formal features are less precise in artefact classification than in ceramic typology, due to the utilization of natural materials, such as shells for beads and cosmetic dishes, and the formation processes used to fashion and refashion ground stone artefacts that were often multi-purpose tools. Within this system, the functional classes have been arranged alphabetically. This choice was made so that there would not be any bias in the order of the functions. That is, one function is not judged to be more important or more interesting than any other. All of the functional classes and formal types allowed for the addition of new objects in subsequent seasons.6 Special studies were undertaken for certain classes of artefacts, especially those that help to relate Tall Jawa to other contemporary sites (see Chapters 3-6).7 Badly broken artefacts that could not be classified were discarded, but broken objects whose shape was recognizable were registered. In some cases, this resulted in partial reconstruction of fragments found at an interval of several field seasons, better enabling detailed description and measurements. Other artefacts for which a precise function could not be determined were also retained in the hope that future excavation and study would provide additional information. 5 In a preliminary study, Judd classified the artefacts from 1991 and, later, those from 1992 in order to test the system and compare our results with those from other reported Iron Age sites; Beckmann did the same for finds from 1993 and 1994. 6 Wright (1992:54) emphasizes the importance of class definitions that allow for the addition of sub-classes. 7 The studies presented here are not intended to be exhaustive, but suggestive of further studies that could be undertaken by interested scholars.

22

chapter two

The importance of retaining artefactual material and reconstructing broken objects has been well demonstrated by Van Beek (1989b). Parallels from Late Bronze and Iron Age sites across the Levant have been included where available, since certain types of artefacts changed little over time.8 In some cases, more common finds, such as millstones, mortars and pestles, ceramic spindle whorls, and especially reworked sherds are poorly represented in field reports with the result that quantitative analysis between sites remains difficult if not impossible. The total number of objects within each class is given in the database, although this number is approximative due to the redesign and reuse of certain tools. Since all artefacts that fall within a given class are present in the database,9 only a limited number of examples are cited and illustrated here. Each recognizable type or sub-type within a class is identified on the basis of formal and material distinctions. Further analysis is possible with reference to the database (see CD-ROM).10 Annotation System In the Catalogue that follows the discussion of types and sub-types within each class, artefacts are identified by their registration number (TJ #) , the figure # within the text, and by Field+Square:Locus #/Pottery Pail #. This is followed by material, Munsell Soil Color Codes (where appropriate), technology, decoration (if any), and measurements. The maximum dimensions in centimeters are indicated for artefacts that stand upright as H(eight), W(idth) or D(iameter), and T(hickness), while items which lie flat are described with their L(ength), W(idth) or D(iameter), T(hickness) and Wt (Weight).11 Artefacts with depressions and perforated objects include the interior diameter (int D) and, where relevant, the depth of the 8 Sites are listed generally east to west and north to south, beginning with Mesopotamia and Northern Syria. 9 Funding to assist with the scanning of artefact drawings was provided by the Ontario Work Study Program and by an Undergraduate Research Assistant Grant from WLU Operating Funds and SSHRC funding to WLU. 10 Because some artefacts were found broken and could not be identified with certainty, generic terms are used in many cases so as not to prejudice future study. 11 The weight (Wt) is indicated in grams (g) for those artefacts that weigh less than 1,000 grams. Larger objects are weighed in kilograms (kg).

artefact classification and typology

23

depression (int Dp).12 The condition (Complete, Broken, Chipped, or Fragment) of each artefact appears last. Full details of measurements and weight in kilograms, initials of artists and explanatory comments for all artefacts are recorded in the database (CD-ROM). In the text, parallels are cited where possible although an exhaustive study of each item is not included in this presentation. Further analysis on the part of interested scholars is welcome. Curating the Artefacts At the end of each season there was a division of finds with the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. Over six seasons the Department retained for the National Museum a total of 74 artefacts that date to the Iron Age or early Persian period (Table 2A). These items are designated in the database as located in ‘Amman (at the Department of Antiquities, see CD-ROM). The remaining objects are either at Wilfrid Laurier University (WLU) or in storage at the American Center for Oriental Research in ‘Amman (ACOR). Certain large stone objects and installations were either left at or returned to the site following registration and analysis (T).

artefact corpus i. adornment I-A. Jewellery Function: Artefacts classed as Jewellery for personal adornment are those items which can be hung on, around or through the body. Such objects were made of a variety of materials and varied considerably in size. In the Levant, jewellery was worn by both men and women during life and after death.

12 Artefacts with a central depression are noted in the database where the interior depth is given.

24

chapter two

Table 2A: Iron Age artefacts in the National Museum, ‘Amman Registration Number 1989 Season TJ 016 TJ 058 TJ 065 TJ 071 TJ 100

Item

Registration Number

Item

1994 Season TJ 1106 TJ 1119

figurine fragment female figurine fragment TJ 1128 scaraboid seal TJ 1182 limestone stopper TJ 1185 tripod mortar TJ 1249 zoomorphic figurine head 1991 Season13 TJ 1286 zoomorphic vessel head TJ 111 Athenian tetradrachm14 TJ 1375 pillar with female figurine TJ 139 zoomorphic vessel TJ 1387 pestle TJ 1392 pestle 1992 Season TJ 1404 door weight TJ 437 scarab TJ 1432 door weight TJ 1465 basalt tray 1993 Season TJ 1485 basalt polisher/weight TJ 674 ceramic “cultic” cup TJ 1500 obsidian point TJ 757 ivory pendant TJ 1513 upper loaf-shaped millTJ 768 basalt stopper/pestle stone TJ 786 basalt tray triangular mortar with TJ 819 upper loaf-shaped millstone TJ 1525 spout TJ 830 grinder TJ 1538 perforated stone TJ 882 pestle/bow drill socket TJ 1547,1550 tripod mortar TJ 965 cylinder seal TJ 1561 upper loaf-shaped millTJ 971 polishing stone stone TJ 1031 basalt mortar TJ 1589 ceramic stopper, painted TJ 1035 saddle quern TJ 1611 metal point TJ 1627 greenstone pendant TJ 1633 pestle TJ 1636 perforated stone TJ 1637 basalt tray TJ 1638 limestone weight TJ 1660 mortar with red stain TJ 1668 perforated limestone disc TJ 1691 ceramic strainer bowl metal point red slipped juglet metal point metal point male figurine head

13 Additional items recovered during the 1991-1995 seasons were chosen by the Department of Antiquities for the National Museum. However, these artefacts are not listed here because they date to the Umayyad period (see Daviau and Tempest, in preparation). 14 A small number of artefacts from Burial B-3 are included here, since they probably date to the Persian Period.

artefact classification and typology Table 2A: Iron Age artefacts in the National Museum, ‘Amman (Cont.) Registration Number 1995 Season TJ 1709 TJ 1712 TJ 1755 TJ 1759 TJ 1761 TJ 1830 TJ 1877 TJ 1891 TJ 1895 TJ 1935 TJ 1940 TJ 1941 TJ 1954 TJ 1964 TJ 1986 TJ 1994,2190 TJ 2007 TJ 2012 TJ 2027 TJ 2059 TJ 2133 TJ 2156 TJ 2159 TJ 2219 TJ 2224

Item

female figurine fragment female figurine fragment copper earring red slipped decanter basalt bowl pendant male figurine fragment spindle whorl basalt tripod mortar basalt oval tray pestle basalt weight pestle basalt spouted mortar scaraboid seal basalt tray base of figurine upper loaf-shaped millstone token/gaming piece pendant fragment arrowhead basalt weight red slipped saucer unfired clay loom weight polishing stone

25

Table 2B: Registered Iron Age Ceramic Vessels not included in Artefact Analysis Registration Number

Item

TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ

juglet juglet lamp lamp tripod cup cultic cup lamp tripod cup lamp juglet handle fragment juglet vessel foot tripod cup base tripod cup base juglet juglet handle(?) small decanter painted handle(?) painted juglet juglet fragment juglet painted rim fragment

058 077 224 225 655 674 712 726 732 964 986 1132 1366 1475 1496 1511 1548 1571 1759 1816 1867 1879 1884 1908 2232

26

chapter two

I-A/1. Pendants Criteria: A pendant is a small object which can be suspended, usually from a cord or thong and worn around the neck, arm or hand. In this class, all objects were perforated at one end to allow a thong or string to fulfil the purpose of suspension.15 Because it is an item of adornment worn on the body, a pendant should be light enough to be comfortable to the wearer, although our judgment concerning weight may differ from that of ancient peoples. The pendant can be of any shape and be of bone, shell, ceramic or stone, not to mention perishable materials such as wood. Pendants could also be used with beads as part of an elaborate necklace (Loud 1948: pl. 218:35), but an isolated find of this type will be considered here solely as a pendant. I-A/1a. Club-shaped Bone Pendants A club shaped pendant decorated with incised, crossed lines within two parallel bands was the only example of this type in our corpus. Club shaped pendants from Bethel show the various decorative styles common during the Iron Age, especially incised circles with central depression, known as ring and dot (Albright and Kelso 1968: pl. 45:5,6,8,9). Pendants with bands and hatching (Albright and Kelso 1968: pls. 114:10; 115:11) appear to have been less popular.16 Surprisingly, the Tall Jawa pendant has the broader, undecorated end at the top rather than vice versa like those from Bethel and Lachish. Catalogue TJ 757 (Fig. 2.1:1; C17:44/92). Bone. Worked. Incised. L 7.30, W 1.15 cm. Complete. Parallels Tyre: Club shaped pendants were decorated with incised diagonal or herringbone lines (Bikai 1978: pl. XXX:13, 14). Hazor: A decorated pendant from Area B, Stratum VB, measured 6.00 cm in length with a simple decoration of incised bands (Yadin 15 An artefact need not be perforated to be hung from the neck. Items with an unusual shape, such as a horseshoe shaped pendant, could have a cord tied around it and be suspended from the neck, wrist or waist. Since string and thong are not normally preserved, it would be difficult to know for certain whether unperforated items were used in this fashion. 16 Platt (1978:24) identified 19 rod or club shaped pendants with cross-hatched decoration in her study of bone pendants and “calendars” from 12 published sites. The symbolic meaning of the decorative motifs, including the ring and dot, is still a matter for discussion.

artefact classification and typology

27

et al. 1960: pl. CV: 33); an undecorated example came from Area A (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. LXXVIII:26). Megiddo: At Megiddo, 36 out of 40 pendants were decorated with “ring and dot” motif (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 97; Loud 1948: pl. 218:131-133, 135); this large number indicates the popularity of club shaped pendants. Bethel: Pendants decorated with incised bands and hatching just below the perforation (Albright and Kelso 1968: pls. 114:10; 115:11) appear in small numbers. Beth Shemesh: One polished bone pendant is shown with two complete stone pendants of the same club shape (Grant and Wright 1938: pl. LIII:29). Lachish: Pendants from Iron Age Tombs 120 and 218 were decorated with circles and with hatch lines inside parallel bands (Tufnell 1953. pl. 55:18-21, 44). Only one pendant had hatch lines close to the bottom end, and the shape was, as usual, the reverse of TJ 757.17 Gezer: Rare examples of upside down club shaped pendants (one identified as a toggle pin) come from the final Stratum 6 occupation phase in Field VI, dating to early Iron I (Dever et al. 1986: pl. 57:17), and from the Late Bronze Age occupation levels in Field I (Dever et al. 1974: pl. 39:1). Beth Shan: Undecorated examples, exemplified by a pendant from Beth Shan (James 1966: fig. 113:17), are also well known. I-A/1b. Shell Pendants Perforated shells that may have been used as items of personal adornment are included in the class of pendants, especially those shells that were clearly modified by human activity as well as by natural or animal activity. I-A/1b-1. Glycymeris Pendants The Glycymeris or bittersweet clam was the most common type of shell used as a pendant.18 These shells range in size from 2.10 to 4.50 cm in width.19 Of the seventeen shells of the Family Glycymerididae, 17 Tufnell (1953:205) thought such pendants were restricted to Palestine and indeed they do not appear in the large bone repertoire from Hama. 18 I am grateful to Edward Kott, Department of Biology, Wilfrid Laurier University, who made the initial identification of shell species. Further analysis is presented by Reese in Chapter 4. 19 Sizes have been adjusted to agree with Reese below.

28

chapter two

four (Sh 6, 10, 39, 40) were not perforated and are classified with natural materials (see below). In the case of the remaining 13 shells, the umbo was holed. Experiments undertaken by Ells20 on a North American species of Glycymeris suggested that several perforated shells from Tall Jawa had been sawn rather than drilled although Reese identified only one hole (TJ 2148=Sh 33) that had been ground by man.21 All others appear to be natural abrasions (see Reese below). None of these perforations is consistent with those formed by drilling or punching as documented elsewhere by Reese (1995a:93). Catalogue (all single valves): TJ 033 (=Sh 1; Fig. 2.2:1; A13:21/90). Reddish yellow (5YR 7/6), very pale brown (10YR 8/4).22 L 4.05, W 3.90, H 1.50 cm. TJ 456 (=Sh 36; Fig. 2.2:2; C27:25/35). Pink (5YR 7/4), gray (5YR 5/1), yellowish red (5YR 4/6). L 4.27, W 4.77, H 1.50 cm. TJ 797 (=Sh 58; Fig. 2.2:3; E54:11/30). Reddish brown (2.5YR 5/ 3), pale red (2.5YR 7/2), white (5YR 8/1). L 3.12, W 3.27, H 1.20 cm. TJ 901 (=Sh 35; C17:45/116). Pinkish white (5YR 8/2), pink (5YR 7/3), pale red (2.5YR 7/2). L 1.97, W 2.02, H 0.70). TJ 1314 (=Sh 59; A83:10/20). Very pale brown (10YR 8/2-7/4), pale red (10R 6/2), white (5YR 8/1). L 3.97, W 4.00, H 1.50 cm. TJ 1833 (=Sh 32; A93:31/104). Very pale brown (10YR 8/2), pale red (10R 6/2), white (5YR 8/1). L 3.37, W 3.10, H 1.10 cm. Chipped. TJ 1859 (=Sh 45; E53:35/73). Very pale brown (10YR 8/2), pale red (10R 6/2), white (5YR 8/1). L 3.70, W 3.90, H 1.40 cm. TJ 2085 (=Sh 61; E53:39/92). Shell reused as polisher, see below. TJ 2148 (=Sh 33; A93:40/143). Pink (7.5YR 7/4), white (7.5YR 8/ 1), light brown (7.5YR 6/4). L 3.70, W 3.92, H 1.30 cm. TJ 2165 (=Sh 37; C27:74/182). Very pale brown (10YR 8/1), white (5YR 8/1). L 3.80, W 4.00, H 1.40 cm. Cut edge. TJ 2225 (=Sh 46; E53:35:73). Reddish brown (2.5YR 5/4), pinkish white (5YR 8/2), white (5YR 8/1), pale yellow (2.5Y 8/3). L 3.40, 20 A Typological, Chronological and Quantitative Study of Perforated, Light Weight Objects from Tell Jawa, unpublished paper, March 19, 1996. Among the shells which Reese catalogued from the Roman Queen Alia Airport Roman Cemetery, two Glycymeris are described as having “natural holes” (Ibrahim and Gordon 1987:48). 21 The authors are grateful to D. S. Reese for numerous editorial suggestions that have been incorporated in the following catalogue and discussion. 22 Colour coding prepared by Sonia Ells.

artefact classification and typology

29

W 3.95, H 1.30 cm. Half shell, chipped, worn on dorsum. TJ 2229 (=Sh 53; E65:24/67). Yellow (10YR 8/6), brownish yellow (10YR 6/6), pink (7.5YR 8/4). L 3.50, W 3.52, H 1.00 cm. TJ 2235 (=Sh 2; Fig. 2.2:4; A5:1/47). Pinkish white (5YR 8/2), yellowish red (5YR 5/8). L. 3.07, W. 2.80, H 1.10 cm. Parallels Beth Shan: Several pierced shells appear to be Glycymeris although only one (Rowe 1940: pl. XXXI:63) is probable, since the remaining shells in the original publication were not identified with the exception of a Murex trunculus. A good example of a Glycymeris from Level VII was catalogued as such (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 145:5). ‘Ai: A collection of 19 perforated Glycymeris shells were found in a group in an Iron Age house (Area C VII), probably all from the same necklace (Callaway 1980:125; fig. 85). Ells (1996:26) points out the importance of this collection in view of the rare occurrence of such groups and the limited publication of shell artefacts in general. Beth Shemesh: Two shells are shown but the perforation is not visible (Grant and Wright 1938: pl. LII:9, 10). Jerusalem: A good example of a perforated Glycymeris comes from a fill (L. 86/68) beneath an Iron Age II surface (Mazar and Mazar 1989: pl. 9:17). From both the British and Israeli excavations, large numbers of such shells from all periods were reported and studied by Reese (1995b). Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: A small number of shells were included among the grave goods of tombs in the cemetery (Pritchard 1980:17:44; fig. 53:1). As well, nine Glycymeris in a group were found in Stratum VII House 64 (Pritchard 1985: fig. 40). ‘Amman: Harding (1951:37) reported several shells from Tomb C and illustrates a Glycymeris (pl. XIV:46) that does not appear to have been holed. Balu‘: One small shell, ca. 3.00 cm in diameter with a 0.40 cm hole, was in association with a green stone pendant and a perforated fossil sea urchin (Worschech, Rosenthal and Zayadine 1986: 301, pl. LXIV:2), suggesting that these items were all used as jewellery. Tawilan: Three water worn Glycymeris violascens, two (#8, 839) of which had a hole at the umbo, were studied by Reese (1995a:93). A fourth shell (#15) was registered. Due to their condition, these shells may have been used as tools (see below, polishing tools). Reese (1995a: fig. 10:1) also illustrates a Lambis truncata sebae that retained clear evidence that its hole had been worked as a trumpet.

30

chapter two

I-A/1b-2. Conch Shell Pendants A single Strombus decorus persicus (conch shell) may have been used as a pendant although in its present condition, the hole is badly chipped. Catalogue TJ 1832 (=Sh 38; Fig. 2.3:1; C65:27/49). L 4.67, W 2.70 cm. Complete. Parallels Timna‘: Among the marine invertebrates from the Shrine of Hathor is a good example of a Strombus gibberulus albus with irregular holes on either side (Reese 1988: 261; fig. 153:5). I-A/1c. Small Anchor-shaped Pendants Stone artefacts with a single, small perforation that were light enough to be worn around the neck are included in the class of pendants rather than that of weights. These artefacts appear in various polished stones, in basalt, and in limestone. Stone pendants come in a variety of sizes and shapes, sometimes determined by the material itself, its weight and its hardness. Because material is an important variable, the stone pendants were sorted by stone type, size and shape. Irregularly shaped natural stones are grouped together. I-A/1c-1. Small Anchor-shaped Stone Pendants A small anchor-shaped pendant of unidentified green stone was recovered from Room 306 amidst a heavy concentration of domestic pottery and artefacts. Unique at Tall Jawa and the finest example of its class, exact parallels are difficult to find. Catalogue TJ 1627 (Fig. 2.4:1; E65:29/106). Stone, grayish green. Polished. H 3.00, W 1.50, T 0.45 cm. Complete. Parallels Baq‘ah Valley: Three stone pendants, two drop-shaped and one slightly anchor-shaped, come from LB II-Iron Age IA tombs (McGovern 1986: fig. 74:1-3). Megiddo: Two grey stone pendants and one steatite pendant (Loud 1948: pls. 207:2, 11; 216:120) from Bronze and Iron Age levels are part of a larger collection which, according to Lamon and Shipton (1939: pl. 101:4-9), were quite common at Palestinian sites during the Iron Age and appeared in various shapes. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Although slightly smaller and made of “alabaster”

artefact classification and typology

31

(Chambon 1984: pl. 73:9), this anchor-shaped pendant is certainly of the same type as TJ 1627. I-A/1c-2. Large Anchor-shaped Pendants Three anchor-shaped artefacts formed of extremely vesicular basalt or pumice meet the criteria designated for pendants. Each pendant is trapezoid or anchor-shaped and perforated near one end. Pendant TJ 155 is very regular in shape with a biconical hole drilled in the centre of the smaller end. By contrast, Pendant TJ 1813 is irregularly formed and the perforation is off-centre. Although the classification of these artefacts as pendants is problematic, in all three examples, the perforation is only 0.20-0.30 cm in diameter, and these objects are much too small to serve as loom weights (cf B 4596; Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCVIII:48), although they may have served as tools (pumice stones) that hung from a cord. Catalogue TJ 155 (Fig. 2.5:1; A14:23/50). Pumice, dark gray (N 4/). H 5.80, W 4.30, T 1.40 cm; Wt 36.4 g. Complete. TJ 1813 (Fig. 2.5:2; B34:29/55). Pumice, dark gray (N 4/). H 6.40, W 4.70, T 2.50 cm; Wt 57.4 g. Complete. TJ 1830 (Fig. 2.5:3; E53:35/68). Pumice, dark gray (N 4/). H 7.80, W 4.00, T 2.20-2.70 cm. Complete. Parallels Tell el-Far‘ah (N): One basalt artefact that appears similar in size and shape was unfinished and listed with the doughnut-shaped perforated weights (Chambon 1984: pl. 76:11). Beer-sheba: A stone pendant, broken at the bottom, was among the finds from Casemate Room 66 (Aharoni 1973: pl. 70:4). Tall al-‘Umayri: Pendants mentioned in this report were made of bone, basalt, ceramics, and shell. This indicates the diversity of materials that could be chosen for suspension. Object #267 (Platt 1989: 361; fig. 20.6) is only a fragment of a basalt pendant. It has rounded corners and measures 1.80 cm wide at the perforation, which occurs 1.00 cm from the top. Tell Beit Mirsim: Although not perforated, a small (7.20 x 5.10 cm) stone of “lava” fits in the size range of the Tall Jawa pendants. Albright (1943:200; pl. 64:18) identified this artefact as a rubbing stone.

32

chapter two

I-A/1c-3. Rectangular Limestone Pendants Limestone pendants were rare and no two were alike; one was square and undecorated while the second was carved with care. For practical purposes, both are considered in this single category of rectangular pendants. Catalogue TJ 1252 (Fig. 2.6:1; B35:11/19). Limestone, very pale brown (10YR 7/3). Carved. Conical drill hole. H 3.60, W 3.50, T 0.90 cm, Wt 22.0 g. Complete. TJ 2059 (Fig. 2.6:2; E53:39/91). Limestone. Carved. H 4.90, W 3.90, T 1.50 cm. Broken. Within this corpus, pendant TJ 1252 was perforated from one side only with the result that the perforation is extremely conical. The small, plain pendant was carefully made and the edges were smoothed and rounded. The remains of limestone pendant TJ 2059 consist of the upper end which was perforated and a section of the rectangular body. The tab was perforated from both sides and what remains is chipped on the edges. The body is slightly larger than the top end and was carved on both sides leaving rectangular depressions of unequal size. The side with the larger depression may have been the obverse, but this is far from certain. Based on its present appearance, it seems that this pendant could be worn on a thong or attached to another artefact or even to an architectural feature. Its archaeological context leaves open all of these possibilities. I-A/1c-4. Natural Stone Pendants A small stone, perforated from one side, appears to have been a pendant rather than a bead since all other stone beads were carefully shaped. This stone object was registered as an artefact on the basis of the appearance of its perforation and the fact that it was not a random find in view of its position immediately above a surface. Catalogue TJ 1934 (Fig. 2.7:1; E53:37/83). Natural stone. H 2.00, W 1.30, T 1.10 cm. Complete. I-A/1d. Reworked Ceramic Pendants Pendants formed from reworked sherds are identified by the position of the hole in relation to the edge of the sherd. Reworked sherds

artefact classification and typology

33

were also formed into buttons, spindle whorls and stoppers. Only those sherds that do not appear to have been part of a mended vessel are included here. I-A/1d-1. Irregularly Shaped Ceramic Pendants Two ceramic pendants formed from reworked sherds were each unique in shape. The smaller of the two (TJ 1479) was almost anchor shaped but had two holes while the larger was lozenge-shaped (TJ 076). The fact that these reworked sherds are not finished on the edges opens up the possibility that these were merely sherds with mend holes. However, the biconical drill holes are not typical of mended vessels and the size of the perforation on Pendant TJ 076 is considerably larger than mend holes present in restored vessels. Catalogue TJ 1479 (Fig. 2.8:1; B55:11/53). Ceramic, gray (7.5YR 6/1). Reworked, Twin perforations. H 4.70, W 3.70, T 0.70 cm; Wt 20.8 g. Complete. TJ 076 (Fig. 2.8:2; A4:18/51) Ceramic, pink (5YR 7/4) ext, pinkish white (7.5YR 8/2) int. Reworked, Perforated. L 6.80, W 5.00, T 0.70 cm; Wt 29.3 g. Complete. Parallels Although no parallels to the exact shape can be expected, the occurrence of ceramic pendants at other sites confirms the classification suggested here. Tyre: One pendant, identified as ceramic, was rectangular in shape and perforated slightly off-centre at the top (Bikai 1978: pl. XXVI:19). Tall al-‘Umayri: In the 1987 season, 5 ceramic pendants were registered (Platt 1991:264). I-A/2. Beads Function: Beads are small, perforated objects strung together to form an item of jewellery for personal adornment which is worn around the head, neck, torso, wrist or ankle. Criteria: Beads are normally smaller than pendants23 and are perforated through the centre in order to be threaded by a string or cord. This perforation was either along the short or long axis. Beads could 23 Finds of beads and pendants in the same context suggest that pendants were strung with beads on necklaces as well as worn separately.

34

chapter two

be made of any material including ceramic, glass, faience, bone, metal, shell, wood, seed and stone (including semi-precious and precious stones). Although beads in a variety of materials may have the same shape, certain shapes are specific to a particular material. In view of this factor, the basic categories used to classify the beads are a) stone, b) glass, c) faience, and d) shell. Within each of these categories, beads are further divided on the basis of shape.24 I-A/2a. Stone Beads The corpus of beads from Tall Jawa was small, consisting of only 41 beads, 32 of which came from a single burial (B-3). Carnelian was the stone most common among beads found in Stratum VIII and VII domestic contexts, although other stones and faience were used as well. Bead types consist of disc-shaped, spherical, cylindrical, tubular, barrel-shaped, conical, biconical, and circular fluted.25 These shapes may be represented by several examples, each of a different size. The sizes of the perforation also varied but were usually in the range of 0.10-0.30 cm. I-A/2a-1. Disc-shaped Stone Beads A limestone, disc bead, cylindrical in section, was somewhat irregular in shape (Beck type I.B.2.b, short cylinder). Catalogue TJ 1191 (Fig. 2.9:1; E53:4/9). Limestone, pinkish white (7.5YR 8/ 2). D 1.40, H 0.55 cm. Hole D 0.15 cm. Complete. Only one disc bead occurred in Iron Age levels at Tall Jawa and parallels are rare although this shape does occur in faience. Parallels Khirbat al-Mudayna (Wadi ath-Thamad): One registered limestone bead (MT 300) from current excavations at Khirbat al-Mudayna is similar in size and proportions (Wadi ath-Thamad Project Object Register, 1998).26 24

The standard classification for beads is Beck 1981. These types are a revision of formal types designed by C. Barlow in her preliminary classification of the Tall Jawa bead corpus. Bead colours and sizes are provided by Barlow from her unpublished paper, “The Jewellery from Tall Jawa” (1995). 26 Artefacts from survey sites in the Wadi ath-Thamad survey area and from current excavations at Khirbat al-Mudayna on the Wadi ath-Thamad are included as parallels where this seems useful. The unpublished Object Register is part of the Wadi ath-Thamad archive at Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON Canada. 25

artefact classification and typology

35

Tell Keisan: Four disc beads made of faience were found together with two pierced shells (Nodet 1980: pl. 95:56).27 Wadi ath-Thamad Site #13: A faience disc bead (WT 13-061) is listed in the Object Register from the 1997 salvage excavation. I-A/2a-2. Spherical Stone Beads This bead group falls into Beck type I.C.1.a, standard circular beads with a size range of 0.60-1.30 cm in diameter. Catalogue TJ 2061 (Fig. 2.10:1; E53:39.91). Carnelian, yellowish red (5YR 5/ 8). D 0.60, 0.60 cm. TJ 2058 (Fig. 2.10:2; D21:17/8). Carnelian, light red (2.5YR 6/6). D 1.10, H 1.10 cm. TJ 1629 (Fig. 2.10:3; A83:15/57). Carnelian, red (10R 4/6). D 1.30, H 1.30 cm. Broken. TJ 1878 (Fig. 2.10:4; A93:33/120). Stone, white (5YR 8/1), red (2.5YR 5/8). D 0.90, H 0.80 cm. Chipped. Parallels Tell el-Far‘ah (N): One bead in the same size range (1.10 cm) is classified as a spherical bead although it has one slightly flattened end (Chambon 1984: pl. 74:18). Jerusalem: An almost spherical bead with slightly flattened ends (Mazar and Mazar 1989: pl. 9:18) falls into this type. Tall al-‘Umayri: Several carnelian beads were found during the random survey on the tell as well as during excavation (Platt 1989: fig. 20.7; 1991: fig. 10.84) although none appear to be perfectly spherical. Tawilan: Carnelian beads in the same size range are present in the bead corpus from the settlement (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.31:2,4). I-A/2a-3. Barrel-shaped Stone Beads The length of barrel-shaped beads (Beck type D.1.b) makes it easy to see that the central perforation of such beads was drilled from both ends.28

27

Five disc beads appear to be illustrated. For numerous reports on the study of drilling techniques employed in the manufacture of cylinder seals and beads, see Gwinnett and Gorelick (1991:186196) and bibliography cited there. 28

36

chapter two

Catalogue TJ 2122 (Fig. 2.11:1; E64:52/61). Carnelian, red (2.5YR 5/6). D 0.90, H 1.50 cm. Parallels Megiddo: Several barrel-shaped beads (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 90:26, 36) appear among the large number of bead types represented at Megiddo. Lachish: Barrel beads appear in a necklace of carnelian and quartz beads restrung for publication (Tufnell 1953: pl. 38:1). Tall al-‘Umayri: Object #60 appears similar to barrel bead TJ 2122 in size, shape and material (Platt 1989: fig. 20.7). I-A/2a-4. Biconical Stone Beads Catalogue TJ 1756 (Fig. 2.12:1; D12:25/40). Chalcedony? red (10R 4/6). D 0.80, H 0.60 cm. TJ 1628 (Fig. 2.12:2; B25:25/48). Haematite?, gray (7.5YR 5/1). D 0.95, H 0.50. Biconical beads of various proportions (Beck types A-D.2.e) were common throughout antiquity. Parallels Lachish: Biconical beads appear in a necklace along with spherical beads (Tufnell 1953: pl. 38:1). Tall al-‘Umayri: An example in carnelian is a good parallel (Platt 1991: fig. 10.82-10.83). I-A/2a-5. Cylindrical Stone Beads Catalogue TJ 1015/1-6, 8-10 ( B34:10/18). Stone? yellow (10YR 7/6; 2,5Y7/ 6). D 0.50, H 0.40-0.70 cm. TJ 1015/16 (Fig. 2.13:1; B34:10/18). Limestone? light greenish gray (10Y 8/1). D 0.55, H 0.50 cm. TJ 1015/17 (B34:10/18). Limestone? white (5Y 8/1). D 0.50, H 0.70 cm. TJ 1015/18 (Fig. 2.13:2; B34:10/18). Limestone? white (5Y 8/1). D 0.50, H 0.30 cm. TJ 1015/19 (B34:10/18). Sandstone? pale yellow (2.5Y 8/3). D 0.50, H 0.60 cm. The material of the third group of beads from Burial TJ/3 (TJ 1015/7, 11-15) cannot be identified. Several beads are heavily en-

artefact classification and typology

37

crusted while others need geological analysis. All of these beads share the same shape and size range as the stone and glass beads. TJ 1015/7, 1-15 (B34:10/18). The shortest bead in this group was TJ 1015/18 with a height of only 0.30 cm. In all other cases, the height ranged from 0.50-0.70 cm for both the stone and glass beads from Burial TJ/3. Although quite small, these beads fall into Beck types C.1.b and D.1.b, standard and long barrel beads, except for bead 1015/18 which is shorter (B.1.b). Parallels Lachish: At Lachish, cylindrical beads are among the smallest in the corpus (Tufnell 1953: pl. 66:19, 20). I-A/2b. Glass Beads The necklace of small beads from Burial TJ/3 included 11 glass beads and fragments (TJ 1015/21-32). The remaining beads were of stone (see above). The glass beads were either spherical or cylindrical with parallels from the tombs in the Baq‘ah Valley (McGovern 1986). A stone bead (Beck type I.B.1.b, circular short barrel) from Cave A4 is slightly larger than the Tall Jawa beads although identical in shape. I-A/2b-1. Spherical Glass Beads Only one bead can be assigned to this type with the reservation that it has slightly flattened ends. Catalogue TJ 1015/27 (Fig. 2.14:1; B34:10/18). D 0.60 cm. Parallels Baq‘ah Valley: The best parallel (McGovern 1986: fig. 67:63) is a bead that McGovern assigned to Beck type I.B.1.a, circular oblate, rather than circular standard, which is more appropriate for TJ 1015/27. I-A/2b-2. Cylindrical Glass Beads Six beads with straight or slightly convex sides are classed as cylindrical beads (Beck type I.D.1.b, long barrel), all in the size range of 0.40-0.50 cm in diameter. The remaining beads (TJ 1015/28-32) are broken and can only be tentatively assigned to this type. Catalogue TJ 1015/21-26 (Fig. 2.15:1=/22; B34:10/18). Glass, dark blue to light bluish gray (5Y 7/1). D 0.40-0.60, H 0.40-0.55 cm.

38

chapter two

Parallels Baq‘ah Valley: The best example of beads similar in size and shape (Beck type I.C.1.b) occurs in the form of a carnelian bead from Cave A2 (McGovern 1986: fig. 61:22). I-A/2c. Faience Beads Three beads made of faience were included among the finds from domestic Building 300. All were in secure loci and can safely be assigned to Stratum VIII.29 Catalogue TJ 1219 (Fig. 2.16:1; E54:32/131). Elliptical. D 1.20, H 1.40 cm. Chipped. TJ 1609 (Fig. 2.16:2; E65:29/108). Cylindrical. D 1.30, H 1.30 cm. TJ 2202 (Fig. 2.16:3; E65:62/85). Biconical. D 1.00-1.10, H 0.70 cm. Parallels for these beads were fairly common, although biconical beads in faience occur less frequently. Parallels Megiddo: Among the hundreds of beads from this very rich site were cylindrical and elliptical beads made of faience (Lamon and Shipton: 1939: pl. 91:25-26; Loud 1948: pl. 218:135). Beth Shan: One example (Rowe 1940: pl. XXXIII:71) serves as a parallel for biconical bead TJ 2202. Lachish: A very common bead form is the large cylindrical faience bead, Beck type I.B.1.b (Tufnell 1953: pl. 66:4). Gezer: A glass bead (Dever et al. 1974: pl. 40:11) serves as a close parallel to cylindrical bead TJ 1609. Tell el Mazar: From the late Iron Age tombs are numbers of very small beads, probably of faience or glass (Yassine 1984: fig. 10:2, 3; 60:298). I-A/2d. Shell Beads Two varieties of shell, cowrie and Conus, and a small group of fossil sea urchins are included among the beads since all were holed in order to be strung. These shells also appear at contemporary sites in association with other bead types.

29 For a study of Late Bronze Age silicate objects, including beads, see McGovern, Fleming and Swann (1993).

artefact classification and typology

39

I-A/2d-1. Cowries Three cowries (Cypraea annulus), each with the dorsum removed, came from Building 300. Shell 55 (TJ 2231) was in Room 306 along with greenstone Pendant TJ 1627, an association that suggests both items were for personal adornment. A fourth shell came from Building 800. Catalogue TJ 1099 (=Sh 64; Fig. 2.17:1; A83:15/57). L 2.12, W 1.57 cm. Open dorsum. TJ 2124 (=Sh 49; Fig. 2.17:2; E64:52/61). L 1.85, W 1.32 cm. Open dorsum. TJ 2227 (=Sh 47; Fig. 2.17:3, E54:16/31). L 1.67, W 12.75 cm. Open dorsum. TJ 2231 (=Sh 55; Fig. 2.17:4; E65:29/98). L 1.80, W 12.7 cm. Open dorsum. Parallels Tell Keisan: Two cowries and 4 disc beads were found together (Nodet 1980: pl. 95:56). Tel Michal: Six cowries found in a jug together with other beads help to confirm their function (Kertesz 1989a:370; pl. 79:2). Additional examples of cowries as beads in a necklace come from Persian period burials (Kertesz 1989a: pls. 79:7; 80:1). Megiddo: A headband of cowries and a single gold bead were in situ in Tomb 2121 (Loud 1948: pl. 227:4). A good example of a necklace with both stone beads and cowries was reassembled for illustration (Loud 1948: pl. 217:129). Beth Shemesh: Cowries were among other shells as part of a necklace in Tomb 14 (Grant and Wright 1938: pl. XLVIII:21). A second necklace of cowries is without precise provenience (Grant and Wright 1938: pl. LII:16). \orvat Qitmit: The only species of shell recovered from this shrine site consisted of a collection of 17 Cypraea annulus. Evidence from one shell revealed the method used to remove the dorsum so that the shell could be strung as a bead (Mienis 1995:276; fig. 6.6). Baq‘ah Valley: Reese (1986: fig. 104:2, 5) identified 72 such shell beads, all from Iron Age I Cave A4 except for 1 shell (B3.23) from Late Bronze Age Cave B3. I-A/2d-2. Conus Beads Although a perforated Conus could be used as a pendant, examples of this shell are usually classified with beads. Complete perforated

40

chapter two

shells as well as the upper, spiral end are found as part of necklaces along with other shell and stone beads. Unlike the Glycymeris, the hole in the centre of the spiral appears to have been drilled. Catalogue TJ 2230 (=Sh 54; Fig. 2.18:1; E65:27/102). H 1.97, D 1.50 cm. Water worn. Holed apex. Complete. TJ 1610 (=Sh 56; Fig. 2.18:2; E65:29/107). H 1.70, D 2.35 cm. Water worn. Holed apex. Broken. Parallels Hazor: What appear to be two Conus from Area B, Stratum VA (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXXXIV:17-18) are described as “conch” shells. Only one was holed at the apex. Tell Keisan: A well formed Conus artefact (Nodet 1980: pl. 95:55) was identified as a button. Beth Shan: Conus ebraeus with a hole in its apex (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 147:7) is a close parallel to Tall Jawa shell TJ 2230. Two examples of the whorl of the Conus used as a bead appeared in Level VII (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 145:1, 2). Megiddo: A bead, simply identified as a shell (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 91:77), was probably a Conus whorl. Beer-sheba: Under the floor of a Stratum VI (tenth-century) house were numerous finds, including Conus and Murex (Herzog 1984:31). The function of the Conus cannot now be determined because it was not found with other beads. Baq‘ah Valley: Such beads were quite common in Iron I Tomb A4 (Reese 1986: fig. 68:2-6, 25-26) where 7 out of 29 beads were formed from the Conus whorl. Tall al-‘Umayri: Among the stone beads was one Conus (Platt 1989: fig. 20.7:489). Tawilan: Two examples are found here (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.32:1, 2). According to Bienkowski (1995:90), one of these (Reg. 688) had a spiral incision. I-A/2d-3. Fossil Sea Urchin Beads Three small fossil sea urchins, perforated in antiquity, probably served as beads. Two other fossils (TJ 439 and 1247) were without holes. Catalogue TJ 005 (Fig. 2.19:1; A2:2/8). L 2.40, W 2.00, T 1.20 cm. Holed. Complete.

artefact classification and typology

41

TJ 553 (Fig. 2.19:2; E55:21/55). D 1.67, T 0.92 cm. Holed. Complete. TJ 690 (Fig. 2.19:3; C54:5/6). D 1.97, T 0.87 cm. Holed. Complete. Parallels Rujm al-Henu: One fossil sea urchin similar to the Tall Jawa bead was reported (McGovern 1983: 131, fig. 13:8; pl. XXV:1). Buseirah: A fossilized sea urchin (ROM #902; 975.416.49), from the 1974 season, is unholed. Tawilan: Although not identified as such, the illustration of stone pendant 502 (Bienkowski 1995:86; fig. 9.19:2) appears to represent a fossil sea urchin. I-A/3. Earrings Function: Earrings are decorations that hang from a hole pierced through the ear lobe. For the best known shapes, ancient iconography provides the necessary evidence to show that these ornaments were in fact earrings and not nose-rings.30 Criteria: Although earrings were popular in Iron Age Palestine, only three were recovered on the tell during six seasons. The most common type of hoop earrings is called “lunate” or “ovate” in shape (Muhly and Muhly 1989:284). Such earrings can be described as “tapered hoop earrings” (Ogden 1995:72) in which the rod forming the oval appears consistent in thickness or as leech-shaped where the form of the hoop becomes thinner as it passes through the ear and swells again near the lower part of the loop (Ogden 1995:73). Either style of earring can be plain or decorated with wrapped wire and granulation. Such jewellery can be made of copper, bronze, gold or silver (Platt 1989: 356).31

30

The best examples of men and women wearing hoop and hoop and cluster earrings include the Stela of Aààurnasirpal from the temple of Ninurta at Nimrud (Barnett and Lorenzini 1975: pl. 2), a king on a relief slab from the Central Palace at Nimrud (Barnett and Lorenzini 1975: pl. 50), a relief fragment of an official from Khorsabad (Barnett and Lorenzini 1975: pl. 59), and Queen Aààur-àarrat on a relief from the Palace of Aààurbanipal at Nineveh (Barnett and Lorenzini 1975: pl. 170). 31 The gold jewellery from Tawilan was analysed using EDX, energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence. The results showed that the gold itself was an alloy containing silver and copper (Ogden 1995: Table 8.1).

42

chapter two

I-A/3a. Lunate Earrings Only one complete earring (TJ 1663) consisting of an ovoid of bronze wire was recovered from secure Iron Age deposits. This find was associated with skeletal remains in Building 910. Comparable earrings analysed by Muhly and Muhly (1989:284) show that an alloy of copper and tin with the occasional addition of lead or arsenic (which may have occurred naturally) was the most common wire chosen for bronze earrings. Catalogue TJ 1663 (Fig. 2.20:1; C65:18/33). Copper/bronze. Opening at back, overlapping ends. L 1.85, W 2.05, T 0.25-0.35 cm. Complete. Parallels This simple earring form was popular throughout the Iron Age and many examples are cited in the literature. Tall Mastuma: Two bronze earrings, one from ninth-century and the other from eighth-century deposits are typical of this class (Tsumoto 1997: fig. 5:10, 11). K§mid el-LÙz: Simple loop earrings were common in graves (Hachmann and Penner 1999: pls. 12-15). Hazor: One earring from Area B, Stratum IV, is dated to the eighthcentury BC (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CVII:23). Tel Michal: Complete examples exhibit the same system of overlapping ends (Muhly and Muhly 1989: fig. 25.10:185, 189). ‘Izbet ‘arãah: A broken lunate shaped earring of tin bronze from Iron Age I is similar in appearance (Lupu 1986: fig. 29:6). Tel Miqne: Several silver earrings of lunate shape were part of the hoards found in seventh-century contexts (Gitin 1995:69; fig. 4.11,12). Maqabalayn: A number of simple bronze earrings were part of the grave goods in a tomb (Harding 1950: pl. XV:2). Tall al-‘Umayri: Intact and broken earrings appear in Iron Age levels (Platt 1989: fig. 20.8:341, 344, 412; 1991: fig. 10.6). I-A/3b. Mulberry Cluster Earrings Catalogue TJ 1755 (Fig. 2.21:1; E53:21/57). Silver. Attached grains. L 2.70, W 1.60, T 1.00. Earring TJ 1755 was only partially preserved to a length of 2.70 cm. This item of jewellery was made of a silver rod formed in the shape of a hoop that appeared almost circular (see Muhly and Muhly 1989: fig. 25.10:179). Because the upper part of the ring is missing,

artefact classification and typology

43

it is not clear whether the rod was leech-shaped or a tapered hoop. Although broken, the opening of the hoop may have been near the top. No additional wire appeared to be wrapped around the rod although there was a pendant “mulberry” cluster that consisted of one slightly flattened ball or grain connected to the hoop and in turn to a cluster of 4 grains, each decorated with 4 smaller grains. Earrings in three silver hoards from Tel Miqne-Ekron (Golani and Sass 1998: figs. 10. 11) show great variety of form and style, especially the use of granulated decoration. While none of these earrings are exact parallels to the earring from Tall Jawa, they increase the number of ornate silver earrings that date to late Iron Age II. Parallels K§mid el-LÙz: Larger, and more elaborate silver earrings of this type were recovered from Tombs 4 and 76 (Hachmann and Penner 1999: pl. 9:9, 12). Tel Michal: A single silver earring with a pendant cluster, somewhat less ornate than the Tall Jawa example, has been compared by Muhly and Muhly (1989: fig. 25.10:195) to Neo-Assyrian jewellery that reached its apex during the Persian period. However, the find spot of the Tall Jawa earring shows clearly that this style was already well known as early as the eighth-century BC (see Barnett above). Maqabalayn: Two silver earrings (Harding 1950: pl. XV:4) were granulated in a somewhat more elaborate style. Tawilan: Several earrings in the gold hoard from Tawilan have similar characteristics. These earrings include examples with individual grains attached directly onto the gold rod that formed the ring (Ogden 1995: fig. 8.20) as well as examples with clusters of grains (Ogden 1995: fig. 8.17). I-A/4. Fibulae Function: Fibulae served as clothing fasteners and were usually worn in the upper body area. They were common during the Iron II period and are shaped like a bow (Platt 1989: 356). Evidence from Tell Mardikh and Tell Afis in Syria provides additional evidence that these pins continued in use during the Persian Period (Mazzoni 1992:232). Three types of bronze fibulae appeared in the archaeological record at Tall Jawa, Type A/4a-1 is the ribbed or metal coiled bow with a spring catch while Type A/4a-2 has a rectangular bow that was rivetted to its pin (Muhly and Muhly 1989:288). The third type (A/

44

chapter two

4b), a violin bow shaped fibula, is represented by a metal fragment. Criteria: In contrast to the simple toggle pin, a fibula has two components, the bow and the pin that links the two ends of the bow. Over time, there was a certain amount of variation in size and decoration of the bow and of the hand at one end that supported the tip of the pin. The appearance of the pin remained constant except for its length and for the technique employed to link the bow at one end to the pin. These elements were attached by either a coiled spring or a rivet. I-A/4a. Bow-Shaped Fibulae I-A/4a-1. Ribbed Bow Fibulae Catalogue TJ 2217 (Fig. 2.22:1; B24:29/46). Copper/bronze, iron spring catch. Size uncertain. Pin missing. Broken. Fibula type I-A/4a-1 is a bronze bow that is missing its pin and is split open as a result of corrosion. This damage enables us to see clearly the position of the iron(?) spring catch and something of the formation processes employed by the metal smith. Due to its present condition, it is not possible to determine precisely whether the original form was bow shaped or triangular. What is significant is that the forearm is undecorated between the hand and the coiled wire decoration nearer to the bend of the bow. Parallels Tell Mardikh: Mazzoni (1992:237) dates a heavily oxidized iron fibula (fig. 6:31) to the eighth to seventh centuries BC. Tel Michal: Ribbed or beaded bow fibulae at Tell Michal range in size from 4.30-8.20 cm from the hand clasp to the opposite end of the bow (Muhly and Muhly 1989: fig. 25.13:243-247). Horvat Ritma: This example (Meshel 1977: fig. 8:11), probably dated to the Persian period, appears to have a thinner bow than TJ 2217. Whether this feature is chronologically significant has not yet been demonstrated since the Tel Michal fibulae with a thicker bow span the range from the Iron Age to the Hellenistic period. Tall al Mazar: Several examples of bow-shaped fibula with beaded or wire wrapped bow from the late Iron Age tombs appear to have a spring catch (Yassine 1984: fig. 55:153-159). ‘Amman: Seventeen fibulae of various sizes from a tomb at Umm Udaina were all bow-shaped with wire wrapped segments at both ends of the bow or arm (Hadidi 1987: fig. 5. 1-17).

artefact classification and typology

45

I-A/4a-2. Rivetted, Flat Bow Fibula Catalogue TJ 995 (Fig. 2.23.1; B34:10/18). Bronze. Undecorated. L 5.50, W 2.00, T 0.60 cm. Complete bow, pin missing. The plain curved bow is rectangular in section, rather than round, with a flat end where the rivet hole is located. This fibula was associated with a bead necklace in Burial TJ/B-3. Stronach (1959:187) identifies these fibulae as semicircular although TJ 995 appears somewhat misshapen. Parallels Tell Mardikh: A broken fibula with a rivetted clasp probably dates to the early Persian period (Mazzoni 1992:238). Tel Michal: Four rivetted examples from this site appear to be the closest parallels, especially item #260 (Muhly and Muhly 1989: fig. 25.13). Samaria: Two rivetted fibulae, one from Period V (C 218) and the other (Q 4197) from a Persian period context may in fact have bows rounded in section although this is nowhere mentioned (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: fig. 103:2, 3). Gezer: Only one fibula bow with rectangular section is illustrated (Macalister 1912: pl. CXXXIV:15). Lachish: Two complete rivetted fibulae (Type 3a) were reported (Tufnell 1953: pls. 57:39; 58:27). Beth-zur: A complete rivetted fibula came from a contaminated locus (Sellers et al. 1968:84; pl. 43a:6). I-A/4b. Violin Bow Fibula Catalogue TJ 780 (Fig. 2.24:1; C54:15/22). Copper. L 4.50, W 0.50 cm. Broken. This copper/bronze fragment was possibly part of an Iron Age I32 violin bow or L-shaped fibula (Stronach 1959:182) such as those found at Hama (Hama Citadel, Level F). No other use for this Tall Jawa metal fragment can be suggested. Parallels Tell Mardikh: Two examples come from Iron II-III contexts (Mazzoni 1992:233; fig.2:1, 2). 32 Birmingham (1963:80) describes the violin bow as Mycenaean in style, a shape that continued in use until the 7th century.

46

chapter two

Hama: Of three L-shaped fibulae, two (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 52:306-307) appear to have a wider shaft than the Tall Jawa example; a third fibula (309) is square in section. I-A/5. Rings Criteria: It is not always possible to distinguish finger rings from earrings since both articles of jewellery were in the same size range (1.50-3.00 cm in diameter) and certain rings had a opening on one side. Rings can be distinguished from small bracelets as these are usually 4.00 cm in diameter or larger. Two bronze rings were recovered from debris layers contaminated by Umayyad reconstruction activities in Building 600. Since good parallels can be cited from Iron Age contexts, these artefacts are assigned to our Iron Age corpus. Catalogue TJ 1458 (Fig. 2.25:1; D13:21/57). Bronze. D 2.80, T 0.30 cm. No ends visible. Complete. TJ 1985 (Fig. 2.25:2; D21:17/7). Bronze. D 2.30, T 0.20 cm. One end preserved. Broken. Both rings were formed of round wire with no flat area or bezel. The only distinction between them is that the wire of ring TJ 1458 is heavier than that of ring TJ 1985, although both types appear to be common in Iron Age deposits.33 Parallels K§mid el-LÙz: The artefacts identified as finger rings range in size from 1.70-3.20 cm; in this case, there does not seem to be any doubt as to their function (Hachmann and Penner 1999: pls. 24:1-2; 25; 26:13). Sarepta: Six copper/bronze rings with diameters in range of 1.402.50 cm are assigned to the class of finger rings (Pritchard 1988:105; fig. 26:29-34). Megiddo: Bronze and iron rings in the same size range (2.00-2.80 cm in diameter) were common in Iron Age levels (Lamon and Shipton 1939: Pl 86:17, 24, 31). Beth Shemesh: Rings were a common grave good in tombs (Grant and Wright 1938: pl. XLVIII:17-19). 33

Because of the way it was broken, the identification of TJ 1985 as a finger ring remains tentative. It could also be classed as a circular earring (see Muhly and Muhly 1989: fig. 25:10:179).

artefact classification and typology

47

Beer-sheba: An iron ring with a diameter of 2.60 cm fits well this class of thick wire circlets (Herzog 1984: pl. 14:11).34 Baq‘ah Valley: Rings appear to be somewhat larger and heavier than round earrings (McGovern 1986: figs. 80:11; 85:23). Maqabalayn: A group of 8 such rings (Harding 1950: pl. XV:1) are in the same size range as TJ 1985. It remains uncertain whether these were actual rings or earrings, since some rings had an opening. ‘Amman: Several rings, each in the range of 2.00-3.00 cm in diameter were among the jewellery from the sixth- to fifth-century tomb at Umm Udaina (Hadidi 1987: fig. 8:20-25). Tall al-‘Umayri and Vicinity: Although somewhat smaller than the rings from Tall Jawa, round wire rings without bezel represent both styles, open and closed rings (Platt 1991: figs. 10.53, 54, 57). Tawilan: Another example formed of copper, or of a copper alloy (Ring 654), is round in section (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.6:2).35

I-B. Cosmetic Related Artefacts I-B/1. Cosmetic Dishes Function: Cosmetic dishes were household items that held small amounts of cosmetics for mixing or applying. Minerals crushed in a mortar would be mixed with oil or water in such a dish to make a paste. Criteria: The class of cosmetic dishes includes high status containers that did not serve as mortars (see below). Three such items were identified in the Tall Jawa corpus, an undecorated Tridacna (Type IB-1/a) and two Unio (fresh water) shells (Type IB-1/b). While Tridacna are not common in the archaeological record, they do appear on occasion and the finest examples are engraved. The largest numbers come from sites in Edom.

34 The measurement for the diameter was taken from the scale on pl. 14, rather than the one on fig. 25, which would indicate that the ring is 6.00 cm in diameter (Herzog 1984: 25:10). 35 The ring from Tall as-Sa‘idiyah, illustrated in Pritchard (1985: fig. 8:16), was probably a bracelet or anklet given its diameter of 8.00 cm.

48

chapter two

I-B/1a. Tridacna Dishes Catalogue TJ 1471 (=Sh 60; Fig. 2.26:1; A83:12/34). Natural. Undecorated. L 13.92, W 8.40, H 3.70 cm. Complete. Tridacna that were engraved were first polished to remove the ridges on the outer surface.36 This was not the case with TJ 1471, although a few of the outer ridges are chipped or cut. Although the dish may have been unfinished, it appears to have been used, since the shine on the interior surface has worn off in the deepest part of the shell. Parallels Tawilan: A total of 15 examples are described by Reese (1995a:93) as “containers for ornaments or foodstuffs, or may have been the raw material for the engraved Tridacna shells.” ‘Amman: A polished Tridacna maxima was decorated with eyes drilled at the joint and inlaid with glass and coloured paste (Koutsoukou and Najjar 1997:147). I-B/1b. Aspatharia/Unio Dishes All complete examples and fragments of Aspatharia and most of the Unio (4 out of 6) dishes and fragments were from Field D deposits. In view of the contamination of the debris layers in Building 600 during its reconstruction in Stratum III, these artefacts will be discussed in a subsequent study; however, see Reese (Chapter 4; Fig. 4.1:6). I-B/2. Cosmetic Palettes and Mortars Function: “Cosmetic palette” is a term generally used to designate a class of small mortars of high quality stone that were probably used to crush materials used as make-up. Elaborately carved flat stone palettes date back to prehistoric times in Egypt. Among Egyptians, eye makeup was often applied to protect against common eye diseases and to ward off evil. To make eye paint, the mineral was ground on a palette using a small pestle or pounder and the ground mineral mixed with water or a water soluble gum for better adhesion (Forbes 1965:17). This functional designation is the result of consensus and has not been proven on the basis of the archaeological 36 Such shells have been studied extensively (see Stucky 1974; Reese 1995a, and Reese and Sease 1993).

artefact classification and typology

49

record alone. New Kingdom Egyptian iconography illustrates men and women applying make-up (Daviau 1993a:44, 46) contained in small bowls, but it is not clear that the container holding the makeup was the mortar used to grind the mineral. During the Iron Age, all Palestinian cosmetic mortars appear to have been bowl shaped. Criteria: Three criteria that help to distinguish between utilitarian mortars and cosmetic mortars are the quality of the stone, usually very fine grain white limestone or alabaster, the size of the object, in the range of 8.00-15.00 cm in diameter and, on most occasions, the presence of decoration. In his study of palettes found in Palestine, Thompson (1972a: 148) referred to examples made of glass, faience, flint, alabaster or marble, but affirmed that the most common finds from Iron Age levels were of finely grained white limestone which simulates marble and alabaster.37 The palettes available to Thompson (1972a: fig. 14) ranged in size from 5.60-12.20 cm in diameter and 1.00-3.90 cm in height. The depression for grinding the paste covers only 50-75% of the upper surface leaving an unusually wide rim. The majority of mortars were elaborately incised on the rim, but about 10% were plain. Decorative grooves marking a carination below the rim were common. The bottom had either a flat or a disk-base. The presence of incised decoration is not necessarily a chronological indicator, since such palettes occur in the same context as undecorated examples. In rare instances, these small mortars had handles (Harrison 1947:pl. 106:2-3). At Tall Jawa, no complete cosmetic mortars were recovered. Only one fragment (TJ 122), which constitutes 25% of the palette, is typical of this class. The rim is 3.00 cm thick and the body is slightly carinated below an incised groove. The upper rim surface is slightly convex and declines toward the edges. This palette is highly polished and smooth, and is composed of fine grain limestone with the appearance of alabaster.38 Other small mortars, some of which were clearly utilitarian (Type VI-A/1a), vary slightly in shape.

37 According to Albright (1943:80), white stone cosmetic palettes were one of the most characteristic objects of the Iron II period at Tell Beit Mirsim while Thompson (1972a:159) suggested that the small number of finds indicates that such objects were limited to the elite. Albright himself (1943:81) thought that the palettes were imported from the north, specifically from Phoenicia since he claimed that there was no finely grained limestone in Palestine. 38 The composition of this object has not been verified by a specialist.

50

chapter two

Catalogue TJ 122 (Fig. 2.27:1; A14:12/20). Limestone. Undecorated. D 10.00, H 3.00 cm; D (of base) 5.00 cm, int D 5.00, int Dp 1.60 cm. Broken. TJ 362 (Fig. 2.27:2; E55:5/14). Stone. D 9.50, H 2.80 cm. D (of base) 4.00, int D 7.10, int Dp 1.20 cm. Broken.39 Parallels Hazor: Of the 5 cosmetic palettes of this type from Hazor Stratum VA (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXXXIII:2-4, 6-7), two were plain (6, 7). Hazor Palette B1667/1 has most in common with the Tall Jawa palettes; this example is 10.80 cm in diameter, 3.00 cm in height, with a depression of 4.80 cm in diameter and 1.40 cm in depth. The disk base is 5.00 cm in diameter and the rim is exactly 3.00 cm in width with a groove incised below it. A slightly larger palette (12.00 cm in diameter) from Area G (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCLVI:9) was assigned to Stratum IV. Tell Keisan: One plain palette (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 83:9) with grooves around its outer side is a classic example of this type. Megiddo: At Megiddo, the vast majority of palettes were decorated. In fact, out of 32 that range in diameter from 7.40 to 10.00 cm and from 1.80 to 3.60 cm in height (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 108:112; 109:13-24; 111:25-32), only one (pl. 111:28), dating to Iron IIC, is plain. Beth Shan: Of the two alabaster palettes illustrated from level IV (Iron IIB) one palette is undecorated (James 1966: fig. 117:8) and has no grooves on its exterior. This palette measures 8.50 cm in diameter and 2.75 cm in height; the depression is 6.00 cm in diameter and 1.75 cm in depth; the base is 4.25 cm wide. The decorated palette (James 1966: fig. 117:9) has a ridge below the rim and is somewhat larger, measuring 9.50 cm in diameter and 3.00 cm in height. The depression is 6.00 cm wide and 1.00 cm deep and the base is 6.50 cm in diameter. Samaria: Plain palettes similar to those at Tall Jawa have been reported from Samaria although only the decorated ones are illustrated (Crowfoot et al. 1957:463; pl. XXVI:1-3). Tell en-Naßbeh: Four out of seven “cosmetic mortars” were undecorated (Harrison 1947:266). Gezer: One undecorated palette appears with several decorated “stone 39 This small mortar was highly polished and smooth, especially on its rim, which slopes toward the outside edges. There was no decoration on this palette. Unfortunately it was lost in shipping and further study is now impossible.

artefact classification and typology

51

saucers” (Macalister 1912: pl. CCXIII:1); this palette has the typical ridge and groove below the rim on the exterior. Tell Beit Mirsim: Among the 11 whole and fragmentary palettes found in Iron Age II strata, Albright illustrated two undecorated examples (1943: pls. 27:4; 30:2). Baq‘ah Valley: An undecorated palette was badly damaged but its rim appears to be 2.00 cm wide (McGovern 1983: fig. 14:1). Tall al-‘Umayri: The plain palettes reported from Tall al-‘Umayri are not illustrated with the decorated one (Platt 1991: fig. 10:44). Tawilan: Among the decorated palettes is one undecorated example (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.16:1) that has a thinner rim (2.00 cm) than TJ 122 and more refined treatment of the outer body.

ii. art and religious symbolism Artefacts in this category belong to several related assemblages that appear to have served a single, symbolic function in the lives of Tall Jawa’s inhabitants. The artefacts themselves show that their creators sought to beautify these objects and were selective in their treatment of each item. Because of the fragmentary nature of the artefacts discussed here, it is not possible to distinguish between the religious and the purely decorative items. Rather than make this judgement, these two functions are included in the same category. Human and animal figures have been classified as figurines since all were small (under 20 cm in size) and could be carried by hand. Larger figures or statues are not represented at Tall Jawa.

II-A. Figurative Objects II-A/1. Anthropomorphic Figures Among the 10 human figurines recovered at Tall Jawa all were female with the exception of a ceramic male head (TJ 100) and a stone male torso (TJ 1877). Their provenience suggests that the two female figurines from Building 300 were in use on an upper storey as was the case for the male figures in Building 102 (Daviau 2001a). Several female torso fragments and the mould-made female head from Field C-east (TJ 1709) were found in surface debris. Due to the small

52

chapter two

number of finds in this category, it is not possible to determine a common type. Finds from Tall al-‘Umayri (Dabrowski 1997) are also few and parallels for the Tall Jawa figures are rare. II-A/1a. Female Figurines Function: Human figures from ancient sites, both in the form of figurines and plaques, are still poorly understood.40 It is frequently assumed that these figures were elements used in cultic activities either in the home, in a local shrine or in a national temple (Dever 1987:226), since figurines have been found in all of these contexts. The association of clay plaques with funerary beliefs and practices, especially those that depict a female lying on a bed, is still a matter for discussion.41 A female figurine from northern Moab (WT-13/86; Wadi ath-Thamad Regional Survey Site #13), with her feet facing front and supported on a base of clay, could fall into such a category, except for the fact that there is clear evidence that this figure had been attached to another artefact, probably a model shrine. Since there is more than one such example from the same site, the position of the feet does not necessarily imply that theses figures were to be understood as supine (Daviau 2001b). All figurines found at Tall Jawa were either in domestic contexts or on the surface with no association to an explicitly religious building. While the stratigraphic context of these figures adds little to our knowledge of “established” religion (Holladay 1987:268), it demonstrates the wide distribution of explicitly religious artefacts in domestic areas (see Daviau, 2001a).42 Criteria: Artefacts in the category of anthropomorphic figurines include those that depict all or part of a human figure and were formed 40 This is especially true for societies from which we have no written evidence, for example ‘Ayn Ghazal where both animal figurines and human figures were recovered in considerable numbers (Rollefson, Kafafi, Simmons 1991:102-3; fig. 3; Schmandt-Besserat 1998). 41 Tadmor 1982:170; M. Tadmor also publicized these views in Eretz-Israel 15 (1981) 79-83, 80*, pls. 11-12; Qadmoniot 15 (1982) 2-10, and was followed by J. Tigay (1986:91), who thinks that those beds with ordinary women were used in sympathetic magic associated with giving birth. Lipi½ski (1986:89) appears to be of the same opinion. In contrast, see Keel and Uehlinger (1998:97-108; thanks to P.-E. Dion for these references). 42 This distribution pattern is not unusual; it is comparable to that found by Albright (1939:108) at Tell Beit Mirsim where he recovered 60 figurines and/or plaques without identifying any religious structures.

artefact classification and typology

53

by hand or in a mould. Figurines can be made in the round using a double mould or in high relief in a single mould with the back trimmed of excess clay. In one case (TJ 1375) there is a figure in relief impressed on a clay cylinder that is larger than the figure but does not constitute a plaque in the true sense. Only one such plaque depicting a human figure impressed in low relief on a flat “tablet” or background was in the Tall Jawa corpus (TJ 1712). As far as could be seen, all clay female figures are solid. Nor were there any recognizable anthropomorphic vessels, although several fragments of relief on vessel sherds (TJ 1713, 1783) may consist of human or animal limbs. Unfortunately, these remain unclassified and fall into the general category of appliqués. II-A/1a-1. Seated Female Figurines Only one figurine (TJ 1119) was probably that of a seated female.43 In this case alone, there was evidence for the back of the chair and its wings. A second figurine (TJ 1709), broken at the shoulders, cannot be excluded from this category although the shawl, common among seated figures, is also missing. For our purposes, a single figurine will represent this type, distinguished from other female figures principally by the wings of the chair which are preserved at shoulder level. Catalogue TJ 1119 (Fig. 2.28:1; E54:13/110). Clay; pink (7.5YR 7/4); gray core (10YR 5/1). Mould made (single), high relief. Painted; white (7.5YR 8/1); reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4); dark gray (7.5YR 4/1). H 7.40, W 7.50, T 2.50 cm; Broken. This figurine, broken at the waist, depicts the head and upper body of a female probably seated on a highly ornate chair with wings.44 Except for a chip on the outer top edge of the left wing and a vertical cut at the bottom of the left ear, the upper body of this figurine is fairly well preserved. Although a certain amount of erosion has worn off the back of the hands, their position and some detail are still clearly visible. The female face is almost perfectly round 43 Hachlili presents an exceptionally clear description of forming techniques and clarifies the distinction between solid figurines and plaques (1971:125-126). Holland (1977:121-22) spells out the various types of Pillar and Plaque figures without distinguishing as separate types a) standing figures with legs and feet showing and b) seated figurines. Surely these figures represent different conceptions and should be treated separately. 44 Thanks to P.-E. Dion for his observations at the time of discovery and to Diane Flores for her drawings.

54

chapter two

measuring 2.0 cm between the ears and 2.0 cm from chin to hair line. Hair was visible on her forehead and in locks resting on her shoulders, while the top of her head was covered by a shawl. The wings of the chair extend 1.6-1.8 cm beyond her shoulders on either side.45 The wing behind her right shoulder measured 3.5 cm from top to bottom while the left wing measured only 2.9 cm. Both wings were complete and rejoined the body at the level of the waist. Although the shoulders are indicated, the arms and elbows are not represented. By contrast, the wrists and hands, closed in small fists, are carefully delineated and are positioned immediately below the breasts. The breasts themselves are well proportioned and not exaggerated in size. There is no remaining evidence that suggests a garment or jewellery at the neckline although there appear to be ridges representing bracelets on each wrist.46 Only the face, hair, head shawl and wings of the chair retain painted decoration. The clay fabric is pink (7.5YR 7/4) with a gray core (10YR 5/1). The shawl is decorated with a white band (7.5YR 8/1) along its front edge and top. Evenly spaced, alternating stripes of reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) and dark gray (7.5YR 4/1) paint had been applied at intervals along the white band.47 The same reddish brown paint covered the face, but it had partially worn off. The ridge of hair above the forehead was painted with dark gray paint as were the locks on either side of the neck, although here the paint was poorly preserved. This can be accounted for by the fact that the locks were grooved with chevrons suggesting strands of hair, making it easier for paint to wear off the more exposed surfaces. The wings of the chair were covered with a white wash and painted with the same red and black paint as the shawl, this time in a crosshatch design with black lines from upper right to lower left and red lines coming from the opposite direction. This same motif and colour scheme repeats at Tall Jawa on a fragment of model shrine façade (TJ 1569), where cross-hatching in red and black is well preserved, 45 The width of each wing is subject to variation because the arms and shoulders of the female are not clearly distinguished from the wings (observation of W. Shury who undertook an initial typology of the figurines). 46 P.-E. Dion (personal communication) suggests that the ridges around each wrist may represent the edges of the sleeves of a garment. 47 A stone sculpture from ‘Amman consisting of the upper torso of a clothed figure, probably male, retains evidence for alternating red and black painted decoration along the fringed edge of a shawl wrapped around his shoulders (Dornemann 1983:158).

artefact classification and typology

55

as well as on pendant petals that decorate a tripod cup (TJ 1014), although the paint colours are somewhat obscured by soot. Such petals with red painted cross-hatching appear on a cultic stand from Megiddo (May 1935: pl. XX) and on another stand from Gezer (Macalister 1912: fig. 460). As well, hatching in red paint was preserved on a ceramic wall bracket, also from Megiddo (Loud 1948: pl. 249). Parallels In a search for the source of inspiration for the Tall Jawa figurine (TJ 1119), each distinctive feature needs to be studied. For the purposes of this treatment, these features include the hair, the position of the hands, the shawl, and the wings of the chair, including painted decoration.48 Hair: On each side of the face the locks of hair fall from behind the ears49 to the shoulders. The chevron pattern that begins below the ears has no parallel among the late Iron II-early Persian period plaques and figurines from ‘Ain Dara (Abu Assaf 1996: pl. 15:5, pl. 16:10, 22, 23, 25-27) and Hama (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 92:707) in Syria or from Megiddo (May 1935: pls. XXV: M 4647; XXVII: M 4495, 787). Figurines from these sites have diagonal or horizontal lines that indicate curled locks which frame the face in front of the ears. Where the hair does appear behind the ears, the style can be that of Hathor with curls spiralling away from the neck or a curl at the end of a long braid, where several strands of spiralling hair are shown (May 1935: pl. XXVI: M 1454). Position of hands: A second distinctive feature is the position of the hands, below the breasts but not touching or supporting them. Figurines or female plaques shown with hands holding the breasts are frequently naked with additional emphasis on the pubic area (May 1935: pl. XXXI: M 594, 598, 634; Beck 1995: fig. 3.67). Females depicted supporting their breasts, so common at Judean sites, were often in the form of pillar figurines such as those from Tell Beit 48 My thanks to P.-E. Dion whose initial research (June 22-30, 1994) produced a harvest of interesting figurines that share certain features with Figurine TJ 1119. His reference to Aegean examples of enthroned women wearing veils proved especially valuable. Figurines of women wearing a crown rather than a veil or shawl were more common in Sicily (Higgins 1970: pls. 150:1103; 151:1099, 1102, 1108; 152:1107; 153:1113-1115; 157:1149-1150). 49 Dornemann (1983:134) points out the great difficulty of accurately illustrating in a mould the position of the ears. In most cases, the ears are out of proportion and their stance is awkward in relation to the face.

56

chapter two

Mirsim (Albright 1938: pl. 25:10, 11, 13; 1943: pls. 29:12; 31:6).50 Figurine TJ 1119 falls into neither of these categories, nor is she holding a disk or musical instrument like the veiled figurines from Megiddo (May 1935: pl. XXVII: M 65, 787, 4365, 4495). Shawl: The conventions for the depiction of a shawl are not often discussed in comparative literature, so that no clear distinctions are readily available between the forming techniques of mould-made figures and the styling of the shawl itself. May (1935:32) has suggested that the shawl or “veil” consists of the clay, which extends beyond the edge of the mould and connects the head to the shoulders. It is difficult from his illustrations to distinguish the veil from locks of hair that fall in front of the shoulders (M 787, 4365, 4495), although it seems clear that the hair was depicted in a column of horizontal lines. What is not clear on the Megiddo examples is the actual form of the veil distinct from the hair since the clay does not form an upper, second ridge above the hair and headband. By contrast, the shawl on figurine TJ 1119 consists of a thick band of clay around the head that connects on either side with the wings of the chair. The painted decoration on the shawl clearly indicates that it was an intended feature, not just the remains of clay left after trimming.51 The particular pattern of painted lines on the curved edge of the shawl appears at Beth Shemesh on the curved, tubular rim of a kernos bowl (Grant 1931: pl. XI). New photographs and a drawing show more clearly the white slip with the red and black parallel lines on the bowl rim (Dothan 1982:224; pl. 8; fig. 4).52 Examples of figurines wearing shawls and seated on a chair or throne appear throughout the Aegean world although they are frequently without known provenience. Since the majority of these 50 While concentrations of such figurines are reported for certain sites (Tell en-Naßbeh, McCown 1947: pls. 85-86, 87:2), individual examples or small numbers of pillar figures also appear at such sites as Beer-sheba (Beit Arieh 1973:36; pl. 71:1), Ashdod (Hachlili 1971: pl. LVII:1, 3), and Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1964: fig. 36:1, 2). For an exhaustive study, see Kletter 1996. 51 Standing female figures clothed in long garments, holding a tambourine and appearing to wear a veil (Macalister 1909:14), fall into a different type than the seated figurines. 52 Although Dothan identifies this kernos vessel as Philistine pottery, the corpus of Stratum III pottery from Beth Shemesh has close affinity with the Stratum VIII pottery at Tall Jawa, which fits best into ninth to eighth century traditions. This may be an example of a decorative motif coming to Palestine from the Aegean and returning to it at a later time.

artefact classification and typology

57

figures represent women completely clothed in the fashion of their own culture, only those whose characteristics help us to better understand Figurine TJ 1119 are cited below. Chair: Among the numerous figurines from the Aegean that depict a woman wearing a shawl and seated on a chair (Higgins 1970: pl. 23:127, 128,53 129; 85:655-659; 86:660-661; 131:908; 134:940),54 only one has the posture of the Tall Jawa lady (Higgins 1970: pl. 23:129) with her hands under her breasts. Other examples, especially those from Tanagra, show a seated woman dressed in a full length garment with her hands on her knees.55 The same is true for figurines from Locris and Corinth (Leyenaar-Plaisier 1979: pls. 15:71; 16:77, 80), as well as from Crete (Leyenaar-Plaisier 1979: pl. 17:85; Mollard-Besques 1954: pl. LXXV:C116-C118). Among the figurines from Rhodes, two females figures are shown with one arm bent at the waist; one is holding a dove and the other holds a child (Higgins 1970: pl. 23:129, 130). Even though little decoration now remains on most of the Aegean figurines and on their garments, a few examples do retain evidence for painted designs. White slip and red and blue painted designs appear on the shawl, clothing and wings of the chair that flank each figure at the level of her shoulders (Higgins 1970:66-67). The fact that the closest parallels appear to come from the Aegean world sets the Tall Jawa figurine apart. At the same time, the utilization of the same painted design on other, locally made artefacts suggests that the figurine was in fact a local product. This inference is confirmed in that no other features, such as clay composition, paint colours or physical appearance suggests an import. Local provenience is also supported by a small number of figurines from Palestinian sites that appear to be wearing a shawl or veil. 53 This figure wears a polos (Higgins 1970:65), instead of a shawl, but is included here because her chair has wings just below the level of her shoulders, similar to other figures with a shawl. 54 This type of the seated woman appears at sites in the western Mediterranean as well, although in these examples, the woman wears a polos or a tall crown and is seated on a fancy throne (Higgins 1970:313; pl. 153:1118; 157:1151). 55 This “goddess” appears to have developed from an earlier, sixth-century style of seated female, with her clothing and the chair itself painted in elaborate designs (Webster 1950: pls. 12, 13, 18). That this figure may have had a very long history in the Aegean can be seen in the Philistine chair figure from Ashdod (Dothan 1971: fig. 91:1). For a detailed description of the seated female figurines from the Athenian Acropolis, see Brooke 1921:355; thanks to W. Shury for this reference.

58

chapter two

Parallels Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: A female head from House 16 in Stratum V (Pritchard 1985:33; fig. 10:31), dated to 820-756 BC, dates this style to a time consistent with Stratum VIII occupation at Tall Jawa. The same cross-hatched painted decoration is clearly visible on a Phoenician style, pregnant female figure (Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:67) which is on display at the ‘Amman National Museum. II-A/1a-2/a. Standing Female Figurines (upper torso) A second figurine also depicts a female head and upper torso broken below the breasts and chipped on either side of the upper body with the result that the arms and hands are not preserved. This figure, which may have been either standing or attached to another artefact, is in low relief with all excess clay trimmed from the back. The hair is shown in two rows of curls on the forehead and in three locks which begin below the ears and reach almost to the shoulders on each side. The ears themselves, large when compared to the facial features, are decorated with lunate earrings, each with three balls hanging from the crescent. There is no indication of jewellery around the neck or of clothing covering the chest. Catalogue TJ 1709 (Fig. 2.29:1; C65:0.5/35) Clay; reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/ 6), int+ext. Mould-made (single). Undecorated. H 5.50, W 3.90; T 1.70 cm. Broken. Parallels ‘Amman: A close parallel from ‘Amman Tomb F, published by Dornemann (1983: fig. 88:3), consists of a mould showing the face of a female with almost identical hair style and earrings. Although it is clear that TJ 1709 was not made from this mould, since the face is rounder than that of the mould, the attempt to represent a female with curls across her forehead, hair falling on the shoulders from behind the ears, and identical earrings is striking. In fact, TJ 1709, although worn, still retains a few diagonal lines on the locks of hair below the right ear. Such detail is very clear in the ‘Amman mould. Dornemann’s discussion of the mould (1983:134) suggests similarities between its features and female representations on ivories from Nimrud. While the ‘Amman mould depicts only one row of curls across the forehead, TJ 1709 shows two rows, closer in conception to the ivory of the “Woman at the Window” (Barnett 1982: pl. 50b).

artefact classification and typology

59

Although Dornemann points out the common cultural traits,56 he does not suggest a date more precise than the Neo-Assyrian period.57 This would fit well with the suggested chronology for Building 910 in Field C-east. Khirbat al-Hajjar: A statuette of a female, standing 46.00 cm in height (Ibrahim 1971:93; pls. 1, 3), is shown with earrings of the same style as on figurine TJ 1709 and on the ‘Amman citadel mould (see above). Because this is a free standing figurine in the round, there are curls at the end of each lock of hair and not just at the ends of the locks that fall on the front of each shoulder. In fact, this statuette has a different style of hairdo, but remains an important witness to Ammonite iconography.58 II-A/1a-2/b. Naked Female Figurines (lower torso) Four examples of standing figurines, all broken in antiquity, depict naked females. Only one of these figures (TJ 1712) can be classed as a plaque where a clay background exceeds the edge of the figure. Two figures (TJ 1106, 2199) were each formed in high relief in a mould with no excess clay left around the body. The fourth figure (TJ 1375) was also in high relief but appeared to grow out of a solid cylindrical pillar. Catalogue TJ 2199 (Fig. 2.30:1; C74:12/28). Clay; pink (7.5YR 7/4), gray core (2.5YR 6/1). Mould made (single). Undecorated. H 4.90, W 2.70, T 2.40 cm. Broken. Figurine TJ 2199 consists of a naked female preserved from just above the waist to just above the feet. Since there is no evidence remaining for the position of the arms, it must be assumed that they 56 See his analysis (Dornemann 1983:159-162) of the double faced stone heads from the ‘Amman Citadel. In the judgment of this investigator, the differences between these sculptures and the Tall Jawa figurine outweigh the similarities. For an example of the various hair styles of female depictions from Assyria, see Prag (1987: figs. 2-7). 57 Dornemann (1983:134) thought that the detail evident in the three moulds under discussion (fig. 88:1-3) would have been obscured by painted decoration identical with that seen on red slipped pottery of the period. While highly decorated specialty items were in use in the latest Iron Age Stratum at Tall Jawa, new types of unslipped wares were introduced as a result of technological change during the late eighth - seventh century (Daviau 1997a:26-27). The clay fabric of Figurine TJ 1709, like several of the new wares, was unslipped and undecorated. 58 Although the hair style of the Khirbat al-Hajjar statuette shows the locks with a centre part rather than curls across the forehead, it is a close parallel to a second mould of a female head, also from ‘Amman (Dornemann 1983: fig. 88:2).

60

chapter two

were bent above the waist. The waist itself is not indicated, although a girdle or the top of the pubic triangle is marked by an incised groove. Due to the amount of wear and pitting, it is difficult to see whether a depression indicates the navel or other details of the pubic area. On each leg, presumably just above the feet, is an incised groove that probably represents anklets. Behind the lower legs, the figurine is hollow; the depression easily fits on the smallest finger. This small figurine may have been set up on a support so that it could be free standing. TJ 1106 (Fig. 2.30:2; C27:0.5/102). Clay; light reddish brown (5YR 6/4, light brownish gray core (10YR 6/2). Mould made (single). Slip. H 4.68, W 3.50, T 2.52. Fragment. Almost unrecognizable when found, Figurine TJ 1206 depicts the lower torso and upper left leg of a naked female. Details indicate the position of the navel, a girdle just above the pubic area, and the genitalia. Covered by a light slip now badly worn, this fragment showed no evidence of other decoration. Catalogue TJ 1712 (Fig. 2.30:3; B56:0.5/1). Clay; pink (7.5YR 7/4), ext+int. Mould made (single). Undecorated. H 5.00, W 3.30, T 2.52 cm. Broken. Representing the lower half of a naked female, Figurine TJ 1712 differs from the figures described above in that it is in low relief on a clay background or plaque, which supports the feet and flanks the legs on either side. Like the other Tall Jawa examples, this figure also has a band at the waist; in contrast, the pubic area is not indicated in detail. The legs and feet are represented with incisions indicating the toes on the right foot. Unfortunately, the left foot is broken off and the lower leg is not well preserved. However, on the right leg, three incised lines indicate anklets. Parallels: This very common style of naked female is seen already in the early second millennium, continuing through the Middle and Late Bronze Ages and into the Iron Age. A detailed analysis is not warranted at this point, in view of the partial nature of the evidence from Tall Jawa. However, a few points can be made. For example, the proportions of the legs are very different from the graceful limbs of the female figurines from Megiddo (May 1935: pl. XXXI), where the legs are long and touch along their entire length. While the legs of Figurine TJ 2199 are fairly close together, they are so poorly represented that there is no indication of the knees. A figurine from

artefact classification and typology

61

‘Amman shares this characteristic (Zayadine 1973: pl. XX:2). In two other figurines (TJ 1106, 1712), the legs are separated slightly from one another along their preserved length. An important element of the Middle and Late Bronze Age depictions of the naked female is the clear demarcation of the pubic triangle. This motif appears to have degenerated by the time of the Tall Jawa figures as the pubic area is variously depicted. For example, the upper band appears to mark the waist above the navel or the position of a girdle below the navel. Most important is the negative evidence derived from these naked female figures, since not one figurine shows the hands at the side of the legs (Monloup 1987:314; pl. 1:1, 2),59 or meeting above the pubic area (Albright 1939: pl. A:6-8). This means that in every case, the hands either were at or above the waist, holding the breasts or carrying an object, such as a disc (Kochavi 1976:52), drum, tambourine, animal or flower. Examples of females with uplifted arms holding animals or flowers usually appear in the form of ceramic plaques (Albright 1939: pl. A:1, 3, 5) or on metal pendants (Negbi 1976: figs. 118, 119), popular during the Late Bronze Age.60 The plaque provides room for the depiction on a solid background of the associated attributes represented by the objects flanking the goddess. At the same time, females shown holding a disc or musical instrument are usually in the form of pillar figurines (Meyers 1991:16, 18). With the exception of plaque figurine TJ 1712 where there is room for uplifted arms, the most likely position for the hands of the standing female figurines is that of holding the breasts. Catalogue TJ 493 (Fig. 2.30:4; E55:19/45). Clay; reddish yellow (5YR 7/6), gray core (7.5YR 6/1); Hand made. Slip, red (10R 5/6). H 5.10, W 2.80, W 3.40 cm. Broken. 59 These figurines can be classed as plaques since there is a background of clay framing the limbs and surrounding the head. The clay was pressed into the mould forming the figure in relief, leaving a backing that was at least the same thickness as the figurine. An example of a plaque comes from a Late Bronze Age context at Tall al-‘Umayri (Younker et al. 1990: pl. 16); it shows a female holding one breast with her right hand, while her left arm hangs down against her leg. 60 These pendants were also discussed by Platt (1976) who refers to the gold pendant from Tell el-‘Ajjul studied by Negbi (1970: pl. 2:4). In this instance, only the face and pubic area are indicated in detail with breasts and navel forming a second triangle on the pendant; the shape of the body is not shown. Hestrin (1987:216; fig. 4) points out that on certain examples from Ugarit and Minet elBeida, an incised branch appears in the place of the navel.

62

chapter two

Figure TJ 493 is a stylized representation of the legs and feet of an anthropomorphic figurine whose complete form and identity remain unknown. No details of the anatomy are indicated either by their shape or by decoration. This item is included in the class of standing figurines since this seems its most likely attribution, although the closest parallels would be those seated, pregnant figures dressed in a long garment whose feet and legs are not delineated. One example from Tel Dor (Stern 1982a: pl. 15:D) is of a figurine seated on a low backed chair.61 However, in the case of TJ 493, there is no evidence of a chair or throne. II-A/1a-3. Pillar Figurines Pillar figurines are typically those that are modelled above the waist while the remainder of the torso and legs is represented by a simple clay cone, either solid or hollow at the base, or by a solid cylinder. Conical-shaped female pillar figurines, such as those found in Moab (WT-13/72; Daviau, 2001b), Judah (Kletter 1996), and on Cyprus (Meyers 1991:15), are not represented at Tall Jawa. Indeed, neither of the two pillar style figurines from Tall Jawa conforms to these types. One appears as a naked figurine in relief impressed full length on a clay cylinder, while the second pillar style figurine is doubtful and may in fact be a column attached to a ceramic model shrine. II-A/1a-3/a. Pillar with Figure in Relief Catalogue TJ 1375 (Fig. 2.31:1; E74:8/33). Ceramic; light reddish brown (5YR 6/4); very pale brown (10YR 7/3) int. Hand made with mould made relief. Red slip. H 6.90, W 5.20, T 5.40 cm (at base), T 3.30 cm (at top). Broken. Attached to one side of a ceramic cylinder, Figurine TJ 1375 represents a completely formed naked female with her hands covering her breasts. The figure itself may have been formed in a mould and then attached to the clay pillar, or a mould could have been pressed against one side of the pillar, which was hand made and finished on the bottom. At the break just above the arms, one can see that the shoulders grew out of the side of the cylinder, which 61 Another feature of these veiled, pregnant female figures is that some are hollow (James 1966: fig. 116:4, 7). Such figurines were most numerous in northern Palestine, especially at sites along the coast where they appear to reflect a Phoenician tradition (Pritchard 1988: fig. 12:34, 39, 42).

artefact classification and typology

63

then tapers as it approaches the head. Broken at this point, only the arms and hands are sufficiently preserved to be certain of their position. This appears to be slightly different from that of the figures shown holding the breasts from below, as on the Ammonite seals discussed by Avigad (1977: fig. 1),62 and the partially clothed figures from ‘Ain Dara (Abu Assaf 1996: pl. 16:b-e). In these examples, the arms are bent so that the elbow is shown near the waist. In the case of TJ 1375, the arms appear to be practically horizontal and the shoulders are only slightly higher. The illustration on a seal from Lachish of a worshipper in a position of veneration beside a naked female who holds her breasts indicates that such a depiction represents a goddess (Keel and Uehlinger 1998: fig. 323).63 Parallels: No close parallels are currently known, due primarily to the shape of the pillar, which at the base, is four and a half times thicker than the legs. This was clearly a free standing pillar, completely covered in red slip (10R 5/8), and not just a background of excess clay. Whether this was an attempt to represent the local understanding of the female represented in Judean style pillar figurines (Hestrin 1987: pl. 30:B) or a new depiction of the relationship of the goddess to a tree trunk (Hestrin 1987:219) cannot be determined on the basis of this single example. Cyprus: A clay caryatid stand from Cyprus (Moorey 1973: fig. 2) consists of a cylinder or pillar of similar shape with applied naked female figures. The principal difference between this stand and TJ 1375 is the relationship of the pillar to the human figures. At no point do the figures grow out of the pillar; they are clearly attached from head to foot. Again from Cyprus, is a decorated clay stand with a naked female on either side of a cylindrical trunk. Although both figures are shown with their hands against the sides of their legs, painted decoration delineates the pubic area. This possible incense stand from royal Tomb 47 is dated to the seventh century (Karageorghis 1980:208; figs. 8-9).64 62 The position of the hands covering the breasts appears on figurines from Wadi ath-Thamad Regional Survey Site #13 (WT-13/35, WT-13/68) while at the same site, an anthropomorphic vessel (WT-13/123) represents a female supporting her breasts with her hands (Daviau, 2001b). 63 Tufnell (1953:365) cites the opinion of B. W. Buchanan, who dated the scaraboid to the Persian period on the basis of the style of clothing of the worshipper. Keel and Uehlinger (1998:329) suggest a date in the seventh century. 64 Female figurines from Cyprus, dated to the sixth century BC, appear to be dressed and adorned with jewellery. At the same time, certain of these figures hold

64

chapter two

II-A/1a-3/b. Unidentified Pillar Figurines Pillar figurines with a cylindrical or slightly conical base are extremely common in Judah and on Cyprus. Kletter (1996:29) studied 854 Judean pillar figurines, using as his principle of classification a “typology according to the heads.” In describing the bodies, he considers them as “hand-made, very schematic and standard.” In the case of the example from Tall Jawa, the pillar is a solid cylinder of clay. Greater variety is seen in the pillar figurines from Moab, where the pillar is often wheel made (Daviau, 2001b: fig. 3).65 Catalogue TJ 1696+1829 (Fig. 2.31:2; A15:6/10+B65:1/18) Clay; pink (7.5YR 7/4); gray core (10YR 5/1). Hand made. Painted. 2 fragments = H 9.70, W 3.80 cm. Broken. Only one example of a cylindrical pillar (TJ 1696+1829) that possibly served as the lower half of a figurine was recognized in the corpus. Three features point to the identification of this artefact as the trunk of a pillar figure, 1) the size and finish of the cylinder itself, 2) a ridge of clay on one side of the upper edge, and 3) painted decoration. The pillar consists of two mendable fragments, one (TJ 1829) of which preserves the finished base. At the break, a series of 5 badly faded bands of gray paint (10YR 5/1) are divided into two groups. The bands extend across the front and sides of the pillar but are missing from the back side. Additional globs of colour may not have been original. Beginning at the level of the bands is a vertical scar on the upper left back, which indicates that this figure was attached to another clay artefact even though it did not mend with any of the recognizable shrine façade fragments recovered during excavation. Above the bands is a horizontal scar and a remnant of clay that may have represented an arm. The only other possibility is that this pillar was in fact a small column attached to the façade of a model shrine, such as one purportedly from Jordan (Weinberg 1978:41).66 Due to the fact that this artefact is incomplete, our attempt at identification must remain tentative. their breasts (Åström, Biers, et al. 1979: fig. 83) like the earlier naked female figures. 65 This was probably the case for two figurines from Mount Nebo cited by Kletter (1996:30) although he does not mention this possibility. 66 Another model with attached columns, also from Jordan, is illustrated in the collection at the Israel Museum Exhibit, at www.imj.org.il/archaeology/ model.htm.

artefact classification and typology

65

Parallels ‘Ain Dara: A single example (Abu Assaf 1996: pl. 17:33; The Catalogue, p. 68) of a cylindrical pillar with attached arms and breasts appears to be a pillar figurine. The figure is rather crudely made, and the head, the most significant element for classification, is missing. However, its size (H 10.3, W 2.8 cm) and the manner in which the arm is attached to the side of the pillar offers support for the identification of TJ 1684+1829 as an anthropomorphic figure. II-A/1a-4. Figurine Moulds Examination of the ceramic figurines at Tall Jawa suggests that they were formed in moulds rather than made by hand. Certain features may have been enhanced by hand and, by necessity, they were slipped and painted after removal from the mould. However, only one fragment of a ceramic figurine mould, attributed to Stratum VIII, can be assigned to the Iron Age occupation levels. Catalogue TJ 1782 (Fig. 2.32:1; A15:1/5). Clay; pale red (2.5YR 7/4); dark reddish gray core (2.5YR 5/1). Undecorated. H 2.50, W 3.20, T 0.80 cm. Broken. Only the lower part of the mould is represented by this small fragment. Depressions for the end of the two legs are visible and clearly indicate that there were no details that would represent the feet. On this basis, one cannot determine the type or sex of figurines produced in this mould, except to say that the legs are not touching along their length, which would suggest a naked figure. II-A/1b Male Figurines Three male figures, all from Building 102, reflect the diversity in iconography at Tall Jawa. A ceramic head (TJ 100) of a male wearing an atef crown has been studied in detail (Daviau and Dion 1994) and compared to the stone sculptures from the ‘Amman area. A second figure, missing its head, is a small stone sculpture of a naked male (TJ 1877), while the third figure (TJ 1872), also in stone, is poorly preserved. A fourth fragment (TJ 2007) represents the skirt and feet of a standing figure; it is included here, based on parallels consisting of more complete examples of male figures.

66

chapter two

II-A/1b-1 Ceramic Male Head Catalogue TJ 100 (Fig. 2.33:1; A4:2/36). Clay; light reddish brown (2.5YR 7/ 4); gray core (10YR 5/1) Mould made (single). Slip. 2.5YR 6/6, red. H 6.55, W 4.40, 3.10 cm. Broken. The study of stone statues and ceramic male figurines depicted with the atef crown (Daviau and Dion 1994) can now be expanded with finds from recent excavations and with additional reflection on the longevity of this iconographic style from the Middle Bronze Age until the Persian period. Parallels Kharayeb: Examples of this style of male figurine were present in both the Iron Age, as an Osiris figure, and in the Persian period, as a seated male with a long beard (Chéhab 1951-1954:17, 20; pl. VII:2; VII:4-6, respectively). Sarepta: A hollow figurine head of a male wearing the atef crown, one of many figurines recovered from the shrine area at Sarepta (Pritchard 1988: fig. 13:60), depicts the same style of beard and mustache. K§mid el-LÙz: The male wearing the Egyptian white crown or its variant, the atef crown, appears as a standing and striding figure (Metzger 1993: figs. 22:4=pl. 19:1; 24:2; Pls 18:1, 2; 22:1), and as a seated, or peace, figure (Metzger 1993: fig. 22:5=pl. 19:2). Another standing male figure with the full atef crown has one arm raised (Metzger 1993: pl. 22:2). Tall Jalul: A recent surface find of a male figurine playing a double flute is shown wearing a very squat version of the atef crown (Younker et al. 1996:72; fig. 12). II-A/1b-2. Stone Figures No complete male figurines were recovered although one headless figure is clearly a male. The second object is badly broken and preserves only a portion of the lower torso. Catalogue TJ 1877 (Fig. 2.34:1; B65:10/26). Silt stone; pale yellow (2.5YR 8/ 3). Carved. Undecorated. H 6.70, W 4.20, T 1.85 cm. Broken. TJ 1877 consists of the complete torso of a beautifully formed male figure in the nude. This statuette sustained damage to its right arm and lost its head and left leg. The base of the right leg is also damaged although in antiquity it had been drilled vertically (0.30 cm

artefact classification and typology

67

deep) and may have had a support. This means that the original length of the right leg cannot now be determined. The left leg was broken across the upper thigh but was not drilled, so that we may suppose the leg originally was full length. The body is smooth without elaborate detail. Only the nipples are somewhat exaggerated, while the arms are slimmer than would normally be the case. Only a few simple incisions represent the penis, giving the figure a somewhat stylized appearance. The stance suggests a standing figure with his arms framing his upper body and bending so that the hands can rest side by side on his abdomen. The hands appear to be on either side of the navel although this feature was only faintly indicated. The back of TJ 1877 is finished and the small buttocks are well defined. No other features help us to identify this figure or its function in Building 102. Parallels This figurine appears to be unique in Transjordan and no comparable figures in stone are known from Israel. It is clearly not a local version of the smiting god or of the seated robed El of the Syrian pantheon (Negbi 1976:29, 46). A number of nude male figures in metal come from Byblos and date to the 2nd millennium. Negbi (1976:21) compares these figurines with Middle Kingdom wooden statuettes and includes them in her Type II, male warriors in “Egyptian” pose. Since nude males are rarely found during the Iron Age outside of Greek art, this small treasure from Tall Jawa remains something of a mystery. Catalogue TJ 1872 (A15:5/22). Porphyry; dark reddish gray (10R 3/1), ext; very dark gray (5YR 3/1), int. Carved. Undecorated; polished. H 4.40, W 4.30, T 3.00 cm. Fragment. This badly damaged fragment seems to represent the hips of a striding figure. Although there are no details that allow us to assign sex and status to the figure, it seems most likely that it belongs among the male figurines since it shares the same stance as striding deities or pharaohs. The material and its treatment, a very hard stone that was highly polished, also points to the importance of the figure represented by this small sculpture. Due to its poor preservation, no comparisons will be attempted.

68

chapter two

II-A/1b-3. Unidentified Anthropomorphic Figures Catalogue TJ 2007 (Fig. 2.35:1; B44:20/40). Ceramic; reddish yellow (5YR 7/ 6), pink core (5YR 7/4). Mould made(?). Slip (2.5YR 6/6, red—back), (10YR 8/2, very pale brown—front); paint (N3/, very dark gray). H 4.30, W 3.10, T 2.70 cm. Broken. This figurine depicts the lower leg portion of a standing figure dressed in a long garment. Broken in the front just above the base, the feet are missing although the base was otherwise complete. Above the level of the feet, the figure was cylindrical. Details of dress include a section of pleats that represent the skirt in the front. No pleats were incised on the sides and around the back. Just below the break were 2 areas of paint that suggest the ends of a long sash or belt. Assuming that the preserved fragment represents approximately one third of the total figure, we would expect a standing figurine with a total height in the range of 12.00 cm. Unfortunately, none of the other figurine fragments from Fields A-B mended with this fragment. Parallels ‘Amman: The best example of a standing male figure in a long, pleated skirt is the stone statue of YaraÈ-‘Azar (Dornemann 1983: fig. 92:3). Here a male wears a shawl and a girdle that hangs down from his waist. The ends of the girdle are decorated with fringe (Dornemann 1983:157). By comparison, TJ 2007 depicts the ends of the girdle in dark gray/black paint without any additional details. At the same time, the ‘Amman stone sculpture is the best model for our small ceramic figure. Interpretation: Scholars who worked in the first half of this century and interpreted a very incomplete archaeological record frequently presumed that human and animal representations were religious in nature. Ceramic figurines, understood to be representations of various gods, were labelled cultic or ceremonial in function, for example Macalister (1909: 14-16), Van Buren (1930: xlviii), May (1935: 28), and Albright (1939: 107-20). But as early as 1885, Perrot differentiated between some figures, which depict votaries (individual humans) and others which depict deities, based on the presence or absence of divine symbols (Perrot and Chipiez 1885, 264).67 In the case of the Tall Jawa figures, only TJ 100 boasts divine symbols 67 Thanks to W. Shury for the initial study of cultic function and for the references included here.

artefact classification and typology

69

(Daviau and Dion 1994). In view of the small number of figurines and their parallels from the region of Ammon (Daviau, in press), it is clear that archaeologists working in Transjordan are still dealing with a very limited archaeological record. At this point, it would be premature to assign the female figurines and the stone male figure (TJ 1877) to the category of votaries without a much larger corpus of comparative material. II-A/1c. Appliqués No complete anthropomorphic vessels were found at Tall Jawa. While this is not surprising in itself, it is somewhat perplexing in that two fragments of ceramic vessels did retain fragments of applied relief. Due to their small size and incomplete condition, the exact nature of these reliefs cannot be identified. Catalogue TJ 1713 (Fig. 2.36:1; A15:0.5/1). Ceramic; pink (5YR 7/4), ext+core; reddish yellow int (5YR 6/6). Wheel made with hand made relief. Paint, dark gray (N4/). H 3.70, W 3.30, T 1.70 cm. Sherd. TJ 1783 (A15:1/5). Ceramic; pink (7.5YR 7/4), light gray core (2.5YR 7/1). Hand made. Slip, red (2.5YR 6/6). Sherd with raised ridge. Of the two sherds with relief, TJ 1713 is the most interesting, probably because it was painted. Now, only one line of dark gray (N4/) paint is preserved on the relief fragment. The relief appears to represent a limb, possibly a bent elbow or leg from a horse and rider figurine, although no such figures could be identified in the Tall Jawa corpus. This omission may be a chronological indicator that puts Stratum VIII prior to the introduction of this style of figurine. II-A/2. Zoomorphic Figures Function: The precise function of zoomorphic figures cannot be determined in every case on the basis of the archaeological record of an individual site, unless they are associated with other, more clearly defined artefacts. Few scholars can claim that they can distinguish between toys and cultic objects within this class when such finds are unstratified or have few parallels. Criteria: To be included in the class of zoomorphic figurine, each object or fragment of an object must depict an animal in whole or

70

chapter two

in part. Figures of animals, like human figures, were made in a variety of styles; as solid figures (II-A/2a), as hollow figures with applied features, and as vessels (II-A/2c) usually with one or more spouts. Also included in this class is the ceramic head of a ram (TJ 963), which appears to have been part of a stand or rhyton. All animal figures within this class from Tall Jawa were made of clay although parallels in metal to the same animal have been found at other sites. Evidence suggests that some zoomorphic figures from Tall Jawa were probably hand made in the round, while others, especially the heads, could have been mould made. In the case of zoomorphic vessels, the bodies show clear signs of being turned on the wheel, probably in the form of a juglet that was then modified by the addition of a neck, head, tail and legs (Hachlili 1971:126). II-A/2a-1. Zoomorphic Figurines Excavation yielded only one solid zoomorphic figurine (TJ 1249) that was clearly not a vessel or an attachment on a larger artefact. Catalogue TJ 1249 (Fig. 2.37:1; E54:32/136). Ceramic; very pale brown (10YR 7/3); dark gray core (5YR 4/1). Mould made with appliqués. Pellets, incised lines. H 6.40, W 3.00, T 4.00 cm. Broken. The only figure of its kind at Tall Jawa, this solid ceramic head and neck of an animal is difficult to identify. It has a narrow muzzle similar to that of horse figurines, however the nose is quite short in comparison to some of the horse and rider figurines from Kourion (Young and Young 1955: Plate 23:1210, 1245, 1252) or from Hama (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 94:720). A second anomaly is the thick neck of TJ 1249 which looks like that of bull figures, especially bull vessels (see below). An applied lump of clay on the left side of the head was broken in antiquity but may have been the base of a horn, although an indentation in this appliqué is puzzling. What appears to be a depression representing the pupil of the eye on a horse’s head from ‘Amman (Zayadine 1973: pl. XIX:1) resembles in its position the appliqué on Head TJ 1249. In contrast, the ‘Amman head was hollow with a spout through the nose. Decoration consists of added clay pellets on the forehead and between the ears, which were not preserved. Below the pellets were two incised bands running across the forehead. Three triangular pendants hang from these bands, while a second set of bands is lower

artefact classification and typology

71

down across the muzzle. No other decoration, either in the form of slip or paint, was evident. Parallels Moab: A single complete figurine from Moab (Weinberg 1978:30) is not an exact parallel, but it does have clay pellets attached to its forehead and nose. This feature is not common on horse figurines, where incisions or paint usually mark the position of the bridle. II-A/2a-2. Zoomorphic Protome One beautifully modelled ram’s head poses a problem for our classification system because it seems to have been slipped both on the exterior and on the interior. The face itself may have been formed in a mould but the inside is in the shape of three triangular planes that appear to have been made by hand. Whether this was the lower part of a rhyton or the corner of a model shrine or stand cannot be determined due to the way in which this fragment was broken. The evidence of slip on the interior suggests that this was not merely an attachment on the rim of a bowl, although the closest parallels to the iconography are found on such vessels. Catalogue TJ 963 (Fig. 2.38:1; C43:1/3) Ceramic; light red (2.5YR 7/6). Hand made. Slip, red (2.5YR 5/8); paint, black (7.5YR 2.5/1); slip, light red (2.5YR 7/6) int. H 5.60, W 6.50, T 4.30 cm. Broken. The face of the ram was decorated with incised lines around the almond-shaped eyes, with depressions in the ears and shallow punctures in the nostrils. Black paint was applied to the inside of the ears, the eyes, horns and across the forehead. The triangular grooves present in the horns appear to be part of the mould; unfortunately, the top of each horn is missing. The shape of the face reflects the triangles forming the inside of the head with the dewlap appearing where two triangular planes meet below the muzzle. The mouth is rendered by a straight groove across the muzzle; excess clay at the corners indicates that the mouth was made after the face was removed from the mould. Chips on the left side of the nose and the right side of the cheek show clearly that this artefact was produced using one of the new clay fabrics that made their appearance under Assyrian influence during Stratum VII in Fields C and D (Daviau 1997:27). Chambon (1984:77) points out that ram head rhyta, made of faience, appear on Cyprus (Enkomi Tomb 86) during the Late Bronze

72

chapter two

Age. Another faience example was recovered at Ulu Burun amidst the finds from the Late Bronze Age ship (Bass 1986:290; 1987:708). According to Chambon (1984:77, n. 26), Palace Ware and metal examples appear at late ninth- to late eighth-century sites in Assyria and its hinterland and continue into the Persian period. Parallels Tall Beydar: That ram attachments had a long history is seen in an example from Tall Beydar and in the metal prototypes cited in the report (Bretschneider 1997:214). Zencirli: In view of the presence of red slip inside head TJ 963, one of the best parallels in terms of function may be the ram’s head and horns on the base of a cup or rhyton found at Zencirli (von Luschan and Andrae 1943: pl. 20:d). Tall Munb§qa-Ekalte: One example of an architectural model is preserved with a ram protome attached (Czichon and Werner 1998: pl. 16:13). Hama: Probably the closest parallel in appearance is a ram’s head that was part of a vessel (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 72:495).68 The detail on the horns and their position curving around the ears to end on the cheeks just below the eyes is almost identical to TJ 963. Tell Abu Hawam: Two Late Bronze Age ram headed cups studied by Zevulun (1987: pl. 6:B, C), one from Tell Abu Hawam and the other from Enkomi, share similarities with TJ 963 in that both have diamond shaped ears and horns that rest on the cheek below the eye. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Another cup with a ram’s head (Chambon 1984: pl. 64:4) lacks the detail on the horns; however, they wrap cleanly around the ears and rest on the cheeks. Megiddo: Two ceramic heads from hollow figures or vessels appear to represent rams, but the horns do not curve to the front of the face (May 1935: pl. XXXVII: M 1014, M 4565). In spite of these differences, both heads were decorated with red wash or slip and certain features were outlined in black (M 4565), the same treatment as the head from Tall Jawa. Ashdod: Among the numerous kernos bull heads (Dothan and Freedman 1967: fig. 44:1-6; 45:1-4), there is one of a ram (Dothan and Freedman 1967: fig. 47:7), although in this example the horns flare 68 Riis and Buhl (1990:158) reserve the term “kernos” for rings that support only cups or small bowls. Those rings with animal heads or other attachments are not included in the same class (cf. Hachlili 1971).

artefact classification and typology

73

out from the side of the head before curving around the ears. Tell en-Naßbeh: Out of 60 ceramic animal heads, only one appears to be that of a ram with the distinctive markings on the curved horns (McCown 1947:273; pl. 88:29). Tell el-Hesi: A very well preserved ram’s head (Bennett and Blakely 1989: fig. 208:5), apparently from a hollow vessel, appears to have undecorated horns in the style of the Ashdod head with flaring horns (see above). At the same time, it is not clear whether the muzzle functioned as a spout. Bennett and Blakely (1989:279) do not cite any Persian period parallels, indicating how rare these figures were. Sahab: Geographically close to Tall Jawa is the site of Sahab where a ram’s head, originally attached to a vessel, is reported without further description (Harding 1948:95; pl. XXXIV:175). However, the broad forehead appears similar to TJ 963. Tawilan: A ram’s head attachment on a bowl is so badly worn that the features cannot now be distinguished (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9:64). Such attachments were however solid on the inside, where they sealed against the bowl rim, and thus are not true parallels for TJ 963. Iconography of the ram: The ram also appears in the iconography of Ammonite seals that date, according to Aufrecht (1989:352), to the seventh-century BC.69 Other uses of the ram’s head are evident in ivory inlays from Nimrud, where it frequently appears as a sphinx head (Herrmann 1986: #418,422-437,532,525,621-24, 633,645-648, 1220), or as an ornament on a sceptre (Mallowan and Herrmann 1974: #87; Orchard 1967: 21-24).70 II-A/2c. Zoomorphic Vessels II-A/2c-1. Zoomorphic Spouted Vessels Four zoomorphic heads with spouts through the muzzle (TJ 139, 1103, 1286, 1900) indicating hollow bodies were identified as zoomorphic vessels.71 Three hand made body fragments (TJ 246, 591, 69 Inscribed seals 19, 87, 106, and 114 (Aufrecht 1989) include animal depictions of what seems to represent a ram, whereas seal 79 appears to show a bovine head. My thanks to P.-E. Dion for these references. 70 Iconographic research undertaken by P.-E. Dion. 71 Two red slipped ceramic spouts (TJ 1313, 1487) were thought to be fragments of animal muzzles. However, on further study, it seems certain that they were spouts on other types of vessels, possibly on a kernos ring. Such small spouted muzzles appeared in significant numbers among the kernos heads at Ashdod (Hachlili 1971: figs. 66-70).

74

chapter two

1836) were most probably from zoomorphic vessels as were six separate legs (TJ 120, 143, 832, 1418, 1781, 1789).72 Catalogue TJ 139 (Fig. 2.39:1; A14:6/36) Ceramic; light red fabric and core (2.5YR 7/6). Mould(?) made head, wheel made body. Red slip (2.5YR 6.6). Painted. L 12.00, T 6.00+ cm. Broken. The head, neck, shoulders and part of the under belly of this painted zoomorphic vessel constitute the only recognizable remains.73 The crown was broken off so that it is not possible to determine whether there were horns, ears, or further decoration on the head of TJ 139. Although the head is damaged, the colour of the ceramic fabric and remains of a thin slip could be recorded. The head has depressions that mark the position of the pupils of the eye and of the nostrils. A larger hole formed an opening in the muzzle that served as a spout. The presence of the spout may not have been the only opening through which liquids were introduced into the vessel. Unfortunately, the back behind the withers, where a fill hole is to be expected, is missing.74 There are two parallel, incised lines across the muzzle below the eyes,75 with three ridged pendant triangles that form an M-shaped pattern. The tip of the muzzle is chipped at this point, making it impossible to know whether there was a second set of parallel lines comparable to those on the muzzle of a horse from Samaria (Crowfoot and Sukenik 1957:77; fig. B.2). In the case of the horse, and on a bovine head from Hazor (Yadin 72

Four additional legs (TJ 403, 902, 1367, 1380), possibly from tripod cups, are too fragmentary for certain identification and are not discussed here. 73 While on loan for study from the Jordanian Department of Antiquities (19911992), TJ 139 was found to mend with another sherd that attached to the right shoulder. This find enabled us to determine more closely the construction techniques employed to form the body and better estimate its maximum diameter. 74 The body of a zoomorphic vessel from Lachish (Tufnell 1953: pl. 30:28) and another from Megiddo (May 1935: pl. 38:M 3016) illustrate the position on the centre back of a second, larger opening in the form of the rim and handle of a juglet. A bovine figure from Samaria (Crowfoot 1957: fig. B:5) shows clearly the position of the fill hole but the rim is missing. This was also the case on the vessel from Umm ad-Dananir Cave A2, where the fill hole was in the form of a small funnel above the opening on the back (McGovern 1986: fig. 88). From Ashdod, the centre and rear section of a zoomorphic vessel show clearly the position of an opening immediately in front of the rear end of the animal (Hachlili 1971: fig. 89:4). 75 Painted lines across the muzzle of the Middle Bronze Age bull vessel from Shiloh (Brandl 1993: fig. 92) indicates that such decoration, possibly the representation of a harness, had a long history.

artefact classification and typology

75

et al. 1961: pl. CLXXVI:24), the uppermost set of bands is above the eyes with a V-shaped design set between them.76 Painted diagonal lines stretching from the back of the neck towards the throat appear black (2.5YR N3, very dark grey) on a light background (7.5YR 8/2, pinkish white).77 Such ridges appear on figurines dated as early as the Early Bronze Age, especially on an example from Jericho (Cleveland 1962: fig. 2).78 Behind the neck of TJ 139 is a raised ridge that extends over the shoulders and bends toward the forelegs on either side. It is unlikely, given the direction of the ridge, that it represents the legs of a rider; instead, it may represent a yoke or harness. A more likely explanation is that the ridge represents a morphological feature similar to the shoulder ridge of the bronze bull figurines from Hazor (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCCXI:1-2) and from the “Bull Site”. Mazar (1982:29) identified the latter as a zebu bull. This characteristic along with a stocky face,79 as opposed to the narrower face of a horse, suggests that TJ 139 was indeed a bull vessel. A complete example of a bull vessel, assigned to Group B of the Jebel Josef tombs in ‘Amman, is hollow with an opening in its upper back, a handle extending from the rim of the opening to the back of the head, and a spout protruding from the neck, below the chin (Harding 1945: pl. XVIII:67). Catalogue TJ 1900 (Fig. 2.39:2; D23:42/44). Ceramic; light red (10R 6/6); gray core (N5/); very pale brown slip (10YR 7/3). Mould(?) made; in76 In fact, the position of a pendant triangle between the eyes of a bull figurine appears already in the third millennium at Jericho (Garstang 1931:18), and at Beth YeraÈ (Bar-Adon 1962:46-47) to mention only Palestinian examples. Miroschedji (1993: figs. 4, 5) discusses these Early Bronze Age bull heads in his study of the head fragment from Tel Yarmouth. 77 The black and white banded colour pattern on a red or pink slip was popular in Transjordan in the Iron Age, but seems restricted to the ‘Amman area where it was applied to human figurines (Dornemann 1983: 140-141), to red slipped bowls (Daviau 1994: fig. 7.1) and jugs, and to specialty items (Daviau 1994: fig. 11.6). A bull figure from Tall as-Sa‘idiyah is described as having a “reddish brown slip, black and white paint” (Pritchard 1985:41), a pattern which suggests a similar painted tradition. 78 A single sherd from Tell Beit Mirsim (Albright 1943: pl. 28:5) depicts a bull with bands across his withers although there is no apparent hump. 79 Two triangular bull heads from vessels found at Tell Beit Mirsim (Albright 1943: pl. 29, figs. 2, 3) are incised around the eyes and otherwise are very stylized. A bull’s head from Samaria (Crowfoot 1957: pl. XII:1), complete with horns, has a broader muzzle than the typical horse head, although in a given example the distinction is not always apparent when the horns are broken off.

76

chapter two

cised lines. L 6.30, W 4.90, T 3.30 cm. Broken. A significant portion of the head and neck of this hollow figure is preserved with the exception of the ears and horns. Although the end of the muzzle is broken off, the opening for the spout is evident inside the head. The eyes are surrounded by a ridge, and the pupils are indicated by depressions. Beginning below the eyes, there are incised, or mould made, lines that form a series of triangles above two bands that run across the muzzle. Below the bands there appears to have been only one, large pendant triangle. Additional incised lines delineate three ridges on the neck, apparently in place of the paint seen on TJ 139. Catalogue TJ 1103 (Fig. 2.39:3; D23:16/33). Ceramic; pink (7.5YR 7/4); int+ext. Red slip (5YR 6/6). Mould made. H 3.10, W 2.70, T 1.96 cm. Spout D 3.0 mm. Broken and worn. This small fragment consists only of the upper portion of the muzzle from below the eyes to the tip of the nose. Evidence on the inside shows that TJ 1103 was hollow with a small hole (0.3 cm) forming the spout through the nose. A single incised or moulded line extends across the muzzle while a second line is just above the end of the nose. Hanging from the upper line are three pendant triangles, the common decorative element on these zoomorphic figures. Catalogue TJ 1286 (Fig. 2.39:4; A84:1/5). Ceramic; very pale brown (10YR 7/3) ext, light gray (10YR 7/2) int. Slip, light red (2.5YR 6/6); paint, dusky red (10YR 3/2). Mould made. H 4.75, W 3.30, T 2.75 cm. Spout D 4.00 mm. Broken and worn. This badly damaged head of a zoomorphic vessel retains certain features that allow us to include this artefact with those discussed above, namely the characteristic grooves around the eyes, a residue of slip and painted decoration, and a spout through the muzzle. Further analysis is unwarranted given the condition of this find. Parallels Neck and body: Nineveh: In terms of the iconography depicting a bull with wrinkles on his neck and a thick muscle ridge across his withers, the best example appears on an Assyrian relief from the palace of Aààurbanipal that shows prisoners in a wagon drawn by a bull (Pritchard 1969: pl. 167). A yoke across the shoulders appears as a rigid band around the neck distinct from the wavy folds of flesh. Such detail

artefact classification and typology

77

suggests that the painted lines or grooves on figurines and vessels represents the neck wrinkles and were not an attempt to illustrate a yoke.80 The thick neck muscle that indicates a zebu bull appears in a relief with Elamite prisoners, but had already entered Palestinian iconography assuming that the date and provenance of the bronze bull figurine from the “Bull” Site is reliable (Mazar 1982:29). Hazor: Incised lines appear to mark the neck folds of a hollow figure from Hazor (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCCLVI:3), although the opening for the spout appears either off centre or missing entirely. Beth Shan: Out of three bull heads from Iron Age Levels, only one (James 1966: fig. 112:1) has painted bands on the neck, a feature in common with the Tall Jawa figures. Ashdod: Among the animal heads on kernos rings that have painted bands around the neck (Hachlili 1971: fig. 66:6, 13; 67:1, 2, 5), several appear to be bull heads (Hachlili 1971: fig. 68:5, 6). Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: Figurine S277 (Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:4) does not have a recorded provenance. This is unfortunate, since this vessel shares several characteristics with those from Tall Jawa. It has a hollow body and incisions around the neck. The principal difference is an “X” on its nose between two sets of parallel lines. Facial features: Zoomorphic figurines of bulls are not as easy to identify as those of horses which are usually shown with painted or incised lines delineating their bridle (Dornemann 1983: fig. 86:9; May 1935: pl. XXXVI: M 4550, M 4823; Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCCLVI:2).81 The most common decorative motif on bulls’ heads is the pendant triangular pattern of grooves positioned between the eyes or lower down on the muzzle. In certain instances, the grooves continue upward to form brows over the eyes. Nimrud: A good example of this feature appears on an ivory of a bull’s face from Nimrud (Mallowan 1951: pl. III:1). As well, a relief of a bull from Aààurbanipal’s palace at Nineveh depicts grooves, which curve around the eyes and dip down onto the muzzle (Pritchard 1969: pl. 167). Hazor: The best example is a head of a bull figurine (Yadin et al. 80 Similar grooves on the neck of figures that are most probably horses (May 1935: pl. XXXVI: M 185, M 772; Yadin 1961: pl. CCCLVI:2) cannot be explained in the same way. 81 This does not seem to be the case with regard to the horse and rider figures from Kourion, where the details of the bridle appear to be missing on all the horses, for example (Young and Young 1955: pl. 26:1521, 1703).

78

chapter two

1961: pl. CLXXVI:24) that has parallel lines incised across the muzzle and frontal bone forming a register filled with a single incised, pendant triangle.82 A less well preserved head and neck has incised lines on the face, forming a triangle, and on the neck (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. LXXVI:17). Ashdod: Several animal heads from kernos rings have a single painted triangle between the eyes (Hachlili 1971: fig. 68:6; 69:5, 6). Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: An animal head attributed to Stratum V (Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:2) retains clear evidence of incised lines around the eyes similar to those preserved on TJ 1286, but the pendant triangle design does not appear to be represented. ‘Amman: A badly shattered head, identified as that of a horse, has a pattern of 3 pendant triangles. From the description and photo (Koutsoukou and Najjar 1997:130; fig. 20), it is not clear whether the eyes were above or below the design. II-A/2c-2. Headless Body Fragments Two fragments representing part of the body and legs of zoomorphic vessels can be discussed briefly.83 The presence of these finds indicates the popularity of these vessels at Tall Jawa. Catalogue TJ 246 (Fig. 2.40:1; A3:8/23). Ceramic; pink (7.5YR 7/4), pinkish gray (7.5YR 7/2) int; Hand made, hollow; incised lines. L 6.00, W 4.50, T 3.10 cm. Broken. Only the left shoulder and a small section of the side and under belly of this zoomorphic body remains. Incised lines outline the top of the leg and replicate the folds of skin in the neck area. Since these fold lines curve away from the leg, we have the impression that the body was longer than that of TJ 1900 and may represent a different animal. Unfortunately, so little is preserved that this suggestion cannot be tested. Surprisingly, this vessel fragment shows no evidence of slip or paint even though it was located in Stratum VIII debris layers in Building 100. Catalogue 82 The cross between the ears is not seen on any of the figures in the Tall Jawa corpus although it does appear on a zoomorphic vessel from Tall as-Sa‘idiyah (Pritchard 1985: fig. 169:2). 83 A third fragment (TJ 939) was clearly a hand made vessel or figure with deep, parallel grooves on the exterior. Due to the way it was broken, it cannot be classed with greater certainty. A fourth fragment (TJ 1836) is so badly damaged that it cannot be classed either as a zoomorphic or an anthropomorphic figure.

artefact classification and typology

79

TJ 591 (Fig. 2.39:2; unregistered). Ceramic; pink (5YR 7/4) ext, reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) int. Hand made. Undecorated. L 7.10, W 4.70. Broken. This fragment consists of the left hind leg and part of the lower body. The leg was attached at the point where there was a sharp change of direction to form the hind parts of this figure. Without the neck and head, it is not known for certain that this was actually a vessel. In view of its narrow diameter (ca. 5.00 cm), TJ 591 may have been a figurine with a hollow body. Possible Parallels Hazor: The back end of a vessel from Hazor (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CXCV:9) shows well the sharp change of direction that marked the position of the back leg in relation to the hind quarter. Chronology: Small bronze bull figures appear in Late Bronze Age strata at several sites including Ugarit (Negbi 1989:n. 18) and Hazor (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCCXLI:1), as well as in Iron Age I (Mazar 1982:3536), although most first millennium figurines and vessels were ceramic.84 Among the ceramic figures that might have served as parallels to the Tall Jawa heads, few exhibit the same features, and many of these are themselves poorly preserved. Only the archaeological context helps to locate the ceramic figures within the Stratum VIII and Stratum VII occupational phases preserved at the site. II-A/2c-3. Zoomorphic legs: Among the ceramic finds were 11 legs, several of which are conical in shape with a rounded end while one leg (TJ 1789) bent down from the body to a flat base. The longest leg (TJ 120) measures 4.00 cm in length and 2.60 cm in diameter, where it would join the body.85 Only two legs (TJ 143, 1781) can be assigned with certainty to zoomorphic vessels, although TJ 1789 was very likely part of a vessel as well. In the case of TJ 143, the exterior surface of the leg is decorated with shallow incised lines that represent fur or hair. For TJ 1781, the evidence consists of a section of the vessel that is still attached to the leg and shows the forming methods of a hollow figure. 84 One such ceramic head with pendant triangle decoration from Hazor (Yadin 1961: pl. CLXXVI:24) was dated to the end of the tenth century (Stratum IXB). 85 Good examples of long legged animal figures are seen in the Sarepta corpus (Pritchard 1988: fig. 14, 5, 12-13).

80

chapter two II-B. Decorative Fragments

Criteria: Grouped under the classification of religious and/or decorative elements is a number of hand made ceramic fragments that were probably elements of one or more model houses or shrines. Iron Age model shrines have a wide distribution across the Levant, from Greece to Mesopotamia (Caubet 1979). Although the shrines vary in shape and size, many are cuboid with an opening on one or more sides.86 The façade surrounding the principal opening could be enhanced with pilasters, capitals and decorative entablature. In some cases, there was a porch with free standing columns (Caubet 1979: pl. VIII:1-3). The artefacts recovered at Tall Jawa include 3 fragments of shrine façades, 4 column fragments, and 1 proto-aeolic capital. Although the exact position of these fragments as parts of ceramic models can only be determined by inference from more complete examples, their shape and the fact that these were hand made confirm that they were not sherds belonging to ceramic vessels.87 II-B/1. Model Shrines—wall and façade fragments Three large ceramic sherds, hand made and irregular in shape, were clearly part of one or more rectangular artefacts, probably model shrines. All three were recovered in the debris of Building 102, the same structure that produced a ceramic male head wearing an atef crown (TJ 100) and a silt stone statuette (TJ 1877; see above). Catalogue TJ 1570 (Fig. 2.41:1; A5:19/42). Ceramic; pink (5YR 7/4) fabric; red (2.5YR 6/6), ext. surface; weak red (2.5YR 6/4) int. surface. Hand made. H 9.20, W 7.80, T 1.40. Broken. Evidence for hand smoothing is visible only on one surface, apparently the exterior. This means that the sherd represents the upper left corner of the model since the top was cut to form a gentle curve that ends above a ridge of clay where something else was attached. 86 This was not the case for shrine models found in Cyprus, where an even greater variety of forms appeared in contrast to Syria and Palestine (Caubet 1979:95-97). 87 A fifth element (TJ 1816), from Building 102 which produced most of the cultic fragments, appears to be a handle fragment decorated with red slip, black paint and rouletted design.

artefact classification and typology

81

Catalogue TJ 2236 (Fig. 2.41:2; A15:34/49). Ceramic; pink (5YR 7/4) fabric; red (2.5YR 6/6) ext. surface; pale red (2.5YR 7/4) int. surface. Hand burnishing. H 9.90, W 8.70, T 1.50-2.00 cm. Broken. Along the left side is a scar where another element sealed onto this sherd. On the right front edge, the clay was pushed up deforming the surface. This scar began 1.50 cm above the base, which itself had clearly been cut. Some of the cut clay seems to have been pressed up onto the interior surface. When fired, the base was not completely oxidized, suggesting that the model had been put on a surface for firing.88 Catalogue TJ 1569 (Fig. 2.41:3; A5:19/42). Ceramic; pale red (2.5YR 7/4) fabric; red (2.5YR 6/6) ext. surface. Hand made. Slip; pink (5YR 7/4). Paint; weak red (10R 4/4), dark gray (5YR 4/1). Broken. This sherd has finished edges on the top and on the right side for 1.50 cm. The left edge looks as if something attached to it had broken away. This fragment is assumed to be the top of a model façade because of its thinness and because of parallels that suggest the location of similar decoration. Fragment TJ 1569 is the most highly decorated fragment, with a cross-hatch design. The front of the sherd was first covered with a pink slip. This area was then divided into squares by red lines bordered in black. Within one box, the painted decoration consists of black lines in one direction and red lines crossing them to form a lattice. The only difference between this decor and that on figurine TJ 1119 is that the background is pink rather than white and that the lattice pattern is more carefully done. Parallels Gezer: A similar painted decoration appears on a small, two-handled vessel in the assemblage from Tombs 84 and 85 (Macalister 1912: pl. LXXXVIII:19). Philistia: Innumerable examples of painted pottery with this design are known from Cyprus and from Philistine sites on the coast of Israel (for example, Dothan 1982: pl. 78, fig. 48). Moab: The finest parallel to the decorated fragment is a shrine model from Moab (Weinberg 1978:33), where the same black and red lattice 88 These unpainted fragments are so poorly understood that parallels cannot be drawn with confidence.

82

chapter two

pattern in squares alternating with unpainted squares appears on the façade. It is unfortunate that so little is preserved of the Tall Jawa models. II-B/2. Columns The best example of a ceramic column fragment (TJ 1277) was not associated with any other recognizable model pieces. Two other column sections (TJ 2062, 2123) were from Building 102 and B300 respectively. TJ 2062 was made by hand in a fabric comparable to cooking pot ware, and was slipped. In fact, it looks like the limb of a statuette. Since no other comparable material was recovered, it remains classified as a column fragment. The last example (TJ 1884) was also of ceramic and its function remains uncertain. For this reason, only TJ 1277 will be discussed. Catalogue TJ 1277 (Fig. 2.42:1; B24:19/44). Ceramic; pink (5YR 7/4) fabric; reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) ext. Hand made. Undecorated. H 10.20, D 3.20 cm. Broken. Column TJ 1277 has a long scar along one side with a lip of added clay along one edge of the scar. On the other edge is a groove that was clearly exposed to heat during firing but whose purpose is unclear. The relationship of this fragment to a ceramic model remains unknown, but it may have functioned as an attached column.89 Parallels K§mid el-LÙz: Both freestanding and attached columns are present on model shrines dating to the Late Bronze Age (Metzger 1993: pls. 72, 73-74). Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Two column fragments, one representing the base and the other representing upper portion and capital (Chambon 1984: pl. 66:2, 3), are good examples of attached elements. II-B/3. Capitals and Attachments Catalogue TJ 218 (Fig. 2.43:1; B64:10/46). Ceramic; reddish yellow (5YR 7/ 89 The small column found at Tell Beit Mirsim (Albright 1943: 85; pl. 65:1) is clearly in a different type since its diameter is 13.50 cm.

artefact classification and typology

83

6); light gray core (7.5YR 7/1). Hand made. Undecorated. H 3.60, W 6.80, 1.40 cm. Complete. A miniature ceramic capital (TJ 218), found intact, is similar in appearance to the Aeolic capital, a form well known in stone architecture throughout the Levant (Betancourt 1977:4).90 The volutes on this capital curve downwards, and centred between them are two clay pellets, one where the volutes spring apart and a second at the point where they come together. On stone capitals, this central space was usually filled with an incised triangle; classic examples were found at Megiddo (May 1935: pl. X) and at Ramat Rahel (Shiloh 1976: pl. 8).91 The bottom of TJ 218 retains clear evidence that it had been detached from another element, probably the top of a column, pilaster or figurine. The upper edge had been sealed with clay to an associated artefact. Additional clay on the back of the capital also indicates that it was formed separately by hand and was then attached to the façade of a shrine model or cultic stand. Also clear is the finished edge of the capital itself, which appears on both side edges. Unfortunately, TJ 218 did not mend with any shrine fragments from Tall Jawa. Parallels Volutes were popular in Canaanite and Phoenician art, and represent a stylized form of palmette. They appear in double and quadruple form in smaller art works such as ivory inlays on furniture and ivory containers (Winter 1989: pl. 65a). Megiddo: Although widely separated from each other, volutes that curve downwards appear on the best preserved façade of a ceramic shrine model (May 1935: pl. XIII) and a larger, “model” capital in painted limestone came from Stratum V (Loud 1948: pl. 270:1). Taanach: The same use of capitals appears on a ceramic shrine from Sellin’s excavations (Glock 1993:1431), along with an incised depiction of a plant with fronds. The same two depictions appear on the 90

This style appears as far east as the site of Mudaybi‘ in Jordan (Mattingly 1996: fig. 11). 91 This architectural motif also appeared in miniature at Ramat Rahel, where the window balustrades of the palace (Aharoni 1964: fig. 38) were carved in the form of four pillars with proto-Aeolic capitals. This motif also appears on a Phoenician ivory inlay from Nimrud of the “woman at the window” motif (Barnett 1982: pl. 50:b). Another inlay showing the complete lotus plant with its coiled fronds in capital style is seen among the Nimrud ivories (Barnett 1982: pl. 50:c). As well, a pair of volutes in relief appears on ceramic body sherd from Tall Dayr ‘Alla (Franken 1992: fig. 7-14:b).

84

chapter two

stand discovered by Lapp (1969: fig. 29). Tell el-Far‘ah (N): A model shrine with a horseshoe shape plan from Tell el-Far‘ah (N) is probably the best example from Palestine of a model with pilasters and volute capitals framing its front opening (Chambon 1984: pl. 66:1). Attached to a decorative façade, the volutes turn upwards. A second example (Iliffe 1944: pl. 21), this one from unknown provenience in Transjordan, has one set of volutes that curve upwards and a second set that turns downwards. ‘Amman: This same decorative motif is seen in the headdress of a figurine from Amman Tomb C dating to the eighth-century BC. In this case, the headdress consisted of 4 spirals at right angles (Harding 1951: 37; pl. XIV:43). The edges of the headdress appear to have been themselves attached to another object since the scars of added clay are still visible. The head of this unusual figurine, painted red with a beard and moustache in black, appears to be that of a male while the body represents a pregnant female.

iii. communication and economy III-A. Inscribed Materials III-A/1. Ostraca Function: Iron Age ostraca found in Levantine sites usually consist of ceramic sherds that have been inscribed in ink (Albright 1943: 73) to communicate or record information. All ostraca are sherds in secondary use and are distinct from inscriptions, written or incised, that were part of the original vessel, such as potter’s or owner’s marks (London 1991:388, 397-400). Catalogue TJ 1071 (figs. 13.3:1-3; C17:43/73). Ceramic, light red (2.5YR 7/ 6) ext, gray (5YR 6/1) int. L 4.60, W 4.32, T 0.98 cm. Broken. Only one Iron Age ostracon was recovered during six seasons of excavations. This lone example was in the collapse of an upper storey surface above Room 802 in Building 800 of Stratum VII (see Dion, Chapter 3).

artefact classification and typology

85

III-B. Seals III-B/1. Stamp Seals Function: Stone or ceramic seals were used to impress an image and/ or an inscription on wet clay and to serve as a system of identification, usually for economic purposes. The clay would already have been formed into a vessel, so that the impression became a permanent part of the pot when it was fired. In other instances where mud stoppers were used to cover the neck of a vessel, a stamp could be impressed on the wet mud and its impression would be retained as the mud dried. Seals, like beads and amulets, were perforated so that they could be strung or set in a ring. Scarabs may have had more than one purpose, functioning both as seals and as amulets. Criteria: Stamp seals appear as scaraboid, conical or anchor-shaped objects, usually small in size (<5.00 cm), with an incised design or inscription carved in negative relief on a flat surface. On cylinder seals, the relief is carved on the curved outer face. Three stamp seals, all dating to the Iron Age, were in the form of a scarab (III-B/1a) or scaraboid (III-B/1b). This small number may reflect the research goals of our project, the fact that domestic rather than public buildings were exposed and the status of Tall Jawa in antiquity. A single cylinder seal (III-B/2) recovered from an intrusive burial (Burial 3) is too worn to be identified. The burial probably dates to the early Persian period. III-B/1a. Scarabs An Egyptian style scarab appeared as a random find fallen among the boulders of Tower 2013 in Field B (Daviau 1993c: fig. 2; Daviau, in preparation/a). Catalogue TJ 437 (Fig. 2.44:1, B53:3/13). Limestone. Incised. Inscribed. L 1.4, W 1.1, T 0.7 cm. Chipped. The anatomy of the beetle is carved in soft limestone. Details on the back and right side of the beetle are well preserved with the head, thorax, wings and right leg clearly delineated. No additional decoration is present. The bottom and lower edges exhibit a certain amount of damage although the hieroglyphic signs on the front are sufficiently clear to be read. The inscription consists of two parts, the name and the epithet.

86

chapter two

The name is incised within a cartouche or oval positioned on the left behind the head and the signs read from top to bottom (Type 1, Jaeger 1982:29). Although the edge of the scarab is damaged at the base of the cartouche, the final sign is clear and there is little reason to doubt that this was indeed a cartouche92 with the name of Men-kheper-re‘ (Tuthmosis III). Although the upper part of the epithet is damaged, Millet reads it as “chosen by Amun-Re.” Based on its style, Weinstein confirms a date during Dynasty XXII.93 The epithet consists of 5 relatively clear signs and reads from top to bottom, stp n Jmn-r‘, chosen by Amun-Re. Because the bottom edge is damaged, no clear n appears below the stp sign. Within the epithet itself, the first sign of the divine name—a reed leaf—is reversed. This may have something to do with its relative position as the inscription reads from left to right instead of right to left. Parallels: Although no exact parallels are known at present, several scarabs share similar characteristics.94 In one example from Beth Shan (Rowe 1936:112-113, pl. XI:476), the cartouche is on the left with a scene on the right. In this case also, the signs read from top to bottom just as they appear to do on a scarab from Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: pl. XV:4), where there is a somewhat longer epithet. Out of ca. 300 scarabs found at Gezer, Macalister (1912: pl. CCVII:28) illustrates only one with the head behind the cartouche in the same position as on the Tall Jawa scarab. Rowe (1936:115) cites one other Thutmose III scarab but without a car92 Jaeger (1982:40) points out that among the scarabs of Men-kheper-re‘ the cartouche was used in 20.77% of his sample of 5,821 scarabs while the oval appeared in 39.72%. Signs without a border of either kind consisted of 31.85% of the sample. 93 My thanks to C. Routledge who first identified the name as Men-kheper-re‘ (personal communication, July 15, 1992, Amman, Jordan), to N. B. Millet, Curator of Egyptian Antiquities, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, ON (personal communication, Oct. 30, 1992), who read the scarab and recognized the epithet, and to J. Weinstein (editor, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research), who determined a 9th century date of manufacture on the basis of style and inscription (personal Communication, Nov. 21, 1992). The author deeply appreciates the comments and corrections on this study made by R. Leprohon, Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, University of Toronto (September 8, 1998). Unfortunately, when it was first published (Daviau 1993c: fig.2), the caption for this scarab read “XXX dynasty style”. 94 In his discussion of Type 1 scarabs, Jaeger (1982:29) cites several previously published examples and illustrates those that have the same titulary (1982: #956, although in a different position on the scarab), as well as one seal with the king’s name on the left and that of his wife on the right. However, in this example as well (1982: 3:948), the name of Men-kheper-re‘ is not under the head of the beetle.

artefact classification and typology

87

touche (#487). Among other examples, the cartouche is in the middle of the scarab with signs running crosswise rather than lengthwise (Rowe 1936: pl. XII:497, 500, 501, 512, passim) and various epithets are used. For the most part, the scarabs mentioned above were from Western Palestine.95 Closer to home is the seal impression from Tall al‘Umayri which includes a cartouche with the praenomen Men-kheperre‘ (Thutmosis III). Here the cartouche is located in the centre of the seal with an epithet on the left and a winged uraeus on the right (Redford 1991:379; fig. 19.2). For this impression, Redford (1991:380) cited parallels from Megiddo and Akko which date to Dynasty XX, especially to the reign of Ramesses IV (1151-1145 BC). Clearly, Tuthmosis III was an eighteenth-dynasty pharaoh whose popularity and importance lasted centuries after his death. III-B/1b. Scaraboids Two late Iron Age II Buildings, B800 in Field C-west and B700 in Field D, each yielded one seal. Both were stone scaraboids with undecorated backs. Although these seals were incised in reverse relief, neither was inscribed with text. Their identification as Ammonite seals rests entirely on their discovery at the site of Tall Jawa. Seal TJ 1128 was embedded in the upper surface of the ceiling over Room 804 (B800) while Seal 1968 was within a debris layer (B700) that contained both Iron Age and Umayyad pottery. Catalogue TJ 1128 (Fig. 2.45:1; C27:48/121). Stone (7.5YR 5/0, dark gray). L 1.90, W 1.60, H 1.00 cm. Complete. TJ 1986 (Fig. 2.45:2; D23:44/75). Stone. L 1.50, W 1.30, H 0.50 cm. Complete. The design of seal TJ 1128 is difficult to identify. Most noticeable are two deep drill holes and one cross sign (\) in the field around the central image. According to P.-E. Dion’s best judgment (personal communication), the cross sign has its closest affinity to Semitic “taw” although it does not resemble exactly any Northwest Semitic seal script.96 This may mean that the cross and the two circular depres95 Tufnell (1953:205) notes that the scarabs of Mn-hpr-R‘ in Tomb 218 at Lachish were part of an assemblage that reflected increased Egyptian trade and may have been related to the effects of Shishak’s invasion and his stationing of troops in the vicinity. Tufnell dated these scarabs to the ninth century BC. 96 The “taw” usually has a slanted cross bar (for example, seal No. 29, Timm

88

chapter two

sions are not epigraphy, but iconography, possibly astral. The central figure has four legs, the longest by far on the right side, just before the tail. Above the second leg there is an extension above the back of the animal; could it represent a rider? In view of the lack of assured parallels, it is difficult to identify the motif intended by the stone carver.97 In the case of seal TJ 1986, the design is much clearer. A creature with four legs, a patterned body and a long neck bent over its back fills the field with the exception of two parallel lines above the back. Although this position was common for the representation of a duck, the fact that there appear to be four legs makes it doubtful that a duck was the intended animal. Parallels: Although no exact parallels are known at present, a few observations may be made. In regard to Seal TJ 1128, it is not unusual for locally made seals to include Mesopotamian motifs consisting of depressions and a star to represent the heavenly bodies (Uehlinger 1993: fig.4; Timm 1993: fig. 6; Crowfoot 1957:86). In his study of a series of “anchor” seals, Keel noted one among them, from Samaria, which appears to depict an equid with a human rider. There are 5 legs, one possibly being the tail of the animal. In his description, Keel says that the arm and legs of the rider are shown above the animal’s rear (1994:27, fig. 16). A second seal from Samaria also shows a figure above an equid with a hanging tail (Crowfoot 1957: pl. XV: 23). What is not clear is whether the human figures represent riders. The depictions of the animal on these seals share many similarities. Dion suggests that if the animal was supposed to be a horse, this design could be related to Buchanan’s “horse group” (1988:23, Nos. 154-157). The only other possibility is that this animal was intended to represent a stag. Based on the presence of signs including round depressions and a \ sign in the space around the rider on the Tall Jawa seal, a combination of motifs seems likely. In regard to seal TJ 1986, there are no close parallels even though the animal depicted is carefully rendered and could have been a recognizable motif. 1989:229), rather than one at a 90o angle from the vertical stoke. Another seal with such a sign in the decorated field (No. 35), cited by Timm (1989: 240-241), is from Samaria. However, in this case, the sign appears to represent an offering stand flanked by two figures. 97 A new study of Iron Age seals is currently being prepared by J. Eggler and O. Keel; hopefully, their expertise will shed light on the iconography of this seal.

artefact classification and typology

89

III-B/2. Cylinder Seals One seal in the shape of a cylinder with a central perforation through its length is too worn for further identification and classification. As a result, parallels cannot be assigned. Catalogue TJ 965 (Fig. 2.46:1; B34:6/11). Stone. Pale red (10R 6/2). L 2.80, D 1.30 cm. Complete.

III-C. Coins Function: Coins are a well known class of artefact with a long history for use in economic exchange and trade. Introduced in the late Iron Age and becoming common in the Persian period, coins rarely appear in sites without occupation of this or later periods. In the case of Tall Jawa, a small group of finds (one coin and a collection of beads and a fibula from Burial 3, see above) can be dated to the early Persian period and suggest that the site was known although unoccupied at the time. A single Greek coin (TJ 111), studied by Beckmann (1994), is of a type dating to 449 BC (Kleiner 1975:6-7; Svoronos 1975: pl. 9:112). The coin was in good condition when found in a debris layer directly above Stratum VIII Plaster Floor B63:11 in casemate Room 201. This tetradrachm depicts Athena on the obverse and her owl with the letters !1/ on the reverse. III-D. Scale Weights Function: Small stone balls or figures were used as weights of various measures along with balance scales. In many cases, these weights are labelled with the name of the weight, although unlabelled weights also appear.98 Criteria: Scale weights of stone, iron, lead or bronze, usually weigh a known amount within the weighing system of the ancient world; p-y-m weights averaged 7.86 g, n-s-p weights were on average 9.75 g, and the shekel had a range of 11.17-11.69 g (Scott 1985:205; table 98

At Jerusalem, more than 50% were uninscribed (Scott 1985:197).

90

chapter two

3). Those from Jerusalem ranged in size from 1.30-6.75 cm in diameter (Scott 1985: figs. 78-79) and almost all were flat on one surface. Catalogue TJ 920 (Fig. 2.47:1; B24:11/16). Basalt. D 5.20, H 4.30. Wt 250 g. Chipped. TJ 1126 (Fig. 2.47:2; C27:48/106). Basalt. D 1.90 cm. TJ 1485 (Fig. 2.47:3; A93:16/66). Basalt. D 4.10, H 3.40 cm. Wt 90 g (8 shekels). TJ 1639 (A83:16/56). Basalt. D 3.60-4.10 cm, Wt 90 g (8 shekels). Very smooth, slightly irregular. TJ 2201 (Fig. 2.47:4; C27:66/189). Stone. D2.40, H 2.10 cm, Wt 50 g (4 shekels?). All artefacts classed as scale weights were of basalt, except for TJ 2201, which is of polished stone. Although only TJ 920 can be identified with certainty, the other objects are probable weights, since they have no other known function and similar objects appear with inscribed scale weights at other sites (McCown 1947:259; fig. 69). Tubb suggests that a group of smooth pebbles at Tall as-Sa‘idiyah were weights, because they were found along with a copper weight in Stratum XII (1988:41; fig. 18). Scale weights TJ 1485 and 1639 each weigh 90 g, the average for 8 shekel weights. Parallels Tell en-Naßbeh: Both inscribed and uninscribed stone were identified (McCown 1947: fig. 69) as scale weights. Beer-sheba: Stone weights similar in shape to TJ 920 appear in several sizes (Aharoni 1973: pl. 70:5, 6). The small number of seals, ostraca and scale weights at Tall Jawa may reflect the types of buildings excavated and the level of economic and administrative functions carried out at this small town during the Iron Age. Only when additional sites that were contemporary with Tall Jawa are excavated and published, will we better understand the characteristics of this settlement and its relative position in the kingdom of Ammon.

iv. craft and industry Tools and equipment associated with various crafts and industries are found in great numbers at all sites with domestic structures. Such

artefact classification and typology

91

tasks as reworking sherds, drilling spindle whorls, beads and pendants, crushing minerals for the production of makeup and dyes, pulverizing materials to be used as temper in ceramic production, as well as preparing fibres for spinning were all activities that could be carried out in work areas inside the home. All these tasks required the use of tools, some of which were also used in the processing and preparation of food. In this class, only those tools that appear to be directly related to craft use are discussed. Multi-functional tools, especially those usually associated with food processing, are discussed below (Class VI).

IV-A. Piercing and Drilling Tools IV-A/1. Awls Function: An awl is designed to bore a relatively permanent hole in materials such as fabric, leather, wood and basketry. This is in contrast to a needle, which pierces a temporary hole in fabric that is immediately filled with thread. Only five iron tools can be classified as awls although several broken metal fragments may also have served as punches. Criteria: An awl is a thin, pointed tool, usually of metal or bone,99 which can puncture compact materials, such as leather or fabrics. In traditional societies, for example at Hasanabad in Iran, awls are still used to make slippers (Watson 1979:186). Catalogue TJ 034 (Fig. 2.48:1; A4:8/22). Iron. L 5.35, T 0.50 cm. Complete. TJ 149 (A14:17/39). Iron. L 4.00, T 0.40-0.50 cm. Complete? TJ 973 (Fig. 2.48:2; C44:30/40). Iron. L 5.20, T 0.75 cm. Complete. TJ 1156 (Fig. 2.48:3; A93:5/12). Iron. L 4.40, T 0.70 cm. Complete. TJ 2072 (C27:70/162). Iron. 5.30, T 0.50 cm. Complete in two pieces. All artefacts in this type are badly corroded and their original shape somewhat obscured. At the same time, they are similar to one another in size and shape, except for TJ 034 that is square in section 99

Chert, an impure form of flint, is extremely abundant in the limestone outcropping surrounding Tall Jawa. Examples of chert borers, probably used for wood working or for drilling holes in ceramic have been classified with lithics.

92

chapter two

along its entire length. The other awls are biconical with the largest diameter close to one end. Parallels are rare although a small group of bone artefacts from Lachish (Tufnell 1953: pl. 63:17-20), that were identified as arrowheads, may have been used as awls. Parallels Megiddo: Several artefacts are grouped together as bronze borers although Loud (1948: pl. 188:1-7) indicates that their classification remains tentative. The best example for our purposes is item d 109 (Loud 1948: pl. 188:5). Beth Shan: A group of copper/bronze tools identified as awls were present in Level VII (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 154:1-3, 7); each of these tools is slightly longer (ca. 7.00 cm) than those found at Tall Jawa. Tel Michal: Only one tool (6972/60), square in section, is a possible awl; but an “engraving tool” with one flat and one pointed end (3319/60) may also have been used to pierce holes (Muhly and Muhly 1989: fig. 25.4:79, 68). Gezer: A bronze “pin” is described in the text as a possible awl (Dever et al. 1986:115; pl. 60:5). At a length of 11.00 cm, this artefact is longer than the awls from Tall Jawa. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Several iron tools can be cited as suitable parallels, especially those that are less than 8.00 cm in length (Chambon 1984: pl. 71:4, 10). IV-A/2. Bow drill bits Function: The tip of the bow drill consisted of a metal point, usually strengthened by hammering the edges to form a conical tip. Such bits, made of bronze, were fitted into a shaft that was supported in turn by a socket. Depictions of Egyptian carpenters in the tomb of Rekhmire show craftsmen using such a tool (Davies 1943: pl. 52). Criteria: The bow drill bit is distinguished from pins and fibula points by its short length, its hardened tip and its finished end. The two examples from Tall Jawa were both in Stratum VIII contexts. Catalogue TJ 108 (Fig. 2.49:1; A14:9/10). Bronze. Hammered. L 4.00, T 4.50 cm. Complete. TJ 1732 (Fig. 2.49:2; E53:6/51). Bronze. Hammered. L 4.00, T 3.50 cm. Complete.

artefact classification and typology

93

Parallels Egypt: Complete bow drills, including the bit, shaft and stone socket or cap were recovered from Dynasty XII contexts (Petrie 1974:39; pl. XLIII:8-14). Megiddo: Although no bow drill bits were identified as such, a bronze borer (Loud 1948: pl. 188:7) and a “chisel” only 5.00 cm in length (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 83:13), both from Stratum V, appear to be the same type of tool. Tawilan: A bronze “needle” fragment, square in section midway along its length (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.6:8), shares this feature with the Tall Jawa bits. IV-A/3. Bow drill sockets Function: The socket held the upper end of the shaft of the bow drill, which was used to perforate stone for jewellery and possibly to drill holes in ceramic to mend vessels or to refashion sherds as spindle whorls, gaming pieces, and buttons. Criteria: The socket was usually in the shape of a stone pestle or small cylindrical roller with one or more depressions in each end. These depressions show evidence of the rotation of the drill shaft. Three bow drill sockets (TJ 1241, 1911, 2237) were identified with certainty among the hundreds of basalt tools recovered during excavation. Two cylindrical rollers (TJ 041, 723), both of limestone with depressions in each end, may also have been bow drill sockets. For the purposes of our study, they will be included here since these cylinders show no evidence of wear on their long sides that would indicate their use as roller pestles. Numerous other basalt tools, including pestles and hand grinders, bear the distinctive depression of the rotating drill shaft, suggesting that these tools were used on occasion as bow drill sockets. IV-A/3a. Pestle-shaped Sockets Catalogue TJ 882 (Fig. 2.50:1; C54:24/32). Basalt. Ground stone. H 6.75, W 3.90-4.75 cm. Depression D 0.60 cm. Complete. There is only a single depression at the narrower end. TJ 1241 (Fig. 2.50:2; D13:10/21). Pumice. Ground stone. H 7.50, W 4.50-4.90. Broken. There is one depression in the smaller end as well as two deep

94

chapter two

depressions and one shallow one in the larger end. Although light in weight (0.100 kg), this artefact appears to have been an effective tool. TJ 1911 (Fig. 2.50:3; E53:37/81). Basalt. Ground stone. H 5.20, W 4.80-5.30, cm. Complete. The depression on the smaller end of socket TJ 1911 shows evidence of extensive use while a second drill hole begun off-centre on the broader end is less deep. Such irregular placement of drill holes appears awkward but was also seen in examples from Megiddo. Parallels Ugarit: Two diabase bow drill handles are reported by Elliott (1991:35; fig. 10:3-4); both have a conical shape, similar to that of pestles. Megiddo: Although there does not appear to be a standard shape, two examples in basalt (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 107:3, 4) are closer in appearance to TJ 1911 than those in limestone. Beth Shan: An unidentified limestone object with a depression in each end (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 131:6) may be assigned to this type. Shiloh: A conical limestone “stopper” (Brandl 1993:254: fig. 9.14:9) has the tell tale drilling hole in the centre of the base. Maybe this should be classified as a drill socket. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Three unclassified artefacts, one in basalt and two in limestone (Chambon 1984: pl. 77:22-24) may be additional examples of tools that served as bow drill sockets (see below). Tell en-Naßbeh: Drill sockets were illustrated along with pestles and hand grinders (McCown 1947: pl. 91:3). IV-A/3b. Roller-shaped Sockets Catalogue TJ 041 (Fig. 2.51:1; A13:22/105). Limestone. L 8.10, D 4.36 cm. Complete. TJ 723 (Fig. 2.51:2; C54:6/18). Limestone. L 7.50, D 2.20-2.70 cm. Complete. TJ 1146 (Fig. 2.51:3; B35:2/5). Limestone. L 5.00, D 2.00-2.30 cm. Depression, D 0.55 cm. Complete. The largest of the three limestone sockets (TJ 041) appears to be relatively soft limestone, rubbed but not worn on its outer surface. Evidence of use is ambiguous since the end depressions are gently rounded rather than conical. At the same time, no other utilitarian purpose is evident.

artefact classification and typology

95

The diameter of TJ 723 varies somewhat along it length, from 2.20-2.70 cm. Evidence for use was apparent in its single depression. The smallest cylindrical socket (TJ 1146) would fit best the hand of a child. Otherwise it would have to be held with only two fingers. Both ends show signs of wear although one end is badly worn. Parallels Megiddo: Three examples of cylindrical sockets vary greatly in size. The first is 14.00 cm (Sass 2000: fig. 12.52:10), the second (M 2065) is 10.00 cm in length, while the third (M 4644) is only 4.40 cm long (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 107:1, 2), closer in size to TJ 1146. Beth Shan: Although not identified as such, an example in limestone (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 131:6) is a likely candidate for this type. Tell el-Far‘ah(N) Three stone tools, one in basalt (F.2630) and two in limestone (F.3443, 3444) were most likely drill sockets although only the largest one, measuring 10.7 cm in length, had holes in both ends. Tel Halif: A limestone “roller” from the burial chamber of a tomb in use during the ninth to eighth centuries BC is close to 10.00 cm in length (Biran and Gophna 1970: fig. 5:14).100 Tawilan: Four cylindrical objects with depressions in both ends are fine examples of drill sockets (Bienkowski 1995:87; fig. 9.22:9-12).101

IV-B. Cutting Tools IV-B/1. Iron Knife Blades Function: Among the artefacts on living surfaces were tools used to cut a variety of materials including foodstuffs and fibres. Metal and chert blades were both present in the same assemblages. Criteria: For the most part, the iron blades from Tall Jawa had parallel edges with one cutting edge. Blades were straight or slightly curved, in contrast to sickles or pruning knives, which were usually 100 This identification as a bow drill socket is based on the scale included in fig. 5, although in a note, the authors (Biran and Gophna 1970: n. 36) compared this artefact to a roof roller from Megiddo. 101 One item (Reg. 875; Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.22:8) may have had a different function since the depressions are significantly larger (3.00 cm) than those in the remaining sockets (<1.00 cm).

96

chapter two

larger in size, had a more rounded curve (depth of concavity=>1.00 cm) and do not appear to be represented in the Tall Jawa corpus.102 Catalogue TJ 867 (Fig. 2.52:1; C54:24/32). Iron. L 10.30, W 2.00, T 1.80 cm. Broken at each end. TJ 1029 (Fig. 2.52:2; E54:31/100). Iron, with copper rivets. L 18.80,W 2.80, T 1.70 cm. Fragment of wood handle. Complete. TJ 2029+2074 (Fig. 2.52:3; E75:22/54+58). Iron, with copper rivets in tang (TJ 2074). L 11.20, W 2.60, T 1.00 cm. Tip broken. TJ 2084 (C76:10/37). Iron. 14.80, W 2.40, T 1.00 cm. Broken at proximal end. In section, the blades are tear drop in shape, with a thick spine that was only slightly thinner than the maximum thickness of the blade. For example, Blade TJ 2029 is 0.70 cm thick along the spine and 1.00 cm thick in the middle of the blade. From this point, the blade tapers to the cutting edge. Blade TJ 1029 is the only complete knife; along with knife TJ 2029+2074, it retains its tang and rivets. Another example of a tang with copper rivets in place is tool fragment TJ 2121. Unfortunately, this fragment does not mend with any of the better preserved blades. Parallels Tall Mastuma: Knife blades from Persian period levels are typically straight sided whereas blades form Iron Age strata include both straight and slightly curved edges (Tsumoto 1997: fig.2:1-7). Tyre: A good example of a knife with one straight edge and a curved spine still retains its rivets (Bikai 1978: pl. XXXVIII:9). Tell Keisan: A number of iron blade and handle fragments (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 98:19-25) have the same straight or slightly curved shape. In contrast, the curve of the Iron Age sickle blades is deeply concave (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 99:17-20). Tel Michal: Several curved-backed and straight-backed knife blades dating to the early Persian period were catalogued. Among those illustrated, a few can serve as parallels (Muhly and Muhly 1989: fig. 25.3:53, 54). Lachish: Complete examples of blades with their rivets still in place 102 In a preliminary typology (Metal Artefacts from Tall Jawa, unpublished paper, 1996), D. Rouk identified three blades as sickles (TJ 867, 1029, 2029). However, the difference between curved knife blades and sickle blades is seen very clearly at Beer-sheba (Herzog 1984: pl. 14:5-7).

artefact classification and typology

97

along the tang (Tufnell 1953: pls. 56:26, 34; 59:11, 13) serve as good parallels for the Tall Jawa blades. Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: Similar in size to TJ 2084 is a straight-backed blade with a rivetted handle from Tomb 113 (Pritchard 1980: fig. 16:6). Tall Dayr ‘Alla: Knife 138 still has its rivets in place (van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:106). Tell el Mazar: Both straight-backed and curve backed knives were dated to the Iron Age (Yassine 1988b: pl. XIV:1, 2, 5). Maqabalayn: A straight-backed knife with rivetted handle comes from a late Iron Age II tomb (Harding 1950: pl. XV:7). Balu‘: One example of a knife has a blade measuring 12.50 cm in length (Worschech, Rosenthal and Zayadine 1986: pl. LXIII:1), well within the size range seen at Tall Jawa. Tawilan: A large group of 17 blades were registered; several of these are close parallels, with the rivets still in place (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.6:1, 3). IV-B/2. Lithic Tools and Weapons IV-B/2a. Lithic Blades and Flakes Over 800 lithic tools were recovered from the surface and from stratified debris layers and sealed floor surfaces. While certain lithics, including Levallois blades (L-87, 758) and a tortoise back core (L530) recovered from the surface, may have been brought to the site in modern times with terra rosa that was used as fertilizer, a significant number were clearly in use or in storage in Iron Age structures. Lamdan’s suggestion (1989:314) that Neolithic tools were brought to Tel Michal by the inhabitants suggests that they knew the value of these lithics and put them to use.103 A sample of typical Canaanean blades and utilized flakes is presented here. Catalogue L-91 (Fig. 2.53:1; E55:5/20). Canaanean blade. L 3.15, W 2.05, T 0.45 cm. L-316 (C27:1/3). Canaanean blade. L-671 (E54:51/174). Canaanean blade. 103 The Tall Jawa lithic corpus is currently being studied at the University of Saskatchewan by Prof. U. Liname, and will be published separately with a complete database. Preliminary typologies and the development of the database were the work of S. Thompson and D. Thomas, students at Wilfrid Laurier University.

98

chapter two

L-815 (Fig. 2.53:2; A15:31/35). Utilized flake. L 4.20, W 2.30, T 1.65 cm. L-816 (Fig. 2.53:3; A15:12/29). Canaanean blade. L 4.85, W 2.16, T 0.60 cm. L-819 (Fig. 2.53:4; A15:31/39). Bladelet. L 3.15, W 1.20, T 0.71. Parallels For the most part, such tools are assigned to strata representing periods prior to the Iron Age, as at Megiddo (Loud 1948: pls. 166, 167). Tell Keisan: Two Canaanean blade segments, possibly for use in a sickle, are shown (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 35:13, 14). Tel Michal: The same types of lithic tools, consisting of Canaanean blades, sickle blades and denticulates, many of which were produced and used as late as the Persian period, are represented at Tel Michal (Lamdan 1989:318; fig. 26.1). IV-B/2b. Lithic Points Only a small number of lithic points were recovered, one of which was a unique example in obsidian. Other examples belong to the Levallois culture. Catalogue TJ 1500 Fig. 2.54:1; E53:11/26). Obsidian. L 2.60, W 1.20 T 0.30 cm. Gray (7.5YR 3/0). Tip broken.

IV-C. Scraping Tools Function: Scrapers were common domestic tools, used for cleaning hides, food preparation, pottery production, trimming wood and other craft related activities. Criteria: A scraper is a chipped stone tool, usually of chert, consisting of one retouched edge on a relatively flat surface, which is either parallel (side scraper) or perpendicular (end scraper) to the long axis of the piece (Bower 1986:466). Other tools that probably served as scrapers were formed from various stones or from reworked ceramic sherds using a different technique. Examples of these two types will be described here.

artefact classification and typology

99

IV-C/1a. Stone Scrapers In addition to lithic scrapers, there is one stone scraper (TJ 173) in the shape of a large flake that resulted from ground stone tool manufacture (L. Quintero, personal communication, July 1995). Although technically debitage, its unique appearance and extremely sharp edges make it an ideal tool. Catalogue TJ 173 (Fig. 2.55:1; B63:42/67). Basalt. L 12.40, W 7.00, T 2.50 cm. Complete. IV-C/1b. Ceramic Scrapers Included among the tools are several reworked sherds with sharpened edges that may have served as scrapers. Catalogue TJ 244 (Fig. 2.55:2; D2:7/13). Ceramic, pinkish white (7.5YR 8.2) ext., pinkish gray (7.5 YR 7/2) int. L 8.00, W 5.60 cm, T 1.10-1.70 cm. Chipped. TJ 593 (Fig. 2.55:3; E55:12/33). Ceramic, light gray (10YR 7/2) ext., gray (10YR 6/1) int. L 12.90, W 15.50, T 1.70cm. Wt 340 g. Reused pithos sherd. Chipped. These ceramic scrapers are each a large reworked sherd whose exact purpose is unclear because the worked edge is so thick. Scraper TJ 244 is sub-rectangular and TJ 593 is triangular. No parallels can be cited at this time. IV-C/2. Chisels Function: A chisel is a tool designed to trim wood, especially wooden beams used as supports for ceilings and as ceiling beams. Although such tools are rare, a small number can be assigned to Iron Age occupation levels with certainty. Criteria: A chisel is a long metal tool, bronze or iron, distinguished by its splayed, or flaring distal end. This end is also flattened, in contrast to the shaft, which can be oval or square in section. Catalogue TJ 2054+2055+2083 (Fig. 2.56:1; D21:20/12+14). Iron. L 44.30, W2.90, T 1.80 cm. Rivets preserved. Corroded. Both ends chipped. Only one chisel appeared among the iron tools. Although both

100

chapter two

ends of this tool were damaged, the preserved length of 44.30 cm is long in comparison with other such tools. At the handle end, there is a recessed groove and the remains of two rivets that held the handle in place. The cutting end was chipped but sufficient metal remains to show that it flared out slightly from the shaft (>1.90 cm). Although this tool was from Field D, it can nevertheless be dated to the Iron Age (Building 700) on the basis of its stratigraphic location, its material and condition, and from known parallels. Chisels from Late Bronze and Iron Age contexts are usually in the range of 9.00-11.50 cm in length and occur in two forms, a) straight sided chisels and b) chisels with the distal end broader than the proximal end. Tools in this size range appear at Megiddo (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 83:18-20) and at Beth Shan (James 1966: fig. 105:6) although the latter is of bronze and has a deep socket for insertion of a handle, with the result that its preserved length is only 16.00 cm. At other sites, a small number of probable chisels are closer in size to the Tall Jawa example. Parallels Tall Mastuma: Only the proximal end of a chisel dated to Iron I occupation levels is preserved (Tsumoto 1997: fig. 3:5). Hazor: An unidentified iron “implement” may be the remains of a chisel (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXXI:14). Tell Keisan: An extraordinary chisel from a secure Iron Age IIB locus measures almost 60.00 cm in length (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 99:5). Megiddo: One iron “dagger” 30.00 cm long (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 81:47) may in fact have been a narrow chisel. Gezer: An iron chisel measuring more than 35.00 cm in length (Macalister 1912: pl. CXCVII:41) appears to be a close parallel. Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: Two, almost identical artefacts, one called a chisel and the other identified as a “spear” (Pritchard 1985: fig. 8:23, 24) were in situ in House 37, surrounded by storejars, juglets, loom weights and other domestic artefacts. Item 23 (S1085/F49) is of special interest in view of it length (43.00 cm). Tell el Mazar: A bronze tool, possibly a short chisel, has the characteristic flaring distal end (Yassine 1988b: pl. XV:1).

artefact classification and typology

101

IV-D. Sharpening Tools IV-D/1. Whetstones Function: The most common tool for sharpening metal blades is a whetstone. The blade, held at an angle, is rubbed across the surface of the stone in order to refine the cutting edge. Criteria: A whetstone is identified by its material, an essential characteristic if it is expected to function properly, and by random cut marks left by the strokes of the blade. At Tall Jawa, whetstones are either of sandstone or other suitable stone imported for this particular purpose. However, several sandstone tools cannot be assigned this precise function; for example, TJ 1476 and TJ 1532 may have been used either as sharpening stones or as sanding or grinding stones. Catalogue TJ 040 (Fig. 2.57:1; A13:22/105). Stone. L 8.00, W 3.90, T 2.30 cm, Wt 118 g. Broken. TJ 564 (Fig. 2.57:2; C27:18/47). Sandstone. L 8.00, W 5.10, T 4.10 cm. Wt. 325 g. Complete. TJ 1023 (Fig. 2.57:3; B24:20/37). Sandstone. L 6.00, W 4.80, 3.80 cm, Wt 200 g. Complete. TJ 1278 (Fig. 2.57:4; E65:37/65). Quartzite. L 9.20, W 7.00, T 4.60 cm. Wt 635 g. Complete. These stones may also have served more than one function as several have extremely smooth surfaces, where they appear to have been used as polishing stones. This is true especially for TJ 040, which has three flat upper surfaces stained with rust, while the lower surface is polished indicating extensive wear. Parallels At Tall Jawa, perforated whetstones that could be suspended from a cord around the neck or waist were not represented. Since these tools vary considerably in shape and size, few parallels are cited here. Ugarit: Small stones, perforated at one end, were identified as whetstones in the Louvre collection of Ras Shamra-Ugarit artefacts (Elliott 1991: fig. 20:6-9, 11). Two similar stones were unperforated, but these too were assigned to the same type (Elliott 1991: fig. 20:6, 10). Megiddo: Whetstones are typically elongated (Lamon and Shipton 1939: Pl 102:25-26, 29), suggesting a difference in technology from Tall Jawa, where stones are of various shapes.

102

chapter two

Tawilan: The majority of whetstones were sandstone and were unperforated (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.27:1-5).

IV-E. Fashioning Tools IV-E/1. Pecking Stones Function: Pecking stones used for craft and industrial purposes functioned as hammer stones in the formation of basalt tools, such as grinders, pestles, millstones and mortars. Evidence for such use was clearly seen in Work Area 211 (west of Building 102), where broken millstones were being recycled and transformed into new grinders, pestles, and small mortars. Criteria: In certain instances, pecking stones could not be distinguished from pounders used in food processing activities. Apart from their location in the archaeological record, one criterion for making such a distinction is their size. Pecking stones (7.00-10.00 cm in diameter) were typically larger than the average pounder (4.50-7.50 cm) and were more irregular in shape. A second distinguishing feature is the choice of various imported and hard stones, although most pecking stones were of chert.104 Catalogue TJ 632 (=L-524; Fig. 2.58:1; C27:37/54). Chert. D 10.00, T 9.10 cm, Wt 1.400 kg. Plaster adhering. Chipped. TJ 873 (Fig.2.58:2; C54:24/32). Chert. D 9.50-10.50 cm, T 6.70 cm. TJ 1521 (Fig. 2.58.3; B25:10/34). Chert. D 8.80-9.00 cm. Large chipped surfaces. L 429 (B54:1/4). D 8.80 cm. Chert core reused as pecking or hammer stone; basalt stain on one end. L 510 (C54:15/22). D 10.00 cm. Lebanese chert. Core reused as hammer stone. L 598 (A93:0.5/6). D 8.85 cm. Chert. Irregular shape. L 658 (A83:16/46). D 9.00 cm. Crystalline stone; two flattened surfaces. L 690 (unregistered) D 10.00 cm. One flat surface; irregular shape 104 Several stone tools do not fit into the formal types presented here. Either their find spot, their condition, their degree of preservation, or their shape make it difficult to identify these objects. A case in point is a rough, anchor-shaped pestle (? TJ 922) which is chipped and battered beyond recognition.

artefact classification and typology

103

Parallels Standard size pounders at Ugarit were called “pecking stones,” but these probably functioned as food preparation tools, since all find spots were in domestic buildings (see Type VI-C/1b below). IV-E/2. Grinding and Crushing Tools Function: A number of stone tools were out of size and weight for their class as food processing tools. These grinders, crushers and pounders, along with an oversize quern, may have served industrial purposes, such as the refashioning of ground stone tools that occurred in Courtyard 211 (Field B), where more than 100 basalt artefacts were found, some broken and others quite new. Other tasks may have included the crushing of materials to produce temper for pottery production, treating hides, and other activities whose precise nature is not apparent from the archaeological record at Tall Jawa. Several such tools were in situ with other craft related tools in Building 300, while others were recovered from the debris that filled the eastern stairway in Building 800. Although found on the stairs themselves, their position may have been secondary having fallen from the upper storey; in this way, their find spot did not clarify their function. Criteria: Artefacts included in this class are large, sometimes oversize, hand tools that show evidence of use comparable to that of smaller, food processing tools. IV-E/2a. Industrial Grinders IV-E/2a-1. Rectangular Industrial Grinders The grinders included in this type are actually sub-rectangular in shape, and more irregular that the finely made small rectangular grinders associated with food processing tasks. Catalogue TJ 014 (Fig. 2.59:.1; A4:3/12). Basalt. L 12.20, W 10.30, T 8.40 cm. Wt 1.794 kg. Complete. TJ 449 (Fig. 2.59:2; C27:18/26). Basalt. D10.00-10.50, T 7.20 cm, Wt 1.200 kg. Chipped. TJ 970 (Fig. 2.59:3; C44:2/8). Sandstone. L 13.50, W 9.50, T 5.50 cm, Wt 1.400 kg. Complete. TJ 1573 (Fig. 2.59:4; A83:16/46). Basalt. L 16.60. W 10.00, T 8.50 cm, Wt 2.550 kg. Chipped.

104

chapter two

IV-E/2a-2. Oval Industrial Grinders Catalogue TJ 824 (Fig. 2.60:1; E44:7/39). Basalt. L 14.50, W 11.50, T 7.70 cm. Complete. TJ 984 (Fig. 2.60:2; D32:47/74). Basalt. L 13.00, W 9.30, T 6.20, Wt 1.220 kg. Complete. TJ 1442+1443 (Fig. 2.60:3; B55:20/41). Basalt. L 11.40, W 7.50, T 4.80 cm, Wt 730 g. Complete in two pieces. TJ 1446 (Fig. 2.60:4; B55:21/57) Basalt. L 12.10, W 8.30, T 7.10, Wt 1.015 kg. Complete. IV-E/2a-3. Anchor-shaped Industrial Grinders Catalogue TJ 1389 (Fig. 2.61:1; B55:20/53). Basalt. H 8.10, W 9.50, T 5.30 cm, Wt 625 g. Complete. Grinder TJ 1389 fits comfortably in the hand, due to the slight concavity on one of its upright sides. The opposite side shows evidence of use as a grinder although the principal use surface was the base. The same is true for grinder TJ 1110, which is more irregular in shape. IV-E/2b. Industrial Millstones Artefacts shaped like upper loaf-shaped millstones but heavier and thicker in section have been assigned a craft or industrial function. Their shape does not suggest that they were used as a lower millstone or as a quern or working surface, each of which have their own characteristics. Catalogue TJ 053 (Fig. 2.62:1; A3:28/72). Basalt. L 21.00, W 13.50, T 7.10 cm, 2.846 kg. Broken. Parallels Tall Dayr ‘Alla: Due to their thickness and width, a sandstone millstone and an oversized grinder (Franken 1992: fig. 5-12:7; 5-16:14) both fit well into this type. IV-E/2c. Large Pounders The stone tools included in this type are almost spherical, with one flattened or chipped side. In view of their shape and the signs of wear, they probably functioned in a slightly different manner than the chert pecking stones described above. The precise use of these tools re-

artefact classification and typology

105

mains unknown although their weight suggests that they could have been used to crush ceramic for temper. In each case, there is sufficient evidence of wear to confirm their classification as tools.105 Catalogue TJ 557 (Fig. 2.63:1; E55:21/50). Conglomerate. D 12.50-14.00 cm, Wt 2.600 kg. Complete. TJ 753 (Fig. 2.63:2; C27:43/77). Vesicular basalt. D 12.70, T 8.70 cm, Wt 1.740 kg. Complete. TJ 773 (Fig. 2.63:3; C27:43/77). Basalt. D 12.50, T 8.70 cm, Wt 2.500 kg. Complete. TJ 1012 (Fig. 2.63:4; E54:31/97). Porphyritic basalt (N4/0, dark gray). D 8.50-9.50 cm, Wt 1.150 kg. Complete. TJ 1028 (Fig. 2.63:5; E54:31/80). Limestone (10YR 8/1, white). L 10.50, W 10.00, T 8.40 cm, Wt 1.550 kg. Complete. TJ 1422 (Fig. 2.63:6; E54:15/153). Limestone. D12.40-13.70, T 11.8 cm, Wt 3.080 kg. TJ 2140 (Fig. 2.63:7; A83:32/111). Limestone. D 13.80-14.40 cm, Wt 3.250 kg. Complete. Parallels Jerusalem: Recovered from an Iron Age II floor with a group of bowl sherds was a stone spheroid (10.00 cm diameter) that could have functioned as a large hammerstone. However, it was initially identified as a “ballistra (sic) ball” (Mazar and Mazar 1989: pl. 11:2). Timna‘: Hammerstones of various sizes (Rothenberg 1988: figs. 91:23; 92:6) were in use with mortars and anvils.106 IV-E/2d. Oversize Quern A single artefact falls into this class (TJ 569), a lozenge-shaped limestone slab with a concave depression and slight rim on one side. Its shape and size as well as the wear pattern show clearly that a variety of grinding and pounding activities were carried out on its upper surface. Because of its size and its association with other craft related artefacts in Room 302, it appears that it was related to industrial use rather than food processing although that cannot be determined with certainty. No parallels can be cited at this time. 105 Albright (1943:76; pl. 57d:1-2) illustrates objects of similar shape but describes them as scale weights, one weighing 1.262 kg and the other, 4.565 kg which equals 400 shekels or 8 minas. 106 Unfortunately, the scale on fig. 92 does not correspond to the sizes listed in the captions (Rothenberg 1988:317).

106

chapter two

Catalogue TJ 569 (Fig. 2.64:1; E55:21/50). Limestone. L 58.00, W 49.00, T 3.50-5.00 cm, Wt 10.250 kg. Regular size saddle querns, lower millstones, and working surfaces or anvils may also have had a craft related function; these tools are discussed with food processing tools below. IV-E/3. Polishing Tools Stones and shells were used in a variety of industries. One well know function is to smooth or burnish the surface of leather hard vessels prior to firing. Polishing tools may also have been used in the preparation of leather and fabrics to soften and compress the material. Tools used to polish ground stone artefacts such as mortars and pestles are less easy to identify. IV-E/3a. Small Polishing Stones Function: This class consists of twenty-two small stones of various shapes that were exceptionally smooth, suggesting extensive use as polishing tools. Because of their shapes (round, tabular, irregular, etc.), these stones were not classified as burnishing tools for pottery production since it would be very difficult to hold them with wet hands. Criteria: Precise criteria or formal variables cannot be assigned to such a diverse group of artefacts, some of which appear to be stone nodules (TJ 240, 2070). Nevertheless, they were clearly recognizable in the archaeological record as tools and not as unused, natural stones. All sides were smooth but some areas had an even more noticeable sheen. No tools in this class were of basalt. IV-E/3a-1. Round Polishing Stones Catalogue TJ 1205 (Fig. 2.65:1; A93:6/25). D 5.30, T 2.70 cm, Wt 100 g. TJ 1246 (Fig. 2.65:2; E54:37/134). D 3.50, T 2.60 cm, Wt 50g. TJ 1644 (Fig. 2.65:3 A83:15/57). D3.30, T 2.30 cm, Wt 30 g. Cut. TJ 2135 (Fig. 2.65:4; B65:30/65). D 4.30, T 1.60 cm. TJ 2201 (Fig. 2.65:5; C27:66/189). D 2.40, T 2.10 cm, Wt 50 g. These small smooth stones must have been extremely difficult to hold securely while in use. In one case (TJ 1644) a cut was made to remove a chunk of stone and provide a finger grip on the tool.

artefact classification and typology

107

Parallels Ugarit: At certain locations, natural pebbles of varying sizes were used as polishing stones (Elliott 1991:23). Beth Shan: Polished pebbles in various shapes (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 126:9-11) were probably used as polishing stones. IV-E/3a-2. Rectangular Polishing Stones Several stones, close to rectangular in shape, were identified as polishing stones although their precise use is not known. TJ 1267 (Fig. 2.66:1; E54:37/135). L 3.25, W 2.60, T 2.41 cm, Wt 030 g. Broken. TJ 1268 (Fig. 2.66:2; E54:37/135). L 3.80, W 3.00, T 2.51 cm, Wt 045 g. Scratched. TJ 1269 (Fig. 2.66:3; E54:37/135). L 6.30, W 2.61, T 1.80 cm, Wt 055 g. Broken. This group, all from the lowest floor surface in Room 302, are each slightly different; TJ 1267 was broken and smooth on its upper, rounded surfaces while TJ 1268 was smooth, but scratched on its flat rectangular face. Object TJ 1269 appears to have been part of a larger stone artefact (a leg?) which was broken and reused as a polisher. IV-E/3a-3. Irregularly-shaped Polishing Stones TJ 171 (Fig. 2.67:1; A14:42/59). L 7.20, W1.60-2.70 cm, Wt 53 g. Complete. TJ 721 (Fig. 2.67:2; B54:3/17). L 4.35, W 3.00, T 1.50 cm. Wear on base. Complete. TJ 840 (Fig. 2.67:3; B44:14/24). L 7.40, W 1.50-2.60 cm. Complete. TJ 1423 (Fig. 2.67:4; A83:2/25). L 4.50, W 2.30, T 1.20 cm. Complete. TJ 2021 (Fig. 2.67:5; E75:3/53). L 5.50, W 4.70, T 3.30 cm, Wt 200 g. Broken. Parallels Megiddo: Several good examples of this class are among the thousands of objects from Megiddo (Loud 1948: pl. 165:3-4). Beth Shan: Two polishing stones, one a pebble, were in Locus 1001 in the northern storerooms (James 1966: fig. 114:22, 23), while a third example was reported from Level VII (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 125:7).

108

chapter two

IV-E/3b. Medium Size Polishing Stones A number of stones with evidence of use on one or more sides are classified with the polishing stones, because they are clearly distinct from hand grinders both in material composition and in shape. At this stage, it is difficult to distinguish these stones from whetstones although several Tall Jawa whetstones are of sandstone or have a granular texture. Catalogue TJ 422 (Fig. 2.68:1; C71:3/15). Fine basalt(?). L 9.10, W 6.50, T 2.70 cm, Wt 286 g. Chipped. TJ 971 (Fig. 2.68:2; C54:30/40). Stone, reddish yellow (7.5 YR 6/ 6). L 9.70, 6.70, T 3.70 cm, Wt 550 g. Complete. TJ 972 (Fig. 2.68:3; C54:30/40). Stone. L 8.00, W 5.00, T 3.00 cm. Complete. TJ 2210 (Fig. 2.68:4; B24: 29/44). Marble(?). D 7.00, T 4.80 cm. Chipped. Parallels Ugarit: One cylindrical stone containing silica is identified as a polishing stone (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 85:81/2098) as well as a thin, oval “pebble” (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 76:81/3326). IV-E/4. Burnishing Tools IV-E/4a. Burnishing Stones A small number of objects show signs of wear which suggests use as burnishing tools, when compared with finds from other sites. Since these tools were not found in association with the potter’s wheels, this functional identification must remain tentative. Catalogue TJ 214 (Fig. 2.69:1; B63:12/29). Stone. L 18.2, W 3.55, T 0.60 cm. Wt 18.20 g. Chipped. This stone tool had one perpendicular edge that was flattened and showed signs of considerable use. IV-E/4b. Burnishing Shells IV-E/4b-1. Glycymeris Among the shell pendants, two Glycymeris bear evidence of wear beyond what could be expected from ordinary use as jewellery. Most striking is TJ 2085, a small shell whose ventral edge is worn horizontally, almost to the middle of the body. Additional evidence for

artefact classification and typology

109

use as a tool can be seen in its perforation, which showed a secondary break. By contrast, Shell TJ 2225 shows minimal evidence of wear along the lateral teeth of its interior ventral edge, but it has a worn area on its periostracum (Ells 1996:24-25). In the pottery cave at Lachish, a worn down Glycymeris was in association with burnishing pebbles and sherds with ground down edges, indicating its use, or reuse, as a tool (Inge 1938:250; pl. XXV:3). The best example of function from ethnographic evidence was seen at Samaria where Crowfoot (1957: pl. XXVII) documented the use of a shell to burnish pottery. Catalogue (all single valves) TJ 2085 (Sh 61; C53:39/92). Pink (7.5YR 8/3), gray (7.5YR 5/1). Holed. L 3.80, W 5.10, H 0.90 cm. Worn. TJ 2225 (Sh 46; Fig. 2.70:1, E53:35/73). Reddish brown (2.5YR 5/ 4), pinkish white (5YR 8/2). Holed. L 4.00, W 3.80, H1.30 cm. Exterior worn. Parallels Tawilan: Two Glycymeris (793, 839) show signs of wear on the body and were probably used as tools (Reese 1995a: Table 10.1). In their water worn condition, these shells were probably not attractive as jewellery. Four other Glycymeris with no hole at the umbo were recovered from Stratum VII levels at Tall Jawa in Fields C and D. These objects may have been collected in preparation for use either as tools or as jewellery. Catalogue TJ 594 (=Sh 6; C27:18/37). L 4.27, W 4.22 cm. TJ 684 (=Sh 40; Fig. 2.70:2; D2:3/11). L 4.02, W 4.02 cm. TJ 1858 (=Sh 39; Fig. 2.70:3; C65:31/51). L 3.20, W 3.37 cm. TJ 2234 (=Sh 10; Fig. 2.70.4; C76:9/24). L 3.37, W 3.25 cm. IV-E/4b-2. Other Shells Of the three freshwater clam shells (Sh 11, 16, 42; see Reese, Chapter 4) one shell (TJ 2226=Sh 42) showed signs of wear that resulted in a perforation on its outer face below the umbo. By contrast with TJ 2085, this shell was not worn along its ventral edge making it more difficult to suggest its precise function. Catalogue TJ 2226 (=Sh 42; Fig. 2.71:1; D31:0.5/41). Very pale brown (10YR 8/2). L.2.50, W 4.50, H 0.50 cm. Worn.

110

chapter two

Other shell species may also have been used as tools. Two murex shells in a single activity area in Building 300, are not unique at Tell Jawa. Another complete murex (TJ 546) was found south of Building 910. This shell has two holes, one is 1.4 mm in diameter, the second is 3.5 mm in diameter. The side with the orifice shows signs of wear (used as a burnishing tool?), especially the obliteration of the fine spiral threads between the ribs and of three ribs to the left of the aperture, whereas the back side is unworn.107 Shell TJ 546 has a very short canal (10 mm) that appears in fact to be broken. Catalogue TJ 546 (=Sh 62; C62:13/35). L 4.45, W 4.00 cm.

IV-F. Natural resources Function and Criteria: Various stone and shell samples can be classified as natural resources or raw materials for craft or industrial use. Although it is not certain in each case how a material was used or the end products envisioned by the ancient craft workers, it is clear that these were imported items chosen for their particular characteristics either as a resource or as a raw material to be modified in some way. Such is the case with small stones of pink quartz and carnelian that were probably intended for beads. The purpose of other products, such as various species of shell, is less clear since they could have been used for food, dye, personal adornment, or as containers. IV-F/1. Stone Raw Material Catalogue Carnelian Samples: TJ 052 (Fig. 2.72:1; A3:24/63). Pyramidal shaped stone, red (10R4/ 6). Pink Quartz Samples: TJ 131 (A14:12/33); TJ 239 (A14:12/34); TJ 257 (Fig. 2.72:2; A14:East Balk); TJ 838 (B44:14/24). 107 Suggestions concerning the identification and use of this shell were made initially by E. Kott, Department of Biology, Wilfrid Laurier University, April 11, 1995. The particular species found at Tall Jawa is “Murex brandaris” of the genus “Bolinus” which comes from the Mediterranean (Radwin and D’Attilio 1976:28).

artefact classification and typology

111

Porphyry Samples: TJ 132 (Fig. 2.72:3; A14:12/23). Tubular Chert Samples: TJ 006 (Fig. 2.72:4; A3:6/13); TJ 147 (A24:5/9). Unknown Stone Samples: TJ 653 (Fig. 2.72.5; A24:1/2). Very pale brown (10YR 8/3). TJ 839 (Fig. 2.72.6; B44:14/24). Olive gray (5Y 5/2); black (N 2.5/). IV-F/2. Shells A variety of shells whose precise function cannot be specified are classed with natural resources. These shells include Glycymeris, Murex, Unio, Conus and Moon Snail (see Reese, Chapter 4). IV-F/3. Metal Resources The majority of metal objects consists of iron points, classified as weapons and discussed below. A few unidentifiable pieces of bronze may have served as raw material in the process of being refashioned. In the artefact corpus, there was little evidence for cosmetic tools, such as kohl sticks, combs or hairpins. In some instances, small groups of iron fragments, recovered from debris layers immediately above floor surfaces, suggest a wider range of artefacts than those reported in this typology, but the pieces do not mend to form recognizable objects. Apart from these samples, one outstanding object was a lead “pendant” that was probably an ingot. This unusual find, from Building 800, is dated to the late Iron Age II and may reflect new dimensions in trade and economy, especially with Assyria (Daviau 1997a). Because of the dearth of parallels, the functional classification of this find remains tentative. Catalogue TJ 2168 (Fig. 2.73:1; A84:8/34). Lead. L 7.70, W 4.10, T 0.60 cm. Wt 150 g. Complete. Parallels Tell al-Rimah: One lead ingot was associated with the Middle Assyrian period Temple (Oates 1965:74-75). Tyre: A thin lead “weight,” rectangular in shape (Bikai 1978: pl.

112

chapter two

XIA:26), is a good parallel in size and shape, although its precise function as a weight is unspecified. Jerusalem: An anchor shaped “weight” of comparable size and weight (240 g) is dated to the first to second centuries AD (Scott 1985:210; fig. 82:24).

IV-G. Potter’s Wheel Only one example of a pair of potter’s wheels was identified among the mortars and door pivot sockets with which the socket shares certain features. A second, broken wheel socket is tentatively included in this class. IV-G/1. Lower Potter’s Wheel Function: The lower wheel supports a second, upper wheel, which rests on its upper surface and can be turned separately. The two wheels are held in position by a tenon that fits into a corresponding socket. It is usually assumed that the socket was the lower wheel and that the upper wheel had the tenon.108 These wheels may constitute the complete device, although several scholars suggest that these were only the bearings that supported a turn table somewhat larger in diameter. It has been suggested that in the Bronze and Iron Ages the turn table was supported on the upper bearing by a layer of clay (Trokay 1989:169; fig. 4). This turn table would serve both as a flywheel and working platform. Wood’s description of the fast wheel (1990:20-21) assumes that “a vertical shaft is attached to the centre of the wooden” flywheel and that this shaft supports, at its top, a second wooden disc which serves as the working platform. Although 108 Surprisingly, Chambon (1984: pl. 78:1-4) illustrates the wheels, which he calls “meule tournante” upside down (see Trokay 1989), and yet, this may be in fact the correct position; see below. Like Chambon, Bienkowski (1995:87; fig. 9.25:1) designated a wheel with a tenon as a rotary grinder, more specifically a quern. While such tools may have entered the archaeological record at this time (see perforated disks, Type IX-B/2 below), usually these grinders have a perforation through both members. Rotary grinders were common beginning in the early Roman period (J. Freed, personal communication, January 28, 1999), and are still in use by Jordanian Bedouin on the banks of the Wadi ath-Thamad (personal observation, 1997). Examples of rotary grinders for crushing grain are otherwise unknown for the Iron Age.

artefact classification and typology

113

it is clear from the pottery itself that a fast wheel was in use in the late Iron Age II period, the archaeological evidence for this style of double potter’s wheel is lacking; it appears only in much later periods. Criteria: The socket wheel is a stone with one flat surface and a central cavity or depression that takes up less than 50% of the upper surface. This is in contrast to mortars where the central cavity occupies 75% or more of the upper surface. The distinction between a door pivot socket and a lower potter’s wheel is not immediately apparent, especially when the wheel with the tenon is missing. In general at Tall Jawa, a door socket was a limestone boulder thick enough to support the pivot and the continuous wear that enlarged the apex of the conical depression. Although one element of the potter’s wheels appears in the shape of a carefully formed socket stone, for example the Late Bronze Age potter’s wheel from Hazor, that had its matching upper wheel (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CXXVII:22, 23), it may also appear in the form of a thick disk with a somewhat irregular shape.109 Because of its broad flat surface, which supported the upper wheel, the cavity is not subject to the same kind of wear as a door socket. Finally, potter’s wheels were of basalt whereas door sockets were typically of limestone, especially in the central plateau of Transjordan.110 Catalogue TJ 318+848 (Fig. 2.74:1; C17:0.5/+C43:1/4). Basalt. L 23.00, W 19.50, T 7.50, int Dp 2.90, Wt 5.989 kg. Complete in two pieces. TJ 556 (C7:15/29) Basalt. D 24.00, T 5.40 cm, Wt 2.500 kg. Broken. Parallels There are several studies of the better known potter’s wheels from workshops dating to the Late Bronze and Iron Ages in Palestine. Wood (1990) has compared these objects with finds from sites across the Levant; for a detailed bibliography of parallels for the wheel bearings themselves, see also Trokay (1989). Sarepta: Comparable to the Late Bronze Age wheels at Hazor is an 109 An example of an extremely rough lower wheel thrust bearing from Nubia, now in the Khartoum Museum, shows clearly that the shape and size of the upper wheel is more regular (Hope 1981: fig. 1A), and necessarily so. 110 The location of sources of basalt used in the formation of ground stone tools at Tall al-‘Umayri, Tall Jawa and Al-Draijat is being studied by Schnurrenberger (1997:308).

114

chapter two

example from Sarepta, described by Anderson (1988: pl. 22:10) as a “lower socketed bearing.” Hazor: In addition to the Late Bronze Age potter’s wheels mentioned above, there are a few Iron Age examples which include lower wheels, one of which is slightly smaller (18.50 cm in diameter; Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXIII:15) than the Tall Jawa wheels. Megiddo: A lower wheel from Iron Age II Stratum V (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 114:2) is an example of a finely made potter’s wheel. Wood (1990:19; fig. 3) discusses the use of such a socket or lower thrust bearing with a wooden disc, or flywheel, although the evidence for this element appears to be lacking for Iron Age II. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): The socket stone was identified as the matching element in a pair of rotary grinding stones (Chambon 1984: pl. 78:4). Gezer: An example of a lower wheel from an Iron Age I house is described as a “basalt tournette or potter’s wheel” (Dever et al. 1971: fig. 15d), rather than as a thrust bearing for a wooden wheel.111 Beth Shemesh: A complete pair of wheels are shown with the lower socket stone being larger than the upper stone (Grant 1932: pl. XLVII:10). IV-G/2.Upper Potter’s Wheel The matching element for the lower wheels described above is usually illustrated as a thick disc with a protruding tenon which stabilizes the upper wheel. The fact that neither element is perforated militates against their identification as rotary millstones, since there would be no way to introduce the grain between the elements.112 Catalogue TJ 1635 (Fig. 2.75:1; C64:9/28). Basalt. D 15.00, T 8.40 cm, Wt 2.140. Broken tenon. 111 Surprisingly, in the final report, the same object is called “the top bearing-stone” of a potter’s wheel (Dever et al. 1986:115), even though it has a central cavity and appears in the plates (pl. 61:12) as a “tournette base.” A second anomaly is its size; if this artefact is indeed drawn at a scale of 1:2 (Dever et al. 1986:277), then it only measures 6.65 cm in diameter, considerably smaller than its photo in the preliminary publication (Dever et al. 1971: fig. 15d), where the scale is in inches (6"=15.30 cm). 112 A demonstration of the technique for grinding grain using a rotary millstone, was given by Salameh (a Khirbat al-Mudayna worker) in his tent on the north bank of Wadi ath-Thamad (July 1997). The grain was dropped through the perforation in the upper stone while it was rotating, and the turning process forced the grain between the stones, where it was crushed.

artefact classification and typology

115

Parallels Hazor: Several Late Bronze wheels with tenons were located in Area C of the lower city (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CXXVII:22, 23). Beth Shan: Here also, James and McGovern (1993: fig. 129:1) identify the element with the tenon as the lower wheel. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Three pivot stones (meule tournante) from as many loci are reported (Chambon 1984: pl. 78:1-3). Tawilan: According to our criteria, a granite “rotary quern” (Reg. 472; Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.25:1) would be classified instead as a wheel with a tenon. Excursus: At Tall Jawa, the potter’s wheels or thrust bearings were recovered in separate squares of Field C and thus none were found together in situ. The result of this situation is that we cannot be certain whether the “upper” wheel (TJ 1635) was in use with either of the lower wheels, although it fits well with Wheel TJ 318+848. If these elements were a pair, it raises the question of how they were used, because the upper wheel is considerably smaller (D 15.00 cm) than the “lower” (D 19.50-23.00). In view of its rounded shape, the “upper” wheel appears better suited as a lower wheel, just as the wheels from Tell el-Far‘ah (N)(Chambon 1984: pl. 78:1-4) and from Beth Shan (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 129:1) were illustrated.113 Evidence from the pottery itself indicates the use of a fast wheel in Late Iron Age II as a result of Assyrian influence (Daviau 1997a:2628). The small size of Pivot Wheel TJ 1635 and the evidence of an area of smoothing, possibly by hand rubbing, on the gently rounded surface of Socket Wheel TJ 318+848 may indicate a reversal of the position of the wheels. This would result in the smaller pivot wheel being on the bottom and the broader socket wheel on the top. Based on the experiments of Amiran and Shenhav, Singer-Avitz (1989:357; fig. 31.5:6) illustrates a pivot wheel as the bottom wheel; this variation in presentation clearly indicates the need for more work in experimental archaeology to test the speed of such wheels in these alternate positions. 113 While the flat surface of two potter’s wheels with tenons (Chambon 1984: pl. 78:1, 2) may argue for their use as upper stones or thrust bearings, suggesting that Chambon illustrated them upside down, the third example (pl. 78:3) is very rounded on the side opposite the tenon. This rounded exterior is problematic in the interpretation of these wheels, since one can hardly imagine how the potter could attach to such a shape either a working surface or his clay lump from which he formed his pots.

116

chapter two v. cultic or high status containers V-A. Ground Stone Bowls and Trays

Function: Bowls were used for the same purpose in the Iron Age as they are today; they function as containers to prepare or hold solids or liquids. Although bowls made out of stone were common in many cultural periods and cannot be used to define a chronological period on stylistic evidence,114 they can still be used to indicate the function of a room or work area. Functional classification becomes more tentative when one attempts to distinguish stone bowls from round mortars. A number of bowl shaped artefacts have a shallow, central cavity, distinct from and yet similar to round mortars. The best quality bowls and trays are so finely finished both inside and out that the evidence for use as a mortar may not be apparent. The function of these objects may be different from both mortars and stone bowls that typically have a deep central cavity. At the same time, it is possible that these bowls and trays could have been used with a small hand grinder rather than with a pestle, in view of their flat interior surface. Criteria: Five types of stone bowls can be distinguished on the basis of the formation of the base; flat base, rounded, disc, ring base and tripod. Otherwise, all bowls have a shallow, relatively flat central cavity and a carefully shaped rim. These bowls are open in form and are finished on both the inner and outer surfaces. This is not the case with utilitarian mortars (Type VI-A/1) which, in most cases, have unfinished bases. Secondly, the bottom of the central depression is flat and can function as a mortar with the use of a hand grinder whereas in most mortars the central cavity has conical or rounded sides, the result of use with a pestle. The interior shows limited evidence for wear since these carefully finished bowls may have functioned as high status items or cultic paraphernalia. The bowl cavity in round bowls comprises most of the surface area of the object, with only a small section tapering to the rim. Similar distinctions can be made in the category of rectangular trays, although the full range of sub types is not represented. 114 “It is impossible to say of which period they were most common or when a certain type started or finished...” (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 112).

artefact classification and typology

117

V-A/1. Round or Oval Stone Bowls V-A/1a. Flat Base Bowls Three styles of round stone bowls are represented at Tall Jawa, bowls with a flat base, those with a ring base and tripod footed bowls. Only two bowls have handles, TJ 1994+2190 and ring base bowl TJ 1338+1339. Although assigned to “round” bowls, TJ 1994+2190 is incomplete, and may have been slightly oval in shape. Catalogue TJ 1647 (Fig. 2.76:1; A4:17/52). Basalt. D 22.00, H 5.40, Int D 19.00, int Dp 3.20 cm. Wt 1.185 kg. Broken. TJ 1994+2190 (Fig. 2.76:2; E63:3+6/10+14. Basalt. D ca. 15.00, H 5.80, int Dp3.65 cm. Wt 500+400 g. Broken in two pieces. V-A/1b. Round Base Bowls Only one bowl with a rounded base and slightly oval shape fits into this type. It is not classified with mortars because of the distinction of two variables; the floor of the central cavity is flat and the base is thin in comparison to mortars used with pestles, all of which have thick bases. Catalogue TJ 1935 (Fig. 2.77:1; E75:21/48). Basalt. L 25.50, W 19.70, H 6.60, int Dp 2.00 cm, Wt 3.200 kg. Complete. V-A/1c. Disc Base Bowls Disc base bowls formed from basalt appear at various sites but are rare at Tall Jawa. Only one broken fragment can be assigned to this type (TJ 1163). However, the base is certainly distinct from a ring base since its thickness equals that of the bowl. This high status artefact was part of an assemblage from the upper storey rooms in Building 800, where numerous high status items were in use (Daviau, in preparation/a). Catalogue TJ 1163 (Fig. 2.78:1; A83:1/7). Basalt. L 9.30, W 7.00, H 7.20 cm, Wt 450 g. Fragment. Parallels Hazor: Although slightly larger in all its dimensions, one basalt bowl (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXIII:8) is a suitable parallel. Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: One mortar, twice as large in size, has a concave disc base (Pritchard 1985: fig. 8:26), close in shape to the foot of TJ 1163.

118

chapter two

V-A/1d. Ring Base Bowls Function and Criteria: All bowls in this category have a shallow, flat interior surface and a low ring base. The bowls were carefully finished, with little evidence that they were used as mortars with pestles although use with hand grinders is possible. However, if they did serve another function, there is no evidence to suggest what that was; yet, their presence in upper storey assemblages along with figurines and other high status items is suggestive. Catalogue TJ 35+1741 (Fig. 2.79:1; A4:7/21+B64:1/60). Basalt. D 21.00, H 5.00, int D 20.00, int Dp 2.10 cm. Wt 814 g. Broken (2 pieces). TJ 191+344 (Fig. 2.79:2; C17:14/18+C27:8/8). Basalt. D 22.00, H 5.80, int D 20.00, int Dp 2.90 cm. Wt. 1.383 kg. Broken (2 pieces). TJ 818 (Fig. 2.79:3; C17:49/110). Basalt. D 23.00, H 6.00, int D 20.50, int Dp 3.00 cm. Wt 1.590 kg. Broken. TJ 1338+1339 (A83:7+9/21+23). Basalt. D 26.30, H 5.10, int D 21.50 cm, Wt 1.900 kg. Broken. TJ 1761 (Fig. 2.79:4; E65:42/121). Basalt. D 17.70, H 6.30, int Dp 14.00, D 3.00 cm. Wt 2.400 kg. Complete. TJ 2214 (B24:29/43). Basalt. D ca. 35.00, H 7.10 cm, Wt 1.700 kg. Broken. Of this group, Bowl TJ 1338+1339 was the finest example. The rim is upright forming an acute angle with the floor of the central cavity; on the exterior there is a bar handle below the lip of the rim. The bowl is of dense basalt and beautifully ground. In contrast, Bowl TJ 2214 is bulky and has a gentle curve between the rim and the floor of the bowl, making it extremely heavy. Parallels Ugarit: A bowl with a diameter of 51.60 cm (Yon et al. 1987: fig.22:79/ 403) is an elegant example of this type. Hazor: Three examples of basalt, ring based bowls were found in Stratum XI, dating to Iron Age IB (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCVI:3, 6, 7); item 7 is the best parallel for TJ 191. Tell el-‘Or¿me: Shallow basalt mortar bowls came in various sizes, often quite large with a diameter in the range of 35.00-45.00 cm (Fritz 1990: pl. 109:3, 4). Megiddo: The range of styles of ring base bowls and mortars can be clearly seen in the Megiddo corpus (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 113:1-10). One of these bowls from Stratum III (pl. 113:7), is 42.50

artefact classification and typology

119

cm wide and 6.00 cm high, almost twice as large as bowls from Tall Jawa. Tell en-Naßbeh: Another example of a shallow basalt bowl with a bar handle (McCown 1947: fig. 63:1) is shown with a variety of utilitarian and high status mortars. Lachish: Although this vessel has a stepped base, it shares most of the other features of TJ 1338+1339. Baq‘ah Valley: A stone “bowl” (McGovern 1986: fig. 90:1; D 14.00 cm) fits well into this class. Tall al-‘Umayri: Only a fragment of a ring base basalt mortar or bowl was reported for 1997 (Platt 1991:250, fig. 10.22). Sahab: Object 229 is a shallow, ring-based basalt bowl; no scale is indicated (Ibrahim 1975: 174, pl. XXX:1, 2). V-A/1e. Low-footed Tripod Bowls Tripod bowls can be distinguished from tripod mortars only by the quality of the basalt and workmanship used in making these bowls. Lack of evidence for wear on the floor of the central cavity may be a secondary criterion although certain basalt bowls did not have the usual flat inner surface typical of ring base bowls. This typology regards as utilitarian mortars those objects that have a rounded or conical depression and have an unfinished base. High status bowls may actually have functioned as mortars, such as Mortar 404 from Ugarit (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 22). The only high status example from Tall Jawa is low-footed, meaning that the feet do not raise the base of the bowl more than 2.00-3.00 cm off the surface. This is in contrast to a single large basalt foot (TJ 1357) that was apparently part of a mortar; the foot alone extends 7.80 cm to the base of the bowl. Catalogue TJ 668 (Fig. 2.80:1; C54:2/4). Basalt. D 30.50, H 7.80, int D 27.50, int Dp 5.50 cm. Wt 3.508 kg. Broken (2 pieces). Parallels Ugarit: A bowl with 3 squat feet and a diameter of 34.00 cm (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 22:79/406) is more typical of tripod mortars. Tyre: Among a small number of tripod basalt bowls, there is one that is very shallow with feet at the same level as the base of the bowl (Bikai 1978: pl. 1:18). Hazor: Among the numerous basalt tools from domestic contexts in Area B are a variety of tripod mortars (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXXXIII:8-11) in the size range of 22.50-30.00 cm in diameter.

120

chapter two

Tell el-‘Or¿me: Tripod basalt mortars were present in late Iron Age II contexts; two of these serve as close parallels (Fritz 1990: pl. 108:14, 16). Beth Shan: Many basalt mortars of various styles were assigned to Upper Level V which dates to Iron IIA (James 1966: fig. 43:3-7, 911). The closest parallel to the Tall Jawa bowl is from Level 6 (James 1966: fig. 106:18) Megiddo: A range of styles of tripod bowls and mortars are present in the Megiddo corpus (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 112:12-17), although in certain instances (Loud 1948: pls. 262:9; 263:24) the feet are taller than those found on the bowls from Tall Jawa. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): One mortar with incised decoration on the outer side of each foot is slightly taller and more ornate (Chambon 1984: pl. 78:7) than the Tall Jawa mortar. Tel Michal: One mortar, assigned to the Persian-Hellenistic period (Singer-Avitz 1989: fig. 31.32:5), is a close parallel to the Tall Jawa bowl. Shiloh: A bowl with three preserved feet (Buhl and Holm-Nielsen 1969: pl. 12; pl. XVI) was recovered from a tunnel between two caves (Bulh and Holm-Nielsen 1969:74). Bethel: Only one example is shown from sixth-century BC levels (Albright and Kelso 1968: pl. 64:15). Tell Beit Mirsim: Tripod mortars appear in two styles; elaborately carved basalt bowls with decorated tripod feet (Albright 1943: pl. 63:32),115 and simple bowls with low feet (Albright 1943: pl. 64:13). Sahab: Bowl 228 appears in a photo to have low feet (Ibrahim 1975: pl. XXX:1, 2). V-A/2. Rectangular Stone Trays All artefacts classed as trays are small, with a maximum length of 22.20 cm. For the most part, these rectangular trays have a flat exterior base and gently rounded corners. The change of direction on the interior varies from gentle to abrupt. In all cases, the floor of the central cavity is flat and finely ground. 115 Albright (1943: 83) states that stone mortars were found frequently and that the finest were tripod mortars. He does not indicate if they were aesthetically better, more efficient or in a better state of preservation but the illustration (Pl 63:32) indicates the high quality of the carving.

artefact classification and typology

121

Catalogue TJ 786 (Fig. 2.81:1; E44:7/24). Basalt. L 22.20, W 14.30, H 4.10, int Dp ca. 1.00 cm. Ledge handle. Complete. TJ 951 (Fig. 2.81:2; B34:6/9). Basalt. L 13.40, W 7.70, H 4.50, int Dp 1.35 cm. Wt 600 g. Loop on one corner. Broken. TJ 1465 (Fig. 2.81:3; E65:18/622). Basalt. L 12.90, W 8.80, T 3.30, int Dp 1.55 cm. Wt 590 g. Complete. TJ 1637 (Fig. 2.81:4; E65:30/110). Basalt. L 17.50, W 12.00-12.80. H 3.90, int Dp 1.10 cm, Wt 1.270 kg. “Warped.” Complete. TJ 1751 (Fig. 2.81:5; E65:16/119). Basalt. L 19.10, W 16.00, H 4.60, int Dp 1.80 cm. Wt 2.150 kg. Complete. The presence of a loop handle on one corner of Tray TJ 951 is not unique; a similar loop appears on a another tray (TJ 1932), of which only a fragment was recovered. In addition to the loop handle, there is also a hole through the rim of TJ 951; this tray may have broken when the hole was drilled. Parallels Beth Shan: Only a fragment of a rectangular basalt “platter” with a ring base is reported for Level VIII (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 123:3).

V-B. Large Stone Tray/Table Large, almost square, stone trays are exceptional finds in a domestic context. In a temple context, such as the Orthostat Temple at Hazor, large ground stone trays (56.00 x 68.00 cm) are often identified as “libation tables” (Yadin et al. 1989:258; fig. 6; 1961: pl. CCLXXXIV:5-8). Only one artefact at Tall Jawa comes close in size, a limestone “table” (42.00 x 47.50 cm) from the upper storey of Building 800. This limestone “table” (TJ 1543), measuring 42.00 x 47.50 cm, was part of a collection of high status or cultic material on the upper storey above Room 807 in Building 800 (Daviau 2001a). Catalogue TJ 1543 (Fig. 2.81:6; A83:12). Limestone. L 47.50, W 42.00, T 13.00, int Dp 2.00 cm. Complete. Parallels No true parallels appear in Iron Age assemblages, at least of the same size. Limestone crushing platforms are similar in shape but measure 1.00 m on a side, four times larger than the Tall Jawa

122

chapter two

“table.” One such press is seen at Tell Qiri in Stratum VIIA (BenTor and Portugali 1987: photos 20-21). The principal differences, apart from size, are the presence of a drain hole in one corner and its association with a large vat that was part of a pressing installation.

V-C. Alabaster Jug The handle and base of an alabaster jug (TJ 688+1198) were recovered in two different buildings (B300 and B700), providing evidence that this high status possession was broken in antiquity. The base is a ring base, characteristic of this type of vessel, and the handle is a broad strap with three vertical grooves. The only parallel is from Dayr ‘Alla (‘Amman National Museum), but has not been published.

vi. food processing tools The largest single class of domestic and utilitarian artefacts is food processing equipment (1049=58.3%),116 consisting primarily of ground stone tools. Within this class is the complete range of items manufactured from basalt, sandstone or quartzite and, occasionally, from limestone. Types within this group include utilitarian stone bowls, mortars in various shapes and sizes, mortars with spouts, pestles, hand grinders, upper loaf-shaped millstones, lower millstones, saddle querns, and working surfaces or anvils. Also used in association with these tools were chert pounders or hammerstones (see Chapter 6). Other uses for these same tools might include the grinding of grain for animals (Watson 1979:171), crushing minerals for cosmetics, grinding stone, shell, or ceramic sherds for clay temper, grinding herbs for medicines, or extracting oils. Because they are so common in Near Eastern town sites, the recording and analysis of stone tools has been neglected. Many of these objects were discarded when found because they were so 116 This calculation does not include the 924 registered reworked sherds, since the identification of a sherd as reworked is very subjective. Even with the inclusion of these sherds, the food processing tools represent 38.5% of the total object corpus.

artefact classification and typology

123

numerous.117 Albright (1943: 84) summarizes this attitude when he says, Many shapeless stone mortars, basins and vats were unearthed in the course of our work,...but no particular purpose seems to be served by reproducing them. The same is true of the many saddle-querns for grinding grain which we excavated; the type is too well known to need further illustration and its late variations are of little chronological significance.

The lacuna that is apparent in the publication of utilitarian objects was filled in part by the work of Elliott (1991), who developed a detailed formal typology for the Late Bronze Age artefacts recovered from Ugarit during the 1978-1987 seasons. Other recent studies are also beginning to see the value of such finds. For example, at Tell el-Hesi, 23 grinding tools were reported (Bennett and Blakely 1989:299) for the Persian period,118 while at Tell el-Far‘ah (N), Chambon published 46 ground stone objects. These numbers are still low when compared to the Ugarit collection that included 180 identifiable artefacts and 27 stone objects whose exact function was unclear. These numbers are somewhat closer to the results from Tall Jawa, although, even with this determined effort at recovery and recording, many badly broken items were discarded since they could not be properly identified. A statistical analysis of such a large corpus of ground stone tools should reveal a pattern of selection for material, size and weight. Combined with future results from trace element analysis, we might then be able to suggest more accurately a specific use for most object types. The following classification is an attempt at both functional and formal typology.119 As a guide to 117

Platt quotes Khair Yassine to the effect that this is also the case in Jordan. From the appearance of these tools (Bennett and Blakely 1989: figs. 222, 223), it is clear that Iron Age style loaf-shaped millstones, hand grinders, pounders, pestles, mortars and polishing stones continued to be used. Bennett and Blakely (1989:302) suggest that these tools were probably produced during the Persian period, although they acknowledge the possibility that Early Bronze Age tools were reused. In view of the need to coordinate food preparation tools with the foods and dietary customs in use at a given time, this suggestion seems somewhat unlikely. Iron Age or Persian period production (or refashioning) seems more probable. 119 It is important to note that K. Wright (1992:53) is still critical of many typologies that suffer from poorly designated variables lacking clear definition. We have attempted to define function and criteria for each type of tool; repeated handling of the artefacts was especially useful in this regard. For a list of artefact names and types, see Wright (1992:61-63). 118

124

chapter two

Table 2C. Food Processing Tools Tool type

Used with

Function

mortars lower millstones querns

pestles, hand grinders, pounders, hand grinders upper millstones, hand grinders, pounders hand grinders, pounders

crushing, hammering grinding

working surfaces

grinding, hammering hammering

this analysis, the tools and their most common functions are presented in a simplified table.

VI-A. Crushing Tools VI-A/1. Mortars Function: As a group, mortars are classified into various types based on the value of certain variables, especially size and shape. These characteristics relate directly to their probable function and to the size and types of tools that could be used in association with them. At Tall Jawa, mortars ranged in size from small mortars that fit in the palm of the hand to large, boulder mortars that were installed in the floor and held in place by chink stones. Mortars of all sizes can be described as multi-purpose objects since they were also used in various crafts and industries. For our purposes, these tools are all presented here in view of their use each day in food preparation activities. At the same time, the quality of basalt chosen for mortars varied from very dense or fine grain basalt to extremely vesicular basalt. Although these choices were surely related to function, the precise use of vesicular basalt mortars remains unclear.120 In most cases, it is possible to distinguish mortars from door sockets of similar size and shape on the basis of the wear pattern in the central depression, although in certain instances this pattern may have been the result of the forming process itself. Secondly, mortars differ from querns because they have a rim that forms a depression deep enough 120 Flynn (1988:56) cites the study of Herch who observed the use of several grinding stones, each with a different degree of coarseness, in a single food processing function. The same may have been true at Tall Jawa in antiquity.

artefact classification and typology

125

to hold the product that is ground or pounded inside the mortar itself. All mortars in use at Tall Jawa were made of basalt or limestone and came in a variety of sizes. Because mortars of various sizes probably functioned differently, they will be categorized first on the basis of size, and secondly, where appropriate, on the basis of shape and portability. VI-A/1a. Small mortars with flat/rounded base Function: Small mortars are receptacles used to crush a small amount of material, possibly spices. Although similar in size to the typical limestone or marble cosmetic mortars (Type I-B/2), the mortars in this class (VI-A/1a) appear to be more utilitarian. Such mortars come in several different shapes although round, oval and rectangular are the most common. The oval mortars were associated on occasion with small chert pounders (Room 302 in Building 300). Criteria: All mortars were made of stone and had a rim around a shallow depression. Certain examples were fashioned from larger, broken ground stone tools, such as hand grinders or upper loafshaped millstones (TJ 1200). Small square mortars had a circular depression in contrast to small rectangular mortars, which usually had an oval depression. Overall maximum size of these small round mortars was <14.0 cm with a central depression in the range of 5.0012.00 cm in diameter. It is this variable that determined the size of pestle or pounder, which was used with these small mortars. VI-A/1a-1/a. Small Round Mortars This type of small mortar could have a square, triangular, or rectangular base but is classified as a round mortar because of the shape of the central depression.121 Few mortars, published from other sites, are shown from the top with the result that we can only assume that they were round rather than oval or triangular. Catalogue TJ 192 (Fig. 2.82:1; B63:44/63). Vesicular Basalt. L 9.60, W 9.00, T 3.60, int D 7.00, int Dp 1.85 cm. Wt 527 g. Complete. 121 One artefact (TJ 151 [Fig. CD-ROM; A14:17/42] of porphyoritic basalt (D ca. 10.00, T 5.00, int D 7.50, int Dp 3.75 cm, Wt 287 g) was originally classified as a mortar, but may in fact have had a different function. Broken in the middle, the central depression has an unusual shape; there is a second, smaller depression on one side.

126

chapter two

TJ 430 (Fig. 2.82:2; C71:3/18). Limestone. D 7.80, T 3.20, int D 5.35, int Dp 2.10. Broken. TJ 503 (Fig.2.82:3; E55:19/45). Basalt. L 7.60, W 6.90, T 3.60, int D 3.50, int Dp 1.10 cm. Reused hand grinder. Complete. TJ 1147 (Fig. 2.82:4; B35:2/5). Basalt. D 7.10, W 5.90, T 3.60, int D 4.70-5.00, int Dp 1.10 cm. Wt 250 g. Broken. TJ 1227 (Fig. 2.82:5; D23:23/45). Basalt. D 10.00, T 7.50, int D 7.30, int Dp 3.00, Wt 600 g. Broken. TJ 1368 (Fig. 2.82:6; B14:11/10). Limestone. D 8.30, T 4.15, int D ca. 5.50, int Dp 1.40 cm. Wt 445 g. Broken. TJ 1819 (Fig. 2.82:7; B63:54/82). Basalt. D 10.00, T 4.70, int D 7.00, int Dp 2.50 cm, Wt 700 g. Chipped. TJ 1939 (Fig. 2.82:8; E53:38/82). Basalt. D 8.10-8.40, T 3.20, int D 6.00-6.20, int Dp 1.40 cm. Wt 400 g. Complete. TJ 1946 (Fig. 2.82:9; E53:37/83). Basalt. D 8.60, T 3.10, int D 6.50, int Dp 1.50 cm. Complete. Mortars TJ 1939 and 1946 were both found in Room 318 and are extremely close in terms of size, shape and quality. The only anomaly is a pair of depressions on the exterior rim of mortar TJ 1939. This appears to be the remnant of a broken loop, a feature also seen on TJ 951, a basalt tray (see Class V, above). Among the small mortars, only two (TJ 1227, 1451) had a thick stump base, similar to an equally small mortar from Tawilan, which has four feet at the base of its stump (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.17:2); all other examples are bowl shaped. Parallels Tyre: A small mortar with a thick base appears to have a concave base (Bikai 1978: pl. XXXII:5). Hazor: Two small basalt bowls (Yadin 1961: pl. CCXXI:22; CCXXXIII:18) fit all of our criteria for small mortars. Tell el-‘Or¿me: Two small mortars, each with a thick base, fall into this size range (Fritz 1990: pl. 108:1, 2). Tel Michal: Several basalt bowls may have been used as small mortars (Singer-Avitz 1989:351; fig. 31.3:10-12). Megiddo: A fine example of a round, small mortar was recovered from Stratum I (Lamon and Shipton 1939: Pl 107:7) while others, dating to Stratum XVII (Loud 1948: pl. 262:5, 6), demonstrate the importance of mortars in this size range. Beth Shan: Two examples can be cited from Iron Age levels (James 1966: fig. 43:4, 11).

artefact classification and typology

127

Shiloh: From the Late Bronze (Stratum VI) is a fine example of a mortar (Brandl 1993: fig. 9.15:1) within our range of “small” mortars. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Two small mortars (Chambon 1984: pl. 78:10, 11) fall into the appropriate size range. Baq‘ah Valley: Also at the high end of our size range is a mortar from Cave 4 (McGovern 1986: fig. 90:3). Tall al-‘Umayri: A limestone example, classed as a palette (Platt 1991: fig. 10.46), shares all of the characteristics of the small, utilitarian mortars. Tawilan: Although classed with the stone bowls, certain items share the characteristics of small utilitarian mortars, especially their size and rough appearance (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.17:9; 9.18:5). VI-A/1a-1/b. Small Mortars with Tripod Foot Function and Criteria: Two round mortars with low feet represent this type. In both cases, the mortars have the usual sloping sides of a utilitarian mortar and not the upright finished rim characteristic of high status bowls and trays. At the same time, Mortar TJ 1547+1550 is a very fine piece. A second type (TJ 1185) is of a low-footed tripod mortar with a tall stem, whose precise function remains unclear due to its extremely vesicular basalt. VI-A/1a-1/b-1. Small Round Mortars with Low Tripod Foot Catalogue TJ 1547+1550 (Fig. 2.83:1; E54:51/172+174). Basalt. D 13.5, T 5.90, int D 10.50, int Dp 3.15 cm. Wt 895 g. Complete in two pieces. TJ 1895 (Fig. 2.83:2; E53:37/77). Basalt. D 13.60, T 7.80, int D 10.70 in Dp 3.00 cm. Wt 2.100 kg. Complete. Parallels Megiddo: Two examples from Megiddo (Loud 1948: pl. 263:18, 19) are somewhat better finished than the Tall Jawa mortars, however that may reflect the richness of the material culture or the quality of the craftsmanship typical of the local material culture. Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: Although the caption and photo do not agree, a good example of a low footed tripod mortar is true to type (Pritchard 1985: fig. 170:4).

128

chapter two

VI-A/1a-1/b-2. Small Round Mortar with Tall Tripod Foot Catalogue TJ 1185 (Fig. 2.84:1; E53:4/8). Vesicular basalt. D 13.35-13.60, int D 9.50, int Dp 2.50, H 14.80 cm. Wt 2.500 kg. Chipped. Parallels Beth Shan: The closest parallel comes from Upper Level V (James 1996: fig. 43:7). Megiddo: A stone mortar with a trumpet base (Loud 1948: pl. 262:15) from Temple 2048 (Stratum VII) is a more elegant example of this style. Mount Ebal: Also of vesicular basalt or pumice, a tall-footed mortar was recovered from a pit in Stratum II (Zertal 1986-87: fig. 21:7). Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: Almost in the shape of a tumbler, one mortar with a solid foot (Pritchard 1985: fig. 170:5) resembles the example from Megiddo. VI-A/1a-2. Small Oval Mortars Mortars in this class have an oval or semi-rectangular cavity although the shape of the base could be oval or rectangular. This feature is in contrast to the high status rectangular basalt tray (Type V-B), which had both a rectangular base and a rectangular depression or cavity. Several oval mortars were formed from broken millstones that appear to have been reworked on the broken edges. While some of these small mortars were formed of very fine grained basalt or of limestone, certain examples are of extremely vesicular basalt (e.g. TJ 1502). Catalogue TJ 101 (Fig. 2.85:1; A13:20/26). Lava. L 7.00, W 4.50, T 2.10, int Dp 0.75 cm. Wt 64 g. Broken. TJ 176 (Fig. 2.85:2; C17:5/8). Basalt. L 8.50, W 5.80, T 3.10, int L 6.60, int W 4.45, int Dp 1.38 cm. Wt 263 g. Complete. TJ 1200 (B35:5/14). Basalt. L 9.20, W 6.30, T 3.50 cm. Wt 430 g. Reused millstone fragment. Chipped. TJ 1455 (Fig. 2.85:3; B35:8/40). Limestone. L 11.00, W 7.20, T 3.20 cm. Wt 295 g. Broken. TJ 1856 (Fig. 2.85:4; C26:0.5). Basalt. L 8.50, W 7.00, T 4.00, int L 3.70, W 2.25, int Dp 0.60 cm. Wt 300 g. Chipped. TJ 1821 (Fig. 2.85:5; E53:7/64). Basalt. L 7.60, W 5.80, T 3.20, int L 5.40, int W 3.25, int Dp 0.80 cm. Wt 300 g. Reused millstone fragment.

artefact classification and typology

129

VI-A/1b. Small Mortars with Spout Function: The exact use of small spouted mortars is not known. All examples recovered from Tall Jawa were relatively clean, apparently not used as equipment in metal working although the spout would have been useful for pouring melted ore. No analysis of residues has been carried out to date although a faint green stain is present in mortar TJ 153.122 Criteria: All mortars in this class vary in shape (triangular, oval and rectangular) but each one has a spout at the narrow end. Catalogue TJ 153 (Fig. 2.86:1; B64:6/35). Basalt. L 12.00, W 8.50, T 3.75, int L 7.00, int W 5.50 cm. Wt 611 g. Reused upper loaf-shaped millstone. Green stain, Chipped. TJ 1525 (Fig. 2.86:2; C66:1/2). Basalt. L 10.20, W 10.10, T 3.80, int D 4.45, int Dp 1.70 cm. Wt 555 g. Complete. TJ 1964 (Fig. 2.86:3; E53:38/84). Basalt. L10.20, W 8.20, T 4.80, int D 5.20 cm. Possible Parallels Tell edh-Dhiba’i: At the site of Tell edh-Dhiba’i, near Baghdad, the equipment used in processing black copper during the Isin Larsa period included a spouted mortar and an ingot mould (see oval mortars, below; al-Gailani 1965: pl. 7:11). According to the author, who made informed guesses (al-Gailani 1965:37-38), this spouted pouring crucible of unfired clay was used in the manufacturing process. VI-A/1c. Medium Mortars Function: On the basis of their association in the archaeological record with other food processing and preparation equipment, it seems certain that most medium mortars were used in food processing activities. However, their size and shape lent them to use in craft related tasks as well. Among the medium sized mortars in basalt was 122 This stain appears to be the result of a green substance that was crushed in the mortar. Two ceramic vessels are heavily coated with an incrustation that far exceeds the usual limestone coating; one is the base of a black ware juglet (C27:7.1), and the second is a small amphora (V105). Both of these vessels appear to have been reused, possibly in the manufacture of metal objects. In the case of juglet C27:7.1, the encrustation consisted of “calcium, with a residue of quartz and a small amount of red crystals, probably iron oxide (haematite)” (personal communication, Prof. R. J. Kominar, Department of Chemistry, Wilfrid Laurier University).

130

chapter two

one semi-circular mortar stained red on its interior surface (TJ 1660), possibly with red ochre or haematite. Criteria: Medium size mortars were at least twice the bulk of small mortars, but could be carried from room to room and used with a variety of pestles and pounding stones. In form, the interior depressions were either round, oval, rectangular or trapezoidal and the size range was 15.00-20.00 cm. VI-A/1c-1/a. Medium Size Round Mortars with flat/rounded base For the most part, round mortars were formed of a block of basalt, left unfinished on the sides and bottom, whereas certain rectangular mortars, refashioned from millstone fragments, were finished on all sides. Catalogue TJ 708 (Fig. 2.87:1; C17:45/83). Basalt. D 17.70, T 9.20, int D 13.00, int Dp 2.70 cm, Wt 3.475 kg. TJ 849 (Fig. 2.87:2; E64:3/24). Basalt. D18.00, T 7.00, int D 11.50, int Dp 2.50 cm, Wt 2.876 kg. Chipped. Parallels Tyre: Although slightly smaller in diameter, one mortar with a shallow concave base (Bikai 1978: pl. XXXII:6) appears to fit well into this class, as does a basalt bowl with a ring base (Bikai 1978: pl. XXIX:12). Hazor: Among the well finished tripod mortars from Hazor, there is a round mortar of medium size with a flat base (Yadin 1961: pl. CLXXXVIII:2). Shiloh: Brandl (1993:254-255; fig. 9.15:1) cites an example from Tell el-Far‘ah(S) (Petrie, Mackay and Murray 1952:18; pl. 21:108). Tel Michal: Several stone bowls demonstrate the continuity of basalt mortars through the Persian and Hellenistic periods (Singer-Avitz 1989:351; fig. 31.3:7-9). Mount Ebal: Zertal labelled several sandstone objects as “basins” (1986-87: fig. 21:1-3, 8-9). Although unfinished and lacking evidence for wear (1986-87:148), it is likely that these objects were intended to serve as mortars, the larger of which could have been in use with elongated hammer stones found at the site. The best parallel for a medium size round mortar is fig. 21:2.123 123 The scale on fig. 21 does not correspond to the measurements cited in the text (Zertal 1986-87:148).

artefact classification and typology

131

‘Amman: A round “quern” with a disc base (Koutsoukou 1997:153:58) is similar in size to Mortar TJ 1761. Timna‘: Two “small” sandstone mortars (Rothenberg 1988:269; fig. 91:4, 5) were in the same size range as medium mortars at Tall Jawa.124 VI-A/1c-1/b. Medium Size Semi-Round Mortars Although only one mortar fits into this class, it was a special piece of equipment. When found, this mortar was in storage but evidence for its final use can be seen in the dark red stain on its interior surface. Clearly, this mortar was used to grind a red substance, possibly haematite. From the same building (B300) there was a limestone hand grinder that was also stained red. Catalogue TJ 1660 (Fig.2.88:1; E65:29/112). Basalt. L 18.90, W 14.30, T 5.90, int D 2.10 cm, Wt 2.000 kg. Stained interior; Chipped. Parallels Hazor: A Late Bronze Age mortar (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXCIX:19) is a good parallel for this shape. Megiddo: Although rounder in shape, two mortars in this size range, one from Stratum VII and the other from Stratum VIB, show signs of haematite grinding (Loud 1948: pls. 262:14; 263:17). VI-A/1c-2. Medium Size Oval Mortars One very narrow mortar (TJ 1417) has an unusual shape which would have required a special pestle or grinder to run lengthwise in the depression. Suitable examples appear in the class of anchor-shaped grinders (TJ 782, TJ 2066). An alternative use for this mortar is as an ingot mould for copper. Catalogue TJ 1417 (Fig. 2.89:1; B35:20/35). Basalt. L 21.50, W 10.00, int L 15.50+, int W 8.00, int Dp 3.00 cm. Broken. Parallels Medium size oval mortars are much less numerous than those in either small or large sizes. Tell edh-Dhiba’i: An unfired clay artefact of similar shape is identi124 The suggestion that these finds were “medium” rather than small is based on the recorded sizes (13.00-15.00 cm; Rothenberg 1988:317) rather than on the scale printed on fig. 91.

132

chapter two

fied as one half of an ingot mould from Tell edh-Dhiba’i, in Iraq (al-Gailani 1965:38; pl. 7:10). Beth Shan: A mortar in the same size range appears in Level VIII (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 123:7). VI-A/1c-3. Medium Size Rectangular Mortars Two styles of rectangular mortars were identified, those formed from a roughly shaped basalt block (VI-A/1c-3/a), and those fashioned from an upper millstone fragment (VI-A/1c-3/b). VI-A/1c-3/a. Rectangular Block Mortars Catalogue TJ 200 (Fig. 2.90:1; B63:44/63). Basalt. L 15.00, W 11.10, T 4.30, int Dp 1.10 cm. Wt 1.280 kg. Chipped. TJ 833 (Fig. 2.90:2; B54:11/31). Basalt. L 25.00, W 15.50, T 6.70, int Dp 3.00 cm. Wt 2.990 kg. Chipped. Parallels Megiddo: A mortar that appears to be similar in size and shape is from Stratum VA (Loud 1948: pl. 263:23). ‘Amman: Although one “sub-rectangular trough palette” of vesicular basalt has a knob handle on one end (Koutsoukou 1997:137; 153:30) similar to trays of dense basalt, its rounded bottom and size (L 25.50, W 12.20-13.90, T 5.00 cm) make it a good parallel for rectangular mortars from Tall Jawa. VI-A/1c-3/b. Refashioned Rectangular Mortars All mortars in this type were finished on the convex base and sides while the bowl of the mortar was dug out of the flat or slightly concave working surface of the millstone. The finished shape of the cavity suggests that these mortars were used with anchor-shaped pestles. Catalogue TJ 378 (Fig. 2.91:1; C17:24/31). Basalt. L 18.20, W 12.00, T 4.70, int D 2.35 cm. Wt 1.600 kg. Broken. TJ 955 (Fig. 2.91:2; E53:19/28) Basalt. L 15.80, W 11.50, T 4.40, int Dp 1.80 cm, Wt 1.110 kg. Chipped. TJ 1019 (Fig. 2.91:3; E64:35/?). Basalt. L. 13.00, W 12.50 cm. Wt 0.931 kg. Broken. Parallels Sahab: A clear example of this type with its small round grinder was

artefact classification and typology

133

among the basalt tools from the Iron Age II building in Area B (Ibrahim 1975: pl. XXIX:2). VI-A/1c-4. Medium Size Trapezoidal Mortars Trapezoidal mortars provide an unusual shape for a working surface. These mortars would have been less suitable for use with round pestles, which work best with bowl shaped mortars, where both the base and the lower edge of the tool can come in contact with the wall of the central cavity. Rectangular and irregularly shaped hand grinders may have been the more suitable partner for rectangular and trapezoidal mortars where the grinding surface was relatively flat. These mortars are included here in the typology instead of with the rectangular trays primarily on the basis of their quality, rather than any known functional difference. In the sample below, four mortars are basalt and one is limestone. Criteria: Although initially classed as rectangular mortars, these artefacts were not true to shape and the central depression was broader at one end than at the other. In this type of mortar, the shape of the base is also trapezoidal. Since such a large number of mortars were probably produced at or near Tall Jawa in a variety of shapes and sizes, it is clear that these shapes were intentional rather than just the result of wear. Such intentionality warrants recognition in the typological system. Catalogue TJ 1031 (Fig. 2.92:1; E54:31/82). Basalt. L 24.1, W 15.00-18.70, T 8.00, int Dp 2.20 cm. Wt 5.000 kg. Complete. TJ 1140 (Fig. 2.92:2; A83:0.5/3). Basalt. L 14.00, W 18.40, T 4.10, int Dp 0.70 cm, Wt 1.550 kg. Broken. TJ 1503 (Fig. 2.92:3; E74:7/44). Limestone. L 18.00, W 15.00, T 6.30, int Dp 2.10 cm. Wt 2.500 kg. Chipped. TJ 2011 (Fig. 2.92:4; E75:22/52). Basalt. L 18.00, W 16.60, T 4.80, int Dp 1.00 cm. Wt 2.000 kg. Chipped. TJ 2215 (Fig. 2.92:5; E64:62/85). Basalt. L 14.50, W 14.00, T 4.90, int Dp 1.85 cm. Wt 700 g. Complete. Parallels: For the most part, mortars are illustrated in section or in photographs where the shape of the interior is not shown from the top. As a result, it is difficult to recognize exact parallels for trapezoidal shaped mortars.

134

chapter two

VI-A/1d. Large Mortars Large mortars appear in three basic shapes, round, oval and triangular. These mortars are usually portable with the exception of boulder mortars that were installed in the floor surface and held in place with chink stones. VI-A/1d-1. Large Round Mortars Function and Criteria: All large mortars were clearly designed for crushing and grinding with a variety of tools, including pestles, hand grinders and other heavy duty tools. The size of the interior depression allowed for greater freedom of arm movement in comparison to medium size mortars, whose depressions were barely larger than the pestles with which they were used. There is also a difference in material, medium mortars tended to be formed of basalt while large mortars were more often of limestone. Catalogue TJ 815 (Fig. 2.93:1; C54:24/31). Limestone (fossilized). D 29.0032.00, int D 20.00-22.00, T 12.50, int Dp 5.00 cm. Complete. Parallels Tyre: A large, shallow (7.00-8.00 cm) basalt mortar (Bikai 1978: pl. XXXVI:19) fits well into this type. Tell el-‘Or¿me: A mortar in the same size range, also with a 5.00 cm depression, was made from local stone, in this case, from basalt (Fritz 1990: pl. 108:7). A second mortar (pl. 108:9) had a shallow depression (2.50 cm) but this may just be evidence that it had seen little use. Tel Michal: A crudely made limestone mortar with an interior depth of ca. 10.00 cm is similar to the large shallow mortars from Tall Jawa. Tall al-‘Umayri: A mortar which measures ca. 27.50 cm fits well into this type (Platt 1991: fig. 10.11); it comes from the Ammonite Citadel building. VI-A/1d-2. Round Boulder Mortars Function: Large limestone mortars installed in a floor surface and surrounded by chink stones were major architectural features that could have served a variety of functions, domestic and industrial (Daviau, in preparation/a). Criteria: These features can usually be distinguished from door sockets due to the large size of the central depression and its hemispherical or semi-globular shape. The depressions inside these mortars pro-

artefact classification and typology

135

vide sufficient space for both the hand and tool of the user, and the concavity continued to expand with use. This is in contrast to the depression in a socket stone, which varies with the size of the pivot beam and was usually conical. Because of their size and their position in the floor, boulder mortars were assigned locus numbers and not entered in the object registry. When exposed during excavation, the outer sides of the mortars were seen to be rough and unfinished. Catalogue Mortar A13:23 Limestone. D 45.00 cm. Mortar E54:54 Limestone. D 55.00-63.00 cm. Mortar E54:38 Limestone. D 40.00-45.00, int D 30.00, int Dp 16.00 cm. Parallels Hazor: Although basalt was the more common stone in use at Hazor, two mortars, each ca. 45.00 cm in diameter (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXIII:11, 12), are good parallels for these large, immoveable mortars. Beth Shan: Although smaller than certain Tall Jawa boulder mortars, one mortar from Beth Shan (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 123:7) was also set into the floor, whereas a larger mortar was described as “below floor” (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 123:10). Tell el-Far‘ah (N): This deep mortar (18.50 cm; Chambon 1984: pl.78:15) shows extensive use.125 Gezer: Both natural boulders and ground stone mortars are represented (Macalister 1912: fig. 233) VI-A/1d-3. Large Oval Mortars Function and Criteria: These mortars may have served the same use as mortars with round depressions. However, their shape suggests that they were used for a back and forth movement rather than a circular one. A small group of limestone basins or troughs may in fact have been oval mortars although the lack of evidence for their precise use makes this interpretation tentative (see Type VI-D below). Catalogue TJ 1865 (Fig. 2.94:1; B65:10/26). Basalt. L 34.20, W 24.8, T 9.70, int Dp 4.45 cm. Wt 10.400 kg. Complete. 125 Unfortunately, the scale on this plate does not correspond to the measurements given for this mortar.

136

chapter two

VI-A/1d-4. Large Triangular Mortar Only a small number (2-3)126 of mortars falls into this class, the best example of which is Mortar TJ 413. Recovered from the debris between the casemate wall (W2023) and West Tower 2024, this mortar may have been in use on an upper storey. Its precise function remains unclear. Catalogue TJ 346 (Fig. 2.95:1; C27:6/8). Limestone. L 23.40, W 18.30, T 9.20, int Dp 1.90 cm. Wt 4.250 kg. Chipped. TJ 413 (Fig. 2.95:2; B26:6/12). Limestone. L 30.20, W 20.60+, T 12.50, int Dp 4.50 cm. Wt 5.750 kg. Broken. Parallels Mount Ebal: While not an exact parallel due to its length (15.00 cm),127 a triangular “basin” may have had a similar function, although no evidence for use as a mortar was reported (Zertal 1986-87:148; Fig. 21:1). VI-A/2. Pestles Function: Pestles were used to pulverize material in a mortar. A short, intense action, requiring motion and power from the wrist and the forearm are needed to operate the pestle properly. Modern mortars and pestles, usually made of marble, are used for grinding spices. Criteria: A tool, frequently conical in shape and held by its long axis, with the larger surface in contact with the material in the mortar is classed as a pestle. When making an initial distinction between pestles and grinders, the location of surface wear is a primary variable. If the surface at the larger end exhibits signs of wear, is somewhat flat with rounded edges, and if the object fits comfortably in the hand, it is classified as a pestle. The end opposite the worn side is frequently smaller, because the hand and thumb grasp the pestle near the working end. If an elongated object has evidence of wear on its long surface and can be pushed back and forth in a mortar or on a quern with one hand, it would be classified as a grinder. A grinder would be used in a continuous motion, while a pestle would make frequent pauses between moments of contact with the uncrushed particles. At Tall Jawa, pestles are present in a variety of shapes and ma126 Although broken at an odd angle, the curvature of Mortar TJ 1771 suggests that it too was a triangular mortar. 127 Zertal (1986-87:148) described this basin as between 20-40 cm.

artefact classification and typology

137

terials. For this initial typology, they are separated into conical, truncated cone, anchor, pyramidal and irregular shapes. It seems likely that these shapes were related to function and to the type of mortar in use with a given pestle, although like many other ground stone tools, these could also be multi-functional. VI-A/2a. Conical Pestles Conical pestles appear in two forms, as a true cone with round base, or as semi-pyramidal with an oval or slightly square base. All examples in this sub-type are >8.00 cm in height. Catalogue TJ 1392 (Fig. 2.96:1; B35:20/35). Basalt. H 8.30, D 4.00-4.65 cm, Wt 210. Complete. TJ 1651 (Fig. 2.96:2; E65:29/108) Basalt. H 9.00, W 5.50, T 4.10 cm, Wt 395 g. Complete. TJ 1940 (Fig. 2.96:3; B65:20/38). Basalt. H 15.10, D 5.80-6.40 cm. Complete. TJ 2015 (Fig. 2.96:4; D31:34/73). Stone. H 10.30, W 6.20, T 4.90 cm. Wt. 700 g. Complete. TJ 2017 (Fig. 2.96:5; E53:39/89). Basalt. H 9.60, D 5.40 cm. Wt 500 g. Complete. TJ 2185 (E64:58/76). Basalt. H 9.20, D 3.70-4.70 cm. Wt 400 g. Reused as bow drill socket. Complete. Parallels Sarepta: Conical pestles are represented in various strata from the Middle and Late Bronze Age (Anderson 1988: pl. 21:2; 22:13). Hazor: Examples of both conical and truncated cone-shaped pestles appear in the repertoire of basalt tools. A conical pestle in the size range for this type measures 4.50 cm in diameter at its base and is 9.50 cm high (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCVI:15). Tel Michal: The largest basalt pestle is exactly 8.00 cm tall (SingerAvitz 1989: fig. 31.7:29). Samaria: A fine example in red marble (Kenyon 1957: fig. 117:2) is similar in size and shape to our finest examples, although this pestle from Samaria was dated to a Hellenistic-Roman period deposit. A second pestle (Kenyon 1957: fig. 117:1), probably of basalt (“grey stone”), dates to Iron Age II. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Among three examples of this type, two are of limestone and one of basalt (Chambon 1984: pl. 77:13). Shiloh: Conical pestles from Middle Bronze Age debris layers are

138

chapter two

round at the base (Brandl 1993:245; fig. 9.13:1-3). These artefacts were also identified as weights in view of the small depressions visible at various places on certain pestles. Comparison with the Tall Jawa tools suggests that there is in fact another explanation for these holes (see bow drill sockets and grinders). Sahab: A fine example, shown only in a photograph, appears to measure ca. 8.00 cm in height (Ibrahim 1975: pl. XXIX:2). VI-A/2b. Truncated Cone Pestles These short cones (<8.00 cm in height) appear with either a round, square or oval base. Catalogue TJ 1893 (Fig. 2.97:1; A15:12/29). Basalt. H 6.85, W 5.05, T 4.60 cm. Wt 300 g. Complete. TJ 1918 (Fig. 2.97:2; E53:37/81). Basalt. H 7.70, D 5.80-6.00 cm, Wt 400 g. Reused as bow drill socket. Complete. TJ 2016 (Fig. 2.97:3; A15:24/35). Basalt. H 6.30, W 5.30, T 4.20 cm, Wt 200 g. Complete. TJ 2066 (Fig. 2.97:4; A15:32/45). Basalt. H 7.30, W 6.40, T 3.20 cm, Wt 300 g. Complete. Parallels Ugarit: A small pestle (79/690) was found in association with a group of pounders and grinders recovered from the street in front of House B in the central city area (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 5). Pestles from other seasons (Elliott 1991: fig. 4:1-2; 20:1-3) are also short (<8.00 cm). Hama: Good examples of this shape are present in Late Bronze Age levels (Fugmann 1958: fig. 153:5A3). Tyre: A short, squat pestle of basalt (Bikai 1978: pl. XXXVI:18) may be classed in this type although it is more spherical than other examples. Hazor: Several examples (Yadin et al. 1961: pls. CCVI:16; CCXXXIII:16) fit well within this type. Tell el-‘Or¿me: A good example of this type was not assigned to a recognized stratum (Fritz 1990: pl. 110:9). Beth Shan: Two Iron Age pestles fall within the size range of conical pestles (Yadin and Geva 1986: fig. 38:7, 8), while one from level VIII is clearly a short (<6.00 cm) cone (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 126:3). Tel Michal: These small tools range in height from 4.50-7.00 cm (Singer-Avitz 1989: fig. 31.7:30, 31, 34).

artefact classification and typology

139

Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Four short cone pestles, all from Iron Age occupation levels, range in size from 3.80-5.80 cm in height (Chambon 1984: pl. 77:11, 12). Shiloh: Short, truncated cone pestles (Brandl 1993: fig. 9.13:4-6; 9.13:10) were typically of basalt. Pella: Two good examples of truncated conical pestles made of basalt and one pestle made of limestone (Smith and Potts 1992: pl. 41:46) date to the Late Bronze Age. Tall Dayr ‘Alla: A pestle standing 5.50 cm tall (van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1986: pl. XIX:2) is an excellent example of this type. ‘Amman: Evidence for use on more than one surface (Koutsoukou 1977:136; 153:10, 117) is typical of these small tools. Tall al-‘Umayri: Typical of this type is a pestle that measures 3.14 cm in height (Platt 1991: fig. 10.17). VI-A/2c. Cylindrical Pestles Criteria: Although these pestles could be included with truncated conical pestles and can be slightly square in section, their shape is closer to a cylinder than to a true cone. Needless to say, their shape may not have affected their function appreciably. Catalogue TJ 063 (Fig. 2.98:1; A13:30/127). Basalt. H 7.60, W 5.10, T 4.40 cm, Wt 294 g. Complete. TJ 1192 (Fig. 2.98:2; B55:10/31). Basalt. H 8.10, D5.40-6.00 cm, Wt 500 g. Complete. TJ 1387 (Fig. 2.98:3; B35:20/35). Basalt. H 6.10, D 3.10-3.70 cm. Wt 210 g. Complete. TJ 1633 (Fig. 2.98:4; E65:29/108). Basalt. H 12.70, W 6.80, T 5.00 cm. Complete. TJ 1642 (Fig. 2.98:5; A93:26/83) Basalt. H 5.60, D 4.30 cm, Wt 175 g. Complete. TJ 2116 (B65:20/53). Basalt. H 8.20, D 4.40 cm, Wt 400 g. Complete. The smallest example of this type is Pestle TJ 1642. Pestles TJ 2116 and TJ 1633 were both apparently reused as hand grinders since one side is flat and shows signs of wear. In addition, Pestle 1633 has a tell tale bow drill socket depression and Pestle TJ 1387 has cut marks around its narrow end. Finally, TJ 1192 is not a perfect cylinder, being slightly square in section.

140

chapter two

Parallels Tyre: A single pestle with almost vertical sides (Bikai 1978: pl. IX:22) can be included in this type. Tell Keisan: Although the use of local stone instead of basalt (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 83:3) is seen at several coastal sites, the shape and function of these pestles are comparable to the basalt tools from Tall Jawa. Beth Shan: Although slightly concave on one side (in the drawing), this pestle is basically cylindrical (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 124:2). Tel Michal: One cylindrical pestle which appears to be broken or chipped at one end (Singer-Avitz 1989: fig. 31.7:33) is still a good example of this type and fits well (H 7.50 cm) into the size range of the Tall Jawa pestles. A second group of cylindrical pestles (SingerAvitz 1989: fig. 31.7:36-38) are somewhat smaller in size (H 4.505.00 cm). Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Five squat cylinders of basalt (Chambon 1984: pl. 77:8-10) can be cited as examples of this type. Tell Beit Mirsim: Albright (1943:84: pl. 63:9) described one small pestle (H 5.00, D 4.30 cm) of this shape. Tawilan: A classic example in granite was found in a pit (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.26:5). VI-A/2d. Anchor-shaped Pestles Anchor-shaped pestles appear in several sizes, with the result that the shape of the base varies somewhat. For example, the small pestles (VI-A/2d-1) are relatively thin with either a slightly curved rectangular or semi-circular base; medium size pestles (VI-A/2d-2) can also have a rectangular or semi-circular base; small and large pestles with a square base have been assigned to “pyramidal pestles” (VI-A/2e). In most cases, these pestles were also used as hand grinders at least on one lateral surface, while a number of square or trapezoidal hand grinders were apparently used as pestles, indicating the multi-functional use of these tools. VI-A/2d-1. Small Anchor-Shaped Pestles Catalogue TJ 549 (Fig. 2.99:1; B43:10/15). Basalt. H 7.10, W 6.60, T 4.20 cm, Wt 300 g. Complete.

artefact classification and typology

141

TJ 1914 (Fig. 2.99:2; E75:21/46). Basalt. H 7.40, W 5.90, T 3.50 cm, Wt 300 g. Complete. TJ 1730 (Fig. 2.99:3; B34:15.46). Basalt. H 7.45, W 5.70, T 4.10 cm. Wt 300 g. Complete. TJ 2067 (Fig. 2.99:4; E63:6/14). Basalt. H 7.40, W 5.60, T 3.30 cm. Complete. VI-A/2d-2. Medium Anchor-Shaped Pestles Pestles in this sub-type are considerably heavier and thicker than the small pestles, suggesting they probably were used to crush different substances. Catalogue TJ 1852 (Fig. 2.100:1; D31:21/43). Basalt. H 7.60, W 7.80, T 5.40 cm, Wt 600 g. Complete. TJ 2009 (Fig. 2.100:2; D31:34/73). Basalt. H 9.0, W 8.70, T 5.70 cm, Wt 550 g. Chipped. Pestle TJ 2009 was a multi-functional tool, having served also as a grinder and later as a small mortar. Grinder TJ 029 was also used as a pestle, but is not included here because it is closer in size and shape to a square hand grinder (see below). Parallels Ugarit: A pestle (79/704) that appears to be anchor-shaped is shown with a group of pestles and pounders from Street 1038 (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 5). VI-A/2e. Pyramidal Pestles True pyramidal shaped pestles are rare because most of them do not come to a point at the proximal end. Here too the tool has a rectangular cross section although it is much smaller than at the distal end. VI-A/2e-1. Small Pyramidal Pestles Catalogue TJ 129 (Fig. 2.101:1; A14:12/33). Pumice. H 4.50, W 4.00, T 3.50 cm, Wt 266 g. Complete. BJ 1622 (Fig. 2.101:2; A83:16/50). Basalt. H 6.00, W 6.00, T 4.00 cm, Wt 250 g. Complete.

142

chapter two

VI-A/2e-2. Large Pyramidal Pestles Catalogue TJ 542 (Fig. 2.102:1; E55:21/56). Basalt. H 8.90, L 5.90, W 4.90 cm, Wt 500 g. Complete. TJ 800 (D22:20/33). Basalt. H 8.00 cm, W 6.00, T 5.00 cm, Wt 600 g. Depression. Complete. TJ 1340 (Fig. 2.102:2; E55:37/65). Vesicular basalt. L 8.40, W 5.20, T 3.80 cm, Wt 270 g. Complete. TJ 1651 (Fig. 2.102:3; E65:29/108). Basalt. L 9.00, W 5.50, T 4.10 cm, Wt 395 g. Complete. Both TJ 1340 and TJ 1651 retain evidence of extensive wear on one or more flat sides; clearly these pestles were also used as hand grinders in flat-bottomed mortars, with querns, or on working surfaces. Parallels Beth Shan: Although not shown in section, the shape of this small pestle is clearly pyramidal (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 124:1). Pella: One pestle of this type shows clear evidence of reuse as a bow drill socket (Smith and Potts 1992: pl. 46:5). ‘Amman: An artefact identified as a weight (Koutsoukou 1997: fig. 164) fits most of the variables assigned to this type of pestle. VI-A/2f. Irregularly-Shaped Pestles Catalogue TJ 024 (Fig. 2.103:1; A13:16/75). Basalt. L 5.90, W 5.40, T 5.10 cm, Wt 259 g. TJ 128 (Fig. 2.103:2; B63:17/34). Basalt. H 6.00, W 4.50, T 4.00, Wt 228 g. Reused as bow drill socket. Complete. TJ 203 (Fig. 2.103:3; B63:44/63). Limestone. H 6.70, W 5.60, T 5.20 cm, Wt 348 g. Complete. TJ 514 (Fig. 2.103:4; C27:28/48). Basalt. H 8.70, W 7.20, T 6.40 cm, Wt 570 g. Complete. TJ 1954 (Fig. 2.103:5; D21:17/5). Basalt. H 6.40, W 5.50, T 4.50 cm. Complete TJ 1982 (Fig. 2.103:6; B65:19/39). Basalt. H 9.20, W 6.80, T 4.70 cm. Wt. 400 g. Complete. Pestle TJ 128 is in the shape of a truncated cone with one flat side. Two deep depressions are evidence that this tool was used also as a bow drill socket. Pestle TJ 514 is triangular in section and may also have been used as a hand grinder on one of its long sides. Two

artefact classification and typology

143

examples are cylindrical, one (TJ 1954) with concave sides and the other (TJ 1982) is cylindrical but has a flaring base on one side while pestle TJ 203 is pentagonal. Parallels Tell el-Far‘ah (N): A cylindrical pestle with concave side profile (Chambon 1984: pl. 77:15)128 makes a good parallel for TJ 1954. Sahab: One pestle clearly indicates that this was a recognised type (Ibrahim 1975: pl. XXIX:2). Tawilan: A granite pestle has the characteristic concave sides that make it easy to grasp (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.26:6).

VI-B. Grinding Tools VI-B/1. Hand Grinders Function: A grinder is held in one’s hand and rubbed against the face of another stone, such as a lower millstone, quern or working surface (anvil). In this combination, motion requires the muscle power provided by full arm movement. At the same time, some grinders also show evidence for use with rectangular or trapezoidal mortars. These tools are classified here with food preparation equipment because of their frequent association with food processing and preparation assemblages, even though they could also have been used for certain craft activities. Larger grinders that were clearly industrial size crushers are described above (IV-E/3). Criteria: Grinders are distinguished from pestles on the principle that the long sides serve as grinding surfaces, and not the narrow end. So too, their thickness does not exceed their length or diameter. The upper part of the hand grinder would be relatively smooth rather than rough or sharp, in order to be comfortable in the hand. The grinding surface of the stone would eventually be worn flat,129 although in many cases, several sides of the grinder show signs of use (Koutsoukou 1997:135). If the stone tool can be operated comfortably with one hand, it is classified as a grinder. 128

This pestle is described as “de profile convexe” (sic). In certain cases it is possible to distinguish between the evidence for hand rubbing and the result of wear which shows clearly that the stone was crushed as a result of use. This is more apparent on millstones where only the lower surface was used. In contrast, hand grinders were commonly used on more than one side. 129

144

chapter two

At least 217 basalt tools are designated as hand grinders along with several tools made from other types of stone; one was of limestone and another of sandstone although these tools may also have functioned as polishing stones, since they were not of basalt. Many grinders were irregular in shape and were probably formed from recycled basalt millstones (i.e. TJ 1804).130 Such tools had the typical “hump” of a millstone. On the other hand, a few grinders were carefully formed of fine grain basalt in round, oval, square or anchor (trapezoidal) shapes. The precise importance of this variety of shapes needs investigation, especially in relation to the differing shapes and sizes of mortars, lower millstones, and working surfaces/anvils. Our appreciation of the deliberate choices of the manufacturers and users of such tools is only now developing.131 Since grinders were multi-purpose tools, it was not uncommon to find small depressions on one or more surfaces, suggesting that these grinders had been reused as a bow drill socket, while larger depressions indicate use as a mortar or lower grinding surface. Grinders recovered during the 1991 season range in size from 6.20 to 11.50 cm in length, with the average being 8.20 cm. The width was in the range of 3.50 to 9.60 cm, with the average being 6.70 cm. The height ranges from 2.50 to 7.30 cm, with the average being 4.40 cm. VI-B/1a. Round Hand Grinders Grinders of this type are in the shape of truncated cylinders, flat on top and bottom with slightly convex sides. Although considered “round,” these grinder are not all perfectly circular. Catalogue TJ 046 (Fig. 2.104:1; A13:22/108). Basalt. D 6.30-6.73, T 4.20 cm. Wt 323 g. Complete. TJ 1760 (Fig. 2.104:2; D12:24/39). Basalt. D 8.30, T 4.30 cm. Complete. TJ 1778 (Fig. 2.104:3; D12:28/43). Basalt. D 7.50-8.00, T 4.00 cm. Wt. 500 g. Reused as bow drill socket. Complete.

130 Courtyard 211 in Area B between Building 102 and Building 200 was a work area where broken basalt tools were refashioned into grinders and small pestles. 131 Petit (1999:159) included the Dayr ‘Alla hand grinders in the same class as the upper loaf-shaped millstones. Since our typology is formal, as well as functional, we chose to keep these tools separate.

artefact classification and typology

145

Parallels Beth Shan: A good example in the same size range was reported from Level VII (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 124:8). Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Although classified as cylindrical pestles, these short tools (3.40-4.20 cm in height; Chambon 1984: pl. 77:6, 7) compare well with round grinders with a slightly convex side profile.132 Shiloh: A somewhat round, squat “pestle” appears closer in shape to the round grinders from Tall Jawa than to the corpus of conical pestles with which it is shown (Brandl 1993: F9g. 9.13:7). ‘Amman: A grinder from ‘Amman was used on both of its flat ends (Koutsoukou 1997:135; 153:2). VI-B/1b. Oval Hand Grinders Oval grinders are usually in the shape of miniature loaf-shaped millstones with less tapering at the two ends. A small group of grinders (TJ 563 and TJ 952) are oval slabs whose exact function is unknown. Evidence for wear is only on one side and could indicate use as a lower grinding surface. At present, these are included with the oval grinders. Catalogue TJ 407 (Fig. 2.105:1; C71:3/13). Basalt. L 9.70, W 6.00, T 3.20 cm. Wt. 350 g. Complete. TJ 563 (Fig. 2.105:2; C55:21/56). Basalt. L 12.9, W 7.40, T 3.30 cm. Wt 550 g. Complete. TJ 952 (Fig. 2.105:3; C53:19/28). Basalt. L 13.00 W 7.60, T 3.10 cm. Wt 600 g. Complete. TJ 1959 (Fig. 2.105:4; E53:38/84). L 11.10, W 7.10, T 4.20 cm. Parallels Tell Keisan: Although described as a polishing stone, it is equally likely that this basalt tool with an oval use surface and triangular section served as a hand grinder (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 83:6). VI-B/1c. Square/Rectangular Hand Grinders Basalt hand grinders appear in three sizes; miniature, standard and heavy duty. The miniature grinders are cuboid in shape, or in the shape of a miniature millstone. Tools that are considered standard were designed for use with medium size mortars and are by far the 132 The description in the plates (Chambon 1984:267) reads “cylindrico-concave.” (sic).

146

chapter two

most common. Oversize grinders are discussed above with craft related tools due to their size and weight. Only a small number of miniature spherical hand grinders were identified although there are several limestone nodules that may have been used as polishing stones or miniature pounders that could also fit into this type. Two basalt objects (TJ 1485 and TJ 1639) are equivalent to 8 shekel weights and are discussed under scale weights (see above, Type III-D). VI-B/1c-1/a. Miniature Cuboid Hand Grinders Catalogue TJ 050 (Fig. 2.106:1; A3:24/66). L 3.20, W 3.00, T 2.80 cm, Wt 56 g. TJ 1711 (Fig. 2.106:2; C76:0.5/3). L 4.00, W 3.00, T 2.50 cm. VI-B/1c-1/b. Miniature Loaf-shaped Grinders TJ 1640 (Fig. 2.107:1; A83:15/57). L 6.00, W 3.40, T 2.90 cm, Wt 90 g. VI-B/1c-2. Standard Size Rectangular Hand Grinders In several cases, grinders assigned to this type were rectangular (or sub-rectangular) in section as well as on their use surface. In other instances, a grinder with a rectangular or square use surface was semicircular in section, the result of its having been formed from a broken millstone fragment, such as grinder TJ 943. There are many examples of reuse; for example, grinder TJ 1641 was used as a bow drill socket on one of its long narrow edges, and grinder TJ 057 was reused as a small mortar. Catalogue TJ 029 (Fig. 2.108:1; A13:21/87). Basalt. L 7.38, W 6.90, T 3.60 cm. Wt 313.8 g. Reused as pestle. TJ 032 (Fig. 2.108:2; A13:21/90). L 6.60, W 5.20, T 4.40 cm. Wt 278 g. Reused as mortar. TJ 057 (Fig. 2.108:3; A4:13/34). Sandstone (?). L 10.50, W 7.00, T 4.40 cm, Wt 558 g. Reused as mortar, Chipped. TJ 072 (Fig. 2.108:4; A13:30/131). Basalt. L 9.40, W 8.20, T 4.20, Wt 615 g. Complete. TJ 550 (E55:21/52). Limestone. L 8.80, W 8.00, T 4.50 cm, Wt 600. Complete. TJ 943 (Fig. 2.108:5; B54:14/48). L 7.50, W 5.00, T 5.00 cm, Wt 640 g.

artefact classification and typology

147

TJ 1447 (Fig. 2.108:6; B55:21/57). L 8.90, W 6.80, T 3.20 cm. Wt 370 g. Complete. TJ 1641 (Fig. 2.108:7; A83:16/56). L 7.70, W 6.40, T 2.80 cm, Wt 350 g. Drill depression. Complete. TJ 1799 (Fig. 2.108:8; D12:30/45). Basalt. L 7.90, W 6.70, T 3.80 cm. Wt 400 g. Complete. TJ 1924 (Fig. 2.108:9; E75:21/47). Basalt. L 14.70, W 7.60, T 5.10 cm. Complete. Parallels Hazor: A basalt artefact that falls into the appropriate size range for hand grinders is reported for Stratum XB (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXIII:6). Tell el-‘Or¿me: Although not shown in section, several stone tools appear to fall into the size range for grinders (Fritz 1990: pl. 110:78, 10-11).133 Tell Keisan: One example of a “pilon percuteur” (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 83:4) shares the features of hand grinders that were used on more than one use surface. Beth Shan: A grinder with a triangular section (James and McGovern 1993: Fit. 124:6), similar to certain upper loaf-shaped millstones, is not unusual, especially for grinders refashioned from larger, broken tools. Tell el-Far‘ah (N): A good example of a basalt grinder or “polissoir” is almost cuboid in shape (Chambon 1984: fig. 77:17). Pella: Final drawings for two basalt grinders are not available but they appear from their descriptions and photographs to represent cuboid grinders (Smith and Potts 1992: pls. 69:11, 72:7). Tall Dayr ‘Alla: At Tall Dayr ‘Alla, grinders were typically of sandstone (Franken 1992: fig. 5-16:11-12). ‘Amman: As an example of sub-rectangular hand grinders, Koutsoukou (1997:153:4) illustrates one that is close in size (L 8.40, W 7.50, T 3.50 cm) to the Tall Jawa examples. Tall al-‘Umayri: Although no drawing is available, the photograph suggests a square grinder (Platt 1991: fig. 10.9).

133 The scale that accompanies the illustrations does not agree with that given in the caption.

148

chapter two

VI-B/1d. Anchor-Shaped Hand Grinders A small number of hand grinders are anchor-shaped and can easily be mistaken for pestles. However, the evidence of wear is very clear on the flat side, which was used for grinding, and is missing from the ends. In addition, the sheen from hand rubbing appears on the side opposite the use surface. That such a tool may have been used as a pestle on occasion is not ruled out and in some cases the surface of one end is crushed; nevertheless, its wear pattern shows clearly that it primary use was as a grinder. Catalogue TJ 031 (Fig. 2.109:1; A4:8/22). L 6.55, W 4.00-5.60, T 4.00 cm. Wt 226 g. TJ 702 (Fig. 2.109:2; C17:45/81). Pumice. L 7.75, W 6.00, T 2.80 cm, W 250 g. Chipped. TJ 1470 (Fig. 2.109:3; A83:12/32). Basalt. L 10.00, W 9.60, T 3.70 cm, Wt 625 g. Complete. TJ 1785 (Fig. 2.109:4; D12:28/43). Basalt. L 7.80, W 6.70, T 4.00 cm. Complete. The size of the surface of these grinders suggests that they were used with querns or working surfaces (anvils) since there are no flatbottomed rectangular trays large enough for them to be effective tools. VI-B/1e. Irregularly-Shaped Hand Grinders TJ 039 (Fig. 2.110:1; A2:6/43). L 7.10, W 5.90, T 4.10 cm, Wt 277 g. TJ 157 (Fig. 2.110:2; C17:711). L 6.90, W 6.80, T 4.90 cm, Wt 413 g. TJ 1763 (Fig. 2.110:3; D12:25/40). L 10.3, W 9.10, T 3.30 cm. Parallels Hazor: Two “pestles” from Stratum XB date to the Iron IIA period (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXIII:6, 9). However, based on our classification, these items should be classified as a grinders, especially item 6 (A3411/1) since its longest surface is worn flat from grinding. Tell Keisan: Grinders of vesicular basalt are not common but do appear within this type (Briend and Humbert 1980: pl. 83:5). Tall al-‘Umayri: Hand grinders usually measure between 5.00-7.00 cm in this classification (Platt 1991: fig. 10.8).

artefact classification and typology

149

VI-B/1f. Uniquely-Shaped Hand Grinders A few hand grinders have unique shapes and, as a result, cannot be classified with other types. Whether these shapes were the result of the material available or of a specialized function cannot be determined on the basis of our sample alone. Included among the food preparation tools are the standard size grinders of this type; miniature grinders, that could have been used equally well in the preparation of spices or of cosmetics, are discussed above as a sub-type of their general shape (VI-B/1c). Catalogue TJ 782 (Fig. 2.111:1; B44:11/21). Basalt. L 7.10, W 4.50 H 4.80 cm. Wt 274 g. Reused as bow drill socket. Complete. This finely made grinder is hammock-shaped on its base and trapezoidal in section with a large depression on one side, suitable for the position of one’s thumb. Both here and on the opposite side there are single depressions, apparently formed by the shaft of a bow drill. VI-B/2. Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper Function: Loaf-shaped millstones were rubbed back and forth (Forbes 1965:146) over a saddle quern or stone working surface to grind foodstuffs, primarily grains. Both hands are used to manipulate the millstone. The convex side was uppermost while the lower surface became increasingly concave with use. When pressure was exerted on worn stones, they broke in half but their position on floors adjacent to saddle querns argues strongly for their continued use. This same association was seen in House 35 at Tall as-Sa‘idiyah (Pritchard 1985: fig. 45). Criteria: Loaf-shaped millstones look like a European-style loaf of bread in shape; they are long (<0.65 m) and elliptical, thickest at the mid-section and tapered at both ends. Such upper millstones have a rounded (half oval), hemispherical, trapezoidal or triangular section and a flat to concave base, which shows the result of wear. In contrast to lower millstones whose concave depression is usually near one end and is crosswise, the depression of an upper millstone is in the middle and runs lengthwise. Sheen on the upper, convex surface is probably the result of handling. Approximately 235 upper millstones and millstone fragments were registered. In a sample of 16 millstones from the 1991 season, the

150

chapter two

width was in the range of 6.50-13.00 cm with an average of 10.60 cm while the thickness measured 3.50-7.00 cm with an average of 4.70 cm. Complete millstones in this sample measure 35.50-44.00 cm in length. Millstones from Tall Jawa were typed according to the shape of the cross section since this shape was related to the overall weight of the stone, at least in the case of half oval millstones. This typology is based principally on shape, in the hope that future studies can take this feature into account in order to determine the correlation between size, shape, weight and the associated foodstuffs in use in the Iron Age Levant. VI-B/2a. Half-Oval Loaf-shaped Millstones The thinnest millstones are described as “half-oval” in their cross section. It may be that these tools had been used for a long period of time although the base usually showed little concavity, suggesting that the millstone had originally been less thick than those of other shapes. Catalogue TJ 179 (Fig. 2.112:1; B63:34/50). Basalt. L 24.00, W 11.50, T 3.50 cm. Wt 1.921 kg. Broken. TJ 696 (Fig. 2.112:2; E44:2/15). Basalt. L 21.80, W 9.60, T 5.20 cm. Wt 1.461 kg. Broken. TJ 941 (Fig. 2.112:3; E65:4/9). Basalt. L 44.00, W 11.00, T 3.50 cm, Wt 3.330 kg. Complete (in two pieces). TJ 1798 (Fig. 2.112:4; A93:31/99). Basalt. L 35.50, W 9.80, T 3.90 cm. Wt 2.450 kg. Complete. Parallels Ugarit: Although not of basalt, this stone of fossilized shell (27.50 cm in length) was fashioned into a millstone (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 85:81/ 789). Hazor: Basalt loaf-shaped millstones were numerous in both Iron I and Iron II strata of Areas A, B and G. Examples of millstones, both half oval and hemispherical in section, were present in Stratum XI (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCVI:17, 19). The sizes of these complete millstones are in the range of 37.00 x 11.0 and 28.00 x 11.50 cm. A complete basalt millstone from Area G, Stratum VII, measuring 40.00 x 15.00 cm, is illustrated right side up134 and is a good ex134 Surprisingly, most upper millstones from Hazor are illustrated upside down (for example, Yadin et al. 1961: pls. CCVI:17, CCXXXV:36-upper). For an ex-

artefact classification and typology

151

ample of millstones with a half oval section (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXLVIII:26). Broken millstones found in situ in the Citadel (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CIV:17, 18) indicate that such tools continued in use.135 Beth Shan: An upper loaf-shaped millstone measuring 50.00 cm long and 12.00 cm wide was found in situ with a saddle quern. Carbonised grains stuck to the upper stone made it possible to identify the exact material crushed by this millstone (Yadin and Geva 1986:51, photos 45, 48).136 Tell el-‘Or¿me: Found in the same room with a saddle quern, this upper basalt millstone (Fritz 1990: pl. 111) is slightly wider (ca. 12.00 cm) than the average millstones from Tall Jawa. Tell el-Hesi: A loaf-shaped millstone, 32.00 cm in length and 9.00 cm in width (Bennett and Blakely 1989: fig. 222:2) is a good parallel for TJ 1798, although it was identified by the excavators as a grinding basin (Bennett and Blakely 1989:299). Tall Dayr ‘Alla: Although slightly wider (13.50 cm) than the Tall Jawa millstones, the same variety of shapes appears at Tall Dayr ‘Alla, including the half oval shape (Franken 1992: fig. 5-12:8). Tall al-‘Umayri: Several hundred upper loaf-shaped millstone fragments were reported from both Iron Age and early Bronze Age levels; only photographs are available so that distinctions according to profile shape are only tentative suggestions (Platt 1989: fig. 20.11:155, 193). Tawilan: Although not described, a fine example of an upper millstone measures 27.00 cm in length and 13.20 cm wide with a half oval section (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.25:4). VI-B/2b. Hemispherical Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper Catalogue TJ 761 (Fig. 2.113:1; E44:6/21). Vesicular basalt. L 41.00, W 12.80, T 6.10 cm, Wt 3.216 kg. Complete. ample of the way they were used, see Dolce (1990: fig. 15), who illustrates the storerooms at Ebla where millstones were in place on their querns, which were lined up on benches along the walls of the room. 135 See also a Late Bronze Age (Stratum 14) example of an upper millstone found with its lower stone or quern from Area BA (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCCXXXV:36). 136 Even though the position of this millstone shows clearly that it was the upper of the two crushing stones, several complete and fragmentary millstones were all described as “lower mill stone(s)” (Yadin and Geva 1986: 93-94; figs. 38:1-2, 5, 9, 11-13; 39:1-6, 8-12, described as a “basalt pestle”). Of these, only one was clearly a lower stone or was reused as such (fig. 39:6).

152

chapter two

TJ 819 (Fig. 2.113:2; C17:49/110). Basalt. L 31.00, W 11.00, T 5.00 cm, Wt 2.500 kg. Complete. TJ 2012 (D31:34/73). Basalt. L 36.2, W 11.80, T 4.60 cm, Wt 3.100 kg. Chipped. Parallels Hazor: Upper millstone B 4950, hemispherical in section (Yadin et al. 1961: pls. CCVI:17), was found with its quern (see below). Shiloh: A quern and its upper millstone are illustrated to show that, in this case, the ends of the millstone exceeded the width of the quern (Buhl and Holm-Nielsen 1969: pl. XXIV). Such usage would certainly contribute to increased wear in the centre and would eventually lead to breakage. Tall Dayr ‘Alla: This shape is represented by a broken millstone that was probably still in use (Franken 1992: fig. 5-12:5). VI-B/2c. Trapezoidal Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper Catalogue TJ 045 (Fig. 2.114:1; A3:24/61). Basalt. L 27.60, W 12.90, T 7.00 cm. Wt 3.300+ kg. Broken. Parallels Hazor: This shape appears with half oval and hemispherical millstones (Yadin et al. 1961: pls. CCVI:20; CCLIII:16). Tall al-‘Umayri: One possible parallel to this shape is reported (Platt 1989: fig. 20.11:231). VI-B/2d. Triangular Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper Catalogue TJ 990 (Fig. 2.115:1; C44:7/11). Basalt. L 27.70, W 14.00, T 7.70 cm. Wt 4.300 kg. Complete. Parallels Hama: A beautiful example of a millstone from Iron Age IIA has a triangular section (Fugmann 1958: fig. 161:5 A 68). Hazor: One millstone, triangular in section, dates to Stratum XA (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXIII:5) while another example is from Stratum VA (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CIV:15). Beth Shan: Two complete millstones, one measuring 37.00(L) x 11.20(W) x 7.00 cm (T) and a second, 41.70(L) x 9.40(W), x 8.00 cm (T), each reveal a triangular section (Yadin and Geva 1986: fig. 38:9, 12). The shape of these tools and their narrow width seem to militate against their published description as lower millstones. An

artefact classification and typology

153

earlier example (Level VIII) also has the same triangular shape (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 126:7). Tall Dayr ‘Alla: This shape is also represented in the cross section of one millstone (Franken 1992: fig. 5-12:3) that is broken at both ends. Tall al-‘Umayri: One example that appears to have the same shape is reported from Field B on the western slope of the tell (Platt 1989: fig. 20.11:325). VI-B/3. Loaf-shaped Millstones–lower Function and Criteria: The lower millstone is similar in appearance to the upper millstone, except that it usually has a concave depression at one end of the use surface. In addition to this, the convex side is rough, with no evidence of the constant hand rubbing apparent on upper millstones. The wear pattern on the flat surface suggests use with broken, upper loaf-shaped millstones and hand grinders. Only a small number of millstones (10) can be assigned to this type. Catalogue TJ 375 (Fig.2.116:1; C61:4/11). Basalt. L 25.50, W 10.50, T 5.40 cm. Wt 2.737 kg. Chipped. TJ 1033 (Fig.2.116:2; C44:6/15). Basalt. L 25.00, W 12.00, T 7.00 cm, Wt 3.150 kg. Broken. Parallels Beth Shan: One stone (Yadin and Geva 1986: fig. 39:6) was probably a lower millstone. Jabal al-Qßeir: Several surface finds were reported as querns (Lindner et al. 1996: fig. 21.2), but the shape and size of these red quartzite tools suggest that they could be classed as lower millstones. VI-B/4. Saddle Querns Function: The quern provides the lower crushing stone for the upper loaf-shaped millstone which is rubbed back and forth over its surface. The quern, used primarily in the crushing of grain, is usually inclined away from the person grinding to allow for greater efficiency (Forbes 1964: 274). Other tools, such as hand grinders, may have been used with the querns, although at Tall Jawa, there was also a type of working surface or anvil (VI-C/2). Criteria: The variables used to distinguish saddle querns from mortars and grinding surfaces include the fact that there are no side walls

154

chapter two

on this type of grinding surface, so that the upper millstone could extend over the side edges for great freedom of movement.137 As the material was ground, it could flow freely over the sides. With use, the quern developed a concave surface extending from side to side, making it look like a saddle. Querns were large, somewhat oval slabs, irregular in shape, that were heavy enough to remain in a stable position when they received the strong continuous friction of the upper millstone. One end is often higher than the other due to the pattern of wear. Saddle querns were usually formed of basalt with the lower surface left unfinished. Catalogue TJ 253 (Fig. 2.117:1; A13:22/105). Basalt. L 37.60, W 26.10, T 6.00 cm. Complete. TJ 587 (Fig. 2.117:2; E55:21/54). Basalt. L 30.00, W 33.00, T 4.5010.50 cm. Dressed border. Complete. TJ 834 (E54:18.49). Basalt. L 24.00, W 26.00, T 5.00. Broken TJ 996 (Fig. 2.117:3; E54:25/68). Basalt. L 43.00, W 27.00, T 7.0010.00 cm. Chipped. TJ 1035 (E54:24/101). Basalt. L 62.00, W 31.00, T 11.00 cm. Chipped. TJ 2198 (C27:70.184). Basalt. L 40.90, W 34.40, T 18.00 cm. Altogether, more than 90 complete and broken querns were identified as such. In certain instances (TJ 1035, C17:50, C54:18), these large stones were reused as a wind break to protect a cooking area or support the clay liner of an oven.138 Broken querns continued to be used as was evident from their position on surfaces along with other food processing tools. Parallels Tyre: A good example of the broad quern, thicker on one end, was present in Iron Age deposits (Bikai 1978: pl. XXIX:15). Hazor: Excellent examples from the Iron Age include a quern measuring 55.00 cm long (B 4950; Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCVI:18); this quern was found in a house along with its upper, loaf-shaped millstone. Tell el-‘Or¿me: A quern and its upper millstone were together in the same locus (Fritz 1990: pl. 111:2). 137 Although the same could be said of working surfaces, their size and shape make them unsuitable for use with full size upper millstones, although they may have been used with a broken millstone. 138 In these instances, the quern was given a locus number.

artefact classification and typology

155

Beth Shan: A saddle quern found in situ with its upper millstone shows clearly the association of these two artefacts. The saddle quern measures 75.00 m x 50.00 cm, has rounded edges and is higher at one end (Yadin and Geva 1986:51; fig. 22; photos 45, 48). Megiddo: A saddle quern and grinder were found in Stratum VI (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 114, fig. 11). Gezer: Macalister (1912: figs. 227, 231) illustrates several querns with their upper millstone rider. Tell en-Naßbeh: The use of a very large quern is illustrated with an upper millstone (McCown 1947: pl. 91:4). Jerusalem: A small quern (ca. 15.00-25.00 cm) was made from extremely vesicular basalt (Franken and Steiner 1990: fig. 2-24:1). Tall al-‘Umayri: One partial basalt quern (Platt 1991: fig. 10.7) serves as an example of the dozens found each season in domestic work areas. Balu‘: A quern is shown in use with pounders although it could also have been used with the millstone recovered from the same floor in R111 (Worschech and Ninow 1994: fig. 3). Jabal al-Qßeir: Several querns were reported, one from a clear Iron Age debris layer (Lindner et al. 1996: fig. 22.1).

VI-C. Hammering Tools VI-C/1. Pounders Function: Among the stone tool repertoire, chert or flint balls are the most controversial objects to be given a functional classification. Some archaeologists see them as ballistic missiles used in warfare, while others identify them as boiling stones or as tools used in the grinding process for food processing. In order to classify objects or discover their function so that other archaeologists might use them as parallels for finds at other sites, one must look at the artefacts with which they were repeatedly associated. If chert balls were found in association with an arsenal, then we could suspect that they had a military function.139 However, when they are found in association with the full range of food processing tools, it is more reasonable to 139 For a discussion of the “sling stones” found on the southwest side of Lachish, see Chapter 6.

156

chapter two

think that they had a domestic function (see Chapter 6).140 At Tall Jawa, there was not one chert ball among the 48+ arrowheads and javelin points that had been shot against the outer casemate walls in Fields A and B. In view of this evidence and the location of all of our chert balls in association with other food processing tools, we have classified chert balls as pounders or hammer stones. In comparison with a pestle that pauses while crushing, the pounder would have an even shorter period of contact with the material. It takes its name from its function, that is, to pound or perhaps to tenderize. Criteria: Pounders are spherical hammer stones whose entire surface could be used in pounding or rubbing. These tools are distinct from the larger pecking stones (Type IV-E/1 above) in that they are small enough to fit in one hand and light enough to be raised continually in order to pound the material. The wear patterns on the pounders indicate that all surfaces were used either to pound or to grind. Flint pounders (5.00-8.50 cm in diameter) were in use as early as the Neolithic period at Jericho (Kenyon and Holland 1983:533), while chert and serpentinite spheres from the Chalcolithic period were among the food processing tools from Lemba (Elliott 1991: fig. 3), during a time when weapons did not feature in the repertoire of Cypriot material culture. Ninety-three pounders were registered from Tall Jawa; most were of chert, although a small number were of porphyritic basalt. For these tools, the average diameter is 6.00 cm, while the range varies 140 Platt (1989: fig. 20.11, object #244) classifies the chert balls as ballistic missiles. However, this classification comes into question when she identifies the assemblage with which they were associated. This assemblage, related to fibula #420, consisted of “a classic assemblage of ‘everyday life’ objects, perhaps suggesting a woman’s belongings” (Platt 1989: 365). Included here are an alabaster bowl, cosmetic spatula, metal ring and fragments, a blacksmith’s stamp(?), chain links, spindle whorl, a “round pestle”, basalt slab, cosmetic palette and 3 ballistic missiles (Platt 1989: 358). If the ballistic missiles fulfilled their assigned function, they seem out of place in this assemblage. If they have been classified incorrectly and are really pounders, which have a domestic function, they would have a better fit in this grouping. We also do not know the criteria that distinguish a round pestle from a ballistic missile. Could they be the same item? The artefacts associated with ‘Umayri fibula #426 also “may indicate a food preparation area” (Platt 1989: 358). Here the assemblage includes 4 quern fragments, 7 upper millstones, a rubbing stone, 4 spindle whorls, a coin, 2 pestles, 2 stone bowl rim fragments, 1 mortar, 2 beads, 1 seal, a bronze rod, a toy wheel, a grinding stone and one ballistic missile. Once again, the ballistic missile, if truly that, is out of place (see Daviau, Chapter 6).

artefact classification and typology

157

from 4.40 to 6.90 cm. The surface is chipped and shows clear signs of being used as a grinder, especially on areas where the cortex of the chert nodule is still preserved (see Chapter 6). A small number of miniature pounders are less regular in shape although the chipping on these artefacts and their association with other craft and food processing tools is clear evidence that they were used as pounders.141 VI-C/1a. Miniature Pounders Two small objects with clear signs of use as pounders, probably with miniature mortars, are grouped together here, even though they cannot be assigned to formal types due to their irregular shape; one is almost a sphere while the other is oblong. As we have noted above, pounders could also be used to pulverize or grind, and the same is true of these miniature examples, although their smooth sides also suggest that they could have been used as polishing stones. Catalogue TJ 1270 (Fig. 2.118:1; E54:37/135). Chert. D 2.80, T 1.90 cm. Chipped. TJ 1385 (Fig. 2.118:2; E54:41/155) Chert. D 4.10, T 4.60 cm, Wt 110 g. Chipped. TJ 1533 (Fig. 2.118:3; E54:11/32). Chert. L. 4.00, W 2.50, T 2.00 cm. Chipped. Parallels Ugarit: The smallest (4.40 x 4.40 x 4.70 cm; 5.50 x 5.60 x 5.80 cm; 6.00 x 7.30 x 7.70 cm) of the “pecking stones” studied by Elliott (1991: fig. 5:10-12) were of chert. VI-C/1b. Standard Size Pounders Catalogue TJ 055 (Fig. 2.119:1; A14:13/34). Chert. D 6.10-6.60 cm, Wt 364 g. TJ 117 (Fig. 2.119:2; A14:6/11). Chert. D 6.50-6.50, T 7.00 cm, Wt 416 g. TJ 625 (Fig. 2.119:3; B63:0.5/69). Chert. D 7.50-8.00, T 8.00 cm, Wt 650 g. TJ 829 (Fig. 2.119:4; B44:14/24). Chert. D 6.00-6.50, T 5.5 cm, Wt 600 g. 141

A number of round or oval stones, probably natural chert and limestone nodules, are more difficult to identify because there is little evidence of wear (TJ 923, 944).

158

chapter two

TJ 1135 (Fig. 2.119:5; D14:4/5). Chert. D 8.15-8.50, T 6.40 cm, Wt 600 g. TJ 1349 (Fig. 2.119:6; E55:37/65). Chert. D 7.20-7.7, T 7.10 cm, Wt 580 g. TJ 1750 (Fig. 2.119:7; B34:28/49). Chert. D 9.30, T 7.30 cm, Wt 850 g. Parallels Ugarit: A typical flint spheroid (5.60 cm in diameter) is reported for Courtyard 1206 in House E (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 81:81/865), and another was located in Road 1038 (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 5:79/688).142 Megiddo: One chert hammer measuring 7.00 cm in diameter (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 106:12) is probably representative of its class. Ashdod: Dothan identified the flint pebbles in Area A as hammer stones (1971: pl. XXIII:5, 6, 8) and associated them with a basalt pestle (1971: pl. XXIII:7). Gezer: A semi-round quartzolite stone, identified as a “rubbing stone,” measures 5.40 cm in diameter, a size that is common for this type. Jerusalem: Two stone artefacts, one of quartz and the other of chert, are in the range of 4.50-6.00 cm in diameter (Eshel and Prag 1995: fig. 32:13, 14). Mount Ebal: The small mortars, basalt querns, sandstone “basins,” hammerstones, and 8 flint balls (all in the range of 5.00 cm in diameter) from Mount Ebal were all clearly food preparation tools (Zertal 1986-87:148; fig. 21:1-9). Pella: Several examples from Iron I-IIA occupation are identified as grinding or hammer stones (Smith and Potts 1992: pl. 73:5). Tall Dayr ‘Alla: Franken (1992: fig. 5-16:9) identified a flint ball (7.80 cm in diameter) as a hammerstone. Tall al-‘Umayri: Object U 244, is 8.00 cm in diameter and was found in association with domestic objects (Platt 1989: fig. 20.11). Balu‘: Comparable “working stones” were in use with a mortar and saddle quern in R111 (Worschech and Ninow 1994: fig. 3). Tawilan: The pounders from Tawilan number 120 and are predominantly of flint, with limited examples in granite, sandstone, basalt and quartzite (Bienkowski 1995:88). While some of these “pestles” are dome-shaped, the diameters are again in the same range (5.009.00 cm), although the larger examples may have been “pecking stones” (see above, IV-E/1). 142

This artefact is labelled 79/688 (Yon et al. 1987:17).

artefact classification and typology

159

VI-C/2. Working Surfaces/Anvils Function: Although “anvil” may be an equally appropriate term, “working surface” was the designation given to thick stones that had a flat upper surface which could be used as the lower stone for hammering foodstuffs and other materials. In many case, these stones were located in secure contexts along with the full range of food processing equipment and/or with craft tools. Their occurrence in these contexts demonstrates their multi-functional use, while their size and shape distinguished them from saddle querns. Criteria: Working surfaces at Tall Jawa were typically cylindrical or irregularly shaped stones that had only one flat, finished surface. The stone was thick relative to its size and was frequently made of compact limestone or of chert, stone that was heavier and more compact than basalt, the favoured stone for saddle querns. In a few instances, basalt slabs appeared to be working surfaces rather than querns as they were not broad enough for use with most millstones and did not show the usual wear pattern that results from crushing grain. A total of 25 working stones or anvils were identified at Tall Jawa. A select group will be presented here although their very nature militates against formal classification. Catalogue TJ 827 (Fig. 2.120:1; C17:44/110). Limestone. L 16.30, W 11.60, T 2.00 cm, Wt 700 g. Broken. TJ 847 (Fig. 2.120:2; C54:26/34). Limestone. L 27.00, W 15.00, T 5.80-7.50 cm, 4.550 kg. Complete. TJ 1517 (Fig. 2.120:3; A93:18/68). Basalt. L 23.40, W 15.90, T 5.20 cm. Wt 3.450 kg. TJ 1626 (Fig. 2.120:4; A83:16/49). Basalt. L 33.00, W 17.50, T 6.50 cm, Wt 4.000 kg. TJ 1656 (Fig. 2.120:5; A83:16/62). Chert. L 27.00, W 23.00, T 10.00 cm, Wt ca. 11.000 kg. Chipped. TJ 1808 (A93:31/98). Limestone. L 33.00, W 20.70, T 7.20 cm. Chipped. Parallels Ugarit: A large (29.00 cm) flat-topped stone was identified by Eliott (1991:17) as an anvil “on which objects were hammered, pounded or shaped.” Hazor: One example from Stratum VA (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXXXIII:20) was 19.50 cm thick which makes its use as an up-

160

chapter two

per millstone suspect since such large stones would be difficult to grasp. This may be a lower millstone or a working surface that served industrial or craft purposes.

VI-D. Stone Troughs and Basins VI-D/1. Small Limestone Troughs Function: The use to which small troughs were put remains obscure. Although complete examples were found on occupation surfaces at Tall Jawa, the associated ceramic vessels and artefacts do not help to explain their function. If these troughs served as mangers, they were only for very small animals, since they are the size of a large dog’s dish. Their shape does not suggest that they were jar stands and any industrial purpose they may have had remains unclear. Criteria: A small trough, less than 50.00 cm in length, is a stone feature, rectangular or slightly oval in shape, whose depression is comparable to nearly 75% of its total size. These characteristics are in contrast to boulder mortars and mortar bowls, which are usually round and whose depression may be quite shallow in relation to total thickness or height. On preliminary examination, there was little evidence of wear. Limestone troughs or basins were not common at Tall Jawa, but they did occur in both Stratum VIII and VII contexts. For the most part, these are small installations that can be carried by a single person, and are not large limestone “mangers” such as those at Megiddo (Lamon and Shipton 1939: fig. 44). Although several trough fragments were also identified, only complete examples are cited here. Catalogue TJ 140 (Fig. 2.121:1; A14:10/0). Limestone. L 33.00, W 20.00, H 13.50 cm. Chipped. TJ 1034 (Fig. 2.121:2; B44:9/0). Limestone. L 38.50, W 29.00, H 18.00, int Dp 8.70 cm. Chipped. TJ 1606 (B35:14/42). Limestone. L 37.40, W 30.20, H 15.00, int Dp 3.50 cm. Complete. TJ 1827 (Fig. 2.121:3; E64:51/55). Limestone. L 34.50, W 25.50, H 24.00 cm. Complete. Parallels Tel Dan: Located in the gate area in front of a row of upright stones

artefact classification and typology

161

(Biran 1998:42) was a small trough (no scale) that appears to be in the size range of the Tall Jawa troughs. Tall al-‘Umayri: Object #152 appears to be very similar to the Tall Jawa troughs. This “mortar” measures ca. 32.00 x 21.00 cm while the depression measures ca. 23.00 x 16.00 cm (Platt 1989: fig. 20.11). Since this object was not described in the text, its height and the depth of the depression are unavailable. VI-D/2. Stone Basins/Bowls Function: The original purpose and method of use of deep basalt basins remains unclear. That they were carefully made and had a distinct function is certain, but the nature of that function is not clear from the available evidence. Criteria: Only one example of a circular, vesicular basalt basin falls into this type. Because of the depth of its central depression (9.00 cm), this basin does not correspond in type to shallow basalt bowls, either circular mortar bowls or high status bowls, such as those with ring base or tripod feet. VI-D/2a. Basalt Basins/Bowls Catalogue TJ 1968 (Fig. 2.122:1; B44:1/42). Vesicular basalt. D 29.80, H 12.00, int Dp 9.00. Broken. Parallels Hazor: At Hazor, a slightly larger basin (D 50.00 cm) (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. XXVI:1) was associated with a group of basalt mortars, two upper loaf-shaped millstones, a perforated stone, two small pieces of haematite and three bronze needles. Tell Beit Mirsim: Although not a true parallel, a tall-footed tripod mortar shows the range of sub-types for this artefact (Albright 1943: pl. 64:12). VI-D/3. Large Limestone Basins Several large basins are classed as architectural features or installations and are discussed in association with the buildings at Tall Jawa (Daviau, in preparation/a). These installations were probably used in a variety of craft related activities, although their location in houses makes the exact nature of those activities uncertain.

162

chapter two vii. leisure VII-A. Toys

A category of artefact that is under-represented in the archaeological record is that of toys. On reflection, this can hardly have been the case in antiquity. Gaming boards were not uncommon and have been recognized as such. However, other types of toys are more difficult to distinguish from objects used in daily activities or in specialized circumstances; such is the case with the “buzz.” VII-A/1. The Buzz Function: The buzz is a simple disk with two holes that is threaded, wound up and pulled to provide the player with a “wind-up” toy. However, this same object has often been identified as a button. If it were truly to function as a button, we might see more variation in form, since the shape would not be essential. The button could be round, square, rectangular or triangular; its sole purpose would be to hold two pieces of fabric together. Another alternative is that this artefact was used in the manufacture of string or cord. The button-shaped objects discovered in the archaeological record are predominantly disc shaped. This suggests that the shape of the object played a crucial role in its function. Since a buzz makes a spinning motion, it is more efficient for speed and balance to have a circular shape as opposed to a shape with sharp projections, such as a square. Van Beek (1989a) studied 17 buzzes from Tell Jemmeh and found that they varied in diameter from 2.00 to 5.40 cm and in width from 0.50 to 1.05 cm in thickness (1989a:55). Such toys have been found world wide, and are particularly popular today in Third World countries. Criteria: Objects are classified as a buzz if they are circular and have two holes. They are only distinguished from the spindle whorl by the appearance of a second hole. Among the six sherds with twin perforations, five were reworked and one (TJ 1714) was formed as a disc before firing although it was drilled after firing. Catalogue TJ 144 (Fig. 2.123:1; B64:6/38). Ceramic, light brown (7.5YR 6/4) ext, gray (10YR 5/1) int. Reworked, smoothed edge, biconical perforations. D 3.25, T 0.60 cm. Broken.

artefact classification and typology

163

TJ 584 (C61:19/39). Ceramic, gray (N 5/) ext+int. Reworked, biconical perforations. D 2.70, T 0.80 cm. Broken. TJ 1251 (Fig. 2.123:2; B34:17/30). Ceramic, light brown (&.5YR 6/4) ext, light reddish brown (5YR 6/4) int. Reworked, biconical perforations. D 3.90, T 0.80 cm. Broken. TJ 1337 (Fig. 2.123:3). Ceramic, reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/4) ext, pink (5YR 7/4) int. Reworked, cylindrical perforations. D 4.10, T 0.80 cm. Broken. TJ 1694 (Fig. 2.123:4; A83:18/65). Ceramic, light red (10R 6/6) ext, gray (N 6/), int. Reworked, biconical perforations. D 3.90, T 0.80 cm. Complete. TJ 1714 (Fig. 2.123:5; E53:3/49). Ceramic, slip, red (2.5YR 6/6) ext + int surface. Formed, biconical perforations. D 2.50, T 0.50 cm. Complete. Parallels Tyre: An example in chalk stone (Bikai 1978: pl. XIV:24) points to the ambiguity of this functional class, since this material is less suitable than ceramic for a buzz. As a toy, the twin perforations would suffer considerably from wear. Tell Jemmeh: The largest group was published by Van Beek (1989a: fig. 2), who studied the function of these small perforated discs. Apart from the examples which date to the Late Bronze or Iron Age from Megiddo and Gezer (from the excavations of Macalister) already cited by van Beek (1989a:56), the following examples have also been published. Gezer: The clearest example was a reworked sherd from Stratum 6A in Field VI (Dever et al. 1986: pl. 57:20). Tell el-Far‘ah(N): One reworked sherd has unevenly spaced perforations, similar to TJ 584, while a second sherd appears unfinished (Chambon 1984: pl. 77:1, 2). Beer-sheba: One ceramic “button” from Stratum II Room 48, dating to Iron IIC, (Aharoni 1973: pl. 73:9) measures 3.20 cm in diameter and 0.60 cm in thickness and thus falls within the size ranges represented at Tell Jemmeh and at Tall Jawa. ‘Amman: A button with widely spaced holes has a diameter of 3.55 cm (Koutsoukou 1997:145:167). Khirbat Al-Hajjar: A good example of a disc with twin holes was in a deep debris layer that contained Iron I and Iron II ceramic sherds (Thompson 1972b:53; pl. V.1). Tall al-‘Umayri: Although there is no indication in the preliminary report that the two objects identified as buttons were formed from

164

chapter two

reworked sherds (Platt 1991: fig. 10:89), it seems that these objects resemble the toys from Tall Jawa. Tawilan: Bienkowski (1995:91; fig. 9.33:5) also classifies this artefact as a toy. VII-B. Gaming Pieces VII-B/1. Astragali Sheep astragali, found in a variety of settings in the archaeological record, remain ambiguous in their functional identification.143 Certain examples, some of which were perforated, have been recognized as gaming pieces at Hama (Riis and Buhl 1990:217), while others found in a cultic setting may have been used in divination. In the case of Megiddo, a bowl filled with astragali (Loud 1948: pl. 285:5) was recovered in a cultic room (L 2081) containing stone altars and cultic stands. Catalogue TJ 2181 (Fig. 2.124:1, E75:25/73). Bone. Natural. W 3.50, T 2.40, H 1.90 cm. Perforated. Complete. Parallels Hama: Two astragali were reported from the 720 BC occupation of Bâtiment II (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 99:814-815). Beth Shan: One example, described as a gaming piece, came from Room 1087 adjacent to the temple (Rowe 1940: pl. XXXI:65). Jerusalem: A single astragalus with twin perforations was identified as a pendant (Eshel and Prag 1995: fig. 32:19). Beth Shemesh: One example from Beth Shemesh has one complete and one unfinished perforation (Grant and Wright 1938: pl. LIII:45). Tall Dayr ‘Alla: An unidentified knuckle bone (Franken 1992: fig. 425:39) measuring 4.00 cm is slightly larger than the sheep/goat bone from Tall Jawa. Baq‘ah Valley: Three worked astragali were present in Cave B3. No precise identification was made, although the excavator suggests that these were gaming pieces or had a cultic function (McGovern 1986:271; fig. 92). 143 Astragali found in association with other animal bones were classified as faunal remains including the astragalus found in the bottom of Oven B63:30. All faunal remains from Tall Jawa are currently being studied by P. Popkin of the Wadi ath-Thamad Project.

artefact classification and typology

165

VII-B/2.Ceramic Gaming Pieces Function: Among the reworked sherds, a small group might be classed as gaming pieces. These sherds appear to be too small to serve either as stoppers for jars or as spindle whorls; at the same time, they are too big for use with small juglets. In certain cases, small reworked sherds (< 3.00 cm in diameter) were formed of gray or red sherds, suggesting deliberate choice on the part of those who refashioned these small objects (see also, London 1991:414). One group, found adjacent to an oven in casemate Room 101, was thought to be such a cache. However, in size certain of these sherds would have been more useful as spindle whorls, and one example was in fact an unfinished whorl (TJ 89/227). Criteria: In this preliminary study, only those discs that are less than 3.00 cm in diameter are presented as gaming pieces although this is not consistent in the database. Our judgment that discs in the range of 3.00-4.00 cm were stoppers is discussed below (Type IX-A/2a). VII-B/2a. Undecorated Ceramic Gaming Pieces Catalogue TJ 89/87 (Fig. 2.125:1; A3:23/57). Ceramic, very pale brown (10YR 7/3) ext, darkgray core (2.5YR 4/1) int. Incised. D 2.80 cm. TJ 89/204 (Fig. 2.125:2; A3:28/28). Ceramic, light reddish brown (2.5YR 6/4) ext, brown (7.5YR 5/4) int. D 3.00 cm. TJ 89/205 (Fig. 2.125:3; A4:2/8). Ceramic, pink (7.5YR 7/3) ext, light gray (7.5YR 7/1) int. D 3.00 cm. TJ 89/235 (Fig. 2.125:4; A3:8/19). Ceramic, light red (2.5YR 6/6) ext; pinkish grey (5YR 6/2) int. D 3.00, T 0.80 cm. Chipped. TJ 89/238 (Fig. 2.125:5; A3:8/19). Ceramic, pink (5YR 7/4) ext; pink (5YR 7/3) int. D 2.70, T 1.00 cm. Chipped. TJ 91/152 (Fig. 2.125:6; A14:1/3). Ceramic, light red (2.5YR 6/6) ext, gray (2.5YR 6/0) int. D 2.30 cm. TJ 91/156 (Fig. 2.125:7; A14:6/37. Ceramic, pink (5YR 7/3) ext, pink (5YR 7/4) int. D 2.00 cm. TJ 91/157 (Fig. 2.125:8; A14:6/37). Ceramic, reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) ext, pink (5YR 7/3) int. D 2.50 cm. Parallels Ugarit: Small reworked sherds are regularly identified as gaming pieces (Calvet and Geyer 1987: pl. IV:b-d).

166

chapter two

Sarepta: All within the range of 2.30-3.30 cm in diameter is a group of 14 reworked sherds (Pritchard 1988: fig. 36:7-8). Gezer: Macalister (1912: fig. 443) illustrated only the bone and ceramic discs that were incised, leaving it uncertain whether the remaining ceramic discs had been formed as such or were reworked sherds. Khirbat al-Mudayna: Limestone gaming pieces were common in the gate area although one ceramic sherd with finely smoothed edges (MT 1/007) serves as a good example of a reworked sherd (Wadi ath-Thamad Registration Record,1995). It is not clear whether this sherd was also a gaming piece. VII-B/2b. Decorated Ceramic Gaming Pieces Only one ceramic disc appeared to be fashioned as a gaming piece with an incised design on one side. This piece resembles a token with the prehistoric sign for a sheep (Schmandt-Besserat, personal communication, July 1995). Given the chronological limits of occupation at Tall Jawa, it is more likely that this disc was an Iron Age object with a specialized function, either a unique gaming piece or a counter of some kind. Catalogue TJ 2027 (Fig. 2.126:1; D31:24/23). Ceramic, red. D 2.40, T 0.50 cm. Incised X. Complete. Parallels Gezer: One of several incised discs was marked on one side with an X, and on the other with a small checkerboard pattern and drilled depressions (Macalister 1912: fig. 443:2). This pattern strongly supports Macalister’s identification as a gaming piece, given the pattern typical on gaming boards. VII-C. Gaming Board Criteria: The term “gaming board” is attributed to stones carved with a pattern that suggests a board game. Since these designs are frequently incised on ordinary limestone boulders flattened on one face, they can easily be overlooked amidst the collapse of stone walls. Only one was identified at Tall Jawa, near the drain in Field B. The incised pattern consists of three rows of 10 squares each, nine squares in each row are complete while the tenth is open ended.

artefact classification and typology

167

Catalogue TJ 854 (Fig. 2.127:1; B24:7/8). Limestone, very pale brown (10YR 8/3). Carved, incised. L 21.00, W 15.00 cm. Chipped. Parallels Hama: A stone fragment with partially preserved gaming boards on each flat surface (Fugmann 1958: fig. 216: 5B860) shows the common hopscotch pattern on one face. Hazor: One gaming board has incised squares on two sides; one side shows a pattern which is similar to a hop scotch, while the reverse has three rows of ten squares (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. LXXVIII:6). A second gaming board (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCLX:28) has a very irregular pattern incised on only one surface. Megiddo: A very fine example (Loud 1948: pl. 268:6) with a regular pattern of eight squares in each of three rows is assigned to Stratum VA. Gezer: A variety of checkerboard designs appear on the game boards from Gezer; these boards were made either with great care or with careless execution (Macalister 1912: figs. 441, 442). Tall Dayr ‘Alla: A fragment found in a Late Bronze Age shrine (Franken 1992: fig. 3-9:16) is so poorly preserved that the full number of squares remains unknown. Khirbat al-Mudayna: A stone slab, forming part of a bench in Gate 100 was incised with 3 games. An individual gaming board (MT4/017=A17.72.396) was recovered from Sanctuary 149, located inside the town, south of Gate 100 (Daviau and Steiner 2001:6).

viii. military defence VIII-A. Arrowheads Function: Small iron points for military use were hafted onto long shafts of wood and used as arrows or javelins.144 In many instances, small clumps of metal found at Iron Age sites are so badly corroded that it is impossible to distinguish the shape of the original artefact when it was in use.145 In published reports, very few pieces of metal are 144

The wood of the shaft is partially preserved on arrowhead TJ 1372. An analysis of the iron content was only possible to a limited extent due to the degree of decomposition; see Mirau, Chapter 5. 145

168

chapter two

illustrated unless the exact shape is recognizable and the function can be identified. Albright (1943:79) illustrates this when he says of the Tell Beit Mirsim iron objects “...iron arrowheads were extremely common, but were so badly rusted that it is not worthwhile to reproduce more than a few.” The same is true for the degree of preservation; it is not always possible to know if a given object is complete until it has been treated and cleaned.146 Otherwise, precise typological classification remains tentative. This is the case for most of the iron weapons from Tall Jawa because of their fragile condition. In spite of the heavy corrosion, an attempt has been made to compare the Tall Jawa corpus with the types identified by Cross and Milik. Another good example of a corpus with the same range of types and sizes is that from the cemetery at Tall al-Mazar (Yassine 1984: fig. 52:65-53:109). The corpus of iron points from Lachish also provides good parallels, especially concerning the formation of the tang. Several points have a bulbous tang, but none appear socketed (Tufnell 1953: pl. 60:5,9,20);147 in fact, this feature is more common on bronze weapons (Tufnell 1953: pl. 60:53). For that reason, the points from Tall Jawa that have a thickened tang are not classified as socketed.148 At the same time, it is significant that no large hand weapons, such as daggers or swords, were recovered from any of the buildings or from outside the walls at Tall Jawa. This is comparable to the situation at Tell el-Far‘ah (N), where only iron knife blades, and not 146 The cleaning of two arrowheads from Tall al-‘Umayri (U-F 6L98:50/216; U-F 7L08:44/271) and three from Tall Jawa (TJ 21, 69, 75), undertaken by I. Tell (1991) under the supervision of M. Krech, Chemistry Department, Wilfrid Laurier University, was only partially successful in view of the poor condition of the artefacts. The cleaning process consisted of time trials using an electrolytic process, I. Tell, “Archaeology Trials,” unpublished paper, Wilfrrd Laurier University. In 1992, additional experiments were continued at the Near Eastern Archaeology Laboratory on arrowheads TJ 1963, 2044, 2060, and 2076. Consolidation by Michael Fuller, Joseph Schneider Haus, Kitchener, Ontario, produced several fine examples that were returned to the ‘Amman National Museum (TJ 016, 071, 065). 147 Tufnell (1953: pl. 60:5,32,58-60) used the term “bulbous” to refer to a group of arrowheads that appeared to each have a tang with two diameters; the distal end of the tang was thicker than its proximal end. However, other points, not designated as bulbous, also had thickened tangs. The same is true of TJ 020 and TJ 1330. 148 One arrowhead with a thick tang from Kinneret is dated to Iron Age I (Muhly, Maddin and Stech 1990:166; pl. 113:2), while two other points with the same thick tang are from Iron Age II loci (Muhly, Maddin and Stech 1990:166; pl. 113:3, 8).

artefact classification and typology

169

daggers or swords, were found (Chambon 1984:90). Criteria: The distinction between arrowheads and javelin points is difficult to define. In general, arrowheads are typically smaller than javelin points and have a tang that is less than half the length of the point. The javelin is like a large arrow which is hurled through the air by hand (Yadin 1963: 10); it has a long slender point, long enough so that its sides are almost parallel. Due to poor preservation, the Tall Jawa points were arbitrarily classified on the basis of approximate shape and size. For example, any metal point less than 11.00 cm in length was classified as an arrowhead; longer points with a long tang were identified as javelins (Muhly and Muhly 1989:271; fig. 25:31), and none appeared heavy enough to classify as spear points. The typology of Tall Jawa arrowheads, initially organized by D. Smith,149 is based on the classes identified by Cross and Milik (1956). Altogether, 170 points were catalogued in the field, with a few instances of two or more points fused together, adding slightly to the total count.150 Due to the large number of points recovered from each excavation area, only the best-preserved examples of each recognizable type are presented here (see CD-ROM for complete list). So too, only the closest parallels are presented, and the list is far from exhaustive.151 VIII-A/1. Lanceolate Points (Type I) Lanceolate points are narrow, leaf shaped arrowheads that do not have a prominent shoulder or barb. Catalogue TJ 017 Fig. 2.128:1; A2:9/25). L 8.50, W 2.30 cm. Tang broken. Total L 8.70 cm. TJ 1322 (Fig. 2.128:2; E54:37/141). L 7.70, W 2.40 cm. Tang L 0.80, W 0.70 cm. Total L 8.50 cm. TJ 1325 (Fig. 2.128:3; E54:37/141). L 7.40, W 2.00 cm. Tang L 2.20, W 0.70 cm. Total L 9.60 cm. TJ 1327 (Fig. 2.128:4; E54:37/141). (a) L 7.20, W 2.60 cm. Tang 149 “A Typology of Metal Points from the Excavations at Tell Jawa,” unpublished paper, Wilfrid Laurier University. 150 A group of 4 or 5 points fused together (TJ 2119) add to the total count. 151 The limitation on the number of parallels cited is discussed at the beginning of this chapter.

170

chapter two

L 2.30, W 1.20 cm. Total L 9.50 cm. (b) L 8.60, W 2.40 cm. Tang L 1.40, W 0.60 cm. Total L 10.00 cm. (c) L 8.40, W 2.10 cm. Tang L 0.60, W 0.60 cm. Total L 9.00 cm. VIII-A/2. Elliptical Points (Type XII) The corrosion makes it difficult to be certain that these points are in fact elliptical, having an oval shape. Nevertheless, a few points are presented here as probable examples of this type, especially TJ 1328. Catalogue TJ 1328 (Fig. 2.129:1; E54:37/141). L 6.00, W 1.50 cm. Tang L 1.80, W 0.50 cm. Total L 7.80 cm. TJ 1329 (Fig. 2.129:2; E54:37/141). (a) L 8.90, W 2.20 cm. Tang L 1.30, W 0.60 cm. Total L 10.30. (b) L 8.50, W 2.1 cm. Tang L 1.50, W 0.80 cm. Total L 10.00 cm. VIII-A/3. Linear Points (Type X) Due to the amount of corrosion, it is not always possible to distinguish clearly points that fall into the linear type. Only one example can be cited that has truly parallel edges. TJ 1245 (Fig. 2.14:130:1; E54:37/140). Point(b) L 8.00, W 1.70 cm. Tang L 2.00, W 1.00 cm. Total L 10.00 cm. Parallels Tall Mastuma: The iron points dating from Iron Age II appear to fall into the same formal types as those from Tall Jawa, lanceolate and elliptical (Tsumoto 1997:58, fig. 1:5-13), although Tsumoto’s criterion to distinguish arrowheads from javelin points was established on the basis of weight alone rather than shape and size. Hazor: Iron arrowheads from Level IXA, dating to Iron IIA, are long slender points (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXIX:24-27) in the same size range as those from Beth Shan, 5.85-8.50 cm in length and 1.251.50 cm in width. An iron javelin point from Stratum II, dating to a later period (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCLVIII: 22), measures 10.80 cm in length (it is missing both tips) and is 1.80 cm wide at its base. This point has a very narrow tang by comparison with the points from Tall Jawa, indicative of its class and due to better preservation. Tell el-‘Or¿me: The same range of shapes can be seen among the 10

artefact classification and typology

171

points from the 1982-1985 seasons (Muhly, Maddin and Stech 1990: pl. 113:1-10). Beth Shan: From Level VI (Iron IA), the best examples of points are bronze arrowheads that range in size from 6.00-8.40 cm in length and 1.20-1.80 cm in width, when measured at their longest and widest points (James 1966: fig. 104:7, 20). Tell Keisan: The longest, elliptical point (8.00 cm) was a surface find. Points dating to late Iron Age II were somewhat smaller (4.50-5.20 cm; Nodet 1980: pl. 98:1,3-6). Megiddo: Lanceolate and elliptical points were common in Strata VIV (Loud 1948: pl. 176:50-58, 64, 66). Taanach: One example of a severely corroded arrowhead (StechWheeler et al. 1981: Ill. 12) shares features in common with the lanceolate points from Tall Jawa. Samaria: Lanceolate points (Kenyon 1957: fig. 111:2-5, 7, 9-10) dominate the assemblage although other shapes are also represented. Tell en-Naßbeh: Lanceolate, elliptical points and oblong points are all represented (McCown 1947: fig. 71:4, 13-18, 22). Buseirah: An example of a lanceolate point from the 1974 season has a thickened tang152 and is slightly longer (ca. 10.50 cm) than those from Tall Jawa. VIII-A/4. Lozenge Points (Type III) This type is characterized by the position of the pointed shoulder falling midway between the tip and the tang. Catalogue TJ 1373 (Fig. 2.131:1; E54:44/151). L 7.00, W 2.70 cm. Tang L 1.65, W 0.90 cm. Total L 8.65 cm. TJ 1377 (Fig. 2.131:2; E54:44/154). L 5.90, W 2.1 cm. Tang L 2.50, W 1.30 cm. Total L 8.40 cm. TJ 1611 (Fig.2.131:3; E65:29/106). L 10.00, W 2.40, T 0.90 cm. Complete Parallels Samaria: Although good examples are difficult to identify, some parallels can be cited (Kenyon 1957: fig. 111:12-13).

152 Personal observation of arrowhead #1083, in the collections of the West Asian Department of the Royal Ontario Museum.

172

chapter two

VIII-A/5. Pointed Ovate Points (Type VI) The distinguishing characteristic of ovate arrowheads is the curved, almost hemispherical proximal end of the point immediately in front of the stem or tang. Catalogue TJ 030 (Fig. 2.132:1; A13:21/87). L 2.10, W 1.75 cm. Tang L 2.15, W 0.65 cm. Total L 4.15 cm. Broken. TJ 065 (Fig. 2.132:2; A2:7/68). L 5.00, W 1.70 cm. Stem present? Tang L 2.20. W 0.80 cm. Total L 7.20 cm. TJ 256 (Fig. 2.132:3; A2:17/73). L 6.90, W 2.20 cm. Tang L 4.00, W 1.00 cm. Total L 10.90 cm. Points TJ 065 and TJ 256 each have a thickened tang and are thus classified as pointed ovate arrowheads, even though TJ 256 is basically lanceolate in overall proportions. Although point TJ 065 shows no clear signs of a central rib, the fact that it is as thick in section as it is wide suggests a rib under the corrosion. Parallels Hama: Iron arrowheads, representing several different formal types (Fugmann 1958: fig. 325),153 all have the thickened tang characteristic of the pointed-ovate shape of Cross and Milik. Samaria: Two fine examples of iron points of Type VIII-A/5 are found at Samaria; one comes from Tomb 108, dated to Period V, and the other was found on the summit of the tell (Period VI; Kenyon 1957: fig. 111:8 and 3 respectively). Tell en-Naßbeh: An example of this small headed point is also seen among the various shapes represented at Tell en-Naßbeh (McCown 1947: fig. 71:21). Lachish: A great variety of shapes are represented in the corpus of iron points from the tell (Tufnell 1953: pl. 60:1-77). Seven examples can be classified as pointed ovate (pl. 60:11, 19, 33, and 58). Ussishikin (1983: pl. 36:2) describes points from his Area R as Assyrian.

153 The points from Building V that have a thickened tang are catalogued as 8A360, 8A366, 8A373, 8A392, and 8A396. In the case of 8A392, three points of different sizes were assigned the same number.

artefact classification and typology

173

VIII-A/6. Triangular Point There was one example of a point with a small triangular head (L 2.00, W 1.10 cm) and long (L 2.90 cm) tang (TJ 519), that may reflect foreign influence or presence. In spite of heavy corrosion, it does not appear to fall into Cross and Milik’s Type V (Ovate), because the head has straight sides. A somewhat larger point (TJ 2204) may be a better example of this type. Catalogue TJ 519 (Fig. 2.133:1; C27:28/52). Iron. Point, L 2.00, W 1.10 cm. Tang L 2.90 W 0.70 cm. Total L 4.90 cm. Complete. TJ 2204 (Fig. 2.133:2; E64:62/85). Iron. Point, L 6.80, W 1.90, T 0.38 cm. Tang broken. Parallels Megiddo: In the early Iron Age strata, especially Stratum VII, arrowheads of this shape appear in bronze (Loud 1948: pl. 176:45-49). Tall al-‘Umayri: From the random survey, one iron arrowhead is illustrated (Platt 1989: fig. 20.5:41) that has a total length of 3.30 cm and is 1.00 cm across the proximal end of the point. Since the point alone appears to measure 2.15 cm in length, it is the closest parallel to TJ 519.

VIII-B. Javelin Points No complete javelin points were identified as such. A single iron “rod” that tapers at one end may in fact have been a javelin point. Catalogue TJ 948 (Fig. 2.134:1; C 53:19/28). L 9.30, D 1.00. Broken at both ends. Parallels Lachish: Among the iron arrowheads, there are five elongated points that could be classed as javelin heads (Tufnell 1953: pl. 60:8, 62). Tell en-Naßbeh: Here too, elongated points were identified as arrowheads, rather than as javelins (McCown 1947: pl. 104:6, 7).

ix. storage Apart from the various ceramic vessels used to store food and household items not currently in use, there is a small group of objects that

174

chapter two

were used in the storage and conservation of food stuffs, most notably jar stoppers.

IX-A. Jar Stoppers Function: The principal function of stoppers was to seal or cover storage vessels in order to keep the contents in a protected environment, reducing evaporation and protecting against insects and small animals. Secondarily, the stopper would facilitate certain types of food processing, such as fermentation. Jar stoppers were frequently made of unbaked clay (Yadin and Geva 1986:83) or stone, and shaped like a muffin or a mushroom. To get an exact fit for a jar filled with liquid, a lump of wet clay was enveloped in a piece of fabric and placed over the mouth (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CLXI:12, 14). Such stoppers were not recovered at Tall Jawa although stone and ceramic stoppers were present. Criteria: Stone stoppers, in the form of a mushroom with a stem, were designed to fit into the tall neck of storage jars or jugs. Such stoppers may have been surrounded by a piece of cloth that would guarantee a tight fit in the neck and could be knotted at the top to serve as a handle to dislodge the stopper.154 Only one stopper from Tall Jawa had a stem although another (TJ 450), shaped like a mushroom cap, was large enough to seal the mouth of a pithos of the style found in large numbers in both Strata VIII and VII. Probably bowls were used as well.155 More common were ceramic lids156 and other artefacts that may have served as stoppers, such as reworked sherds and stone discs, both of which took considerable time to fashion. Few of these stoppers were of a size to cover the mouth of jugs and storage jars, although they could fit into the neck of these vessels. Certain stoppers were formed out of body sherds that retained part of a handle, which made them easier to remove from the neck of the vessel. 154 M. Gennings, “Lids and Stoppers: A Typology,” unpublished paper, Wilfrid Laurier University, 1996. 155 This use may explain the presence of mended bowls that could only serve to hold dry foodstuffs or as covers for pithoi. 156 Additional ceramic stoppers or lids in the shape of inverted shallow bowls or of mushrooms with their stem will be considered in detail in the final report on Iron Age pottery (Daviau, in preparation/b).

artefact classification and typology

175

For precious items that came in small or miniature juglets, we can only assume that woven fabric or a ball of wool was used as a plug, since the neck size of these vessels (< 1.00 cm) does not correspond to any item that could have served as a stopper. IX-A/1. Stone Stoppers IX-A/1a-1. Mushroom-shaped Stopper (upright) One example of a finely worked basalt object, possibly used as a stopper, had a mushroom-shaped top and a cylindrical stem. This stopper was initially identified as a pestle because the rounded end was smooth. In fact, the shape of this stopper lent itself to multifunctional utilization and the presence of drill holes indicates that it was used on occasion as a bow drill socket. A second stopper, made of ceramic, was red slipped and painted. This high status item may have been associated with a specialized function (Daviau 2001: fig. 3.10, 11). Nevertheless, it is included here because its actual function is at present unknown and it shares the shape of the basalt “stopper.” Catalogue TJ 768 (Fig. 2.135:1; C17:46/99). Basalt. D 7.50, H 5.50, D of stem 4.50 cm. Stem broken. TJ 1589 (Fig. 2.135:2; A83:16/50). Ceramic. D 9.00, H 2.75, D of stem 4.80, Wt. 115 g. Decorated. Parallels Ugarit: Two limestone stoppers with truncated stem are round on top but ovoid at the base (Elliott 1991: fig. 12:1-3). Sarepta: A stone stopper with a stem 6.00 cm in diameter (Pritchard 1988: fig. 33:16) would fit comfortably into the mouth of a jug or storejar. Khirbat al-Mudayna: A limestone stopper (MT 1/030) with a somewhat longer stem (8.50 cm) comes from the site of Khirbat alMudayna (Wadi ath-Thamad Project, object register, 1996).157 Tawilan: Two stoppers are good parallels, while a third was perforated at the top (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.24:1-3). 157 Two “stoppers” (D 10.00-12.00, H 12.90-15.00 cm), found in Temple 149 (Daviau and Steiner 2001: fig. 11:1, 2), are considerably larger than other examples. Unfortunately, there were no storejars in B149 that could confirm the identification of these two limestone objects as stoppers.

176

chapter two

IX-A/1a-2. Mushroom-shaped Stoppers (inverted) Inverted mushroom cap stoppers, without the stem, have the flat surface uppermost and the rounded cap upside down. Such stoppers would be ideally suited to fit into the upper neck of a pithos or storejar, especially in view of their sizes (D 15.00 cm; 7.80-9.50 cm). The presence of TJ 450 in Casemate Room 301, along with several smashed pithoi, strengthens this identification. Catalogue TJ 450 (Fig. 2.136:1; E55:12/38). Limestone. D 13.70-15.00, T 6.50 cm. Complete. TJ 1182 (Fig. 2.136:2; E74:2/9). Limestone. D 7.80, T 3.60 cm. Complete. TJ 2184 (E75:25/79). Limestone. D 9.50-10.50, T 3.20 cm. Wt. 550 g. Chipped. IX-A/1b. Lentil-shaped Stoppers Catalogue TJ 828 (Fig. 2.137:1; C44:1/5). Limestone. D 9.20, T 5.00 cm, Wt 550 g. Chipped. TJ 1317 (Fig. 137:2; A5:16/19. Chert nodule. D 8.50-9.00, T 5.00 cm. Wt 465 g. Complete. TJ 1697 (A83:16/50). Chert nodule. D 8.00-9.00, T 5.10 cm. Complete. IX-A/1c. Disc-shaped Stoppers Ellliot (1991:39) makes a distinction between stoppers whose base entered into the neck of a jar, and lids that would sit on top of the jar rim. Not all of these items were round, although several discs are also listed as lids in her typology. Catalogue TJ 1275 (Fig. 2.138:1; E74:2/9). Limestone. D 6.00, T 0.70-1.10 cm. TJ 1869 (D31:24/52). Limestone. D 9.50, T 2.50 cm, Wt 450 g. Complete. TJ 2057 (Fig. 2.138:2; E75:25/57). Stone. D 6.40, T 2.70 cm. Wt 200 g.158 TJ 2186 (C66:7/17). Limestone. D 10.50, T 1.80 cm, Wt 400 g. Incised. Chipped. 158

Stoppers were weighed by M. Jennings.

artefact classification and typology

177

The incised lines on stopper TJ 2186 appear to be random although an initial checkerboard pattern may have been subsequently defaced. An example of an incised lid was also recovered at Ugarit (Elliott 1991: fig. 12:6). Parallels Ugarit: Two sandstone discs, one 4.30 cm and the other 6.30 cm in diameter, are interpreted as jar lids although the correspondence to the size of jar necks was not discussed (Elliott 1991:39; fig. 12:4, 5). Megiddo: A stone disc 4.00 cm in diameter is somewhat smaller than the Tall Jawa examples. IX-A/2. Ceramic Stoppers The suggestion that reworked ceramic discs should be classified as stoppers is based on the assumption that their sizes correspond to the sizes of the mouths of storage vessels. For example, assuming that stoppers were fitted into the neck with a piece of fabric to facilitate removal, reworked discs with a diameter of 3.00-4.00 cm would fit snugly into the neck of wide mouth juglets and large decanters. At the same time, stoppers of this size cannot easily be distinguished from gaming pieces. Discs in the size range of 6.007.00 cm in diameter could serve as stoppers for jugs and storage jars, but hole mouth jars (D 12.00 cm) and pithoi (D 15.00-17.00 cm) could not be stoppered in the same fashion. London (1991:417) clusters the mean diameters of the discs from Tall al-‘Umayri (Field F) into three groups, 3.50 cm, 5.50 cm and 7.00 cm. On this basis, she suggests that these items were counters159 instead of stoppers (or unfinished spindle whorls). Apparently, she did not take into consideration the size of the neck opening of vessels where these discs could have served as stoppers. At the same time, London (1989:414) did consider reworked bases and handle sherds with part of the wall of the body fashioned in the shape of a disc as probable stoppers. 159 London (1991:417) based her argument in part on the view of SchmandtBesserat (1983:118), that illiterate people often make use of pebbles of different sizes as counters. This could also have been the case in ancient Ammon since gathering pebbles is a much easier task than refashioning a potsherd. London added triangular sherds to the reworked sherd register, and identified them as counters. However, the triangular sherds from Tall Jawa show no signs of being reworked, and could be classed as simple body sherds.

178

chapter two

IX-A/2a. Reworked Body Sherds Nearly 800 reworked sherds from Tall Jawa were registered even though it was not certain in each case that the sherd was intentionally fashioned as a disc. Nor was its use as a stopper certain, since many were of a size that did not correspond to the diameter of the neck of storage jars or jugs with which they could have been in use. If these stoppers were used in the same manner as wet clay plugs, the addition of a piece of fabric may have filled in the gaps and secured the disc in place. This practice may also account for the irregularity seen in certain discs. In other cases it was clear that the reworked discs were gaming pieces (see above) or blanks for spindle whorls (see below); the latter can be accounted for by the fact that many discs had a depression on at least one side.160 Therefore, only the most likely candidates for classification as stoppers are presented here (the complete corpus is included in the CD ROM database).161 Catalogue TJ 91/191 (Fig. 2.139:1; B64:9/48). Reworked body sherd; reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) ext; pink (5YR 7/4) int. Chipped. TJ 95/154 (Fig. 2.139:2; A15:33/42). Reworked body sherd; pinkish gray (2.5YR 7/2) ext; gray (10YR 7/2) int. D 6.75, T 0.90 cm, Wt 4 g. Chipped. TJ 95/173 (Fig. 2.139:3; B65:15/64). Reworked pithos sherd; pinkish gray (7.5YR 7/2) ext; light gray (10YR 7/1) int. D 8.40, T 1.70 cm, Wt 14 g. Chipped. TJ 95/147 (Fig. 2.139:4; C76:9/24). Reworked pithos sherd; dark gray (5YR 4/1) ext; light gray (10YR 7/1) int. D 7.50, T 1.60 cm. 95/157 (Fig. 2.139:5; C27:67/159). Reworked pithos sherd; gray (10YR 6/1) ext; reddish brown (2.5YR 5/4) int. D 6.60, T 1.30 cm. Parallels Hazor: Reworked sherds in the size range of 2.00-6.00 cm are unequivocally labelled as stoppers (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CV:37, 38, 41). Beth Shan: Five jar stoppers were excavated from Stratum IV, dating to Iron IIB (Yadin and Geva 1986:82-83, figs. 82, 83, 84). Megiddo: Ceramic discs ranging in size from 2.60-6.30 cm in diameter were grouped with a small number of stone discs, all probably used as stoppers (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 103). 160 161

Several reworked sherds were later reclassified as unfinished spindle whorls. All reworked sherds are in the database with their illustrations.

artefact classification and typology

179

Tall al-‘Umayri: A large sample of Iron Age reworked sherds illustrate the range of sizes and sherd thickness chosen for this artefact type (London 1991: fig. 21.18:6-27, 29, 32-39). IX-A/2b. Reworked Body Sherds with Handle Catalogue TJ 89/125 (Fig. 2.140:1; A13:22/121). Ceramic, weak red (2.5YR 5/2) ext; reddish brown (2.5YR 5/4) int. D 4.60, T 0.80 cm. Chipped. TJ 89/207 (Fig. 2.140:2; A13:6/13??). Ceramic, light gray (10YR 7/2) ext + int. D 7.50, T 1.00 cm. Chipped. TJ 89/239 (Fig. 2.140:3; A3:8/19). Ceramic, pink (7.5YR 7/4) ext; pink 5YR 7/3 int. D 4.20, T 1.00 cm. Chipped. TJ 93/144 (Fig. 2.140:4; E64:2/9). Ceramic, pink (5YR 7/4) ext; reddish/yellow (5YR 7/6) int. D 5.00, T 0.70 cm. Chipped. TJ 93/164 (Fig. 2.140:5; B54:3/16). Ceramic, pink (5YR 7/4) ext. D 5.50, T 0.70 cm. Chipped. TJ 93/172 (Fig. 2.140:6; B54:3/5). Ceramic, light red (2.5YR 7/6) ext. D 5.20, T 1.30 cm. Chipped. TJ 93/184 Fig. 2.140:7; E54:5/27). Ceramic, very pale brown (10YR 7/3) ext. D 6.00, T 0.70 cm. Chipped. Parallels Tall al-‘Umayri: The most important collection of reworked sherds, studied by London (1991:405), date to the Early Bronze and Iron Age levels at Tall al-‘Umayri. Handle sherds that were probably used as stoppers appeared in the Field F corpus (London 1991: fig. 21.18:31, 40). IX-A/2c. Reworked Base Sherds Disc or double disc bases, the latter extremely common in Ammon, were often chosen to be reworked. Too thick to serve as spindle whorls, these sherds appear to have served as stoppers (London 1991:408). Catalogue TJ 10 (A13:11/15). Reworked base; dark gray (10YR 4/1). D 11.50, T 2.45 cm. Wt 11 g. Broken. TJ 1745 (Fig. 2.141:1; B34:28/49). Reworked base; dark gray (5YR 4/1). D 6.80, T 1.50 cm. Wt 7 g. Complete.

180

chapter two

Parallels Tall al-‘Umayri: Double disc bases with their distinctive shape were identified as probable stoppers (London 1991: fig. 21.18:28, 30).

x. textile production X-A. Spinning Tools Artefacts used in spinning and weaving were found in almost every excavation area at Tall Jawa. Especially numerous were spindle whorls and loom weights. Surprising in view of the evidence for textile production is the apparent absence of needles; only one poorly preserved needle is part of the Tall Jawa repertoire (X-C/1. below). At least, no objects were recognizable as needles in the artefact corpus. Examples of bronze needles are reported from many sites in Palestine, such as Megiddo (Loud 1948: pl. 187:12-22) and Beth Shan (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 150:1-4). Since Barber’s comprehensive study of textile production and tool use (1991), there is no need to repeat her findings here. Specific correlation of such tools to production techniques and materials in ancient Palestine is also well expressed in the Tall Dayr ‘Alla report (Vogelsang-Eastwood 1989). Our concern here is to establish the range of types represented at Tall Jawa for each tool group. X-A/1 Spindles Function: The spindle is the rod on which the thread is wound in the spinning process. Criteria: Complete spindles consist of a slender rod, rounded at the proximal end and tapered at the distal end. In many examples, there is a small notch in the proximal end to catch the yarn. Spindles were usually made of wood, but spindles of metal, bone and ivory have been found (Forbes 1964:154). Where one or both ends are broken, it is difficult to distinguish a bone spindle from a bone pin or small wand. Those with decoration are easier to classify.

artefact classification and typology

181

X-A/1a. Undecorated Spindles Catalogue TJ 1530a+b (Fig. 2.142:1; E65:28/88). Bone. Undecorated. L 14.35, D 0.70 cm. Chipped. TJ 1603 (Fig. 2.142:2; E65:29/92). Bone. Undecorated. L 12.25, D 0.70-0.35 cm. Chipped. These undecorated spindles appear to be complete, except for an identifiable split at the proximal end that indicates the original position of the thread notch. In both cases, the notch was formed by inserting a tool, which was flat on one side and ever so slightly convex on the other, into the proximal end. On each spindle, the outer lip of the notch was broken away. The total length of 12.2514.35 cm is considerably shorter than the long spindles (27.00-38.00 cm) reported by Watson (1979: Table 5.4). The thickness of the Tall Jawa rods appears to be relative to their length, since longer spindles may be as much as 1.10 cm in diameter (see M 3530 below). Evidence for use as a spindle is clear on TJ 1530, where rough scratch marks on one side appear 2.00 cm above the distal tip, where the whorl was positioned. In order to fit at this point on the shaft, the spindle whorl would need a central hole of 0.70 cm. Comparable marks are not visible on spindle TJ 1603. Parallels Hama: Two examples of bone spindles are illustrated although only one is so identified. Spindle 744 appears in three pieces, since it is not certain that the distal section actually mends with the two joined pieces (Riis and Buhl: 1990: fig. 97:744). The two mended pieces of spindle 744 measure 13.5 cm in length and 0.80 cm in diameter, clearly in the range of the Tall Jawa spindles. This example also shows the thread notch. A longer example, Spindle 737, is decorated; several other broken pieces are decorated as well (Riis and Buhl: 1990: fig. 97:736, 737, 738). Tyre: Although classed as a punch (Bikai 1978: pl.XXXVI:14), this bone tool shares many of the characteristics of the small bone spindles from Tall Jawa, including a break at the place of the thread notch. Hazor: One bone rod, close in size (13.0 cm in length) to the Tall Jawa examples, is not identified as a spindle (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CV:27), although it is illustrated with a hemispherical spindle whorl. This rod from Area B dates to Stratum IV, ca. 700 BC. Another rod, also from Area B but dating to Stratum VI, is only partially preserved (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXIX:37).

182

chapter two

Tell el-‘Or¿me: One undecorated spindle measures ca. 14.00 cm in length (Fritz 1990: pl. 112:12). Megiddo: Large numbers of textile tools found at Megiddo reflect the same ratio of spindles (ca. 2.0%) to spindle whorls (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pls. 93-96), suggesting that perishable material was normally used, such a reed or wood (see Hasanabad; Watson 1979: figs. 5:51, 52). Several bone rods, probably spindles, appear among the textile tools and are similar to an example from LB levels (M 3530) in size (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 96:10-12). X-A/1b. Decorated Spindles Decorated artefacts, frequently identified as ivory wands, small rods (Ariel 1990:140) or pins (Winnett 1964:27; pl. 19:8), are occasionally illustrated with a spindle whorl in place (Gachet 1987: pl. 4:39, 40; Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 95:38). The most common style of decoration is incised fish scales or cross-hatching between incised bands (Gachet 1987: pl. 4:34, 24). Catalogue TJ 2203 (Fig. 2.143:1; E64:62/85). Bone. Incised herringbone pattern and bands. L 9.00, D 0.95 cm. Fragments (3). This single example of a decorated spindle from Tall Jawa consists of three fragments (TJ 2203) recovered in 1995. Although the Iron Age date of this spindle is secure stratigraphically, it imitates the style of Late Bronze Age spindles that were especially popular at Megiddo and Ugarit. Parallels: Ugarit: Long spindles at Ugarit, in the range of 22.0 cm (Gachet 1987: pl. 4:38, 39, 40), are classified as wands although they certainly fall within the accepted size range for spindles (12.00-22.00 cm long).162 Hama: Decorated spindles appear to be somewhat longer that the undecorated examples. An almost complete spindle measures 18.3 cm (Riis and Buhl 1990: Fig 96:736; three fragments, fig. 97:738). Sarepta: A decorated spindle broken at the end was also broken at the top, probably at the thread groove, although this feature is not 162 Several bronze “kohl sticks” from Hazor (Yadin et al. 1961: pls. CXCI:21, 22; CCLXXXIII:33) may in fact have been spindles, since they do not have the flattened end typical of kohl applicators but are round in section for their entire length. Secondly, all three examples have a head that is square in section and is quartered forming two perpendicular grooves. This head is similar to that on an ivory spindle with a pomegranate head from Ugarit (Gachet 1987: pl. 4:40).

artefact classification and typology

183

mentioned in its description (Pritchard 1988: fig. 30:8). Megiddo: The finest sample of decorated spindles was recovered from Late Bronze Age strata (X-VIIA+VI; Loud 1948: pl. 197:1-13). Here are spindles with incised diagonal lines, herringbone design, and incised lattice pattern. Beth Shan: A single ivory spindle, measuring 15 cm in length and 1.00 cm in diameter, is very ornate with incised decoration at both ends consisting of diagonal lines and lattice patterns (James 1966: fig. 114:1). Jerusalem: A rod decorated with sets of parallel lines that cross at intervals (Ariel 1990: fig. 21:Bl 178) appears to be similar in design. Tall Dayr ‘Alla: Here too, there is a 20.00 cm long bone spindle with incised lines as decoration; in this case, the lines do not appear to cross (Franken 1992:4-5:18). Baq‘ah Valley: Only a spindle handle with incised lattice decoration within parallel bands, dated to LB II, was recovered from Cave B3 (McGovern 1986: fig. 76.4) X-A/2. Spindle Whorls Function: The spindle whorl weighs the spindle down at one end and improves rotation by adding momentum and acting as a flywheel. The dimensions and weight of the spindle whorl are related to the thickness and strength of the yarn desired and of the fibres used (Forbes 1964:154). The spindle and whorl are still used in traditional societies; for example the Bedouin women of Jordan use wooden spindles and whorls that form one solid unit. The spindle portion is rolled on the thigh, and the thread is wound around the spindle after it has been twisted (Judd, personal observation, 1991). In her study, Watson (1979:174) found that the villagers of Hasanabad used wooden spindles and whorls, which were purchased separately at the bazaar. The whorls were all either circular disks or conical in section. In her sample of 19 whorls, Watson (1979: Table 5.4) found that the average diameter was 5.50 cm and the average thickness was 2.90 cm. By comparison, in a sample of Tall Jawa ceramic spindle whorls from the 1991 season, the average diameter is 5.50 cm and the average thickness is 1.12 cm.163 The central 163 The very small discs (1.20-2.40 cm) found at Tell el-Far‘ah(N) (Chambon 1984: pl. 75:18-31) were not found at Tall Jawa. These small discs may have served

184

chapter two

perforation measures 0.40-0.70 cm in diameter which may reflect both the size of the tool used to pierce these discs and the thickness of the spindle. Criteria: Spindle whorls made of wood, stone, ceramic, bone, metal or glass have a single perforation in the centre. Although they are generally plano-convex in shape, the actual profile could be that of a disk, hemisphere, cone or bicone (Forbes 1964:154). Albright (1938: 55-56) suggested that ivory spindle whorls, common in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, were replaced by ceramic disks early in the Iron Age.164 Among 115 whorls from Tall Jawa, only 1 was made of bone/ivory, 3 were of limestone, and 3 were made of basalt; all other whorls were formed from reworked sherds.165 X-A/2a. Ceramic Whorls The largest single group of spindle whorls in use at Tall Jawa consists of ceramic disks formed by reworking a sherd (108 examples).166 In the total corpus, the largest whorls measured 8.50-9.00 cm in diameter (TJ 1497, 2004), while the smallest were in the range of 3.00-3.50 cm (TJ 511, 743).167 The thickness of the sherds chosen for drilling measured 0.65-2.50 cm and the biconical central holes ranged in size from 0.20-1.00 cm in diameter.168 The size of the hole was probably correlated with the thickness of the spindle, few of which survive in the archaeological record, as well as with the fibre chosen for spinning. The sherds were chosen from a great variety of vessel types, including red slipped fine ware, jug or jar sherds, cooking pot ware and pithos sherds. The edges of the sherds were chipped and left as single hole buttons; Chambon gave them the generic name “rondelle”. 164 Both examples from Shiloh (Brandl 1993:237; fig. 9.9:6), and their parallels, date to the Middle Bronze Age. 165 Three perforated sea urchin fossils (TJ 005, 553, 690) range in size from 1.50-2.50 cm in maximum diameter. We have classified these objects as beads, even though the largest (TJ 005) is close to the minimum size for spindle whorls (Barber 1991:51). 166 One ceramic ring (TJ B35.5.1161) appears to belong to the Umayyad period. The fabric is certainly not Iron Age pottery. Also, the diameter of the central hole is larger (2.50 cm) than the normal range for a whorl. 167 Such small whorls also have the smallest holes (0.20 cm), leading one to suspect that they were probably single hole buttons rather than whorls, since the next size of perforation is 0.40 cm in diameter. 168 Nodet (1980:315) suggests that whorls should have a large diameter and be as thin as possible to be effective. The thick pithos sherds appear to be a strange choice for fast spinning whorls.

artefact classification and typology

185

rough, except in two instances (TJ 744, 2022) where their edges were smoothed. Although several unfinished whorls were recovered (for example, TJ 002), the vast majority were drilled through, so that the cause of breakage in antiquity cannot now be attributed to the manufacturing process. In certain cases, where the hole is off centre (TJ 097, 2144), there is evidence of wear indicating that the imbalance caused by the position of the hole was not a functionally debilitating factor.169 Unfinished or failed spindle whorls are in the same size range as completed whorls. Blanks would not be expected to occur in the case of sherds which are less than 3.00 cm in diameter and were formed from relatively thick sherds (ca. 1.00 cm). It is more likely that these were used as small stoppers or as gaming pieces. There are, of course, always exceptions to this theoretical model, such as TJ 89/154, a sherd with a diameter between 3.00-3.50 cm with a clear drill hole begun off centre but never completed. This large group of reworked ceramic sherds is in sharp contrast to contemporary Tawilan, where whorls were predominantly of stone or clay (not reworked) and were decorated (Bienkowski 1995:89). Catalogue Only a sample of reworked sherds are presented here; see CDROM for complete listing. TJ 511 (Fig. 2.144:1; D31:18/34). Ceramic; light red (2.5YR 7/6) obv, pink (5YR 7/4) rev. D 3.40, T 0.90 cm. Broken. TJ 743 (Fig. 2.144:2; E44:6/21). Ceramic; reddish yellow (5YR 6/ 6) obv, pink (7/5YR 7/4) rev. Reworked. D 3.20, T 0.80 cm Complete. TJ 1316 (Fig. 2.144:3; A5:7/11). Ceramic; obverse discoloured; light brown (7.5YR 6/4) rev. Reworked. D 3.50-3.70 cm. Complete. TJ 1936 (Fig. 2.144:4; B65:23/37). Ceramic; very dark gray (5YR 3/1) obv, reddish brown (5YR 4/4) rev. Reworked. D 3.80. Complete. TJ 130 (Fig. 2.144:5; A24:1/4). Ceramic; gray (7.5YR 6/1) obv, gray 169 From the 1989 and 1993 seasons, 21 reworked sherds were classified as failed spindle whorls. In some cases, these whorls may have been unfinished (TJ 89/189, 191, 193, 197; illustrations on CD-ROM). Their exact classification was not immediately apparent since these objects are rarely discussed in the literature. Our judgment is that certain reworked sherds were probably blanks for spindle whorls, while those that indicate drilling or appear to have broken during the drilling process are beyond doubt.

186

chapter two

(7.5YR 5/1), rev. Reworked. Irregular; D 3.50-3.80 cm. Complete. TJ 2022 (Fig. 2.144:6; D21:20/11). Ceramic; light red (10R 6/6) obv, reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) rev. Reworked. Burnished. Irregular; D 3.30-4.00 cm. Complete. TJ 2163 (Fig. 2.144:7; A15:3/57). Ceramic; pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/ 2) obv, gray (7.5YR 6/2) rev. Reworked. D 4.40 cm. Complete. TJ 093 (Fig. 2.144:8; A13:32/129). Ceramic; yellow (10YR 7/6) obv, gray (7.5YR 5/1) rev. Reworked. D 4.45 cm. Complete. TJ 097 (Fig. 2.144:9; A3:6/17). Ceramic; red (2.5YR 6/6) obv, dark gray (7.5YR 4/1) rev. Reworked. Irregular; D 4.80 x 5.10 cm. Complete. TJ 2114 (Fig. 2.144:10; C74:9/22). Ceramic; gray (N 5/) obv, and rev. Reworked. D 5.30 cm. Complete. TJ 2183 (Fig. 2.144:11; A15:36/56). Ceramic; pink (5YR 8/3) obv, gray (N 6/) rev. Reworked. D 5.20 cm. Complete. TJ 106 (Fig. 2.144:12; B63:0.5/3). Ceramic; gray (10YR 5/1) obv, and rev. Reworked. Irregular; D 5.00 cm. Complete. TJ 905 (Fig. 2.144:13; C17:45/117). Ceramic; dark gray (N 4/) obv and rev. Reworked. D5.20, T 1.60 cm. Complete. TJ 794 (Fig. 2.20:14; B44:11/21). Ceramic; reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/6) obv, light brown (7.5YR 6/4). Reworked. D 5.80, T 0.85 cm. Broken. TJ 967 (Fig. 2.144:15; E65:8/12). Ceramic; light red (2.5YR 6/6) obv, gray (2.5YR 6/1) rev. Reworked. D 6.10, T 1.70 cm. Complete. TJ 207 (Fig. 2.144:16; B64:10/46). Ceramic; light brown (7.5YR 6/ 4) obv, gray (7.5YR 6/1) rev. Reworked. D 7.00 cm. Broken. TJ 2004 (Fig. 2.144:17; D23:44/73). Ceramic; very pale brown (10YR 8/2) obv, light reddish brown (5YR 6/4) rev. Reworked. D 8.80, T 1.10-1.30 cm. Slip. Broken Parallels170 Tyre: Although identified simply as weights, several ceramic discs (Bikai 1978: pls. XXIV:16, 17; XXX:10, 11, 17, 18) appear to be perforated reworked sherds, probably used as whorls. 170 Like ground stone tools, ceramic spindle whorls are a common find in Iron Age sites but are not often illustrated to the extent that their numbers would warrant; nor is there detailed analysis in site publications (for example, SingerAvitz 1989:359; fig. 31.7:18). This may be due to the fact that these tools, like millstones, vary on the basis of material and not because of forming processes that can be documented in a formal typology.

artefact classification and typology

187

Tell Keisan: Four out of the six whorls formed from reworked sherds (Nodet 1980: pl. 96:39-44) date to Iron Age strata. Their size range is 2.70-4.90 cm. Megiddo: At Megiddo, there were spindle whorls formed as such before firing (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pls. 93:5, 22, 26-27, 50, passim),171 as well as potsherds drilled to form whorls (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pls. 93:6, 23, 32, 54, 61-62, 68; 94:21, 45-46, 60; 95:18-19). These sherds appear to range in size from 3.00-7.40 cm, similar to the range for the Tall Jawa whorls. Beth Shan: Only one artefact, identified as a “ceramic object” (James 1966: fig. 110:8) from Lower Level V, appears to have been a whorl; as well, three perforated discs were recovered from Level VII (James and McGovern 1993:1-3). Hazor: One perforated potsherd from Stratum VA (Yadin et al. et al. 1961: pl. CCXXXII:21) measures 4.40 cm at its widest diameter and is 0.80 cm thick. Gezer: The perforated ceramic whorl appears already in Stratum 6A/ 5C (Iron IB; Dever et al. 1986: pl. 59:12). Lachish: Only one “pierced disk” from the tell is illustrated (Tufnell 1953: pl. 65:14). Beth-zur: Ceramic discs measuring 5.80-7.00 cm were not classified according to function and their use as stoppers was rejected due to their flat shape (Sellers 1968:83; pl. 42b). The possibility that they were unfinished spindle whorls or gaming pieces seemed most likely to the excavator. Beer-sheba: Ceramic whorls appear in small numbers in various strata (Herzog 1984: figs. 19:14; 25:17). Tell el-Far‘ah(N): Five reworked sherds, each with a single hole (Chambon 1984: pl. 77:3-5), are in the size range of 3.80-6.60 cm in diameter. ‘Amman: A very close parallel for our smallest ceramic whorls (TJ 511, 743), at least in overall size and in the size of the central perforation, is spindle whorl 145 (Koutsoukou and Najjar 1997:143, 154). Other whorls (141-144) range is size from 3.60-4.70 cm in diameter. Tall al-‘Umayri: Four perforated discs, two very irregular in shape, 171 Item M 3282 (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 93:7) appears to have been a miniature wheel rather than a spindle whorl.

188

chapter two

were classed as spindle whorls (Platt 1989: fig. 20.10, Objects #111, 135, 150, 204). Balu‘: A whorl, 6.00 cm in diameter, was 1.00 cm thick (Worschech, Rosenthal and Zayadine 1986: fig. 15:62). X-A/2b. Bone/Ivory Whorls One bone/ivory spindle whorl (TJ 110) is present in the corpus. The central hole has vertical sides and is 0.38 cm in diameter. This whorl, flat on one face and slightly convex on the other, could have fit on the distal end of the smaller of the two undecorated spindles (TJ 1603), but this is unlikely given their relative find spots (Spindle Whorl TJ 110 was in Building 113 in Field A, while Spindle TJ 1603 was in Building 300 in Field E). Catalogue TJ 110 (Fig. 2.145:1; A13:5/9). Bone. Worked. D 3.28, T 0.65 cm. Complete. Parallels Ugarit: By contrast with the Tall Jawa whorl, the examples from Minet el-Beida, including an undecorated one (4.00 cm in diameter and 0.40 cm in height/thickness), have central holes that measure nearly 1.20-1.35 cm in diameter (Gachet 1987: pl. 4:39, 40). However, ivory spindles that would fit into these whorls were probably used with them. Tyre: A small bone whorl is flat on one face and slightly convex on the other (Bikai 1978: pl. XIV:23). Baq‘ah Valley: This bone spindle whorl (McGovern 1986:244, fig. 76:1) represents the model for Late Bronze and Early Iron Age spindle whorls. It has a convex cone section that measures 2.40 cm in diameter and 0.30 cm in height. However, it is somewhat smaller in diameter than TJ 110 (3.28 cm). Tell el-Far‘ah (N): Two bone whorls are slightly smaller (2.40-2.60 cm in diameter) than TJ 110, but are very close to it in thickness (0.65 and 0.80 cm; Chambon 1984: pl. 75:1, 2). Hama: The 15 bone whorls published from the 720 BC destruction layer, range in size from 2.00-4.40 cm (Riis and Buhl 1990:208-212; fig. 97:746-747, 766-768; 770-774 777-778, 780=3); the thinnest whorl (772) is 0.30 cm thick. Hazor: A whorl from LB II Tomb 1844 is close in size to the Tall Jawa whorl (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CXXXVII:27). Megiddo: The largest sample is from Megiddo although here the bone

artefact classification and typology

189

whorls come in a great variety of shapes (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pls. 93-95 passim). Close parallels from Late Bronze Age strata can also be found (Loud 1948: pl. 172:18, 30). Beth Shan: One ivory spindle whorl measuring 2.00 cm in diameter and 0.40 cm in thickness was found at level VI, dating to Iron IA (James 1966:319, fig. 101:25). A second whorl, larger in size (D 3.04, T 0.90 cm), was attributed to the Late Bronze Age (Oren 1973: fig. 34:5). Samaria: Except for a single incised groove, bone whorl Q 4683 (Crowfoot 1957: fig. 92a:22) is similar in size and shape to TJ 110. Another whorl is slightly larger in diameter but is very thin in section (0.40 cm; Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924: fig. 242:4a). Shiloh: Two whorls, slightly smaller in size (Brandl 1993: fig. 9.9:6), are typical of the type. X-A/2c. Stone Whorls Three basalt rings, probably used as spindle whorls, are sufficiently well preserved for study. More common are limestone, hemispherical whorls of which there were two complete and one broken whorl. More doubtful as whorls are a limestone disc (TJ 1835) and a small perforated stone ring (TJ 1118), which may have served instead as loom weights or other craft related equipment. X-A/2c-1. Convex, Ring-shaped Whorl Catalogue TJ 009 (Fig. 2.146:1; A4:2/10). Basalt. Ground stone, biconical drill hole. D 3.50, T 1.65 cm. Complete. Parallels Tell el-‘Or¿me: Two small basalt rings were classified as spindle whorls (Fritz 1990: pl. 106:10, 20).172 Megiddo: A good parallel, described as “double convex” in shape, is from Stratum XVII at Megiddo (Loud 1948: pl. 171:7); other examples from Strata V-III are likely parallels (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pls. 93:18-19, 25; 94:82; 95:1). Beth Shan: An unstratified basalt ring (Yadin and Geva 1986: fig. 37:3; Photo 89) is a very close parallel to the Tell Jawa whorl, although there is no evidence to support its identification as a spindle whorl. 172 A third basalt ring has a central hole of 1.40 cm, considerably larger that average (Fritz 1990: pl. 106:7),

190

chapter two

Tell Beit Mirsim: A group of 5 stone whorls were reported for the Iron Age. Of these, one (Albright 1943: pl. 62:6) was a ring of similar size and proportions as TJ 009. X-A/2c-2. Plano-convex Whorl TJ 027 (Fig. 2.147:1; A4:7/16). Basalt. Ground stone; biconical drill hole. D 4.15, T 2.20 cm. Broken. Parallels Megiddo: Although the technique for drilling the central hole appears to produce a sharp angle rather than a rounded opening, several whorls from Megiddo are possible parallels (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 94:37-38) X-A/2c-3. Cylindrical Whorl TJ 2053 (Fig. 2.148:1; B35:23/46). Basalt. Ground stone; biconical drill hole. D 4.70, T 2.40 cm. Broken. TJ 1118 (Fig. 2.148:2; C65:3/4). Limestone. D 5.90, T 2.50 cm. Chipped. The function of these artefacts is inferred from their similarity in shape with ceramic spindle whorls formed from reworked pithos sherds, such as TJ 2141 and 2183. Parallels Megiddo: The shape, size and proportions of the stone whorls from Tall Jawa are unusual; nevertheless, a limestone whorl from Megiddo serves as a close parallel (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 94:69). Samaria: Although dated to a late Roman deposit, this gray stone whorl (Kenyon 1957: fig. 117:4) can be considered a suitable parallel. X-A/2c-4. Hemispherical Whorls Two complete and two broken limestone/chalk whorls are in the form of a hemisphere or truncated cone with slightly convex sides and one flat surface. These whorls are the finest large whorls (4.004.40 cm in diameter) in the Tall Jawa corpus.173 Catalogue TJ 924 (Fig. 2.149:1; C17:55/118). Chalk. Straight-sided drill hole. D 3.80, H 2.60 cm. Complete.

173

A broken fragment (TJ 1890) may also be included in this type.

artefact classification and typology

191

TJ 1891 (Fig. 2.149:2; C27:61/143). Chalk. Straight-sided drill hole. D 4.20, H 2.00 cm. Complete. TJ 1818 (B34:29/54). Chalk. Straight-sided drill hole. Fragment. TJ 1901 (Fig. 2.149:3; A15:13/31). Chalk. Straight-sided drill hole. D 4.30, H 2.50 cm. Broken. Parallels Hama: Limestone whorls dated to the 720 BC destruction level share the same conical shape (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 97:752, 765). Hazor: One whorl from Area L, Stratum VII (Garfinkel 1997: fig. III.33:25), is slightly smaller (3.60 cm in diameter) than the Tall Jawa whorls. Megiddo: Again, Megiddo yields the best examples (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pls. 93:28; 94:2). Smaller whorls of the same general shape are also represented. Lachish: One “clay” spindle whorl shares the same shape and size (Tufnell 1953: pl. 65:2). Khirbat Al-Hajjar: A limestone cone, initially described as a “loom weight” (Thompson 1972b:72; pl. XI:34) is probably another example of this style of whorl, especially in view of its size (D 2.80, H 2.50).

X-B. Weaving Tools X-B/1. Loom Weights Function: Vertical and horizontal looms were used to weave yarn and fibres to form cloth and mats for domestic use. Early evidence for a vertical loom that used weights was recovered at Troy in Room 206 and dated to ca. 2,500 BC (Barber 1991:93). During the Iron Age in Palestine, evidence that the vertical, warp-weighted loom was used comes from a variety of sites (Tel Batash, Kelm and Mazar 1995:162-3; Taanach, Friend 1998:2-4; Tall as-Sa‘idiyah, Pritchard 1985:36; Tall Dayr ‘Alla, van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989: figs. 70, 72). This type of loom consisted of an upper beam, which was supported by two posts. Hanging vertically between the posts, the warp threads were held taut by weights (Barber 1991: fig. 3.24). Because a series of weights is needed to hold the warp threads, these weights are often found lined up in the debris reflecting their pattern of use, or as a group in storage. In most cases, the weights remained in situ even though the wood of the loom is rarely preserved (Vogelsang-

192

chapter two

Eastwood 1989:59).174 At Tall Jawa, holes in upright stone pillars suggests the position of the upper beam, either in a doorway, or stretching across the corner of a room. Criteria: Loom weights are normally made of stone, unfired clay or ceramic and have a single hole through which the yarn can be passed.175 The weights are shaped like spheres, doughnuts, small anchors (some almost triangular in shape), or biconical; other forms have been identified in Persian period assemblages (Tiede 1989:282).176 In several instances in the archaeological record, doughnut shaped and anchor shaped weights were found together and were obviously contemporary (Tel Batash, Kelm and Mazar 1995: fig. 8.26; Tall as-Sa‘idiyah, Pritchard 1985:35, fig. 52). Loom weights are not always consistent in size or weight. Where such consistency is needed, clay weights could easily be made uniform in size, perforated and sun dried in a shorter period of time than it would take to gather stones all of the same size, which would then have to be drilled by hand. At Tall Jawa, unfired clay loom weights177 could be identified with ease as they were recovered in groups of 6 or more in a single location. Such groups were in use in Building 300 of Stratum VIII as well as in Buildings 700, 800 and 910 from Stratum VII. In Building 910, a few weights were anchor shaped; all other loom weights 174 Sheffer (1981: pl. 15), Vogelsang-Eastwood (1989:59), and Kelm and Mazar (1995:162-163) discuss reconstructed models of such looms. The illustration of the clay weights from Tel Batash (Fig 8.26) shows them in situ. The average per household was between 30-50 weights, suggesting intensive textile production. 175 Tiede suggests that Persian period weights occasionally have twin holes (1989:282) rather than the single hole. In her final discussion, Tiede (1989:314315) suggested that the perforations in the weights were not used to hold the warp threads but to hold “an intermediate device such as a metal ring, wooden or metal rod, or loop of cord...to facilitate attachment of the threads.” This seems to agree with Barber (1991:91; fig. 3.13) and explain the evidence from ancient iconography on a Greek lekythos, although evidence on another Greek vase painting (Barber 1991: fig. 3.26) and from ethnographic analogy (Barber 1991: fig. 3.27) does not show the loop or ring in use. 176 See also the weights (#150-152) with two holes from ‘Amman (Koutsoukou and Najjar 1997:144). 177 L. Cowell, the ceramic registrar and a professional member of the Waterloo Potters’ Workshop, easily demonstrated the practicality of unfired clay loom weights over against fired weights. She reconstituted the clay of a shattered loom weight and formed a new weight, which was then sun dried and ready for use the following day. This experiment was carried out during the 1993 season, after the discovery of loom weights in Room 802.

artefact classification and typology

193

were doughnut-shaped, and occurred in a variety of sizes. This difference was also noted at Tall Dayr ‘Alla, where a chronological difference could be assigned to the later (Phase V) weights, which were oval in shape and larger than the round weights from Phase IX (Vogelsang-Eastwood 1989:60). Although one or more perforated stones from Tall Jawa could have served as loom weights, their function is much less certain and, as a result, these objects will be discussed as a group below. Out of a total of 95 loom weights, 81 unfired doughnut-shaped weights and 1 partially fired cylindrical weight were sufficiently well preserved to document their position in the archaeological record and to record their weight. These loom weights range in size from 6.50-10.50 cm in diameter and have a thickness of 4.10-8.50 cm, appearing to be comparable to the 215 loom weights from Tall asSa‘idiyah, which averaged 7.90 in diameter, 5.70 cm in height, and had a central hole 2.10 cm in diameter (Pritchard 1985:35). Since many of the unfired loom weights at Tall Jawa shattered during excavation, only the best preserved are presented in this catalogue. All identifiable loom weights and fragments were weighed for future analysis. The weight range was 0.200-1.800 kg, falling into five groups; 1, very small (200-300 g); 2, small (350-550 g); 3, medium (600-850 g); 4, large (0.900-1.300 kg); 5, very large (1.350-1.800 kg). The largest single group consisted of 28 very small weights that represented 34.0% of the total corpus. Second most common were the small and medium size weights, which constituted 22% and 24% respectively. Eleven large weights (13%) and two very large weights (2%) were the least common.178 As a group, these loom weights are much heavier than those reported from Tel Michal (Singer-Avitz 1989:358), where small loom weights were in the range of 15-85 g and large weights were 100-130 g.179 The Tel Michal loom weights were also quite different in shape from the Tall Jawa collection.

178 Five loom weights (6%) were not weighed due to their poor condition (see CD-ROM database for individual weights). The clustering of loom weights was the work of A. Drago in “Textile Tools from Tall Jawa,” unpublished paper, Wilfrid Laurier University, 1996. 179 Such variation in weight may reflect the clay content of the soil used to make the weights as well as intentional design. Differences in the fibres being woven would also be a consideration.

194

chapter two

X-B/1a. Doughnut-shaped Loom Weights All round clay balls are designated as doughnut shaped even though some are almost spherical. The distinction made by Friend (1998:72), whereby doughnut shaped weights were 1.00 cm wider in diameter than their height, was not in use during our initial classification although it surely applies to the loom weights in this group. A selection of the best preserved weights presented here will serve as an example of the entire corpus. Catalogue TJ 1672 (Fig. 2.150:1; E53:20/44). Unfired clay, yellowish brown (10YR 7/2). D 10.00, T 8.00 cm, D=hole 1.30 cm, 960 g. Complete. TJ 1842 (Fig. 2.150:2; B34:30/58). Unfired clay. D 10.50, D=hole 1.80 cm. Wt 800 g. Complete. TJ 1843 (Fig. 2.150:3; B34:30/58). Unfired clay. D 10.40, D=hole 2.30 cm, Wt 500 g. Complete. TJ 1903 (Fig. 2.150:4; D31:27/66). Unfired clay. D 7.80, T 4.10, D=hole 1.50 cm, Wt 300 g. Complete. TJ 1971 (Fig. 2.150:5; D31:32/70). Unfired clay, very pale brown (10YR 7/3). D 6.90-7.80, T 4.50, D=hole 0.90-1.50 cm, Wt 225 g. Complete. TJ 2107 (Fig. 2.150:6; C27:66/167). Unfired clay. D 7.70, T 6.00, D=hole 2.80 cm, Wt 400 g. Complete. TJ 2219 (Fig. 2.150:7; B24:29/46). Unfired clay. D 9.70, T 8.20, D=hole 1.80 cm, Wt 1.050 k. Complete. Parallels Hama: Doughnut-shaped loom weights, oval in section, were identified as fired clay (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 96:729). Hazor: Comparable loom weights are shown in groups in Area A (Yadin et al. 1958: pl. VII:3, 4), where they appear above collapsed ceiling material, and in Area B (Yadin et al. 1960: pls. XVIII:2; XX:4).180 Four unfired clay loom weights in the range of 5.50-7.50 cm in diameter and one baked clay weight (8.20 cm in diameter) were among those found in Area B (Yadin et al. 1958: pls. LXXII:1418). In Area L, several fired clay loom weights (Garfinkel 1997: fig. 180 In Locus 3067, the loom weights were embedded in a debris layer above a roof roller, probably a fallen ceiling, suggesting that the weaving was done on the roof. It is surprising that the caption for the photo of Building 3067 identifies the room where the roof roller and loom weights fell as “Courtyard” 3067a (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. XX:4).

artefact classification and typology

195

III.40:8-11) are close in size (7.00-8.50 cm) to the Tall Jawa weights. ‘Ein Gev: A group of perforated, unfired clay lumps in the shape of doughnuts or anchors were initially identified as fish net weights due to their presence at a seaside town (Mazar et al. 1964:25, pl. 14A. However, their composition and their use at sites far from the sea points instead to their use as loom weights. Beth Shan: One large (10.50 cm) doughnut-shaped weight of “dried mud” was reported from Upper Level V (James 1966: fig. 114:15), along with 49 clay loom weights from Lower Level V (James 1966:334, figs. 110:22; 118:14) and 10 weights from Level IV (James 1966:350). A “clay ring” from Stratum VII appears to be somewhat larger (D 15.8, T 7.00 cm) than the norm (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 127:15) and may have served another purpose. Tell el-‘Or¿me: In a single building (683), 102 ceramic loom weights and 26 fragments were found in two long rooms (Rabe 1996:100). These biconical and cylindrical loom weights range in size from 5.809.20 cm in diameter and from 172-498 g in weight. Tell Keisan: Several groups of weights found in association with charred wood were evidence of weaving and the use of unfired clay loom weights (Nodet 1980:318; pl. 97:27, 29-30). Tel Qiri: The one unfired clay weight assigned to the Iron Age fits well the size range (ca. 10 cm in diameter; Ben-Tor and Portugali 1987: fig. 56:1) that was typical of weights from Tall Jawa. Tell el-Far‘ah(N): Thirty-four unfired clay loom weights (Chambon 1984:264) along with several fired clay weights are all in the same size range (D 6.25-10.00 cm) as those from Tall Jawa. Beer-sheba, Lachish, Gezer, Ta‘anach and Tell Beit Mirsim: Sheffer (1981:81-83; pls. 15; 16:1, 2) studied the use of loom weights on the warp weighted loom along with dozens of unfired clay loom weights recovered at Tel Beer-sheba, which she compares with groups from Tell Beit Mirsim, Gezer and Lachish.181 Tall as-Sa‘idiyah: See discussion above (Pritchard 1985: fig. 170:1) Tall Dayr ‘Alla: A total of 16 clay weights ranging in size from 8.009.50 cm in diameter and 5.50-6.00 thick (H) were reported from different phases (van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989: photo 68). 181 In her analysis of 59 unfired weights from Tell el-Hesi, Tiede (1989:282) notes that there is insufficient evidence to determine whether the variety of shapes (ball, drum, conical, biconical, etc.) was functional or chronological. The fact that no true parallels to Iron Age doughnut shaped weights are illustrated here may be accounted for by the Persian period date of the Hesi corpus.

196

chapter two

Tall al-Mazar: Several rooms of Building 300 contained dozens of clay loom weights, both doughnut shaped and anchor shaped. These are all assigned to Stratum III (seventh to sixth century; Yassine 1988b:85; pl. XVIII:1-6). Tawilan: The presence of several small clay loom weights (Reg. 137a, D 6.00, T 4.80 cm; and Reg. 750, D 7.00, T 4.00 cm; Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.30:5, 9) suggests that fibres similar to those woven at Tall Jawa were woven at Tawilan, although larger loom weights are not represented here. Indeed, four other weights (Reg. 190, 303, 749, 752) were even smaller. X-B/1b. Cylindrical Loom Weights Only one completely unfired clay loom weight falls into this type, which consists of a round weight with almost vertical sides. Other examples are partially fired, probably accidentally. Catalogue TJ 740 (Fig. 2.151:1; C17:44/92). Partially fired clay, pinkish gray (7.5YR 7/2). Hand made. Cylindrical. D 10.50, H 8.20, D=hole 2.00 cm. Chipped. TJ 1518 (Fig. 2.151:2; A83:14/41). Unfired clay, light gray (10YR 7/2). Hand made. D 9.30, D=hole 1.70 cm, Wt 590 g. Broken TJ 1975 (Fig. 2.151:3; D31:33/71). Unfired clay. D 10.40, T 6.00, D=hole 1.30 cm, Wt 800 g. Complete. TJ 2130 (Fig. 2.151:4; A83:32/111). Unfired clay. D 11.00, T 4.507.20, D=hole 2.10 cm, Wt 1.150 k. Chipped. Parallels Sarepta: Both fired and unfired cylindrical loom weights appear in the corpus. A close parallel for TJ 740 is somewhat smaller in overall size (D 7.00, H 7.00 cm; Pritchard 1988: fig. 24:2). Tell Keisan: Among the 36 loom weights found in a group, one cylindrical weight (Nodet 1980: pl. 97:28) is close in size and shape to TJ 740. Gezer: Although dated to the Middle Bronze Age, a fired cylindrical loom weight (Dever, Lance and Wright 1970: pl. 37:7) is a close parallel. X-B/1c. Anchor-shaped Loom Weights The loom weights identified here as anchor-shaped are oval or subrectangular in cross section, and in profile, these weights are subrectangular and/or cone shaped, with a single hole in the upper third

artefact classification and typology

197

of the weight. Loom weight TJ 1849 is close in shape to what Friend (1998:74) calls an ovoid shape. However, since she does not illustrate the footprint of this type, it is not possible to determine the degree of similarity between her type to the weights from Tall Jawa. Catalogue TJ 1840 (Fig. 2.152:1; C65:28/50). Unfired clay. Hand made. H 12.50, W 7.70, T 6.00, D=hole 1.10-1.70 cm. Complete. TJ 1848 (Fig. 2.152:2; C65:28/52). Unfired clay. Hand made. H 12.00, W 7.50, T 5.50, D=hole 1.40 cm. Complete. Parallels Hama: Anchor shaped weights are also reported (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 96:731), although the dominant form appears to be that of small cylinders, used either as weights or as bobbins. Sarepta: Two weights are described as “elongated pendants” (Pritchard 1988:99; fig. 24:8, 9). Shiloh: Although not all finds from Cave M dated to the same period, Buhl (1969:22) was confident that a partially baked, pyramidal-shaped loom weight (Buhl and Holm-Nielsen 1969: pl. 7:74) dated to Iron Age II. Beth Shan: Two clay weights (H 10.00, 10.70 cm) from Upper Level V appear similar to anchor-shaped weights (James 1966: fig. 114:14, 16), although they are also close in shape to a group of 13 stone loom weights which were found in Level V, dating to Iron IB (James 1966: fig. 110:18). These loom weights are shaped like round pears. They measure 8.40 cm in length, 6.60 cm in width, 4.80 cm in thickness and are perforated 1.00 cm from the top. Gezer: Similar in shape, but dated to the Hellenistic period, is a single weight identified as “unfired” (Dever et al. 1974: pl. 41:9), while two Middle Bronze Age loom weights, similar in shape, were fired (pl. 40:2-3). X-B/1d. Ring-shaped Clay Loom Weights A partially preserved weight of fired clay falls in a class by itself. This artefact (TJ 906) is so badly broken that its dimensions can only be estimated. However, it clearly has a central hole (2.70 cm) that is large in relation to its total diameter (ca. 8.00 cm). Catalogue TJ 906 (Fig. 2.153:1; E64:2/3). Ceramic, red (2.5YR 6/6) fabric, gray (N 4/) int. Hand made. Slip, very pale brown (10YR 8/2). Irregular, D 8.00+, H 6.40, D=hole, 2.70 cm. Broken.

198

chapter two

No close parallels have been identified, leaving the function of this weight in doubt. For example, the eight fired clay loom weights from Tell el-Hesi (Tiede 1989:1, 25, 43-47, 64) all have relatively small holes (ca. 0.70 cm vs. 2.70 cm), and none has the same shape as TJ 906. X-B/2. Bone Spatulae Function: Paper thin pointed bone tools, known as spatulae, are usually associated with textile production although their exact function is unclear. Certainly, they did not function as weft beaters (or sword beaters), as these tools appear to have been wooden rods heavy enough to compact a row of weft yarn in its place (Barber 1991:85). Secondly, the lack of wear evident on their edges is another challenge to the view that they served as sword beaters (van der Kooij and Ibrahim 1989:60; Photos 80-82, 84). Bienkowski’s detailed review (1995:83-84) of scholarly suggestions concerning the function of these objects is not repeated here, although I agree that the thinness of these tools also militates against their use as warp heddles.182 The best suggestion as to their use appears to be that of Tufnell (1953:397), who thought they were used as pattern sticks to separate certain threads when weaving a complicated pattern.183 Criteria: Spatulae are slightly curved, thin pieces of bone, pointed at one end and rounded on the opposite end. They vary somewhat in shape, usually having straight sides with two shoulders where the sides taper toward the pointed end. At Tall Jawa, three bone tools and one fragment are classified as spatulae because they were all associated with areas that contained weaving tools. As in other examples, the Tall Jawa spatulae are polished on both surfaces and have one pointed and one rounded 182 Another review of opinions concerning the function of the spatulae and a comprehensive list of sites where such tools have been found is that of Ariel (1990:127-130), who suggests that the spatulaes found at Jerusalem had been manufactured there. 183 Apart from their possible use in textile production, other suggested functions are that the spatulae served as an awls (McNicoll et al. 1992: pl. 69:7), or as instruments for cleaning one’s eyes (Van Beek and Van Beek 1990:208). Another view of the spatula is that those with rounded ends were cosmetic sticks and the variety with pointed ends were used to puncture abscesses and clean wounds (Kertesz 1989b:364). Clearly this is not the common understanding, since the vast majority of spatulae have one rounded and one pointed end.

artefact classification and typology

199

end. By contrast with the parallels cited below, the best preserved examples from Tall Jawa are quite triangular in shape. An unusually small spatula (TJ 1871) may in fact be a bone inlay (Brandl 1993: fig. 9.9:5) or a cosmetic spoon (Kenyon 1957: fig. 114:1-5). Catalogue TJ 1153 (Fig. 2.154:1; E65:11:49). Bone. Worked. L 8.50, W 2.70, T 0.10 cm. Chipped. TJ 1507 (Fig. 2.154:2; E54:37/143). Bone. Worked. L 9.80, W 3.50, T 0.10 cm. Broken. TJ 1871 (Fig. 2.154:3; B65:10:26). Bone. Worked. L 3.20, W 1.65, T 0.35 cm. Broken. TJ 1885 (E74:18/42). Bone. Worked. L 3.90, W 1.90, T 0.20 cm. Fragment. Parallels Sarepta: Only one partial spatula was reported from Area II, X (Pritchard 1988: fig. 31:35). Hazor: One example from Area A, Stratum VIII measured 9.4 cm in length and 1.75 cm in width (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. LXXVIII: 24) while those in a second group, also from Area A (Stratum VI), all measured approximately 8.00 cm in length (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXXVIII: 25-27). Tell el-‘Or¿me: Along with two thin spatulae (Fritz 1990: pl. 112:7, 9) are two others that are considerably thicker (pl. 112:6, 8) and may have had a different function. Megiddo: A large collection is illustrated, indicating the range of shapes and sizes (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pls. 95:39-62; 96:1-9).184 Beth Shan: A partially preserved example is 2.40 cm wide (James 1966: 114:9); its thickness is not shown, but it is probably standard. Samaria: During Crowfoot’s excavations, 70 spatulae in the size range of 6.00-16.50 cm in length were recovered from Iron Age to Hellenistic period levels (Kenyon 1957:461). Spatulae in this same size range had already been reported by Reisner (1924: fig. 241:b-m). Tell en-Naßbeh: Those represented here (Harrison 1947:272; pl. 105:26-3) are dated to late Iron Age II. Harrison did not associate spatulae with textile production tools. However, she was sure that 184 It is not surprising that a large number of textile tools are present in Iron Age strata at Megiddo. Already in the Middle and Late Bronze Age, the number of textile tools at Megiddo was more than twice the mean when compared to contemporary sites (Daviau 1993:464; Chart 7.2).

200

chapter two

their shape and colouring militated against their use with cosmetics. Horvat Ritma: The date of these slim spatulae (Meshel 1977: fig. 9:1517) is late due to their association with pottery from Structure B, identified by the excavator as Hellenistic to Roman (Meshel 1977:131). Either there was contamination in the stratigraphy or these items continued to be produced over a long period. Shiloh: A single example with a tapered end opposite the point (Finkelstein 1993:237; Fig 9.9:7) measured 11.50 x 2.50 x 0.25-0.30 cm thick. Gibeon: Various sizes and shapes were represented in this corpus (Pritchard 1964: fig. 33:20, 24, 25, 28, 29). Beth-zur: Fragments of spatulae are sufficiently well preserved to demonstrate the range of shapes of these tools (Sellers et al. 1968: pl. 42a). Lachish: Three spatulae (Tufnell 1953: pl. 63:23, 24, 26) are close in size and shape to those from Tall Jawa, although other examples measuring 7.00-17.00 cm are also suitable parallels, since these tools are often found broken. Jerusalem: A fine example of a complete spatula (Franken and Steiner 1990: fig. 2-11:5) was embedded in a ninth-century wall. Tell el-Hesi: Spatulae from Persian period levels (Tiede 1989: fig. 211) show the same range of shapes and sizes as those from the Iron Age and may suggest more about the size of the animal bones available to form an individual tool than about the needs of the user and the pattern of the weave, although this remains to be demonstrated. For a discussion of parallels in Palestine, see Tiede 1989:285. Pella: Although it does not correspond to its description in the text, a complete spatula appears in the plates (Smith and Potts 1992: 96; pl. 69:7). Tell al-Mazar: Spatulae in two sizes (6.00 and 9.00 cm in length) are illustrated (Yassine 1988b: pl. XIII:6). Khirbat al-Hajjar: An intact spatula (13.20 cm in length) was found in association with a bronze needle (Thompson 1972b:52; pl. V.1) Tawilan: The size range of the 32 spatulae is from 9.70-19.20 cm (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.10-11), some of which are considerably longer than those in our collection.

artefact classification and typology

201

X-C. Sewing Tools X-C/1. Needles Function: Needles are used to pierce fabric and draw thread through the perforation in order to link two pieces of fabric, to sew a hem or attach a button. Criteria: Needles can be distinguished from pins by the hole or loop near one end of the tool. In certain instances, needles appear to be very close in form to toggle pins. This is not a concern for the Iron Age since such pins appear much less frequently at this late date, having been replaced by the fibula.185 A variable that may prove decisive is the thickness of the shaft, pins tend to be thicker than needles. Catalogue TJ 1233 (Fig. 2.155:1; E54:32/131). Iron. L 6.10, T 0.10-0.30 cm. Bent and corroded. Parallels Megiddo: Twenty-three bronze needles were of various sizes (Loud 1948: pls. 186, 187) and could hardly be distinguished from toggle pins (Loud 1948: pl. 219:6-9), although Lamon and Shipton did attempt separate classification (1939: pl.84:1-10 vs. 11-13). Tall Dayr ‘Alla: Another example of a bent and corroded needle (in bronze; Franken 1992: fig. 3-10:25) was among the destruction debris while another (Franken 1992: fig. 3-9:17) was in the cella of the Late Bronze Age shrine.

xi. weighing Function: In this class are those weights intended for industrial use. Certain small and medium size weights with grooves around their middle appear to have been multi-purpose. In the case of ring-shaped perforated stones, it is not always possible to distinguish those weights used to secure a door from those used in olive pressing or other industrial activities. Three varieties of heavy duty perforated stone 185 Certain objects made of bone or ivory from Megiddo (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 96:10-23) were variously identified as hairpins or rods; only one “toggle pin” was in this group. Some of these ivory artefacts actually may have been spindles.

202

chapter two

weights could be distinguished at Tall Jawa, ring-shaped perforated stones, disc shaped stones and tether or anchor stones of irregular shape. In some examples of ring-shaped stones, the central perforation was sufficiently large to accommodate a wooden beam, although there is no remaining evidence to show that these stones were used in this way rather than attached by ropes to the beam. In either case, these weights could have been used in securing doors or in pressing olives.

XI-A. Unperforated Grooved Weights All weights in this type are small (< 15.00 cm) with the exception of weight TJ 1508, and only one (TJ 2156) was perforated although it is not ring shaped as are all other small and medium sized perforated weights. The groove on these stones resembles those on larger “rope stones” found near cisterns and wells, for example at Khirbat al-Mudayna in northern Moab (Wadi ath-Thamad 1997, architecture registration). Catalogue TJ 1404 (Fig.2.156:1; E53:6/20). Basalt. D 5.70-6.00, L 9.50 cm. Wt 570 g. Complete. TJ 1432 (Fig.2.156:2; B55:20/41). Basalt. L 12.30, W8.70, T 5.80 cm. Wt 1.065 kg. Complete. TJ 1508 (E75:11/25). Limestone. L 25.80, W 17.10, T 8.40 cm, Wt 7.200 kg. Complete. TJ 2156 (A15:7/54). Basalt. L 7.50, W 5.50, T 5.10 cm, Wt 450 g. Perforated. Broken(?) Parallels Tall al-‘Umayri: A squat weight, oblong in shape, has a longitudinal groove around its middle (Platt 1991: fig. 10:37). Although different in shape from those from Tall Jawa, it may have had a similar function.

XI-B. Perforated Weights Function: Perforated stones come in a range of sizes, with variation in the size of the central perforation. Weight is another factor that varied greatly, making it difficult to assign a single function to all

artefact classification and typology

203

stones. These large limestone rings show evidence of considerable wear inside the central perforation, indicating that some other element rotated in the hole. Since these holes were cut before use, it seems evident that they were not the typical socket stone that was gradually degraded during use (see each type for additional suggestions). Criteria: The weights in this category consist of round or irregularly shaped stones that have a single perforation, either in the centre or at one end. The majority of such stones were worked or ground stone artefacts although a few tether or anchor stones were merely natural stones with a perforation. Among perforated stones and discs, individual items ranged in size from 6.00-24.70 cm while the tether/ anchor stones are even larger. These stones are discussed in groups based on size, since this may help to distinguish their function more clearly in future. XI-B/1. Small Stone Rings This group of weights ranges in diameter size from 8.00-13.00 cm.186 Their size may be directly related to their material (usually basalt), since limestone weights usually occur in much larger sizes. The smallest weights (TJ 1118, 1253, 1941 and 2211) fit easily into the palm of the hand and may have served as loom weights, although this is far from certain since they were not found in groups. This uncertainty is increased because the central perforations are only 1.00-1.30 cm in diameter, allowing for the use of only a thin cord. Secondly, these holes show little evidence of ware. Catalogue TJ 070 (Fig. 2.157:1; A13:30/131). Basalt. D 11.70, T 5.50 cm, Wt 0.642 kg. TJ 1115 (Fig. 2.157:2; D33:8/12). Limestone, white (5YR 8/2). D 12.30-13.00, T 5.50 cm. Broken. TJ 1253 (Fig. 2.157:3; B34:17/30). Basalt. Biconical perforation. D 8.25, T 4.00 cm. Broken. TJ 1636 (Fig. 2.157:4; E53:19/38). Basalt. D 12.00, T 5.60 cm, Wt 1.100 kg. Complete. 186 One perforated basalt ring was considerably larger (TJ 1141) at 17.00 cm and fits better into the group of large perforated stones, most of which were of limestone.

204

chapter two

TJ 1941 (Fig. 2.157:5; E53:37/85). Basalt. D 9.00, T 3.90 cm. Complete. TJ 2211 (Fig. 2.157:6; TJ E64:62/85). Granite. D 8.30 cm, slightly irregular; D 1.30-3.30 cm. Biconical perforation. Complete. Parallels Tyre: A stone weight in the shape of a doughnut (Bikai 1978: pl. XXX:19) fits well into this type. Gezer: A doughnut shaped basalt weight, identified as a loom weight and dated to Middle Bronze Age II, appears to be the only one of its kind (Dever et al. 1986: pl. 49:1). This is somewhat surprising since loom weights are usually found in groups. Hazor: A basalt stone (12.00 cm in diameter) was recovered in R 255, a room in the gate (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXXVIII:18). Beth Shan: Several basalt rings with diameter of 9.00-12.00 cm appear to be good parallels (James 1966: figs. 106:15; 110:22). One weight from Level VII (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 127:14) and one from Level VI (Yadin and Geva 1986: fig. 38:10) both have the typical biconical perforation. XI-B/2. Medium and Large Stone Rings Ring-shaped stone weights in the size range of 14.00-24.00 cm in diameter and with a thickness of 4.00-8.00 cm probably served a single function. The majority of such stones were formed from limestone, although there was an occasional basalt perforated stone (TJ 1141) in this size range. One point of contrast between the basalt and limestone ring-shaped stones is the size of the central perforation, 2.50 vs. 7.50 cm in diameter respectively in stones of equal size (TJ 1141, 1638). Since this may reflect on their functional class, stones of each material are presented separately. XI-B/2a. Medium Stone Rings—Basalt Catalogue TJ 1141 (Fig. 2.158:1; D13:6/8). Basalt. Ground stone, biconical perforation. Irregular shape, L 18.20, W 14.80, T 6.60 cm. Complete. Parallels Sarepta: A typical example with a biconical perforation appears in a Late Bronze Age assemblage (Anderson 1988: pl. 24:24).

artefact classification and typology

205

Hazor: A basalt stone of comparable size (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CCXXXIII:17) was located in R3184, a paved, side room in a 4room house in Area B (Stratum XI). Other perforated stones were reported from Area A (Stratum VI) (Yadin et al. 1961: pl. CLXXXVIII:11, 12). Beth Shan: A good example of a basalt ring of comparable size is reported for Level VIII (James and McGovern 1993: fig. 128:6). Balu‘: Identified as a possible mortar or socket stone, a broken basalt ring with a Moabite inscription is similar in size (16.00 cm.; Worschech, Rosenthal and Zayadine 1986:301; pl. LXV:1). XI-B/2b. Large Stone Rings—Limestone These limestone rings were beautifully made with almost completely smooth sides and evidence of wear inside the central perforation. Of special note is the size of the perforation, which was consistently within the range of 6.00-8.50 cm in diameter. Catalogue TJ 397 (Fig. 2.159:1; E56:7/17). Biconical perforation. D 21.40, T 8.90, int D 7.00 cm, Wt 3.000 kg. Broken. TJ 1114 (Fig. 2.159:2; E54:13/110). Limestone, white (10YR 8/3). D 22.00, T 6.20, int D 6.00 cm. Broken. TJ 1359 (Fig. 2.159:3; B55:5/49). D 23.00, T 6.70, int D 7.00 cm. Broken. TJ 1384 (Fig. 2.159:4; A83:2/25). D 22.00, T 5.50, int D 8.00 cm. Broken. TJ 1624 (Fig. 2.159:5; E65:27.104). Limestone, white (10YR 7/4). Irregular shape, L 22.00, W 20.40, T 7.20, int D 8.50 cm, Wt 4.510 k. Complete. TJ 1638 (E65:29/106). Limestone, white (10YR 8/3). D 19.50, T 7.30, int D 8.00 cm, Wt 3.350 k. Complete. TJ 1795 (Fig. 2.159:6; E65:44/124) Limestone. D 23.30, T 7.30, int D 7.30 cm. TJ 2010 (Fig. 2.159:7; A15:24/35). Limestone. D 23.7, T 9.30, int D 7.50 cm, Wt 2.000 k. Broken. Parallels Megiddo: No details of size or number of occurrences were noted (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 114:8). Baq‘ah Valley: Almost triangular in section, this stone shows clear signs that the perforation was biconical (McGovern 1983: pl. XXVI:2). Tall al-‘Umayri: A broken section of a ring shaped limestone weight

206

chapter two

represents some of the 24 reported weights from the 1987 season (Platt 1991: fig. 10:35). Tawilan: A broken segment of a limestone ring is the only one reported (Bienkowski 1995: fig. 9.19:5).

XI-C. Limestone Discs Another form of perforated stone, found in groups at Tall Jawa but rarely attested from contemporary sites, was made of calcareous limestone in the shape of a thin (1.20-4.50 cm) disc. The rough texture of these discs makes it hard to imagine that they were used as weights with yarn or ropes, yet their exact function eludes us. The largest group was located in Room 306 amid a heavy concentration of smashed pottery vessels, ivory spindles and complete juglets. The discs themselves were usually in the range of 16.00-22.00 cm in diameter, although individual smaller and larger discs are represented. The central perforation was small (3.50 cm) in comparison to the hole in high quality limestone rings (on average 7.50 cm). In most cases, there was one worn surface that was slightly concave (TJ 1167, 1534, 1540). In other instances, the worn side is almost, but not quite, flat (TJ 1535, 1602). Only one disc was absolutely flat on one side and also showed evidence of wear on the other side (TJ 1607). The fact that these discs were found in piles in a storeroom makes it difficult to assign a particular function. Clearly, they were used in some craft activity since the wear patterns indicate that something rotated on one side of each disc. It is possible that these discs were a form of potter’s wheel although they appear to be too light in weight (see Type IV-G above). Secondly, no other tools usually associated with potting tasks were recovered with the discs.187 In some cases, examples of perforated discs were identified as possible potter’s wheel thrust bearings (Loud 1948: pl. 268:1, 2), but there is no consensus on this interpretation. More likely is the suggestion of F. Braemer188 that these discs were an early form of rotary quern, which served as grinders for a soft material. What is certain is that these stones were used seasonally and were not in use when Building 300 collapsed. 187

For a summary of the stone bearings formerly reported for sites in the Levant, including new examples from Tell Kannas, see Trokay 1989. 188 Personal communication, Nov. 27, 1998.

artefact classification and typology

207

XI-C/1. Small Stone Discs Catalogue TJ 1498 (Fig. 2.160:1; B14:15/21). D 12.00, T 2.70, int D 1.70 cm. Broken. TJ 1835 (Fig. 2.160:2; A15:3/15). D 7.50, T 1.30, int D 1.40 cm. Broken. Parallels Jerusalem: A small disc (6.50 cm in diameter) is classified as a loom weight (Franken and Steiner 1990: fig. 2-35:1). Beer-sheba: Two small limestone discs were identified as loom weights (Herzog 1984: fig. 20, 21). Tawilan: The same identification was also made for a small disc from Edom (Bienkowski 1995:89; pl. 9.30:3). XI-C/2. Medium and Large Stone Discs TJ 718 (C71:0.5/2). Limestone, pale yellow (2.5Y 7/3). D 19.10, T 2.20-3.00 cm. Fragment. TJ 1129 (Fig. 2.161:1; B54:0.5/63). Limestone, pale brown (10YR 6/2). D 15.6, T 4.00 cm. Broken. TJ 1162 (Fig. 2.161:2; B35:3/6). Limestone. D 14.00-16.00, T 2.50 cm. Broken. TJ 1534 (Fig. 2.161:3; E 65:28/75). Irregular shape, D 15.50-18.00, T 4.00, int D 4.00 cm, Wt 0.765 k. Chipped. TJ 1535 (Fig. 2.161:4; E65:28/75). Irregular shape, D 14.40-16.50, T 3.50, int D 2.90 cm, Wt 0.805 k. Complete. TJ 1536 (Fig. 2.161:5; E65:28/75). Irregular shape, D 15.50-17.50, T 4.30, int D 3.00 cm, Wt 0.940 k. Chipped. TJ 1537 (Fig. 2.161:6; E65:28/75). Irregular shape, D 17.00-18.50, T 3.10, int D 4.00 cm, Wt 0.805 k. Chipped. TJ 1538 (Fig. 2.161:7; E65:28/75). Irregular shape, D 16.50-17.00, T 4.70, int D 4.00 cm, Wt 1.060 k. Complete. TJ 1539 (Fig. 2.161:8; E65:28/75). D 17.00, T 3.30, int D 5.00 cm, Wt 0.565 k. Broken. TJ 1540 (Fig. 2.161:9; E65:28/75). Irregular shape, D 20.50-23.00, T 4.40, int D 3.70 cm, Wt 1.490 k. Complete. TJ 1593 (Fig. 2.161:10; E65:26/93). D 16.00, T 3.00 cm, Wt 0.910 k. Complete. TJ 1594+1602 (Fig. 2.161:11; E65:29/92). D 17.00, T 2.90, int D 4.50 cm, Wt 0.740 k. Complete (in 2 pieces).

208

chapter two

TJ 1595 (Fig. 2.161:12; E65:26/93+96). Irregular shape, D 17.50, T 3.70 cm, int D 2.80, Wt 0.565 k. Complete (in 3 pieces). TJ 1607 (Fig. 2.161:13; E65:29/92). D 19.50, T 2.80, int D 3.50, Wt 0.850 k. Complete (in 3 pieces). TJ 1634 (Fig. 2.161:14; E 65:30/110). D 16.00, T 3.15, int D 3.00, Wt 1.120 k. Complete. TJ 1665+1666 (Fig. 2.161:15; E65:29/110). D 20.00, T 2.70, int D 3.50 cm. Broken. TJ 1667 (Fig. 2.161:16; E65:29/108). D 16.60, T 3.80, int D 3.40 cm. Broken. TJ 1668 (Fig. 2.161:17; E53:20/44). D 21.00, T 4.00, int D 3.90 cm, Wt 1.950 k. Complete. TJ 1834 (Fig. 2.161:18; E64:1/56). D 20.80, T 3.30, int D 3.60 cm, Wt. 1.300 k. No comparable discs, light in weight, with evidence of wear on one side, appear in the reports studied by the authors. Heavy, granite rotary grinding stones, like the one from Timna‘ (Rothenberg 1988: fig. 90:6) date to a much later period and serve a very different purpose.189

XI-D. Tether Stones Function: A group of natural stones, perforated either in the middle or near one edge and several limestone slabs, oval or round in shape, each with a single perforation close to one edge, are popularly called tether stones. These large weights may have served a variety of functions, including use as door weights. What is certain is that the tethering of animals at Tall Jawa is not supported by any evidence for animal management inside the walled town. The use of large weights tied to the beam of an olive press, as seen in Greek vase painting (Forbes 1955: fig. 28), is by far the most common use for such large weights. For example, anchor-shaped perforated stones have been found in great numbers at Tel Miqne-Ekron, where 105 olive pressing buildings have been identified (Gitin 1995:63). Criteria: By contrast to the limestone ring weights, “tether” stones usually have their perforation near one edge rather than in the middle 189 Roman period pottery and lamps were present in the uppermost loci (Rothenberg 1988: figs. 87-88), below the surface where the rotary quern was found.

artefact classification and typology

209

and the holes are small in comparison to the overall size of the weight. Secondly, these stones are often found in groups, indicating that they were used together. Formal typology is not useful in this class of finds because of the irregular shape of many of the stones. However, due to the variation in size, two types can be distinguished: small to medium natural stones and large stone slabs. XI-D/1. Natural Tether Stones Catalogue TJ 221 (Fig. 2.162:1; C17:14/15). Natural stone. L 11.70, W 9.40, T 7.90 cm. TJ 588 (Fig. 2.162:2; C72:2/7). Natural stone. L 10.30, W 9.50, T 6.00 cm. Wt 600 g. TJ 1356 (C65:14/20). Natural stone. L 16.00, W 14.60, H 12.70 cm. Wt 3.000 k. XI-D/2. Slab-shape Tether Stones Catalogue TJ 1810 (Fig. 2.163:1; A93:31/99). Limestone. L 33.00, W 27.00, T 14.00 cm. TJ 1824 (C65:26/47). Limestone. L 21.20, W 20.00, T 9.00 cm. TJ 1825 (Fig. 2.163:2; A93:31/104). Limestone. L 27.00, W 25.00, T 12.00 cm. The 10 “tether” stones were all located in the Stratum VII buildings in Field C, dating to the late Iron Age II. It is not certain whether this was a change of technology over time or an indication of a new industry. A single stone installation with a circular groove (C76:20) that may have been used as a domestic press is too small (30.00 cm) to have been used with these large weights and most probably comes from Stratum III (Umayyad period). Other explanations for the use of these weights are not immediately apparent, especially in view of the fact that the weights appear to have been in use in upper storey rooms. Parallels Ugarit: Carefully formed slab-shaped weights were common in the Late Bronze Age oil pressing buildings (Callot 1987: figs. 4, 6, 11). Tel Michal: Several perforated stones of varying shaped are classified as anchors (Singer-Avitz 1989: fig. 31.5:1-3), although it is pre-

210

chapter two

cisely these kinds of stones that were used also as industrial weights. Tel Miqne: Anchor-shaped weights were used in the oil pressing buildings located throughout the city of Ekron (Gitin 1998:173; fig. 8). Tell Batash: A reconstruction of Building 950 shows the pressing installation and the weights used with the beam press (Kelm and Mazar 1995: fig. 8:13). The weights themselves are shown where they fell (Kelm and Mazar 1991: fig. 16). Tell en-Naßbeh: An anchor-shaped weight and a small pressing basin were among the domestic tools published by McCown (1947: pl. 91:2). Beth Shemesh: Large anchor-shaped stones were not associated by the excavators with crushing basins and pressing vats, because these were identified at the time as installations for dyeing (Grant and Wright 1938: pl. XXI:1, 4).190

xii. miscellaneous XII-A. Small Finds XII-A/1. Bone Objects A bone or ivory tube, still containing the end of a wooden, or reed shaft escapes classification. Dothan suggested (1971:67, pl. XXIV:10) that an artefact close in appearance to the Tall Jawa example may have served as the head of an awl, a pin or a kohl stick. Catalogue TJ 1608 (Fig. 2.164:1; A83:26/48). Bone. L 3.70, D 1.50 cm, Wt 0.005 g. Broken. XII-A/2. Stone Objects A small number of elongated stone tools, square in section, appear to be rudimentary chisels. Because they do not have a sharpened end, this identification remains tentative but other interpretations of this artefact are currently lacking. Its position on a living surface 190 This identification followed the work of Albright at Tell Beit Mirsim (1943: pl. 52), where he first classified such installations.

artefact classification and typology

211

with other food preparation and craft related tools suggests that this was an object with a known function. Catalogue TJ 1407 (Fig. 2.165:1; E55:37/66) Limestone. L 13.50, W 2.40, T 3.30 cm. Wt 215 g. Broken.

XII-B. Large Finds Several “unknown” artefacts remain unidentified. The two stone objects presented here are classed as “large,” although this is relative since their class and type are not defined. XII-B/1. Limestone Object One elongated piece of porous limestone in the shape of a phallus (TJ 1024) is identified as an object, rather than as a natural stone, due to its position on a sealed surface. Its original function is unknown and its identification is uncertain. TJ 1024 (Fig. 2.166:1; E 54:31/99). Limestone. L 13.00, max W 9.00, T 8.00 cm, Wt 600 g. XII-B/2. Basalt Object TJ 1805 (Fig. 2.166:2; C27:30/137). Basalt. D 43.00, H 14.40, int D 12.00 cm. D=hole 10.00 cm. Broken. This artefact is in the shape of a large, deep bowl that was carefully designed and finely finished. The anomaly is the well-shaped opening in the base, which was intentional and is not the result of wear. The function of this artefact, like several, smaller ceramic vessels with openings in the base, remains unknown. Although this corpus of Tall Jawa artefacts will not grow in numbers, new excavations will provide examples of comparable artefacts that can be used to refine the typology presented here. More comparative work also needs to be done, especially among utilitarian tools. Hopefully, this corpus will contribute to a better understanding of the tools of daily life employed by the Iron Age inhabitants of ancient Ammon.

212

chapter two

Fig. 2.1. Club-shaped Bone Pendants; Fig. 2.2. Glycymeris Shell Pendants

artefact classification and typology

213

Fig. 2.3. Conch Shell Pendants; 2.4. Small Anchor-shaped Pendants; 2.5. Large Anchor-shaped Pendants

214

chapter two

Fig. 2.6. Rectangular Limestone Pendants; 2.7. Natural Stone Pendants; 2.8 Irregularly-shaped Ceramic Pendants

artefact classification and typology

215

Fig. 2.9. Disc-shaped Stone Beads; 2.10. Spherical Stone Beads; 2.11. Barrel-shaped Stone Beads; 2.12. Biconical Stone Beads; 2.13. Cylindrical Stone Beads; 2.14. Spherical Glass Beads; 2.15. Cylindrical Glass Beads

216

chapter two

Fig. 2.16. Faience Beads; 2.17. Cowrie Shell Beads; 2.18. Conus Shell Beads; 2.19 Fossil Sea Urchin Beads

artefact classification and typology

217

Fig. 2.20. Lunate Earrings; 2.21. Mulberry Cluster Earrings; 2.22. Ribbed Bow Fibulae; 2.23. Riveted, Flat Bow Fibulae; 2.24. Violin Bow Fibulae; 2.25. Rings; 2.26. Tridacna Cosmetic Dishes; 2.27. Cosmetic Palettes and Mortar

218

chapter two

Fig. 2.28. Seated Female Figurines; 2.29. Standing Female Figurines (upper torso); 2.30. Naked Female Figurines (lower torso)

artefact classification and typology

219

Fig. 2.30:4 Naked Female Figurines (lower torso); 2.31. Pillar Figurines; 2.32. Figurine Moulds

220

chapter two

Fig. 2.33. Ceramic Male Heads; 2.34. Stone Male Figurines; 2.35. Unidentified anthropomorphic Figurines; 2.36. Appliqués; 2.37. Zoomorphic Figurines; 2.38. Zoomorphic Protome

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 2.39. Zoomorphic Vessels; 2.40 Headless Zoomorphic Fragments

221

222

chapter two

Fig. 2.41. Model Shrine Fragments; 2.42. Ceramic Model Columns 2.43. Capitals and Attachments; 2.44. Scarabs

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 2.45. Scaraboids; 2.46. Cylinder Seals; 2.47. Scale Weights

223

224

chapter two

Fig. 2.48. Awls; 2.49 Bow Drill Bits; 2.50. Pestle-shaped Bow Drill Sockets

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 2.51. Roller-shaped Bow Drill Sockets; 2.52. Iron Knife Blades

225

226

chapter two

Fig. 2.53. Lithic Blades and Flakes; 2.54. Lithic points; 2.55.Scraping Tools

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 2.56. Chisels; 2.57. Whetstones; 2.58. Pecking Stones

227

228

chapter two

Fig. 2.59. Rectangular Industrial Grinders; 2.60. Oval Industrial Grinders

artefact classification and typology

229

Figure 2.62:1

Fig. 2.60:3-4. Oval Industrial Grinders; 2.61. Anchor-shaped Industrial Grinders; 2.62. Industrial Millstones; 2.63:1. Large Pounders

230

chapter two

Fig. 2.63:2-7. Large Pounders; 2.64. Oversize Quern; 2.65. Round Polishing Stones

artefact classification and typology

231

Fig. 2.66. Rectangular Polishing Stones; 2.67. Irregularly-shaped Polishing Stones; 2.68. Medium Size Polishing Stones; 2.69. Burnishing Tools

232

chapter two

Fig. 2.70. Glycymeris Shell Tools; 2.71. Other Shell Tools; 2.72. Stone Raw Materials; 2.73. Metal Resources

artefact classification and typology

233

Fig. 2.74. Lower Potter’s Wheel; 2.75. Upper Potter’s Wheel; 2.76. Flat Base Bowls; 2.77. Round Base Bowls

234

chapter two

Fig. 2.78. Disc Base Bowls; 2.79. Ring Base Bowls; 2.80. Low-Footed Tripod Bowls

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 2.81:1-5. Rectangular Stone Trays; 2.81:6. Large Stone Tray/Table

235

236

chapter two

Fig. 2.82. Small Round Mortars

artefact classification and typology

237

Figure 2.85:5 Fig. 2.83. Small Mortars with Low Tripod Foot; 2.84. Small Mortars with Tall Tripod Foot; 2.85. Small Oval Mortars

238

chapter two

Fig. 2.86. Small Mortars with Spout; 2.87. Medium Size Round Mortars; 2.88. Medium Size Semi-round Mortars; 2.89. Medium Size Oval Mortars

artefact classification and typology

239

Fig. 2.90. Rectangular Block Mortars; 2.91. Refashioned Rectangular Mortars; 2.92. Medium Size Trapezoidal Mortars

240

chapter two

Fig. 2.92:2-5. Medium Size Trapezoidal Mortars; 2.93. Large Round Mortars

artefact classification and typology

241

Fig. 2.94. Large Oval Mortars; 2.95. Large Triangular Mortars; 2.96. Conical Pestles

242

chapter two

Fig. 2.96:5. Conical Pestles; 2.97. Truncated Cone Pestles; 2.98. Cylindrical Pestles

artefact classification and typology

243

Fig. 2.99. Small Anchor-shaped Pestles; 2.100. Medium Anchor-shaped Pestles; 2.101. Small Pyramidal Pestles; 2.102. Large Pyramidal Pestles

244

chapter two

Fig. 2.103. Irregularly-shaped Pestles; 2.104. Round Hand Grinders; 2.105. Oval Hand Grinders

artefact classification and typology

245

Fig. 2.105:4. Oval Hand Grinders; 2.106. Miniature Cuboid Hand Grinders; 2.107. Miniature Loaf-shaped Hand Grinders; 2.108. Standard Size Rectangular Hand Grinders

246

chapter two

Fig. 2.109. Anchor-shaped Hand Grinders; 2.110. Irregularly-shaped Hand Grinders; 2.111. Uniquely-shaped Hand Grinders; 2.112. Half Oval Loaf-shaped Millstones— upper

artefact classification and typology

247

Fig. 2.112.2-4. Half Oval Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper; 2.113. Hemispherical Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper

248

chapter two

Fig. 2.113:2. Hemispherical Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper; 2.114 Trapezoidal Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper; 2.115. Triangular Loaf-shaped Millstones—upper; 2.116. Loaf-shaped Millstones—lower

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 2.116:2. Loaf-shaped Millstones—lower; 2.117. Saddle Querns

249

250

Fig. 2.117:2-3. Saddle Querns

chapter two

artefact classification and typology

251

Fig. 2.:118. Miniature Pounders; 2.119. Standard Pounders; 2.120. Working Surfaces/Anvils

252

chapter two

Figure 2.120:3

Figure 2.120:5

Figure 2.120:4 Fig. 2.120:3-5. Working Surfaces/Anvils

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 121. Small Stone Troughs; 2.122. Stone Basin/Bowls

253

254

chapter two

Fig. 2.123. The Buzz; 2.124. Astragali; 2.125. Undecorated Ceramic Gaming Pieces; 2.126. Decorated Ceramic Gaming Pieces; 2.127. Gaming Boards

artefact classification and typology

255

Fig. 2.128. Lanceolate Points; 2.129. Elliptical Points; 2.130. Linear Points; 2.131.Lozenge Points; 2.132. Pointed Ovate Points; 2.133.Triangular Points

256

chapter two

Fig. 2.134. Javelin Points; 2.135. Mushroom-shaped Stoppers—upright; 2.136. Mushroom-shaped Stoppers—inverted; 2.137. Lentil-shaped Stoppers; 2.138. Discshaped Stoppers

artefact classification and typology

257

Figure 2.140:3

Fig. 2.139. Reworked Body Sherds; 2.140. Reworked body Sherds with Handle; 2.141. Reworked Base Sherds

258

chapter two

Fig. 2.142. Spindles; 2.143. Decorated Spindles; 2.144. Ceramic Spindle Whorls

artefact classification and typology

259

Fig.2.144:13-17. Ceramic Spindle Whorls; 2.145. Bone/Ivory Spindle Whorls; 2.146. Convex, Ring-shaped Whorls; 2.147. Plano-Convex Whorls; 2.148. Cylindrical Whorls; 2.149. Hemispherical Whorls

260

chapter two

Fig. 2.150. Doughnut-shaped Loom Weights; 2.151. Cylindrical Loom Weights

artefact classification and typology

261

Fig. 2.152. Anchor-shaped Loom Weights; 2.153. Fired Clay Loom Weights; 2.154. Bone Spatulae; 2.155. Needles; 2.156. Unperforated Grooved Weights; 2.157. Small Stone Ring Weights

262

chapter two

Fig. 2.157:5-6. Small Stone Ring Weights; 2.158. Medium Stone Ring Weights; 2.159. Large Stone Ring Weights

artefact classification and typology

263

Fig. 2.159:5-7. Large Stone Ring Weights; 2.160. Small Stone Discs; 2.161. Medium and Large Stone Discs

264

chapter two

Fig. 2.161:4-10, 12. Medium and Large Stone Discs

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 2:161:11, 13-18. Medium and Large Stone Discs

265

266

chapter two

Fig. 2.162. Natural Tether Stones; 2.163. Slab-shaped Tether Stones

artefact classification and typology

Fig. 2.164. Bone Objects; 2.165. Stone Objects; 2.166. Large Finds

267

268

chapter three

CHAPTER THREE

THE OSTRACON FROM BUILDING 800 Paul-Eugène Dion Introduction The ostraca from Transjordan that can be dated to the seventh century BC are few; indeed those from Hisban (Cross 1994)1 and from Tall al-Mazar (Yassine 1988) are dated to the sixth to fifth centuries, as are two from Tall Dayr ‘All§ (Hoftijzer and van der Kooij 1989:69-70), and two from Tall al-‘Umayri (U89.1812, ed. Herr 1997:328-29; U89.1858, ed. Sanders 1997:331-336). Ostracon P-566 from the ‘Amman Citadel (Momani and Koutsoukou 1997:166) may not be much older. In view of this paucity, an ostracon from Stratum VII at Tall Jawa (TJ 1071) constitutes a rare find, since this phase of occupation appears to pre-date the Persian period (see Chronology, below). The Tall Jawa inscribed sherd (Fig. 3.1) is a five-sided fragment from a jug or, more probably, from a storejar (0.70-0.80 cm thick). The exterior and interior surfaces were light red (2.5YR 7/6), while the fabric colour was pink (5YR 7/4) with a gray (5YR 6/1) core. In its present condition, the top edge measures 3.30 cm, the greatest width is 4.40 cm and the bottom edge is 2.15 cm wide. The greatest length is 4.30 cm, while the length along the left edge is 4.00 cm. As it now exists, the sherd appears to be incomplete, with the upper right hand corner missing. At the same time, the remainder of the sherd shows no sign that the text extended beyond the left edge or the bottom line. Photography and Digital Enhancement Photographs using angled lighting were taken at the Near Eastern Archaeology Laboratory at Wilfrid Laurier University in an attempt to recover as much as possible of the largely illegible text. Since these 1

Bibliographical references are found at the end of this chapter.

the ostracon from building 800

269

initial photos showed no more than could be seen by the naked eye, West Semitic Research prepared new photographs.2 Subsequent photography and digital enhancement by Applied Photographic Research yielded a series of images (Fig. 3.2, 3), some of which revealed a clear distinction between the pigment of the ink and the incrustations that adhered to the clay.3 In addition, it was possible to identify the residue of the ink even when the pigment itself had worn off.

The Text Tentative Reading ]x x l br x x r x y à x x t n l x x l à m‘ È ãnk2q[ The condition of the Tall Jawa ostracon is such, that even after the efforts noted above, only a few characters of lines 2 and 3 could be tentatively identified. Yet, the very limited decipherment that we are submitting seems sufficient to establish that the text is written in Aramaic. Considering the stratigraphic provenance of the sherd, as well as the fact that some of the characters that we could read have parallels in the earliest of the Hisban ostraca (see below), a date ca. 600 seems likely enough. Several characters that left traces but could not be identified are replaced by x in our transliteration; but it must be emphasized that all our readings are questionable, except for the ‘ayin that ends line 2, and the Èeth that opens line 3. The final qof is suspect because of its large size; moreover, there is no trace of the numerals that normally should follow this letter were it really an abbreviation for qab. The kaf on line 3 is as doubtful palaeographically as it is textually (see below).

2 We are grateful to B. Zuckermann for his photograph and his generous suggestion that digital analysis would be useful. The colour negative he provided is kept at Wilfrid Laurier University in the Tall Jawa Project Archive. 3 J. Henderson, a Registered Biological Photographer, prepared the photographs and digital enhancements in colour, which could not be published here, but are on file at Wilfrid Laurier University in the Tall Jawa Project Archive.

270

chapter three

A few parallels from Transjordan to the characters used in this inscription: beth (line 1): cf. Hisban ost. A4. Èeth (line 3): cf. Hisban ost. A1, lines 5, 11; U89.1858, line 4. kaf (line 4): cf. Hisban ost A1, especially line 1; A4, line 3. ‘ayin (line 2): cf. Hisban ost. A5, line 2; U89.1858, line 2. qof (line 3): cf. Hisban ost. A6, line 1. reà (line 1): cf. Hisban ost. A6, line 3. It would be futile to offer a translation, but the last two lines of the ostracon seem to order the release (tn, “give,” line 2) of 2 k(ors) (??) and perhaps a certain number of qabs (q?) of wheat (Èãn), to a person whose name ends in a ‘ayin (a form of the verb àm‘ ?). Should this interpretation be correct, it would place the Tall Jawa ostracon in a category of texts well represented among the Tel Arad ostraca (Aharoni 1981), both Hebrew (ca. 600; e.g., Nos. 3; 4) and Aramaic (fourth century; see espec. Nos. 5; 9); unfortunately, the formulary cannot be determined in its entirety, due to the opacity of line 1. Crucial to the reading of the document, and to its linguistic classification as Aramaic, is the identification of the third character of line 3 as a nun, resulting in an -n plural instead of the -m plural of Ammonite. The Aramaic sequence br (“son”) on line1would support this indication, if only it could be ascertained. The first two characters of line 2, tn (“give”) pose a problem, for similar Aramaic texts (e.g., Tel Arad, No. 5) use hb. This problem is not too disturbing; as one can see from the relevant entries in Hoftijzer and Jongeling (1995), the verb ntn is documented in Imperial Aramaic as in Old Aramaic; the imperative hb, on the other hand, is only attested to from the fifth century on (e.g., in the Aràam letters). It would not be too surprising for a release order written in Ammon at the end of the seventh century to use the imperative tn, which is found in equivalent texts written in Canaanite dialects during the same period on both sides of the Jordan, such as the Arad Ostraca mentioned above, the Edomite ostracon from \orvat ‘Uza (Beit-Arieh and Cresson 1985), and Ammonite ostracon No. 3 of Tall al-Mazar (Yassine 1988:139). The amount of wheat to be released is a puzzle. Due to its tilt from upper right to lower left, the letter that follows the nun on line 3 cannot be a samech (standing for s’h). At a pinch, this could be a kaf, in spite of its strong slant and very thick shoulder; a beth standing for bt is out of the question, since the bath was a measure re-

the ostracon from building 800

271

served for liquids. If a kaf is retained, it should then stand for krn; but textual implications make this doubtful. First, there is some disproportion between the measures involved: from kor, a very large capacity measure of ca. 360 litres, one would jump to qab, a measure approximating 2 litres (see Powell 1992: 904). Secondly, the word kr itself is unexpected in late seventh-century Transjordan. None of the Aramaic evidence for this Babylonian loan word (Hoftijzer and Jongeling 1995: 533) is clearly earlier than ca. 500 BC, and it only began to appear in Hebrew after Nebuchadnezzar II (Ezek. 45:14, and late, secondary parts of Solomon’s story, 1 Kgs. 5:2,25). Of course, this judgment could be modified by the publications of numerous Aramaic tablets reported from Tall ’¿É \amad and the \arr§n area.

Bibliography Aharoni, Y. 1981 Beit-Arieh, I. 1985 Cross, F. M., 1994 Herr, L. G. 1997

Arad Inscriptions. Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society. and B. Cresson An Edomite Ostracon from \orvat ‘Uza. Tel Aviv 12: 96-101. Jr. The Ammonite Ostraca from Tell Hesban. Pp. 169-174 in Hesban After 25 Years, eds. D. Merling and L. T. Geraty. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Epigraphic Finds from Tall al-‘Umayri during the 1989 Season. Pp. 323-330 in Madaba Plains Project 3.The 1989 Season at Tell el‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. eds. L. G. Herr, Ø. S. LaBianca, R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Hoftijzer, J. and K. Jongeling 1995 Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions. 2 vols. Handbuch der Orientalistik I,21. Leiden: Brill. Hoftijzer, J. and G. van der Kooij 1989 Inscriptions. Pp. 62-70 in Picking up the Threads...A continuing review of excavations at Deir Alla, Jordan. Leiden: University of Leiden. Momani, A. and A. Koutsoukou 1997 The 1993 Excavations. Pp. 157-171 in The Great Temple of Amman. The Excavations. A. Koutsoukou, K. W. Russell, M. Najjar, and A. Momani. Amman: American Center of Oriental Research. Powell, M. A. 1992 Weights and Measures. Pp. 897-908 in Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 6. New York: Doubleday. Sanders, T. K. 1997 An Ammonite Ostracon from Tall al-‘Umayri. Pp. 331-336 in Madaba Plains Project 3. The 1989 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicin-

272

chapter three

ity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca, R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Yassine, Kh. and J. Teixidor 1988 Ammonite and Aramaic Inscriptions from Tell el-Mazar. Pp. 137142 in Archaeology of Jordan: Essays and Reports, by Kh. Yassine. Amman: University of Jordan.

the ostracon from building 800

Fig. 3.1. Ostracon TJ 1071; photo by Applied Photographic Research

273

274

chapter three

Fig. 3.2. Enlarged views of Ostracon TJ 1071; photo by Applied Photographic Research

the ostracon from building 800

275

Fig. 3.3. Enhanced views of Ostracon TJ 1071; photo by Applied Photographic Research

276

chapter four

CHAPTER FOUR

SHELLS AND FOSSILS FROM TALL JAWA, JORDAN David S. Reese Introduction Tall Jawa, overlooking the Madaba plains, produced 32 marine shells (Table 4A), 18 fresh-water shells (Table 4B), 10 fossils (Table 4C) and 2 land snails.1 The site is today 125 km from the Mediterranean Sea and 255 km from the Red Sea, both as-the-crow-flies distances. The shells come from Stratum VIII (early Iron Age II; ninth to eighth centuries B.C.), Stratum VII (late Iron Age II; late eighth to seventh centuries B.C.), and Ummayad occupation levels (Stratum III). Comparanda for the shells are drawn from other Iron Age sites in Jordan, Israel, and Syria. Examples from the region of Edom include Buseirah, about 150 km from the Red Sea, which produced 148 marine shells, and Tawilan, 90 km from the Red Sea and 160 km from the Mediterranean Sea, which produced 68 marine shells and 14 sea urchins spines. Most of the shells at Tawilan are from topsoil or unstratified deposits, but all can best be dated to the seventh to sixth century B.C. All marine invertebrates except for the Glycymeris come from the Red Sea (Reese 1995a). The Edomite site of Ghrareh, about 70 km from the Red Sea, produced 20 marine shells (Reese, forthcoming), while Umm el-Biyara, 100 km from the Red Sea, produced 118 shells.

1 Shells in excellent condition were registered as artefacts, especially if they appeared to have been used as a cosmetic dish or item of jewellery. Other shells, whose function was not initially understood, were registered as samples. The result was variation in registration formulas. In order to account for all shells, a shell registry was established, and each shell received its own Sh number. Those with object numbers have the code TJ plus a number; shells from the 1989 season also carry a code from the Madaba Plains registration system–U and a number (the editor).

shells and fossils from tall jawa

277

Marine Shells Glycymeris (Dog-cockle) Most of the Tall Jawa marine shells (19 shells) are the Mediterranean Glycymeris violascens, the Dog-cockle or Bitter-sweet clam. All were collected dead on the beach and most have a naturally made (by wave and water-action) hole at the umbo (bivalve “beak”). Stratum VIII produced 8 Glycymeris, with 7 water-worn (four naturally holed at umbo, 2 with open umboes, one hinge fragment) and one worn shell which has a holed umbo and has been grounddown on the lower body (Fig. 4.1:1).2 There are 10 Glycymeris from Stratum VII with 8 water-worn (6 naturally holed at umbo, one with ground-down hole at umbo, one unholed, one distal only) and 2 worn unholed shells with one definitely collected dead and the other probably collected dead. There is also one Iron Age Glycymeris from Field D that is water-worn and unholed. In Edom, Buseirah produced 4 Glycymeris with 2 water-worn and one holed at the umbo, and Tawilan produced 4 Glycymeris (3 water-worn, 3 holed at the umbo, and 2 ground-down in the centre of the body). Umm el-Biyara produced 3 Glycymeris holed at the umbo with one ground-down at the umbo itself. Ghrareh produced 4 examples with 3 water-worn, 2 with a ground-down hole at the umbo and a ground-down body, one ground-down on the body and with a hole punched from the inside below the umbo, and one hinge fragment. Comparable finds from Area A at Jerusalem consist of 2 waterworn and umbonally holed Glycymeris of the seventh century and 6 water-worn and holed shells of ca. 587 B.C. The Israeli excavations produced 2 holed examples of the seventh century – 586 B.C. Other sites in Jordan and Israel with Glycymeris holed at the umbo are noted by Reese (1995b:265-66), to which we can add examples from ‘Ai (Callaway 1980:125, fig. 85) and Ashdod (Parotiz 1982:101), Ashkelon, Tel Miqne-Ekron, Tel Megadim, Tell Dover, ‘Ein Zippori, etc. in Israel and Iron Age Tell Kazel in Syria (Badre 1990:78). The Glycymeris ground-down on the body from Tall Jawa, Taw2 Shells with object numbers are included in the database (CD-ROM) along with their illustrations, and, in a few cases, with a photo (object #_1).

278

chapter four

ilan, Umm el-Biyara, and Ghrareh are similar to water-worn, umbonally holed, and centrally ground-down examples interpreted as pottery burnishers from late Israelite levels at Samaria-Sebaste, although here the ground-down surface is closer to the umbo (Crowfoot 1957:471, pl. XXVII). Similarly ground-down Glycymeris have been found at Tall ’¿É \amad on the lower Habur River in Syria. The seventh-century B.C. Room M2 of Building G in the Lower City II produced 3 examples with 2 also holed at the umbo. An unstratified deposit above Room M2 produced an example grounddown on the body. Building C here produced a ground-down and umbonally holed example (Reese 1991:134, 136, figs. 85-86). Some of these shells were probably used as pendants and others used in some utilitarian fashion. Cowries From Stratum VIII at Tall Jawa come 3 Cypraea annulus (Money cowrie or Gold-ringer) with an open dorsum, one of which is grounddown around the edge (Fig. 4.1:2). There is also one cowrie with an open dorsum from Stratum VII. By way of contrast, Buseirah produced 56 small-sized cowries (19%) with at least 19 definitely C. annulus and 14 holed. There are 4 burnt, 4 with an open dorsum, and one with a ground-down dorsum. Tawilan yielded 28 small cowries (34.1%), with at least 13 C. annulus of which 8 come from one necklace, one from another necklace, and 5 others found together. Two have an open dorsum and one is burnt. Eight Cypraea were found together, as were 5 C. annulus on a possible earth floor in Area III West. There is also one holed C. annulus from the 1st century Burial XXXI. Umm el-Biyara produced 119 shells with 104 cowries (87.4%), mainly C. annulus. At least 10 have an open dorsum and 7 are burnt. There is one sample of 32 unmodified cowries. A better comparison with Tall Jawa are the finds from Ghrareh where there were 3 C. annulus with one ground-down and holed on the dorsum and two unmodified. The Israeli excavations at Jerusalem under the direction of the late Y. Shiloh produced one C. annulus of ca. 586 B.C. (Mienis 1992:123). At Tell el-Mazar in the Jordan valley, 300 km from the Red Sea, Grave 47 of a one or two year old, found in a large storage jar, produced 4 C. annulus with open dorsi, and at least 5 other

shells and fossils from tall jawa

279

C. annulus and one Cypraea moneta with open dorsi were found in the sixth- to fifth-century B.C. cemetery (Yassine 1984:120, figs. 14:6164, 59:168; personal analysis). Cowries with the dorsum removed are also known from the Iron I Cave A4 in the Baq‘ah Valley (Reese 1986:321, fig. 104:2, 5), at Tall Dayr ‘Alla, Tall as-Sa‘idiyah, Lachish, Tell Keisan, etc. (Reese 1986:328-29). The holed cowries were probably personal ornaments or could have been attached to other items (animals, walls) while the unmodified examples may have been gaming pieces or charms. Tridacna (Giant clam) From Stratum VII come a complete unmodified Tridacna valve and a body fragment with two cut parallel sides (Fig. 4.1:3). Buseirah produced 64 Tridacna fragments (27.7%) from 13 deposits. Thirty (30) fragments come from one area (A.III.1) and there are groups of 23 and 17. One shell, measuring 163 x 51 mm, has a yellow substance in the shell’s interior. One shell is water-worn, and another worn. There is also an engraved Tridacna squamosa from Buseirah on display (no. 1120) in the ‘Amman National Museum (Bennett 1977: 7; pl. 1B; 1978:167, 170; fig. 4A; 1982:187; fig. 3a; Brandl 1984:19, fig. 13). For a recent discussion of these engraved shells see Reese (1988a) and Reese and Sease (1993). Tawilan produced 15 Tridacna valve remains, with 6 identifiable as T. squamosa. At least 9 are fragmentary, and 4 examples have been discarded. Umm el-Biyara produced 6 Tridacna fragments of 2 shells in two deposits, with one burnt. Ghrareh produced 4 Tridacna remains of the seventh to sixth century, one of which is water-worn. An externally and internally polished Tridacna maxima (L 208, W 140 mm) with eyes on the inner umbo (inlaid with glass and pigmented with yellow faience paste and traces of red pigment below the left eye) and yellow pigment in the interior of the shell, comes from the Iron II levels at the Great temple on the ‘Amman Citadel (Koutsoukou [with A. Aplin] 1997:147-148). Area A of K. Kenyon’s excavations at Jerusalem produced one Tridacna fragment of ca. 587 B.C. (Reese 1995b:268, 275). The Shiloh excavations at Jerusalem produced one small T. squamosa fragment of the seventh century to 586 B.C. and three of the sixth to fourth century (two T. squamosa, one partly polished; one T. maxima; Mienis 1992:127).

280

chapter four

The Tridacna fragments or complete valves may have been used as small containers for foodstuffs or ornaments, or may have been the raw material for engraved shell objects. Such an object was found in 1974 at Buseirah. Cone shells From Stratum VIII comes a water-worn Conus cf. taeniatus holed at the apex and with the upper columella removed and a water-worn Conus upper body with a holed apex (Fig. 4.1:4). Buseirah produced 11 Conus (4 holed at the apex), Tawilan produced 3 Conus (2 with apical holes), and Umm el-Biyara produced 2 Conus. Near the coast, Iron II Ashdod produced a Conus holed at the apex (Dothan and Porath 1982: pl. XVII:15 right). Murex shells There are 2 water-worn Murex brandaris, with one from Stratum VIII and another from Stratum VII which has a gastropod-bored hole on the body near the lip and small hole in the upper columella. Basket or Nassa shells From Stratum VIII comes an Arcularia gibbosulus with a ground-down hole on the lower body (Fig. 4.1:5). Stromb From Stratum VII comes a Strombus decorus persicus with an irregular hole on the lower body. Only a small number have been reported from Edomite sites; for example Buseirah produced 6 Strombus with one holed, and Umm el-Biyara produced one Strombus. Spider conch or Scorpion shells Tall Jawa produced a ?Lambis truncata sebae fragment, which was associated with Iron Age material in Field D. This shell type was somewhat more common in Edom. Buseirah produced 28 Lambis fragments with one water-worn, 2 burnt, and 4

shells and fossils from tall jawa

281

made into checker-sized gaming pieces (British Museum 136749-51). Tawilan produced 2 Lambis, one has an apical hole and can be blown like a trumpet (Reese 1995a:95, fig. 10.1). The second is an engraved, centrally holed disc which has been published by B. Brandl as made from Tridacna (Brandl 1984:17, figs. 1d, 2d, 5b, 7a, 9a; Reese 1995a:95, fig. 10:2, 1988a:39, n. 31; Reese and Sease 1993:20). A rather similar example was found in sixth- to fourth-century BC fill in the Shiloh excavation at Jerusalem (Brandl 1984: figs. 1e, 2e; Mienis 1988:431, fig. 2, 1992:123). Ghrareh produced only one Lambis with an open apex, the digitations broken off, and a burnt apex and lip from a possible hearth in Room 14. It has an open apex, and may have been utilized as a trumpet, like one from Tawilan.

Fresh Water Shells Thera are 18 fresh-water shells with 10 local (9 Unio bivalves [4 from Stratum VIII, 5 in Field D] and one Melanopsis praemorsa gastropod). There are also 8 samples with Aspatharia rubens fragments (Fig. 4.1:6), a species today restricted to the Nile River, all from Umayyad Building 600. These shells have been found at numerous Near Eastern sites (Reese, Mienis and Woodward 1986). Land snails The collection includes two Helix land snails, from Stratum VIII (TJ92 E57.2.4) and Stratum VII (TJ94 C64.9.28).3

Fossils At Tall Jawa, Stratum VIII produced 2 holed (Fig. 4.1:7, 8) and one unholed sea urchin (or echinoid; Fig. 4.1:9) and 2 fragments, while Stratum VII produced a holed and an unholed sea urchin. A broken fossil shark tooth comes from Stratum VIII (TJ89 A3.30/85). Fossils are known from various Near Eastern and Aegean archaeological sites (Reese 1985, 1988b:266-68, 1995c; Mienis 1992:126). Some may have been used as ornaments, but most are probably from 3

For the most part, land snails were not collected during excavation (the editor).

282

chapter four

local building stones. Buseirah produced over 850 fossil Gryphaea fragments, 86 other fossil bivalve fragments, 69 fossil sea urchins (two holed), 23 fossil gastropods and three fossil ammonite fragments. Umm el-Biyara produced one fossil ?Coenhalectypus sea urchin (Reese 1988b:267-68), and a possible holed fossil sea urchin was found at Tawilan (Bienkowski 1995:86, fig. 9.19:2). In the Baq‘ah, Umm ad-Dananir produced a holed fossil sea urchin, and a holed fossil sea urchin was found at Rujm al-Henu (McGovern 1983:131, fig. 13:8, pl. XXV:1). Other examples come from Balu‘ which produced a fossil sea urchin (Worschech, Rosenthal and Zayadine 1986: 301, pl. LXIV:2), and from Timna in Israel that produced 7 fossil sea urchins (Price 1988: pl. 154:4-5), 7 fossil gastropods (pl. 154:7, 8, 10), and several fossil bivalves (pl. 154:6, 9). Fossil shark teeth are known from various sites in Syro-Palestine: an Early Bronze Age grave at Lahun, the Fosse Temple at Lachish, Hellenistic Gezer, Late Hellenistic Tell Sãk~s, and Nabatean and later Nessana (Reese 1984:191-92).

Catalogue of Tall Jawa Shells and Fossils Table 4A. Marine Shells Stratum VIII Field A: Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number4

Sh-2

TJ 2235 TJ95 A5:1/47 Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, W 28, H 30.75, D hole 2.75 x 1.75.5

Sh-1

TJ 33 TJ89 = U89.1846 (A13:21/90)6 Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, right, H 40.5, W 39.00, D hole 5.25 x 3.25.

4 Locus number consists of Field+Square:locus/pottery pail number. In certain cases, the pottery pail number is replaced by the object registration number, for example, 536. 5 Measurements in millimetres: D – diameter; H – height; L – length; W – width. 6 Artefacts from the 1989 season were assigned numbers in the Madaba Plains Registration system, U 1846. These artefacts were renumbered subsequently in the Tall Jawa system.

shells and fossils from tall jawa

283

Field B: Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-34

TJ 1812 TJ95 B34:29/55 Murex brandaris – water-worn, broken distal, H 49.5, W 42.00.

Sh-5

TJ95 B65:23/41 Glycymeris – water-worn hinge fragment, broken.

Field E (all in Building 300) Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-45

TJ 1859 TJ95 E53:35/73 Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, right, H 37.00, W 39.00, D hole 2.25 x 1.25.

Sh-46

TJ 2225 TJ95 E53:35/73 Glycymeris – worn, holed umbo (?ground-down), ground-down on lower body (19 x 12), right, H 34.00, W 39.50, D hole 2.75 x 1.75.

Sh-61

TJ 2085 TJ95 E53:39/92 Glycymeris – very water-worn piece, open umbo area, broken distal, W 27.00, D hole 5.50.

Sh-47

TJ 2227 TJ94 E54:16/31 Cypraea annulus – open dorsum, L 16.75, W 12.75, H 6.25.

Sh-58

TJ 797 TJ93 E54.30.797 Glycymeris – water-worn, open umbo, right, H 31.25, W 32.75, D hole 7.00 x 4.00.

Sh-48

TJ 2228 TJ94 E54:51/174 Arcularia gibbosulus – ground-down hole on lower body, L 14.75, W 10.00, D hole 3.25 x 2.50.

Sh-49

TJ 2124 TJ95 E64:52/61 Cypraea annulus – open dorsum (ground-down), L 18.50, W 13.25, H 5.00.

Sh-53

TJ 2229 TJ94 E65:24/67 (Room 306) Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, left, H 35.00, W 35.25, D hole 2.50 x 1.75.

Sh-54

TJ 2230 TJ94 E65:27/102 (Room 306) Conus cf. taeniatus – holed apex, water-worn, upper columella removed, vermetids inside lip, H 19.75, W 15.00, D hole 3.25 x 3.00

Sh-55

TJ 2231 TJ94 E65:29/98 (Room 306, found with greenstone pendant TJ 1627) Cypraea annulus – open dorsum, L 18.00, W 12.75, H 6.25.

284 Sh-56

chapter four TJ 1610 TJ94 E65:29/107 Conus upper body – holed apex, water-worn, irregularly broken, H 17, D 23.5, D hole 4.75 x 5.25.

Stratum VII Field A+C-west (Building 800) Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-64

TJ 1099 TJ94 A83:15/57 Cypraea annulus – open dorsum, L 21.25, W 15.75, H 7.25.

Sh-59

TJ 1314 TJ94 A83:20/1314 Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, left, H 39.75, W 40, D hole 4.25 x 3.50

Sh-60

TJ 1471 TJ94 A83:34/1471 Tridacna – complete, unmodified, fresh, right, H 84.00, W 139.25.

Sh-32

TJ 1833 TJ95 A93:31/104 Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, broken distal (ancient), right, H 33.75, W ca. 31.00 (broken), D hole 4.75 x 3.25.

Sh-33

TJ 2148 TJ95 A93:40/143 Glycymeris – water-worn, ground-down hole at umbo, left, H 37.00, W 39.25, D hole 2.75 x 2.00.

Sh-6

TJ 594 TJ92 C27:18/37 Glycymeris – worn (collected dead), unholed, left, H 42.75, W 42.25.

Sh-35

TJ 901 TJ93 C17:45/116 Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, left, H 19.75, W 20.25, D hole 2.25 x 1.50.

Sh-36

TJ 456 TJ92 C27:25/35 Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, left, H 42.75, W 47.75, D hole 7.75 x 3.75.

Sh-37

TJ 2165 TJ95 C27:74/182 Glycymeris – water-worn, natural hole at umbo, broken distal (ancient), left, W 40.00, D hole 4.00 x 2.25.

shells and fossils from tall jawa

285

Field C-east Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-62

TJ 546 TJ92 C62:35/546 Murex brandaris – water-worn, gastropod-bored hole on body near lip (D 3.25) and small hole in upper columella on labial side (D 1.5), broken distal, H 44.5, W 40.00.

Sh-8

TJ94 C65:14/22 Glycymeris distal fragment – water-worn

Sh-38

TJ 1832 TJ95 C65:27/49 Strombus decorus persicus – irregular hole on lower body, L 46.75, W 27.00, D hole 4.25 x 4.00.

Sh-39

TJ 1858 TJ95 C65:31/51 Glycymeris – worn (probably collected dead), unholed, right, H 32.00, W 33.75.

Sh-9

TJ95 C75:1/15 Tridacna body fragment – exterior not smoothed-down, 2 cut parallel sides, H 40.00, W 12.25.

Sh-10

TJ 2234 TJ95 C76:9/24 Glycymeris – water-worn, unholed, H 33.75, W 32.50.

Field D (Building 700) Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-40

TJ 684 TJ91 D2:3/11 (outside Building 700) Glycymeris – water-worn, unholed, right, H 40.25, W 40.25.

Sh-15

TJ94 D14:1/10 (Surface) ?Lambis inner columella fragment – L 50.25.

Table 4B. Fresh-water Shells Stratum VIII Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-3

TJ94 B25:25/48 Melanopsis praemorsa – fresh, has colour

Sh-4

TJ91 B64:3/10 ?Unio fragment – 15.75 x 11.25

286

chapter four

Sh-27

TJ95 E53:4/59 Unio fragment

Sh-57

TJ 1860 TJ95 E53:35/73 Unio – complete (in Amman)

Sh-30

TJ94 E65:18/52 Unio fragment

Stratum VII (all Field D, Building 700) Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-11

TJ95 D2:20/31 Unio – complete, fresh, right, H 24.50, W 43.00.

Sh-63

TJ95 D12:21/36 Unio – broken distal, right, W 43.75.

Sh-16

TJ94 D14:12/17 Unio – complete, fresh, left, H 32.25, W 55.00.

Iron Age to Ummayad Shell number

Object Number

Sh-17

Year and Locus Number TJ93 D22:0.5/1 (Surface clearance)

?Aspatharia distal end Building 600 (Umayyad reuse of Building 700) Shell number

Object Number

Sh-18

Year and Locus Number TJ95 D22:37/65

?Aspatharia nacre fragment Sh-51

TJ 1102 Aspatharia body fragment

Sh-19

TJ94 D23:15/26 TJ92 D31:19/37

?Aspatharia fragments Sh-20

TJ95 D31:21/45 ?Unio distal fragment – 2 attaching pieces

Sh-22

TJ95 D31:24/57 Aspatharia upper body fragment, right

shells and fossils from tall jawa Sh-42

287

TJ 2226 TJ95 D31:0.5/41 Unio – hole on upper body made from exterior, right, H 24.00, W 42.00, D hole 3.25 x 3.50.

Sh-23

TJ92 D32:12/21 Aspatharia fragments, left

Sh-43

TJ 463 TJ92 D32:12/29 Aspatharia – broken, left, W 100+

Sh-24

TJ92 D32:17/30 Aspatharia hinge fragment, left

Table 4C. Fossils Stratum VIII Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-66

TJ 5 TJ89 A2:8/5 Sea urchin (regular) – worn, bevelled hole (made from both sides), D 24.00, H 12.00, D hole 3.00-3.25.

Sh-73

TJ 64 TJ89 A3:30/85 (=U 2051; floor surface, Room 103) Shark tooth – broken, no sides or distal end

Sh-72

TJ 1009 TJ93 E65:11/26 (Building 300) Trochiform gastropod – internal mould, broken apex, not complete distal, maybe intentionally smoothed distal, L 20.50, distal W 19.25.

Sh-65

TJ95 E53:4/59 Cockle fragment

Sh-68

TJ 1247 TJ94 E54:37/134 Sea urchin (regular) – D 26.5, H 12.25.

Sh-28

TJ92 E55:19/46 Bivalve fragment

Sh-69

TJ 553 TJ92 E55:21/55 Sea urchin (regular) – bevelled hole (made from both sides), D 16.75, H 9.25, D hole 3.00.

288

chapter four

Stratum VII Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-70

TJ 439 TJ92 C69:9/23 Sea urchin (irregular)—recently broken at one end, L 30+ (broken), W 28.75.

Sh-67

TJ 690 TJ93 C54:5/6 Sea urchin (regular)—bevelled hole (made from both sides), D 19.75, H 8.75, D hole 2.25

Sh-71

TJ 1367 TJ94 A83:9/22 room collapse into R807) Bivalve – both valves, W 30.00, H 25.75

(Building 800, upper

David S. Reese 16 December 1999 Table 4D. Additional Tall Jawa Shells and Fossils Shell number

Object Number

Year and Locus Number

Sh-74

TJ93 E44:6/21 Shell fragment

Sh-75

TJ93 D32:35/56 Shell fragment

Sh-76

TJ91 M2:15/29 Shell fragment

Sh-77

TJ93 D22:11/17 Bivalve, fossil fragment

Sh-78

TJ91 D2:2/6 Bivalve, fossil, complete.

Sh-79

TJ93 B54:4/56 Ammonite fossil, broken

Bibliography Badre, L. 1990

Tell Kazel, Syria. AUB Museum excavations 1985-87. Preliminary report. Area II. Berytus 38:55-86.

shells and fossils from tall jawa Bennett, C.-M. 1977 1978 1982 Bienkowski, P. 1995

Brandl, B. 1984. Callaway, J. A. 1980

289

Excavations at Buseirah, Southern Jordan. 1974: Fourth Preliminary Report. Levant 9:1-10. Some Reflections on Neo-Assyrian influence in Transjordan. Pp. 165-71 in Archaeology in the Levant: Essays for Kathleen Kenyon, eds. P. Moorey and P. Parr. Warminster: Aris & Phillips, Ltd. Neo-Assyrian influence in Transjordan. Pp. 181-87 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I, ed. A Hadidi. Amman: Department of Antiquities. The Small Finds. Pp. 79-92 in Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan, by C.-M. Bennett and P. Bienkowski. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology No. 8. The British Institute at Amman for Archaeology and History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. The Engraved Tridacna-shell Discs. Anatolian Studies 34:15-41. The Early Bronze Age Citadel and Lower City at Ai (et-Tell). American Schools of Oriental Research Reports, no. 2, ed. D. N. Freedman. Cambridge, MA: ASOR.

Crowfoot, G. M. 1957 Burnishing Pottery. Pp. 470-71 in Samaria-Sebaste III. The Objects, by J. W. Crowfoot, G. M. Crowfoot and K. M. Kenyon. London: Palestine Exploration Fund. Dothan, M. and Y. Porath 1982 Ashdod IV. Excavations of Area M. The Fortifications of the Lower City. ‘Atiqot (English Series) XV. Jerusalem: Department of Antiquities and Museums. Koutsoukou, A. 1997 Miscellaneous Finds. Pp. 135-56 in The Great Temple of Amman: The Excavations, by A. Koutsoukou, K.W. Russell, M. Najjar, and A. Momani. Amman: American Center of Oriental Research. McGovern, P. 1983 Test Soundings of Archaeological and Resistivity Survey Results at Rujm Al-Henu. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 27:105-141. Mienis, H. K. 1988 Een Gegraveerde Lambis-schijf uit de opgravingen van de “City of David” in het oude Jeruzalem, Israel. Correspondentieblad van de Nederlandse Malacologische Vereniging 242: 430-432. 1992 Molluscs. Pp. 122-30 in Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985 directed by Yigal Shiloh III. Stratigraphical, Environmental and Other Reports, eds. A. de Groot and D.T. Ariel. Qedem 33. Jerusalem: Hebrew University. Parotiz, J. J. 1982 Note on Invertebrata. P. 101 in Ashdod IV. Excavations of Area M. The Fortifications of the Lower City, by M. Dothan and Y. Porath. ‘Atiqot (English Series) XV. Price, D. 1988 Minerals and Fossils. Pp. 266-67 in The Egyptian Mining Temple at Timna, Researches in the Arabah I. 1959-1984, by B. Rothen-

290

chapter four berg. London: Institute for Archaeo-Metallurgical Studies, Institute of Archaeology.

Reese, D. S. 1984

Shark and Ray Remains in Aegean and Cypriote Archaeology. Opuscula Atheniensia XV:188-192. 1985 Fossils and Mediterranean Archaeology. AJA 89/2: 347-48 (abstract). 1986 The Marine and Freshwater Shells. Pp. 320-32 in The Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age of Central Transjordan: The Baq‘ah Valley Project, ed. P. McGovern. Monograph 65. Philadelphia: University Museum. 1988a A New Engraved Tridacna Shell from Kish. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 47/1: 35-41. 1988b Recent Invertebrates as Votive Gifts and Addendum: Fossils as Votives from Archaeological Sites. Pp. 260-68 in The Egyptian Mining Temple at Timna, Researches in the Arabah I. 1959-1984, by B. Rothenberg. London: Institute for Archaeo-Metallurgical Studies, Institute of Archaeology. 1991 Marine and Fresh-water Shells and an Ostrich Eggshell from Tall ’¿É \amad, Syria. Pp. 133-36 in Die Rezente Umwelt von Tall ’¿É \amad und Daten zur Umweltrekonstruktion der Assyrischen Stadt Dãr-katlimmu, by H. Kühne. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag. 1995a Marine Invertebrates and Fossils. Pp. 93-96, 345 in Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan, ed. C.-M. Bennett and P. Bienkowski. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology No. 8. The British Institute at Amman for Archaeology and History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1995b Marine Invertebrates and Other Shells from Jerusalem (Sites A, C, and L). Pp. 265-78 in Excavations in Jerusalem 1961-1976, Vol. IV, eds. I. Eshel and K. Prag. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology, No. 6. The British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1995c The Invertebrate Fossils. In J. A. Gifford, The Physical Geology of the Western Mesara and Kommos. Pp. 87-90 in Kommos I/1 The Kommos Region, Ecology, and Minoan Industries, eds. J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Forthcoming Marine Shells from Ghrareh, Jordan. In final excavation report, by S. Hart. Sydney. Reese, D. S.; Mienis, H. K. and F. R. Woodward 1986 On the Trade of Shells and Fish from the Nile River. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 264: 79-84. Reese, D. S. and C. Sease 1993 Some Previously Unpublished Engraved Tridacna Shells. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 52/2:1-20. Worschech, U.F. Ch., Y. Rosenthal and F. Zayadine 1986 The Fourth Survey in the North-west Ard el-Kerak and Soundings at Balu‘ 1986. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 30: 285-310. Yassine, K. 1984 Tel el Mazar I. Cemetery A. Amman: University of Jordan.

shells and fossils from tall jawa

Fig. 4.1. Marine Shells and Fossils

291

292

chapter five

CHAPTER FIVE

ANALYSIS OF IRON PROJECTILE POINTS FROM TALL JAWA Neil A. Mirau Introduction This report details the results of analysis of three iron projectile points recovered from the site of Tall Jawa, Jordan (TJ 453, 520, 525; Fig. 5.1:1-3). The analysis was intended to determine any relevant information about their method of manufacture, most notably whether or not the iron had been carburized or “steeled.”1 All three points were heavily corroded and therefore retained little or none of their original surface.2

Methodology All three points were subjected to a thorough surface visual examination at a number of magnifications to examine their original form and to evaluate the degree of destruction from corrosion. A small sample from each artefact was then removed with a cutting wheel. Each sample so removed was mounted on a slide using epoxy, was ground and polished. Each sample was then etched using a 2% nital (nitric acid in ethyl alcohol) solution. The samples were examined 1

Four iron arrowheads, one from Tall al-‘Umayri (U1963) and three from Tall Jawa (TJ 16, 65, 71) were in sufficiently good condition to be conserved in 1992 by Michael Fuller of the Joseph Schneider Haus, Kitchener, Ontario. Their condition is described as “heavily corroded iron, brittle, weak areas easily crumbled; all pieces have metal core.” These metal points were subject to mechanical cleaning (TJ 016 and TJ 065 were repaired with B-72 mixed 50% with acetone), and were treated with a tannic acid wash (3x) which was a solution of 5% tannic acid in H2O (100 ml) with 10 ml ethanol. 2 Dr. Andreas Hauptmann examined a sample of the iron points and determined that they were not suitable for analysis at the Deutsches Bergbau-Museum, Forschungsinstitut für Montangeschichte, due to their poor state of preservation.

analysis of iron projectile points

293

in an optical microscope at various magnifications. The optical microscopic examination indicated that the three samples were similar in microstructure. A portion of one artefact (TJ 520) was prepared for and subjected to scanning electron microscopic (SEM) inspection, using standard SEM preparation and observation techniques. SEM observation can be useful in the analysis of corroded iron materials for detection of remnants of microstructure visible in the corroded iron (Stech-Wheeler et al. 1981).3

Results The analysis revealed little or no evidence that the artefacts had been deliberately carburized, that is, made into steel. Rather, it appears that the projectile points were forged from bloomery iron producing wrought, rather than steeled, iron artefacts. If the objects had been deliberately and thoroughly carburized, the samples would have revealed evidence of such carburization in their remnant microstructure in spite of the substantial corrosion. Optical microscopic examination revealed a very small amount of heterogeneously distributed carbides in the samples. This suggests that these carbides are the result of the iron bloom trapping small amounts of carbon in the initial forging process, rather than being the result of deliberate carburization of the artefacts. If the artefacts from which the samples were extracted had been deliberately carburized, carbides should have been present in much greater density in the samples’ microstructure (a carbide is a compound of carbon and metal or other electropositive elements). The inference that the artefacts were not deliberately carburized is further supported by the lack of martensite in the analyzed samples. Martensite forms when a carburized iron object is subjected to rapid cooling and quenching. The SEM analysis similarly revealed only minimal relic carbides and no other evidence of purposeful carburization of any kind. It should be noted that the degree of carburization of iron artefacts can vary and that lightly carburized artefacts may contain evidence of such carburization only at or near their surface. In the case of these projectile points, all surfaces were so heavily corroded 3

Bibliographical references are found at the end of this chapter.

294

chapter five

that little or none of the original surface remained and therefore any surficial evidence of carburization has been lost. Having said that, and as noted above, SEM analysis should have revealed more substantial relic structures of carburization if the objects had been subjected to it.

Conclusions There is a slight possibility that the projectile points could have been lightly carburized and that the evidence for such treatment has been erased due to the highly corroded nature of the artefacts. However, the best and most firmly supported interpretation is that these points are made of wrought iron forged from an iron bloom and that no deliberate carburization of the objects was carried out in the manufacturing process. This does not mean that the makers of these projectile points had no knowledge of or were incapable of producing steel. Projectile points are essentially items that have a limited useful “life span” and the extra effort and expense required to produce harder, more durable steeled points did not increase the effectiveness of the points sufficiently to make carburization worthwhile. Wrought iron is more malleable than steel and though it is softer, it will produce an effective limited- or no-reuse projectile point. In their analysis of iron artefacts at Kinneret, Muhly, Maddin and Stech (1990) noted that there would be no significant advantage in the steeling of arrowheads, given their intended use and short lifespan. This point can also be made for the Tall Jawa points. That is, given their intended purpose, the makers of the points simply did not have to carburize them and in not carburizing them, cast of manufacture was reduced and ease of manufacture was increased. In summary, the metalworkers who produced these projectile points may not have had the knowledge or capability to produce steeled iron, however it seems more likely that the extra expense, effort and time required to produce steeled projectile points was simply not considered necessary to produce a perfectly usable projectile point like the ones recovered from Tall Jawa. R. P. Wilson prepared the Tall Jawa artefacts for analysis at Agat Laboratories. I am grateful for his assistance in this preparation and

analysis of iron projectile points

295

in the technical interpretation. The author alone is responsible for any errors of omission or interpretation in this analysis.

Bibliography Muhly, J. D.; Maddin, R. and T. Stech 1990 The Metal Artifacts. Pp. 159-75 in Kinneret. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen auf dem Tell el ‘Oreme am See Gennesaret 1982-1985, by V. Fritz. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins, 15. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Stech-Wheeler, T.; Muhly, J. D.; Maxwell-Hyslop, K. R. and R. Maddin 1981 Iron at Taanach and Early Iron Metallurgy in the Eastern Mediterranean. American Journal of Archaeology 85:245-268, Pls. 43-45.

296

chapter five

Fig. 5.1:1

Fig. 5.1:2

Fig. 5.1. Iron Points subject to analysis

Fig. 5.1:3

analysis of iron projectile points

297

CHAPTER SIX

FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF FOOD PREPARATION TOOLS: The Use of Chert Spheroids P. M. Michèle Daviau Introduction The study1 of ground stone tools and equipment has been omitted, or at best, treated extremely briefly in recent reports of archaeological excavations in Syria-Palestine (Stern 1984:27; fig. 4:41; Mazar 1985: 16-17; Lapp 1981: 110; Yadin et al. 1989: 44).2 For example, in his discussion of small finds and objects from Hazor, Yadin did not describe ground stone tools, or establish a typology for them, even though they were present in excavated loci and were illustrated in his plates (1989: 44; pl. CLXXXVIII:1-16, 18).3 In other cases where representative samples of ground stone vessels and objects have been included in published reports, the judgment of archaeologists seems to be that these artefacts, especially the tools, have been made from earliest times “and are without particular significance chronologically” (Lapp 1981:110; see also Ben-Tor and Portugali 1987:237). That may be so, but this doesn’t mean that they are devoid of interest. In an attempt to better understand trade patterns in the Late Bronze and Roman periods, Xenophontos has identified the prov1 An initial study of food preparation and storage assemblages was presented by Daviau at the Annual Meeting of the American Schools of Oriental Research in New Orleans (November 18, 1990). 2 A noticeable exception is the final report of the excavations at Jericho. In Jericho V, Appendix A, stone vessels, tools and objects are listed and briefly described (1983:485-575). The problem of recognizing ground stone tools, especially hammer stones, is clearly acknowledged by the excavators who indicate that “only a fraction of the total number in the excavated levels” were recorded because “the difference between nodules battered by use as hammer stones and naturally abraded cobbles may be slight” (Kenyon & Holland 1983:513). 3 Numerous other examples could be cited with the same results, especially those reports published during the first half of this century. New studies are now appearing; however this chapter does not include references to the latest published material.

298

chapter six

enance of basalt artefacts found in Cyprus by a study of their trace elements and has located several sources of vesicular basalt in Jordan, east and north of Amman (1988:176; fig. 4; see also Schnurrenberger 1997). Although this is an important study, the functional identity and characteristics of the artefacts themselves, especially the difference between basalt grinders and stone pounders, has been skipped over as self-evident. The danger involved in such cursory treatment of these objects is that some tools may be incorrectly identified for lack of attention to their material and to their archaeological context.4 A case in point is the identification of flint or chert balls as sling stones by O. R. Sellers (1939: fig. 7a, b), and later by G. E. Wright (1962:124; fig. 77). These scholars have been followed unquestioningly in subsequent publications, without analysis of the archaeological context of the stones themselves. More recent typologies of ground stone tool functional categories are those of Lee5 and of Elliott (1991), who classified more than 200 stone artefacts from Ugarit (Chapter 2 above). With the current interest in functional analysis and activity area studies there is a deepening awareness of the need to study, in context, all types of artefacts that constitute functional assemblages in discrete loci, including ground stone and pecked stone objects. Sufficient archaeological and ethnographic evidence for the functional character of most types of ground stone tools has been adduced in Chapter 2. However, the case of stone spheroids deserves greater attention. In this study, the context of two groups of chert balls will be examined in light of their contextual relationship to ground stone tools whose function is more certain. Secondly, the possible functions for these tools will be assessed in view of ethnographic observation, which describes food preparation activities and indicates the tools used for various steps in these processes. Thirdly, several parallels from culturally distinct but structurally similar archaeological contexts will be compared, and finally we will make suggestions for the functional interpretation of the chert balls, based on the palaeobotanical evidence for food use at Tall Jawa and sites in its geographical vicinity.6 4

The ability to recognize some flint or basalt spheroids as boiling stones, comes from a serious attempt to identify the evidence of use and the find spot of each object (Kenyon & Holland 1983:533). 5 Lee presented a complete classification system at the Annual Meeting of the American Schools of Oriental Research in Anaheim in 1985. 6 This study was prepared with the support of a short-term grant from Wil-

analysis of food preparation tools

299

Stone Tools in Fields A+B Ground stone tools excavated in 1989 and 1991 in Fields A+B were concentrated in two areas, A3+B63 (Rooms 102+202) and A13+A14+A24 (Rooms 106 and R108). In each room, there was a series of superimposed floor surfaces with cooking ovens in situ. Altogether, five assemblages can be isolated (A3:24=Room 122, lower floor surface; A3:28=Room 122, upper floor surface; A13:16,21, 22,23=Room 106 floor surface; A13:30=Room 126; and A14:,10,11, 12+A24:4). These assemblages include a total of 48 stone tools, of which 10 are stone spheroids. The tool types consist of saddle querns, grinders, upper millstones, pestles, mortars, whetstones, one door weight (?), and chert balls. The grinders, querns, pestles, millstones, and donut-shaped perforated stone are of basalt. One upper millstone fragment and one whetstone are of sandstone. A boulder mortar (A13: 23), embedded in the beaten earth floor (A13:12) of Room 106, is of limestone, and the stone balls (spheroids) are of chert. The saddle querns from these 1989 assemblages are thin, rectangular pieces of basalt, ca. 4.0-5.0 cm thick and approximately 25.0 x 35.0 cm large. They are relatively flat on the upper grinding surface and slightly convex on the lower surface. Upper millstones that were used with the querns are loaf-shaped and average 30.00-40.00 cm long, 10.0-12.0 cm wide, and 5.0-6.0 cm thick. They are somewhat concave on the bottom side and convex on the upper side. Eight millstones, 2 complete and 6 broken, but probably still in use, are included in the six artefact groups under study here. In order to determine the effect of wear on these stone tools, nine were examined microscopically.7 This examination made it possible to distinguish between the sheen caused by hand rubbing over a long period of use, and the crushing or cutting of the surfaces that were rubbed, pounded or scraped against another surface. For example, only one sandstone millstone was subject to microscopic analysis; its flat bottom side showed signs of rubbing which caused striations, and the convex side showed ridge marks, as if it had been used also as a whetstone. frid Laurier University and with the assistance of Shawn Standfast (ceramic reconstruction), Adele Tempest (artefact illustration), and Antonius J. Haakman (ceramic illustration). 7 Each stone object was submitted to magnification at the rate of 40x using an Olympus microscope.

300

chapter six

The 13 grinders vary in shape ( cuboid, rectangular, trapezoidal, and irregular). The smallest of these measures 5.7 x 5.0 x 4.7 cm, while the largest is 9.1 x 8.0 x 4.2 cm. The smaller grinders fit easily into one’s hand and could have been used in a small mortar or even with a saddle quern. Such use is strongly suggested by microscopic analysis of the wear pattern on the cuboid grinder that showed some wear on its smaller end and extensive wear and a sheen on the larger end, but minimal wear on the edges of these surfaces. Due to its size, the largest, rectangular grinder was also probably used with a quern; its flat bottom shows wear and has a noticeable sheen; the convex top is even more worn and there is a heavy sheen, while all four edges show varying degrees of wear.8 The four pestles also vary in shape; one is square in cross section and rectangular in long section, while another is square in cross section, and pyramidal in longitudinal section. The best preserved, fully rectangular pestle measures 7.6 x 4.4 cm. The evidence of wear is restricted to one end and shows the result of crushing and striking. On the square end of the pyramidal pestle, the wear pattern consists of spiral striations and sheen. The chert spheroids range in size from 6.00-7.00 cm in diameter. Two stones examined microscopically showed extensive wear. The larger stone has five areas that are chipped and show traces of blows and an additional five areas show wear and striations that result from rubbing or crushing. The smaller of the two stones also shows evidence of blows and wear from friction both on the chipped and unchipped areas. There is also a definite sheen on the worn areas. The stone tools from these assemblages fall into three functional categories suggested by Lee, Category 1 (crushing and pulverizing) which includes mortars and pestles; Category 2 (grinding and sharpening) which consists of querns, millstones, grinders and the perforated stone (in secondary use); and Category 3 (hammering, pecking, and striking) which accounts for the chert balls, previously identified as sling stones or ballistic missiles.

8

A perforated stone, only partially preserved, was probably in secondary use. This is suggested by the wear pattern on the lower surface of the stone, which was crushed and had a considerable sheen. From this evidence, it is probable that this stone was used as a grinder in association with the tools with which it was found.

301

analysis of food preparation tools Table 6A. Stone Tools by Room and Locus Locus

Crushing

Room 102+202 A3: (upper) A3:28 (lower) B63

1 pestle 1 mortar

Grinding

Hammering

Other

1 grinder* 1 upper millstone

1 spheroid

1 “natural” stone

1 saddle quern 1 upper millstone

1 spheroid

3 upper millstones 1 saddle quern

Room 106 A13 (upper) 1 pestle 2 upper millstones 2 mortars 8 grinders 1 saddle quern A13 (lower)

Room 108 A14+24

2 pestles

3+ ovens

2 spheroids

1 2 1 1

roller pestle(?) whetstones boulder mortar “natural” stone

1 upper millstone 3 spheroids 2 grinders 1 perforated stone(?)

2 “natural” stones 1 brazier

2 grinders 3 querns

1 limestone trough 1 oven

2 spheroids

Assemblages The ground stone tools in Rooms 102, 106, and 108 were found on a series of superimposed floors, associated with bowls, cooking pots, jugs, juglets, storejars, and spindle whorls (Table 6B, below). When such an assemblage is compared to a model food preparation tool kit that was designed on the basis of ethnographic research and ancient iconography for Bronze Age houses (Daviau 1993a:48), Robinson’s coefficient of agreement is 179.4 or 89.7%. This is a very high degree of similarity for an archaeological assemblage, comparing favourably with only two assemblages from Late Bronze Age Hazor, out of a study of 84 locus groups from 22 Middle and Late Bronze Age sites. At Hazor, Locus 6223, has a similarity coefficient of 165 or 82.5%, and Locus 2004 in Area 210, has a coefficient of 157.3 or 78.6% (Daviau 1993a:234, 254), when compared to the food preparation and consumption paradigm. The only other comparable assemblages are those from Tell Hadidi, Syria (Dornemann 1981;

302

chapter six

Daviau 1993a:441-442; Chart 5.1). Such a close degree of fit between the Tall Jawa assemblage and the model tool kit reinforces the functional categories suggested by Lee, namely that all of these stone tools were in fact used in the preparation of food for cooking and/or storage. Table 6B. Absolute and Relative Frequencies of Room 102+202 Artefact and Pottery Types Artefact Type

n

%

Cooking pots Small bowls Large bowls Jugs/juglets Storejars Ovens Spindle Spindle whorls Serrated point (shark tooth?) Grinders Spheroids Millstones Quern

18 24 17 11 4 4 1 2 1

20.9 27.8 19.6 12.7 4.6

2 3 2 1

2.3 3.5 2.3 1.2

Total

86

1.2 2.3 1.2

99.6%

Table 6C. Degree of Similarity between Room 102+202 Artefact Types and Model Paradigm for Food Preparation Category Oven Cooking pots Bowls Storejars Jugs/juglets Other

Paradigm 3% 20% 46% 13% 13 5% 100%

Finds

Difference

1.2% 20.9% 47.4% 4.6% 12.7% 12.8% 100.0%

1.8 0.9 1.4 8.4 0.3 7.8 20.6

Similarity 200.0 -20.6 179.4 or 89.7%

The data for the principal room (R106) in Building 113 does not fit as well into the working paradigms. However, the similarity to a combined food preparation and storage model indicates a series of activities related to food preparation and processing. The finds include cooking pots, bowls, jugs/juglets, storejars, mortars, pestles, grinders, millstones, chert spheroids, whetstones, a whorl and projectile points (see Table 6D).

303

analysis of food preparation tools Table 6D. Absolute and Relative Frequencies of Room 106 Artefact and Pottery Types Artefact Type

n

%

Cooking pots Small bowls Large bowls Jugs/juglets Storejars Pithoi Miniature vessels Cooking areas/braziers Small mortar Boulder mortar Spindle whorl Pestles Grinders Spheroids Millstones Quern Whetstones Projectile points Total

3 12 14 14 4 14 2 2 1 1 1 4 8 7 3 1 2 6 99

3.03 12.12 14.14 14.14 4.04 14.14 2.02 2.02 1.01 1.01 1.01 4.04 8.08 7.07 3.03 1.01 2.02 6.06 99.99%

Table 6E. Degree of Similarity between Room 106 Artefact Types and Model Paradigms for Food Preparation and Storage combined Category

Paradigm

Finds

Difference

Cooking area/oven Cooking pots Bowls Storejars Jugs/juglets Other

1.5% 10.0% 29.0% 42.5% 12.5% 4.5% 100.0%

2.02% 3.03% 26.26% 18.18% 14.14% 34.34% 97.97%

0.98 6.97 2.74 24.32 1.34 29.84 66.19

Similarity 200.00 -66.19 133.81 or 62.90%

Archaeological Parallels Stone tools used for food processing are preserved in the archaeological record of thousands of sites throughout the Near East from the Neolithic period to the present day. The advent of these tools is usually associated with the development of agriculture. Along with a variety of querns (slab grinding stones) and hand grinders, two stone balls were recovered from 6th millennium levels at Hajji Firuz Tepe. These stones were in the size range of 3.50-5.40 cm in diameter and

304

chapter six

showed evidence of pounding and rubbing (Voigt 1983: 1, 255; fig. 117:a). Comparable examples from Jericho (Kenyon and Holland 1983:533), and from Lemba (Elliott 1991: fig. 3), cited in Chapter 2, above, indicate the continued use of such tools throughout the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods. Among the Middle Bronze Age remains at Mari, Jean Margueron identified chert ovoids, similar to those at Tall Jawa, as food preparation tools. He said that they were always found in association with cooking pots in the palace kitchens (oral communication, September 24, 1990). While this may suggest their use as boiling stones, rather than hammer stones or pounders, their close association with cooking pots clearly points to their domestic use.9 Closer in time to Tall Jawa are the small hammer stones identified among the Iron Age stone tools at Tell Qiri (Ben-Tor and Portugali 1987: fig. 58:21, 22); in this case they were of basalt, rather than of flint. At Megiddo, the hammers and rubbers were made of chert, as at Tall Jawa (Lamon & Shipton 1939: xxvi; pl. 106:12=7 cm., Str. III). At Tall Dayr ‘Alla, 62% of the round “pestles” were of flint. Analysis of these stones by Petit (1999:152; fig. 3:1) revealed clear signs of use, including grooves and sheen “caused by pounding and grinding.” What is certain is that flint balls are frequently ignored as worked objects, appearing to be part of wall collapse or to be merely “natural” stones. However, the 93 spheroids from secure domestic contexts at Tall Jawa preclude this interpretation. In order to better understand the two model assemblages presented in Tables 6B-6E, especially the function of the chert spheroids, the next step is a comparison of these assemblages with those observed in ethnographic studies of traditional Near Eastern communities and with New World archaeological assemblages.

Ethnographic Evidence Patty Jo Watson’s study of the life ways of the inhabitants of Hasanabad, a village in western Iran, has become a classic in ethno-archaeology. Her observations on the tool kits of daily life, as well as 9 Sellers (1939:43) noticed that women living in villages in Palestine used heated stones to warm water. However, this evidence was not considered determinative of the function of stone balls, possibly because of his knowledge of the later use of ballistae with catapults.

analysis of food preparation tools

305

on construction techniques of domestic structures and the social organization of the community, provide a starting point for understanding traditional behavioural patterns that may be reflected in the archaeological record of ancient Near Eastern sites. Watson’s study is of particular value because the community at Hasanabad was not heavily influenced by modern technology and consumer goods from outside the village. This makes it possible to identify traditional classes of artefacts and installations necessary for the basic activities of food production, preparation, consumption and storage. Indeed, from her own experience, Watson refers to artefacts from excavations of Neolithic sites in Western Asia to show the continuity of craft techniques, subsistence patterns, and exploitation of natural resources (1979: 36, 300). At Hasanabad, Watson identified a wooden pounder to tenderize meat, a metal sugar hacket, a stone pestle used with a wooden mortar to pulverize salt (1979: 169; pl. 5.6 a, b), a boulder mortar and round stone, and a two piece rotary quern used to grind wheat or barley10 into flour as typical household equipment (1979: 169; fig. 5.47). These objects can be assigned to the three food preparation functional categories identified by Lee; namely hammering, crushing, and grinding. Numerous other examples could be cited. One of these is a postcard from Khartoum in the Sudan, showing a woman using a wooden pestle and mortar alongside a girl grinding with a hand grinder and a quern (personal observation). The caption reads “Western Province women preparing bread”. Another example is that of the film Yaaba, in which a woman uses a loaf-shaped millstone and a saddle quern to crush grain and grind tubers (personal observation). The association of a round stone with such typical food preparation tools in modern times indicates the longevity of this tradition and the importance of the tool to accomplish certain tasks related to the processing of certain foods. North American Parallels A similar pattern can be seen in the excavations at Mesa Verde, Colorado at Sites 499 and 866. Site 499 dates to early Pueblo III 10 Watson says that barley was usually used as animal feed although it was used for human consumption in times of necessity.

306

chapter six

(ca. AD 1100-1150) and Site 866 is slightly earlier, Pueblo II (AD 1060). The types of food preparation stone tools in use consisted of sandstone manos, both spheroid and rectangular, slab and trough metates (Lister 1964: Tables 3-6,11), an occasional boulder mortar, lap mortars, and hammer stones (Lister 1966: Tables 2-3,10-11,13). The manos were used with the metates for both crushing and grinding because mortars were not popular at these sites (Lister 1966:92). Hammer stone could be used for both hammering and grinding. Two examples from cultures that flourished even earlier, from 200 BC to AD 1, consist in the Mogollon culture of New Mexico and the early Hohokam of Arizona. In the Mogollon repertoire the food preparation tools consisted of manos, metates, boulder mortars and pestles, representing the functions of grinding and crushing (McGregor 1965: 145). At Snaketown, Arizona, the tools in the Pioneer phase of the Hohokam culture consisted of vesicular basalt mortars and pestles, manos, metates, and hammer stones (McGregor 1965:155). These examples are directly related to the food types utilized by these cultures, somewhat different from those in the Near East. Nevertheless, the range of tasks in preparing those food stuffs for consumption appear to be the same, since the full range of activities identified by Lee are present; crushing, grinding and hammering.

Botanical Remains at Tall Jawa The range of agricultural products and the methods of their production in ancient Canaan have been identified from texts and archaeological contexts (Borowski 1987 and Hopkins 1985). These include cereals, legumes, fruits, nuts, vegetables, spices, and other plants used for food (Borowski 1987: 87-139). Few recipes and even fewer details of the tasks involved in the food preparation process can be gleaned from ancient texts. For example, Ezek 4:9-12 suggests a recipe for a type of bread which includes several different grains and legumes; And you, take wheat and barley, beans and lentils, millet and emmer, and put them into a single vessel, and make bread of them.

The text does not make it clear whether one or two foods are mentioned here, a type of porridge and a kind of bread or just one baked product. Recipes from Mesopotamia, published by Bottéro

307

analysis of food preparation tools

(1985: 41), list the ingredients with only minimal instructions for cooking. What is not described in such texts is the equipment needed to process specific food stuffs. Such equipment is assumed on the basis of the archaeological record from Near Eastern sites and from ancient iconography, such as Egyptian tomb paintings and NeoAssyrian reliefs. This iconographical material illustrates a variety of food preparation tasks, but attempts to distinguish the range of tools employed in these tasks are frustrated by the nature of the iconography itself where the actions of the human figures were emphasized but the tools in use are less apparent. The various ground stone tools involved in food preparation activities present in the assemblages from Tall Jawa fall into the same three functional categories represented by tools observed in Watson’s ethnographic studies and at New World sites. At Tall Jawa, these tools were used to process the foods utilized by Iron Age inhabitants of the Madaba Plains. These food products can be identified by comparison with other Palestinian sites of the same period and from the botanical remains excavated at Tall Jawa, Tall al-‘Umayri and Tall Hesban. The botanical remains from Tall Jawa consist of cereals, legumes, nuts, spices and vine crops. Table 6F. Botanical Analysis, Tall Jawa, Field A Cereals

Legumes

Nuts

Spices

Other

Barley Wheat

Chick pea Lentil Navy bean Grean bean Broad bean Vetch

Almond Pistachio

Coriander All spice Poppy Cinnamon

Olive Grape Radish Fig

A larger sample is available from Tall al-‘Umayri during the same Iron II period, but the range of food stuffs recovered through flotation falls into four basic categories, cereals, legumes, fruits, and oil crops, with no evidence for nuts.

308

chapter six

Table 6G. Botanical Analysis, Tall al-‘Umayri Cereals

Legumes

Barley Wheat Millet? Corn cockel

Broad bean Green bean Chickpea Lentil Vetch

Nuts

Spices Poppy Black pepper Coriander

Other Olive Grape Mellon? Flax

(Geraty et al. 1989: 442-547; Clark 1997:64).11

In the survey of Tall Hesban, a comparable repertoire of food products was recovered. This repertoire consists of cereals, various legumes (peas and beans), herbs, fig, olive, grape, and vegetables (LaBianca & Lacelle 1986: Table 7.1). Botanical samples from Tall Dayr ‘Alla consisted of several varieties of wheat and of barley, some of which required more than one crushing to separate the grains from the husk (Petit 1999:161). It seems logical at this point to try and correlate the foodstuffs, tools and functions. Certainly, the millstones and querns were used to grind cereal grains into flour. This may have involved more than one stage in the process, and hand grinders and pounders may have been used to crush smaller amounts of grain to remove the husks and bran (Petit 1999:161). Cuboid and rectangular shaped grinders may have been used to grind certain legumes, such as peas and chickpeas, although these may have been cooked and/or dried unprocessed. Mortars and pestles could have been used for crushing dried pulses and spices. And what about nuts; how were they cracked?12 The chert balls which show clear signs of use as grinders and pounders look like the ideal tools for this purpose. Among the three operations of grinding, crushing and hammering distinguished by Lee, these spheroid stones seem eminently suitable for use as hammer stones processing a variety of foods. This suggestion agrees very well indeed with the evidence of wear and chipping revealed by microscopic analysis. Now may be time 11 Details for the botanical remains were presented by Douglas R. Clark, in “Madaba Plains Project: The Western Defensive System at Tell el-‘Umeiri, Jordan,” a paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Schools of Oriental Research, New Orleans, November 18, 1990 (currently Clark 1997:53-98). 12 The study by R. W. Younker (1995) that explored the likelihood of balanophagy, the eating of acorns in the Near East during times of alternate subsistence strategies, supports the need to correlate tools needed to process nuts and nut meats.

analysis of food preparation tools

309

to restore these stone tools to their rightful place in the food processing repertoire and to search for sling stones in another artefact group.

The Search for Sling Stones Evidence for the use of sling stones by armies during the Iron Age comes primarily from stone carved Assyrian reliefs that depict small groups of slingers with their weapons (Barnett and Lorenzini 1975). What is clear in any study of the reliefs is that the weapons are shown larger than actual size and out of proportion with the soldiers. For example, the largest dagger blades found at Megiddo (Loud 1948: pls. 178-179) are in the range of 16.00-19.00 cm, whereas those depicted on Assyrian reliefs are the length of a man’s forearm (ca. 22.00-25.00 cm; Barnett and Lorenzini 1975: pl. 67). Swords in the archaeological record range in size from 45.00-62.50 cm (Muhly and Muhly 1989:271), but appear even larger on reliefs, where they are shown 1.5 times the length of a man’s arm, ca. 75.00 cm long (Barnett and Lorenzini 1975: pl. 34). The same is true on an Aramaean sculpture at Zencirli, in which the sword is the same length as the king’s leg (von Luschan 1902: pl. 37c). This may be part of the propagandistic style of the reliefs themselves (Bleibtreu 1990:57). The same disproportion in art is seen 1000 years later on a mosaic floor in the chapel of Priest John at Khirbat el-Mukhayyat (= Nebo; Piccirillo 1993:223). In this case, the man holds a sling with a stone that is larger than his fist, surely an exaggeration! Artefacts from Iron Age sites where warfare is well documented may be helpful in determining the size of sling stones. For example, at Lachish (Tufnell 1953: pl. 40:5) a group of “slingshots” was located at the southwest corner of the tell, apparently in the area of the fiercest Assyrian attack. These stones are approximately 4.505.50 cm in diameter.13 What is not clear is the source of these stones; were they slung against the walls by the slingers and fell far short of their mark, or were they hurled by hand down on the enemy by the defenders? The defenders may have been using whatever came to 13 Inca sling stones are even smaller (ca. 4.00-4.50 cm in diameter), in spite of the fact that very long sling straps were used (personal observation, Smithsonian Museum of Natural History, November, 1993).

310

chapter six

hand;14 Judean soldiers on the Lachish relief in Room XXXVI of Sennacherib’s Southwest Palace at Nineveh are depicted throwing stones down on the Assyrians (see the defenders on the gate tower, one with a bow, two each with a stone in his hand, and a fourth man with a sling;15 Bleibtreu 1990:36). A similar group of defenders (one bowman, one slinger, and one stone thrower) appears on a relief in Tiglath-pileser III’s palace at Nimrud, and two soldiers with stones appear on a relief in the Northwest Palace at Nimrud (see a defender ready to drop a large round stone on the head of an enemy soldier and a shield bearer ready to throw a smaller stone; Bleibtreu 1990:42). Even more defenders throwing stones down on Assyrian soldiers who are climbing scaling ladders are shown on a Nineveh relief of Sennacherib’s attack on Aranziash (Bleibtreu 1990:42). What is important here is that only defenders are shown dropping or throwing stones down on the attackers; attackers do not throw stones at the defenders. The size of the sling stones in the depiction of Assyrian slingers, as they appear in a relief from the Southwest Palace at Nineveh (Barnett and Lorenzini 1975: pl. 67),16 cannot be determined with certainty.17 Their position in the Lachish relief shows the slingers outside the ranks of bowmen (Yadin 1963:430-431), which suggests that their missiles had a greater range than the bow; this would be realistic only if their sling stones were small (3.00-4.00 cm). One could argue that this is the case as shown on a relief fragment from the palace of Ashurbanipal that shows the right arm of a slinger with a stone less than half the size of his fist (Yadin 1963:452). The importance of small stones was appreciated by Greek slingers in their war with the Persians, whose slings “have only a short range because the stones that are used in them are as large as the hand can hold; the Rhodians, however are versed also in the art of slinging leaden 14 That this was not unknown in antiquity is clear from the story of the death of Abimelech (Jud. 9:50-55). In this narrative, a woman who had taken refuge in a fortified tower, threw a millstone down on Abimelech when he approached the tower, crushing his skull. 15 Unfortunately, the relief is damaged so that the end of the sling and its stone are obscured and cannot be compared in size with the stone being flung by hand. 16 Unfortunately, the upper right hand corner of this orthostat is damaged, precisely at the place where the sling stones are depicted, so that their relative size is difficult to determine. 17 This is also the case in the depiction of the slinger from Tell Halaf (Yadin 1963:364). Only the slinger’s thumb is visible; the stone is hidden in the pad of the sling, making it as small as the thickness of the sling itself.

analysis of food preparation tools

311

bullets” and shoot more than twice as far as the Persians (Xenophon, Ana. III iii 16-17).18 The difference in weapon technology during the Persian period is seen most clearly in the development of stone throwing machines. Stones known as ballistae were the shot thrown by a ballista that was a shooting engine or non-torsion machine invented sometime before 353 BC (Marsden 1969:1-2, 43). Such stone throwers developed into torsion artillery capable of hurling heavy stones (called B"8\<J@<@4; Marsden 1969:23). At Carthage, 5,600 stones are assigned to the Roman attack on the city in 146 BC. These stones fall into several groups, varying in size and weight; 16.0-18.5 kg, 20.026.0 kg, and 35.0-40.5 kg (Marsden 1969:81). At Tel Dor, ballista balls were found along with sling bullets and arrowheads (Shatzman 1989:462). Sling bullets were few in number (2 vs. 100 arrowheads) and weighed 36.0 g and 59.5 g, respectively, whereas the 200 ballista balls fell into groups that weighed 500 g, 2.0, 3.0, 5.0, 9.0, 17.0, 26.0, and 29.0 kg. Clearly ballistae are not in the same class as sling stones belonging to the Iron Age. So the questions remain; how do we distinguish sling stones from hammer stones, were hammer stones used as sling stones when needed, or as missiles to hurl down on the enemy? Or, are sling stones another class of artefact that is rarely recognized during excavation? Only a few suggestions regarding Iron Age sling stones can be mentioned here. At Khirbat al-Mudayna on the Wadi ath-Thamad, small (2.00-3.00 cm) limestone balls found in the burned ceiling collapse of the six-chambered gate (B100), and on the floor of gate Room 102 (Chadwick, Daviau and Steiner 2000) may be a good candidate for sling stones. These small stones have more in common with later, Hellenistic sling bullets which were mould made of lead, oval in shape, and measured approximately 4.0 cm long, 1.502.00 cm thick, and weighed 60 g (Gera 1985:153, n. 2). The suitability of the small stones is also based on ethnographic observation which shows that modern slingers find the chert balls too large and heavy; instead they choose small stones, “about one inch in diameter” (ca. 2.50 cm; Reimer 1991:21).19 While the search for sling 18

Paul Dion notes that “stones” is not a free translation, but a literal rendering of lithois; as for leaden bullets, it is tais molybdisin. 19 J. Lange of Waterloo, OntarioON, uses prune size stones with her sling (oral communication, Nov. 22, 1993). The same is true of Jordanian Bedouin, who scorn my offer of chert balls as sling stones, and choose instead small, walnut size stones

312

chapter six

stones in the archaeological record continues, the functional classification of hammer stones or pounders as a domestic and industrial tool rests assured.

(personal observation, Tall Jawa, Jordan, July, 1995). The same can be said for Syrian slingers who scare birds using small stones, several of which can be held in the hand at the same time (Christie 1977:46).

analysis of food preparation tools

Fig. 6.1. Chert Pounders

313

314

chapter seven

CHAPTER SEVEN

IMPLICATIONS FOR CHRONOLOGY P. M. Michèle Daviau Introduction The artefacts from Tall Jawa can be grouped into three principal chronological periods, Iron Age to early Persian, late Byzantine to early Islamic, and Ottoman to modern times. In this study of Iron Age objects, the emphasis has been on functional and typological classification, rather than on formal changes that could be indicative of chronological developments. This reflects certain scholarly opinions, discussed earlier (Chapter 6), which point to the fact that many artefacts of daily life, such as ground stone tools, have been used since the first appearance of agricultural settlements as necessary equipment for processing grains and other foods. These tools changed little over a 4,000 year continuum, being directly related to specific functions for their size and shape, and dependent on local resources for their material. New tools had entered the repertoire as craft specialization became more refined, and military and political interests developed. Overall, the variety of artefact types increased rapidly over the millennia, with some types going out of fashion and being replaced by new items, especially objects of personal adornment, high status or luxury goods, military equipment, and symbolic or religious objects and works of art. It is among these object types, rather than among ground stone tools, that chronological indications are to be sought.

Iron Age Indicators For the Iron Age, the most sensitive indicator remains the ceramic repertoire, although this is less well known for Transjordan than it is for Cisjordan. A common surface treatment is red slip and burnish, which appears on numerous bowls, jugs, and juglets, either by itself or with bands of black paint and white wash (Daviau 1993b).

implications for chronology

315

This same treatment appears on several small artefacts, including female and zoomorphic figurines, ceramic discs, and a mushroom shaped stopper, as well as on miniature vessels and a “cultic cup”. While this treatment was more popular during Stratum VIII at Tall Jawa, it continued to be used for high status items during Stratum VII, although its use had declined significantly on bowls and jugs (Daviau 1993b, 1997a). The artefact that was most closely related to the contemporary ceramic corpus was the reworked sherd. These sherds, found in their hundreds, some formed into spindle whorls, and others still apparently blank, can be directly related by their fabric, thickness, and surface treatment to the ceramic assemblage most recently in use. This establishes a link between the ceramic chronology and the chronology of the artefact assemblage, especially when both the pottery and the reworked sherds are found together in a sealed locus along with other artefacts. Apart from pottery, certain materials are hallmarks of the period, especially iron. The number of iron weapons increased steadily during the Iron Age, almost to the exclusion of bronze weapons, which had dominated the military arsenal in the second millennium. Bronze trilobate arrowheads appear in small numbers during the Iron Age II and early Persian period at several sites in Jordan, such as Khirbat al-Mudayna, where five were recovered amidst the destruction material in the six-chambered gate (Chadwick, Daviau and Steiner 2000). However, none were found at Tall Jawa where all 170 metal points were made of iron. So too, iron was the metal of choice for knife blades, although lithic material was also used. The small number of certain types of artefacts, such as spindles and ivory spindle whorls, makes it impossible to establish a formal sequence and note changes over time. However, there was a noticeable change apparent among unfired clay loom weights, with anchor-shaped weights, only appearing in a late Iron Age II context (Stratum VII). Further study is needed to determine whether this difference in shape was purely chronological or was also related to function. Works of art with religious significance are often clear indicators of chronology, although in the case of the figurines from Tall Jawa, so many of them were unique in their type that comparison with finds from other sites was extremely limited (Daviau, in press). When comparison was possible, for example with figurine moulds from

316

chapter seven

‘Amman (Chapter 2, above), these were often from fills or from disturbed loci, themselves without a secure stratigraphic or chronological setting, except for the ceramic material with which they were found. In the final analysis, the artefact which could be most useful, the Tall Jawa ostracon (Chapter 3, above) is, unfortunately, too poorly preserved to offer a definitive dating for the largest Stratum VII building uncovered in Field C-west (B800). Its script does fit well with the ceramic evidence from this building, which included levigated clays and the use of a fast wheel that produced new shapes, especially fine wares unknown in Stratum VIII, and imitation Assyrian palace ware (Daviau 1997a:26-27). Thus, the artefacts from Iron Age buildings at Tall Jawa consist of two main groups, one that includes artefact types that have had a long history at thousands of sites in the Levant, namely the food processing and craft tools, and a second group that fits more tightly into the Iron Age, especially Iron Age II. These include those artefacts common throughout Palestine and southern Syria at Iron Age II sites, such as wide rimmed cosmetic mortars, figurines and artefacts decorated with red slip and black and white bands similar to contemporary ceramic vessels, female figurines with large earrings similar to the stone female heads from ‘Amman (Dornemann 1983:159-162), and the plethora of iron arrowheads. Hopefully, this study of artefacts from an Iron Age town, along with future publications of finds from neighbouring sites, will serve as a starting point for a rich corpus of Ammonite artefacts that will illuminate the life ways of these ancient people and their tools of daily life.

implications for chronology

317

CHAPTER EIGHT

MULTIMEDIA INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN ARCHAEOLOGY: THE TALL JAWA DATABASE ON CD-ROM David Hemsworth Introduction This Multimedia Information Systems program sprang out of a luncheon meeting four years ago when a discussion developed on the subject of how best to disseminate the graphic and textual information contained in the Tall Jawa artefact database. In the past, certain limits were imposed on published works with respect to the number of illustrations that could reasonably be included, with the result that the complete corpus of artefacts, especially those objects that were broken, was rarely shown. In addition, the experienced excavator made choices regarding which objects to illustrate, and what information to provide in the text. In instances where quantification or in-depth artefact analysis is needed, complete data on all finds is required (Van Beek 1989b), some of which may not be included in a final report due to space limitations. Secondly, every researcher who has had to peruse hundreds of pages of published text or original field notes in order to compile information for a particular research project knows the need for comprehensive and searchable databases. For example, if a person wants to find an artefact made of a particular material and found in a certain location, the user may have to search through each locus sheet summary (published or unpublished) for the information. Locating items with more than one or two variables would be even more complicated. A searchable database with images could make available many categories of artefact data almost instantaneously, thus providing users with an invaluable tool. At the outset of this project, a multimedia information system was leading edge technology, but its use in archaeological publications was almost non-existent. So, without the luxury of an established model, a prototype of the present system was developed. During the

318

chapter eight

past few years, several databases of artefacts and figurines have been published on the web; these presentations will facilitate the preparation of multimedia programs in future. However, the database presented here on CD-ROM is directly related to the functional typology presented above (Chapter 2). It is our hope that this system will provide users with a powerful, user-friendly tool for searching and accessing information obtained from our excavations.

The Database The record fields in the Tall Jawa database represent the categories of information recorded for each registered object. While most of this information is not subject to modification, certain categories, such as class, type and function were modified on the basis of the study of each object. Only after handling the artefacts repeatedly, could we correctly identify certain items, especially those that were broken or only partially preserved. In some cases, an additional fragment of an object was found years after the first piece, making it possible to mend these two fragments and better understand the complete object. So too, information in the fields of Stratum and Chronology could only be refined once the building phases of the structures in which the objects were located had been determined. Since both of these aspects of the archaeological record are subject to further refinement as our understanding grows, the information in these fields should be understood to be our considered opinion, but not as definitive. Certain fields in the original database provided needed information concerning Wilfrid Laurier University’s acquisition numbers, the preparation of drawings, completion of scanning, and photograph numbers; these working fields are not represented here, so that the presentation of data in its final format is more useful for the reader. A small number of registered items consist of ceramic vessels, which will be presented in the pottery database (Daviau, in preparation/ b). In addition, certain artefacts related to the use of Building 600 during the late Byzantine-early Umayyad period are in a separate database in Daviau and Tempest (in preparation). For these reasons, the registration numbers are not completely sequential. Along with each record is an image of the item consisting of the line drawing prepared in the field. Certain objects were redrawn in

artefact database on cd-rom

319

the lab due to their good state of preservation or their high quality. In some cases, colour photographs also accompany the artefact record; these images can be accessed under a duplicate record for a particular registration number and the siglum_1. The Microsoft Access 2000 database represents finds from six seasons of archaeological excavation. All artefacts and reworked sherds are included (2,768), with each record having 26 fields, including a comments field (Table 8A). All objects were numbered sequentially in the REG_NUM (registration number) field (001-2238), except for the reworked sherds, which have the letters “Sh” and a year code preceding their number (e.g., sherd Sh91-127 is the twenty-seventh sherd from 1991 in the range 101-499). The image name is tied to the REG_NUM field, with the .jpg extension appended to indicate a “jpeg” image.

Overview of the system The information system is designed for researchers, lecturers and students in the classroom and in the field who make use of archaeological field reports. This system (IS) is suitable for users at the beginner to intermediate level of computer literacy. Many researchers in archaeology work primarily in the PC platform, and at the present time Microsoft Access is one of the leading database programs for small-scale applications. The original database (dBase IV) was converted to Access and a program was generated using Microsoft Visual Basic 6 (the prototype was originally written in Visual Basic 3). Visual Basic was chosen because of its multimedia capabilities and tight integration with Access as well as its cross program / platform support.

320

chapter eight

Table 8A: List of Fields in each Record of the Database Field Name

Content

Site-Yr Field Square Locus Pail Reg_No

Code for site (TJ) + year (89, 91-95) Letter (A-E) Number Number Number Number in Object Registry/Ceramic Technology Registry (for reworked sherds) Roman Numeral Iron I, Iron II, Persian Artefact Class Type within a class Probable function As far as can be determined Maximum preserved size Second preserved size Standing height or thickness In kilograms Exterior diameter of circular objects Interior diameter of circular objects Depth of depression Exterior colour code (Munsell) Exterior colour code name Interior colour code (Munsell) Interior colour code name Broken, Chipped, Complete, Fragment WLU/‘Amman/ACOR (place of storage)/T (at Tall Jawa) Additional information; initials of artist

Stratum Chronology Class Type Function Material Length Width Height Weight Ext-Dia Int-Dia Depth Ex Ccode Ex Color Int Ccode Int Color Condition Cur-Loc Comments

Although the IS could be placed on a network, it is primarily designed to be installed on an IBM PC compatible computer running Windows 95, 98, ME, NT or Windows 2000. It should also remain compatible with future Windows versions. At the time of installation, the user will have to inform the program where the CD-ROM is located, so that access to the large number of images and the database is possible. It is the intention of this design that advanced statistical manipulation and analysis will be done in other programs, by importing the database directly (e.g. OBDC link – see Microsoft website or Microsoft Access manual for more information).

artefact database on cd-rom

321

Requirements Windows 95, 98, ME or Win2000,1 16 MB RAM (64 MB recommended especially for newer operating systems), VGA 800x600 for best viewing, 10 MB of hard drive space for program, CD-ROM drive.

Installation To install the Arch2000 program insert the CD-ROM into the drive and run the ‘setup.bat’ file (double click on the file from Windows Explorer). This will begin the installation process. During the install process follow the instructions. Depending on what has been installed previously on the computer, the installation program may require rebooting of the computer. If the program finds installed components that are newer than those on the CD-ROM it will ask whether to keep the newer existing file or replace it with its older version. It is recommended that the newer version be kept. If the installation program says that it needs to replace older files with up-to-date versions, it is recommended that they be replaced and updated. The setup program will ask for the location where you wish the program to be installed on your hard drive (default c:\program files\Arch2000). The program will automatically create a program group and insert the program icon. After installation, the program will search the computer for the CD-ROM and access the Tall Jawa images from the “images” subdirectory. Note: depending on your computer setup, certain files may already be installed (registered) on your system. Thus, if you get an error box indicating a file cannot be registered, just continue the installation. Along with the “images” subdirectory, the CD-ROM has a subdirectory named “Install” that contains the main setup program that initiates the install. In addition the “Install” directory has a subdirectory named “Support”. This subdirectory contains the Arch2000 program, the associated Tall Jawa Access database, and the support 1 This program has not been tested on NT 4, but should run if the latest NT service pack has been installed.

Artefact Artefact Image Image Mean Menu

322

Main

Registration Registrati Information

on

chapter eight

Object Object Information

Informati

Record Record Controls

Controls Fig. 8.1 Main screen of the Tall Jawa information system

Search Search Controls

Contro

artefact database on cd-rom

323

files needed for installing and running the program. Generally the user will not have to interact with the files in the “Install” directory.

The Tall Jawa Information System The information system has a one-screen layout. From this screen (Figure 8.1), access to images, searches, and printing is controlled. This interface allows for easy and quick access to the information in the database. Main menu The main menu is located at the top left of the main screen (Fig. 8.1) and has two major pull down submenus, labelled “File” and “Copy to ClipBoard”.

Fig. 8.2: File submenu The “File” submenu allows the user four options (Figure 8.2). The “Print Page” option produces a snapshot of the screen and outputs the image to the default printer. The user may want to change the default printer (From the Microsoft Windows Start, Settings, Printer menu) to direct the output to a specific location. The “Print Current Records” allows the user to print all the current records as selected by the “Record Control” on the main screen. The records printed will in most cases be the result of a query and not the full database. The “Print Range” allows the user to print a range of the current records (as selected by the “Record Control”). The “Print Range” menu has a handy feature that allows user to advance through the records

324

chapter eight

and click on the “Use Current” button to enter the current record into the text box, rather than typing. Presently, the “Print Range” command does not update the pictures for each record when printing. Hence all the printouts will have the first image in the image box. If separate images are needed each page will have to be printed individually. The “Exit” option exits the program. All query information will be lost and the Tall Jawa database closed.

Fig. 8.3: Copy to ClipBoard submenu The “Copy to ClipBoard” submenu is designed to move information from this program to other programs such as word processors or spreadsheets, such as Microsoft Excel. The “Copy Page” option allows users to copy all the textual information on the screen to the clipboard. The information stored on the clipboard will be formatted with the field name, separated by two tabs, and then the record information. For example: Site year: TJ89 The information was formatted with two tabs so that it can be pasted neatly into a spreadsheet’s columns or a word processor document. Note that the image is not copied. The “Copy Range” option uses the same format as the “Copy Page,” and allows the user to copy a range (textual information) of the current records into another program for presentation or further analysis. The “Copy Range” menu has a handy feature that allows user to advance through the records and click on the “Use Current” button to enter the current record into the text box, rather than typing. The “Copy Current Records” option uses the same format as the “Copy Page,” but copies all of the records currently selected by the “Record

artefact database on cd-rom

325

Control” object. This allows the user to copy the result of a query or all the records, into another program for presentation or further analysis. The “Copy Image” option allows users to copy the current record’s image into a paint program (such as Microsoft Paint). This option is limited to programs that recognize image information and does not support importing directly into word processing programs. To do this, paste the image into a paint program and copy it from the paint program and paste it into the word processor.

Database information The database information system presents the fields in Table 8A for each record. The fields are divided into two sections; the object registration fields (1-6 upper left) and object descriptive fields (7-26). There are three elements for each field (see field example, Fig. 8.4).

Fig. 8.4: One field from the registration portion of the database. On the left there is a check box, followed by the field name and the object’s data for the specific record. The check box allows the user to perform a search for similar information. By selecting the check box and clicking on the “Perform Search” button in the lower right, the program will search for information similar to that in the selected field. The user may select more than one check box to narrow a search. The program performs an “AND” search with the selected fields.

326

chapter eight

Record Control

Fig. 8.5: Record control object. The program uses a standard record control object to allow users to move through the records. The left and right arrows, allow you to move forward and backwards though the dataset. The bounded left and right arrows allow you to move to the beginning and end of the dataset. The central textual area labelled “Record Control” indicates the current record being used. A slider object is also available to allow the user to move to a point in the database quickly by moving the pointer left and right (left mouse click on the pointer and while holding the button down, drag the pointer left and right). Alternately, if a user wants to view a specific artefact, they can click on the “Enter Search” button and type into the REG_NUM (registration number) box the number of the desired object and click “Perform Search” (see searching the database for further information). The number of records will change if the user performs a search or loads a different database. In the case of a search, the text in the record control will reflect the number of records that match the search.

artefact database on cd-rom

327

Artefact Images

Figure 8.6: Artefact Image control object. The line drawings of the artefacts were scanned and originally saved in .pcx format because it was one of the first formats that supported 24 bit colour. With the popularity of the .jpeg format, it was decided to convert the images into this file type. The images were then stored at the highest resolution with virtually no loss. On the CD-ROM all of the images are located in the image directory. For information on the numbering system for the images see the database field section in this chapter (Table 8A). The images were scanned at a width x height of 640 x 480 pixels, which matches the typical screen resolution of a VGA computer screen (for better viewing 800 x 600 is preferred). A scale is placed on each image to give a perspective of image size. On the main screen a thumbnail image of each object (where image was available) can be seen in the upper right corner of the screen. In order to speed movement through the database on slower computers, the user can deselect the “Auto-load picture” check box, located above the thumbnail image. This will turn off the image display for future thumbnails. When the check box is deselected, a “Show Image” button will appear. This button allows the user manually to view the thumbnail.

328

chapter eight

Full Image Preview: The image can be seen in full screen mode simply by clicking on the thumbnail image. The image will be viewed in its native format of 640 x 480 pixels. To return to the main screen mode just click on the full screen image. Searching the database

Fig. 8.7: Search controls area Searching the database can be performed in two ways: simple searches for information that is similar to information in a particular field, and a complex user-defined search. The program uses an “AND” search for all multiple criteria searches. Searches from the main screen allow the user to find information that is similar to that in a field(s) of the present record. This is done by simply clicking on the check box adjacent to the field and then clicking on the “Perform Search” in the search control area. Selecting the appropriate check boxes can search matches for more than one field. Note: the buttons in Fig. 8.7 will become available (visible) as needed. A more powerful search facility can be activated by clicking on the “Perform Search” button in the search control area, or by clicking on the text box containing information for which the user wants to

artefact database on cd-rom

329

search. Activating the search screen brings up a second screen where the text boxes are yellow in colour. If this is the first time a search has been activated and the “Perform Search” button used, all the check boxes will be cleared and the text boxes will be yellow. If the search was entered by clicking on a text box instead, the current field will appear in blue with the current record information already entered in the field and the associated check box checked. The user can click on this cell to enter information or click on the “Perform Search” button to find similar objects. If past searches have been performed, the search criterion information will be seen in blue in the text box. If you do not want to include these items in the present search, ensure that the unwanted check boxes are deselected. As information is entered into yellow text boxes, the box will change to blue and its check box activated. Once the search criteria have been entered, click on the “Perform Search” button and the program will return to the main screen with the number of matches reflected in the “Record Control” object. Now the user can view the subset of chosen records by using the “Record Control”. After a search is completed, the “Clear Search” button will appear. Clicking on this button will reset all of the selected fields to their non-selected state thus returning the database to its original (all records browsable) state. This can also be accomplished by deselecting all of the check boxes that were involved in the search, and then clicking on the “Perform Search” button. If a search is unsuccessful and no matching records are found, a message box will appear and a subsequent error box will be presented giving a technical definition of why the search failed. If a letter has been entered into a numeric field, an error indicating that too few parameters were entered will be seen (because in a numeric search all non-numeric information is stripped off). The user may decide to exit the search without performing a search by pressing the “Exit Search” button. This will deselect all the check boxes and reset the database to it original state. The full database is now available for review.

330

chapter eight

Uninstalling the Program As with other programs developed under the Microsoft Visual Development Suite, this program registers the information necessary to uninstall itself in the “Windows Control Panel” under the “Add/Remove Programs” utility. For each of the different versions preceding Windows 95 the procedure is virtually identical. The following illustrations were captured from Windows 2000. To uninstall the program (see Fig. 8.8) click on the “Start” icon, select “Settings”, and select “Control Panel”. The control panel will appear as seen in Figure 8.9.

Fig. 8.8: Accessing the Control Panel

Fig. 8.9: Accessing Add/Remove Programs

artefact database on cd-rom

331

From the control panel select “Add/Remove Programs”. The “Add/ Remove Programs” window will appear as seen in Figure 8.10. On the left side of the window the “Change/Remove” box (Install/Uninstall in Windows ME) must be selected (it usually is selected by default when the “Change/Remove Program” window loads). Select “Arch2000” and click on the “Change/Remove: button (Add/Remove in Windows ME). The user will be prompted to confirm that the program is to be removed and then finally clicks “OK” to complete the procedure.

Fig. 8.10: Removing Arch2000

It is hoped that the multimedia information system developed here will provide researchers with a powerful tool for accessing and investigating the artefacts unearthed at Tall Jawa. It is also hoped that other researchers will see the utility and produce similar systems to aid in dissemination of other archeological findings. The authors can be contacted for further updates to the program or to report problems or suggestions for enhancements.

This page intentionally left blank

bibliography

333

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abã Ass~f, ‘A. 1996 Aharoni, Y. 1964 1975

Die Kleinfunde aus ‘Ain D~r~ (Taf. 15-26). Damaszener Mitteilungen 9:47-111. Excavations at Ramat Rahel. Seasons 1961 and 1962. Roma: Centro di Studi Semitici. Excavations at Tel Beer-sheba, Preliminary Report of the Fifth and Sixth Seasons, 1973-1974. Tel Aviv 2:146-168.

Aharoni, Y., ed. 1973 Beer-sheba I. Excavations at Tel Beer-sheba, 1969-1971 Seasons. Institute of Archaeology Publications, No. 2. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Albright, W. F. 1938 The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim, Vol. II. The Bronze Age. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 17. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. 1939 Astarte Plaques and Figurines from Tell Beit Mirsim. Pp. 107120 in Mélanges syriens offerts à Monsieur René Dussaud. Vol. 1. Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique 30. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner. 1943 The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim, Vol. III. The Iron Age. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 21-22. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. Albright, W. F. and J. L. Kelso 1968 The Excavation of Bethel (1934-1960). Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 39. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research. Anderson, W. P. 1988 Sarepta I. The Late Bronze and Iron Age Strata of Area II,Y. Publications de l’Université Libanaise, Section des études archéologiques. Beyrouth: Département des Publications de l’Université Libanaise. Ariel, D. T. 1990 Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh. Vol. II. Imported Stamped Amphora Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory, and Glass. Qedem 30. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Artzy, M. 1987 On the Storage of Olive Oil in Antiquity. Pp. 1-4 in Olive Oil in Antiquity, eds. M. Heltzer and E. Eitam. 1987 Conference, Haifa. Haifa: University of Haifa, Israel Oil Industry Museum, Dagon Museum. Åström, P.; Biers, J. C., et al. 1979 Corpus of Cypriote Antiquities 2. The Cypriote Collection of the Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Missouri-Columbia. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, Vol. XX:2. Gothenburg, Sweden:

334

bibliography Paul Åströms Förlag.

Avigad, N. 1977 Bar-Adon, P. 1962

Two Ammonite Seals Depicting the Dea Nutrix. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 225:63-66. Another Ivory Bull’s Head from Palestine. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 165:46-47.

Barber, E. J. W. 1991 Prehistoric Textiles: The Development of Cloth in Europe and the Near East with Special Reference to the Aegean. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 1994 Women’s Work: The First 20,000 Years. Women, Cloth and Society in Early Times. New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company. Barlow, C. 1995 The Jewellery from Tell Jawa. Unpublished paper, Wilfrid Laurier University. Barnett, R. D. 1982 Ancient Ivories in the Middle East and Adjacent Countries. Qedem 14. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Barnett, R. D. and A. Lorenzini 1975 Assyrian Sculpture in the British Museum. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. Bass, G. F. 1986 A Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun (KaÕ): 1984 Campaign. American Journal of Archaeology 90: 269-296. 1987 Oldest Known Shipwreck Reveals Bronze Age Splendors. National Geographic 172:693-733. Beck, H. C. 1981 Classification and Nomenclature of Beads and Pendants. Archaeologia 77:1-76; reprint ed., York, PA: George Shumway Publisher. Beck, P. 1995 Catalogue of Cult Objects and Study of the Iconography. Pp. 27-197 in \orvat Qitmit. An Edomite Shrine in the Biblical Negev, ed. I. Beit-Arieh. Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series No. 11. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Beckmann, M. 1994 Fraternizing with the Enemy: An Athenian Coin from Persian Palestine. The Picus 28-38. Beit Arieh, I. 1973 The Western Quarter. Pp. 31-37 in Beer-sheba I. Excavations at Tel Beer-sheba, 1969-1971 Seasons, ed. Y. Aharoni. Institute of Archaeology Publications, No. 2. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Bennett, C.-M. and P. Bienkowski 1995 Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology, No. 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bennett, W. J. Jr. and J. A. Blakely 1989 Tell el-Hesi. The Persian Period (Stratum V), eds. K. G. O’Connell and F. L. Horton, Jr. American Schools of Oriental Research Excavation Reports. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

bibliography

335

Bennett, W. J. Jr., Sollberger, J. B. and A. F. Gettys 1989 Flint Tools. Pp. 231-256 in Tell el-Hesi. The Persian Period (Stratum V), by W. J. Bennett and J. A. Blakely. American Schools of Oriental Research Excavation Reports. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Ben-Tor, A. 1987 The Small Finds. Pp. 236-243 in Tell Qiri. A Village in the Jezreel Valley. Report of the Archaeological Excavations 1975-1977, by A. BenTor, Y. Portugali and M. Avissar. Qedem 24. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Ben-Tor, A.; Portugali, Y. and M. Avissar 1983 The Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavations at Tel Yoqne‘am, 1979 and 1981. Israel Exploration Journal 33:30-54. Ben-Tor, A. and Y. Portugali 1987 Tell Qiri. A Village in the Jezreel Valley. Report of the Archaeological Excavations 1975-1977. Qedem 24. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Betancourt, P. P. 1977 The Aeolic Style in Architecture: a survey of its development in Palestine, the Halikarnassos Peninsula, and Greece. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Bianchi, S. and F. Faggella 1993 The Resumption of the Archaeological Investigation at Qal‘at el-Mishnaqa, 1992 Excavation: A Preliminary Report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 37:407-414, Pls. I-II. Bienkowski, P. 1995 The Small Finds. Pp. 79-92 in Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan, by C.-M. Bennett and P. Bienkowski. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology, No. 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bikai, P. M. 1978 The Pottery of Tyre. Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd. Biran, A. 1998 Sacred Space. Of Standing Stones, High Places and Cult Objects at Tel Dan. Biblical Archaeology Review 24/5:38-45, 70. Biran, A. and R. Gophna 1970 An Iron Age Burial Cave at Tel alif. Israel Exploration Journal 20:151-169. Birmingham, J. 1963 The Development of the Fibula in Cyprus and the Levant. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 95:80-112. Bleibtreu, E. 1990 Five Ways to Conquer a City. Biblical Archaeology Review 16/3:3644. 1991 Grisly Assyrian Record of Torture and Death. Biblical Archaeology Review 17/1:52-61, 75. Boling, R. G. 1989 Site Survey in the Tell el-‘Umeiri Region. Pp. 98-188 in Madaba Plains Project 1. The 1984 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, L. G. Herr, Ø. S. LaBianca, and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

336 Borowski, O. 1987 Bottéro, J. 1985 Bower, J. 1986 Brandl, B. 1993

bibliography

Agriculture in Iron Age Israel. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. The Cuisine of Ancient Mesopotamia. Biblical Archaeologist 48:3647. In Search of the Past. Chicago: Dorsey Press. Clay, Bone, Metal and Stone Objects. Pp.223-262 in Shiloh. The Archaeology of a Biblical Site, by I. Finkelstein, S. Bunimovitz, and Z. Lederman. Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series No. 10. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

Bretschneider, J. 1997 Die Unterstadt (Feld J). Pp. 209-230 in Tell Beydar, Three Seasons of Excavations (1992-1994). A Preliminary Report, eds. M. Lebeau and A. Suleiman. Subartu 3. Turnhout: Brepols. Briend, J. and J.-B. Humbert 1980 Tell Keisan (1971-1976). Une cité phénicienne en Galilée. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht; Paris: J. Gabalda. Brooke, D. 1921 Catalogue of The Acropolis Museum. Volume II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brothwell, D. and P. Brothwell 1969 Food in Antiquity. A Survey of the Diet of Early Peoples. London: Thames and Hudson. Buchanan, B. and P. R. S. Moorey 1988 Catalogue of Ancient Near Eastern Seals in the Ashmolean Museum. Vol III, The Iron Age Stamp Seals (c. 1200-350 BC). Oxford: Clarendon Press. Buhl, M.-L. and S. Holm-Nielsen 1969 Shiloh. The Danish Excavations at Tall Sailãn, Palestine, in 19226, 1929, 1932, and 1963. Archaeological-Historical Series I, Vol. XII. Copenhagen: The National Museum of Denmark. Callaway, J. A. 1980 The Early Bronze Age Citadel and Lower City at Ai (et-Tell). American Schools of Oriental Research Excavation Reports, No. 2. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research. 1983 A Visit with Ahilud. Biblical Archaeology Review 9/5:42-53. Callot, O. 1987 Les huileries du Bronze Récent à Ougarit. Pp. 197-212 in Le centre de la ville, 38e-44e campagnes (1978-1984), by M. Yon et al. Ras Shamra-Ougarit III. Mémoire No. 72. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Calvet, Y. and B. Geyer 1987 L’eau dans l’habitat. Pp. 129-156 in Le centre de la ville, 38e-44e campagnes (1978-1984), by M. Yon et al. Ras Shamra-Ougarit III. Mémoire No. 72. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Caubet, A. 1979 Les Maquettes architecturales d’Idalion. Pp. 94-118 in Studies presented in memory of Porphyrios Dikaios, eds. V. Karageoghis et al. Nicosia: Zavallis Press.

bibliography

337

Chadwick, R.; Daviau, P. M. M. and M. Steiner 2000 Four Seasons of Excavations at Khirbat al-Mudayna on the Wadi ath-Thamad, 1996-1999. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 44:257-270. Chambon, A. 1984 Tell el-Far‘ah I. L’âge du fer. Mémoire no. 31. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Chéhab, M. H. 1951-1954 Les terres cuites de Kharayeb. 2 vols. Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth X-XI. Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient, Adrien Maisonneuve. Christie, A. 1977 Agatha Christie, An Autobiography. New York: Ballantine Books. Ciolek-Torrello, R. 1984 An Alternative Model of Room Function from Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona. Pp. 127-53 in Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Archaeology, ed. H. J. Hietala. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Clark, D. R. 1997 Field B: The Western Defensive System. Pp. 53-98 in Madaba Plains Project 3: The 1989 Season of Excavations at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca, and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Cleveland, R. L. 1962 An Ivory Bull’s Head from Ancient Jericho. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 163:30-36. Cohen, R. and Y. Yisrael 1995 The Iron Age Fortresses at ‘En Haseva. Biblical Archaeologist 58:223-235. Cross, F. M., Jr. and J. T. Milik 1956 A Typological Study of the El-Khadr Javelin and Arrow-heads. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 3:15-23, Pls. III-IV. Crowfoot, G. M. 1957 Glass. Pp. 403-422 in The Objects from Samaria. Samaria-Sebaste III, by J. W. Crowfoot, G. M. Crowfoot and K. M. Kenyon. London: Palestine Exploration Fund. Crowfoot, G. M. and E. L. Sukenik 1957 Israelite Figurines. Pp. 76-84 in The Objects from Samaria. Samaria-Sebaste III, by J. W. Crowfoot, G. M. Crowfoot and K. M. Kenyon. London: Palestine Exploration Fund. Crowfoot, J. W., Crowfoot, G. M. and K. M. Kenyon 1957 The Objects from Samaria. Samaria-Sebaste III. London: Palestine Exploration Fund. Czichon, R. M. and P. Werner 1998 Tall Munb~qa-Ekalte I: Die Bronzezeitlichen Kleinfunde. Ausgrabungen in Tall Munb~qa-Ekalte, ed. D Machule. Bd. 1. Saarbrücken: Saarbrücker Druckerei und Verlag. Dabrowski, B. 1997 Clay Figurines from Tall al-‘Umayri and Vicinity (The 1987 and 1989 Seasons). Pp. 337-349 in Madaba Plains Project 3: The 1989 Season of Excavations at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø S. LaBianca, and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

338 Dajani, A. 1970

bibliography

A Late Bronze Age Tomb excavated at Sahab. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 15:29-36. Daviau, P. M. M. 1992 Preliminary Report of the Excavations at Tell Jawa in the Madaba Plains (1991). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 36:145-62. 1993a Houses and Their Furnishings in Bronze Age Palestine. Domestic Activity Areas and Artefact Distribution in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. JSOT/ ASOR Monograph Series, 8. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. 1993b Intrasite Distribution of Red Slipped and Black Burnished Wares at Tell Jawa, Jordan. Paper presented to the ASOR Pottery Interpretation and Analysis Group, Annual meeting of the American Schools of Oriental Research, Nov. 20th, Washington, D.C. 1993c Preliminary Report of the Third Season of Excavations at Tell Jawa, Jordan (1992). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 37:325-40. 1994 Excavations at Tell Jawa, Jordan (1993). Preliminary Report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 38:173-193. 1995 Iron Age II Pithoi from Tall Jawa, Jordan: Construction Techniques and Typology. Pp. 607-616 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V, eds. K. ‘Amr, F. Zayadine and M. Zaghloul. Amman: Department of Antiquities. 1996 The Fifth Season of Excavations at Tell Jawa (1994): Preliminary Report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 40:83100. 1997a Technological Change and Assyrian Influence at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Bulletin of the Canadian Society of Mesopotamian Studies 32:2332. 1997b Tell Jawa: A Case Study of Ammonite Urbanism during Iron Age II. Pp. 156-171 in Aspects of Urbanism in the Ancient Near East: From Mesopotamia to Crete, eds. W. E. Aufrecht, N. A. Mirau and S. W. Gauley. JSOT Supplement Series 244. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. 2001a Family Religion: Evidence for the Paraphernalia of the Domestic Cult. Pp. 199-229 in The World of the Aramaeans. Studies in History and Archaeology in Honour of Paul-Eugène Dion. Vol. 2, eds. P. M. M. Daviau, J. W. Wevers and M. Weigl. JSOT Supplement 325. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. 2001b New Light on Iron Age Religious Iconography: The Evidence from Moab. Pp. 317-326 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan 7. Amman: Department of Antiquities of Jordan. in press Diversity in Ammonite Religious Iconography. Conference Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. May 25, 2000. Copenhagen, Denmark. in prep./a Excavations at Tall Jawa. Volume I: The Iron Age Town. in prep./b Excavations at Tall Jawa. Volume III: The Iron Age Pottery. Daviau, P. M. M. and P. E. Dion 1994 El the God of the Ammonites? The atef-crowned Head from Tell Jawa, Jordan. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 110:158-167.

bibliography

339

Daviau, P. M. M. and M. Steiner 2001 A Moabite Sanctuary at Khirbat al-Mudayna. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 321:1-21. Daviau, P. M. M. and A. Tempest in prep. Excavations at Tall Jawa. Volume IV: The Roman, Early Islamic, and Ottoman Periods. Davies, N. de Garis 1943 The Tomb of Rekh-Mi-Re at Thebes. New York: Plantin Press. Dearman, J. A. 1989 Historical Reconstruction and the Mesha Inscription. Pp. 155211 in Studies in the Mesha Inscription and Moab, ed. A. Dearman. Atlanta: Scholars Press. Dever, W. G. 1987 The Contribution of Archaeology to the Study of Canaanite and Early Israelite Religion. Pp. 209-247 in Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross, eds. P. D. Miller, Jr., P. D. Hanson, and S. D. McBride. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1992 A Case-Study in Biblical Archaeology: The Earthquake of ca. 760 BCE. Eretz-Israel 23 (Avraham Biran Volume): 27*-35*. Dever, W. G.; Lance, H. D.; Bullard, R. G.; Cole, D. P.; Furshpan, A. M.; Holladay, J. S., Jr.; Seger, J. D. and R. B. Wright 1971 Further Excavations at Gezer, 1967-1971. Biblical Archaeologist 34:94-132. Dever, W. G., Lance, H. D. and G. E. Wright 1970 Gezer I: Preliminary Report of the 1964-1966 Seasons. Annual of the Hebrew Union College Biblical and Archaeological School in Jerusalem, Vol. 1. Jerusalem: Hebrew Union College. Dever, W. G.; Lance, H. D.; Bullard, R. G.; Cole, D. P. and J. D. Seger 1974 Gezer II: Report of the 1967-1969 Seasons in Fields I and II, ed. W. G. Dever. Annual of the Hebrew Union College Biblical and Archaeological School in Jerusalem, Vol. 2. Jerusalem. Dever, W. G.; Lance, H. D.; Bullard, R. G.; Cole, D. P.; Furshpan, A. M.; Gitin, S.; Holladay, J. S., Jr.; Seger, J. D. and R. B. Wright 1986 Gezer IV: The 1969-1971 Seasons in Field VI, the “Acropolis”, ed W. G. Dever. Annual of the Hebrew Union College Biblical and Archaeological School in Jerusalem, Vol. 4. Jerusalem: Hebrew Union College. Dikaios, P. 1962 The Stone Age. Pp. 1-204, Figs. I-LII in The Swedish Cyprus Expedition. Vol. IV. Pt. 1A. The Stone Age and the Early Bronze Age in Cyprus. Lund: The Swedish Cyprus Expedition. Dolce, R. 1990 Les magasins et les lieux de traitement des denrées alimentaires à Ebla au IIIème et au IIème millénaires. Annales Archéologiques Arabes Syriennes 40:122-145. Dornemann, R. H. 1981 The Late Bronze Age Pottery Tradition at Tell Hadidi, Syria. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 241:29-47. 1983 The Archaeology of the Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Milwaukee: Milwaukee Public Library. Dothan, M. 1971 Ashdod II-III. The Second and Third Seasons of Excavations 1963, 1965. ‘Atiqot IX-X (English Series). Jerusalem: Department of Antiquities and Museums.

340

bibliography

Dothan, M. and D. N. Freedman 1967 Ashdod I. The First Season of Excavations 1962. ‘Atiqot VII (English Series). Jerusalem: Department of Antiquities and Museums. Dothan, T. 1982 The Philistines and their Material Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press. Eitan, A. 1983 Vered Yericho. Pp. 106-107 in Excavations and Surveys in Israel 1983. Vol. 2. Jerusalem: Department of Antiquities and Museums. Elliott, C. 1991 The Ground Stone Industry. Pp. 9-97 in Arts et industries de la pierre, ed. M. Yon. Ras Shamra-Ougarit VI. Lyons: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Ells, S. 1996 A Typological, Chronological and Quantitative Study of Perforated, Light Weight Objects from Tell Jawa, unpublished paper. Wilfrid Laurier University. Eshel, I. and K. Prag. 1995 Excavations by K. M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961-1967 IV. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology No. 6. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Finkelstein, I.; Bunimovitz, S. and Z. Lederman 1993 Shiloh. The Archaeology of a Biblical Site, ed. I. Finkelstein. Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, No. 10. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Flannery, K. V. and Winter, M. C. 1976 Analyzing Household Activities. Pp. 34-47 in The Early Mesoamerican Village, ed. K. V. Flannery. New York: Academic Press. Flynn, G. A. 1988 The Ground Stone Tools from Umm ad-Dananir, Jordan. Unpublished MA Thesis. State University of New York at Binghamton. Forbes, R. J. 1955 Studies in Ancient Technology, Volume I. Leiden: E. J. Brill. 1964 Studies in Ancient Technology, Volume IV. Leiden: E. J. Brill. 1965 Studies in Ancient Technology, Volume III. 2nd ed. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Franken, H. J. 1992 Excavations at Tell Deir ‘All§. The Late Bronze Age Sanctuary. Louvain: Peeters Press. Franken, H. J. and M. Steiner 1990 Excavations in Jerusalem 1961-1967, Vol.II. The Iron Age Extramural Quarter on the south-east Hill. Monographs in Archaeology No. 2. New York: Oxford University Press. Friend, G. 1998 Tell Taannek 1963-1968. III: The Artifacts. 2: The Loom Weights. Palestine Institute of Archaeology, Excavations and Surveys. Birzeit: Birzeit University. Fritz, V. 1990 Kinneret. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen auf dem Tell el ‘Oreme am See Gennesaret 1982-1985. Abhandlungen des Deutschen PalästinaVereins, 15. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

bibliography Fugmann, E. 1958 Gachet, J. 1987

Al-Gailani, L. 1965 Gal, Z. 1989 1993 Garfinkel, Y. 1997

Gera, D. 1985

341

Hama. Fouilles et Recherches de la Fondation Carlsberg 1931-1938. II, L’architecture des périodes pré-hellénistiques. Nationalmuseets Skrifter IV. Copenhagen: Fondation Carlsberg. Objets en os et en ivoire. Pp. 249-272 in Le centre de la ville, 38e44e campagnes (1978-1984), by M. Yon et al. Ras Shamra-Ougarit III. Mémoire No. 72. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Tell edh-Dhiba’i. Sumer 21:33-40; Pl. 1-9. Loom Weights or Stoppers. Israel Exploration Journal 39:281-283. Cabul. A Royal Gift Found. Biblical Archaeology Review 19/2:3844, 84. The Iron Age Phases in Area L. Pp. 218-294 in Hazor V, An Account of the Fifth Season of Excavation, 1968, by A. Ben-Tor, R. Bonfil, Y. Garfinkel, R. Greenberg, A. M. Maeir, and A. Mazar. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society/Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Tryphon’s Sling Bullet from Dor. Israel Exploration Journal 35:153163. Geraty, L. T., et al. 1986 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity. Pp. 117-143 in Preliminary Reports of ASOR-Sponsored Excavations 1980-84, ed. W. E. Rast. BASOR Supplement No. 24. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Geraty, L. T.; Herr, L. G.; Ø. S. LaBianca and R. W. Younker, eds. 1989 Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Garstang, J. 1932 Jericho: City and Necropolis. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 19:3-22. Gibson, S. and G. Edelstein 1985 Investigating Jerusalem’s Rural Landscape. Levant 17:139-155. Gifford, J. A.; Rapp, Jr., G. and C. L. Hill 1989 Site Geology. Pp. 209-18 in Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel, eds. Z. Herzog, G. Rapp, Jr. and O. Negbi. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. Gitin, S. 1995 Tel Miqne-Ekron in the Seventh Century B.C.E.: The Impact of Economic Innovation and Foreign Cultural Influences on a Neo-Assyrian Vassal City-State. Pp. 61-79, Pls. I-IV in Recent Excavations in Israel. A View to the West. Reports on Kabri, Nami, MiqneEkron, Dor & Ashkelon, ed. S. Gitin. Colloquia & Conference Papers, No. 1. Archaeological Institute of America. 1998 Philistia in Transition: The Tenth Century BCE and Beyond. Pp. 162-183 in Mediterranean Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Early Tenth Centuries BCE, in Honor of Trude Dothan, eds. S. Gitin, A. Mazar, and E. Stern. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

342 Glock, A. E. 1993 Gnivecki, P. 1987

bibliography

Taanach. Pp. 1428-1433 in The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, ed. E. Stern. New York: Simon & Schuster.

On the Quantitative Derivation of Household Spatial Organization from Archaeological Residues in Ancient Mesopotamia. Pp. 176-235 in Method and Theory for Activity Area Research, ed. S. Kent. New York: Columbia University Press. Golani, A. and B. Sass 1998 Three Seventh-Century B.C.E. Hoards of Silver Jewelry from Tel Miqne-Ekron. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 311:57-81. Grant, E. 1931 Ain Shems Excavations. 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931. Part I. Biblical and Kindred Studies, No. 3. Haverford, PA: Haverford College. 1932 Ain Shems Excavations. 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931. Part II. Biblical and Kindred Studies, No. 4. Haverford, PA: Haverford College. Grant, E. and G. E. Wright 1938 Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine). Part IV (Pottery). Biblical and Kindred Studies, No. 7. Haverford, PA: Haverford College. 1939 Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine). Part V (Text). Biblical and Kindred Studies, No. 8. Haverford, PA: Haverford College. Gwinnett, A. J. and L. Gorelick 1991 Bead Manufacture at Hajar ar-Rayhani, Yemen. Biblical Archaeologist 54:187-196. Hachlili, R. 1971 Figurines and Kernoi (Areas D, H, Trench C 1). Pp. 125-135 in Ashdod II-III. The Second and Third Seasons of Excavations 1963, 1965. ‘Atiqot IX-X (English Series). Jerusalem: Department of Antiquities and Museums. Hachmann, R. and S. Penner 1999 K~mid el-LÇz. 3. der Eisenzeitliche Friedhof und seine kulturelle Umwelt. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde. Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GMBH. Hadidi, A. 1987 An Ammonite Tomb at Amman. Levant 19:101-120. Hadjisavvas, S. 1987 An Introduction to Olive Oil Production in Cyprus. Pp. 98-105, Figs. 1-18 in Olive Oil in Antiquity, eds. M. Heltzer and E. Eitam. 1987 Conference, Haifa. Haifa: University of Haifa, Israel Oil Industry Museum, Dagon Museum. Harding, G. L. 1945 Two Iron Age Tombs from ‘Amman. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine 11:67-74, Pls. XVII-XVIII. 1948 An Iron Age Tomb at Sahab. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine 13:92-102, Pls. XXXIV-XXXV. 1950 An Iron-Age Tomb at Meqabelein. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine 14:44-48, Pls. XIII-XVII. 1951 Two Iron-Age Tombs in Amman. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 1:37-40, Pl. XIV.

bibliography Harrak, A. 1987 1988 Harrison, M. 1947

343

Another Specimen of an Assyrian Game. Archiv für Orientforschung 34:56-57. Preliminary Remarks on the Grave Recently Discovered in the North-West Palace at Nimrud. Bulletin of the Canadian Society of Mesopotamian Studies 16:25-29.

Toilet Articles, Jewelry, and Other Artistic Products. Pp. 265272 in Tell en-Naßbeh, 1: Archaeological and Historical Results, by C. C. McCown. Berkeley: The Palestine Institute of Pacific School of Religion and New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. Herr, L. G.; Geraty, L. T.; LaBianca, Ø. S. and R. W. Younker 1991 Madaba Plains Project: The 1989 Excavations at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 35:155179. 1994 Madaba Plains Project: The 1992 Excavations at Tell el-‘Umeiri, Tell Jalul, and Vicinity. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 38:147-72. Herr, L. G.; Geraty, L. T.; LaBianca, Ø. S.; Younker, R. W. and D. R. Clark 1996 Madaba Plains Project 1994: Excavations at Tall al-‘Umayri, Tall Jalul, and Vicinity. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 40:63-81. Herrmann, G. 1986 Ivories from Nimrud (1949-1963) 4. Ivories from Room SW 37 Fort Shalmaneser. Commentary and Catalogue. London: British School of Archaeology in Iraq. Herzog, Z. 1984 Beer-sheba II: the Early Iron Age Settlements. Publications of the Institute of Archaeology 7. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Herzog, Z.; Rapp, G. Jr., and O. Negbi, eds. 1989 Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. Hestrin, R. 1987 The Lachish Ewer and the Asherah. Israel Exploration Journal 37:212-223. Higgins, R. A. 1970 Catalogue of the Terracottas in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities British Museum. Vol. 1. London: The Trustees of the British Museum. Hodson, F. R. 1982 Some Aspects of Archaeological Classification. Pp. 20-29 in Essays in Archaeological Typology, eds. R. Whallon and J. A. Brown. Evanston, IL: Center for American Archaeology Press. Hogarth, D. G. 1914 Carchemish: Report on the Excavations at Djerablus on behalf of the British Museum. Vol. 1. London: The British Museum. Holladay, J. S., Jr. 1987 Religion in Israel and Judah Under the Monarchy: An Explicitly Archaeological Approach. Pp. 249-299 in Ancient Israelite Religion, eds. P. D. Miller, P. D. Hanson, and S. D. McBride. Philadelphia.: Fortress Press.

344

bibliography

Holland, T. A. 1977 A Study of Palestinian Iron Age Baked Clay Figurines, with special reference to Jerusalem, Cave 1. Levant IX:121-155. Homès-Fredericq, D. 1987 Possible Phoenician Influences in Jordan in the Iron Age. Pp. 8996 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan III, ed. A. Hadidi. Amman: Department of Antiquities. 1992 Late Bronze and Iron Age Evidence from Lehun in Moab. Pp. 187-202 in Early Edom and Moab. The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan, ed. P. Bienkowski. Sheffield Archaeological Monographs, 7. Sheffield: J. R. Collis Publications. Hope, C. A. 1981 Two Ancient Egyptian Potter’s Wheels. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities XI:127-133. Hopkins, D. C. 1985 The Highlands of Canaan. The Social World of Biblical Antiquity Series, 3. Sheffield: The Almond Press. Humbert, J.-B. and F. Zayadine 1992 Trois campagnes de fouilles à Amman (1988-1991). Troisième terrasse de la Citadelle. Revue Biblique 99:214-260. Ibrahim, M. M. 1971 Two Ammonite Statuettes from Khirbet El-Hajjar. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 16:91-97; Pls. I-III. 1974 Second Season of Excavation at Sahab, 1973 (Preliminary Report). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 19:55-61, Pls. XII-XXIII. 1975 Third Season of Excavations at Sahab, 1975 (Preliminary Report). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 20:69-82, Pls. XXV-XXXIV. Ibrahim, M. M. and R. L. Gordon 1987 A Cemetery at Queen Alia International Airport. Yarmouk University Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology Series, Vol. 1. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Ibrahim, M. M. and G. van der Kooij 1986 Excavations at Deir ‘Alla, Season 1984. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 30:131-143. Inge, C. H. 1938 Excavations at Tell ed-Duweir. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 70:240-256. Iliffe, J. H. 1944 A Model Shrine of Phoenician Style. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine 11:91-92. Jacobs, P. F. 1993 Lahav Research Project. 1993 Season. Report Part I, Excavations in Field IV. Unpublished field report. Jacobs, P. F. and O. Borowski 1992 Lahav Research Project. 1992 Season. Report Part I, Excavations in Field IV. Unpublished report. JADIS 1995 Jordan Archaeological Database Information System. Amman: Department of Antiquities of Jordan.

bibliography Jaeger, B. 1982 James, F. 1966

345

Essai de classification et datation des scarabées de Menkhéperrê. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis: Series Archaeologica, 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.

The Iron Age at Beth Shan. Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania. James, F. W. and P. E. McGovern 1993 The Late Bronze Egyptian Garrison at Beth Shan: A Study of Levels VII and VIII. University Museum Monograph 85. Phila.: The University Museum. Joukowsky, M. 1980 A Complete Manual of Field Archaeology. Tools and Techniques of Field Work for Archaeologists. New York: Prentice Hall Press. Karageorghis, J. 1980 La grande déesse à Salamine. Pp. 203-213 in Salamine de Chypre. Histoire et archéologie. Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, No. 578. Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Keel, O. 1994 Philistine ‘Anchor’ Seals. Israel Exploration Journal 44:21-35. Keel, O. and C. Uehlinger 1998 Gods, Goddesses and Images of God in Ancient Israel, trans. Th. H. Trapp, Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. Kelm, G. L. and A. Mazar 1982 Three Seasons of Excavations at Tel Batash–Biblical Timnah. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 248:1-36. Kelm, G. L. and A. Mazar 1987 Seventh-Century B.C.E. Oil Presses at Tel Batash, Biblical Timnah. Pp. 121-127 in Olive Oil in Antiquity, eds. M. Heltzer and E. Eitam. 1987 Conference, Haifa. Haifa: University of Haifa, Israel Oil Industry Museum, Dagon Museum. 1991 Tel Batash (Timnah) Excavations: Third Preliminary Report, 1984-1989. Pp. 47-67 in Preliminary Reports of ASOR-Sponsored Excavations 1982-1989, ed. W. E. Rast. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, Supplement 27. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 1995 Timnah. A Biblical City in the Sorek Valley. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Kelso, J. L. and W. F. Albright 1968 The Excavation of Bethel. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 39. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research. Kempinski, A. and V. Fritz 1977 Excavations at Tel Masos (Khirbet el-Meshâsh), Preliminary Report on the Third Season, 1975. Tel Aviv 4:136-158. Kent, S. 1984 Analyzing Activity Areas: An Ethnoarchaeological Study of the Use of Space. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

346 Kent, S., ed. 1987

bibliography

Method and Theory for Activity Area Research. New York: Columbia University Press.

Kenyon, K. M. 1957 Miscellaneous Objects in Metal, Bone and Stone. Pp. 439-468 in The Objects from Samaria. Samaria-Sebaste III, by J. W. Crowfoot, G. M. Crowfoot and K. M. Kenyon. London: Palestine Exploration Fund. Kenyon, K. M. and T. A. Holland 1983 Excavations at Jericho. Vol. V. The Pottery Phases of the Tell and Other Finds. London: The British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. Kertesz, T. 1989a Beads and Pendants. Pp. 370-374 in Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel, eds. Herzog, Z.; Rapp, G., Jr.; and O. Negbi. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. 1989b Terracottas and Worked Bone Artifacts. Pp. 361-364 in Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel, eds. Herzog, Z.; Rapp, G., Jr.; and O. Negbi. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. Kleiner, F. S. 1975 Greek and Roman Coins in the Athenian Agora. Picture Book #15. Princeton, New Jersey: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Kletter, R. 1991 The Rujm el-Malfuf Buildings. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 284:33-50. 1996 The Judean Pillar-Figurines and the Archaeology of Asherah. B.A.R. International Series 636. Oxford: Tempus Reparatum. Kochavi, M. 1976 Tel Aphek, News and Notes. Israel Exploration Journal 26:51-52. 1993 The Land of Geshur Project, 1992. Israel Exploration Journal 43:185-90. Kochavi, M.; Renner, T.; Spar, I. and E. Yadin 1992 Rediscovered! The Land of Geshur. Biblical Archaeology Review 18/ 4:30-44. van der Kooij, G. and M. M. Ibrahim, eds. 1989 Picking up the Threads...A Continuing Review of Excavations at Deir Alla, Jordan. Leiden: University of Leiden, Archaeological Centre. Koutsoukou, A. 1997 Miscellaneous Finds. Pp. 135-156 in The Great Temple of Amman. The Excavations, by A. Koutsoukou, K. W. Russell, M. Najjar, and A. Momani. Amman: American Center of Oriental Research. Koutsoukou, A. and M. Najjar 1997 Figurines. Pp. 127-134 in The Great Temple of Amman. The Excavations, by A. Koutsoukou, K. W. Russell, M. Najjar, and A. Momani. Amman: American Center of Oriental Research. Koutsoukou, A.; Russell, K. W.; Najjar, M. and A Momani 1997 The Great Temple of Amman. The Excavations. Amman: American Center of Oriental Research. Kramer, C. 1979 Village Ethnoarchaeology. New York: Academic Press. LaBianca, Ø. S. and L. Lacelle, eds. 1986 Environmental Foundations: Studies of Climatical, Geological, Hydrolog-

bibliography

347

ical and Phytological Conditions in Hesban and Vicinity. Hesban 2. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Lamdan, M. 1989

Flint Implements. Pp. 314-319 in Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel, eds. Herzog, Z.; Rapp, Jr., G. and O. Negbi. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. Lamon, R. S. and G. M. Shipton 1939 Megiddo I, Seasons of 1925-1934, Strata I-V. Oriental Institute Publications 42. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lapp, N. L. 1981 Tell el-Ful and Some Iron Age Constructions. Pp. 47-62 in The Third Campaign at Tell el-Ful: The Excavations of 1964, ed. N. L. Lapp. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 45. Cambridge, MA: The American Schools of Oriental Research. Lapp, P. W. 1969 The 1968 Excavations at Tell Ta‘annek. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 195:2-49. Lee, John R. 1985 A Preliminary Master Typology of Ground Stone Tool Functional Categories. Paper presented to the American Schools of Oriental Research Annual Meeting, Anaheim, CA. Leyenaar-Plaisier, P. G. 1979 Les terres cuites Grecques et Romaines. Catalogue de la Collection du Musée National des Antiquités à Leiden. Vol. III. Leiden: Ryksmuseum van Oudheden te Leiden. Lindner, M.; Knauf, E. A.; Zeitler, J. P. and H. Hübl 1996 Jabal al-Qeir: A Fortified Iron II (Edomite) Mountain Stronghold in Southern Jordan, Its Pottery and its Context. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 40:137-166. Lipi½ski, E. 1986 The Syro-Palestinian Iconography of Woman and Goddess, Review Article. Israel Exploration Journal 36:87-96. Lister, R. H. 1964 Contributions to Mesa Verde Archaeology: I. Site 499, Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado. University of Colorado Studies, Series in Anthropology, No. 9. Boulder: University of Colorado Press. 1966 Contributions to Mesa Verde Archaeology: III. Site 866, and the Cultural Sequence at Four Villages in the Far View Group, Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado. University of Colorado Studies, Series in Anthropology, No. 12. Boulder: University of Colorado Press. London, G. A. 1991 Aspects of Early Bronze and Late Iron Age Ceramic Technology at Tell el-‘Umeiri. Pp. 383-419 in Madaba Plains Project 2. The 1987 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. London, G. A.; Plint, H. and J. Smith 1991 Preliminary Petrographic Analysis of Pottery from Tell el-‘Umeiri and Hinterland Sites, 1987. Pp. 429-439 in Madaba Plains Project 2. The 1987 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

348 Loud, G. 1948 Low, R. D. 1991

Lupu, A. 1986

bibliography

Megiddo II, Seasons of 1935-1939. Oriental Institute Publications 62. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Field F: The Eastern Shelf. Pp. 170-2331 in Madaba Plains Project 2. The 1987 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Metal Objects and Building Materials: A Chemical Report. Pp. 135-140 in ‘Izbet Sartah. An Early Iron Age Site near Rosh Ha‘ayin, Israel. by I. Finkelstein. B.A.R. International Series, 299. Oxford: B.A.R.

Luschan, F. von 1902 Ausgrabungen in Sendschirli ausgeführt und herausgegeben im Auftrage des Orient-Comités zu Berlin. Mittheilungen aus den Orientalischen Sammlungen, III. Berlin: Georg Reimer. Luschan, F. von and W. Andrae 1943 Die Kleinfunde von Sendschirli. Sendschirli V. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Macalister, R. A. S. 1909 Report on the Excavation of Gezer. Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement 1909:14-16. 1912 The Excavation of Gezer, 1902-1905 and 1907-1909 II. London: John Murray. Marsden, E. W. 1969 Greek and Roman Artillery. Historical Development. Oxford: at the Clarendon Press. McCown, C. C. 1947 Tell en-Naßbeh, 1: Archaeological and Historical Results. Berkeley: The Palestine Institute of Pacific School of Religion and New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. McGovern, P. E. 1983 Test Soundings of Archaeological and Resistivity Survey Results at Rujm Al-Henu. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 27:105-141. 1986 The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of Central Transjordan: The Baq‘ah Valley Project, 1977-1981. University Museum Monograph 65. Philadelphia: University Museum. McGovern, P. E.; Fleming, S. J. and C. P. Swann 1993 The Late Bronze Egyptian Garrison at Beth Shan: Glass and Faience Production and Importation in the Late New Kingdom. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 290-291:1-27. McGregor, J. C. 1965 Southwestern Archaeology. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. MacKay, D. B. 1995 Tel Miqne-Ekron. Report of the 1994 Spring Excavations Field IISW. The Olive Oil Industrial Zone of the Late Iron Age II, ed. S. Gitin. Jerusalem: W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research. Mallowan, M. E. L. 1951 Excavations at Nimrud, 1949-1950. Iraq 13:1-20.

bibliography

349

Mallowan, M. and G. Herrmann 1974 Ivories from Nimrud (1949-1963) 3. Furniture from SW7 Fort Shalmaneser. London: British School of Archaeology in Iraq. Mattingly, G. L. 1996 Al-Kerak Resources Project 1995: A Preliminary Report on the Pilot Season. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 40:349368. Maxwell-Hyslop, K. R. 1971 Western Asiatic Jewelry c. 3000-612 BC. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd. May, H. G. 1935 Material Remains of the Megiddo Cult. Oriental Institute Publications 26. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mazar, A. 1982 The “Bull Site”—An Iron Age I Open Cult Place. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 247:27-42. 1985 Excavations at Tell Qasile. Part Two. The Philistine Sanctuary: Various Finds, the Pottery, Conclusions, Appendixes. Qedem 20. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Mazar, B.; Biran, A.; Dothan, M. and I. Dunayevsky 1964 ‘Ein Gev Excavations in 1961. Israel Exploration Journal 14:1-49. Mazar, E. and B. Mazar 1989 Excavations in the South of the Temple Mount. Qedem 29. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Mazzoni, S. 1992 Fibulae from Tell Mardikh and Tell Afis. Pp. 231-273 in Tell Afis e l’età del ferro. Pisa: Giardini. 1995 Settlement Pattern and New Urbanization in Syria at the Time of the Assyrian Conquest. Pp. 1-11 + Pls. I-III in Neo-Assyrian Geography. Convegno Internazionale, Rome, 10-12 November 1993. Quaderni di Geografia Storica 5, ed. M. Liverani. Rome: Università La Sapienza. McNicoll, A. 1992 The Hellenistic Period. Pp. 103-118 in Pella in Jordan 2. The Second Interim Report of the Joint University of Sydney and College of Wooster Excavations at Pella 1982-1985, by McNicoll, A. W. et al. Mediterranean Archaeology Supplement 2. Sydney. Meijer, D. J. W. 1989 Ground plans and archaeologists: On similarities and comparisons. Pp. 221-236 in To the Euphrates and Beyond. Archaeological studies in honour of Maurits N. van Loon, eds. O. M. C. Haex, H. H. Curvers and P. M. M. G. Akkermans. Rotterdam and Brookfield: A. A. Balkema. Meshel, Z. 1977 \orvat Ritma–An Iron Age Fortress in the Negev Highlands. Tel Aviv 4:110-135. Metzger, M. 1993 K~mid el-LÇz. 8. Die spätbronzezeitlichen Tempelanlagen. Die Kleinfunde. Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde. Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GMBH.

350 Meyers, C. L. 1991 Mienis, H. K. 1995 Mirau, N. A. 1997

bibliography

Of Drums and Damsels. Women’s Performance in Ancient Israel. Biblical Archaeologist 54:16-27. Molluscs. Pp. 276-279 in \orvat Qitmit. An Edomite Shrine in the Biblical Negev, ed. I. Beit-Arieh. Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series No. 11. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

The Social Context of Early Iron Working in the Levant. Pp. 99-115 in Aspects of Urbanism in the Ancient Near East: From Mesopotamia to Crete, eds. W. E. Aufrecht, N. A. Mirau and S. W. Gauley. JSOT Supplement Series 244. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. Miroschedji, P. de 1993 Notes sur les têtes de taureau en os, en ivoire, et en pierre du Bronze Ancien de Palestine. Pp. 29*-40* in Studies in the Archaeology and History of Ancient Israel in Honor of Moshe Dothan, eds. M. Heltzer, A. Segal and D. Kaufmann. Haifa: Haifa University Press. Mollard-Besques, S. 1954 Catalogue raisonné des figurines et reliefs en terre-cuite grecs, étrusques et romains. Vol I. Époques préhellénique géométrique, archaïque et classique. Musée National du Louvre. Paris: Éditions des Musées Nationaux. Monloup, T. 1987 Figurines de terre cuite. Pp. 307-328 in Le centre de la ville, 38e44e campagnes (1978-1984), by M. Yon et al. Ras Shamra-Ougarit III. Mémoire No. 72. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Moorey, P. R. S. 1973 Some Syro-Phoenician Bronze Caryatid Stands. Levant 5:83-90. 1985 Materials and Manufacture in Ancient Mesopotamia: The Evidence of Archaeology and Art. B.A.R. International Series, No. 237. Oxford: B.A.R. Muhly, J. D.; Maddin, R and T. Stech 1990 The Metal Artifacts. Pp. 159-75 in Kinneret. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen auf dem Tell el ‘Oreme am See Gennesaret 1982-1985, by V. Fritz. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins, 15. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Muhly, J. D. and P. Muhly 1989 Metal Artifacts. Pp. 267-313 in Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel, eds. Herzog, Z.; Rapp, Jr., G.; and O. Negbi. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. Musil, A. 1907 Arabia Petraea I. Moab. Vienna: In Kommisssion bei Alfred Holder. Najjar, M. 1992 The Excavations at Khilda. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 36:420-407 (Arabic). Negbi, O. 1970 The Hoards of Goldwork from Tell el-‘Ajjul. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 25. Göteborg: P. Åströms Förlag.

bibliography 1976 1989

351

Canaanite Gods in Metal: An Archeological Study of Ancient Syro-Palestinian Figurines. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. The Metal Figurines. Pp. 348-362 in Yadin et al. Hazor III-IV: An account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavation, 1957-1958. Text, ed. A. Ben-Tor. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Nicholas, I. M. 1980 A Spatial/Functional Analysis of Late Fourth Millennium Occupation at the TUV Mound, Tal-e Malyan, Iran. Unpublished dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Nodet, E. 1980 Perles. Fusaïoles et Pesons. Pp. 311-321 in Tell Keisan (1971-1976). Une cité phénicienne en Galilée, eds. J. Briend and J.-B. Humbert. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht; Paris: J. Gabalda. Oates, D. 1965 The Excavations at Tell al-Rimah. Iraq 27:62-80. Ogden, J. 1995 The Gold Jewellery. Pp. 69-78 in Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan, by C.-M. Bennett and P. Bienkowski. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology, No. 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Olavarri, E. 1983 La campagne de fouilles 1982 à Khirbet Medeinet al-Mu‘arradjeh près de Smakieh (Kerak). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 27:165-178. von Oppenheim, M. F. 1950 Tell Halaf. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Orchard, J. J. 1967 Ivories from Nimrud 1.2. Equestrian Bridle-Harness Ornaments. London: British School of Archaeology in Iraq. Oren, E. D. 1973 The Northern Cemetery of Beth Shan. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Perrot , G. and Ch. Chipiez 1885 Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, Vol. 3, Phénicie - Cypre. Paris: Librairie Hachette. Petrie, W. M. F. 1974[1927] Objects of Daily Life. Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd. Petrie, W. M. F.; Mackay, E. J. H. and M. A. Murray 1952 City of Shepherd Kings and Ancient Gaza V. British School of Archaeology in Egypt, 64. London: Bernard Quaritch. Piccirillo, M. 1993 The Mosaics of Jordan. Amman: ACOR. Petit, L. P. 1998 Grinding Implements and Material Found at Tall Dayr ‘Alla, Jordan: Their Place and Role in Archaeological Research. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 43:145-167. Platt, E. E. 1976 Triangular Jewelry Plaques. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 221:103-111.

352

bibliography 1978 1989

1991

Powell, M. A. 1992 Prag, K. 1987

Bone Pendants. Biblical Archaeologist 41:23-28. ‘Umeiri Objects. Pp. 355-366 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season of Excavations at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, L. G. Herr, Ø. S. LaBianca, R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. The Objects. Pp. 246-265 in Madaba Plains Project 2. The 1987 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Weights and Measures. Pp. 897-908 in Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 6. New York: Doubleday. Decorative Architecture in Ammon, Moab and Judah. Levant 19:121-127.

Pritchard, J. B. 1980 The Cemetery at Tell es-Sa‘idiyeh, Jordan. Museum Monograph 41. Philadelphia: University Museum. 1985 Tell es-Sa‘idiyeh. Excavations on the Tell, 1964-1966. University Museum Monograph 60. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. 1988 Sarepta IV. The Objects from Area II, X. Publications de l’Université Libanaise, Section des études archéologique. Beyrouth: l’Université Libanaise. Pritchard, J. B., ed. 1969 The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. 2nd rev. ed. with Supplement. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rabe, N. 1996 Perforierte Tonkugeln vom Tell el-‘Oreme. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 112:100-121. Radwin, G. E. and A. D’Attilio 1976 Murex Shells of the World. An Illustrated Guide to the Muricidae. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Redford, D. B. 1991 The Scarab Seal Impression. Pp. 379-380 in Madaba Plains Project 2. The 1987 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Reed, W. 1964 The Excavations at Dibon (Dh§bân) in Moab, Part 2: The Second Campaign, 1952. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 36-37 for 1957-1958. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. 1965 The History of Elealeh (’El-‘Al) in Moab. The College of the Bible Quarterly 42:12-16. Reese, D. S. 1986 The Marine and Freshwater Shells. Pp. 320-334 in The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of Central Transjordan: The Baq‘ah Valley Project, 1977-1981. University Museum Monograph 65. Philadelphia: University Museum. 1988 Recent Invertebrates as Votive Gifts. Pp. 260-265 in The Egyp-

bibliography

353

tian Mining Temple at Timna, Researches in the Arabah I. 1959-1984, by B. Rothenberg. London: Institute of Archaeo-Metallurgical Studies. 1995a Marine Invertebrates and Fossils. Pp. 93-96 in Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan, by C.-M. Bennett and P. Bienkowski. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology, No. 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1995b Marine Invertebrates and Other Shells from Jerusalem (Sites A, C and L). Pp. 265-278 in Excavations by K. M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961-1967 IV, eds. I. Eshel and K. Prag. British Academy Monographs in Archaeology No. 6. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reese, D. S. and C. Sease 1993 Some Previously Unpublished Engraved Tridacna Shells. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 52:109-128. Reimer, S. 1991 The Sling in Modern “Warfare.” Archaeology in the Biblical World 1/1:21. Reisner, G. A.; Fisher, C. S.; and D. G. Lyon 1924 Harvard Excavations at Samaria, 1908-1910. Vol. 1. Text. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Riis, P. J. and Buhl, M.-L. 1990 Hama, Fouilles et Recherches 1931-1938. II.2. Les objets de la période dite syro-hittite (âge du fer). Nationalmuseets Skrifter XIII. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet. Rollefson, G. O.; Kafafi, Z. A.; and A. H. Simmons 1991 The Neolithic Village of ‘Ain Ghazal, Jordan: Preliminary Report on the 1988 Season. Pp. 95-116 in Preliminary Reports of ASOR-Sponsored Excavations 1982-1989. ed. W. E. Rast. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, Supplement 27. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Rose, D. G. and L. E. Toombs 1978 Four Seasons of Excavation at Tell el-Hesi. A Preliminary Report. Pp. 106-149 in Preliminary Excavation Reports: Bab edh-Dhra, Sardis, Meiron, Tell el-Hesi, Carthage (Punic), ed. D. N. Freedman. The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 43. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research. Rothenberg, B. 1988 The Egyptian Mining Temple at Timna, Researches in the Arabah I. 19591984. London: Institute for Archaeo-Metallurgical Studies, Institute of Archaeology. Rowe, A. 1936 A Catalogue of Egyptian Scarabs, Scaraboids, Seals, and Amulets in the Palestine Archaeological Museum. Le Caire: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. 1940 The Four Canaanite Temples of Beth Shan: The Temples and Cult Objects. Publications of the Palestine Section of the University Museum, vol. 2, part 1, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Sass, B. 2000 The Small Finds. Pp. 349-423 in Megiddo III. The 1992-1996 Seasons, eds. I Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin, and B. Halpern. Tel Aviv:

354

bibliography

Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology, Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. Schaeffer, C. F. A. 1939 Ugaritica. Tome III. Mission de Ras Shamra. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner. Schmandt-Besserat, D. 1983 Tokens and Counting. Biblical Archaeologist 46:117-120. 1998 Ain Ghazal Monumental Figures. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 310:11-17. Schnurrenberger, D. W. 1997 A Preliminary Report on Basalt Sources in Central and Northern Jordan. Pp. 308-310 in Madaba Plains Project 3.The 1989 Season at Tell el-‘Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca, R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press. Scott, R. B. Y. 1985 Weights from Jerusalem. Pp. 197-212 in Excavations in Jerusalem 1961-1967. Volume I, by A. D. Tushingham. Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum. Sellers, O. R. 1939 Sling Stones of Biblical Times. The Biblical Archaeologist 2:41-44. Sellers, O. R.; Funk, R. W.; McKenzie, J. L.; Lapp, P. and N. Lapp 1968 The 1957 Excavation at Beth-zur. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 38. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research. Shatzman, I 1989 Artillery in Judaea from Hasmonaean to Roman Times. Pp. 461482 in The Eastern Frontier of the Roman Empire. Proceedings of a colloquium held at Ankara in September 1988, eds. D. H. French and C. S. Lightfoot. 2 vols. British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, Monograph 11. B.A.R. International Series 553. Oxford: B.A.R. Sheffer, A. 1981 The Use of Perforated Clay Balls on the Warp-Weighted Loom. Tel Aviv 8:81-83, Pl. 15-16. Shiloh, Y. 1976 Proto-aeolic Capitals and Israelite Ashlar Masonry. Qedem 11. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. 1984 Excavations at the City of David I. Qedem 19. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Singer, C.; E. J. Holmyard and A. R. Hall, eds. 1954 A History of Technology, Volume I. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Singer-Avitz, L. 1989 Stone and Clay Objects. Pp. 350-360 in Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel, eds. Herzog, Z.; Rapp, Jr., G.; and O. Negbi. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. Smith, R. H. and T. Potts 1992 The Middle and Late Bronze Ages. Pp. 83-101 in Pella in Jordan 2. The Second Interim Report of the Joint University of Sydney and College of Wooster Excavations at Pella 1982-1985, by McNicoll, A. W. et al. Mediterranean Archaeology Supplement 2. Sydney.

bibliography

355

Spaulding, A.C. 1982 Structure in Archaeological Data: Nominal Variables. Pp. 1-20 in Essays in Archaeological Typology, eds. R. Whallon and J. A. Brown. Evanston, IL: Center for American Archaeology Press. Stech-Wheeler, T.; Muhly, J. D.; Maxwell-Hyslop, K. R. and R. Maddin 1981 Iron at Taanach and Early Iron Metallurgy in the Eastern Mediterranean. American Journal of Archaeology 85:245-268, Pls. 4345. Stern, E. 1982a Excavations at Tel Dor, 1981: Preliminary Report. Israel Exploration Journal 32:107-117. 1982b Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period 538-332 B.C. Warminster: Aris and Phillips Ltd. 1984 Excavations at Tel Mevorakh (1973-1976). Part Two: The Bronze Age. Qedem 18. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Stronach, D. 1959 The Development of the Fibula in the Near East. Iraq 21:181206. Stucky, R. A. 1974 The Engraved Tridacna Shells. Dédalo X/19. São Paulo: Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia Universidade de São Paulo. Svoronos, J. N. 1975 Corpus of the Ancient Coins of Athens, completed by B. Pick; trans L. W. Higgie. Chicago: Ares Publishers Inc. Tadmor, M. 1982 Female Cult Figurines in Late Canaan and Early Israel: Archaeological Evidence. Pp. 139-73 in Studies in the Period of David and Solomon and Other Essays, ed. T. Ishida. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. 1996 Plaque Figurines of Recumbent Women—Use and Meaning. Pp. 290-296 in Eretz-Israel 25 (=Joseph Amiran Volume). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Thompson, H. O. 1972a Archaeological Notes II: Cosmetic Palettes. Levant 4:148-150. 1972b Tiede, L. J. 1989

Tigay, J. H. 1986 Timm, S. 1989 1993

The 1972 Excavation of Khirbet Al-Hajjar. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 17:47-72; Pls. II-XI. Ceramic and Clay Loomweights, Ceramic Spindle Whorls, Bone Spatulae. Pp. 282-284 in Tell el-Hesi. The Persian Period (Stratum V), W. J. Bennett and J. A. Blakely. American Schools of Oriental Research Excavation Reports. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. You shall have no Other Gods: Israelite Religion in the Light of Hebrew Inscriptions. Harvard Semitic Studies 31. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press. Moab zwischen den Mächten. Studien zu historischen Denkmälern und Texten. Ägypten und Altes Testament 17. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Das ikonographische Repertoire der moabitischen Siegel und

356

bibliography seine Entwicklung: vom Maximalismus zum Minimalismus. Pp. 161-193 in Studies in the Iconography of Northwest Semitic Inscribed Seals. Proceedings of a Symposium held in Fribourg on April 17-20, 1991, eds. B. Sass and C. Uehlinger. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, 125. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Trokay, M. 1989

Tsumoto, H. 1997 Tubb, J. 1988 Tufnell, O. 1953

Les deux documents complémentaires en basalte du Tell Kannas. Pp.169-175 in Reflets des deux fleuves. Volume de mélanges offerts à André Finet, eds. M. Lebeau and P. Talon. Akkadica Supplementum VI. Leuven. Peeters. Metal Objects from the 1993-1995 Excavations at Tell Mastuma, Northwestern Syria. Bulletin of the Ancient Orient Museum 18:5771. Tell es-Sa#idiyeh 1987: Third Season Interim Report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 32:41-58. Lachish III. The Iron Age. New York: Oxford University Press.

Tushingham, A. D. 1972 The Excavations at Dibon (Dhiban) in Moab. The Third Campaign 195253. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 40. Cambridge, MA: The American Schools of Oriental Research. Uehlinger, C. 1993 Northwest Semitic Inscribed Seals, Iconography and Syro-Palestinian Religions of Iron Age II: Some Afterthoughts and Conclusions. Pp.257-288 in Studies in the Iconography of Northwest Semitic Inscribed Seals. Proceedings of a Symposium held in Fribourg on April 17-20, 1991, eds. B Sass and C. Uehlinger. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, 125. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Ussishkin, D. 1978 Excavations at Tel Lachish—1973-1977. Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv 5:1-97. 1983 Excavations at Tel Lachish 1978-1983: Second Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv 10:97-175. Ussishkin, D. and J. Woodhead 1993 Excavations at Tel Jezreel 1992-1993: Second Preliminary Report. Levant 26:1-48. Van Beek, G.W. 1983 Digging Up Tell Jemmeh. Archaeology 36/1:12-19. 1989a The Buzz: A Simple Toy from Antiquity. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 275:53-58. 1989b Total Retrieval and Maximum Reconstruction of Artifacts. An Experiment in Archaeological Methodology. Pp. 12*-29* in EretzIsrael (Yadin volume) 20. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. van Beek, G. and O. Van Beek 1990 The Function of the Bone Spatula. Biblical Archaeologist 53: 205209. van Buren, E. D. 1930 Clay Figurines of Babylonia and Assyria. Yale Oriental Series, Researches XVI. New Haven: Yale University Press.

bibliography de Vaux, R. 1951

357

La troisième campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far‘ah, près Naplouse. Revue Biblique 58:393-430, 566-90. 1955 Les Fouilles de Tell el-Far‘ah, près Naplouse. Revue Biblique 62:541-89. Vogelsang-Eastwood, G. 1989 Textiles. Pp. 57-61 in Picking up the Threads... A Continuing review of excavations at Deir Alla, Jordan, eds. G. van der Kooij and M. M. Ibrahim. Leiden: University of Leiden, Archaeological Centre. Voigt, M. M. 1983 Hajji Firuz Tepe, Iran: The Neolithic Settlement. Hasanlu Excavation Reports, eds. R. H. Dyson, Jr. University Museum Monograph 50. Phila.: The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania. Wampler, C. C. 1947 Tell en-Nabeh, II: The Pottery. Berkeley: The Palestine Institute of Pacific School of Religion and New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. Watson, P. J. 1979 Archaeological Ethnography in Western Iran. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology 57. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Webster, T. B. L. 1950 Greek Terracottas. The King Penguin Books. Hammondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd. Weinberg, S. 1978 A Moabite Shrine Group. Muse 12:30-48. Wimmer, D. 1987 Tell Safut Excavations, 1982-1985: A Preliminary Report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 31:159-74. Winnett, F. V. 1964 The Excavations at Dibon (DhÊbân) in Moab, Part 1: The First Campaign, 1950-1951. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 36-37 for 1957-1958. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. Winter, I. J. 1989 North Syrian Ivories and Tell Halaf Reliefs: The Impact of Luxury Goods upon “Major” Arts. Pp. 321-332, Pls. 62-66 in Essays in Ancient Civilization presented to Helene J. Kantor, eds. A. Leonard, Jr. and B. B. Williams. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 47. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wood, B. G. 1990 The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine. The Ceramic Industry and the Diffusion of Ceramic Style in the Bronze and Iron Ages. JSOT Supplement Series, 103. Sheffield: JSOT Press. Woolley, C. 1921 Carchemish II. The Town Defenses. London: The British Museum. Worschech, U. 1989 Preliminary Report on the Second Campaign at the Ancient Site of el-Balu‘ in 1987. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 34:111-121. 1995 City Planning and Architecture at the Iron Age Site of al-B~lu‘

358

bibliography

in Central Jordan. Pp. 145-59 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V, eds. K. ‘Amr, F. Zayadine and M. Zaghloul. Amman: Department of Antiquities. Worschech, U. F. Ch. and F. Ninow 1994 Preliminary Report on the Third Campaign at the Ancient Site of el-Balu‘ in 1991. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 38:195-203. Worschech, U. F. Ch.; Rosenthal, U. and F. Zayadine 1986 The Fourth Survey in the North-west Ard el-Kerak and Soundings at Balu‘ 1986. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 30:285-310. Wright, G. E. 1962 Biblical Archaeology. rev. ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press. Wright, K. 1992 A Classification System for Ground Stone Tools from the Prehistoric Levant. Paléorient 18/2:53-81. Xenophontos, C; Elliott, C. and J. G. Malpas 1988 Major and Trace-Element Geochemistry used in Tracing the Provenance of Late Bronze Age and Roman Basalt Artefacts from Cyprus. Levant 20:169-183. Yadin, Y. 1963 The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands. 2 vols. New York: McGrawHill Book Company, Inc. Yadin, Y. and S. Geva 1986 Investigations at Beth Shean: The Early Iron Age Strata. Jerusalem: Qedem 23. Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Yadin, Y.; Aharoni, Y.; Amiran, R.; Dothan, T.; Dunayevsky, I. and J. Perrot 1958 Hazor I: An Account of the First Season of Excavations, 1955. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. 1960 Hazor II. An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Yadin, Y.; Aharoni, Y.; Amiran, R.; Dothan, T.; Dothan, M.; Dunayevsky, I. and J. Perrot 1961 Hazor III-IV. An Account of the Third Season of Excavations, 1958. Plates. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Yadin, Y.; Aharoni, Y.; Amiran, R.; Ben-Tor, A.; Dothan, M.; Dothan, T.; Dunayevsky, I.; Geva, S. and E. Stern 1989 Hazor III-IV: An account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavation, 1957-1958. Text, ed. A. Ben-Tor. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Yassine, Kh. 1984 Tell el Mazar I. Cemetery A. Amman: University of Jordan. 1988a Ammonite Fortresses: Date and Function. Pp. 11-31 in Archaeology of Jordan: Essays and Reports. Amman: University of Jordan. 1988b Tell el-Mazar, Field I: Preliminary Report of Areas G, H, L, and M. Pp. 75-135 in Archaeology of Jordan: Essays and Reports. Amman: University of Jordan. Yon, M.; Lombard, P. and M. Renisio 1987 L’organisation de l’habitat: les maisons A, B, et E. Pp. 11-128 in Le centre de la ville, 38e-44e campagnes (1978-1984), by M. Yon

bibliography

359

et al. Ras Shamra-Ougarit III. Mémoire No. 72. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Young, J. H. and S. J. Young 1955 Terracotta Figurines from Kourion in Cyprus. Museum Monographs. Philadelphia.: The University Museum. Younker, R. W. 1995 Balanophagy and the Bedrock Industries of Ancient Jordan. Pp. 685-691 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V. Amman: Department of Antiquities. Younker, R. W.; Geraty, L. T.; Herr, L. G. and Ø. S. LaBianca 1990 A Preliminary Report of the 1989 Season, including the Regional Survey and Excavations at el-Dreijat, Tell Jawa, and Tell el‘Umeiri (June 19-August 8, 1989). Andrews University Seminary Studies 28:45-52. Younker, R. W.; Geraty, L. T.; Herr, L. G. and Ø. S. LaBianca 1993 The Joint Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1992 Seasons, including the Regional Survey and Excavations at Tell Jalul and Tell el-‘Umeiri. Andrews University Seminary Studies 31:205-238. Younker, R. W.; Geraty, L. T.; Herr, L. G.; LaBianca, Ø. S. and D. Clark 1996 Preliminary Report of the 1994 Season of the Madaba Plains Project: Regional Survey, Tall al-‘Umayri, and Tall Jalul Excavations (June 15-July 30, 1994). Andrews University Seminary Studies 34:65-92. Zayadine, F. 1973 Recent Excavations on the Citadel of Amman. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 18:17-35. Zayadine, F.; Humbert, J.-B. and M. Najjar 1989 The 1988 Excavations on the Citadel of Amman. Lower Terrace, Area A. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 33:35763, Pl. LII. Zertal, A. 1986-87 An Early Iron Age Cult Site on Mount Ebal: Excavation Seasons 1982-1987. Tel Aviv 13-14:105-165. 1989 The Wedge-shaped Decorated Bowl and the Origin of the Samaritans. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 276:7784. Zevulun, U. 1987 A Canaanite Ram-Headed Cup. Israel Exploration Journal 37:88104. Ziderman, I. 1987 First Identification of Authentic Tekelet. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 265:25-31.

This page intentionally left blank

subject index

361

SUBJECT INDEX A adornment 23, 26, 27, 33, 39, 110, 314 alabaster 30, 49, 50, 122, 156 Ammonite 1–3, 59, 63, 73, 87, 134, 270–272, 288, 316 anchor-shaped 30, 31, 85, 102, 131, 132, 141, 148, 196, 197, 208, 210, 315 anthropomorphic 52, 53, 62, 63, 65, 69, 78, 220 anvil 105, 106, 122, 143, 144, 148, 153, 159 appliqué 53, 70 Aramaic 269, 270, 271, 272 Arcularia gibbosulus 280, 283 arrowhead 25, 92, 156, 167–173, 292, 294, 311, 315, 316 Aspatharia 48, 281, 286, 287 astragali 164 awl 53–57, 68, 91, 92, 198, 210 B ballista 304, 311 barrel 34–37 basalt 24, 25, 30, 31, 90, 93–95, 102, 103, 105, 106, 108, 113, 114, 117– 122, 124–130, 132–135, 137–140, 142, 144–148, 150, 151, 154–156, 158, 159, 161, 175, 184, 189, 203– 205, 298, 299, 304, 306 base 2, 7, 19–23, 25, 49, 50, 52, 62–66, 68, 70, 72, 79, 81, 82, 86, 94, 95, 97, 104, 107, 114, 116–122, 124–126, 128–133, 137, 138, 140, 143, 148– 150, 161, 165, 169, 170, 175–180, 193, 203, 211, 277, 298, 311, 317– 321, 323–329 basin 123, 130, 135, 136, 151, 158, 160, 161, 210 bead 21, 26, 32–41, 44, 45, 85, 89, 91, 110, 156, 184 bearing 112–115, 206 biconical 31, 33, 34, 38, 92, 162, 163, 184, 189, 190, 192, 195, 204, 205 bit 2, 6, 27, 42, 51, 64, 79, 85, 92, 93,

97, 99, 136, 169, 205, 211, 304, 307, 327 blade 95–98, 101, 168, 309, 315 bone 20, 26, 27, 31, 33, 78, 91, 92, 164, 166, 180–184, 188, 189, 198– 201, 210 bow 6, 24, 43–45, 92–95, 137–139, 142, 144, 146, 149, 175, 310 bracelet 46, 47, 54 breast 54, 55, 57, 58, 61–65 bronze 6, 41–46, 75, 77, 79, 89, 92, 93, 99, 100, 111, 156, 161, 168, 171, 173, 180, 182, 200, 201, 315 bull 70, 72, 74–77, 79, 310, 311 burnish 81, 106, 108–110, 278, 314 button 32, 40, 93, 162, 163, 184, 201, 324–329, 331 buzz 162, 163 C Canaanite 83, 270 capital 1, 6, 80, 82–84 carbon 293 carburized 292, 293, 294 carnelian 35, 36, 38, 110 ceramic 2–4, 6, 7, 20–22, 24, 26, 31, 33, 51, 55, 61, 62, 65, 66, 68–70, 72– 74, 79, 80, 82–85, 91, 93, 98, 99, 105, 122, 129, 160, 163, 166, 173– 175, 177, 183–187, 190, 192, 195, 211, 299, 314–316, 318 chair 53–57, 62 chert 6, 91, 95, 98, 102, 104, 122, 125, 155–159, 298–300, 302, 304, 308, 311 chisel 93, 99, 100, 210 clay 25, 52–54, 56–64, 70, 71, 80–85, 112, 115, 122, 129, 131, 154, 174, 178, 185, 191–198, 269, 315, 316 coin 5, 20, 89, 156 column 56, 62, 64, 80, 82, 83, 324 communication 54, 84, 86, 87, 99, 112, 129, 166, 206, 304, 311 conch 30, 40, 280 conical 31–34, 36, 38, 64, 79, 85, 92, 94, 113, 116, 119, 135–139, 145,

362

subject index

162, 163, 183, 184, 189, 190–192, 195, 203–205, 215 copper 6, 25, 41, 42, 45–47, 90, 92, 96, 129, 131 corroded 91, 167, 171, 201, 292–294 cosmetic 21, 47, 49, 50, 111, 122, 125, 149, 156, 198–200, 276, 316 cowrie 38, 39, 278, 279 crush 47, 48, 91, 103, 105, 112, 114, 121, 122, 124, 125, 129, 134, 136, 141, 143, 148, 151, 153, 156, 159, 210, 299, 300, 305, 306, 308, 310 cuboid 80, 145, 147, 300 cult 1, 2, 5, 6, 21, 22, 24–26, 30, 52, 55–57, 59, 60, 68–70, 80, 83, 87, 88, 98, 102, 106, 108, 109, 116, 121, 127, 133, 156, 157, 160, 162, 164, 169–171, 180, 202, 206, 298, 303, 306, 310, 314, 315 cutting 95, 96, 100, 101, 292, 299 cylinder 24, 34, 35, 53, 62, 63, 64, 85, 89, 93, 139, 140, 144, 197 cylindrical 34, 37, 38, 59, 63–65, 68, 93, 95, 108, 140, 143, 145, 159, 163, 175, 193, 195, 196 Cypraea annulus 39, 278, 283, 284 D dagger 100, 168, 169, 309 decorated 26, 27, 32, 41, 43, 44, 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 54, 58–60, 63, 65–68, 71–73, 79–83, 87, 88, 120, 165, 181– 183, 185, 188, 254, 316 disc 3–7, 20–22, 24, 26, 28, 34, 35, 39, 48, 51–53, 56, 58, 59, 61, 63, 74–76, 78, 82, 84, 86, 87, 91, 106, 111, 112, 114, 116, 117, 122, 123, 131, 146, 149, 155, 161–163, 165, 166, 169, 174, 176, 177–180, 183–187, 189, 192, 193, 195, 200, 202, 203, 206– 208, 279, 281, 297, 298, 314, 315, 317 dish 21, 28, 47, 48, 53, 54, 58, 60–62, 65–69, 75, 79, 82, 108, 109, 160, 163, 165, 178, 179, 185, 186, 276, 307 doughnut 31, 192–196, 204 drill 6, 7, 24, 28, 31–33, 35, 40, 48, 66, 67, 87, 91–95, 121, 137–139, 142, 144, 146, 149, 162, 166, 175, 184, 185, 187, 189–192

E earrings 41–43, 46, 47, 58, 59, 316 ethnographic 20, 21, 109, 192, 298, 301, 304, 307, 311 exchange 89 F façade 54, 64, 80–84 female 24, 25, 51–64, 69, 84, 315, 316 fibula 43–46, 89, 92, 156, 201 figurine 6, 24, 25, 51–71, 75, 77, 79, 81, 83, 84, 118, 315, 316, 318 fired 25, 81, 85, 129, 131, 192, 193– 198, 315 flake 97–99 flat 22, 35, 37, 43, 45, 46, 48, 49, 53, 79, 85, 90, 92, 98, 99, 101, 102, 104, 107, 108, 113, 115–120, 125, 130, 132, 133, 136, 139, 142–145, 148, 149, 153, 159, 166, 167, 176, 181, 182, 187, 188, 190, 206, 299, 300 flint 49, 91, 155, 158, 298, 304 food preparation 98, 103, 123, 124, 143, 149, 156, 158, 211, 297, 298, 301, 302, 304–306, 307 fossil 29, 38, 40, 41, 134, 150, 184, 276, 281, 282, 288 function 4, 6, 7, 19–21, 39, 40, 46, 48, 51, 67, 68, 69, 72, 73, 82, 85, 90, 91, 95, 101–106, 108, 109, 111, 112, 116, 118, 119, 123–125, 127, 133, 134, 136, 137, 139–141, 144, 145, 149, 155, 156, 159–164, 166, 168, 174, 175, 185, 187, 190, 193, 195, 198, 199, 202–204, 206, 208, 211, 276, 298, 300, 302, 304–308, 311, 314, 315, 318, 320 fused 169 G gaming board 166, 167 gaming piece 25, 164, 166 glass 20, 33, 34, 37, 38, 48, 49, 184, 279 Glycymeris 27–29, 40, 108, 109, 111, 212, 232, 276–278, 282–285 greenstone 24, 39, 283 grind 24, 49, 93, 94, 101–105, 108, 112, 114, 116, 118, 122–126, 131– 134, 136, 138–149, 151, 153–158, 206, 208, 298–306, 308

subject index grinder 24, 93, 94, 102–104, 108, 112, 116, 118, 122–126, 131–134, 136, 138–149, 153, 155, 157, 206, 298– 303, 305, 308 H hair 53–59, 62, 79, 111, 123, 201 hammer 6, 92, 102, 105, 122, 124, 130, 156, 158, 159, 297, 300, 304–306, 308, 311, 312 handle 25, 49, 74, 75, 80, 81, 94, 96, 97, 100, 117, 118, 119, 121, 122, 132, 174, 177, 183 Hebrew 1, 270, 271, 289 Helix 281 hemispherical 134, 149, 150, 152, 172, 181, 189 horn 70–76 horse 26, 69–71, 74, 75, 77, 78, 84, 88 I incised 26, 27, 49, 50, 60, 61, 68, 70, 71, 74–79, 83–87, 120, 166, 167, 177, 182, 183, 189 ink 20, 84, 269 inscribed 84, 87, 89, 90, 268 iron 6, 44, 46, 47, 89, 91, 92, 95, 96, 99, 100, 111, 129, 167, 168, 170, 172–174, 289, 292–294, 315, 316 ivory 24, 58, 73, 77, 83, 180, 182–184, 188, 189, 201, 206, 210, 315 J javelin 156, 167, 169, 170, 173 jewellery 23, 29, 33, 41–43, 46, 47, 54, 58, 63, 93, 108, 109, 276 K kernos 56, 72, 73, 77, 78 knife 96, 97, 168, 315 L Lambis 29, 280, 281, 285, 289 lead 42, 89, 111, 152, 184, 310, 311, 317, 319 leisure 162 lentil 306 limestone 24, 30, 32, 34, 49, 83, 85, 91, 93–95, 105, 113, 121, 122, 125, 127– 129, 131, 133–135, 137, 139, 144,

363

146, 157, 159, 160, 166, 175, 184, 189, 190, 191, 203–208, 211, 299, 301, 311 lithic 6, 91, 97–99, 156, 303–305, 315 loaf-shaped 24, 25, 104, 122, 123, 125, 129, 144, 145, 147, 150, 151, 153, 154, 161, 299, 305 loom weight 25, 191, 192, 196, 197, 204, 207 lower 41, 54, 59–61, 64–66, 68, 70, 71, 77, 79, 85, 101, 104, 106, 112–115, 122, 124, 133, 143–145, 149, 151– 154, 159, 160, 218, 219, 248, 249, 270, 277, 278, 280, 283, 285, 299– 301, 325, 327 lunate 41, 42, 58 M male 24, 25, 51–69, 80, 84, 218, 219, 315, 316 manos 306 Melanopsis praemorsa 281, 285 metal 20, 24, 34, 43–45, 61, 67, 70, 72, 91, 92, 99–101, 111, 129, 156, 167, 169, 180, 184, 192, 292–294, 305, 315 metates 306 military 155, 167, 314, 315 millstone 22, 24, 25, 102, 104, 106, 114, 122–125, 128–130, 132, 143– 147, 149–156, 159–161, 186, 299– 302, 305, 308, 310 miniature 83, 145, 146, 149, 157, 175, 187, 315 model 4, 6, 20, 52, 54, 62, 64, 68, 71, 72, 80–84, 185, 188, 192, 301, 302, 304, 317 mortar 22, 24, 25, 47, 48–50, 102, 105, 106, 112, 113, 116–120, 122–137, 141–146, 153, 156–158, 160, 161, 205, 299–303, 305, 306, 316 mould 51, 53, 55, 56, 58, 59, 61, 62, 65, 70, 71, 76, 129, 131, 132, 287, 311, 315 mulberry 43 Murex brandaris 110, 280, 283, 285 mushroom 174–176, 315 N naked 55, 59–65, 269 natural 21, 27, 28, 30, 42, 106, 107,

364

subject index

110, 111, 135, 157, 203, 208, 209, 211, 277, 282–284, 297, 301, 304, 305 needle 91, 93, 161, 180, 200, 201

proto-Aeolic 83 protome 20, 72 pulverize 136, 157, 305 Q

O obsidian 24, 98 ostracon 84, 268, 269, 270, 316 oval 25, 41, 65, 86, 99, 108, 117, 125, 128–131, 134, 135, 137, 138, 144, 145, 149–152, 154, 157, 160, 170, 177, 193–196, 208, 311 P paint 24, 25, 48, 54–59, 63–65, 68, 69, 71, 74–78, 80–84, 175, 192, 208, 307, 314, 325 palette 48–51, 127, 132, 156 paradigm 301, 302 pecking 102–104, 156–158, 300 pendant 24–27, 29–33, 39, 41, 43, 55, 61, 70, 74–78, 79, 91, 108, 111, 164, 197, 278, 283 perforated 22, 24, 26, 28, 29, 31–33, 39, 40, 85, 101, 102, 112, 114, 161, 163, 164, 175, 184, 186, 187, 189, 192, 193, 195, 197, 201–206, 208, 209, 261, 299–301 pestle 22, 24, 25, 48, 93, 94, 102, 106, 116–118, 122–125, 130–134, 136– 146, 148, 151, 156, 158, 175, 299– 302, 304–306, 308 petal 55 pigment 269, 279 pillar 24, 55, 56, 59, 61–65, 83, 192 plaque 52, 53, 55, 59–61 point 3, 24, 29, 55, 59–61, 63, 64, 67, 69, 71, 74, 79, 83, 86, 91, 92, 96, 98, 102, 111, 141, 156, 163, 167–173, 181, 195, 198, 200, 204, 226, 292– 294, 298, 302–305, 308, 314–316, 326 polish 24, 25, 27–30, 48–50, 67, 90, 101, 106–108, 123, 144–146, 157, 198, 279, 292 polos 57 potter’s wheel 113, 114, 206 pounder 6, 48, 102, 103, 122–125, 138, 141, 146, 155–158, 298, 304, 305, 308, 312 projectile 292–294, 302

quern 24, 103, 104, 106, 112, 115, 122–124, 131, 136, 142, 143, 148, 149, 151–156, 158, 159, 206, 208, 299–301, 303, 305, 308 R ram 2–4, 6, 7, 20–26, 31–33, 51, 55, 61, 62, 65–76, 78–85, 91, 93, 98, 99, 105, 110, 122, 129, 137, 140–142, 160, 162, 163, 165, 166, 173–175, 177–179, 183–187, 190, 192, 195, 197, 211, 214, 220, 222, 243, 254, 258, 259, 269–272, 299, 300, 309, 314–321, 323–326, 328–331 rectangular 32, 33, 43, 45, 80, 99, 103, 107, 111, 116, 120, 121, 125, 128– 130, 132, 133, 140, 141, 143, 146– 148, 160, 162, 196, 299, 300, 306, 308 relief 41, 53, 58–62, 69, 76, 77, 83, 85, 87, 307, 309, 310 reworked 7, 19, 22, 32, 33, 98, 99, 122, 128, 162–166, 174, 177–179, 184– 187, 190, 315, 319, 320 ring 3–6, 19, 20, 21, 23–27, 30, 33, 35, 41–44, 46–50, 54–59, 61–68, 71–73, 77, 78, 80–86, 88, 90–93, 95, 97, 99, 100, 102, 106, 112–119, 121–124, 129, 130, 135, 136, 143–145, 150– 152, 154–156, 158, 159, 161, 162, 164, 177, 182–185, 187, 189–195, 199–206, 208, 217, 269–272, 278, 279, 281, 294, 297, 300, 301, 304– 309, 311, 315–318, 321, 327, 329 rivet 43–45, 96, 97, 100 roller 93, 95, 194, 301 round 3, 5–7, 21, 23, 26, 28, 30–33, 43, 45–48, 50, 53, 54, 56, 58–61, 63, 68, 70–73, 75–81, 87, 88, 91, 93, 94, 96, 99–101, 103, 106, 107, 109, 113, 115–123, 125–127, 130–139, 144, 145, 149, 154–158, 160, 162, 174– 176, 180, 182, 183, 186, 189, 190, 193, 194, 196–198, 201–204, 208, 238, 277, 278, 280, 283, 284, 292,

subject index 297–299, 301, 304, 305, 307, 310, 314 S saddle 24, 106, 122, 123, 149, 151, 153–155, 158, 159, 299–301, 305 sandstone 101, 102, 104, 108, 122, 130, 131, 144, 147, 158, 177, 299, 306 scale 47, 89, 90, 95, 105, 114, 119, 130, 131, 135, 146, 147, 161, 182, 319, 327 scarab 24, 25, 63, 85–87 scaraboid 24, 25, 63, 85, 87 scraper 98, 99 sea urchin 29, 38, 40, 41, 184, 276, 281, 282 seal 4, 6, 24, 25, 35, 63, 73, 81, 83, 85– 90, 97, 156, 174, 211, 315 sharpen 99, 101, 210, 300 shawl 53–57, 68 shell 21, 26,–31, 34, 35, 38, 39, 40, 47, 48, 106, 108–111, 122, 150, 276, 277–281, 289, 290 sherd 3, 7, 19, 20, 22, 32, 33, 53, 69, 74, 75, 80, 81, 83, 84, 91, 93, 98, 99, 105, 109, 122, 162–166, 174, 177– 179, 184–187, 190, 268, 269, 315, 319, 320 shrine 6, 39, 52, 54, 62, 64, 66, 71, 80– 84, 167, 201 silver 41–43 slab 41, 105, 145, 154, 156, 159, 167, 208, 209, 303, 306 slip 24, 25, 56, 57, 59, 60, 62, 63, 65, 71–76, 78, 80–82, 91, 163, 175, 184, 314, 316 socket 24, 92–95, 100, 112–115, 124, 134, 135, 137–139, 142, 144, 146, 149, 168, 175, 203, 205 spatula 156, 198, 199, 200 spear 100, 169 spherical 34–37, 104, 134, 138, 146, 149–152, 156, 172, 181, 189, 190, 194, 247, 248, 259 spindle 7, 19, 22, 25, 32, 91, 93, 156, 162, 165, 177–191, 201, 206, 301, 315 spinning 91, 162, 180, 184 spout 24, 25, 70, 73–77, 122, 129 square 3, 32, 46, 81, 82, 91–93, 99, 115, 121, 125, 137–141, 144, 146, 147, 162, 166, 167, 182, 210, 300

365

stamp 85, 156 steel 292–294 stone 6, 7, 21–27, 29,–32, 34, 36, 37, 39–41, 48–51, 54, 59, 65–69, 80, 83, 85, 87–91, 93–95, 98, 99, 101–108, 110, 113–117, 119–137, 139, 140, 142–147, 149–161, 163, 164, 166, 167, 174–178, 184–186, 189–193, 197, 201–211, 214, 227, 229, 246– 249, 282, 283, 297–312, 314, 316 stopper 7, 24, 32, 85, 94, 165, 174– 180, 185, 187, 315 storage 23, 97, 131, 173, 174, 177, 178, 191, 278, 297, 302, 305, 320 Strombus decorus persicus 30, 280, 285 sword 168, 169, 198, 309 T tether 202, 203, 208, 209 tetradrachm 24, 89 textile 6, 180, 182, 192, 198, 199 tooth 281, 287, 302 toy 69, 156, 162–164 trade 83, 87, 89, 111, 297 trapezoidal 130, 133, 140, 143, 144, 149, 300 triangular 24, 44, 70, 71, 75, 77, 99, 125, 129, 134, 136, 142, 145, 147, 149, 152, 153, 162, 173, 177, 192, 199, 205 Tridacna 47, 48, 217, 279–281, 284, 285, 289, 290 tripod 24, 25, 55, 74, 116, 117, 119, 120, 127, 130, 161 trough 132, 135, 160, 161, 301, 306 typology 7, 21, 54, 64, 96, 111, 119, 123, 133, 137, 144, 150, 169, 176, 186, 209, 211, 297, 318 U unfired 25, 129, 131, 192–197, 315 Unio 2, 47, 48, 111, 281, 285–287 unperforated 26, 101, 102 upper 5, 24, 25, 32, 40, 42, 43, 49, 51, 53, 54, 56, 58, 60, 61, 64, 67, 75, 76, 80, 82–84, 86, 87, 93, 101, 103–105, 107, 112–115, 117, 118, 121, 122, 124, 125, 129, 132, 136, 143, 144, 147, 149–156, 159, 161, 176, 191, 192, 196, 208, 209, 218, 246, 247, 248, 268, 270, 280, 283–288, 299,

366

subject index

301, 310, 325, 327 V vessel 6, 7, 20, 24, 25, 33, 53, 56, 63, 69–81, 84, 85, 93, 106, 119, 122, 129, 160, 173–175, 177, 184, 206, 211, 297, 303, 306, 315, 316, 318

142, 146, 150, 170, 180, 183, 186, 189, 191–198, 201–210, 299, 311, 315 whetstone 101, 102, 108, 299, 301, 302 whorl 7, 19, 22, 25, 32, 40, 91, 93, 156, 162, 165, 177–191, 301–303, 315 working surface 104, 115, 132, 133, 143, 149, 153, 159, 160

W Z weapon 6, 111, 156, 168, 309, 311, 315 weaving 180, 194, 195, 198 weight 6, 22–26, 30, 31, 89, 90, 94, 100, 103, 105, 111, 112, 123, 138,

zoomorphic 6, 20, 24, 69, 70, 73, 74, 76, 78, 79, 315

subject index

367

GEOGRAPHICAL NAME INDEX A Aegean 55–57, 281, 290, 334 ‘Ai 29, 55, 63, 65, 277, 333, 353 ‘Ain Dara 55, 63, 65 ‘Amman 1–4, 23–25, 29, 44, 47, 48, 54, 58, 59, 61, 65, 68, 70, 75, 78, 84, 122, 131, 132, 139, 142, 145, 147, 163, 168, 187, 192, 268, 279, 316, 320, 342 Arad 270, 271 Ashdod 56, 57, 72, 73, 74, 77, 78, 158, 277, 280, 289, 339, 340, 342 Ashkelon 277, 341

344, 347, 350 Egypt 48, 49, 66, 67, 85–87, 92, 93, 289, 290, 307, 344, 345, 348, 351– 353 ‘Ein Gev 195, 349 ‘Ein Zippori 277 G Gezer 27, 38, 45, 50, 55, 81, 86, 92, 100, 114, 135, 155, 158, 163, 166, 167, 187, 195–197, 204, 282, 339, 348 Ghrareh 276, 277, 278, 279, 281, 290 Gibeon 200

B H Balu‘ 29, 97, 155, 158, 188, 205, 282, 290, 357, 358 Baq‘ah Valley 1, 30, 37, 38, 39, 40, 47, 51, 119, 127, 164, 183, 188, 205, 279, 290, 348, 352 Beer-sheba 31, 40, 47, 56, 90, 96, 163, 187, 195, 207, 333, 334, 343 Beth Shan 27, 29, 38, 40, 50, 77, 86, 92, 94, 95, 100, 107, 115, 120, 121, 126, 128, 132, 135, 138, 140, 142, 145, 147, 151–153, 155, 164, 170, 171, 178, 180, 183, 187, 189, 195, 197, 199, 204, 205, 345, 348, 351, 353 Beth Shemesh 27, 29, 39, 46, 56, 114, 164, 210 Beth-zur 45, 187, 200, 354 Bethel 26, 27, 120, 333, 345 Buseirah 1, 41, 171, 276–280, 282, 289

Habur 278 Hama 27, 34, 35, 45, 46, 52, 55, 63, 70, 72, 112, 114, 138, 152, 164, 166, 167, 172, 175, 181, 182, 188, 191, 194, 197, 202, 341, 353 \arr§n 271 Hasanabad 91, 182, 183, 304, 305 Hazor 6, 26, 40, 42, 50, 74, 75, 77, 79, 100, 113–115, 117–119, 121, 126, 130, 131, 135, 137, 138, 147, 148, 150, 152, 154, 159, 161, 167, 170, 178, 181, 182, 187, 188, 191, 194, 199, 204, 205, 268–270, 297, 301, 341, 351, 358 \orvat Qitmit 39, 334, 350 \orvat Ritma 349 \orvat ‘Uza 270, 271

C

I

Corinth 57 Crete 21, 57, 338, 350 Cyprus 62–64, 71, 80, 81, 298, 335, 339, 342, 358, 359

‘Izbet ‘arãah 42

E Edom 1, 2, 47, 134, 154, 158, 162, 185, 207, 270, 271, 276, 277, 280, 334,

J Jabal al-Qßeir 153, 155 Jalul 4, 66, 343, 359 Jerusalem 29, 35, 89, 90, 105, 112, 155, 158, 164, 183, 198, 200, 207, 271,

368

geographical name index

277, 278, 279, 281, 289, 290, 333– 335, 339, 340–342, 344, 346, 348, 349, 351, 353–356, 358 K K§mid el-LÙz 342, 349 Kharayeb 66, 337 Khartoum 113, 305 Khirbat al-Hajjar 59, 163, 191, 200 Khirbat al-Mudayna 34, 114, 166, 167, 175, 202, 311, 315, 337, 339 Kinneret 168, 294, 295, 340, 350 L Lachish 26, 27, 36–38, 45, 63, 74, 87, 92, 96, 109, 119, 155, 168, 172, 173, 187, 191, 195, 200, 279, 282, 309, 310, 343, 356 Locris 57 M Maqabalayn 42, 43, 47, 97 Mediterranean 57, 110, 276, 277, 290, 295, 333, 341, 349, 350, 354, 355 Megiddo 27, 30, 36, 38–40, 46, 50, 55, 56, 60, 72, 74, 83, 87, 92–95, 98, 100, 101, 107, 114, 118, 120, 126– 128, 131, 132, 155, 158, 160, 163, 164, 167, 171, 173, 177, 178, 180, 182, 183, 187–191, 199, 201, 205, 304, 309, 347, 348, 349, 353 Minet el-Beida 61, 188 Moab 1, 2, 52, 62, 64, 71, 81, 202, 205, 338, 339, 344, 350, 352, 355, 356, 357 Mount Ebal 128, 130, 136, 158, 359 Mount Nebo 64 N Nebo, Mount 64 Nile 281, 290 Nimrud 41, 58, 73, 77, 83, 310, 343, 348, 349, 351, 354 Nineveh 41, 76, 77, 310 P Pella 139, 142, 147, 158, 200 Philistia 81, 341

R Ramat Rahel 56, 83, 333 Rhodes 57 Rujm al-Henu 41, 282 S Sahab 1, 2, 73, 119, 120, 132, 138, 143, 338, 342, 344 Samaria 45, 50, 74, 75, 86, 88, 109, 137, 171, 172, 189, 190, 199, 278, 289, 337, 346, 353 Sarepta 46, 66, 79, 113, 114, 137, 166, 175, 182, 196, 197, 199, 204, 333, 352 Shiloh 74, 83, 94, 120, 127, 130, 137, 139, 145, 152, 184, 189, 197, 200, 278, 279, 281, 289, 333, 336, 340, 354 Sicily 55 Site #13 35, 52, 63 T Taanach 83, 171, 191, 295, 342, 355 Tall ’¿É \amad 271, 278, 290 Tall al-Mazar 168, 196, 268, 270 Tall as-Sa‘idiyah 29, 47, 58, 75, 77, 78, 90, 97, 100, 117, 127, 128, 149, 191– 193, 195, 279 Tall al-‘Umayri 2, 4, 19, 31, 33, 35, 36, 40, 42, 47, 51, 52, 61, 87, 113, 119, 127, 134, 139, 147, 148, 151–153, 155, 158, 161, 163, 168, 173, 177, 179, 180, 187, 202, 205, 268, 271, 292, 307, 308, 337, 343, 359 Tall Beydar 72 Tall Dayr ‘Alla 83, 97, 104, 139, 147, 151–153, 158, 164, 167, 180, 183, 191, 193, 195, 201, 279, 304, 308, 351 Tall Mastuma 42, 96, 100, 170 Tall Munb§qa-Ekalte 337 Tawilan 29, 35, 40, 41, 43, 47, 48, 51, 73, 93, 95, 97, 102, 109, 115, 126, 127, 140, 143, 151, 158, 164, 175, 185, 196, 200, 206, 207, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280–282, 289, 290, 334, 335, 351, 353 Tel Megadim 277 Tel Michal 6, 39, 42–45, 92, 96–98,

geographical name index 120, 126, 130, 134, 137, 138, 140, 193, 209, 341, 343, 346, 347, 350, 354 Tel Miqne 42, 43, 208, 210, 277, 341, 342, 348 Tell Abu Hawam 72 Tell al-Rimah 111, 351 Tell Batash 210 Tell Beit Mirsim 31, 49, 51, 52, 55, 75, 82, 120, 140, 161, 168, 190, 195, 210, 333 Tell Dover 277 Tell edh-Dhiba’i 129, 131, 132, 341 Tell el Mazar 38, 97, 100, 358 Tell el-Far‘ah (N) 30, 31, 35, 72, 82, 84, 92, 94, 114, 115, 120, 123, 127, 135, 137, 139, 140, 143, 145, 147, 168, 188 Tell el-Hesi 73, 123, 151, 195, 198, 200, 334, 335, 353, 355 Tell el-‘Or¿me 118, 120, 126, 134, 138, 147, 151, 154, 170, 182, 189, 195, 199 Tell en-Naßbeh 50, 56, 73, 90, 94, 119, 155, 171, 172, 173, 199, 210, 343, 348

369

Tell Jemmeh 162, 163, 356 Tell Kazel 277, 288 Tell Keisan 35, 39, 40, 50, 96, 98, 100, 140, 145, 147, 148, 171, 187, 195, 196, 279, 336, 351 Tell Mardikh 43, 44, 45, 349 Timna‘ 30, 105, 131, 208 Tyre 26, 33, 96, 111, 119, 126, 130, 134, 138, 140, 154, 163, 181, 186, 188, 204, 335 U Ugarit 61, 79, 94, 101, 103, 107, 108, 118, 119, 123, 138, 141, 150, 157– 159, 165, 175, 177, 182, 188, 209, 298, 354 Umm el-Biyara 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 282 W Wadi ath-Thamad 311, 337 Z Zencirli 72, 309

This page intentionally left blank

Tall Jawa Artefact Database belonging to Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan Volume 2 The Iron Age Artefacts

ms Access 2000, Windows 95/98/me/nt/2000 compatible

© 2002 Brill Academic Publishers

CULTURE AND HISTORY OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST ISSN 1566-2055 1. Grootkerk, S.E. Ancient Sites in Galilee. A Toponymic Gazetteer. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11535 8 2. Higginbotham, C.R. Egyptianization and Elite Emulation in Ramesside Palestine. Governance and Accommodation on the Imperial Periphery. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11768 7 3. Yamada, S. The Construction of the Assyrian Empire. A Historical Study of the Inscriptions of Shalmanesar III Relating to His Campaigns in the West. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11772 5 4. Yener, K.A. The Domestication of Metals. The Rise of Complex Metal Industries in Anatolia. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11864 0 5. Taracha, P. Ersetzen und Entsühnen. Das mittelhethitische Ersatzritual für den Großkönig TutÉalija (CTH *448.4) und verwandte Texte. 2000. ISBN 90 04 11910 8 6. Littauer, M.A. & Crouwel, J.H.and P. Raulwing (ed.) Selected Writings on Chariots and other Early Vehicles, Riding and Harness. 2001. ISBN 90 04 11799 7 7. Malamat, A. History of Biblical Israel. Major Problems and Minor Issues. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12009 2 8. Snell, D.C. Flight and Freedom in the Ancient Near East. 2001. ISBN 90 04 12010 6 9. Westbrook, R. & R. Jasnow (ed.) Security for Debt in Ancient near Eastern Law. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12124 2 10. Holloway, S.W. Aààur is King! Aààur is King! Religion in the Exercise of Power in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12328 8 11. Daviau, P.M.M. Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Volume 2: The Iron Age Artefacts. 2002. ISBN 90 04 12363 6

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan, Volume 1: The Iron Age Town (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Egyptianization and Elite Emulation in Ramesside Palestine: Governance and Accomodation on the Imperial Periphery (Culture and History of the Ancient Near ... and History of the Ancient Near East)

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan: Volume 2: The Iron Age Artefacts (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan, Volume 1: The Iron Age Town (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan - Volume 4, The Early Islamic House (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Excavations At Mendes: Volume 1. The Royal Necropolis (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Flight and Freedom in the Ancient Near East (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The God Dagan in Bronze Age Syria (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The Ancient Near East: A History

The Ancient Near East: A History

Ancient Ammon (Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient Near East)

Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Ancient Sites in Galilee: A Toponymic Gazetteer (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Ancient Egypt and the Near East: An Illustrated History

East of the Jordan

Egyptianization and Elite Emulation in Ramesside Palestine: Governance and Accomodation on the Imperial Periphery (Culture and History of the Ancient Near ... and History of the Ancient Near East)

Divrei Shalom: Collected Studies of Shalom M. Paul on the Bible and the Ancient Near East, 1967-2005 (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

A Companion to the Ancient Near East

A Companion to the Ancient Near East

Figurative Language in the Ancient Near East

Slavery in the Ancient Near East

Causing His Name To Live (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The Ancient Near East in the 12th-10th Centuries BCE: Culture and History

On Art in the Ancient Near East – Vol. 1: On the First Millennium BCE (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Origins: The Ancient Near Eastern Background of Some Modern Western Institutions (Studies in the History of the Ancient Near East)

Islam, the Ancient Near East and Varieties of Godlessness

Islam, the Ancient Near East and Varieties of Godlessness

Gods in the Desert: Religions of the Ancient Near East

History of Biblical Israel: Major Problems and Minor Issues (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Egypt, Canaan and Israel: History, Imperialism, Ideology and Literature (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 1, Part 2: Early History of the Middle East

The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 1, Part 2: Early History of the Middle East

The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 1, Part 2: Early History of the Middle East

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan: Volume 2: The Iron Age Artefacts (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan, Volume 1: The Iron Age Town (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan - Volume 4, The Early Islamic House (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Excavations At Mendes: Volume 1. The Royal Necropolis (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Flight and Freedom in the Ancient Near East (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The God Dagan in Bronze Age Syria (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The Ancient Near East: A History

The Ancient Near East: A History

Ancient Ammon (Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient Near East)

Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Ancient Sites in Galilee: A Toponymic Gazetteer (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Ancient Egypt and the Near East: An Illustrated History

East of the Jordan

Egyptianization and Elite Emulation in Ramesside Palestine: Governance and Accomodation on the Imperial Periphery (Culture and History of the Ancient Near ... and History of the Ancient Near East)

Divrei Shalom: Collected Studies of Shalom M. Paul on the Bible and the Ancient Near East, 1967-2005 (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

A Companion to the Ancient Near East

A Companion to the Ancient Near East

Figurative Language in the Ancient Near East

Slavery in the Ancient Near East

Causing His Name To Live (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The Ancient Near East in the 12th-10th Centuries BCE: Culture and History

On Art in the Ancient Near East – Vol. 1: On the First Millennium BCE (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Origins: The Ancient Near Eastern Background of Some Modern Western Institutions (Studies in the History of the Ancient Near East)

Islam, the Ancient Near East and Varieties of Godlessness

Islam, the Ancient Near East and Varieties of Godlessness

Gods in the Desert: Religions of the Ancient Near East

History of Biblical Israel: Major Problems and Minor Issues (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

Egypt, Canaan and Israel: History, Imperialism, Ideology and Literature (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 1, Part 2: Early History of the Middle East

The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 1, Part 2: Early History of the Middle East

The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 1, Part 2: Early History of the Middle East

Recommend Documents