Excavations at the Ottoman Military Compound (Qishle) in Jaffa, 2007, 2009 (Agypten Und Altes Testament, 91 / The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project Series, 4) 3963271140, 9783963271144

Citation preview

Ägypten und altes TestamenT 91 ÄAT 91 The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project Series, Volume 4

Excavations at the Ottoman Military Compound (Qishle) in Jaffa, 2007, 2009

www.zaphon.de

The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project Series, Volume 4 Aaron A. Burke and Martin Peilstöcker, Series Editors

Excavations at the Ottoman Military Compound (Qishle) in Jaffa, 2007, 2009

Edited by Yoav Arbel Zaphon

ÄAT-91-Jaffa-4-Cover.indd 1

01.06.2020 12:59:05

The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project Series, Volume 4 Aaron A. Burke and Martin Peilstöcker, Series Editors

Excavations at the Ottoman Military Compound (Qishle) in Jaffa, 2007, 2009 Edited by Yoav Arbel With Contributions by Omry Barzilai, Sylvain Bauvais, Katherine S. Burke, Adi Erlich, Gerald Finkielsztejn, Peter Gendelman, Ayelet Geri-Dayan, Alexander Glick, Yael Gorin-Rosen, Robert Kool, Inbar Ktalav, Peter I. Kuniholm, Brita Lorentzen, Yossi Nagar, Kate Raphael, Moshe Sade, Tzvi Shacham, Moshe Sharon, Naomi Sidi, Edna J. Stern, Limor Talmi, Anna de Vincenz and Tomasz Wazny

ÄGYPTEN UND ALTES TESTAMENT Studien zu Geschichte, Kultur und Religion Ägyptens und des Alten Testaments

Band 91

Gegründet von Manfred Görg Herausgegeben von Stefan Jakob Wimmer und Wolfgang Zwickel

The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project Series, Volume 4 Aaron A. Burke and Martin Peilstöcker, Series Editors

Excavations at the Ottoman Military Compound (Qishle) in Jaffa, 2007, 2009 Edited by Yoav Arbel With Contributions by Omry Barzilai, Sylvain Bauvais, Katherine S. Burke, Adi Erlich, Gerald Finkielsztejn, Peter Gendelman, Ayelet Geri-Dayan, Alexander Glick, Yael Gorin-Rosen, Robert Kool, Inbar Ktalav, Peter I. Kuniholm, Brita Lorentzen, Yossi Nagar, Kate Raphael, Moshe Sade, Tzvi Shacham, Moshe Sharon, Naomi Sidi, Edna J. Stern, Limor Talmi, Anna de Vincenz and Tomasz Wazny

Zaphon Münster 2021

Illustrations on the cover: • “View of Jaffa from the Northern Rock”. Copyright Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project. • Jaffa in the late nineteenth century. To the right – the entrance to the Qishle complex. Photo by Georgios and Constantinos Zangaki. Courtesy of Z. Shacham.

Ägypten und Altes Testament, Band 91 The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project Series, Volume 4 Aaron A. Burke and Martin Peilstöcker, Series Editors Excavations at the Ottoman Military Compound (Qishle) in Jaffa, 2007, 2009 Edited by Yoav Arbel With Contributions by Omry Barzilai, Sylvain Bauvais, Katherine S. Burke, Adi Erlich, Gerald Finkielsztejn, Peter Gendelman, Ayelet Geri-Dayan, Alexander Glick, Yael Gorin-Rosen, Robert Kool, Inbar Ktalav, Peter I. Kuniholm, Brita Lorentzen, Yossi Nagar, Kate Raphael, Moshe Sade, Tzvi Shacham, Moshe Sharon, Naomi Sidi, Edna J. Stern, Limor Talmi, Anna de Vincenz and Tomasz Wazny

© 2021 Zaphon, Enkingweg 36, Münster (www.zaphon.de) All rights reserved. Printed in Germany. Printed on acid-free paper.

ISBN 978-3-96327-114-4 (Buch) ISBN 978-3-96327-115-1 (E-Book) ISSN 0720-9061

TABLE OF CONTENTS SERIES EDITORS’ FOREWORD ........................................................................................................... XI CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION (Yoav Arbel) .......................................................................................... 1 Earlier Research in the Vicinity of the Qishle ........................................................................................... 1 Methodology and Impediments ................................................................................................................. 2 Contributions of the Qishle Excavations ................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................... 5 Works Cited ............................................................................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 2: THE NORTHEASTERN BASTION OF JAFFA’S FORTIFICATIONS (Tzvi Shacham) .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Introduction................................................................................................................................................ 7 Phase A ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Phase B ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Phase C .................................................................................................................................................... 10 Works Cited ............................................................................................................................................. 13 CHAPTER 3: STRATIGRAPHY (Yoav Arbel)........................................................................................ 15 Stratum IV: the Hellenistic Period, Fourth to Second Centuries BCE..................................................... 20 Stratum III: the Crusader Period, Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries CE ................................................. 23 Stratum II: the Late Ottoman Period – Late Eighteenth to Early Twentieth Centuries CE ..................... 32 Stratum I: the British Mandate, 1920–1948 ............................................................................................. 53 Works Cited ............................................................................................................................................. 56 CHAPTER 4: POTTERY OF THE HELLENISTIC, ROMAN AND BYZANTINE PERIODS (Peter Gendelman) ................................................................................................................................... 59 Hellenistic Period ..................................................................................................................................... 59 Early Roman Period ................................................................................................................................. 61 Byzantine Period ...................................................................................................................................... 61 Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 62 Works Cited ............................................................................................................................................. 62 CHAPTER 5: AMPHORA STAMPS AND FRAGMENTS (Gerald Finkielsztejn) ................................ 67 Catalogue ................................................................................................................................................. 67 Works Cited ............................................................................................................................................. 72 CHAPTER 6: A TERRACOTTA FIGURINE (Adi Erlich) ..................................................................... 73 Discussion ................................................................................................................................................ 73 Works Cited ............................................................................................................................................. 74 CHAPTER 7: CRUSADER POTTERY (Katherine S. Burke / Edna J. Stern) ......................................... 75 Part 1. Assemblages by Excavation Area ................................................................................................ 75 Part 2. Dated Assemblages: The Two Phases of Crusader Occupation at Jaffa ...................................... 77 Part 3. Pottery Typology .......................................................................................................................... 79 Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 93 Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................... 93

VI

Table of Contents

Tables ....................................................................................................................................................... 94 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 123 CHAPTER 8: PORCELAIN AND CERAMIC VESSELS OF THE OTTOMAN PERIOD (Anna de Vincenz)................................................................................................................. 127 Preface and Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 127 8.1. Porcelain and Fine Wares ............................................................................................................... 129 8.2. Glazed Earthen Wares..................................................................................................................... 146 8.3. Coffee Cups .................................................................................................................................... 158 8.4. Stoneware Bottles and Tankard ...................................................................................................... 165 8.5. Coarse Wares .................................................................................................................................. 167 8.6. Smoking Pipes, Narghile and Smoking Implements....................................................................... 174 8.7. Roof Tiles, Tiles, Kuzan and Antilia .............................................................................................. 216 Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................. 217 Works Cited .......................................................................................................................................... 219 Appendix 1: The Typological System-Abbreviations and Key ............................................................. 224 Descriptive Tables for Pottery Plates ..................................................................................................... 244 Figures ................................................................................................................................................... 266 CHAPTER 9: BACKSTAMPS ON NINETEENTH-CENTURY EUROPEAN PSEUDO-PORCELAIN AND STONEWARE SHERDS (Yoav Arbel) .......................................... 305 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 305 Producer Marks from the Qishle ............................................................................................................ 308 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 318 CHAPTER 10: DENDROCHRONOLOGICAL DATING AND PROVENANCING OF THE LATE OTTOMAN BUILDINGS (Brita Lorentzen, Peter I. Kuniholm and Tomasz Wazny) ..................................................................................................................................... 325 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 325 Material and Methods ............................................................................................................................ 326 Results.................................................................................................................................................... 328 Conclusions............................................................................................................................................ 330 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ 331 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 333 CHAPTER 11: IRON FORGING IN OTTOMAN JAFFA: A METALLOGRAPHIC STUDY OF IRON SLAGS (Sylvain Bauvais) .................................................................................... 337 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 337 The Economic Context of Ottoman Metallurgy in Jaffa ........................................................................ 338 The “Chaîne Operatoire” in Iron- and Steel-Making ............................................................................. 338 Analysis of the Set of Slags ................................................................................................................... 339 Synthesis and Interpretation ................................................................................................................... 344 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 345 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 346 CHAPTER 12: RECONSTRUCTING THE POPULATION HISTORY OF JAFFA: HUMAN REMAINS FROM THE QISHLE (Yossi Nagar) .............................................................. 349 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 349 Description of Bones from the Cemetery .............................................................................................. 349

Table of Contents

VII

Discussion .............................................................................................................................................. 356 Conclusions............................................................................................................................................ 362 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 362 CHAPTER 13: FRAGMENT OF AN ARABIC INSCRIPTION (Moshe Sharon)............................... 365 CHAPTER 14: A HOARD OF WEAPONS FROM THE LATE NINETEENTH–EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURIES (Alexander Glick) ................................................................................ 367 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 367 Historical Background – Rifles of the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries ....................... 367 The Rifles from the Qishle Cache .......................................................................................................... 372 Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 381 Conclusions............................................................................................................................................ 381 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 382 CHAPTER 15: CANNON BALLS FROM THE QISHLE (Alexander Glick)...................................... 383 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 385 CHAPTER 16: MUSKET BALLS (Yoav Arbel) .................................................................................... 387 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 387 The Qishle Musket Balls........................................................................................................................ 388 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 389 CHAPTER 17: COINS FROM THE QISHLE (Robert Kool) ............................................................... 391 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 391 Frankish-Period Coins ........................................................................................................................... 392 The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem .......................................................................................................... 392 East Mediterranean Currencies .............................................................................................................. 396 Medieval European Currencies .............................................................................................................. 397 Ottoman-Period Coins ........................................................................................................................... 399 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 400 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 401 Catalogue ............................................................................................................................................... 405 CHAPTER 18: GLASS VESSELS (Yael Gorin-Rosen) .......................................................................... 413 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 413 Glass Vessels from the Byzantine, Late Byzantine and Umayyad Periods ........................................... 413 Glass Vessels from Stratum III, the Crusader Period – Area A ............................................................. 414 Glass Vessels from Stratum II, the Ottoman Period – Areas D5 and E ................................................. 425 Glass Vessels from Stratum I, the British Mandate – Areas A, C, D and E .......................................... 425 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 430 Figures ................................................................................................................................................... 433 CHAPTER 19: GLASS BRACELETS AND BEADS (Anna de Vincenz) ............................................. 443 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 443 Discussion and Typology....................................................................................................................... 444 Dating of the Bracelets .......................................................................................................................... 446 Glass Beads ............................................................................................................................................ 446 Modern-Day Bead Production and Hebron Glass Beads ....................................................................... 446

VIII

Table of Contents

The Beads from the Qishle .................................................................................................................... 447 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 448 Figures ................................................................................................................................................... 448 Appendix (Catalogue of Bracelets; Catalogue of Beads) ...................................................................... 454 CHAPTER 20: HORSESHOES, BURIAL GOODS AND OTHER METAL FINDS (Kate Raphael) .. 459 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 459 Horseshoes ............................................................................................................................................. 459 Mule or Donkey Shoes .......................................................................................................................... 461 Stirrup .................................................................................................................................................... 461 Jewelry ................................................................................................................................................... 461 Bracelets ................................................................................................................................................ 463 Pendants and Beads ............................................................................................................................... 464 Weapons ................................................................................................................................................ 465 Buckle .................................................................................................................................................... 466 Weights .................................................................................................................................................. 467 Probes .................................................................................................................................................... 467 Miscellaneous ........................................................................................................................................ 467 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 469 CHAPTER 21: STONE OBJECTS (Naomi Sidi) ................................................................................... 471 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 471 Basalt ..................................................................................................................................................... 471 Beach Rock ............................................................................................................................................ 472 Marble .................................................................................................................................................... 472 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 472 Figures ................................................................................................................................................... 473 CHAPTER 22: LITHIC ASSEMBLAGE (Omry Barzilai) .................................................................... 475 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 477 CHAPTER 23: ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL FINDS (Moshe Sade) ...................................................... 479 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 479 Animal Bones from the Crusader Period ............................................................................................... 479 Animal Bones from the Ottoman Period................................................................................................ 479 The Archaeozoological Assemblages at the Qishle ............................................................................... 480 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 484 CHAPTER 24: MOLLUSKS (Inbar Ktalav) ............................................................................................ 485 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 485 Materials and Methods........................................................................................................................... 485 Results.................................................................................................................................................... 485 Discussion .............................................................................................................................................. 493 Conclusions............................................................................................................................................ 495 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ 495 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 496 Figures ................................................................................................................................................... 498

Table of Contents

IX

CHAPTER 25: MISCELLANEOUS FINDS (Naomi Sidi / Limor Talmi / Ayelet Geri-Dayan) ........... 499 Architectural Elements .......................................................................................................................... 499 Stone Objects ......................................................................................................................................... 499 Spindle Whorls ...................................................................................................................................... 500 Bone/Metal Objects ............................................................................................................................... 500 Domino Game Pieces............................................................................................................................. 501 Stoppers ................................................................................................................................................. 501 Conclusions............................................................................................................................................ 501 Figures ................................................................................................................................................... 502 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 508 CHAPTER 26: CONCLUSIONS (Yoav Arbel) ...................................................................................... 509 LIST OF LOCI .......................................................................................................................................... 511

SERIES EDITORS’ FOREWORD The publication presented here is already the fourth volume in the Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project (JCHP) series, which was inaugurated in 2011, less than ten years ago. At the same time, it is the first volume dealing with the results of a salvage excavation carried out by the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), one of the supporting organizations of the JCHP from 2007 until 2014. One of the central goals of the JCHP was to serve as an umbrella under which all research of the history and archaeology of Jaffa—in all premodern periods (i.e., before the end of World War I) could find research support, and to provide a platform for publication, something that was lacking in many earlier projects. From the beginning Yoav Arbel agreed to a cooperation with the JCHP, bringing IAA excavations starting with the Qishle presented here into robust dialogue not only with IAA excavations in and around Jaffa (many by Martin Peilstöcker) but also with those of the newly formed JCHP, which sought to curate, analyze, and publish the excavations of Jacob Kaplan in Jaffa. Over the years, Arbel has remained committed to this effort in his excavations throughout Jaffa and numerous publications in the JCHP series. This has resulted in wider, direct, and more robust collaborations between the JCHP and many of this volume’s contributors, including Katherine Strange Burke, Inbar Ktalav, Brita Lorentzen, Edna Stern, and Anna de Vincenz. Many of this volume’s other contributors have also previously authored contributions appearing the History and Archaeology of Jaffa volumes. We are grateful to Dr. Arbel for his patient cooperation with the JCHP and for making its vision a reality during its early years. The excavations published in this volume are the first systematic investigation of Ottoman remains in the lower town of Jaffa, and to our knowledge the only such volume in Israel dedicated largely to a final excavation report of Ottoman period remains. This is profound, because as noted by Arbel in this work, cultural heritage remains from after 1799 CE have not been previously identified in legal terms as antiquities in the manner in which earlier remains are treated as archaeological. Dr. Arbel is to be commended for his vigorous efforts to defend such scientific inquiry as important and intellectually vital, and for his fastidious efforts to seek analyses for the full range of materials that originated from these excavations, as seen in this volume. This work finds further context with other publications that appeared several years ago in The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 2 (see Part II. Historical and Archaeological Studies of Medieval and Ottoman Jaffa in Burke, Burke, and Peilstöcker 2017). Salvage archaeological work, particularly in an urban environment, faces many limitations such as identifying viable locations for scientific excavation, the safety of workers, logistics, budget restrictions, burglary, and still others. Despite all of this, the volume illustrates that an excellent excavation strategy combined with the excavator’s organizational abilities can yield impressive outcomes in contexts, under less than ideal conditions, which many would have feared to undertake. These excavations, in the former Israeli police compound of Jaffa, complete the archaeological investigation of the northern part of Jaffa’s lower town (Peilstöcker 2009, Peilstöcker et al 2006). Following an investigation by Jacob Kaplan in 1961 and 1962 (Area T; see Tsuf 2018: 84–89), the area of the Clock Tower was again excavated by Martin Peilstöcker in 2005 and Limor Talmi in 2007 (for publications, see Burke and Peilstöcker 2017). As real estate development in Jaffa leads to its gentrification and economic development, publications such as this provide an indispensable record of the past, which further fills out the picture created by historical sources for the late Ottoman period. Provided here is one of a very few publications of the archaeology of Ottoman fortifications, and probably the most detailed concerning the habitation of such a fortress. Taken together with recent publications of the photographic record of Jaffa’s Ottoman fortifications (see Shacham 2017), the archaeological evidence of Jaffa’s Jerusalem Gate (Arbel and Rauchberger 2017), and historical maps of Jaffa from the late Ottoman period (Shacham 2011), a more complete picture of the northern side of late Ottoman Jaffa’s lower town emerges. These are supplemented by careful study of a variety of weaponry and armament associated with Jaffa’s military history in the late Ottoman period, such as rifles, and cannon and musket balls. (Note that, while no cannon were recovered from the Qishle, examples of cannons found

XII

Series Editors’ Foreword

in Jaffa are today displayed atop the northern ridge of the site, west of the Jaffa Museum of Antiquities along the northern side of Mifratz Shlomo Street, where they were deposited by the museum’s staff under Jacob Kaplan’s direction.) The volume also offers the first extensive study of Ottoman period porcelain and ceramic vessels, and European wares from Jaffa, which is the first from the coast of Israel. De Vincenz’s study offers a unique perspective into the nature of late Ottoman trade relations and interactions with the Mediterranean and Europe. These studies are also supplemented by the first published dendrochronological study of a late Ottoman period building in Jaffa, and a study of the production of iron and steel at the site during this period. Finally, proper analysis of a range of other materials from the Ottoman period Qishle, as well as its earlier phases, complete its late Ottoman archaeological setting. This volume is also significant as it represents a number of other firsts for Jaffa’s archaeology. It is the first extensive publication of Crusader-period ceramics from Jaffa, which were analyzed by Katherine Burke and Edna Stern. More ceramics from this period remain to be published from the Ganor Compound and Flea Market excavations, as well as from the mound excavations by Jacob Kaplan. Nevertheless, as in other areas around Jaffa, Crusader and late Ottoman period remains are conspicuously prominent, especially when compared to remains from the early Islamic period. It has truly been our pleasure to work with Dr. Arbel to publish these results, and we graciously thank the editors of the Ägypten und Altes Testament series, Stefan Wimmer and Wolfgang Zwickel, for their work on this volume and support of the publication of archaeological research in Jaffa. Aaron A. Burke and Martin Peilstöcker, Co-Directors The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project June 2020 Works Cited Arbel, Yoav, and Lior Rauchberger 2017 The Jerusalem Gate of Late Ottoman Jaffa: An Updated Survey. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 2, edited by A. A. Burke, K. S. Burke, and M. Peilstöcker, pp. 163–178. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 2. Monumenta Archaeologica 41, A. A. Burke and M. Peilstöcker, eds., Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles, California. Burke, Aaron A., Katherine S. Burke, and Martin Peilstöcker (editors) 2017 The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 2. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 2. Monumenta Archaeologica 41. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles, California. Burke, Aaron A., and Martin Peilstöcker 2017 Appendix 2. Excavations in Jaffa and Abu Kabir, 1985–2015. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 2, edited by A. A. Burke, K. S. Burke, and M. Peilstöcker. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 2. Monumenta Archaeologica 41, A. A. Burke and M. Peilstöcker, editors. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles, California. Electronic document, http://dig.ucla.edu/jaffa2/node/2. Peilstöcker, Martin 2009 Yafo, Clock-Tower Square. Hadashot Arkheologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 121. http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.asp?id=1024&mag_id=115. July 17, 2010. Peilstöcker, Martin, Amit Re’em, Elie Haddad, and Peter Gendelman 2006 Yafo, Flea Market Complex. Hadashot Arkheologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 118. http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.asp?id=431&mag_id=111. July 17, 2010. Shacham, Tzvi 2011 Jaffa in Historical Maps (1799–1948). In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 1, edited by M. Peilstöcker and A. A. Burke, pp. 137–174. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 1. Monumenta Archaeologica 26, A. A. Burke and M. Peilstöcker, eds., Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles.

Series Editors’ Foreword

2017

XIII

A Panoramic View of Late Ottoman Jaffa from November 1860 by Louis Vignes. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 2, edited by A. A. Burke, K. S. Burke, and M. Peilstöcker, pp. 157–162. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 2. Monumenta Archaeologica 41, A. A. Burke and M. Peilstöcker, eds., Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles, California. Tsuf, Orit 2018 Ancient Jaffa from the Persian to the Byzantine Period: Kaplan Excavations. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 3. Ägypten und Altes Testament 89. Zaphon, Münster.

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Yoav Arbel Israel Antiquities Authority Between the late 1940s and the mid-1990s, archaeological work in Jaffa concentrated in and around the ancient mound (Bowman et al. 1955, Kaplan 1962, 1964a; 1964b; 1970; 1972; for recent surveys and a preliminary summary of recent research see Peilstöcker 2011, Burke and Lords 2010). Change came in the 1990s, following large-scale investment by the Tel Aviv-Jaffa municipality in local urban renewal. Infrastructure was upgraded, trade and tourism promoted, and developers initiated the establishment of modern hotels in historical compounds, subject to conservation of the original architectural core. This wave of development rendered previously unexcavated sites outside the mound available for archaeological research for the first time, resulting in a series of salvage excavations. The Ottoman military compound of Jaffa (the Qishle), its location particularly significant, was one of the largest sites to be excavated.

Fig. 1.1. The Qishle compound between the Clock Tower square, the sea shore, the Mahmouddieh mosque. The Qishle is located by Clock Tower Square, at the northern access point to the modern city and near the historical roads to Jerusalem, Samaria and the Galilee. The compound is part of a cluster of religious and government buildings constructed (or extended, as in the case of Jaffa’s central mosque) in this area during the closing decades of Ottoman rule (Figure 1.1). The continuous use of the complex by the Ottoman, British Mandate and Israeli security forces (see Chapter 2) prevented archaeological investigation within it. In 2005 the property was sold to investors who erected a new hotel, in which parts of the late nineteenth-century buildings were incorporated. In 2007 and 2009, prior to construction, the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) carried out extensive salvage excavations at the site, lasting a total of nine months. This report covers the results of the IAA excavations, while those of a final effort in 2011 by a Tel Aviv University expedition are to be published separately (Edrey and Gross, forthcoming). Earlier Research in the Vicinity of the Qishle As noted, no excavations took place in the Qishle before the present project; however, some were carried out in its surroundings. Excavations on Ruslan Street (Kletter 2004; Arbel et al. 2012), the Clock Tower Square

2

Chapter 1

(Peilstöcker 2009) and the eastern end of the sea promenade (Arbel and Volinsky 2011) revealed evidence of intensive activity during the second half of the Ottoman period (late eighteenth–early twentieth centuries CE). Substantial functional changes were noted, as the area developed from a fortified zone (Pierce 2011) with an open market and a cemetery beyond its walls to a government and urban center. The occupation gap between the Crusader and the late Ottoman periods, attested to by numerous historical sources (Tolkowsky 1924: 129–131; Burke 2011) and identified at other Jaffa sites (Kaplan 1974; Arbel 2010; Re’em 2010) was also confirmed in various sites in the Qishle’s vicinity (Peilstöcker et al. 2006; Peilstöcker 2009; Kletter 2004: 202–205). Other periods were represented mostly through pottery and other artifacts, with no associated architectural remains. Methodology and Impediments Excavations in a built compound like the Qishle presented challenges and difficulties that archaeologists are usually spared in open field sites. A profusion of derelict infrastructure––water pipes, sewer lines, cables and concrete foundations––considerably obstructed progress and dictated uneven dimensions for excavation squares. Walls over a century old were at risk of destabilization due to excavations next their foundations, asbestos roofs had to be removed, and workers and earth-shifting machines had to be kept safely apart. Additional concerns were the preservation of the historical buildings; the removal of a large volume of excavated soil without causing traffic obstructions in adjacent streets; obtaining the cooperation of merchants in the neighboring Clock Tower Square, whose businesses were affected by the excavations; and the omnipresent risk of physical or legal action by religious factions opposing the disturbance of graves, which abounded in the compound.

Fig. 1.2. Schematic plan of the main structures, Crusader walls and Ottoman graves.

Introduction

3

After most of the Mandate and Israeli buildings were removed, the site was divided into seven main parts consisting of the three original Ottoman buildings and four adjoining courtyards (Figure 1.2).1 All ground floor rooms were excavated, as were large segments of the courtyards (Figures 1.3–1.4). As most of the excavated ground consisted of deep soil accumulations, much of it intentionally introduced prior to the construction of the military compound, sieving was conducted only during the cleaning of well-defined floors or pits. Most of the graves were exposed for recording purposes to the level of the capping stones (see Nagar, this volume). The actual burials were not disturbed, because there was no salvage-related justification for the removal of graves that were not expected to be compromised by construction work. Contributions of the Qishle Excavations The Qishle compound covered a relatively broad area, allowing us to expand the excavation and better contextualize architectural remains than is possible in the small courtyards or narrow streets to which many urban projects in Jaffa are circumscribed. Finds mostly from the Hellenistic, Crusader and late Ottoman periods, three key phases in the history of Jaffa’s Lower City, reflected processes of abandonment and resettlement, expansion and contraction, and continuity and change. The contributions of Peter Gendelman, Gerald Finkielsztejn, and Adi Erlich enrich the growing corpus of local and imported Hellenistic pottery, and help delineate the unprecedented spread of Jaffa’s urban sphere beyond the boundaries of the mound during this period. Elements of culture, trade, technology, aesthetics, and political fortunes derive from the presentation of the Crusader pottery by Katherine S. Burke and Edna Stern, who were also able to associate Crusader architectural remains to specific phases within these intriguing two centuries. The Hellenistic, Crusader, and late Ottoman periods (see below) left various additional traces in glass, metal, stone, and bone objects, which are discussed in the chapters by Yael Gorin-Rosen, Kate Raphael, Naomi Sidi, Limor Talmi, and Ayelet Geri-Dayan. Robert Kool presents his conclusions from his study of an important assemblage of coins minted by Hellenistic, Crusader, medieval Muslim, and late Ottoman authorities. Additional economic and cultural perspectives on all three periods may be found in the osteological and malacological reports by Moshe Sade and Inbar Ktalav.

Fig. 1.3. The Western Courtyard: Crusader structures between Ottoman graves and drain channels.

1

Five areas were designated during the excavation (A–E). The areas appear on the plans and are referred to by some of the authors, but in light of the compound’s clear structural division, the stratigraphic description in this report (Chapter 3) refers mostly to buildings and courtyards.

4

Chapter 1

The late Ottoman period, represented in many Israeli sites in rich architectural and artifact remains, nonetheless exceeds the upper limit of archaeological relevance according to Israel’s Antiquities Law (Ajami 2011: 37). Many archaeologists consider this period too “modern” to merit archaeological attention, regardless of its legal status. Consequently, invaluable information that archaeological methods could have provided has been irretrievably lost (Baram 2002, 2007). Fortunately, attitudes are changing. A growing number of researchers now agree that despite the abundance of textual and illustrated original materials describing the more recent centuries, archaeology may offer a significantly higher resolution to our perspectives of relevant groups, cultures, and political entities. Messages are as embedded in their material remains as in those of any other time period. As late Ottoman finds comprise the largest and most varied assemblages from the Qishle, they occupy a large share of this volume. Heading this contribution is Anna de Vincenz’s broad survey of the diverse classes of ceramics of the period, an innovative study in both scale and content that no future researchers of the subject could afford to bypass. My discussion of producer stamps complements the chapter by Vincenz, who added another important report on the jewelry of the period. Much of that jewelry, and many of the metal artifacts covered by Raphael, Sidi, Talmi, and Geri-Dayan, originated in dozens of Muslim graves that were destroyed as the military compound was constructed. Yossi Nagar’s meticulous investigation of the human remains unearthed from mass graves or scattered in later layers offers an instructive outlook on Jaffa’s Muslim population between the eighteenth and the early twentieth centuries.

Fig. 1.4. The Eastern Courtyard: Ottoman graves over Crusader walls.

Introduction

5

The Qishle operated as a military compound under both the Ottomans and the British. Zvi Shacham summarizes its history in the opening chapter of this volume. The military legacy is reflected in several classes of finds, most directly in Glick’s investigation of an extraordinary hoard of weapons from the turn of the twentieth century. Earlier weaponry such as cannon balls, musket shot, and flint particles of flintlock firearms are described in separate chapters, by Glick, this author, and Omry Barzilai. Meaningful other technological, historical, and commercial angles of the Ottoman phases are covered by Sylvain Bauvais, who traced evidence for iron working before the military compound was constructed and by Brita Lorentzen, Peter Kuniholm and Tomasz Wazny, who studied the original wooden floorboards of one of the buildings. The fragment of an ornate late Ottoman fragmentary inscription is presented and contextualized by Moshe Sharon. In both substance and variety, excavations in extra-mound Jaffa over recent decades has challenged what was previously known or assumed about the city’s history and archaeology. Much of that substance and variety is encompassed in the results of the excavations at the Qishle. I was fortunate to be entrusted by the Israel Antiquities Authorities with the field direction and publication of the excavation, and to receive the cooperation of experts in so many fields, which I sincerely appreciate. We earnestly hope that all readers, whether academic researchers or interested members of the public, will benefit from our joint effort. Acknowledgements The Qishle excavations involved a large number of people who contributed at the site and in the laboratory and library work that followed the field project. Area supervisors Lior Rauchberger, Miri Cohen, Israel Korenfeld, Ronit Korin, Limor Talmi and Dr. Dor Golan and their assistants Oksana Ashkenazi, Rudi Haim, Rachel Ben-Ezra and Ksenia Petrov worked with me in the field under challenging conditions. Their efforts, dedication, and patience are noted and appreciated. I wish to thank Tsila Sagiv, Asaf Peretz and Itamar BenEzra (field photographers), Clara Amit (finds photographer), Irena Lidsky-Reznikov (pottery drawing), Carmen Hersch (drawing of glass finds), Vadim Essman, Slava Pirsky, Rivka Mishayev and Tania Meltsen (field surveyors), Natalia Zak (plans), Olga Shorr (glass and pottery restoration), Raisa Vinitzky, Gali Beiner and Helena Kuperschmidt (metal laboratory), Eli Bechar, Raed Abu Halaf and the late Shlomo Ya‘aqov-Jam (administration), Diego Barkan and Moshe Ajami (IAA coordination) and Skyview (aerial photographs). I am also indebted to Dr. Anna de Vincenz, who rendered invaluable assistance in the myriad technical and digital aspects involved in the preparation of this volume and to Miriam Feinberg Vamosh for her professional language editing and advice. The Qishle excavations were financed by the Orchidea Hotel Group. I am grateful to the series editors Prof. Aaron A. Burke and Dr. Martin Peilstöcker for including this book in the JCHP publications and to Kai Metzler, for his patient and meticulous efforts in editing this volume. Works Cited Ajami, Moshe 2011 Cultural Heritage Management: The Flea Market and Clock Tower Square Excavations. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 1, edited by M. Peilstöcker and A. A. Burke, pp. 33–40. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles. 2010 Yaffo, HaZorfim Street, Preliminary Report Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 122. Electronic document http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id= 1474&mag_id=117 August 13, 2017. Arbel, Yoav, Mohammed Hater and Stella Yechielov 2012 Yafo, Roslan and Mifraz Shlomo Streets, Preliminary Report. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 124. Electronic Document http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_ detail_eng.aspx?id=2117&mag_id=119 August 13, 2017.

6

Chapter 1

Arbel, Yoav and Felix Volinsky 2011 Yafo, Rezif Ha-‘Aliya Ha-Sheniya Final Report Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 123. Electronic document http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng. aspx?id=1698&mag_id=118 August 13, 2017. Baram, Uzi 2002 The Development of Historical Archaeology in Israel: An Overview and Prospects. Historical Archaeology 36(4): 12–29. 2007 Filling a Gap in the Chronology: What Archaeology is Revealing about the Ottoman Past in Israel. In Reproaching Borders: New Perspectives on the Study of Israel-Palestine, edited by S. Sufian and M. LeVine, pp. 15–40. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham. Bowman, John, Benedikt S. J. Isserlin, and K. R. Rowe (editors) 1955 The University of Leeds, Department of Semitics Archaeological Expedition to Jaffa 1952 Proceedings of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society 7. Burke, Aaron A. and Krystal V. Lords 2010 Egyptians in Jaffa: A Portrait of Egyptian Presence in Jaffa during the Late Bronze Age. Near Eastern Archaeology 73.1: 2–30. Burke, Katherine S. 2011 Mamluk Jaffa: A Note. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 1, edited by M. Peilstöcker and A. A. Burke, pp. 107–108. Monumenta Archaeologica 26. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles. Edrey, Meir and Boaz Gross Forthcoming The Stratigraphy of the Eastern Area of the Qishleh Compound. Excavations at Jaffa: The Mound and its Surrounding Area, Salvage Excavations Reports 11, edited by Z. Herzog, M. Edrey and B. Gross. Kaplan, Jacob 1962 Jaffa. Israel Exploration Journal 12 49–150. 1964a Jaffa’s History revealed by the Spade. Archaeology 17: 270–276. 1964b Jaffa. Israel Exploration Journal 14: 285–286. 1970 Tel Aviv-Yafo. Israel Exploration Journal 12: 225–226. 1972 The Archaeology and History of Tel Aviv-Jaffa. BA XXXV: 65–95. 1974 Tel Aviv-Yafo, Haşorfim Street, Old Jaffa. Israel Exploration Journal 24.2: 137. Kletter, Raz 2004 Jaffa, Roslan Street. 'Atiqot 47: 193–207. Peilstöcker, Martin 2009 Yafo Clock-Tower Square, Preliminary Report. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 121. Electronic document http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.asp?id= 1024mag_id=115. September 10, 2012. 2011 The History of Archaeological Research in Jaffa. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 1, edited by M. Peilstöcker and A. A. Burke, pp. 17–32. Monumenta Archaeologica 26. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles. Peilstöcker, Martin, Amit Re'em, Elie Haddad and Peter Gendelman 2006 Yaffo, Flea Market Complex. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 118. Electronic document http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/reports_eng.asp?id=111. September 10, 2012. Re’em, Amit 2010 Yafo, the French Hospital, 2007–2008, Preliminary Report. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 122. Electronic document http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_ eng.asp?id=1566&mag_id=117. August 13, 2017. Tolkowsky, Samuel 1924 The Gateway of Palestine: A History of Jaffa. London.

CHAPTER 2: THE NORTHEASTERN BASTION OF JAFFA’S FORTIFICATIONS Tzvi Shacham Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv Introduction Jaffa began to develop again as a city in the second half of the seventeenth century, after a period of abandonment lasting several centuries (Kark 1990: 9). During the first half of the eighteenth century the town was fortified again. Three phases can be noted in the fortifications, including their northeastern corner, with which this article is concerned. Phase A dates from the eighteenth century, between the construction of the wall and towers and the withdrawal of the French forces in May 1799. Phase B dates to the beginning of the nineteenth century, when the fortifications were restored by the Ottomans with British planning and supervision. The walls and main gate were reinforced and bastions were erected at strategic spots as a result of lessons learned from the March 1799 French siege and subsequent conquest. Phase C dates to the 1870s, when the walls and bastions were dismantled. A military base and a prison were built on the site of the northeastern bastion, and the southeastern bastion was replaced by the St. Joseph French hospital. Phase A A late-eighteenth century narrative by the French traveler de Volney2 describes Jaffa’s fortifications as follows: The bottom of the hill is surrounded by a wall without a rampart, of twelve or fourteen feet high, and two or three in thickness. The battlements at the top are the only difference by which it is distinguishable from a common garden wall. This wall, which has no ditch, is environed by gardens, where lemons, oranges, and citrons, in this light soil, grow to a most prodigious size (de Volney 1788, vol. I: 145–46). The first map of Jaffa that illustrated the fortifications was drawn by Colonel Jacotin of the French Engineering Corps in 1799. This map was the basis for several later maps published in France in the first half of the nineteenth century (Shacham 2011: Figs.13.1–5). Those maps show the northern wall of Jaffa with a tower at the point where the wall turns southward toward the main city gate (the Jerusalem Gate, later also known as the Abu Nabbut Gate). Unfortunately, the maps lack any details beyond the outer city walls and its towers. A later, verbal description of the fortifications is offered by Alderson: This place [Jaffa] is described as being at that time [1799] surrounded by a wall flanked by good towers, with guns mounted on them, but without a ditch. The port and roadstead were defended by two forts, and the place was well garrisoned (Alderson 1843: 23–25). Phase B In this phase Jaffa was fortified again under the supervision of the British General Sydney Smith in 1800, following the withdrawal of the French forces from the town and from the Land of Israel in May 1799, and the reestablishment of Ottoman rule (Tolkowsky 1924: 153). The sea wall underwent some refurbishment by Mohammed Agha (Abu Nabbut) in 1816 (see Shacham 2001). On August 30, 1800 the cornerstone was laid

2

Napoleon’s armies made use of this description in their 1799 campaign. For a more detailed comparative analysis of the historical accounts of the eighteenth-century wall and structural remains probably associated with it, see this volume, Chapter 3, Stratum IIc.

8

Chapter 2

for the large southeastern bastion designed by Major Holloway, an engineer, and his assistant Major Fletcher.3

Fig. 2.1 Jaffa from the east (by P. Rowan, 1814; The National Archives WO 55-1562-2 (11)S) A drawing from 1814 by P. Rowan (Figure 2.1) shows the bastion and other parts of the fortification, including the eastern gate complex. The bastion also appears in a painting from April 4, 1839 by the British artist David Roberts (Figure 2.2). Fig. 2.2. Jaffa from the north. At the left side the bastion, with the gate complex behind it (by D. Roberts 1836; Eretz Israel Museum Collection, Tel Aviv).

In 1841–1842 two new maps were prepared by the British Engineering Corps. The first map, by Major Robe, dates from 1841 and marks the northeastern bastion with the letter A (Shacham 2011: Fig.13.12). The map’s file, currently in the British National Archives, includes a 2-page report written by Lieutenant Colonel R.C. Alderson, dated June 10, 1841, which describes the town’s fortifications. The northeastern bastion is portrayed as follows: “There are four extremely irregular Land Fronts with three principal Bastions (A.B.C.)

3

Turkish Ceremony of Laying a First Stone. The Sporting Magazine. January 1801. I am grateful to Lior Rauchberger for bringing this source to my attention. On the fortification complex of Jaffa in the nineteenth century see Sapir 1970 and 1981.

The Northeastern Bastion of Jaffa’s Fortifications

9

besides small minor ones, with a low fausse bray and dry Ditch … The whole of very bad profile and trace and of indifferent Masonry.”4 The poor condition of the structure, which necessitated changes and repairs, may have been the result of an 1838 earthquake that damaged large parts of Jaffa, including the bastions (Tolkowsky 1924: 159). Alderson noted that a new alignment would be needed in order to improve the fortifications but due to high costs he proposed improvements in the existing course, such as the raising of the parapet of the “fausse bray” (a low rampart, parallel and below the main rampart) up to 8 feet, the addition of two small towers and widening of the ditch in front of the towers and bastion (Alderson 1843). Fig. 2.3. The northeastern bastion in the Skyring map of 1842 (Alderson 1843; British Library: MSS no P.P. 40501.i. vol. 6. Folio: p.24.).

The second British map was completed by Lieutenant C.F. Skyring (Shacham 2011: Fig. 13.13) on February 27, 1842 and includes a detailed description of the northeastern bastion and a cross-section of the wall, the fausse bray and the ditch in front of it (Figures 2.3–2.4) Yet the note that appears on the map makes no reference to the northeastern bastion. In a description of Jaffa’s fortifications in 1842 Alderson does not mention the bastions at all, even though they appear on the map (Alderson 1843: 25, n. 8). An illustration added to a British Admiralty map drawn in 1863 by Lieutenant F.G.D. Bedford (Shacham 2011, Figs. 13.15) shows the city as seen from the sea. The northeastern part of Jaffa’s walls appears on the illustration, also by Bedford, as well as an outer view of the bastion. The only later information we possess concerning the northeastern bastion comes from the maps of Theodor Sandel in the Baedeker travel guides5 and on a map dated 1878/1879 (Shacham 2011: Fig. 13.19), published as an appendix to Schwartz 1880.

4

Alderson, R.C. July, 7, 1841. The National Archives WO 55-1562-2 (7 and 8). Baedeker, K. The Mediterranean/Das Mittelmeer. Leipzig. Baedeker, K. Palestine and Syria Handbook for Travelers. Leipzig. 5

10

Chapter 2

Fig. 2.4. Section of the northeastern bastion, added to the Skyring map of 1842 (Alderson 1843; British Library,: MSS no P.P. 40501.i. vol. 6. Folio: p.24.).

Phase C During the mid-1870s Jaffa’s status as a fortified city was officially nullified and work began on dismantling of the walls and altering the gate area and the northeastern bastion (Kark 1990: 63). Schwartz describes the bastion in the following words: So steht am Nordende der Stadt noch ein altes Fort auf einem niedrigen Rücken, der sich zwischen dem Marktplatz und der Küste erhebt, und ein Theil der Stadtmauer von hier bis zum Meer hinunter. Auf jener Bastion wird noch jetzt mit der einzigen Kanone Jafa’s im Ramadan bei Sonnenuntergang der Schuss abgegeben …. (Translation: In the northern end [of the town] stands an old fort on a low hill that rises between the market square and the beach. Part of the city wall also continues to the sea. A single cannon is still fired on the bastion as the sun sets in [the month of] Ramadan …) (Schwarz 1880: 47). Fig. 2.5. Jaffa from the north. The bastion is seen at the left (Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv Collection).

Additional late nineteenth-century engravings show the bastion and the gate from a northern perspective (Figures 2.5–2.6). A rare, undated photograph by Felix Bonfils depicts the market square, with a wall in the background. In my opinion, the wall (at least the segment on the right side of the photograph) belongs to the northeastern bastion (Figure 2.7). The dilapidated state of the wall indicates that the photograph was taken in the late 1870s or early 1880s.

The Northeastern Bastion of Jaffa’s Fortifications

11

Fig. 2.6. Jaffa from the north. To the left, the bastion and the Mahmouddiyeh Mosque (Eretz Israel Museum Collection, Tel Aviv).

Fig. 2.7. Jaffa’s market place, photographed by Felix Bonfils between 1881–1885 ( NYPL record ID 117135/digital ID 112589). Following the dismantling of the bastion, a prison that also served as military base was erected at its site, situated by the market square on the course of the old wall. This development should be dated based on the inscription over the imposing gate to the new complex (Figures 2.8, 2.9), which glorifies Sultan Abdul Hamid II (r. 1876–1909) on the occasion of the construction of the new compound. The date mentioned in the inscription under the tughra (Ottoman monogram) reads 1304 of the Hijra, corresponding to1886/1887 (Sharon 2017: 119–121).6 A photograph-based engraving illustrates the new look of the area as seen from the northeast (Figure 2.10). Several buildings were erected when the former northeastern bastion was replaced by the prison and

6

See also Tütüncü 2016: 38–39.

12

Chapter 2

military compound. The style of the new buildings suggests that European engineers, possibly German, were behind the planning. The compound continued to serve as a prison and police headquarters under British Mandate and Israeli authorities (see a brief survey in this volume, Chapter 3, Stratigraphy, Stratum I). In 2005 the Israeli police vacated the site and it was sold to private investors for the construction of a new hotel.

Fig 2.8. The inscription over the Qishle’s entrance (photograph by T. Shaham).

Fig. 2.9. The Qishle gate and the market square at the end of the nineteenth century (Eretz Israel Museum Collection, Tel Aviv).

The Northeastern Bastion of Jaffa’s Fortifications

13

Fig. 2.10. Entrance to the compound, beginning of the twentieth century. (Tzvi Shacham collection).

Works Cited Alderson, R. C. 1843 Notes on Acre and some of the Coastal Defences of Syria. Papers on Subjects Connected with the Duties of the Corps of Royal Engineers 6. British Museum: general Cat.V.2, London. Kark, Ruth 1990 Jaffa: A City in Evolution, 1799–1917. Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi Press, Jerusalem. Sapir, Baruch 1970 An outline of Moslem architecture and planning in Jaffa. M.A., Technion, Haifa. (Hebrew – English abstract). 1981 The Fortress of Jaffa. In Jaffa and its Sites, edited by E. Schiller. Qardom 15: 65–73 (Hebrew). Schwarz, G. 1880 Jaffa und Umgebung. ZDPV III: 44–51; Tafel III. Shacham, Tzvi 2001 The Sea –Wall of Jaffa – Historical Survey. In Yafo – Tides of Times, edited by E. Ayalon and T. Shacham, The First Annual Convention of Jaffa’s Research, pp. 9–11, Tel Aviv. (Hebrew). 2011 Jaffa in Historical Maps (1799–1948). In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 1, edited by M. Peilstöcker and A. A. Burke, pp. 177–186. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 1. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Jerusalem and Los Angeles. Sharon, Moshe 2017 Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum Palaestinae (CIAP) Volume 6: J(1). Brill, Leiden. Tolkowsky, Samuel 1924 The Gateway of Palestine. A History of Jaffa. George Routledge & Sons, London. Tütüncü, Mehmet 2016 Filistin’de (İsrail’de) Türkçe Kitabeler VI. Türk Kültürü Kongresi, Ankara 21–26 Kasım 2005, Yayın: VI. Türk Kültürü Kongresi Bildiriler I (VI. Turkish Culture Congress, Proceedings Vol. 1), pp. 461–493. Volney, C.F. de 1788 Travels Through Syria and Egypt in the Years 1783, 1784, and 1785. London.

CHAPTER 3: STRATIGRAPHY Yoav Arbel Israel Antiquities Authority The Qishle excavations took place within the boundaries of the late nineteenth-century Ottoman military and prison compound, later used by the British Mandatory and Israeli police forces. Numerous structural additions, many of which were provisional, had been incorporated into the complex over the decades. Most of these additions were removed prior to the excavations, reviving, in a sense, the original plan of the compound. That plan (Figure 3.1a–d), which forms the basis for this report, includes three main two-story buildings (I, II, III), two large courtyards (western and eastern) and two smaller ones (northern and southern). This survey describes the archaeological discoveries following the four-layer stratigraphic sequence represented at the site: Hellenistic, Crusader, Ottoman (three sub-layers and a cemetery) and British Mandate.

16

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.1a. General plan of the excavation.

Stratigraphy

17

18

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.1b. Building I and Southern Courtyard.

Stratigraphy

Fig. 3.1c. Building II, Northern and Eastern Courtyards.

19

20

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.1d. Building III and Western Courtyard. Stratum IV: the Hellenistic Period, Fourth to Second Centuries BCE Jaffa was an important Mediterranean harbor during the Hellenistic period, one of the harbors serving commercial and military maritime traffic between Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt and site of a mint. Archaeological excavations on Jaffa's mound confirmed the existence of a permanent settlement under Ptolemaic rule in the third century BCE. The material remains, along with historical sources of the time, reflect a significant and influential town, with fine construction, civil administration and diverse trading connections (Rowe 1955; Landau 1959; Kaplan 1962; 1964a: 276; 1964b; 1970; 1972: 88–89; Tsuf 2018). Hellenistic remains were also encountered in salvage excavations on the margins of the mound (Peilstöcker 1998; 1999; 2000; Arbel 2008). The existence of an affluent citizenry in Jaffa with a strong Hellenistic orientation is also reflected in burials (Avner-Levy 1996; 1998). Jaffa underwent two important transitions during the second century BCE. In 198 BCE the Ptolemids lost the city to the Antioch-based Seleucids. Then, in 142 BCE, Jaffa fell to the Hasmoneans after several previous attempts, resulting in a cultural re-establishment of the city as a predominantly Jewish town. During the five decades of Seleucid domination the city appears to have experienced some deterioration, although the struggles between the Hasmoneans and the Seleucids over Jaffa indicate that the decline was a gradual process. Occupation remains from that phase at the extra-mound Ganor compound and Flea Market (Peilstöcker et al. 2006; Arbel 2008, 2017a: 68–70) on the one hand, and their disappearance in sites more distant from the Qishle on the other, support that impression. Hellenistic architectural remains in the Qishle compound are scant, probably due to the dismantling of walls for re-utilization of materials in later buildings. Yet Hellenistic pottery was found in many parts of the site, some among identifiable Hellenistic features and others mixed with later materials. The pottery included red-slipped and black-slipped table wares, imported and local storage jars and wheel-made oil lamps, all ranging between the fifth and the second centuries BCE (Gendelman, this volume). Late Hellenistic moldmade lamps were not found at this site, conforming to the pattern noted in other lower-city Hellenistic layers.

Stratigraphy

21

All stamped handles of imported storage vessels dated to no later than the third century BCE (Finkielsztejn, this volume). Western Courtyard Robber trenches of possibly Hellenistic walls were detected at the northern part of courtyard. Two of the trenches (L944, L926) appeared as perpendicular bands of dark soil across the sandy sediment (L927), reaching down to the natural kurkar bedrock. Locus 926 (0.70 m wide, 0.60 m deep) continued the northwestern contour of W935 and W971 for another 2.60 m. Wall 971 and W998 were clearly incorporated in Crusader construction and are discussed under Stratum III (see below). They may have been built over Hellenistic foundations, although an earlier Crusader phase is also an option. As there were no affiliated floors, the Hellenistic association of the trenches is circumstantial. It rests mainly on the stratigraphic position below the Crusader stratum (Stratum III), which represents the first postHellenistic occupation of the site after a long habitation gap. Most of the identifiable sherds found in the trenches dated to the Hellenistic period, but a small quantity of medieval brown-glazed cooking vessels was also found, which may be related to the robbing phase. Two poorly defined pits dug into the sediment that reached the bedrock contained mixed finds that closely resembled the assemblage from the robber trenches. Among the finds in the larger pit (L928, 1.80 m diameter) were a stamped handle of an imported Aegean storage jar and sherds of Hellenistic oil lamps but also a medieval arrowhead and an Italian coin from the twelfth or thirteenth century CE (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 23). The pits cannot be dated with precision; they may have been dug during the Hellenistic period and reused in Crusader times, but a Crusader origin and the accidental penetration of earlier sherds is also a viable option. The trenches and pits were covered with a mixed sediment into which several late Ottoman graves had been dug. Two possibly Hellenistic walls, partially preserved, were discovered near the curved projection of the eighteenth-century defense wall (W966, W1032, Shacham, this volume), in dense reddish clay (L1020) above the bedrock. The walls were built of uncut kurkar stones, and survived to a height of up to four courses. Both were perpendicular to the Ottoman wall and in all likelihood were severed during its construction. Associated pottery dated to the Hellenistic period. This Hellenistic occupation was disturbed in Ottoman times, as inferred by intrusions of gray soil with Ottoman pottery into the natural clay. The origin of these intrusions remains unclear. They may have been formed through drilling or digging activities related to the construction of the fortifications of the military compound. Excavations to bedrock (3.10 m under the modern floors) at the center of the courtyard reached a space within the bedrock. There were no finds in it but the sandy layer (L1142) over it contained Hellenistic sherds. The space was accessed through a straight-angled entrance measuring 0.75 x 0.85 m (Figure 3.2). No marks of cutting tools were noticed, although the rugged kurkar (calcareous aeolianite) surface may have obscured such marks. Rock-cut tombs from the Persian and Hellenistic periods are known from other parts of Jaffa, such as the Andromeda Hill (Avner-Levy 1996; 1998) and the French Hospital compound (Re’em 2010). The lack of finds in the Qishle space fails to support the possibility that it was a tomb. It may have been part of a quarry.

22

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.2. The space in the bedrock, looking east.

A coin of Ptolemy II (285–246 BCE) was found within another possible robber trench (L1082) at the southern part of the courtyard (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 1). The trench, which in form, depth and fill resembled the trenches on the northern part of this courtyard, was located within the level of Crusader foundations. A second Hellenistic coin was discovered in a late Ottoman lime kiln at the northeastern corner of the Western Courtyard, ca. 5 m east of the nearest robber trench (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 2).

Fig. 3.3. Hellenistic hearth and affiliated ash layer by Ottoman foundations, looking west.

Stratigraphy

23

Eastern Courtyard A probe between the foundations of the nineteenth-century retaining wall (W506) in the northern limit of the courtyard reached a Hellenistic context comprising a hearth and associated ash concentration (L508) (Figure 3.3). Lastly, the foot of a fine Hellenistic figurine was found between the Ottoman graves in the Eastern Courtyard (see Erlich, this volume). Stratum III: the Crusader Period, Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries CE Crusader layers were generally not recorded on Jaffa's mound but were discovered in previous salvage excavations on the mound’s margins and in the Lower City (Peilstöcker 1998: 69; 1999: 47; 2000: 48; Peilstöcker and Priel 2000; Peilstöcker et al. 2006; Kletter 2004: 202–205; Barshad 2000; Arbel 2008, Jakoel 2017, Arbel 2017a: 74–77). Most of these excavations took place along modern streets, where expansion was impossible and exposure provided only a general impression. A broader coverage of the substantial Crusader occupation was conducted at the Qishle. Crusader walls in the Qishle had several characteristics in common: 1. In most cases only the foundation courses survived, made up of uncut or roughly cut stones, measuring 0.20–0.35 x 0.35–0.60 m on average. 2. General dimensions were similar. Average width was 0.60–0.70 m. Length varied with preservation. 3. Surviving superstructure courses consisted of façades made of dressed kurkar stones, cores of smaller field stones bonded with coarse mortar. The walls appear to have been part of dwellings. Poor preservation precluded the full reconstruction of building plans. Fig. 3.4. Base of medieval pedestal buried in the Ottoman moat, looking south.

Eastern Courtyard The dense distribution of approximately 40 late Ottoman graves (see below, The Cemetery) under the modern surface allowed an only partial excavation of this part of the site. Probes were dug where graves were absent and along the foundations and the robber trenches of the Ottoman fortification. The deeper probes yielded

24

Chapter 3

mostly Hellenistic finds (see Stratum IV, above). The sediment into which the graves were originally dug (L497) contained medieval pottery, as well as a thirteenth-century CE coin of Frederick II (Kool, this volume, Cat.No. 25). These results exemplify the occupation gap between the Crusader and late Ottoman strata. The foundation course of a medieval wall (W500) built of uncut kurkar stones was exposed in a narrow probe between the contour of the missing Ottoman fortifications and late Ottoman graves. At its northwestern end W500 forms a 90-degree angle with a wall turning northeast, while its southeastern end was cut by the Ottoman bastion. An installation that included at least two plastered compartments (L498, L499) was also partly destroyed by the Ottoman bastion’s foundation trench. The installation’s original dimensions cannot be determined based on the surviving segment. It was probably used for the processing of liquids. The wall and the installation show no relation to the graves and should be dated by the medieval pottery in the abutting soil. The bottom of the Ottoman moat rests over a layer of clay that covers the bedrock. A thick pedestal, possibly the base of pillar or a vault pedestal (L503, 1.20 m high) was exposed within the clay layer. It was built of fieldstones bonded with packed soil (Figure 3.4). Traces of what was probably a stone-built ring that originally wrapped the surviving core were found, representing a missing, finer façade. Hellenistic pottery was found in the abutting clay, as was a mid-thirteenth-century coin (a denier of Balian, Lord of Sidon, Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 15). The pillar appears to have been part of a medieval structure built into the Hellenistic layer.

Fig. 3.5. Stone-paved Crusader yard and cistern, cut by eighteenth century wall, looking south. Western Courtyard Stone-paved Courtyard This courtyard was discovered in a Crusader building (see below) found next to the northern face of an eighteenth-century fortification (see Stratum IIc, W908), the construction of which destroyed part of the Crusader remains (Figure 3.5). Three walls enclosing a stone-paved floor were exposed (L1099, Figure 3.6), with a cistern in the middle (L1113) and an underlying drainage system. The floor was paved with tight-

Stratigraphy

25

fitting flagstones fashioned out of kurkar and beach rock, and laid over a bed of hard plaster. The soil above the floor, under it and within the drainage system contained local and imported Crusader wares (Burke and Stern, this volume). The medieval assemblage also includes large fragments of locally produced glass jugs and bottles (see Gorin-Rosen, this volume). Water was drawn from the cistern through a circular opening (0.45 m in diameter), delineated by a ring of stones ca.15 cm high. The cistern was filled with soil. Safety considerations prevented its excavation. The remains probably represent the inner courtyard of a domestic unit. Such courtyards, where various daily chores were performed, are known in the region since antiquity (Mazar 1992: 485–489, Hirschfeld 1995: 57–85) and could still be found in Jaffa and other locations as late as the twentieth century (Canaan 1933: 23, 65; Sapir 1970: 13; Kark 1990: 59). Little remained of the structure to which the paved floor related. The best preserved wall (W1058) had an outer face built of dressed stones and tightly packed pebbles. Its core consisted of smaller stones bonded with mortar. Wall 1091 was perpendicular to W1058. The two walls must have met at a 90-degree angle, but the corner between them was missing. Wall 1058 formed a straight corner with W1101, which extended 1.50 m to the southwest before being cut by the Ottoman fortification and a drainage channel (Figure 3.7). All three walls were built over a layer of natural sand mixed with bits of kurkar. A 1.40-m-deep pit (L1107), discovered approximately 5 m east of the building, contained six imported Crusader amphorae (Figure 3.8, Burke and Stern, this volume, Fig. 7.9:1‒5, Pl. 7.1, and see Avissar and Stern 2005: 105, fig. 44.1). The rims and handles were intentionally broken off, presumably to adjust the vessels for a secondary function. Several detached handles were also found in the pit.

Fig. 3.6. The Crusader paved yard, cistern mouth and underground drain, looking south.

26

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.7. Ottoman channel cutting Crusader wall W1101, looking northwest. Fig. 3.8. Hoard of Crusader amphorae in pit, looking south.

Stratigraphy

27

Fig. 3.9. Crusader water reservoir, looking southeast.

The Reservoir and Cistern (L1043, L1115) A large complex for the storage and distribution of water was discovered in the Western Courtyard in a natural topographic depression later obscured by the massive Ottoman fill (see Stratum IIa, below). It included two adjoined reservoirs, a southern one and a northern one, and an underground cesspit, fed by a stone-built drainage network. The walls of the reservoir were built of uncut stones and coated with grayishwhite hydraulic plaster. A large quantity of pottery, glass sherds and metals artifacts of Crusader types was recovered (Burke and Stern, figs. 1.3, 3.3, 3.7, 5.8, 12.3, 12.5) including a thirteenth-century coin of the Kingdom of Sicily (see Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 26). The floor of the southern reservoir (L1043) was comprised of plaster and compacted shells. Glycymerisinsubrica shells, the most common mollusks on the shores of the Holy Land, were introduced as bonding material for the plastered floor (see Ktalav, this volume, No. B.1). Such shells were frequently used in Crusader Jaffa for the consolidation of foundation beds for packed earth floors. An uneven sheet of travertine covered much of the floor’s plastered surface, indicating water accumulation over time. Plaster covered both faces of W1018 which separated the two reservoirs. Pottery-rich soil accumulations also sealed the floor of the northern reservoir (L1115, Figure 3.9). A twelfth-century feudal denier of the lords of Vierzon (see Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 20) was embedded in the floor, indicating the time of construction, while a fourteenth-century CE Mamluk coin (see Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 31) in the soil above it marks the end of use. The medium-sized building into which the reservoir was built apparently suffered intentional dismantling during the Ottoman period, as indicated by the missing parts – ends of walls that otherwise show fairly good preservation, in some cases (W1018) up to 10 courses (1.20 m high). A 30-cm-high plastered bench or shelf was built along W1018 and W1121 (Figure 3.10).

28

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.10. Plastered benches or shelves along the wall of the reservoir, looking west.

Fig. 3.11. The chute, as seen from inside the cesspool, looking northeast.

Stratigraphy

Fig. 3.12. Cross-section of the Crusader cistern and cesspool, looking northeast.

Fig. 3:13a–b. Northwestern and southeastern walls of the cesspool.

29

30

Chapter 3

A small drain (0.15 m in diameter) was exposed at floor level (L1115) in the northwestern corner of the reservoir. An iron plate, unusual in medieval installations, framed the drain, allowing effective sealing when needed. Waste water flowed through the drain into a steep chute (Figure 3.11), installed over the northern corner of a cesspit (L1118, 2.84 x 1.77 x 2.70 m). The cesspit was built directly beneath the reservoir (Figure 3.12). Fieldstones bonded with hard plaster and packed soil were used in the construction of its walls (Figure 3.13a–b). The vaulted ceiling was built of large dressed blocks. No plaster was used for either the walls or the floor (L1120), excluding the option of water storage and suggesting that the purpose of the cesspit was to drain the reservoir. Similar cesspits are known from the Knights Palace Hotel site in Acre (Syon 2010) and other Acre sites. Fragmentary Structures Several Crusader walls were discovered in the eastern part of the Western Courtyard under late Ottoman graves, 10–15 cm below the modern surface. Some graves were installed directly over walls from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries CE, causing considerable damage to the Crusader remains. Walls were disturbed by gravediggers, building stones were used for the lining of burials and wall extensions were obscured by graves that could not be excavated. Consequently, exposed Crusader walls could not be joined into coherent building plans and are described here as separate segments. Building a. The northernmost architectural remains of this building consisted of a corner of a building partly obscured by graves (Figure 3.14) and partly outside the excavation limits (W93, W188). Two courses of relatively large hewn stones remained of W93, with smaller, uncut fieldstones inserted between the blocks for consolidation. Five courses survived of W188, which was built in similar style. The walls were constructed on the relatively compact, sandy soil accumulated over the bedrock. Wall 93 apparently postdates W188, as it was built on a slightly higher level and partially used W188 as a foundation. Associated soil (L116, L171) included medieval pottery, glass fragments, a large volume of shells which may have been used in floors and an anonymous follis Byzantine coin from the first half of the eleventh century CE (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 4). A broad floor or floor foundation bed made of densely laid small stones (L159) was discovered over the natural soil to the southwest of W188, under soil containing pottery from the Crusader period. The fragmentary remains of an associated wall (W189) were discovered at the northeastern edge of the floor. Building b. Walls in a better state of preservation were discovered ca. 5 m south of W93 (W1057, W961). Wall 1057 was built of dressed stones and may have been part of a large building. The wall was thickened along its northeastern face in a later phase, doubling its width. Fine ashlars were used at the northwestern face of W961, built roughly perpendicular to W1057. The inner face remained obscured by the eighteenthcentury fortification and its structural context could not be determined. Building c. Wall 967 was built of fieldstones ca. 0.20 x 0.30 m in size, consolidated with packed soil and crushed lime. The wall, which lost some stones to a grave built directly over it, linked up at a ca. 100-degree angle with W970. Later grave damage left only three fieldstone courses of this wall, reaching a maximal height of 0.45 m. Judging by their position, W967 may have been part of the same building as W1057, but the extensions that would have formed a 90-degree corner were not preserved. A 1.5-cm-thick plaster floor (L1007) was exposed southwest of W967. The floor was 0.15 m under the wall's lowest course, thus unrelated to it. Crusader pottery was found above the floor and in its foundation bed, as were large quantities of shells of the type used in Crusader floor paving. The plaster coating was spread on a dense layer of crushed kurkar laid over a sterile sandy sediment. The majority of affiliated pottery dated between the twelfth and the thirteenth centuries CE.

Stratigraphy

31

Fig. 3.14. W93 under Ottoman grave, looking north.

Fig. 3.15. The corner between W998 and W971, looking south. Late Ottoman pit at front. Building d. Parts of two buildings belonging to two different phases were exposed in a good state of preservation. The earlier complex consists of two walls joined at a 90-degree-angled corner (W998, W971) (Figure 3.15). The walls were built of field stones and survived up to seven courses (1.20 m). Robber trenches

32

Chapter 3

of additional walls of the same structure extended to the northwest. The foundations of these walls were laid into a natural sand and clay sediment, in which were lenses of darker, possibly ash-mixed soil containing Crusader and a few Hellenistic sherds. The presence of Hellenistic sherds raises the option that some of the robber trenches resulted of medieval looting of stones of Hellenistic remains. Wall 935 survived to four courses of small fieldstones consolidated with compact soil, reaching a maximal height of 0.50 m. Its northwestern segment was built over W971. Wall 935 was securely dated by predominantly medieval potsherds in soil accumulation abutting its foundations. Among the sherds were local and imported vessels, as well as a thirteenth-century coin of King Henry III of England (r. 1216–1272) (Kool, this volume Cat.No. 22). An unusual aspect of W935 was the penetration of additional courses under its central part into the soil to a depth of 70 cm below that of other parts of the wall (Figure 3.16). The oddity may be explained by an attempt to strengthen the grip of the wall into the underlying sandy sediment.

Fig. 3.16. The structural addition (left) under W935, looking northeast.

Stratum II: the Late Ottoman Period – Late Eighteenth to Early Twentieth Centuries CE Stratum IIc (1750s–1799) Southern Courtyard The ramparts breached by Napoleon on March 7, 1799 were described by travelers and drawn in military maps of the time; however, other than a small segment reported by Kaplan (1964b, see below) no substantial parts of these walls came to light in earlier excavations. The part exposed at the Qishle included part of a wall (W908) and a semi-circular tower (W909). It was discovered at the southern edge of the Western Courtyard, having been incorporated as foundations in the later wall separating the Qishle compound from the Maḥmūdiyya Mosque. Their location and form exclude associations to the early nineteenth-century rampart, parts of which were also exposed in the compound (see Stratum IIb, below). Modern construction and the

Stratigraphy

33

deep fill over which the late Ottoman military complex was built completely obscured the ramparts prior to the excavation. The abutting mixed fill contained large quantities of waste, such as animal bones, ceramic and glass sherds, metal scrap, as well as building stones that may have originated in Crusader walls or in later Ottoman graves. The pottery and glass were mostly of late Ottoman date but medieval sherds and a coin of the Ayubbid ruler Al-Kamil were also found (1218–1237, Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 5). Seashells common in the foundation beds of Crusader floors were scattered through the soil. The dismantling of Crusader architectural remains is best illustrated in the cutting by Ottoman rampart builders of the above-mentioned Crusader paved courtyard. The face of W908 was built of dressed kurkar blocks (average size: 0.30 x 0.40 m). Its width remains unclear but it is unlikely to have been very thick, when considering the foundations arches at its base. The arches are an early example of a standard nineteenth-century Ottoman method of construction in larger buildings in Jaffa. Unlike nineteenth-century examples, the arches under discussion were asymmetrical. Some were broad and squat while others taller and narrower. A retaining wall supported the fortifications where the natural topography was steeper. The lower courses and foundation arches of a 1.4-m-thick wall and the threshold of an associated gate discovered at the northern end of Ruslan Street, outside the western perimeter wall of the Qishle, appears to be an extension of W908 (Arbel et al. 2012). Wall 2 in an adjacent site excavated by Kletter (2004: 194) was also founded on vaults and a channel passed under it. Both elements also appeared associated with W908 at the Qishle. Interlocking stone courses prove that W908 and the tower at its eastern end (W909) belong to the same phase and were built following a single plan (Figures 3.1, 3.17). Assuming that the tower (W909) was semicircular (see Date and Chronology, below), the exposed segment comprises roughly a third of the original structure. Six courses of dressed stones of similar type, cutting and size as those in W908 were left of the tower’s superstructure and four additional courses were built as foundations. The foundation courses were partly bonded with solid mortar. There were no foundation arches. Lacking associated floors and sealed contexts, dating must rely on the following circumstantial points: 1. The wall and tower significantly deviate from the contour of the nineteenth-century fortifications and could not have been part of them. 2. Nineteenth-century maps by Robe and Skyring (from 1841 and 1842), Bedford (1863) and Sandel (1878) depict angular towers incorporated in Jaffa’s ramparts, while late eighteenth-century maps by Jacotin (1799) and Pink (1800) show semicircular towers, including one at the general location of the Qishle compound (Shacham 2011: fig. 18.8). 3. Several coins and various pottery types of eighteenth-century origin, including numerous smoking pipes, were found throughout the compound (see Vincenz, this volume). Among them were five complete or restorable briq jugs found in a pit next to W908 (Figure 3.18). These finds reflect intense activity at the site during that period. The absence of dwellings and other civilian structures immediately outside the city walls should not be surprising and corresponds to the scene depicted on the maps. 4. While the present compound of Jaffa’s main public mosque (the Maḥmūdiyya) reaches the fortifications, its eighteenth-century predecessor was a much smaller and more modest building (Kana‘an 2001). Enough space existed between the mosque and the fortifications to allow convenient movement of troops and transportation of equipment and munitions.

34

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.17. Curved tower, eighteenth century fortifications, looking south.

Fig. 3.18. Hoard of Black Gaza Ware briq jugs, looking west. The condition in which Napoleon found the fortifications is reflected in the contemporaneous Jacotin map, in which the southeastern bastion is described as Tour ébréchée (broken or cracked tower). In a similar manner, Count Constantine F. de Volney, who visited Jaffa in 1783, and saw the fortifications standing, wrote of “a wall without a rampart, of twelve to fourteen feet high, and two or three in thickness … the

Stratigraphy

35

battlements at the top were the only tokens by which it was distinguishable from a common garden wall.”7 His impressions, while exaggerated, somewhat correspond to the remains exposed during excavations at the Qishle. They also resemble remains of the ramparts found at the French Hospital compound (Re’em 2010), which were also founded on relief arches, facilitating the work of sappers attempting to undermine the wall or tunnel under it. Kaplan (1964b), who several decades ago came across the “corner of a fortified tower of the eighteenth century A.D.,” received a similar impression. While dressed stones were used in the construction, he also notes that “the workmanship is rough, and the work appears to have been carried out in haste.” In the case of Jaffa’s eighteenth century fortifications, archaeology and historical texts appear remarkably complementary. Stratum IIb (1800–1880) The refurbishment of the fortifications following Napoleon’s withdrawal was part of Jaffa’s general reconstruction, carried out by the Ottoman governor Mohammed Agha, “Abu Nabbut,” with British assistance. The northeastern defenses, which controlled the routes to the hinterland and accesses to the harbor, but were easily overcome by French forces, required particular consideration. To resolve the problem, a new bastion was built at the corner between the eastern and northern walls. Skyring’s maps and section drawings depict an octagonal tower, equipped with several cannon (Shacham, this volume, Figure 2.3–2.4, and see Glick, Ch. 15, this volume, for cannon balls from the excavation), with a moat along its face. The bastion is clearly shown in Turner’s 1837 panoramic illustration of Jaffa. In the second half of the nineteenth century the fortifications fell into neglect. The disused bastion can still be seen on the Sandel map of 1878 (marked in German as Alt Fort – “old fort” – a term hinting dereliction), although the walls are no longer shown. The construction of the Qishle compound in the 1880s completely obscured the bastion’s remains. Parts of its foundations and of the adjacent moat came to light during the excavations. Surviving Segments of the Bastion A substantial segment of the northeastern wing of the bastion was discovered under the narrow Northern Courtyard, between Buildings II and III of the later Qishle compound and parallel to the Qishle’s northeastern perimeter wall (Figure 3.1). Additional parts were exposed under adjacent rooms. The main segment (W242) was found 0.50 m below the courtyard’s floor. Its face consisted of dressed kurkar blocks (0.40–0.60 x 0.26 m) bonded with mortar (Figure 3.19). The segment has no back wall and was laid against the rising bedrock and over a layer of compact natural clay. Five courses survived to a height of 1.30 m. Its westernmost part (W217) was discovered 0.70 m under the floor of a former prison cell (later an office, Room B5) in Building III (Figure 3.20). Its western extension was cut near the foundations of the room’s western wall. The easternmost extension (W425) was found below Room C6, in a two-storied British concrete addition to the front of Building II, which was later removed. The eastern end was systematically dismantled. The moat was approximately 2.50 m deep and 3.50 m wide. Four courses survived of its southern retaining wall (W832), reaching a height of 0.90 m over the bedrock. The retaining wall was built of dressed kurkar blocks (0.20 x 0.18 x 0.18 m) and fieldstones. A 1.40-m-wide robber trench of the upper courses was discerned. An Italian coin of King Vittorio Emanuele II (ruled 1861–1878, Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 102) was found in the abutting soil accumulations, along with large quantities of late Ottoman pottery, some with producer marks (for elaboration on this subject see Arbel, Ch. 9, this volume), glass sherds and metal scrap. This material represents the systematic filling of the moat, probably during the construction of the Qishle. No parts of the outer retaining wall were exposed.

7

Travels through Syria and Egypt in the Years 1783, 1784 and 1785 (cited in Tolkowsky 1924: 144).

36

Chapter 3

Figure 3.21, drawn in the Eastern Courtyard, shows the moat at its various stages. Locus 496 represents the natural clay at the bottom of the moat. Locus 401 shows a point where the builders of the moat cut into the bedrock. Loci 495 and 455 are the two layers of intentional fill and L489 is one the graves of the late Ottoman burial ground (see the Cemetery, below). The graves reached the margins of the moat but were not found in its fill, possibly because earlier graves on the route of the moat were removed as it was being dug. A well-preserved wall (W506) located several meters east of the bastion’s main segment, may have also been related to the fortifications. Thirteen courses remained of this wall, reaching nearly 3 m in height. The upper eight courses were constructed of hewn kurkar blocks (average size 0.40 x 0.30 m). Five courses of roughly-hewn stones were used in the foundations (Figure 3.22). Mortar was applied in both superstructure and foundations.

Fig. 3.19. Foundations of the nineteenth-century bastion, looking southwest.

Fig. 3.20. Segment of nineteenth-century bastion under the floor of a prison cell, looking southwest.

Fig. 3.21. Cross-section of the Ottoman moat and graves in the Eastern Courtyard.

Stratigraphy

Fig. 3.22. Segment of possible fortification at the Eastern Courtyard, looking southwest.

37

Fig. 3.23. Segment of W63, an inner retaining wall of the Ottoman moat (?) at the Western Courtyard, looking east.

Fig. 3.24. Structural arch under W809, looking south.

The Bastion Wall’s Foundation Trench The surviving walls and moat of the bastion and their depictions in original maps and illustrations suffice to reconstruct their missing extensions in the Eastern Courtyard. The late Ottoman graves are also helpful in such a reconstruction, because as already mentioned, they cover large parts of the courtyard but are missing along the contour of the fortifications. Two large stones found at the bottom of the foundation trench at the southeastern part of the Eastern Courtyard (W464) may be remains of the missing fortification. Based on surviving parts of the bastion and

38

Chapter 3

on the superimposition of nineteenth-century maps on the plan of the Qishle compound, it appears that Building I was erected over the bastion’s southern wing. If so, a 3-m-deep soil accumulation encountered under the floor of Building I (Probe D2, see below) may be interpreted as fill brought in during the construction of the building to seal the moat. The fill was rich with late nineteenth-century artifacts. Another part of the moat's southern retaining wall was discovered at the center of the Western Courtyard. That wall (W63), consisting of dressed kurkar courses consolidated with mortar on both faces, was built over the bedrock and laid against the natural sand and clay (Figures 3.1, 3.23). The fill abutting it contained a large quantity of late nineteenth-century artifacts. Scattered human bones were also found in it, probably from graves disturbed during the construction of the Qishle. A coin of Abdul Hamid I dated 1783–1784 (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 37) was found on the bedrock, along with a lead musket ball (for musket balls from the excavation see Arbel, this volume, Ch. 16). Stratum IIa (1890s–1917) The late nineteenth-century military and prison complex consists of three large structures (Buildings I, II, III), several smaller buildings and courtyards, and affiliated drainage infrastructure (Figure 3.1). Structural arches supported the foundations, a characteristic feature in late nineteenth-century Ottoman construction in Jaffa (Figure 3.24). Substantial earthworks preceded its construction, moderating the topographic decline toward the sea, filling in the moat and burying the remains of the derelict northeastern bastion. In most places the fill was amassed on a layer of gray plaster packed over beds of crushed shells and compact lime mixed with ash. The fill was rich with nineteenth-century ceramics, glass sherds, metal artifacts, animal bones (see respectively Vincenz, Arbel, Gorin-Rosen, Raphael, Sade, Sidi, Talmi and Geri-Dayan, this volume), and, most telling for dating, numerous Ottoman coins , many of which are of rulers from the second half of the nineteenth century, such as Abdul Mecid and Abdul Aziz, as well as contemporaneous European mints. The fill also contained scattered human bones, probably from graves disturbed during the construction of the new complex (Nagar, this volume, The Cemetery, below). Building I – Figure 3.1b Probes D1, D2. The former police mess hall in Building I retained much of its original form. The broad arches that held the ceiling and upper floor survived intact, as did their stabilizing structural link and the decorated floor tiles. Two 6 x 4-m-probes were excavated under the floor. The western probe (D1) reached nearly 3 m, while the excavation of the eastern probe (D2) was halted at approximately 1.50 m, with the discovery of disarticulated human bones. Room D5. This chamber and Room D7 were originally part of a single vaulted space with walls built at irregular angles that was later divided by a brick wall. Room D5 may have been part of an earlier building that was incorporated in the new complex. Under the modern concrete floor was an earlier floor paved with small sandstone slabs. A fragmentary plastered installation of unclear function was associated with the earlier floor. A family tomb with two burial niches was exposed under the earlier floor (The Cemetery, below). A water channel (L642) capped with beach rock slabs was discovered near the foundations of the eastern wall. The plastered inner conduit was 0.50 cm deep. The channel obstructed access to the burial niches and circumvented the tomb, thus clearly post-dates it. Associated finds dated to the late nineteenth century. Room D7. This irregularly shaped chamber underwent several alterations. Whether the present entrance connecting northward was the original access remains inconclusive. A short concrete staircase was later added to link the room to the higher passageway outside. An additional doorway in the western wall led to a narrow spiral staircase that climbed to an upper stone-walled chamber that was later replaced with a room with concrete walls.

Stratigraphy

39

The floor was paved with gray tiles, similar to those used in Buildings II and III. Fragmentary architectural or installation remains from the late Ottoman period (W619) were exposed 20 cm under the foundation bed of the floor, in association with an earlier floor made of tightly packed fieldstones and laid on a dark and soft fill (L632). A similar floor was found in Room D5 at the same elevation. As these two chambers were originally linked, this was apparently their original floor. Most of the pottery sherds in the fill dated to the late Ottoman period. Two graves were exposed under the floor (The Cemetery, below). A fragment of a curved marble slab bearing Arabic script was found in the fill at the western part of the chamber (see Sharon, this volume). Arabic inscriptions have been rare in archaeological excavations in Jaffa, this being one of few known examples. Building II – Figure 3.1c Room E2. Excavations in this room (in its latest use a communication center of the Israeli police) reached a depth of 2.70 m, cutting through a modern floor, a sandy foundation bed and a compact soil accumulation. The lowest level contained a scatter of cut and uncut stones (0.15 x 0.30 m on average). Larger dressed stones were mostly found in deeper levels. The fill included large amounts of late Ottoman pottery and disarticulated human bones. Walls 836 and 837 lay directly under the western and eastern walls of the room respectively, and served as their foundations. Both walls were built of uncut local kurkar blocks (average dimensions 10 x 18 cm), consolidated with clay. Wall 837 was built over a supporting arch (2.30 m in diameter), indicating that the ground floor of Building II was subdivided in the late Ottoman phase of the building’s history. Room E1. Prior to the excavations this room was partitioned into several small chambers and storage spaces. The foundations of its eastern wall (W808), also the eastern perimeter wall of Building II, were exposed to a length of 3.75 m. Construction materials consisted of roughly cut stones measuring between 0.25 x 0.20 m and 0.30 x 0.10 m, and consolidated with clay and plaster. The wall was built on foundation arches. Changes took place in the room still during its Ottoman phase. A 1.20-m-wide stepped passageway was exposed under the gray tiles floor next to the southern wall of the structure. Five steps (L810, 25 cm wide) descended to its floor, paved with gray tiles (L840, 25 x 25 cm), like those of the upper ground floor room (Figure 3.25). A concrete slab (1.00 x 1.20 m), into which two large iron stakes were fitted, was exposed at the center of the lower tile floor. The northern wall of the stepped passageway (W807) had a solid, smoothly plastered inner face, while the outer face consisted of jutting fieldstones and clumps of rough plaster. This was obviously a retaining wall supporting the fill below the floor of the main space of the room and abutting the descending passageway. At some stage the inner space of the ground floor of Building II was divided by a long partition wall into eastern and western sections. The southern end of the new wall blocked a window at the center of the southern perimeter wall of the structure and prevented access to the descending passageway. An entrance in this wall was sealed with concrete.

40

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.25. Late Ottoman staircase discovered under British Mandate floor, looking east.

Fig. 3.26a–c. Red-painted decorations on plastered stones in the debris. Room C1 (West). This room was last used as an office. Below the tile floor and its sandy foundation bed was darker and denser sediment, containing late Ottoman pottery, some bones and a coin of Abdul Hamid II dated to 1901–1902. A fragmentary plaster floor of unclear context was under the fill. Several large plastered stones were over it, adorned with dark red geometric designs (Figures 3.26a–3.26c). They may have been part of the original decoration of the main entrance to the complex. The discovery of graves stopped the excavation under the plaster floor.

Stratigraphy

41

Room C1 (East). This was the main entrance hall to the central Ottoman structure. It was later partitioned into several office spaces. A solid structural link (W837), exposed 10 cm under the tile floor, subdivided the main space into eastern and western parts. The link consisted of four courses of cut kurkar blocks (0.15 x 0.20 on average) consolidated with plaster and resting on structural arches. The top of the structural link was coated with a layer of white plaster. Shallow depressions, 15 cm wide, on an east–west orientation were cut into the link to accommodate wooden floor planks. Remains of wood were found in one of them. The use of wooden planks in a government building reflects European influence during that period. Wooden floors survived intact in the upper floor of Building I (see Lorentzen, this volume). Rooms C2, C5. These rooms served the Israeli and possibly also the British police as an office (C2) and a holding cell (C5). The thick sand foundation beds under the gray tile floors limited excavations to narrow probes (3.50 x 2.50 m), reaching a maximal depth of 1.50 m. The sand contained late nineteenth-century sherds and coins. Building III – Figure 3.1d Rooms B1–B4. Gray tile floors of British Mandate or late Ottoman date were exposed under the modern floors in all chambers. There were no architectural remains. A crude installation of unclear purpose was discovered in Room B4. Western Courtyard Westernmost Chamber. The remains of a small building were unearthed near the western boundary of the compound (Figures 3.1, 3.27). A single room was exposed, with a partly preserved floor and a corresponding drain channel. The walls (W905, W906) were built of small cut kurkar stones consolidated with mortar. Four courses survived to a height of 0.55 m. The floor (L918) was paved with fine kurkar slabs bonded with clay. Stone size varied. The floor was covered with ashy sediment but there was no evidence of destruction. Late Ottoman pottery was found in both ashy sediment and foundation bed. The channel (L923) circumvents the building. It was 0.30 m deep. Its frames were built of stones and plaster and its floor was paved with packed fieldstones and soil. A coin of the Austrio-Hungarian monarch Franz Joseph (1848–1916) was found in the conduit (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 105). Fragmentary capstones were found next to the channel. Ottoman pottery and glass sherds and two Ottoman coins from the second half of the nineteenth century were found sealed under the channel. The Upper Channel System. A channel system in use between the late nineteenth or the early twentieth centuries was uncovered approximately 0.20 m under the Western Courtyard’s uppermost surface (the system was documented and removed during the excavation and does not appear on the final plan). The channels were built of cut kurkar blocks consolidated with hard gray mortar tempered with bits of chalk and soil. Each outer frame was 0.20–0.35 cm thick and preserved to a height of 0.45 m. Inner conduits were 0.30–0.40 m wide and 0.30 m deep, with plaster coating up to 3 cm thick. The system underwent various phases and parts of it were severed and sealed with stones. A small barrel-shaped stone cistern (1.40 x 1.80 m, 1.40 m high), probably a cesspit, was installed on the route of one of the channels. Pottery and other artifacts from adjacent accumulations dated to the late nineteenth century, among them an Austro-Hungarian issue of Franz Joseph dated 1912 (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 104).

42

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.27. Late Ottoman building and channel in the Western Courtyard, looking east.

The Lower Channel System. A stone-lined channel (L198, 10.60 x 1.10 m) with a plastered conduit and beach-rock cover slabs stretched on a south–north course across the southern part of the Western Courtyard. The channel probably drained a foot-washing fountain in the courtyard of the Maḥmūdiyya Mosque (Figure 3.28). The channel crossed into the Qishle compound under one of the foundation arches of the eighteenth century fortification (W908). Parts of the channel were laid over the bedrock or natural clay and other parts on the late nineteenth century fill. The builders were aware of the local segment of the moat’s retaining wall (W63), and circumvented it. The channel intersected with an older drain extension (L1104), the use of which discontinued at some stage (Figures 3.1, 3.29). Periodic infrastructure renovations are the likely reason for the alteration. Two later, makeshift installations built against W908 and possibly used for storage sealed the channel next to the point where it met the foundation arch. A coin of Abdul Hamid II (1876–1909) was found between the installations and the channel (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 91). A poorly preserved later channel (L1106) that probably corresponds to these installations was found 1.50 m west of them and at similar elevation. The channel was built of cut stones in secondary use and capped with beach-rock slabs. Only 1.70 m of its length remained. Its frames were 0.80 m high and its conduit 0.30 m deep. A later outlet built into W908 drained water into the channel. Corresponding layers contained mainly late Ottoman pottery. A small hoard of 13 Ottoman coins minted by Mahmud II (1808–1839) was found on the bedrock next to the foundations of the channel (Kool, this volume, Cat. Nos. 41–54). A large alabaster bead was found with the coins, possibly used to tie the cord of the unpreserved pouch in which the coins were kept (see Vincenz, this volume, Ch. 19, Figs. 19: 3.21–3.22).

Stratigraphy

43

Fig. 3.28. The Ottoman channel that drained the mosque’s fountain, looking south. Lime Pits. Irregularly shaped pits for the mixing of lime for construction were discovered in various parts of the Western Courtyard. Some of the pits disturbed earlier graves. The pits were probably used during the construction of the Qishle compound and sealed under the newly leveled surface with the completion of the project. The filling material was rich with late nineteenth-century artifacts. The Wells. Two wells were found in the Western Courtyard. One (not on the plan) was situated by the courtyard’s northern boundary. Its frame was built of concrete; thus it was probably dug or was still in use during the British Mandate. An older well (L910) was found near the western perimeter wall of Building II (Figure 3.30), in an area otherwise occupied by late Ottoman burials, some of which were disturbed during its excavation. Its circular frame (1.25 m in diameter) was built of cut kurkar blocks. An iron ladder and fixtures of the drawing mechanism were still attached to the shaft. The shaft was ca. 8 m deep, reaching the aquifer near sea level, and was found almost free of filling material. Four meters to the west of the well was a concrete platform, on which the pumping engine must have been installed. This well was probably one of the main water sources for the Qishle compound. It should be noted that dozens of horseshoes and a stirrup were discovered in the Western Courtyard (Raphael, this volume). Stables on the premises would have required a substantial water supply.

44

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.29. The two channels phases, Western Courtyard, looking west.

Eastern Courtyard – Figure 3.1c Room C7. Three walls (W522, W529, W528) and a plaster floor of of a room that preceded the Qishle’s entrance chamber were discovered 0.30 m under the chamber’s tile floor. The walls were built of roughly hewn kurkar blocks consolidated with compact mortar. Their inner faces were coated with 3-cm-thick plaster. Related late Ottoman finds show that the room preceded the Qishle chamber by only decades. It was probably part of a structure removed to clear the ground prior to the new project.8 Northern Courtyard – Figure 3.1c Two poorly preserved late Ottoman walls and a drainage channel were exposed 0.20 m under the modern surface. The walls were built of fieldstones of irregular size, with no consolidation materials. Preservation varied between one and five courses. Maximal height reached 0.70 m. The channel was built of stones (average stone size 0.25 x 0.16 x 0.20 m). Its gray-plastered inner conduit was 0.75 m wide. No capping slabs remained. A coin of Sultan Abdul Mecid (1839–1861) was found in an adjacent packed earth floor. Southern Courtyard – Figure 3.1c Part of a large wall (W626, 0.40 m under the modern surface) and a built stone channel (L638, 1.20 m under the modern surface) were exposed. The wall and channel were dated through associated ceramics to the late Ottoman period.

8

There are several documented cases of the systematic removal of buildings to allow construction projects initiated by the local Ottoman authorities or to clear the way for development (Kark 1990: 49, 100–101, 262; Yinnon 2001: 152– 153, 281–282.

Stratigraphy

45

Fig. 3.30. Late Ottoman well in the Western Courtyard, looking northwest.

The Cemetery Textual records, maps, illustrations and early photographs from the late eighteenth century to the early twentieth century mention or depict a large Muslim cemetery located north of Jaffa (Arbel 2017b: Kark 1990: 153, 199, 209; Ze’evi 1985: 76, 91, 89; Ben Arieh 2007: 92–93; Yinnon 2001: 231–234). The cemetery was in use until 1915 or 1916, before its grounds were incorporated into the expanding city and Muslim funerals were directed to graveyards near Jaffa (Arbel 2017b: 105–6). Some families apparently removed the remains of their relatives to other graveyards, but hundreds of burials remained in place, although the tombstones were completely or partly dismantled (Yinnon 2001: 233–234; Kark 1990: 299). Hundreds of graves and dozens of partially dismantled grave markers of secure association to the northern cemetery were exposed on Razi’el Street (Sion and Rapuano 2017) and recently at the Elisabeth Bergner compound (Arbel 2017c). Possibly corresponding graves were discovered at the Clock Tower Square (Peilstöcker et al. 2006), the Saray (Talmi 2010) and the Flea Market (Peilstöcker et al. 2006). A large number of graves that in all probability belonged to the same burial field were found in all three Qishle courtyards and under the floors of several rooms.9 The excavations of most of the graves stopped at the level of the slabs covering the actual burials (for the reasons see Nagar, this volume). Information over human remains (Nagar, this volume) derives mostly from concentrations of disarticulated bones found in various locations. These remains apparently originated in the destruction of the graveyard during the construction the early nineteenth-century fortifications and 1880s military compound. Some of the numerous

9

Dozens of additional graves were exposed and excavated in 2011 by a Tel Aviv University team. The excavations will be published in a separate report (Edrey and Gross, forthcoming).

46

Chapter 3

beads, bracelet fragments and modest jewelry items found in late Ottoman contexts may have accompanied burials that were later disturbed (see Vincenz and Raphael, this volume).10 Burials in the Eastern Courtyard Between 20 and 23 burials were found approximately 1.00 m under the Eastern Courtyard (Figures 3.1c, 3.31). The graves consisted of stone-lined cists, capped with between 3–5 beach rock slabs (Figure 3.32). Typical dimensions reached 1.20–1.50 m in length and 0.30–0.50 m width, with capping slabs between 0.10– 0.20 x 0.30–0.40 m. The graves were fairly intact. Their east–west orientation followed Muslim funerary requirements (Canaan 1927: 25). Two of the burials were unusual: A double cairn tomb (L485, L486, 1.50 m x 1.80 m), found at the center of the courtyard, contained parallel burial niches with roughly built vaulted roofing made of fieldstones bonded with mortar. Dressed stones were used for the eastern face, into which the openings were installed (Figure 3.33). Piled-up field stones covered the niches. Cairn tombs were also found at the burial field under Razi’el Street (Sion and Rapuano 2017). A late Ottoman sāqiya vessel discovered between two graves in the western part of the courtyard contained two fetuses (see Vincenz, this volume, Fig. 8.7: 8, and Nagar, this volume). The vessel was broken at its neck to allow the insertion of the bodies. The type dated between the eighteenth and the first part of the nineteenth century (Ayalon 2000: 224, Figure 3.10). Infant jar burials from this period are unusual but have been met at several sites, such as the Yad Eli‘ezer cemetery in Nes Ziyona, southeast of Jaffa (Glick 1998: 74) and Tel el-Hesi, in Israel’s southern lowlands (Eakins 1993: 12, 18; Toombs 1985, 107, pls. 26–27).11

Fig. 3.31. The burial ground at the Eastern Courtyard, looking west.

10

On principle, Muslims are to be buried with nothing but their shrouds (Halevy 2007: 188). In practice, females were sometimes interred with their bead necklaces and metal or glass bracelets. 11 T. Canaan mentions infants inserted “in large broken jars” (1927: 8, n. 1) in a burial plot accidently discovered as Turkish soldiers were digging military trenches next to a saint’s tomb. A traditional explanation for the custom among Muslims (Kressel, Bar-Zvi and Abu-Rabi’a 2014: 22) described the jar as a symbolic representation of a womb that bears and protects the infant until the day of resurrection.

Stratigraphy

47

Fig. 3.32. Graves at the Eastern Courtyard, looking east.

Fig. 3.33. Cross-section of the cairn tomb showing the burial niches, looking west. Burials in the Western Courtyard More than 30 graves, most of which poorly preserved, were discovered at the eastern part of the Western Courtyard (Figures 3.1d, 3.34). Their orientation, dimensions and characteristics were similar to those of the Eastern Courtyard graves. No markers remained. Several graves (L992, L1038, L150, L165 and others) were installed directly over the Crusader layer, as proven by Crusader pottery and coins found within the context of the relevant walls. Late Ottoman pottery, glass and metal artifacts were found in the graves layer, as were coins struck by Sultan Abdul Mecid in 1840–1841 (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 58), Czar Alexander II in

48

Chapter 3

1877 (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 101) and a French Tunisian coin dated 1892 (Kool, this volume, Cat. Nos. 58, 101, 103 respectively). A copper ring (B.10160) adorned with a red glass type produced in Europe from the mid-nineteenth century (see Raphael, this volume), was found in the same context. The graves could not be excavated for the reasons mentioned above (see Arbel, Introduction, this volume). Masses of disarticulated bones were concentrated near the western perimeter wall of Building II. The bones probably belonged to graves destroyed as the structure's foundations were being laid. Burials in the Northern Courtyard Disarticulated skeletal remains were found amassed in a stone-walled chamber (L820) partly sealed by the bastion (W242) (see above, Stratum IIb, Figure 3.19). The walls of the chamber were built of hewn kurkar stones (average size 0.31 x 0.22 x 0.20 m) consolidated with soil and some lime mortar. Five courses survived, reaching up to 1.30 m in height. Late Ottoman pottery was found with the bones. The chamber clearly predates the early nineteenth-century bastion. According to the Jacotin map of 1799, the northern Muslim cemetery was already in use by the late eighteenth century. Thus, the construction of the bastion in the early nineteenth century may have destroyed earlier burials, with the bones collected and re-interred in the derelict chamber. A cist grave (L825, 0.70 x 0.40 m) was discovered near the western section of the Northern Courtyard, in association with late Ottoman pottery and metal objects, including three bronze rings (B.9176, B.9122, B.9217, Raphael, this volume, nos. 16, 17). The grave, on an east–west orientation, was found at a much higher level than the mass grave, within soil abutting the nineteenth-century bastion.

Fig. 3.34. Cluster of graves (center) over Crusader walls, looking east.

Stratigraphy

49

Burials in Building I Room D2. A concentration of disarticulated human bones was found ca. 2.30 m under the room’s floor. They could not be removed for analysis and were superficially examined on site. The location near the Eastern Courtyard indicates graves from the same cemetery that were disturbed during the later construction of the building. Room D5. A solid burial structure built of stones and mortar was discovered ca. 0.15 m under the modern concrete floor (Figure 3.35). The upper part of the structure formed a plateau. The two vaulted niches for multiple burials were installed below it. The niches (L650, L651, 1.80 x 0.60 m) were on an east–west orientation. They could be accessed through two openings (0.70 x 0.50 m) in the eastern wall. The thresholds, lintels and jambs were fashioned out of dressed kurkar blocks. Skeletal remains of at least two individuals were discovered at the southern niche (L651), one of which in articulation (Figure 3.36). Disarticulated human remains were also found in the northern niche (L650).The bones could not be removed and were thus examined in situ (Nagar, this volume). This type of burial structure is an unusual yet familiar feature in Muslim cemeteries (Figure 3.37). They are used as family tombs, with skeletal remains periodically shifted to make room for new interments. Room D7. Two stone-lined cist graves (L647, L649; 1.70 x 0.65 m) were found at the eastern part of the room, ca. 0.80 m below the modern gray-tile floor. The graves, placed 40 cm apart, were laid on an east– west orientation. Associated pottery dated to the late Ottoman period. The western grave contained a young female, who had been buried with a bronze earring and several beads, probably part of a necklace. The eastern grave held the remains of an older male. The bones showed several anatomic irregularities (L649, see Nagar, this volume). Burials in Building II Room C1. Human leg bones in an east–west orientation were discovered near the western part of the room (W402). Scattered beach rock slabs in the adjacent soil indicated a disturbed, stone-lined cist grave. Adjacent finds include a coin of Abdul Hamid (r. 1876–1909, Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 87) and a small beach-rock anchor (Sidi, this volume, Fig. 21.6). The anchor may have been placed in secondary use in the frame of the grave and dislodged with its disturbance. Disarticulated or partially articulated skeletal remains of at least two individuals, one of which an infant, were discovered in the central and western parts of the room, ca. 1.40 m under the modern floor. The graves were apparently destroyed during the construction of the building’s western perimeter wall. A scatter of stones near the bones may have been part of the cists’ frames. Room C7. Seven burials were discovered approximately 1.00 m under the floor of the compound’s main entrance chamber from the Clock Tower Square. The graves were found under the foundation levels of structures from the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century. Five of the burials were stone-lined cist graves roofed with beach-rock slabs. Two burials were unusual in the rare preservation of their superstructure’s stone bases (Figure 3.38). The platforms (L533, L538), which measured 0.80 x 1.86 m and 0.65 x 1.70 m respectively, were the bases of stepped or oblong markers commonly used in Muslim cemeteries (Figures 3.39, 3.40). Many examples, also with their upper steps missing, were recently found at an excavation in another part of Jaffa’s northern Muslim cemetery at the Elisabeth Bergner compound (Arbel 2017c). The seven graves were opened and excavated by the Tel Aviv University team (Edrey and Gross, forthcoming).

50

Chapter 3

Room E2. A large quantity of disarticulated human and animal bones was found in the 2.70-m-deep fill abutting the southern foundations of Building II. Ceramic and glass sherds in the fill dated to the nineteenth century. The human bones probably originated in burials destroyed during construction of the building. It should be noted that the closer the surviving graves were to the building’s perimeter walls, the poorer their preservation. Fig. 3.35. The burial structure in Room D5, looking southwest.

Fig. 3.36. Articulated human remains in the southern niche, looking west.

Fig. 3.37. Burial structure at the Mamilla Muslim cemetery, Jerusalem.

Stratigraphy

51

Fig. 3.38. Ottoman graves and structures at Unit C7.

Fig. 3.39. Base of two grave markers, Room C7, looking west.

Fig. 3.40. Similar graves at the Mamilla Ottoman cemetery, Jerusalem.

Building III Room B5. Two disturbed cist graves were discovered near the foundations of the bastion’s northern wall (W217), along with disarticulated bones of three or four individuals. Late Ottoman pottery was found between the graves and the wall.

52

Chapter 3

Southern Courtyard A partially preserved stone-lined grave (L643, 1.70 x 0.70 m) was discovered under the floor of a room, which at its latest stage served as a lavatory. The grave was capped with beach rock slabs. Disarticulated bones of an adult and a child (possibly of an earlier internment), were found pushed into the grave’s eastern end. Associated pottery dated to the late Ottoman period. The Date of the Cemetery As the majority of the graves were not excavated and no datable artifacts were found in the mass graves, dating of the Qishle cemetery must rely on the stratigraphic position and on artifacts found in soil abutting intact or disturbed graves. Two points should be stressed: Muslim cemeteries are usually outside of settlements (Halevy 2007: 146–148) and no burials would have taken place within the grounds while the fortifications were relevant or once the military compound was built. There are thus two possible options for dating the cemetery: 1. The eighteenth century, when the ramparts formed the graveyard’s southern limit. 2. The mid-nineteenth century, once the fortifications had become obsolete and prior to the erection of the military compound. Option 1: The Eighteenth Century. The existence of a burial ground north of Jaffa is first mentioned in 1799, on a map drawn by Pierre Jacotin, an engineer serving with Napoleon’s forces in the Holy Land. The word tombeaux is marked in the open grounds to the north of Jaffa. These graves are depicted in artistic works from the 1830s by David Roberts and William Henry Bartlett. The panoramic pictures, painted from approximately a mile from the walls, show a thin scatter of stepped tombstones with the protruding markers typical of Muslim graves. The artists offered only a general impression of the city limits and while no graves can be seen next to the walls, they may have been intentionally omitted from the pictures. As shown by examples in Jerusalem and Acre, Muslim cemeteries may reach as close as a city’s walls, as long as they do not spread into the city proper (although as cities grow, they often engulf graveyards originally outside their limits). The mass grave within the chamber under the nineteenth-century bastion in the Northern Courtyard is the only burial context in the Qishle compound that may be securely dated to the eighteenth century. Option 2: The Mid-nineteenth Century. In a photograph taken by the French photographer Felix Bonfils (probably from the grounds of the present-day Clock Tower Square) the ramparts of Jaffa still appear – in an obviously damaged condition – behind a telegraph pole and provisional market stalls.12 The photograph is one of several indications that the official condemnation of the fortifications in 1888 and their even earlier actual dismantling concluded a state of neglect. If so, once the northeastern bastion lost its defensive function the northern Muslim cemetery could spread into its vacant grounds, especially as space availability rapidly decreased. The number of graves within the compound is estimated between 120 and 170, a figure consistent with two decades of demographic growth in a town notorious for hygiene deficiencies and widespread disease (Kark 1990: 153, 208–216). Burial would have ceased with the construction of the new barracks and prison in the 1880s. During construction numerous graves must have been destroyed and the bones re-interred in mass graves.13

12

Telegraph communications reached Jaffa during the 1860s (Kark 1990: 217). Testimonies describe anguish and unrest among Jaffa's population due to the destruction of the northern cemetery (Yinnon 2001: 234). In similar spirit, bedouins and fellahin in the Gaza region interpreted the Ottoman defeat to Allenby’s forces as a punishment for the demolition, on Turkish orders, of hallowed tombs and the felling of associated sacred trees (Canaan 1927: 97). 13

Stratigraphy

53

Analysis 1. The graveyard had spread beyond the nineteenth-century fortifications but graves reach only as far as the eighteenth century wall and tower. On the other hand, between two and three decades apparently elapsed between the end of use of the later fortifications and the construction of the military compound. During that time the vacant grounds between the mosque and the derelict walls could have been used for burial. 2. The nineteenth-century coins and jewelry found in the context of the graves may have been originated in disturbed burials or lost by visitors to the cemetery during the burial period. They may have also reached the context later and accidentally, as the grounds were levelled for the construction of the Qishle. 3. The general date range of the late Ottoman sāqiya vessel in which the fetuses were found covers both options, although the use of ceramic vessels for water-drawing was becoming less common as the nineteenth century progressed. 4. A C14 sample taken from one of the graves dated the associated remains to the second half of the nineteenth century (L649, Nagar, this volume). While this seems to strongly support the later dating, a single sample does not suffice, in my view, to reach a definite conclusion relevant to the whole burial ground. It should also be noted that the burial from which the sample was taken was unusual in several ways. In brief, it may be concluded that the earlier option may better accommodate the religious and historical circumstances while the later date is supported by the presence of artifacts in adjacent – albeit not secure – contexts. Lacking direct information that could be derived from the systematic excavation of the graves, the dating remains inconclusive. Stratum I: the British Mandate, 1920–1948 Although the original Ottoman buildings comprise the core of the Qishle compound, the architectural impact of changes and additions from the three decades of British Mandate is evident. Concrete, a solid and relatively inexpensive building material, was widely used by the British authorities throughout the complex. Their utilitarian approach is exemplified in the main doorway at the center of Building II. The original stone-framed entrance was tall and elegant, with a dedicatory inscription set overhead and a flight of curved stone stairs linking it descending to the Eastern Courtyard. The more practical British authorities replaced the stone stairs with plain concrete steps, and had the doorway lowered and narrowed by a new 90-degree-angled frame with jambs and lintel made of concrete. The dedicatory inscription was removed and its stone frame was half blocked with a concrete balcony attached to the front of the second story. A two-story concrete addition was built against the face of northern wing of the building, disregarding the symmetry with which the Ottoman architects were concerned. A small watchtower, built over the roof of the building’s southern wing, further compromised the symmetry. Utilitarian additions were also introduced into the courtyards. Lockup cells were built in the Northern Courtyard and a refuse pit was dug in the remaining open space. The pit was filled with metal kerosene cans, tin cups and glass bottles (Figure 3.41).14

14

Kerosene cans were first imported during the final years of Ottoman rule and re-utilized by the local population for various purposes (Kark 1998:532). The cans found in the pit seemed to be of a later type, used in the first half of the twentieth century. The other artifacts in the pit were similarly dated.

54

Chapter 3

Fig. 3.41. Refuse pit from the British Mandate Period, looking west.

Figs. 3.42. Sketch of a horse on Mandate prison plaster.

Fig. 3.43a,b. Brass buttons from British uniforms.

Fig. 3.44. Morse transmitter.

Stratigraphy

55

During the last decades of Ottoman rule, Jaffa’s local authorities invested extensively in the installment or improvement of water and sewer lines (Kark 1998: 532). Yet as revealed by excavations in the Qishle compound and under neighboring streets, the new infrastructure consisted mostly of stone-built channels with plastered conduits and slab capping, differing little from systems dating back to Roman times and earlier. British engineers replaced them with ceramic and metal pipelines linked to tanks built of bricks or cement. British gray-tile floors were found under the modern Israeli tiles in most ground rooms of Buildings II and III. Five Mandate prison cells (7.50 x 3.00–4.40 m) at the ground floor of Building III were refurbished by the Israeli police to serve as offices. Mandate gray tiles as well as the basins and pipes of the inmates’ latrines were exposed under the modern floor in each of those rooms. Graffiti, presumably sketched by inmates, were revealed under later layers of plaster. Among them were human profiles, depictions of animals and automobiles, as well as brief inscriptions, names and dates in various languages (Figure 3.42). Post-1948 activity at the compound left few recoverable Mandate artifacts. A single Mandate coin dated 1942 (Kool, this volume, Cat. No. 106) and a British uniform brass button were found under the modern floor of the Eastern Courtyard. A similar button was retrieved from the Western Courtyard (Figures 3.43a, b). The buttons depict the royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom: the English lion and the Scottish unicorn flanking a shield with the emblems of England, Scotland and Ireland. The motto Honi soit qui mal y pense (“shame be to him who thinks evil of it”) of the ancient Order of the Garter surround the shield, under which appears the royal motto Dieu et mon droit (“God and my right”). British military buttons were also found in several other excavations in Jaffa. A large, 3-m-deep refuse pit at the northwestern corner of the Western Courtyard (L35), used during the early years of British occupation contained unusually diverse artifacts. Among them were glass bottles, iron pumps, an early twentieth-century helmet, parts of an ornate iron fence, tin cups, artillery shell cases, leather boots, English door locks, as well as a Morse Code transmitter (Figure 3.44). The most intriguing discovery was a hoard of approximately 80 rifles from the turn of the twentieth century, including German, British and American military issues as well as numerous double-barrel shotguns (Glick, this volume). The guns were intentionally broken before being disposed of and some were burnt, probably when already in the waste pit. That treatment, the effect of time and the conditions in the pit severely damaged the weapons, in most cases leaving little more than fragments of barrels. No accurate count was therefore possible. Still, some rifles were better preserved and manufacturer’s details could be read on a few. An inscription on an 1890s German Mauser rifle indicates that it was produced on behalf of the Ottoman army. The number 1917 on another weapon represents the hoard’s latest confirmed date. Based on these details, in addition to the manufacturing date of several German bullet cases from the same context (1916 and 1917) and typological analysis of the weapons, the hoard appears to have been deposited shortly after World War I or in the early 1920s. This was not an easy period for the new British administration in Jaffa. Many in the local Arab population expressed their dissatisfaction with British presence and policies through armed attacks against British troops in the serpentine alleys of the city core. To regain control over the situation, the British conducted a series of raids in which arrests were made and weapons confiscated. These confiscations may have been the source of the rifles from the Qishle. The variance in weapon type and the presence of numerous shotguns along with the standard issues, as well as the makeshift repairs conducted on several rifles, indicate that these weapons were pillaged from World War I battlefields or were randomly purchased in market stalls or from obscure suppliers. Weapons obtained in these ways are often inappropriately stored and maintained; thus regular armies often consider them unfit for military re-use and destroy them to ensure that they do not fall into the wrong hands.15 Such may have been the circumstances behind the deposit of the Qishle weapons hoard. 15

Awareness of the lethal potential of weapons in poor condition when used by determined insurgents derived from British colonial experience. Winston Churchill (1957: 183) relates that early in the American War of Independence (June 17, 1775) a British regiment under General Thomas Gage was beaten back by “a hail of buck-shot and bullets from ancient hunting guns” fired by American insurgents at Breed’s Hill, Boston. Churchill had some first-hand experience

56

Chapter 3

Works Cited Arbel, Yoav 2008 Yaffo, Flea Market Complex. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Survey in Israel 120. Electronic document, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.asp?id=900&mag_id=114. August 13, 2017. 2017a Salvage Excavations in Jaffa’s Lower Town, 1994–2014. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 2, edited by A.A. Burke, K.S. Burke and M. Peilstöcker, pp. 63–88. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los Angeles, California. 2017b Post-Medieval Muslim Burials in Jaffa: Archaeological Evidence and Historical Perspective. Journal of Islamic Archaeology 4.1: 87–112. 2017c Yafo, Elisabeth Bergner Street. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 121. Electronic document, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.asp?id=25312&mag_id= 125. December 10, 2017. Arbel, Yoav, Mohammed Hater and Stella Yechielov 2012 Yafo, Roslan and Mifraz Shlomo Streets, Preliminary Report. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 124. Electronic Document, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_ eng.aspx?id=2117&mag_id=119. March, 20 2013. Avissar, Miriam and Edna Stern 2005 Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk Periods in Israel. IAA Reports 26. Avner-Levy, Rina 1996 Jaffa, Yefet Street. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot 106: 79–80 (Hebrew). 1998 Yafo, Yefet Street. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 118: 55–56. Ayalon, Etan 2000 Typology and Chronology of Water-Wheel (sāqiya) Pottery Pots from Israel. Israel Exploration Journal 50: 216–226. Barshad, Dror. 2000 Yafo. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 111: 101. Ben-Arieh, Yehoshua 2007 The Rediscovery of the Holy Land in the Nineteenth Century. Magness Press, Jerusalem. Canaan, Taufik 1927 Mohammedan Saints and Sanctuaries in Palestine. Luzac, London. 1933 Palestinian Arab House, its Architecture and Folklore. Syrian Orphanage Press, Jerusalem. Churchill, Winston S. 1943 My Early Years. Macmillan & Co., London. 1957 A History of the English-Speaking Peoples. The Age of Revolution (Volume 3). Dodd, Mead & Co, New York. Eakins, J. Kenneth. 1993 Tell El-Hesi: The Muslim Cemetery in Fields V and VI/IX (Stratum II). Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana. Glick, Donald 1998 Nes Ziyona, Yad Eli'ezer (a). Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Survey in Israel 18: 73– 74.

in the issue, having participated as an officer in the final battle of the Mahdi Revolt near Omdurman, Sudan (September 2, 1898). According to him “20,000 rifles of various kinds, from the most antiquated to the most modern” were aimed at the British army (Churchill 1943: 201).

Stratigraphy

57

Edrey, Meir and Boaz Gross Forthcoming The Stratigraphy of the Eastern Area of the Qishleh Compound. In Excavations at Jaffa: The Mound and its Surrounding Area, edited by Z. Herzog, M. Edrey and B. Gross. Salvage Excavations Reports 11. Halevy, Leor 2007 Muhammad’s Grave: Death Rites and the Making of Islamic Society. Columbia University Press, New York. Hirschfeld, Yizhar 1995 The Palestinian Dwelling in the Roman-Byzantine Period. Franciscan Printing Press, Jerusalem. Jakoel, Eriola 2017 Remains from the Byzantine, Early Islamic, Crusader and Ottoman Periods in the “Ganor Compound”. 'Atiqot 88: 71–83 (Hebrew, English summary, pp. 159–160). Kana’an, Ruba 2001 Waqf, Architecture, and Political Self-Fashioning: The Construction of the Great Mosque of Jaffa. Muqarnas 18: 120–140. Kaplan, Jacob 1962 Jaffa. Israel Exploration Journal 12: 149–150. 1964a Jaffa’s History revealed by the Spade. Archaeology 17: 270–276. 1964b Jaffa. Israel Exploration Journal 14: 285–286. 1970 Tel Aviv-Yafo. Israel Exploration Journal 12: 225–226. 1972 The Archaeology and History of Tel Aviv-Jaffa. Biblical Archaeologist 35: 65–95. Kark, Ruth 1990 Jaffa, A City in Evolution 1799–1917. Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi Press, Jerusalem. 1998 The Introduction of Modern Technology into the Holy Land (1800–1914 CE), in The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land, edited by T.E. Levy, pp. 524–541. Leicester University Press, London. Kletter, Raz 2004 Jaffa, Roslan Street. 'Atiqot 47: 193–207. Kressel, Gideon M., Sasson Bar-Zvi and ‘Aref Abu-Rabi’a 2014 The Charm of Graves – Perceptions of Death and After-Death among the Negev Bedouin. Sussex Academic Press, Chicago. Landau, Ya'akov 1959 A Stamped Jar Handle from Jaffa. 'Atiqot 2: 186–187. Mazar, Amihai 1992 Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000–586 B.C.E. Doubleday, New York. Peilstöcker, Martin 1998 Yafo. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot 108: 69–70 (Hebrew). 1999 Yafo. R. Hanina and R. Yehuda Me-Raguza Streets. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 110: 46–47. 2000 Yafo. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 20: 47–49. Peilstöcker, Martin and Maya Priel 2000 Yafo, Razif Ha-'Aliya Ha-Sheniya. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 111: 40–41. Peilstöcker, Martin, Amit Re'em, Elie Haddad and Peter Gendelman 2006 Yafo. Flea Market Complex. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Survey in Israel 118. Electronic document http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=431&mag_id=111. August 13, 2017.

58

Chapter 3

Re'em, Amit 2010 Yafo, The French Hospital 2007–2008. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 122. Electronic document, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.asp?id=1566& mag_id =117. September 10, 2017. Rowe, K. R. 1955 Pottery. In The University of Leeds, Department of Semitics Archæological Expedition to Jaffa 1952 edited by J. Bowman, B. S. J. Isserlin and K. R. Rowe. Proceedings of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society 7(4), pp. 231–250. Sapir, Baruch. 1970 Development of the Construction and Urban Building in Jaffa during the Islamic Period. M.A. The Technion Institute, Haifa. Shacham, Tzvi 2011 Jaffa in Historical Maps (1799–1948). In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 1, edited by M. Peilstöcker and A. A. Burke, pp. 177–186. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 1. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Jerusalem and Los Angeles. Sion, Ofer and Yehuda Rapuano 2017 Yafo: Razi’el and Ratosh Streets. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 129. Electronic document, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=25311&mag _id=1 25. December 10, 2017. Syon, Danny 2010 ‘Akko, the Knight’s Hotel. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 122. Electronic document, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=1481&mag_id=117. December 10, 2017. Talmi, Limor 2010 Yafo, Final Report. Hadashot Arkhaeologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel 122. Electronic document, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.asp?id=1330&mag_id=117. August 13, 2017. Tolkowsky, Samuel 1924 The Gateway of Palestine. A History of Jaffa. George Routledge & Sons, London. Tsuf, Orit 2018 Ancient Jaffa from the Persian to the Byzantine Period. Kaplan Excavations (1955–1981). Edited by A.A. Burke and M. Peilstöcker, The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Projects Series, Vol. 3. Zaphon, Münster. Toombs, Lawrence E. 1985 Tell el-Hesi, Modern Military Trenching and Muslim Cemetery in Field I, Strata I–II. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Waterloo, Ontario. Yinnon, Yaakov 2001 Around the Clocktower. Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi Press, Jerusalem (Hebrew). Ze'evi, Rehavam (editor) 1985 Yafo – Tides of Times. Ha'aretz Museum, Tel Aviv.

CHAPTER 4: POTTERY OF THE HELLENISTIC, ROMAN AND BYZANTINE PERIODS Peter Gendelman Israel Antiquities Authority The IAA excavations in the Qishle compound in Jaffa yielded rich assemblages of pottery from various periods. Most of the types in this report date from the Hellenistic period, the earliest stratum represented at the site. While few architectural elements or installations can be clearly associated with this stratum, probably due to the removal of building materials for later construction, the pottery assemblage leaves no doubt as to the activity, and in all likelihood the occupation, in this part of Jaffa during that time. Pottery included both imported and local wares. No buildings were discovered from the succeeding Roman and Byzantine periods, although Roman burials were exposed by Tel Aviv University teams in the easternmost part of the compound and will be published separately by the excavators, M. Edrey and B. Gross. A small quantity of sherds from the Roman and Byzantine periods was found mixed with pottery from the more dominant Crusader and late Ottoman layers. Although there were no Roman or Byzantine layers at the Qishle, those periods are well known from other sites in Jaffa. Therefore, representative Roman and Byzantine pottery types are also presented in this report. Hellenistic Period Imported Fine Tableware Fragment of imported Attic West Slope Ware – handled kantharos cup decorated with ivy (Figure 4.1:1). Similar vessels, dated to the fourth–early third centuries BCE, were reported from the Athenian Agora excavations (Rotroff 1997: 84–85, figs. 4, 5:22–31, pl. 3:31). Fragment of small shallow bowl with rounded wall and wide arched rim (Figure 4.1:2). Made of hard, light red fabric, apparently imported. This is a very common shape shared by two slightly different types of bowls, both dating to the third and second centuries BCE. One is a small version of a fish-plate with shallow central depression (see, e.g., Type BL4d from Tel Dor – Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 292, figs. 6.3:22–27). The other are bowls without a floor depression (see, e.g., vessels from Tel Beth-Shean – Johnson 2006: 526, fig. 15.1:7; and from Yoqne‘am – Avissar 1996: 48, pl. X.1:13). The state of preservation of our fragment does not permit determination of the type to which it belongs. Two fragments of a hemispherical footed bowl known as an echinus-bowl, one made of imported pink fabric and the second of micaceous gray fabric (Figure 4.1:3, 4). The gray-fabric bowl was decorated on its floor with stamped palmettos. Such bowls date from the second half of the fourth century BCE throughout the Hellenistic period, and are commonly reported from elsewhere (cf. Tel Keisan: Briend and Humbert 1980: 109, pl. 13:1–4; Tel Beth-Shean: Johnson 2006: 524, fig. 15.1:4; Tel Dor: Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 290–291, fig. 6.1:1–29, photo 6.1; Apollonia/Arsuf: Tal 1999: 153–154, fig. 4.35:2–4; Fischer and Tal 1999: 230, figs. 5.7:7–8; Tel Michal: Fischer 1989: 183, fig. 13.3:1–3). Fragment of mold-made hemispherical bowl of imported pink fabric (Figure 4.1:5). Such vessels were made of diverse fabrics, and are generally dated to the second–early first centuries BCE. They are well represented in the Hellenistic sites of the region (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995: 212–215, fig. 5.5). Fragment of slender slipped jug (Figure 4.1:6). Resembles vessels from Tel Dor dating from the third to the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 308, fig. 6.29:13, 14).

60

Chapter 4

Local Bowls Fragment of deep skyphoid cup with spurred handles (Figure 4.1:7). This vessel was made of soft, reddish fabric similar to those of local jars and un-slipped vessels. This is the local version of imported vessels produced at several workshops along the Ionian and Aegean coasts and the Levant (cf. discussion in Salles 1993: 187 and Młynarczyk 2000: 230). The imported vessels, commonly found at numerous sites at the region, are generally dated from the late fourth to the early second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 294, fig. 6.6:3– 9, photo 6.10; Fischer 1989: 185, fig. 13.3:24; Fischer and Tal 1999:237, fig. 5.11:12). Mortaria Base fragment of well-known type of footed bowl-mortarium (Figure 4.1:8). Known as “Persian Bowls” or “Levantine Mortaria” (Blakely and Bennett 1989). This vessel was made of imported, greenish-white fabric probably indicating Cypriot origin. Cypriot/Aegean origins had already been suggested for these vessels (Tal 1999: 97–98). Although usually dated within the Persian period, the evidence from Tel Keisan (Briend and Humbert 1980: 108, pl. 12:1–3) and Tel Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 295, fig. 6.9:1–7) may suggest continual import of “Levantine Mortaria” until the early third century BCE. Fragment of large bowl-mortarium with wide out-turned rim with deep rounded depression on top (Figure 4.1:9). Made of same fabric as the above-mentioned footed bowl-mortarium. Such vessels were reported from the layers dating to the fourth–second centuries BCE at the Kiton excavations (Salles 1993: 268, figs. 208: 301; 230:521; 232:521). Fragment of mortarium with flat base made of hard imported fabric (Figure 4.1:10). Similar vessels known from Tel Dor as Type BL18a are dated from the fourth to the third centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 295, fig. 6.10:1–2). Unguentaria Two fragments of slender fusiform unguentaria with curved rim and low hollow leg with disk-shaped foot (Figure 4.1:11, 12). Similar vessels commonly reported derived from late Persian–early Hellenistic deposits at numerous sites such as Tel Keisan (Briend and Humbert 1980: 111, pl. 14:21), Tel Dor (as UG 2b: GuzZilberstein 1995: 304–305, figs. 6.26:9–22, photo 6.25), Appolonia/Arsuf (Tal 1999: 157–158, fig. 4.38:14; Fisher and Tal 1999: 240, figs. 5.14:9, 5.16:4) and Tel Michal (ca. 350–300 BCE; Singer-Avitz 1989: 135, fig. 9.13:13). Cooking Ware Fragment of globular cooking pot with thick wall, high neck and grooved lip (Figure 4.1:13). Similar vessels from Kh. Kinniyeh are dated to the fourth century BCE (Briend and Humbert 1980: 113–114, pl. 17:9, 11). Fragment of globular cooking pot with cylindrical neck and out-folded rim (Figure 4.1:14). This variant is a characteristic cooking pot of the end of the Persian period and the early Hellenistic period, reported from numerous sites (cf., e.g., Tel Keisan: Briend and Humbert 1980: 107, pl. 11:1–2; Yoqne‘am: Avissar 1996: 51, fig. X.3:12; Tel Dor: Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 299, fig. 6.18:1–11, photo 6.15a; Tel Gezer: Gitin 1990: 236– 237, pl. 31:11–12). Fragment of wide casserole with wide ledge rim with lid setting and vertical strap handle (Figure 4.1:15). Similar vessels are reported from deposits at Tel Dor dated to the mid-third to the second century BCE (GuzZilberstein 1995: 299–300, fig. 6.20:10, 12–13). Fragment of domed lid with hollow knob handle (Figure 4.1:16). Such lids are common finds in late Persian and Hellenistic deposits in sites in Israel (Shiqmona: Elgavish 1974: 41, pl. XXIX:277; Tel Keisan: Briend and Humbert 1980: 108, pls. 11:10–11, 17:19–20; Tel Beth-Shean: Johnson 2006: 531–532,

Pottery of the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Periods

61

fig. 15.3:54–56; Tel Dor: Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 302, fig. 6.24:1–10, photo 6.19; Appolonia/Arsuf: Tal 1999: 125, fig. 4.23:9; Tel Michal: Singer-Avitz 1989: 135–136, fig. 9.13:15). Shallow, flat-bottom baking-tray with flaring wall and massive tubular handle connected to the rim (Figure 4.1:17–19). Made of diverse coarse micaceous fabrics. Such vessels were widely produced throughout the Mediterranean (Hayes and Harlaut 2001: 115, fig. 73; Berlin 1998: fig. 2.51:17–18). Reported in deposits from the fourth to the first century BCE at various sites (Tel Keisan: Briend and Humbert 1980: 108, pl. 11:4; Tirat Yehuda: Yeivin and Edelstein 1970: fig. 9:30; Tel Dor: Guz-Zilberstein 1995: 300, fig. 6.23a:1–4; Tel Michal Fischer 1989: 185, fig. 13.3:27). Local Jars Fragmentary, local sack-shaped jars, with wide rounded shoulder, short cylindrical neck and thick folded rim (Figure 4.1:20–22), made of various local fabrics. This is the most common shape of local containers in the Persian and Hellenistic periods (sixth–third centuries BCE) commonly reported mainly in assemblages from costal sites such as Tel Keisan (Briend and Humbert 1980: 105–106, pl. 8:1a–f, 3, 4, 6–7), Tel Dor (GuzZilberstein 1995: 311, figs. 6.35:8–10, 6.36:2–4, photo 6.37a–b), Apollonia/Arsuf (Tal 1999: 102, figs. 4.13:12–13) and Tel Michal (Singer-Avitz 1989: 122, 124, figs. 9.4:1–9, 11–12, 9.5:16, 8, 9.6). Imported Amphora Fragment of imported amphora with cylindrical neck and everted rim (Figure 4.1:23). Made of soapy fabric abundant with thin silvery mica. This vessel belongs to the group of “mushroom-shaped rim” amphorae, which was produced during the fourth–third centuries BCE in several workshops located in the Eastern Aegean and Ionia, including Rhodes, Kos, Knidos, Kazomenai, Paros, Skopelos, Samos and several centers so far unidentified (Nørskov 2004: 289–290). Brazier Fragment of brazier with high trapezoid lug and plastic decoration on the rim exterior (Figure 4.2:1). This seems to be a local version of imported devices such as those reported from Tel Dor (cf. Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995: 205–207, fig. 5.1–2). Oil Lamps Two fragments of wheel-made oil lamp with elongated nozzle (Figure 4.2:2–3). This is a common local imitation of Attic prototype. It dates to the late Persian and Hellenistic periods (fourth–second centuries BCE). Such lamps are commonly reported at numerous sites (Tel Dor: Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995: 235, fig. 5.13:9–10, 5.14:1–8; Tel Keisan: Briend and Humbert 1980: 110, pl. 14:1–3; Appolonia/Arsuf: Tal 1999: 161, fig. 4.41:15–16). Early Roman Period Fragment of familiar wheel-made knife-pared (Herodian) type of oil lamp (Figure 4.2:4); dates from the late first century BCE to the late first–early second century CE (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994: 43–53). Byzantine Period Single fragment of bowl-basin with flat grooved rim and rouletting decoration on the exterior (Figure 4.2:5). Similar to Cypriot Red Slip Ware Hayes Form 7, and dates from the second half of the sixth century CE to

62

Chapter 4

the early seventh century CE (Hayes 1972: 377–379, fig. 81:7.1). At Jalame similar vessels were dated as early as the late fourth century CE (Johnson 1988: 159–160, fig. 7-14:252). Summary The pottery from the Qishle excavations includes a moderate quantity of vessels dating to the Hellenistic period. The vessels originated from various loci (L116, 295, 427, 432, 461, 465, 487, 930, 943, 947, 950, 953, 971, 976, 982, 1010, 1028, 1060, 1073, 5184). Some loci represented layers associated with contemporaneous architectural remains, while others contained soil accumulations where Hellenistic sherds were mixed with later materials. The assemblage includes a variety of table, household, cooking and storage vessels both imported and locally manufactured. Most of the vessels belong to well-dated types familiar from other excavations at Jaffa and throughout the region. The dating of the Hellenistic pottery in the assemblage, along with the absence of certain later Hellenistic groups (such as North Syrian Slipped Ware – Black-Slipped Predecessor of Eastern Sigillata A ca. 150–128/125 BCE – Slane 1997: 257–261) suggests that the Hellenistic assemblage dates to the early to mid-third century BCE. The pottery from the Early Roman and Byzantine periods is scattered and most probably reached this area accidentally as result of later activities. Works Cited Avissar, Miriam 1996 The Hellenistic and Early Roman Pottery, In Yoqne’am I: The Late Periods, edited by A. Ben-Tor, M. Avissar and Y. Portugali, pp. 48–59. Qedem Reports 3, Jerusalem. Barag, Dan and Malka Hershkovitz 1994 Oil Lamps from Masada. In Masada IV: The Yigal Yadin Excavations 1963–1965, Final Report, edited by J. Aviram, G. Foerster and E. Netzer, pp. 7–147. Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem. 1998 Naukratis/Kom Hadid: A Ceramic Typology for Hellenistic Lower Egypt. In Ancient Naukratis: Excavations at a Greek Emporium in Egypt, Part II, The Excavations at Kom Hadid, edited by Leonard, A. Jr. AASOR 55: 26–163. Blakely, Jeffrey A. and W. J. Jr. Bennett 1989 The Levantine Mortaria of the Persian Period. In Analysis and Publication of Ceramics: the Computer Data Base in Archaeology, edited by J. A. Blakely and W. J. Jr. Bennett, pp. 45–65. BAR International Series 551. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford. Briend, Jacques and Jean-Baptiste Humbert 1980 Tell Keisan (1971–1976) une cité phénicienne en Galillée. (Orbus biblicus et Orientalis. Series Archaeologica 1). Editions universitaires Fribourg, Fribourg. Elgavish, Joseph 1974 Archaeological Excavations at Shiqmona, Report No.2, The Level of the Hellenistic Period – Stratum H, Seasons 1963–1970. Haifa Museum of Art, Haifa. (Hebrew). Fischer, Moshe 1989 Hellenistic Pottery (Strata V–VIII). In Excavation at Tel Michal, edited by Z. Herzog, R. Rapp and O. Negbi, pp. 177–187. Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series No. 8. Tel Aviv and Minneapolis. Fischer, Moshe. and Oren Tal 1999 The Hellenistic Period. In Apollonia-Arsuf, Final Report of the Excavations, edited by I. Roll and O. Tal, pp. 223–261. Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series No. 16. Tel Aviv. Gitin, Seymor 1990 Gezer III: A Ceramic Typology of the Late Iron II, Persian and Hellenistic Periods at Tell Gezer. Annual of the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology 3. Jerusalem.

Pottery of the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Periods

63

Guz-Zilberstein, Bracha 1995 The Typology of the Hellenistic Coarse Ware and Selected Loci of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods, In Excavations at Dor, Final Report, Vol. IB Areas A and C: The Finds, edited by E. Stern, J. Berg, A. Gilboa, B. Guz-Zilberstein, A. Raban, R. Rosenthal-Heginbottom and I. Sharon, pp. 289– 434. Qedem Reports 2. Jerusalem. Hayes, John W. 1972 Late Roman Pottery. British School at Rome, London. Hayes, John W. and Cécile Harlaut 2001 Ptolemaic and Roman Pottery Deposits from Alexandria. In Alexandrina 2, Études alexandrines 6, edited by J.-Y. Empereur, pp. 99–134. Johnson, Barbara L. 1988 The Pottery. In Excavations at Jalame. Site of a Glass Factory in Late Roman Palestine, edited by C. Davidson Weinberg, pp. 137–226. University of Missouri Press, Columbia. 2006 The Hellenistic to Early Islamic Period Pottery, In Excavations at Tel Beth-Shean 1989–1996. Vol. I: from the Late Bronze Age IIB to the Medieval Period, edited by A. Mazar, pp. 523–589. Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem. Młynarczyk, Jolanta 2000 Pottery from the Hellenistic Cistern at Sha'ar ha-Amakim. Ε'EλλΚερ: 225–235. Nørskov, Vinnie 2004 Amphoras from Three Wells at the Maussolleion of Halikarnassos: Something to Add to the Typology of Mushroom Rims? In Transport Amphorae and Trade in Eastern Mediterranean, Acts of the International Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens, September 26–29, 2002, edited by J. Eiring and J. Lund. Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens, Vol. 5: 285–293. Rosenthal-Heginbottom, Renate 1995 Imported Hellenistic and Roman Pottery; Lamps. In Excavations at Dor, Final Report. Volume I B. Areas A and C: The Finds, edited by E. Stern, J. Berg, A. Gilboa, B. Guz-Zilberstein, A. Raban, R. Rosenthal-Heginbottom and I. Sharon, pp. 183–288. Qedem Reports 2. Jerusalem. Rotroff, Susan I. 1997 The Athenian Agora Vol. XXIX, Hellenistic Pottery: Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Table Ware and Related Material. American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, NJ. Salles, Jean-François 1993 Kition-Bamboula Vol. IV, Les niveaux hellénistiques. Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, Paris. Singer-Avitz, Lily 1989 Local Pottery of the Persian Period (Strata XI–VI). In Excavation at Tel Michal, edited by Z. Herzog, R. Rapp and O. Negbi, pp. 115–144. Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series No. 8. Tel Aviv and Minneapolis. Slane, Kathleen Warner 1997 Tel Anafa II,i, The Hellenistic and Roman Pottery, The Fine Ware. JRA Supp. Series Number 10.2.1: 249–394. Ann Arbor, MI. Tal, Oren 1999 The Persian Period. In Apollonia-Arsuf, Final Report of the Excavations, edited by I. Roll, and O. Tal, pp. 83–222. Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series No. 16. Tel Aviv. Yeivin, Zeev and Gershon Edelstein 1970 Excavations at Tirat Yehuda. ‘Atiqot 6: 56–67 (Hebrew, English summary: p.6*).

64

Chapter 4

Fig. 4.1. Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine ceramic vessels.

Pottery of the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Periods Illust. 4.1:1

Locus 295

Basket 6031

4.1:2

1028

10788-1

4.1:3

1060

10761-6

Type West Slope cup Fish-plate circle bowl Echinus bowl

4.1:4

953

10762-2

Echinus bowl

4.1:5

930

10523-7

Ionian bowl

4.1:6

1073

10787-2

jug

4.1:7 4.1:8

116 1028

1616-7 10788-15

4.1:9

1028

10788-11

4.1:10

982

10478

4.1:11

971

11117

skyphos local mortarium bowl mortarium bowl mortarium bowl unguentarium

4.1:12 4.1:13

943 5184

10231-1 5184-14

unguentarium cooking pot

4.1:14 4.1:15

1028 943

10788-4 10231

cooking pot casserole

4.1:16 4.1:17

427 487

5184-7 5184-8

lid baking-tray

4.1:18

1060

10761-1

baking-tray

4.1:19

465

5260

baking-tray

4.1:20

947

10183-1

4.1:21

950

10202-5

4.1:22

1028

10788-14

4.2:23

943

10231-4

local amphora local amphora local amphora amphora

65

Description Light red hard clay. Good black glaze allover, ivy made of pink paint and incision to the right. Light red hard clay. Slip dark red to dark gray on int. Pink hard clay with some small white grits. Slip dark red to dark gray on upper ext. Gray hard clay with some silvery mica. Slip dark gray thin, palmettos stamp on floor. Pink hard clay with some small white grits. Slip dark red to dark grayish brown on upper ext. Pink hard clay with some small white grits. Spotted slip allover, vary dark red to reddish gray. Reddish yellow clay with small grits of lime, un-slipped. Reddish yellow clay with some lime, rough fabric. Salt whitened on ext. Greenish white clay with some lime, rough sandy fabric. Pink hard clay with some small white and brown grits. Reddish brown coarse and sandy clay with some lime. Salt whitened on ext. Light red hard clay with some dark grits. Reddish brown coarse and hard fired clay with some lime and gray grits. Red clay, gray core, rather soft fabric with some lime and quartz. Reddish brown clay with some lime and quartz, coarse, rather hard fabric, fire blackened on ext. Reddish brown coarse clay with some lime. Red clay accommodated with golden and silvery mica, some fossil shells, rather soft sandy fabric, knife shaved handle. Fire blackened. Dark brown clay accommodated with golden and silvery mica, burnished. Fire blackened. Pinkish clay with mica (transparent), some gray grits, rather soft sandy fabric, wet smoothed. Fire blackened. Light gray clay, surfaces turn to pink, hard fired fabric heavy packed with lime grits. Reddish yellow clay with some lime and red grits, rough hard fabric. Salt whitened on ext. Buff clay, hard fired clay with lime pebbles and dark grits. Pinkish brown micaceous (silvery) clay, soapy fabric. Wet smoothed.

Table 4.1: Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine ceramic vessels.

66

Chapter 4

Illust. 4.2:1

Locus 461

Basket 5249-4

Type brazier

4.2:2 4.2:3 4.2:4

1010 976 658

10583 10349 1263

4.2:5

127

1696-8

oil lamp oil lamp knife-pared oil lamp CRSW bowl

Description Reddish yellow coarse clay, salt whitened, plastic decoration on ext. Fire blackened. Red hard clay, smoothed exterior Pink hard clay, smoothed exterior Pinkish brown clay, smoothed exterior Light red hard clay. Reddish brown worn slip.

Table 4.2: Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine ceramic vessels.

CHAPTER 5: AMPHORA STAMPS AND FRAGMENTS Gerald Finkielsztejn Israel Antiquities Authority Eight stamped amphora handles (three from Rhodes, one from Cyprus, three from the so far unpublished “Simios Group” – previously evidenced in Jaffa but the origin of which has not been located – and a last one from an unidentified origin) were uncovered in the excavations of Jaffa’s Qishle. Twenty-five unstamped amphora fragments (one from the Northern Aegean, one from Chios, two from Cyprus, seven from the Southeastern Aegean, six from Knidos, five from Rhodes, three unclearly identified) were registered. The finds, stamped and unstamped, are presented according to classes and rough chronological order. The unidentified classes are put at the end of the catalogue. The dates of the Rhodian stamps are based on Finkielsztejn 2001. Catalogue16 Northern Aegean: Unstamped Amphora Fragments One stem toe: L.928, B.10194, stem toe with a rounded end (see Lawall 2004: 449–451). Date: last quarter of the fourth–beginning of the third century BCE.

Chios: Unstamped Amphora Fragment Bottom of the base with the top of a broken elongated hollow toe: L.915, B.10058 (not illustrated; see Lawall 2004: 453). Date: early third century BCE. Cyprus: Amphora Stamp 1. L.1022, B.10652 – Rectangular stamp. Monogram with the letters ΠΑ / Ι The handle has a very rounded profile, with a thick oval section (4.4 x 3.0). The fabric is light reddish-brown with few mica flakes (some copper-colored ones) and medium-size inclusions of various colors. These features point to a Cypriot production, perhaps Kouriot (see Finkielsztejn 2013). Date: probably third century BCE.

Two (and possibly five) elongated toes: L.494, B.5331; light brown (lighter surface, white inclusions).

16

The registration number comprises the locus number (L. three or four digits) followed by the basket number (B. four or five digits) and, sometimes, by an order number, all separated by a dot. Measurements are in centimeters. H = height, D = diameter; S = section of handle; p (added) = preserved. All the fragments are catalogued due to their significance but the less well preserved ones are not illustrated. The photographs of the stamps are by G. Finkielsztejn. The drawings are by Irena Lidski-Reznikov. The drawings are on a scale of 1:5 while the photographs are on a scale of 1:1.

68

Chapter 5

L.941, B.10132, worn stem-toe with a depression at the button (reddish-brown with medium-size white inclusions and few brown ones). Note that a Cypriot origin cannot be ruled out for the three unclearly identified toes below, at the end of the catalogue.

South-Eastern Aegean: Unstamped Amphora Fragments Seven unstamped fragments. Six “mushroom” rims, including one with the upper attachment of the handle, may be attributed to the productions of the southeastern Aegean, i.e. from Samos to Rhodes, which constituted a koine of amphora forms in the late fourth–early third centuries BCE (see Lawall 2004: 451–453). One button toe. Date: end of the fourth–beginning of the third centuries BCE. L.1001, B.10482.4 (not illustrated; very flat and horizontal; yellowish-white fabric with lots of very fine copper colored mica). L.1001, B.10482.7 (flat below bottom; yellowish-white fabric). L.950, B.10202.4 (not illustrated; not too sloppy; light red fabric and yellowish-white surface with lots of fine mica). L.1082, B.10884 (not too sloppy; red fabric and light brown surface with some white and brown inclusions). L.740, B.10244 (not illustrated; with upper attachment of handle; very sloppy; dark red fabric and beige surface with some white inclusions and fine mica). L.1073, B.10787 (very sloppy; red fabric and light brown surface with many brown inclusions).

One button toe: L.1009, B.10507, button toe with a shallow depression in center (buff to light reddish-brown, white and brown inclusions and very fine mica).

Rhodes: Stamped Handles 2. L.928, B.10445 – Unstamped or Circular Stamp (not illustrated). The worn rounded upper branch of a handle may have borne a circular stamp with a device (a rose). Date: probably the middle of the third century BCE. 3. L.505, B.5466 – Circular stamp. ’Επὶ Φιλοκράτευς Four petals around a knob with three sprigs in between each petal. The same device adorns stamps by the fabricant Μίκυθος, with his name framed in two lines (Nachtergael 1978: 18–20, fig. 1, with additional references). The identical device suggests that the latter fabricant endorsed our amphora. The same name of fabricant appears on various types of stamps, including “button

Amphora Stamps and Fragments

69

stamps” and stamps with the month and a device. There seem to be two homonym fabricants at least, the latest one having most probably been active around the period of the appearance of the month on the stamps. Considering the date arrived at for our eponym, the fabricant seems to be Μίκυθος 2nd. Note that the precise date of the eponym is not fully stabilized in the sequence (Finkielsztejn 2001: 191). Date: ca. 230–225 BCE. 4. L.954, B.10551 – Rectangular stamp. [’Επίγο]νος [Πεδα]γεί(τνυος) The restoration of the reading is tentative, but quite likely. The profile of the handle is rounded with an almost circular section. The suggested fabricant is the early homonym of two. He was using both the rectangular and ivy-leaf-shaped stamps (Finkielsztejn 2001: 103). Date: ca. 215–205 BCE. Rhodes: Unstamped Amphora Fragments Five fragments of Rhodian amphorae may be roughly dated: L.979, B.10303, a toe of the middle of the third century BCE ( H 4.4, Dtoe 2.9, Dring 6.4; see Empereur and Tuna 1989: 283, fig. 8, g–j, especially i). L.131, B.5109 (not illustrated), a handle of the second half of the third century missing the upper part. Three cylindrical toes of the “classical” form of the Rhodian amphorae that started in the second third of the third century BCE were retrieved (none illustrated): L.1118, B.11134, H 4.0, D 4.7, with two ribs at base. L.1044, B.10566, H 4.0, D 4.4, with one rib at base. L.1028, B.10738, of a half capacity amphora, H 3.8, D 3.7, with one rib at base. Knidos: Unstamped Amphora Fragments One rim with upper attachment of handle: L.1103, B.10999 (thick oval handle; light brown, few white inclusions, very fine white mica). Date: third century BCE (Şenol 1995: 5, 32, 89, pl. 4, fig. 15, pl. 24, figs. 61–62, with stamp corpus KT 5006). Five toes are listed here in roughly their relative chronological order (see Empereur and Tuna 1988: 345, fig. 4, g–h): L.114, B.1576 (Not illustrated; with line in center; H 4.5, D 6.0). L.461, B.5163 (H 3.3, D 5.9). L.092, B.1562 (H 4.1, D 6.1). L.994, B.10379 (H 2.3, D 6.0). L.465, B.5260 (H 5.2, D 6.9; Şenol 1995: pl. 3, fig. 8). Date: first quarter of the third century BCE.

70

Chapter 5

The “Simios Group”Amphora Stamps of Unidentified Origin 5. L.939, B.10345 – Rectangular stamp. Σιμίου κεραμε(ύς) Linear frame. The profile of the handle is rounded and its section oval (4.1 x 2.6). The fabric is brownish-white, the surface light brownish-red, with very few white and few brown and brick inclusions. The form and fabric of this handle is quite different from that of No. 6 (below; the stamp of which bears the same name and function, obviously by the same engraver, or perhaps by one that copied the present die as it appeared on the stamp, resulting in a retrograde reading. The origin cannot be identified, but the style of the stamp is similar to some of those appearing on Macedonian-Thracian ones (the so-called “Parmeniskos Group”). The mention of the function of “potter” – κεραμεύς – is rarely attested, e.g., in the Black Sea regions and on the Levantine coast (Finkielsztejn 1998: 87–88, 104, note 51). Considering that all the known examples so far were found in Jaffa, and until clay tests are made or a similar stamp is published from elsewhere, it may be suggested that we are dealing with a local amphora. However, no evidence of Levantine production of amphorae of a “Greek style” form is known so far. Date: Hellenistic period (according to the aspect of the handle and stamp). 6. L.928, B.10597 – Rectangular stamp. Σιμίου κεραμε{ι}(ς) Linear frame. Retrograde reading. A stamp from the same die was uncovered in another excavation in Jaffa, by J. Kaplan (to be published by this writer). The name Σίμιος seems quite rare, as in Fraser and Matthews 2000 it appears only twice in the volume on Central Greece. The last letter of the function is an iota where one would expect an upsilon. Since neither the term κεράμειος (potter’s workshop), nor a noun of the same category are paralleled on amphora stamps, it may be suggested that the engraver simply wrote what he could, in the very narrow space remaining at the end of the line on the die. The profile of the handle is rounded. Part of the lower attachment of the handle is preserved and the location of the bend indicates that the neck was probably quite short (H ~10 cm, S 3.4 x 2.4). The fabric is light buff and the surface greenish-white, with few white inclusions (see No. 5). Date: Hellenistic period (according to the aspect of the handle and stamp). 7. L.504, B.5427 – Rectangular stamp. Σ[ ο[ Linear frame. This stamp displays some degree of affinity with Nos. 5 and 6, but the form of the sigma is different (with horizontal upper and lower bars here, as opposed to “open” there). The profile of the handle is rounded and the section is oval (3.4 x 2.0). The fabric is brownishwhite, the surface light brownish-red, with very few white and few brown inclusions. It is similar to that of No. 5. However, the size and form of the handle are quite different. Date: Hellenistic period (according to the aspect of the handle and stamp).

Amphora Stamps and Fragments

71

Stamped Amphora Handle of Unidentified Origin 8. L.1086, B.10945 – Rectangular stamp. ]ΜΑ(? Very narrow, deeply imprinted stamp. It is not certain that the name is abbreviated. The handle is flat (4.6 x 2.0) and its profile is rounded. The fabric and surface are very light brown, with few fine brown inclusions and rare mica. Date: perhaps third century BCE.

Unstamped Amphora Fragments of Unidentified Origin Three toes were not clearly identified; a Cypriot origin cannot be ruled out for the three of them. L.1082, B.10884, smoothed cone with a hole, at the base of an elongated amphora (light brown with very fine white inclusions).

L.1009, B.10507, solid elongated toe recalling those of Italian amphorae (with a thin rib around the rounded tip; light reddish-brown with brown and white inclusions); however, a Cypriot origin cannot be ruled out.

L.976, B.10606, solid elongated toe recalling those of Italian amphorae (light red with some white inclusions).

Four handles with part of the bend of the Hellenistic period were retrieved, the classes of which were not identified (none illustrated). Two are made of a similar fabric, very light buff with few dark inclusions and lots of very fine mica, surface beige: L.481, B.10295, complete, H 17.5, S 4.3 x 2.3. L.1043, B.10666, almost complete, H 15, S 4.7 x 2.3. One vertical branch of a handle with imprint of finger at lower attachment: L.928, B.10542, Hp 12, S 3.0 x 1.9, pink fabric with red brick inclusions and reddish-white surface. One almost complete handle: L.163, B.1900, H 13.7, S 3.3 x 2.3, dark red fabric with brownish-white surface.

72

Chapter 5

Works Cited Empereur, Jean-Yves, and Tuna, Numan 1988 Zénon de Caunos et l’épave de Serçe Limani. Bulletin de correspondance héllénique 112: 342–357. 1989 Hiérotélès, potier rhodien de la Pérée. Bulletin de correspondance héllénique 113: 277–299. Finkielsztejn, Gérald 1998 Timbres amphorique du Levant d’époque hellénistique. Mélanges Jacques Briend. Transeuphratène 15: 83–121. 2001 Chronologie détalliée et révisée des éponymes amphoriques rhodiens de 270 à 180 av. J.-C. Environ. Premier bilan. BAR International Series 990. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford. 2013 Cypriot Amphora Stamps of the Hellenistic Period Found in Israel. In The Transport Amphorae and Trade of Cyprus, edited by Mark L. Lawall and John Lund (Gösta Enbom Monographs 3), pp. 86– 100. Aarhus. Fraser, Peter M. and Elain Matthews 2000 Lexicon of Greek Personal Names III.B: Central Greece: from the Megarid to Thessaly. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Lawall, Mark 2004 Amphoras without Stamps: Chronologies and Typologies from the Athenian Agora. Sixth Scientific Conference on Hellenistic Pottery (Volos, April 17–23 2000), pp. 445–454. Athens. Nachtergael, Georges 1978 La collection Marcel Hombert I Timbres amphoriques et autres documents écrits acquis en Egypte (Papyrologica Bruxellensia 15). Bruxelles. Şenol, Kaan 1995 Monogram stamps on early Knidian Amphorae (IIIrd c. BC). Unpublished MA. Ege University, Izmir (Turkish).

CHAPTER 6: A TERRACOTTA FIGURINE Adi Erlich University of Haifa This terracotta figurine (Figure. 6.1–6.3, photos A. Gorzalczany) was found out of its original stratigraphic context in Area C, Square C9, L.501, B.5414 (soil accumulation from a medieval stratum). Technical details: Solid, probably handmade and worked with a sharp tool. Light red fabric (Munsell’s color chart: 7.5YR 7/8, reddish-yellow) with tiny voids. Measurements and preservation: 1.9 cm high, 3.8 cm wide at profile, 1.5 cm wide at front. Left foot of the figurine is preserved up to the ankle. Description: The figurine fragment from Area C depicts the bare left foot of a human figure. It is finely modeled and well articulated. The ankle is modeled on top of the foot. The toes are too long in proportion to the leg, which might hint at a feminine foot.

Fig. 6.a–c: Foot of the figurine. Discussion Articulated solid legs are rare among Hellenistic and Roman figurines from Israel and its surroundings, where as a rule figurines are cast in one mold for the whole front, rendering it in relief, as in Maresha (Erlich and Kloner 2008: 108). Similar legs and feet were discovered at Caesarea (Gendelman 2015: 28–33). A few articulated feet made in a double-mold technique and different in style were unearthed at Tel Dor (Erlich 2010: 190, nos. 71–73). They were dated to the Early Roman period by style or context (Erlich 2010: 131– 132). In the favissa of the shrine at Kharayeb (between Tyre and Sidon) articulated legs appear only rarely (Chéhab 1951–1954: pl. XVI, no. 3; pl. XVII; pl. LXXXVI no. 1) and are typical of large-scale figurines (Chéhab 1951–1954: pl. XCVII), unlike the average size of the Jaffa fragment. Articulated bare feet, which are normally mold-made, are common among figurines from Asia Minor, especially Myrina, in figures of Aphrodite, Nike, Eros and others (Mollard-Besques 1963: passim). Largescale figurines of males also end with bare feet (Merker 2000: 274, pl. 63 no. V30, from Corinth; Burn and Higgins 2001: 138, pl. 63, from Smyrna). Our fragment however, with its slender toes and delicate shape seems to belong to a female. Dating this piece is difficult. Its handmade technique is uncharacteristic among Hellenistic and Roman figurines. The fine modeling and average size suggests a Hellenistic date (third–second centuries BCE), as the Roman figurines become larger in size and coarser in modeling. This figurine was most likely imported from overseas, perhaps from Asia Minor, and it joins a few more unpublished Hellenistic figurines from Jaffa

74

Chapter 6

(R. Avner, pers. comm.; others are to be published by the author), which seem to be of foreign production. These figurines were probably brought to the harbor of Jaffa during the Hellenistic period. Works Cited Burn, Lucilla and Higgins, Reynold 2001 Catalogue of Greek Terracottas in the British Museum III. British Museum Press, London. Chéhab, Maurice H. 1951–54 Les terres cuites de Kharayeb. Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth 10–11. Beirut. Erlich, Adi 2010 Part Two: Figurines, Sculpture and Minor Art of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods. In Excavations at Dor, Figurines, Cult Object and Amulets, 1980–2000 Seasons, edited by E. Stern, pp. 117–209. Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem. Erlich, Adi and Kloner, Amos 2008 Maresha Excavations Final Reports II: Hellenistic Terr acotta Figurines from the 1989–1996 Seasons. IAA Reports 35. Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. Merker, Gloria S. 2000 Corinth XVIII–IV: The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore, Terracotta Figurines of the Classical, Hellenistic and Roman Periods. American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton N.J. Mollard-Besques, Simone 1963 Musée national du Louvre: Catalogue raisonné des figurines et reliefs en terre cuite grecs et romains II: Myrina. Musée national du Louvre, Paris.

CHAPTER 7: CRUSADER POTTERY Katherine S. Burke, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures, UCLA Edna J. Stern, Israel Antiquities Authority The Crusader-period ceramics presented in this paper originate from features excavated at the Qishle site in Jaffa in which physical remains of the Crusader period were identified (Arbel, Chapter 3, Stratum III, this volume). The sherds were examined, identified, quantified, and examples were chosen for presentation according to typology (Table 1).17 From the outset the methodology used was based on that developed to study ceramics from Crusader Acre (modern ‘Akko; see Stern 1997; 2007; 2012a), as both sites served as important ports during the days of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem and seem to have similar pottery assemblages. The study of Crusader period pottery unearthed in Jaffa is in its preliminary stages, however, and this serves as one of the first published studies.18 Therefore, although some comparisons are made to the ceramic assemblage at Acre, any conclusions drawn here are preliminary and will doubtless have to be revised as more Crusader period ceramics are published from Jaffa. Part 1. Assemblages by Excavation Area The Crusader ceramics from the excavations at the Qishle compound come from five distinct areas, as described by Yoav Arbel in this volume (Chapter 3, Stratum III). Examination of the makeup of the assemblages from each area may help to illuminate the function of these areas. The data is also presented on the grounds that future publications may provide further comparable data. In the western courtyard, northern complex, two phases of fieldstone-built walls were excavated. The earlier phase is composed of three walls (W998, W971, W1026), two of which meet at a 90-degree angle and form the corner of a building. The later phase is represented by wall 935, which overlies W971 and W1026 (see Arbel, Chapter 3, Stratum III). This area above all provides one of the few tantalizing glimpses we have into the early Crusader occupation of Jaffa. Both of the phases of walls were built in the twelfth or early thirteenth century in an area that previously had not seen occupation since the Hellenistic period (see Arbel, Chapter 3, Stratum III). Wall 935, representing the second building phase, was used well into the thirteenth century, as the associated fills (loci 977, 983, and 993) contain ceramics that date exclusively to the thirteenth century. Glazed table wares (primarily bowls) comprise two thirds (62.50%) of the ceramic assemblage of this area, which yielded thirty-two rim sherds. These come from loci 935, 943, 971, 987, 993, 1015, 1026, 1042, and 1049 (omitting the two thirteenth-century loci, 977 and 983). A relatively high proportion of cooking wares were also collected (28.13%), however, with a small remainder of plain wares (9.38%), which refers to unglazed utility vessels such as store jars, water jugs, basins, and bowls. The majority of the glazed 17

The article was written in 2012. It was slightly updated over the years, but does not refer to all relevant studies published since. For the purposes of quantification only rim sherds were included in the counts, but the presence of bodysherds was noted if rim sherds of that type were absent. A total of 708 rim sherds was counted, and of them representative samples of nearly every type and subtype were chosen for illustration. The typology set out here provides a description of each type and its date range. For each type reference is made to the handbook of Islamic and Crusader pottery published by M. Avissar and E. J. Stern, where further references are found (Avissar and Stern 2005). Throughout, reference is also made to recent work on the extensive material of Acre (Stern 1997; 2007; 2012a) and Caesarea (Arnon 2008) whenever possible. Some additional references are supplied for types for which more extensive discussion is useful. 18 For over a decade several excavations in Jaffa have revealed remains from the Crusader period. Nevertheless pottery from Jaffa has been published only from a restricted excavation dating exclusively to the thirteenth century (Kletter 2004), and in a preliminary publication of whole and restored vessels from large-scale excavations at the Ganor Compound (Burke 2011). Forthcoming studies include pottery from the excavation of the French hospital site (Stern in preparation), the Ganor Compound (Burke, in preparation), HaTzorfim Street (Burke, forthcoming) and Ruslan Street (Stern and Burke, in preparation).

76

Chapter 7

table wares are imports (80.00%). Thus although none of the other categories of ceramics includes imported products, the total proportion of imports excavated from the western courtyard, northern complex is a rather high 50.00%. The western courtyard, central complex also shows two phases of Crusader occupation. The earlier phase is represented by plaster floor L1007 and its makeup. The second phase is represented by the 90-degree angle of fieldstone-built walls W967 and W970, the corner of a building erected some time after the floor had gone out of use (see Arbel, “Stratum III,” this volume). The ceramics from this area (thirty-two rim sherds from loci 954, 957, 967, 996, 1007, and 1012) all date to the thirteenth century. The ceramic assemblage is comprised mostly of cooking wares (65.63%) with one third glazed table wares (34.38%) and no plain wares. The cooking wares include the sherd of one Cypriot cooking pot, with the remainder products of the southern Levant. Conversely, the glazed table wares are nearly all imported (81.82%), as in the western courtyard, northern complex. Total imports are 34.38%. The western courtyard, southern complex contains a single phase of occupation, the architectural remains of which are the corner of one building and two walls from another. Both structures are built of cut stones, in contrast to the preceding areas, and the high-quality dressed blocks of which W1057 and W961 are built suggest a large, perhaps public, building (see Arbel, Chapter 3, Stratum III). The loci excavated are for the most part thirteenth century in date, although some Ottoman sherds were introduced when later graves were dug (see Arbel, Chapter 3, The Cemetery). The Crusader ceramic assemblage comes from loci 103, 116, 163, 171, 187, 953, 962, 1051, 1057 and is comprised of seventy rim sherds. Despite the more impressive appearance of the structures in this complex, most of the associated sherds are of cooking wares (64.29%), as in the fieldstone-built central complex. Of these 6.67% were imported from Cyprus and the remainder were made in the southern Levant. The next most abundant category is glazed table wares (28.57%), of which 70.00% are imports. Few plain wares are present (7.14%), of which only one sherd is imported, from either Spain or North Africa. Total imports are 25.71%. The stone-paved courtyard (L1099) and associated walls (W1058, W1091, W1101), possibly part of a house, yielded pottery from loci 1071, 1091, 1095, 1099, 1107, 1112, 1113, and 1114, with the total rim count at twenty-nine rim sherds. The ceramics are thirteenth century in date, but for a few Mamluk-era sherds. These were recovered from the drain system underneath the courtyard floor (L1112, L1114), and may have washed in after the main period of occupation. The majority of the ceramics from this area are glazed table wares (55.17%), of which over half (56.25%) are locally made. Cooking wares comprise 24.14% of the assemblage, and include one cooking vessel imported from northern Italy, southern France, or Catalonia (see NIT/SFR/CA.CW below), while the remainder are products of the region. Plain wares only comprise 20.69% of the assemblage of this domestic area. Total imports make up a substantial portion of the ceramics from the stone-paved courtyard area at 41.38%.19 The ceramics from the plaster-lined reservoir, associated cesspit, and drains are nearly all thirteenth century in date, although a Mamluk coin was found in the reservoir’s fill (Arbel, Chapter 3, Stratum III). In contrast to the domestic area of the courtyard, just over half of this ceramic assemblage is comprised of cooking wares (51.70%), all of which are southern Levantine products. Glazed table wares make up one third of the assemblage (32.95%). The proportion of imports is the same as in the western courtyard, southern complex (70.69%). Total plain wares make up 15.34% of the assemblage. Total imports are only 25.57%. This area yielded a larger number of sherds than the domestic area, with the rim sherd count at 176. They come from loci 115, 1017, 1019, 1030, 1102, 1103, 1110, 1111, 1118, and 1120. In the excavations at the Knights’ Hotel in Acre, a similar phenomenon occurred of large amounts of pottery, mainly cooking ware

19

Compare the make-up of the published thirteenth-century assemblage from Acre, which comes from a domestic area in the Knights’ Hotel excavations: Total imports comprise a slightly smaller proportion of the assemblage at 35.70%. Total local products are 64.30%, total glazed table wares 34.56%, total cooking wares 31.13%, and total plain wares 34.31% (Stern 2007: 190 and data from Table 3, omitting Acre bowls).

Crusader Pottery

77

and glazed bowls, and much of it restorable, being found in cisterns and cesspits (Syon and Tatcher, forthcoming).20 Part 2. Dated Assemblages: The Two Phases of Crusader Occupation at Jaffa As alluded to above, two ceramic assemblages were distinguished within the larger Crusader group excavated from the Qishle site, an earlier assemblage and a later assemblage. These were identified based on the presence or absence of certain types of imports that are securely dated by excavations outside of the southern Levant, following the methodology established at Acre.21 Partly because of the disturbed nature of the Crusader remains at the Qishle site, it was difficult to distinguish these assemblages stratigraphically and to clearly describe the nature of the earliest Frankish occupation. The early assemblage is represented by fourteen loci, of which only seven comprise a related and decipherable group. This is found in the western courtyard, northern complex, where as described above two groups of walls were found superimposed upon one another, representing two phases of building, but both within this first phase of Crusader occupation according to the ceramic dating (see Arbel, Chapter 3, Stratum III). The early Crusader ceramic assemblage at the Jaffa Qishle site is characterized by the continuation of a tradition of locally-made glazed table wares and cooking wares from Fatimid times, as well as by the presence of glazed table wares imported from the Byzantine Empire, specifically in the region of the Aegean Sea (GR.GL). Cooking vessels (BE.CW) retain their classic shapes, primarily of flat-bottomed pans and globular pots, and remain thin-walled and relatively finely potted. Pans are usually glazed all the way to the rim rather than just the interior of the base as during the Fatimid period, and have simple rounded rims rather than folded rims. “Pie-crust” handles have largely disappeared. The deeper pots are very similar if not indistinguishable from their predecessors, having a variety of rim forms as described below, and glaze usually only on the interior of the base. Related to these are glazed table wares (BE.GL) with monochrome glaze, incising, or slip-paint (Tables 2, 3).22 The early assemblage is dated from the beginning of the twelfth to the early thirteenth century.23 At the beginning of this period Jerusalem was the capital of its own Latin kingdom and Jaffa was its port. When Jerusalem was taken by Salah al-Din in 1187 the capital of the Kingdom of Jerusalem moved to Acre in the north, and Jaffa’s importance was much diminished (Richard 1979: 177). Well before this event Jaffa’s port had already lost much of its traffic, however, based on documentary evidence. 24 According to the Qishle site Jaffa’s imports make up 34.78% of the early assemblage; 100% of them come from the region of the Aegean Sea (Table 3). These proportions will surely change when data from other excavations can be taken into 20

Cesspits may be considered common receptacles for broken or cracked ceramic vessels that cannot be repaired, and other items that are no longer usable, in areas outside of the Latin Levant as well. For example, a cesspit that may have begun as a cistern in early thirteenth century Quseir al-Qadim, Egypt, yielded large amounts of pottery, much of it glazed bowls (Burke 2007: 56). 21 For dated Crusader-period assemblages see Stern 2007: 186–92; 2009; 2012a:24–29. 22 It should be noted that the early assemblage at the Qishle site is not entirely representative of the early assemblage at Jaffa overall. Other excavations currently being published by the authors have produced additional types, also found at Acre, such as unglazed vessels of the BE fabric (BE.PL), and another glazed type from this fabric called “Glazed Bowls with Double Slip” (BE.GL.6) known from several sites in the southern Levant and made famous by the Serçe Limani shipwreck (Avissar and Stern 2005: Fig 1, type I.1.1; Jenkins 1992). Other local wares include handmade, comb-incised basins (VL.PL.1), handmade painted bowls and jars (VL.PL.5, or HMGPW), storage and table jars, some similar to those of Acre fabric (VL.PL.6, VL. PL.7). Several other types of glazed Aegean bowls (GR.GL.4–7, 9) are also found in the early assemblage at Jaffa, in addition to the two types appearing in the early assemblage at the Jaffa Qishle site (GR.GL.1–2). High-handled amphorae (TUR/GR.PL.1) and small imported amphorae (TUR/GR.PL.4) are also present in the early assemblage. 23 The ceramics from a pit excavated at the site of Mi‘ilya provides a glimpse into the early Crusader occupation of a rural site in the vicinity of Acre (Stern 2012b). 24 Jacoby asserts that Acre had already usurped Jaffa’s role by 1111, based on the documentary evidence from Venice (Jacoby 1997: 157).

78

Chapter 7

account. Nevertheless the Qishle site data compares well with the aggregate of material from Acre. The imports to that port comprise 27.78% of the early assemblage (Table 4), but the same types of Aegean vessels make up only 40.00% of total imports while the remainder are glazed tablewares possibly from Egypt, and small imported amphorae from Turkey or Greece (see TUR/GR.PL.4 below and Stern 2012a: 25, data derived from Table 3.1). The later Crusader assemblage dates to the middle and late thirteenth century. At the Qishle site loci dated to the thirteenth century are sixty-one in number and represent the majority of the Crusader occupation.25 Locally-made products still comprise the majority of the ceramic assemblage, with a slight increase in the proportion of imports (to 38.93%). Locally-made wares continue in the traditions from the previous period. In terms of proportions, cooking wares continue to dominate the locally-made products, followed by the glazed table wares and the plain wares (Table 5). The cooking vessels tend to have coarser and sandier fabric than previously, but the most noticeable change is in the potting, which is much thicker, and in the forms, with heavy, modeled rims on the globular vessels. The glaze always now extends to the rim and sometimes over, on both pots and pans (see BE.CW below). The glazed table wares continue as previously. Plain wares continue as previously, but with the introduction of certain types of slipper lamps (Table 6; also see Slipper lamps and Slipper lamps with “Jaffa handle” below). Examining the imports of glazed table wares by provenance shows only small differences between the Jaffa and Acre thirteenth-century assemblages. In this period the glazed table wares imported to Jaffa (as represented by the Qishle site) are predominantly from the Eastern Mediterranean (51.15%; Table 7). The second largest group comes from Italy (35.11%), with much smaller proportions coming from central and northern Syria (8.4%) and the western Mediterranean (5.34%). Therefore as expected Jaffa’s ceramics reflect an orientation towards the Byzantine world, the trade of which was dominated by the Italian mercantile cities of Venice, Pisa, and Genoa. In the thirteenth century Acre’s imported glazed table wares come primarily from northern and central Syria (41.32%). Like Jaffa, the second-largest proportion comes from Italy (35.54%). The group from the eastern Mediterranean comprises 20.25% of glazed table wares, while the smallest proportions come from the western Mediterranean (1.65%) and China (1.65%, Stern 2007: data taken from Table 3). Therefore Acre’s later imports also reflect an orientation toward the Byzantine world, as well as its connections to neighboring Syria via overland and local sea trade (see also Stern 2007: 202‒ 205; 208‒209; Stern 2012a: 133–135). The increase in the provenances of imports in the thirteenth century represents the increase in sea traffic between the Frankish ports in the Levant and European and Byzantine ports, as Frankish control of parts of the Levant endured and relations between Muslims and Franks were for the most part peaceful (Richard 1979: 201, 274–275, 285–286). The Levant maritime trade of the period was sub-divided into long-distance trade (to Europe), mid-distance trade (to Egypt and the Byzantine Empire), and local trade. Local trade was characterized by ships plying the length of the Levantine coast from Asia Minor to Egypt, buying and selling merchandise and picking up and unloading passengers in the various ports along the way. The vessels used for this traditional activity along the Mediterranean coast were either small or medium-sized ships belonging to local traders, or were larger ships of European traders and seamen. This activity is attested to in the second half of the thirteenth century in Italian contracts that speak of sailing between Laiazzo in Asia Minor, Latakieh, Beirut, and Acre on the Syrian coast, and Damietta and Alexandria in Egypt. Acre became a significant port for this kind of traffic along the coast because of its central geographical position and its good harbor (Jacoby 1998). Thus while Acre was the undisputed major Levantine port, and Jaffa sat on only a minor international trade route, the latter’s participation in the local coastal trade explains the wide variety of imported ceramics found in the later assemblage (Jacoby 1998; Lilie 1984: 261). At the Qishle site about 39% of the later assemblage is imported and 61% is locally made (Table 8), although as mentioned for the early assemblage these proportions will surely change when the ceramics from

25

The disturbance of Ottoman graves and other remains prevented more loci from being included in the statistical analysis of the thirteenth century.

Crusader Pottery

79

other Jaffa excavations are published. For the time being, when compared to the later assemblage from Acre, the proportions of imports and locally-made ceramics are similar at 36% imports and 64% locally-made in Acre (Stern 2007: Tables 1–2). This is also perhaps explainable by the participation of both ports in the local Mediterranean coastal trade. Part 3. Pottery Typology After the excavations, pottery that had been preliminarily dated to the Crusader period was examined by loci, 286 in number. The sherds were identified and counted by type (Table 9), following the typology set out for Acre, with the addition of new type designations for those not found at Acre (see Table 1, and Stern 2007: 253–256; Stern 2012a: 175–181). The ceramics are presented according to production regions, based primarily on the existing Crusader-period pottery typologies from the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem and from other major medieval Mediterranean port sites, as well as on the results of provenance studies and archaeological remains of pottery production. They are arranged in geographical order: the Levant, the eastern Mediterranean, Italy, the western Mediterranean, and imports from unknown provenances. Each regional group received an abbreviation of two or three letters (for example, AC = Acre, SY = Central Syria, NSY = Northern Syria, etc.). In cases where confirmed provenance information was not available, affiliation of a certain type or group with a production center was assigned according to fabric appearance and/or typology. Groups the precise production site of which was unknown were named using a broad geographical term, for example, “Turkey and/or Greece” (abbreviation TUR/GR), the area covered by the Byzantine Empire. Pottery types the production sites for which were assumed to be a local source other than Acre, the Lebanese coast or Beirut, were grouped as “Varia Local” (abbreviation VL) and pottery types that were not made of any of the known local fabrics, but the provenance of which remained unknown, were grouped as “Varia Imported” (abbreviation VI). After the initial division according to geographic production regions, each group was further divided into three main subgroups: plain, unglazed wares (abbreviation PL), cooking wares (abbreviation CW), and glazed wares (abbreviation GL). These three subgroups were further divided into types numbered in sequence (1, 2, 3 …) according to various criteria such as decoration techniques (in the majority of the groups), fabric groups, or vessels forms. In Jaffa we added some abbreviations for types that did not appear in the Acre typology (e.g., VL.PL.2, Shallow Carinated Bowls; VL.GL.3, Glazed slippainted bowls) and also added types to define oil lamps (LMP.SL, Slipper lamps; LMP.SL.J, Slipper lamps with Jaffa handle; LMP.BH.PL.1, Plain Saucer Lamps; LMP.BH.GL, Glazed Saucer Lamps; LMP.LN.GL, Glazed Lamps with Long Nozzle).26 Local Wares Locally-made wares comprise 65.22% of the early assemblage and 60.72% of the later assemblage (Tables 4‒5). This group comprises vessels thought to be made in the region, that is the southern Levant. It includes vessels for which the provenance is unknown, vessels that have been identified as possibly coming from multiple manufacture sites in the southern Levant, and vessels thought to be made in Lebanon and in the vicinity of Beirut, based on petrographic analyses. Most of the locally-made types continue earlier traditions. This is especially clear in the cooking wares and the mold-made lamps.

26

Despite its limitations, this methodology enabled us to obtain as comprehensive a picture as possible of the local and imported Crusader-period pottery found at coastal sites in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. It is acknowledged that these type-abbreviations work ad hoc for the presentation of the Crusader-period pottery from Acre and Jaffa and possibly for Crusader-period pottery from other sites within the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, but may not be appropriate for publication of pottery from other sites throughout the Mediterranean.

80

Chapter 7

Local Handmade Wares Very few handmade vessels were recovered in the excavations, most of the assemblage being comprised of wheel-made wares. Both handmade types described here are decorated, either with comb-incising or painting. Hand-made basins (VL.PL.1). – The fabric of these vessels is of an orange-buff poorly-levigated clay with common coarse red, yellow, and black particles. The vessels are well potted. The form is a hand-made basin with a flat base, conical body, and thickened rim. There is often comb incising on the exterior and the top of the rim (Fig. 7.1:1‒2). This type is known from Acre, Caesarea, and other Crusader sites in northern Israel, and at other excavations at Jaffa (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.1.2.2, fig. 36:3; Burke, in preparation; Burke, fothcoming; Stern 2012a: 49–50, type VL.PL.1, Pl. 4.24; in preparation; Stern and Burke, in preparation). According to the petrographic analysis of such basins found at Acre it has been suggested that this type was produced in the western Galilee (Shapiro 2012: 106–107, 115). It dates to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 84). Hand-made painted bowls and jugs (VL.PL.5). – The fabric of these vessels fires pale yellow to black if overfired, with common very coarse particles of unmixed clay and the addition of red particles. Vessels are coarsely potted and the fabric is loose. Only one rim sherd of a bowl was found in the Qishle excavations (Fig. 7.1:3). The form is of a bowl with curved sides and a rim that is thickened on the inside and outside. No base is preserved. The vessel is covered with a cream slip on the inside and outside, over which geometric designs are painted in dark reddish brown (cf. Arnon 2008: type 171a, p. 331; Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.1.4.2, fig. 38:8; Burke, forthcoming; Kletter and Stern 2006: 180–181). Other forms are jugs with bodies that are globular, piriform, or carinated (basket 11028, not illustrated) and necks that are conical, cylindrical (basket 10883, not illustrated), or slightly bulging at center to rims that are simple or have small everted lips (Arnon 2008: 51, 365–366, type 572b; Avissar and Stern 2005: Figs. 47–48, type II.4.4; Stern 2012a: 49, 50, type VL.PL.5, fig. 4.14, pl. 4.26:4, 5). Five other sherds of closed forms have been found at Jaffa in thirteenth century assemblages (Burke, in preparation; Burke 2011: 206; Stern, in preparation). This hand-made decorated type is often refered to in the literature as Hand-Made Geometric Painted Ware (HMGPW), and is known throughout the region of Bilad al-Sham, while variants appear in Iran, the Gulf region, Nubia, and the Maghreb (Johns 1998: 69). Although it is commonly mistaken for evidence of Mamluk occupation, manufacture begins in the second half of the twelfth century and seems to continue through the early Ottoman period (Johns 1998: 67–69). Numerous examples have been found throughout Israel. See Avissar and Stern (2005: 89–90) for a list of published and unpublished sites. Hand-made wares have been found in large numbers mainly at rural sites, and are quite scarce in urban sites (see Kletter and Stern 2006). This is the case in other port cities like Acre (Stern 2012a: 49–50) and Beirut (van der Steen 1997–1998) and therefore it is not surprising that few sherds have been found in Jaffa to date. Local Mold-made Wares Slipper lamps (LMP.SL). – The fabric of these vessels fires pink to light brown, with common fine white particles and sparse coarse black particles.The lamps are made in a two-part mold, the top and bottom of the vessel being pressed into a mold separately. The vessels are almond-shaped, with gently curved tops and flat bases. The central filling-hole is relatively small. Decoration consists of linear and curvilinear designs. These lamps ordinarily have either a tall, slightly curved tongue handle, or a curved handle that closes onto the top of the lamp, forming a loop. Lamps with a tall, slightly curved tongue handle date to the late twelfth century and early thirteenth century and occasionally bear Arabic inscriptions. These are usually considered an Ayyubid type (Avissar and Stern 2005: type III.2.1.1; Hadad 1999: type 44). The lamps with the curved

Crusader Pottery

81

handle that forms a loop is considered a Mamluk type dating to the second half of the thirteenth to the fourteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: type III.2.1.2.; Hadad 1999: type 45). Although these lamps have an Islamic dynasty definition, they were also used by the Frankish population in Acre. There the earlier type was produced in the “Acre fabric” (Stern 2012a: 36, type AC.PL.6, pl. 4.11:9, 10). Lamps of these types were possibly also used by the Frankish population in Jaffa. They seem to be quite common in Jaffa, and have been found in other excavations as well (e.g., Kletter 2004: 205, fig. 16:10; Stern, in preparation). Several of those from the Qishle site were missing their handles (Fig. 7.2:1, and lamps not illustrated here from baskets 10664, 11156, 11157; cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: types III.2.1.1 and III.2.1.2, fig. 53:1–4; Hadad 1999: 109–14, types 44, 45). Slipper lamps with Jaffa handle (LMP.SL.J). – These slipper lamps are as above, but the handles curve down without forming a loop, often stopping about 0.5 cm from the top of the lamp body (Fig. 7.2:2‒3). As this handle type is unlike those found in other sites, it has tentatively been dubbed a “Jaffa handle.” It appears only in the late assemblage in Jaffa so far, and therefore a preliminary date is assigned to the thirteenth century. Flasks (VL.PL.6). – The vessel is of a light-firing fabric with sparse coarse white particles and very sparse coarse red particles. Only the rim and neck are preserved (Fig. 7.3:1). The neck is carinated but smooth up to a rounded, thickened rim. This seems to be the upper part of a moldmade flask of a uniform, well known type that is usually considered to be Mamluk. They are often decorated with Mamluk blazons and Arabic inscriptions, and were found mainly in Mamluk assemblages. In addition a kiln site was excavated in Damascus (Avissar and Stern 2005: 117, type II.4.5.2, fig. 49:3, 4). However, an intact example of this type of flask was found in Acre, with an incision of a cross on its base, indicating that this type was also used by Christians in the Frankish town (Stern 2012a: 50–52, type VL.PL.6, fig. 4.17, pl. 4.27:6). Fragments of such flasks were found elsewhere in Acre as well (Stern 1997: 40, fig. 4:18). This type of flask dates to the thirteenth and fourteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 117). Local Wheel-made Wares Acre Plain Ware (AC.PL). – Undecorated vessels that are very similar to vessels made in the vicinity of Acre were unearthed at the Qishle site. Ledge-rim bowls were the most common form found, but kraters and jars were also extant. Petrographic and chemical analysis has shown that the vessels found in Acre and made of a defined fabric were produced there. These wares are dated in Acre to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 82, type II.1.1.2, fig. 35:4–6; Shapiro 2012: 104, 105, 114, 155; Stern 2012a: 34– 38, type AC.PL.1, 2, fig. 4.1, pls. 4.1, 4.2; Waksman, et al. 2008: 159, 176–183, figs. 1, 2:1, 3). It has not been fully established whether the vessels found in Jaffa were produced in Acre or locally. Similar vessels were found at other excavations in Jaffa (Burke 2011: 206, fig.17.2:2660, 4452, 3859; Stern, in preparation) and at the castle at Arsur (Apollonia-Arsūf) in a pit dated to the last Crusader phase (Roll 2007: 75).27 The “Acre fabric” fires to a light red, with sparse to abundant coarse quartz sand and black particles. Vessels are fairly coarsely potted and usually have a light gray wash or self-slip on the surfaces. Bowls of this fabric (“Acre bowls”) are small and hemispherical on a disk base with a rounded, thickened ledge rim (AC.PL.1). The ledge has a dip or groove down the center (Fig. 7.3:2, cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.1.1.2, fig. 35:4). Plates of this type are also present (Fig. 7.3:3, cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.1.1.2, fig. 35:6). These were found in extremely large quantities in the Hospitallers’ Compound in Acre, and probably have a specialized function there (Stern 2012a: 28, Table 3.4, AC.PL.1). It is not clear that they have the same function in Jaffa, however (also see Burke, in preparation). The simple jug of “Acre fabric” (AC.PL.3) has a flat base, piriform body, and conical neck to a beveled rim. It has a single handle that extends from mid-neck to shoulder (Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.4.1, fig.

27

Our thanks to Israel Roll and Oren Tal for showing E.J.S these finds during the summer of 2008.

82

Chapter 7

45:1; Stern 2012a: 34–38, type AC.PL.6, pl. 4.6, 4.7). The sample from the Qishle site preserves only the base (Fig. 7.3:4). Kraters or drinking jugs of “Acre fabric” (AC.PL.4) are piriform on a disk base, with wide straight necks that are ribbed, up to a simple or beveled rim. One handle of oval section extends from mid-neck down to the vessel shoulder. A rim sherd is illustrated here (Fig. 7.3:5, cf. Stern 2012a: 34–38, fig. 4.3, type AC.PL.4, pl. 4.8). A more complete example has been found in another excavation at Jaffa (Burke, in preparation; Burke 2011: Fig.17.2:2660). Jars of Acre material (AC.PL.5) tend to have an ovoid body, often on an omphalos base. The neck is long and narrows slightly to the lip, which is folded and sometimes pinched. Two vertical handles extend from mid-neck to shoulder (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.3.2.4, fig. 44:6; Stern 2012a: 34–38, type AC.PL.5, pl. 4.9, 4.10). The samples from the Qishle site include rims (Fig. 7.3:6‒7) and a rim with handle (not illustrated). A few other examples are known from Jaffa (Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern and Burke, in preparation). Locally-made Vessels for Storage Narrow-necked amphorae (LE.PL). – The fabric of these vessels fires to a light reddish yellow, is hard, of medium density, and contains sparse medium to coarse red particles and abundant black and white particles. The vessel has a piriform body that is wide at the shoulder and dramatically narrows toward the neck. A drip ring is present below the pointed rim (Fig. 7.3:8), below which two handles of oval cross-section stretch to the shoulder (Fig. 7.3:9). The vessel sits on a ring base (Fig. 7.3:10, cf. Arnon 2008: 53, 376, type 873; Avissar and Stern 2005: Fig.44:3–5, type II.3.2.3; Stern 2012a: 38–40, type LE.PL, fig. 4.4, pl.4.12:2–8). Petrography has shown this type of amphora to have been made in Lebanon (Goren 1997: 72; Shapiro 2012: 106, 115). It was once known only in the northern part of Israel (Avissar and Stern 2005: 106) and to date only two vessels are known from Jaffa including the one shown from the Qishle site (bodysherds were found at the Ganor site, see Burke, in preparation). Although the sample from the Qishle site was found in a locus containing three Mamluk sherds (L1102, part of the fill of the reservoir described above and in Arbel, Chapter 3, Stratum III), this type is normally dated to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 105). Cooking Wares (BE.CW) The wheel-made cooking wares used in the southern Levant in the Crusader period continue types seen in the Early Islamic period (e.g., Arnon 2004: Fig. 8; el-Masri 1997: Fig. 4). Initially there is little difference between those used in the Fatimid and in the early Crusader period, up to perhaps the mid-thirteenth century. Some time in the thirteenth century both major forms of vessel (open and closed) are manufactured with thick walls and heavy rims (Avissar and Stern 2005: 91). Tests of examples found in Acre indicate these vessels, as well as a group of glazed table wares of similar fabric, were most likely imported from Lebanon, in the vicinity of Beirut (Stern and Waksman 2003: 169– 170, 175; Waksman, et al. 2008: 163–166, 176–183, fig. 2:5–6, figs. 7–8). Analyses of sherds from Jaffa have shown that they were also produced in Beirut (Stern, Waksman and Shapiro 2020).28 The fabric of these cooking vessels is of medium compaction and fires to a reddish brown with light red surfaces. It contains common amounts of fine to coarse quartz and sparse to moderate medium black particles. Thin-walled cooking pans (BE.CW.O.thin). – This dish is open, flat or slightly convex on the bottom, with thin, vertical, slightly flared walls that terminate in a rim that is simple (Fig. 7.4:1) or has a tiny outturned lip. There are often two types of handles, a set of each appearing on the same vessel. One type is a

28

A project (in the framework of the POMEDOR) in which petrographic and Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence analysis (XRF) on sherds from Jaffa was conducted.

Crusader Pottery

83

horizontal strap handle, and the other is of the small, triangular ledge variety, often flattened. The vessels are wet-smoothed on the exterior, while the glaze, which is often dark brown or dark purple, covers the interior up to the rim rather than being restricted to the interior of the base as in the Early Islamic types (cf. Arnon 2008: 53, 373, type 775; Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.2.3.1, fig. 41:1–2; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; 2011: Fig.17.2:91766; Stern 1997: Fig. 5:39; 2012a: 41–44, type BE.CW.1, pl. 4.14:1–6; Stern and Burke, in preparation). Thick-walled cooking pans (BE.CW.O.thick). – This dish is open, flat or slightly convex on the bottom, with thick, vertical, slightly flared walls that terminate in a rim that is thickened (Fig. 7.4:2) or everted and sometimes folded flat against the vessel wall. Handles are as the thin-walled variety. The dark brown or reddish-brown glaze usually extends across the interior all the way up to the rim. The vessels are wetsmoothed on the exterior (Arnon 2008: type 775, pp. 373–374; Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.2.3.2, fig. 41:3; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern 1997: Fig. 5:40; 2012a: 41–44, type BE.CW.2, pl. 4.14:7– 17; Stern and Burke, in preparation). The rim is sometimes very sloppily formed, as in vessel 10508/1 (not illustrated). Thin-walled cooking pots (BE.CW.Cl.thin). – These cooking pots are deep and globular, with thin walls, no necks, and rims that are plain (Fig. 7.4:3) or everted (Fig. 7.4:4). The vessels are wet-smoothed on the exterior, and the interior of only the base is glazed dark brown (cf. Arnon 2008: 48, 328–329, type 761; Avissar and Stern 2005: types II.2.1.2 and II.2.1.3, fig. 39:2–4; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; 2011: Fig.17.2:3286; Stern 1997: Fig. 5:22–26, 35; 2012a: 41–44, type BE.CW.1, pls. 4.15:3–12, 4.16:1, 2; Stern and Burke, in preparation). One unusual example not illustrated here is glazed dark reddish brown on the entire interior to just over the rim (basket 10071/4). Thick-walled cooking pots (BE.CW.Cl.thick). – These cooking pots are deep and globular, with thick walls, no necks, and thick rims in a variety of forms: plain (Fig. 7.4:5), rolled (Fig. 7.4:6), ledge (Fig. 7.4:7), or gutter (Fig. 7.4:8). The vessels are wet-smoothed on the exterior, and the interior is glazed reddish brown, with the glaze extending up and over the rim. Decoration consists of a finger-indented applique on the exterior (e.g., 10185/1, not illustrated, cf. Arnon 2008: type 772a; Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.2.1.4, fig. 39:7–8; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; 2011: Fig.17.2:2535; Stern 1997: Fig. 5:27–33, 36; Stern 2012a: 41–44, type BE.CW.2, pls.4.16:3–11, 4.17; Stern and Burke, in preparation). Deep cooking pots / Globular cooking pots with thickened rim (BE.CW.D). – These are deep pots with inward-slanting, thickened rims and carinated shoulders (e.g., Fig. 7.4:9). The vessels are wet-smoothed on the exterior, and the interior is glazed brown, but not all the way to the top (cf. Arnon 2008: type 773a, pp. 371–372; Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.2.1.1, fig. 39:1; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern 1997: Fig. 5:34; Stern 2012a: 41–44, type BE.CW.1, pl.4.15:1, 2). These are sometimes confused with an Early Islamic type of similar form, but the earlier ones commonly have a groove at the base of the neck (Avissar 1996: 133, type 2). Closed Vessels of Cooking Ware Fabric Monochrome-glazed vessels of cooking ware fabric (BE.GL.1). – A variety of vessels are known to have been made of the southern Levantine cooking-ware fabric and glazed with a brown or purple glaze similar to that used on the cooking vessels. Forms include jugs, pilgrim flasks, lamps, and bowls (Burke, forthcoming; Stern and Burke, in preparation). At the Qishle site we have the neck of a flask (Fig. 7.5:1, cf. Burke, in preparation), the neck and handle of a jug that may have once had a filter (Fig. 7.5:2), and a beehive/saucer lamp (Fig. 7.6:1). Similar forms of the same cooking-ware fabric with the same glaze were found at Acre, dating to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Stern 2012a: 44–47, type BE.GL.1, pls. 4.18:7–10, 4.19:6–10).

84

Chapter 7

Glazed Table Wares The fabric of the southern Levantine glazed table wares resembles that of the cooking wares but fires much redder and is less sandy. It contains sparse to common medium quartz, and moderate to abundant fine to medium white and black particles. Upon visual inspection with a 10x lens the glazed table wares all appear to be of the same fabric, but it is possible that scientific analyses will eventually reveal multiple manufacture sites. Levantine glazed bowls (BE.GL.2). – The Levantine glazed bowls have been covered on the interior with a light-colored thin wash before glazing in yellow or green. The result is a vessel with a rough or gritty surface texture. Forms vary from bowls with curved sides and everted or ledge rims to shallow bowls with incurved, squared rims (baskets 1751/9, 10629/1, not illustrated, cf. Arnon 2008: 49, 337–340, type 272a–g; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.1.2, fig. 2:2–3, 6–8; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern 1997: Fig. 6:49; 2012a: 44–47, type BE.GL.2, pls. 4.19:11–25, 4.20:1–3; Stern and Burke, in preparation). They date to the second half of the twelfth and the first half of the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 8). Levantine glazed bowls found in Acre were analyzed by petrography and chemical analyses and found to be produced in Beirut, as the cooking wares (Stern and Waksman 2003: 170–171, 173–175; Waksman, et al. 2008: 159–163, 176–183, fig. 2:3, fig. 4). Petrographic analysis of Levantine glazed bowls found in Tiberias have also shown that they were produced in Beirut, and distributed to this inland site (Shapiro 2013, 210; Stern 2013, 203). X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) and petrographic analyses are planned for Levantine glazed bowls excavated from the Flea Market at Jaffa. Glazed bowls with reserved slip (BE.GL.3). – These vessels have been decorated with large splashes of slip, over which a green or yellow monochrome glaze is applied. Known forms are bowls, jugs, and oil lamps. The Qishle vessels of this type are bowls (Fig. 7.5:3‒4). The form is often that of a shallow bowl on a low ring base with a ledge rim (cf. Arnon 2008: 50, 348, type 274b, c; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.1.6.4, fig. 8:1–2; Burke, in preparation; Burke 2011: 203–204; Stern 2012a: 44–47, type BE.GL.3, fig. 4.9:a, pl. 4.20:4– 9; Stern and Burke, in preparation). They date to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 22). “Regional” glazed, slip-painted vessels (BE.GL.4). – This group of vessels has been identified by virtue of its homogeneous clay body (coarse red ware with large white and dark particles), clear or pale yellow glaze that is usually entirely flaked away, and small repertoire of slip-painted designs (e.g., wide straight lines arranged in stripes, a grid, or as a star taking up the entire inner base of the bowl). It is recognized to be distinct from the rest of the locally-made glazed slip-painted vessels, described below (VL.GL.3). This type is referred to as a “Regional Slip-painted bowl” (BE.GL.4) and two examples are shown here (Fig. 7.5:5‒6, cf. Arnon 2008: types 276a–d; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.1.6.3, fig. 7:9–11; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern 1997: 47–48, fig. 7; 2012a: 44–47, type BE.GL.4, fig. 4:11, pl. 4.21:1–10; Stern and Burke, in preparation). One example not illustrated here is painted with a star in a circle (basket 11035). Although the bases of these bowls are often quite thin and carelessly potted, this example is lumpy and retains the finger-marks of the potter. The results of the analysis of this type of glazed slip painted bowl from Acre has shown a slightly different fabric composition from the remainder of the BE.GL group, and seems to have been manufactured in a workshop that was not situated in Beirut, but in the close vicinity (Stern and Waksman 2003: 175; Waksman, et al. 2008). It dates to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 19). Levantine glazed bowls with sgraffito decoration (BE.GL.7). – This group is as the Levantine glazed bowls described above, but with the addition of abstract designs, usually curved lines, incised lightly into the slip under the glaze (Fig. 7.5:7, a ledge-rim bowl). There is no difference in date from the Levantine glazed bowls without sgraffito (cf. Arnon 2008: 49, 337–340, type 272a–g; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.1.2, fig. 2:1, 4–5; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern 2012a: 44–47, type BE.GL.7, fig. 4.9:b, pl. 4.23; Stern and Burke, in preparation).

Crusader Pottery

85

Local Wheel-made Wares of Unknown Provenance Shallow Carinated Bowls (VL.PL.2). – The fabric is fine and dense, firing to a pinkish buff. It contains common medium to coarse black particles and common medium white particles. The vessel is well potted. One sherd of an unglazed wheel-made bowl was recovered (Fig. 7.5:8). It is of a type that resembles bowls manufactured in the Iron Age, having a carinated wall with a thickened and very slightly everted rim. Some bowls of this type have simple and slightly incurved rims. This type of bowl was not commonly found in sites within the Crusader kingdom of Jerusalem and was reported thus far only from Emmaus-Qubeibeh and Yoqne’am (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.1.1.1, fig. 35:1–2; from elsewhere in Jaffa also see Burke, in preparation). It probably dates to the twelfth and first half of the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 82). Glazed slip-painted vessels (VL.GL.3). – This group has been decorated with a light slip that has been painted rather than splashed on, then glazed yellow or less commonly, green (cf. Arnon 2008: types 276a–d; Avissar and Stern 2005: types I.1.6.1–I.1.6.2, fig. 7:1–8; Stern 2007:107–112). In contrast to the group made of southern Levantine fabric (BE.GL.4), the glaze is usually well preserved and shiny. Vessel forms from the Qishle site are carinated bowls (Fig. 7.5:9) and oil lamps (Fig. 7.6:2, a beehive lamp). Although jugs are also known in this group, none was found at the Qishle site. It is interesting to note that this type is very rare in Acre, and seems to be more abundant in Jaffa (Burke, in preparation; forthcoming). It dates from the second half of the twelfth century to the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 19). Plain Saucer Lamps (LMP.BH.PL.1). – The fabric fires buff with pale yellow surfaces obtained with a light slip or wash. It contains common fine to medium white particles and sparse fine black particles, and is of medium density. This lamp type, also referred to as a “cup and saucer lamp” or “beehive lamp,” is formed in two parts. The lower part of the lamp is saucer-shaped with a pinched nozzle, upon which sits a rounded, closed compartment for oil (the “cup”). A small looped handle connects the two parts at the back. The example shown here (Fig. 7.6:3) is covered with a light slip or wash (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type III.1.1.1 – for form, see fig. 52:4). It dates to the second half of the twelfth and the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 124). Glazed Saucer Lamps (LMP.BH.GL). – As the plain lamps described above, but glazed inside and out (Fig. 7.6:4). They probably have the same date, of the second half of the twelfth and thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 124). Glazed Lamps with Long Nozzle (LMP.LN.GL). – The fabric of this group is not uniform. One lamp is made of a high-fired orange-buff fabric, of moderate density and containing sparse coarse quartz and white particles (Fig. 7.6:5). Another is of a greenish-yellow-firing fabric containing sparse medium black particles (Fig. 7.6:6), and a third is possibly of soft-paste, firing pale yellow and with sparse sand (Fig. 7.6:7). These wheelmade lamps have a short rounded body, relatively tall neck with simple or everted rim, and a long nozzle, the channel of which is either rounded or squared. The handles are often curved, with an oval crosssection, and rise from the back of the body to attach at the neck under the rim (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type III.1.2.1, fig. 38:8; Burke, in preparation; Stern 1997: 46, fig. 6:60, 61; 2012a: 55–58, type NSY.GL.1, pl. 4.31:9, 10). Some handles, however, appear to be made of a square piece of clay with a circular hole punched through (basket 11069/2, not illustrated). This lamp type, made with light clay rather than red, is dated to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 126). Imported Wares Imported pottery comprises 34.78% of the early assemblage and 38.93% of the later assemblage at the Qishle site (Tables 4‒5). As described in the section on dated assemblages, the origin of imports in the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries is limited to the Aegean region (GR.GL), while the catalogue of provenances greatly expands in the thirteenth century. Accordingly the later assemblage includes ceramic wares, primarily glazed bowls, from central and northern Syria, the eastern Mediterranean, Italy, and the western Mediterranean

86

Chapter 7

(Table 7). The relative proportions of imported ceramics represent the organization of trade in the period, as the Mediterranean was dominated by the maritime cities of Italy and to a lesser extent, France. They were prominent not only in the trade of the Frankish states, but in the ports of Byzantium as well, where they negotiated extensive privileges (Jacoby 2005; Laiou 2002). As outlined above, the major mid-distance trade routes ran between Egypt and Byzantium, with calls at the ports of the Latin Levant along the way (Lilie 1984: 242–61). In the latter the Italians could do business with Muslim merchants bringing goods from inland Syria (Irwin 1980: 73). Long-distance voyages were also made directly between the Italian and Crusader ports, bringing pilgrims, Christian fighters, and European goods to the Latin Levant (Jacoby 1997). In recent research on Acre it has been suggested that pottery was imported to the Latin Levant in two ways. Small amounts were brought by individuals such as pilgrims or merchants bringing items for storage or preparing and serving food, and purchased either in their homeland or during the sea journey. The majority of the imported pottery, consisting mainly of glazed bowls and plates, came as cargo, but rather than a luxury item most likely served as salable space fillers or ballast (Stern 2012a: 145–160). Central Syria Soft-paste ware with monochrome glaze (SY.GL.1). – This type is extremely rare in the Qishle assemblage, consisting of one body sherd from a thirteenth-century locus (L153, basket 1870, not illustrated). The fabric is soft-paste (also known as stonepaste), a ceramic fabric consisting of 70% quartz mixed with equal parts white clay and glass frit, which vitrifies upon firing and to which glaze can fit well (Mason and Tite 1994: 83–90). Forms are usually conical, ledge-rim, or carinated bowls, all on a ring base, glazed turquoise inside and out (Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.2.2, fig. 9:2; Stern 2012a: 52–54, type SY.GL.1, pl. 4.28:1–6). This type is found in ceramic assemblages from other excavations in Jaffa, but it is quite rare (Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern, in preparation). Northern Syria (NSY.GL) Glazed table wares made in Northern Syria comprise 2.12% of the later assemblage and 7.63% of all imported glazed table wares in the later assemblage. The fabric of this group is pinkish-buff with medium to coarse white and dark particles. Vessels are fairly coarsely potted. Vessel forms are hemispherical bowls on low ring bases with wide ledge rims and a ridge at the rim-body join. A few bowls are carinated with thickened rims. Of this type, the polychrome sgraffito sub type is well-known, recognized as “Port St. Symeon Ware.” The two additional sub types presented here were apparently manufactured at the same workshops as the Port St. Symeon Ware as indicated by the fact that the forms, the fabric, and the glaze are identical to the Port St. Symeon Ware (Avissar and Stern 2005: 53–56; Stern 2012a: 55–58). This was established by recent petrographic analyses of a number of the vessels found in Acre (Shapiro 2012: 107–111, 115), and recent INAA analysis on pottery from Kinet, Turkey (Blackman and Redford 2005: 104). Monochrome glazed (NSY.GL.1). – One sherd of this type, not illustrated here, was found in this excavation (basket 10685). It is slipped white on the interior and covered with a monochrome light green glaze. This is a rare type, identified at Acre but not at other sites in Israel (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.7.1, fig. 21:1–2; Stern 2012a: 55–58, type NSY.GL.1, fig. 4.19a, pl. 4.30). It is dated to the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 53). Sgraffito with monochrome glaze (NSY.GL.2). – This is also a type only reported at Acre in Israel, and was found in another excavation in Jaffa (Stern, in preparation). The single example found at the Qishle site is the low ring base of a bowl that is slipped white on the interior, through which several zig-zag lines have been incised across the vessel, over which a dark green glaze was applied (11133/1–2, not illustrated; cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.7.3, fig. 21:5; 2012a: 55–58, type NSY.GL.2, pl. 4.31:20–23). It is dated to the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 53).

Crusader Pottery

87

Sgraffito with green and brown splash or “Port St. Symeon Ware” (NSY.GL.4). – This well-known type has a white slip on the interior into which various geometric or floral motifs have been incised, usually covering the entire interior of the vessel in multiple registers. Sometimes the center of the base is incised with a human or animal design. Over this is a transparent light yellow or green glaze, enhanced with splashes or daubs of brown, yellow, or dark green glaze (Fig. 7.7:1–2). The carinated bowls often have decoration on the exterior of the cavetto as well as the interior (cf. Arnon 2008: type 274e, p. 349, type 274g, p. 351; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.7.4, fig. 22; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern 1997: Fig. 13:95–98; 2012a: 55–58, type NSY.GL.4, fig. 4.19:b–c, pls. 4.32–4.38; Stern and Burke, in preparation). This type is dated to the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 56). Cyprus Vessels imported from Cyprus comprise 23.66% of the imports and 6.58% of the total later assemblage. Cyprus Plain Ware (CY.PL). – This hand-made jug is very similar to the Cypriot cooking vessel. It is of reddish-brown fabric firing to dark gray on the exterior. It is rather coarse, with common amounts of medium black and white grits. The vessel is wet-smoothed on the exterior. The rim is sometimes pinched to form a spout, as the example from the Qishle site shows (Fig. 7.7:3). The vessel sits on a rounded base and has one or two strap handles descending from rim to shoulder (Gabrieli, et al. 2001: 347, type 4.11, fig. 3:3–5, 7). This is quite a rare type in Israel, having previously been reported only at Acre (Stern 2012a: 58, 59, type CY.PL, pl. 4.40:1) and appearing only rarely in Jaffa (Burke, forthcoming). The parallels in Acre have globular bodies with a narrow neck to a slightly thickened rim. They appear in the late assemblage at Acre, and also at the Jaffa Qishle site (Stern 2012a: 59). Cypriot hand-made cooking pot (CY.CW). – The fabric fires to a dark reddish brown, burnt to gray or black on the exterior, and contains moderate medium white particles and moderate very coarse gray and black particles. It is fairly loose in density. These hand-made cooking vessels are globular in shape, with a thickened, everted rim. Strap handles reach from the rim to the shoulder (Fig. 7.7:4). The vessels are wetsmoothed on the exterior (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.2.2.1, fig. 40:1; Gabrieli, et al. 2001: 346–347, type 4.9, fig. 3:1; Stern 1997: Fig. 5:37; 2012a: 59, 60, type CY.CW, fig. 4.20, pl. 4.40:5–10; Stern and Burke, in preparation). They were probably imported into the Levant in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 94). Cyprus glazed table wares (CY.GL). – The glazed table wares from Cyprus imported to the southern Levant in the Crusader period are most likely to have been manufactured at Paphos (Avissar and Stern 2005: 57; Stern 2012a: 60–65). The clay body, which is reddish-orange, well-levigated, and hard-fired is distinctive. Typical forms are bowls and plates on a high ring base with everted foot. Bowls are deep or carinated with simple or ledge rims, and plates have simple incurved or ledge rims. Jugs are rare at Jaffa and only one bodysherd is extant in the Qishle assemblage (11028, not illustrated). All of the decorative types of Cyprus glazed table wares enumerated here date to the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 58–60). Cypriot Monochrome Ware (CY.GL.1). – Bowls of this type have a light slip entirely covering the interior, and a monochrome yellow or green glaze (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.8.2, fig. 24:1; Burke, in preparation; Stern 2012a: 60–65, type CY.GL.1, pl. 4.41:1–6). The example from the Qishle site is the rim and cavetto of a ledge-rim bowl (10982/2, not illustrated). Cypriot Slip-painted Ware (CY.GL.2). – This type is slip-painted under a transparent yellow or green glaze. Designs are typically loops, spirals (Fig. 7.7:5), or zig-zags (Fig. 7.7:6, cf. Arnon 2008: type 272h; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.8.1, fig. 23; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; 2011: 204–205; Stern 1997: Figs. 8–9; Stern 2012a: 60–65, type CY.GL.2, fig. 4.21:a, pl. 4.42; Stern and Burke, in preparation). One carinated bowl with an unusual design has white slip paint in a series of vertical lines on the exterior of the vertical rim, and a series of festoons on the interior just under the rim. The interior base appears to have the beginning of a spiral (10282/15, not illustrated). The one closed form of Cypriot glazed table ware from Qishle is a slip-painted jug with a spiral design (11028, not illustrated).

88

Chapter 7

Cypriot Monochrome Sgraffito Ware (CY.GL.3). – This is the most commonly found type of Cypriot glazed ware at the Qishle site. It has thin incised decorations under a transparent yellow or green glaze. Designs tend to be simple, such as a series of concentric circles around the rim (Fig. 7.7:7) and/or the base (baskets 11149/6–8 and 10646/5–6, not illustrated), or a “grid iron” medallion in the center of the vessel (cf. Arnon 2008: type 272h; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.8.3, fig. 24:2–7; Burke, in preparation; Burke 2011: 205; Stern 1997: Fig. 10; 2012a: 60–65, type CY.GL.3, fig. 4.21:b, c, pls. 4.43:9–15, 4.44, 4.45:1–13; Stern and Burke, in preparation). CYPRIOT ONE-COLOR SGRAFFITO WARE (CY.GL.4). – This type is decorated with sgrafitto under a transparent yellowish glaze with green or brown splashes (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.8.4, fig. 25:1; Burke, in preparation; Stern 2012a: 60–65, type CY.GL.4, pls. 4.45:14–16, 4.46:1–9 ; Stern and Burke, in preparation). The example illustrated here is glazed light yellow with dark yellow splashes (Fig. 7.7:8). The Aegean Glazed table wares made in the Aegean region comprise 100% of the imports in the early assemblage (34.78% of the total early assemblage) and 25.19% of imports in the later assemblage (7.0% of the total later assemblage). They began to be imported to the Levant appearently already in the mid-twelfth century and continued into the early thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 45–47; Stern 2012a: 65–69). It is interesting to note that this group is very common in ceramic assemblages from other excavations in Jaffa (Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern, in preparation; Stern and Burke, in preparation). The fabric of this group is pinkish buff in color. The clay is not well levigated and contains sparse amounts of coarse quartz and moderate amounts of medium white and black grits. The potting is rather sloppy and the vessels are thick-walled. Forms are shallow bowls on low ring bases with incurved, beveled rims, or small hemispherical bowls on low ring bases with very wide ledge rims. A variety of decorative styles is outlined below. Monochrome glazed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.1). – This type has a light-colored slip applied more than once on the interior, and only once on the exterior to about halfway down the cavetto. It is covered on the interior to the rim by a pale yellow glaze. The example shown here (Fig. 7.7:9) has a pale pink slip (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.5.1, fig. 17:1; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern 2012a: 65–69, type GR.GL.1, pl. 4.48:1–3 ; Stern and Burke, in preparation). Green splashed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.2). – This type is as the monochrome glazed group, but with the addition of random splashes of light green glaze around the interior of the vessel (Fig. 7.7:10–11, cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.5.2, fig. 17:2; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; 2011: 204; Stern 1997: Fig. 6:62; 2012a: 65–69, type GR.GL.2, pl. 4.48:4–6; Stern and Burke, in preparation). One unusual example from the Qishle site, has its slip applied unevenly, leaving large areas of the vessel unslipped, under a yellow glaze, so that the unslipped areas appear olive green. The form is of a shallow bowl with an incurved rim on the low ring base typical of these wares (10278/1, not illustrated). Sgraffito with fine incision / “Byzantine Fine Sgraffito Ware” (GR.GL.4). – This type is as the monochrome, but with the addition of finely-incised designs on the interior of the vessel through the slip and under the glaze. Motifs can be vegetal, geometric, pseudo-calligraphic arranged inside a central medallion, or figural (cf. Arnon 2008: 49, 341, type 272h; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.4.3, fig. 16:2; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; 2012a: 65–69, type GR.GL.4, fig. 4.22, pl. 4.48:9–15; Stern and Burke, in preparation). Figure 7.7:12 illustrates the ring base of a bowl slipped light pink, incised with a possible chain motif, and glazed yellow. Another sherd of a ledge-rim bowl is slipped white on the interior, with thin incising in curved and straight lines on the ledge rim, and covered with a green glaze inside and out. The glaze appears translucent yellow on the exterior (10071/3, not illustrated). Sgraffito with broad incision, “Byzantine Incised Sgraffito Ware” or “Aegean Coarse-incised Ware” (GR.GL.6). – This type is as the finely-incised type, but the motifs are incised with a larger tool which leaves broad strokes (cf. Arnon 2008: type 272k, no. 42/93 I6.1013.L.074, p. 342 and 272o, No. 641.11-4, p. 345;

Crusader Pottery

89

Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.4.5, fig. 16:1–2 and type I.5.3, fig. 17; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; 2011: 204; Stern 1997: Fig. 13:99–101; 2012a: 65–69, type GR.GL.6, fig. 4.23, pl. 4.49:1–9; Stern and Burke, in preparation). Byzantine Champlevé Ware (GR.GL.8). – This type is decorated as above, but with an incising technique whereby the background is cut away to leave the motif in relief (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.4.6, Fig 16:3–4; Burke, in preparation; Stern 2012a: 65–69, type GR.GL.8, fig. 4.23, pl. 4.49:11, 12). The example shown here, a bodysherd from near the base of a bowl, has a design in a roundel (Fig 7.8). Brown splashed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.9). – This type is as the green splashed group (GR.GL.2), but with random splashes of light brown glaze rather than green around the interior of the vessel. This type does not appear elsewhere in the southern Levant from excavations to date. At the Qishle site only bodysherds are found, although indicator sherds have been unearthed elsewhere in Jaffa (Burke, in preparation). Turkey or Greece Glazed table wares and amphorae from Turkey or Greece comprise 15.14% of the ceramic imports in the later assemblage. The amphorae are types shaped for maritime transport, and were commonly found in shipwrecks (Stern 2012a: 149–153, Table 8.1). High-handled Amphora (TUR/GR.PL.1). – The fabric fires to a light or medium reddish brown and contains moderate to abundant medium white and yellow particles (limestone, which has sometimes burned out to leave yellow-rimmed voids), and occasionally moderate fine black particles. It is of medium density and hardness. This is a small carrot-shaped amphora with everted rim and two handles that rise high above the rim before turning down to attach at the shoulder. Numerous sherds and six nearly whole amphorae of this type were found in Area A, Square 35, adjacent to the domestic courtyard described above (Fig. 7.9:1‒5, Pl. 7.1, See Arbel, Chapter 3, Stratum III; and cf. Arnon 2008: 53, 375, type 872a; Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.3.2.1, fig. 44:1; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Günsenin 1989: 271–274, figs. 8–11, type 3; Hayes 1992: 76, fig. 26:10–11, pl. 13:b–c, type 61; Stern 1997: Fig. 4:10–11; 2012a: 70, 71, type TUR/GR.PL.1, fig. 4.24, pl. 4:50; Stern and Burke, in preparation). This concentration of amphorae, most of them with the handles broken off, may indicate that they were deliberately collected in order to be reused. The possible multi-functional nature of this type of amphora has been mentioned by Vroom (2003: 155), while Hayes suggests that they could be used as beehives (1992: 76). This type was imported into the southern Levant from the Black Sea region in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 105). Globular Amphora (TUR/GR.PL.2). – The fabric is fine, light reddish brown, with some white grits and mica. This amphora, rarely found in Jaffa, has a large, globular body and a low, narrow neck ending in a thin, simple rim (cf. Burke, in preparation; forthcoming). Two heavy, oval-sectioned handles rise above the rim, turn back down, and join the shoulder of the vessel, just above the widest part of the body (Fig. 7.9:6). Shallow ribbing is present all over the body, which is covered with a whitish or light brown wash. (Günsenin 1989: type 4; Hayes 1992: type 62). It was imported into the southern Levant, possibly from the Black Sea region, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Stern 2012a: 71, type TUR/GR.PL.2, pl. 4.51:1, 2). Small Imported Amphora (TUR/GR.PL.4). – The fabric is fine and hard, firing light orange and containing moderate very fine black particles and sparse medium white particles. As with the high-handled amphora the form is small and carrot-shaped, but with a shoulder that is wider and more carinated than the high-handled type. The neck is long and narrow with a slightly flaring, simple rim. The handles extend from just under the rim to the shoulder (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.3.2.2, fig. 44:2; Burke, in preparation; Stern 2012a: 72, type TUR/GR.PL.4, pl. 4.52; Stern and Burke, in preparation). The sample from the Qishle site preserves only the neck and upper part of the handle (Fig. 7.9:7). It is most likely also an import into the southern Levant, probably during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Avissar and Stern 2005: 105). Genuine Zeuxippus Ware Class IA (TUR/GR.GL.1). – Fine reddish-orange clay fabric that is very well levigated, fine, and hard-fired. The vessels, mostly bowls, have extremely thin walls. Shapes are of shallow

90

Chapter 7

bowls with simple, ledge, or slightly everted rim on a high ring base with a simple, incurved foot. The vessels are decorated with a thick white slip that often drips down the exterior of the cavetto. Incising is in thin and thick lines in various patterns. Common designs include concentric circles on the interior of the base, and groups of three parallel lines perpendicular to the ledge rim, which alternate with an incised motif. This class is decorated with a monochrome glaze, which is usually pale yellow or green (cf. Arnon 2008: type 272p, vessel K.61/182, p. 345; Avissar and Stern 2005: 48–49, type I.6.2, fig. 19:5; Burke, forthcoming; Stern 2012a: 72–76, type TUR/GR.GL.1, Pl. 4.53:1, 2 ). Genuine Zeuxippus Ware Class II (TUR/GR.GL.2). – This is as above but with the addition of brown splashes to enhance the incising (Fig 7.10:1–2, cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.6.1, fig. 19:1–4; Burke, in preparation; Stern 1997: Fig. 11; 2012a: 72–76, type TUR/GR.GL.2, fig. 4.26:a, pl. 4.53:3–8; Stern and Burke, in preparation). Southern Italy Glazed table wares made in Southern Italy (SIT.GL) comprise 9.77% of the later assemblage and 35.11% of its imported glazed table wares. Proto-maiolica from Apulia (SIT.GL.2). – This type is by far the most popular type of Proto-maiolica ware at the Qishle site. The fabric is pale yellow or buff, of medium density, with sparse medium dark particles. Common forms are bowls with simple rims (Fig. 7.10:3), ledge-rim bowls (Fig. 7.10:4‒5), small bowls with beveled rims (Fig. 7.10:6), and large basins or dishes with thickened rims (basket 10358, not illustrated). All of these forms sit on low ring bases (Fig. 7.10:7). Much less common are jugs with pearshaped body and cylindrical neck (Fig. 7.10:8). Decoration consists of a white glaze on the interior over which designs are painted in brown, blue, and yellow. The most common motif on the interior of the base is a grid within a medallion, usually of brown and sometimes of blue paint, but geometric, vegetal, and zoomorphic motifs are also known (e.g., bowl 11148/2, Fig. 7.10:7, has a bird painted in blue and brown). One interesting sample, a bodysherd from a large open vessel (Pl. 7.2), has a depiction of a dragon outlined in black with daubs of blue paint. The vessel rims are frequently decorated with chevrons and festoons (cf. Arnon 2008: 50, 353–355, type 275a–d, f; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.9.1.1, figs. 26–27; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; 2011: 205; Stern 1997: Fig. 14:102–107, 109–112; 2012a: 76–80, type SIT.GL.2, figs. 4.27–4.29, pls. 4.57:4–9–4.60 ; Stern and Burke, in preparation). This type is dated to the second half of the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 64). Sicilian Proto-maiolica (SIT.GL.3, 4). – The fabric of this type is finer and harder than the Apulian fabric. It is pink with sparse red particles and common mica. Forms are as the Apulian type. The interior is covered with a white glaze over which designs are painted in brown, yellow, green, and blue (SIT.GL.3). The monochrome variety has brown hatching as infill (SIT.GL.4). As known from other sites, a single vegetal or zoomorphic figure is common in the central field, with chevrons or other repeating motifs around the rim. The monochrome sample from the Qishle site has a bird in the center (basket 10508/4, not illustrated; cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.9.1.2, fig. 28; Stern 1997: Fig. 14:108; 2012a: 76–80, type SIT.GL.3, 4, pls. 4.61). This type is dated to the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 67). “Ramina, Manganese, Rosso” (RMR) Proto-maiolica (SIT.GL.5). – The fabric of this type is pale yellow, of medium hardness and well levigated with sparse fine black particles. Forms are hemispherical bowls with ledge rim and a high ridge or lip at the rim-body join (Fig. 7.10:9), and small bowls with thickened, beveled rims (Fig. 7.10:10). A white glaze is overpainted with designs in brown, blue, green, and red. The samples from the Qishle site have simple designs of lines and dots (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.9.1.3, fig. 29:1; Burke, in preparation; Stern 2012a: 76–80, type SIT.GL.5, pls. 4.62:1–5). This type is dated to the end of the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 69).

Crusader Pottery

91

Northern Italy and/or Southern France and/or Catalonia Cooking Pot of Northern Italy and/or Southern France and/or Catalonia (NIT/SFR/CA.CW). – Cooking wares made in Northern Italy, Southern France, or Catalonia are rare in the southern Levant, having been previously reported only from Acre. Otherwise they are found in the western Mediterranean, where they originate (Capelli, et al. 2006: 189–190, fig. 1:1; Marchesi and Vallauri 1997: 86, fig. 59; Stern 2012a: 87, 88,type NIT/SFR/CA.CW, pl. 4.68:1–3). To date one sherd is known from Jaffa (Fig. 7.10:11). The fabric is coarse with common additions of coarse quartz and red particles, and fires orange-red. The vessel form is of a cooking bowl with a simple rim, flat base, and small handles formed either of single or double cone-shaped protrusions (cf. Stern 2012a: Pl. 4.68:3). Only a small portion of the rim and handle are preserved from the Qishle sample. It is glazed translucent pale yellow inside and out, which makes the surfaces appear brick red. This type of cooking pot was imported into Acre in the thirteenth century, and the single sample from Jaffa also appears in a thirteenth century context (Stern 2012a: 87, 88). Catalonia Catalonia Glazed Ware (CA.GL.1). – This rare import to Israel is only represented at Jaffa by the bodysherd of a jug, with the base of a handle attached (cf. Stern 2012a: 85–87, type CA.GL.1, pl. 4.66:3). The fabric fires light red to light reddish brown and contains common medium to very coarse quartz, moderate fine to very coarse red particles (possibly grog), and common medium black particles. The body of the jug is decorated with deeply incised concentric circles on the exterior, creating horizontal ribs, and glazed a dark monochrome green (basket 10173/2, 6, not illustrated). At Jaffa it appears in a locus (945) that has thirteenth century pottery and one coin that is either Mamluk or early Ottoman in date, and may be as early as fourteenth century and as late as seventeenth century (see Kool, Chapter 17). At Acre the few known samples appear in the later assemblage (Avissar and Stern 2005: 77, fig. 33:1–3; Stern 2012a: 86), and one intact jug was found at Yoqne’am (Avissar 2005: 70–71, fig. 2.21:11). In southern France this type is dated to the fourteenth century (Démians d’Archimbaud and Vallauri 1998: 93, fig. 43:4). Spain or North Africa Spain/North Africa Plain Ware (SP/NA.PL). – This type of utility ware made in Spain and/or North Africa is very rare in Jaffa, and comprises less than 1% of imports at the Qishle site (Table 7). The example illustrated here is the bodysherd of a large jar (Fig. 7.11). The fabric is light red with moderate medium to very coarse white particles, moderate medium to coarse black particles, and moderate mica. A floral motif has been stamped into the exterior surface, over which are the remains of a white slip. They date from the late twelfth to fourteenth centuries in the Western Mediterranean, but appear in Acre, ‘Atlit, and Jaffa in thirteenth century contexts (Marchesi and Vallauri 1997: 83–84; Pringle 1986; Stern 2012a: 89–91, type SP/NA.PL, Figs. 4.35, 4.36, Pl. 4.71). North Africa “North African Blue and Brown Ware” or “North African Cobalt and Manganese Ware” (TU.GL). – This type of glazed table ware made in North Africa comprises only 1.27% of the later assemblage and 4.58% of its imported glazed table wares. The fabric is hard, light yellow or buff, with sparse medium to very coarse dark and light particles. Forms are conical or carinated basins with thick walls and small everted rims (Fig. 7.12:1‒3). The vessel interiors and exteriors have been glazed white, over which blue and brown or purple linear and vegetal designs have been painted (cf. Arnon 2008: 50, 355–356, type 275e, g; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.10.1, fig. 32; Burke,

92

Chapter 7

in preparation; 2011: Fig. 17.2:91436, 91641; Stern 2012a: 88–89, type TU.GL, fig. 4.34, pls. 4.69, 4.70).29 They date from the end of the twelfth to the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 76). Egypt Bowls Decorated with Over- or Under-Glaze Painting (EG.GL.2). – This type is taken to be made in imitation of luster ware, because of the similarity between the designs found on vessels of this type and those of luster ware. One rim sherd of a bowl was found of this type (basket 10125/1, not illustrated). The fabric fires light brown and contains common medium to coarse dark red grits and moderate medium white grits. The form is of a shallow curved-sided bowl with flaring rim. It is decorated with white opaque glaze on the interior and over the rim to 2 cm below. Over the glaze an arabesque design has been painted in black or brown paint (cf. Arnon 2008: 48–48, 318–323, type 264; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.3.2.1, fig. 13:6; Stern 2012a: 96, 97, type VI.GL.2, fig. 4.43, pl. 4.79:6–10). It is dated from the late eleventh to the end of the twelfth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 35). At the Jaffa Qishle site it appears in a locus dated to the thirteenth century, so must count as residual in this context. Imports of Unknown Provenance Sphero-Conical Vessels / “Grenades” (VI.PL.2). – This well-known vessel type is not well represented at the Qishle site, only one pointed base sherd having been unearthed (Fig. 7.12:4). The vessel is of heavy, coarse fabric with abundant black particles and moderate medium white particles, firing to a reddish-yellow with gray core. The exterior has been slipped dark gray (cf. Avissar and Stern 2005: type II.5.2, fig. 51; Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern 2012a: 94, 95, type VI.PL.2, fig. 4.42, pl. 4.76:8–12). These vessels are known from the tenth to the thirteenth century in numerous sites around the Near East (Adams 2002:pl. 16:e3; Ghouchani and Adle 1992: 72; Keall 1992b: 12). Numerous suggestions have been made for the purpose they served, including as projectile weapons containing Greek fire, as containers for mercury, perfume, or other high-value liquids, or as beer gourds (Ettinghausen 1965; Ghouchani and Adle 1992; Hildburgh 1951; Keall 1992a; 1992b; 1993; Pentz 1988; Seyrig 1959). As Rogers convincingly argues, they are likely to be multi-purpose vessels (1969).30 Vessels with Thin Wash under a Monochrome Glaze (VI.GL.4). – The fabric is fired light reddish brown, with moderate fine to medium white and red particles. It is fairly hard and of medium density. The vessels are most commonly shallow bowls on low narrow footrings, with small ledge rims that have two subtle grooves around them so that the center portion is raised (Fig. 7.12:5). One rare form not illustrated here has a “stepped” rim, with a rounded lip and a groove just under it in the vessel interior (basket 10969/2, not illustrated). The vessels have a thin beige slip or wash applied under a yellow or light green monochrome glaze (Fig. 7.12:5‒6, cf. Arnon 2008: 49, 333, type 271e; Avissar and Stern 2005: type I.13.1, fig. 34:6; Stern 2012a: 98, 99, type VL.GL.4, pl. 4.81:1‒3). One rare vessel has both yellow and green glazes (Fig. 7.12:7). This type of glazed bowl seems to be quite common at Jaffa, and was found in quantity in other excavations as well (e.g., Burke, in preparation; forthcoming; Stern, in preparation; Stern and Burke, in preparation). It was imported into the southern Levant from an unknown origin in the thirteenth century (Avissar and Stern 2005: 80).

29

The vessel shown in Fig. 7.12:1 seemingly has only brown paint. For further investigations of these objects, see Brosh (1980), Dumarçay (1965), Ghouchani and Adle (1992), Poulsen (1957), and Savage-Smith (1997). For a recent detailed recounting of the arguments regarding function, see Sharvit (2008). 30

Crusader Pottery

93

Summary The substantial excavations at the Qishle compound provide an opportunity to see nearly the full assemblage of Crusader ceramics at Jaffa, with emphasis on the thirteenth century, as detailed above. The quantity of pottery collected is large enough to yield not only representative samples of most of the types known from previous excavations at Jaffa and other Crusader sites, but even rare subtypes. For example, a rare type of glazed table ware imported from the Aegean with splashes of brown glaze, rather than the usual green, occurs in small quantities at Jaffa and has not been published from elsewhere in the southern Levant (see GR.GL.9 above). Likewise a new type of slipper lamp has been identified (see LMP.SL.J above). Perhaps more important, the corpus is substantial enough to allow comparisons with the growing body of published Crusader ceramics from the southern Levant, particularly from the coastal sites of Acre and Caesarea. This comparison, by type and assemblage, yields a fuller, more detailed picture of the patterns of trade and exchange in the Mediterranean world of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Acknowledgments The authors wish to express our gratitude to Yoav Arbel for inviting us to study this assemblage, and for providing us contextual information with alacrity. We are also grateful for his help with the ever-challenging job of illustrating the sherds correctly. We wish to thank Martin Peilstöcker for inviting each of us to be involved in the study of Crusader pottery of Jaffa. We also thank him and Aaron Burke, co-directors of the Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project, for our use of the facilities in the Jaffa Museum. We are grateful to Irena Lidsky-Reznikov and Olga Shorr for drawing and restoring the pottery. The participation of Katherine Strange Burke in the publication of these materials would not have been possible without a generous grant from the Max van Berchem Foundation. The Max van Berchem Foundation is a scientific foundation established in Geneva, Switzerland, in memory of Max van Berchem (1863–1921), the founder of Arabic epigraphy. Its aim is to promote the study of Islamic and Arabic archaeology, history, geography, art, epigraphy, religion, and literature. Her work on this project in the summer of 2012 was also assisted by a Faculty Research Grant from the Cotsen Institue of Archaeology at UCLA.

94

Chapter 7

Tables Table 1. Index of Type Abbreviations31 Local Wares LMP.SL LMP.SL.J LMP.BH.PL.1 LMP.BH.GL LMP.LN.GL

Slipper lamps Slipper lamps with Jaffa handle Plain Saucer Lamps Glazed Saucer Lamps Glazed Lamps with Long Nozzle

Acre Plain Ware (AC.PL) AC.PL.5 jars AC.PL.6 simple jugs

VL.PL.1 VL.PL.2 VL.PL.6 VL.PL.5 VL.GL.3

Hand-made basins Shallow Carinated Bowls Flasks Hand-made painted bowls and jugs Glazed slip-painted bowls

AC.PL.1 AC.PL.4

bowls kraters or drinking jugs

Levantine Coast LE.PL Narrow-necked amphorae Cooking Wares (BE.CW) BE.GL.2 Levantine glazed bowls BE.GL.3 Glazed bowls with reserved slip BE.GL.4 “Regional” glazed, slip-painted vessels BE.GL.7 Levantine glazed bowls with sgraffito decoration

BE.CW.O.thin Thin-walled cooking pans BE.CW.O.thick Thick-walled cooking pans BE.CW.Cl.thin Thin-walled cooking pots BE.CW.Cl.thick Thick-walled cooking pots BE.CW.D Deep cooking pots / Globular cooking pots with thickened rim BE.GL.1 Monochrome-glazed vessels of cooking ware fabric

Imported Wares Central Syria SY.GL.1 Soft-paste ware with monochrome glaze Northern Syria NSY.GL.4 Sgraffito with green and brown splash or “Port St. Symeon Ware” Cyprus CY.GL.3 CY.GL.4

Cypriot Monochrome Sgraffito Ware Cypriot One-Color Sgraffito Ware

The Aegean GR.GL.2 Green splashed “Aegean Ware”

31

NSY.GL.1 NSY.GL.2

Monochrome glazed Sgraffito with monochrome glaze

CY.CW CY.PL CY.GL.1 CY.GL.2

Cypriot hand-made cooking pot Cyprus Plain Ware Cypriot Monochrome Ware Cypriot Slip-painted Ware

GR.GL.1

Monochrome glazed “Aegean Ware”

This typology is based on that used at Acre (see Stern 2007: Appendix 1; Stern 2012a), but it has been modified for use at the Qishle site, with the following type abbreviations added: VL.PL.2, VL.GL.3, LMP.SL, LMP.SL.J, LMP.BH.PL.1, LMP.BH.GL, LMP.LN.GL, BE.CW.O.thin, BE.CW.O.thick, BE.CW.Cl.thin, BE.CW.Cl.thick, BE.CW.D, and GR.GL.9. The abbreviation system is further explained in Part 3: Typology.

Crusader Pottery

GR.GL.8 GR.GL.9

Byzantine Champlevé Ware Brown splashed “Aegean Ware”

GR.GL.4 GR.GL.6

Turkey or Greece TUR/GR.GL.1 Genuine Zeuxippus Ware Class IA TUR/GR.GL.2 Genuine Zeuxippus Ware Class II Southern Italy SIT.GL.5

“Ramina, Manganese, Rosso” (RMR) Proto-maiolica

95

Sgraffito with fine incision / “Byzantine Fine Sgraffito Ware” Sgraffito with broad incision, “Byzantine Incised Sgraffito Ware” or “Aegean Coarse-incised Ware”

TUR/GR.PL.1 High-handled Amphora TUR/GR.PL.2 Globular Amphora TUR/GR.PL.4 Small Imported Amphora

SIT.GL.2 SIT.GL.4

Proto-maiolica from Apulia Sicilian Proto-maiolica

Northern Italy and/or Southern France and/or Catalonia NIT/SFR/CA.CW Cooking Pot of Northern Italy and/or Southern France and/or Catalonia Catalonia CA.GL Catalonia Glazed Ware Spain or North Africa SP/NA.PL Spain/North Africa Plain Ware North Africa TU.GL “North African Blue and Brown Ware” or “North African Cobalt and Manganese Ware” Egypt EG.GL.2

Bowls Decorated with Over- or Under-Glaze Painting

Imports of Unknown Provenance (Varia Imported) VI.PL.2 Sphero-Conical Vessels / “Grenades” VI.GL.4 Vessels with Thin Wash under a Monochrome Glaze Table 2. Jaffa-Qishle 12th c. Assemblage: Rim Fragment Count by Type (14 loci) Ceramic type Qty. Percent of total “Beirut” fabric: thin-walled cooking pans (BE.CW.O.thin) 3 13.04% “Beirut” fabric: thin-walled cooking pots (BE.CW.Cl.thin) 7 30.43% “Beirut” fabric: Levantine glazed bowls (BE.GL.2) 1 4.35% “Beirut” fabric: Levantine glazed bowls with sgraffito decoration (BE.GL.7) 1 4.35% “Regional” glazed slip-painted vessels (BE.GL.4) 2 8.70% Local fabrics: hand-made basins (VL.PL.1) 1 4.35% Monochrome glazed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.1) 3 13.04% Green splashed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.2) 5 21.74% TOTAL 23 100.00% Residual 42 —

96

Chapter 7

Table 3. Jaffa-Qishle 12th c. Assemblage: Rim Fragment Count by Category (14 loci) Ceramic Ware Group Qty. Percent of total Local table wares (BE.GL) 4 17.39% Local cooking wares (BE.CW) 10 43.48% Local plain wares (VL.PL) 1 4.35% Local wares subtotal 15 65.22% Imported table wares (GR.GL) 8 34.78% TOTAL 23 100.00% Residual 42 — Table 4. Comparison of Acre and Jaffa-Qishle 12th c. Assemblages: Rim Fragment Count by Category32 Yafo Acre Ceramic Ware Group Qty. Percent of total Qty. Percent of total Local table wares 4 17.39% 13 18.06% Local cooking wares 10 43.48% 19 26.39% Local plain wares 1 4.35% 20 27.78% Local wares subtotals: 15 65.22% 52 72.23% Imported table wares 8 34.78% 16 22.22% Imported plain wares — — 4 5.56% Imported wares subtotals: 8 34.78% 20 27.78% TOTALS 23 100.00% 72 100.01% Residual 42 — 78 — Table 5. Jaffa-Qishle 13th c. Assemblage: Rim Fragment Count by Category (61 selected loci) Ceramic Ware Group Qty. Percent of total Local table wares (BE.GL, VL.GL, LMP.GL) 61 12.50% Local cooking wares (BE.CW) 189 38.52% Local plain wares (AC.PL, LE.PL, VL.PL, LMP.PL) 36 10.04% Local wares subtotal 286 61.07% Imported table wares (SY.GL, NSY.GL, CY.GL, GR.GL, TUR/GR.GL, 159 33.61% SIT.GL, SP/NA.GL, TU.GL, VI.GL) Imported cooking wares (NIT/SFR/CA.CW) 1 0.20% Imported plain wares (TUR/GR.PL) 25 5.12% Imported wares subtotal 185 38.93% TOTAL 471 100.00% Residual 221 — Later intrusive 11 — Table 6. Jaffa-Qishle 13th c. Assemblage: Rim Fragment Count by Type (61 selected loci) Ceramic type Qty. Percent of total Plain beehive lamps (LMP.BH.PL) 1 0.21% Glazed beehive lamps (LMP.BH.GL) 2 0.42% Slip-painted beehive lamps (LMP.BH.GL.SP) 1 0.21% Slipper lamps (LMP.SL) 7 1.49% Slipper lamps with “Jaffa handle” (LMP.SL.J) 4 0.85% 32

Data derived from Stern (2012a: Table 5.1), leaving out Acre bowls.

Crusader Pottery

Ceramic type “Acre” fabric: other open vessels (AC.PL.2) “Acre” fabric: jugs and juglets (AC.PL.3) “Acre” fabric: kraters (AC.PL.4) “Acre” fabric: jars (AC.PL.5) “Acre” fabric: simple jugs (AC.PL.6) “Beirut” fabric: thick-walled cooking pans (BE.CW.O.thick) “Beirut” fabric: thin-walled cooking pans (BE.CW.O.thin) “Beirut” fabric: thick-walled cooking pots (BE.CW.Cl.thick) “Beirut” fabric: thin-walled cooking pots (BE.CW.Cl.thin) “Beirut” fabric: deep cooking pots (BE.CW.D) “Beirut” fabric: Levantine glazed bowls (BE.GL.2) “Beirut” fabric: Levantine glazed bowls with sgraffito decoration (BE.GL.7) “Beirut” fabric: glazed bowls with reserved slip (BE.GL.3) “Regional” glazed slip-painted vessels (BE.GL.4) Narrow-necked amphorae (LE.PL) Local fabrics: hand-made basins (VL.PL.1) Local fabrics: shallow carinated bowls (VL.PL.2) Local fabrics: flasks (VL.PL.6) Local fabrics: hand-made painted bowls and jugs (VL.PL.5) Local fabrics: glazed, slip-painted bowls (VL.GL.3) Central Syria soft-paste fabrics: monochrome glaze (SY.GL.1) Northern Syria fabric: glazed, unidentified (NSY.GL) Northern Syria fabric: monochrome glazed (NSY.GL.1) Northern Syria fabric: monochrome glazed with sgraffito (NSY.GL.2) Northern Syria fabric: “Port St. Symeon” ware (NSY.GL.4) Cypriot hand-made cooking pot (CY.CW) Cypriot monochrome ware (CY.GL.1) Cypriot slip-painted ware (CY.GL.2) Cypriot monochrome sgraffito ware (CY.GL.3) Cypriot one-color sgraffito ware (CY.GL.4) Monochrome glazed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.1) Green splashed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.2) Sgraffito with fine incision / “Byzantine Fine Sgraffito Ware” (GR.GL.4) Sgraffito with broad incision, “Byzantine Incised Sgraffito Ware” or “Aegean Coarse-incised Ware” (GR.GL.6) Byzantine Champlevé Ware (GR.GL.8) High-handled amphorae (TUR/GR.PL.1) Genuine Zeuxippus Ware Class IA (TUR/GR.GL.1) Genuine Zeuxippus Ware Class II (TUR/GR.GL.2) Proto-maiolica from Apulia (SIT.GL.2) Sicilian Proto-maiolica (SIT.GL.4) “Ramina, Manganese, Rosso” (RMR) proto-maiolica (SIT.GL.5) Possible Proto-maiolica of unknown provenance (SIT.GL.6) Northern Italy and/or Southern France and/or Catalonia cooking ware (NIT/SFR/CA.CW) “North African Blue and Brown Ware” (TU.GL)

97

Qty. 3 1 2 10 1 78 14 74 20 3 1 1 13 42 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 1 12 16 2 10 19 2

Percent of total 0.64% 0.21% 0.42% 2.12% 0.21% 16.56% 2.97% 15.71% 4.25% 0.64% 0.21% 0.21% 2.76% 8.92% 0.21% 0.42% 0.21% 0.21% 0.42% 0.21% 0.21% 0.21% 0.21% 0.21% 1.49% 0.21% 0.21% 2.55% 3.40% 0.42% 2.12% 4.03% 0.42%

1

0.21%

1 25 1 2 36 1 7 2

0.21% 5.31% 0.21% 0.42% 7.64% 0.21% 1.49% 0.42%

1

0.21%

6

1.27%

98

Chapter 7

Ceramic type Spain or North Africa glazed ware (SP/NA.GL) Vessels with thin wash under a monochrome glaze (VI.GL.4) TOTAL Residual Later intrusive

Qty. 1 27 471 221 11

Percent of total 0.21% 5.73% 100.00% — —

Table 7. Comparison of Acre and Jaffa-Qishle 13th c. Assemblages: Relative Frequencies of Imported Table wares Jaffa Acre Area and Ware Group Qty. Percent of imports Qty. Percent of imports Central and Northern Syria SY.GL 1 0.76% 23 9.50% NSY.GL 10 7.63% 77 31.82% Sub-totals 11 8.40% 100 41.32% East Mediterranean CY.GL 31 23.66% 37 15.29% GR.GL 33 25.19% 8 3.31% TUR/GR.GL 3 2.29% 4 1.65% Sub-totals 67 51.15% 49 20.25% Italy NIT.GL — — 8 3.31% SIT.GL 46 35.11% 78 32.23% Sub-totals 46 35.11% 86 35.54% West Mediterranean SFR.GL — — 1 0.41% CA.GL — — 1 0.41% SP/NA.GL 1 0.76% — — TU.GL 6 4.58% 2 0.83% Sub-totals 7 5.34% 4 1.65% Other CH.GL — — 4 1.65% TOTALS

131

100.00%

242

100.41%

Table 8. Comparison of Acre and Jaffa-Qishle 13th c. Assemblages: Rim Fragment Count by Category Jaffa Acre Ceramic Ware Group Qty. Percent of total Qty. Percent of total Local table wares 61 12.95% 26 3.30% Local cooking wares 189 40.13% 233 29.61% Local plain wares 36 7.64% 247 31.39% Local wares subtotals: 286 60.72% 506 64.30% Imported table wares 159 33.76% 246 31.26% Imported cooking wares 1 0.21% 12 1.52% Imported plain wares 25 5.31% 23 2.92% Imported wares subtotals: 185 39.28% 281 35.70%

Crusader Pottery

TOTALS Residual Later intrusive

Jaffa 471 221 11

100.00% — —

99

Acre 787 208 3

100.00% — —

Table 9. Rim Fragment Count of All Ceramic Types Found in the Jaffa Qishle Site Percent of Total Ceramic Type Qty.33 Closed lamps (LMP.CL) 1 0.13% Plain beehive lamps (LMP.BH.PL) 1 0.13% Glazed beehive lamps (LMP.BH.GL) 2 0.25% Slip-painted beehive lamps (LMP.BH.GL.SP) 1 0.13% Lamps with long nozzle (LMP.LN) 0 — Glazed lamps with long nozzle (LMP.LN.GL) 0 — Slipper lamps (LMP.SL) 7 0.89% Slipper lamps with “Jaffa handle” (LMP.SL.J) 4 0.51% “Acre” fabric: bowls (AC.PL.1) 3 0.38% “Acre” fabric: other open vessels (AC.PL.2) 3 0.38% “Acre” fabric: jugs and juglets (AC.PL.3) 2 0.25% “Acre” fabric: kraters (AC.PL.4) 3 0.38% “Acre” fabric: jars (AC.PL.5) 15 1.91% “Acre” fabric: simple jugs (AC.PL.6) 1 0.13% “Beirut” fabric: unglazed vessels (BE.PL) 0 — “Beirut” fabric: thick-walled cooking pans (BE.CW.O.thick) 135 17.15% “Beirut” fabric: thin-walled cooking pans (BE.CW.O.thin) 26 3.30% “Beirut” fabric: Globular cooking pots with plain rim and glazed interior 1 0.13% (BE.CW.Cl.deep.thin.gl) “Beirut” fabric: thick-walled cooking pots (BE.CW.Cl.thick) 106 13.47% “Beirut” fabric: thin-walled cooking pots (BE.CW.Cl.thin) 46 5.84% “Beirut” fabric: deep cooking pots (BE.CW.D). 15 1.91% “Beirut” fabric: monochrome glaze, no slip (BE.GL.1) 3 0.38% “Beirut” fabric: Levantine glazed bowls (BE.GL.2) 13 1.65% “Beirut” fabric: Levantine glazed bowls with sgraffito decoration 4 0.51% (BE.GL.7) “Beirut” fabric: glazed bowls with reserved slip (BE.GL.3) 17 2.16% “Regional” glazed, slip-painted vessels (BE.GL.4) 64 8.13% “Beirut” fabric: glaze-painted bowls (BE.GL.5) 0 — “Beirut” fabric: glazed bowls with double slip (BE.GL.6) 0 — Narrow-necked amphorae (LE.PL) 5 0.64% Local fabrics: hand-made basins (VL.PL.1) 7 0.89% Local fabrics: shallow carinated bowls (VL.PL.2) 2 0.25% Local fabrics: flasks (VL.PL.6) 2 0.25% Local fabrics: hand-made painted bowls and jugs (VL.PL.5) 3 0.38% Local fabrics: jars with folded rim (VL.PL.6) 0 — Local fabrics: other jars (VL.PL.7) 0 — Local fabrics: glazed, slip-painted bowls (VL.GL.3) 1 0.13% Central Syria soft-paste fabrics: monochrome glaze (SY.GL.1) 1 0.13% 33

Quantity “0” indicates that only body sherds were found of this type.

100

Chapter 7

Ceramic Type Central Syria soft-paste fabrics: black paint under clear or turquoise glaze (SY.GL.3) Northern Syria fabric: glazed, unidentified (NSY.GL) Northern Syria fabric: monochrome glazed (NSY.GL.1) Northern Syria fabric: monochrome glazed with sgraffito (NSY.GL.2) Northern Syria fabric: “Port St. Symeon” ware (NSY.GL.4) Cyprus plain ware (CY.PL) Cyprus cooking ware (CY.CW) Cypriot monochrome ware (CY.GL.1) Cypriot slip-painted ware (CY.GL.2) Cypriot monochrome sgraffito ware (CY.GL.3) Cypriot one-color sgraffito ware (CY.GL.4) Cypriot sgraffito with green and brown splash (CY.GL.5) Monochrome glazed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.1) Green splashed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.2) Slip-painted “Byzantine Ware” (GR.GL.3) Sgraffito with fine incision / “Byzantine Fine Sgraffito Ware” (GR.GL.4) Glaze-painted “Byzantine Ware” (GR.GL.5) Sgraffito with broad incision, “Byzantine Incised Sgraffito Ware” or “Aegean Coarse-incised Ware” (GR.GL.6) Aegean coarse incision with green splash (GR.GL.7) Byzantine Champlevé Ware (GR.GL.8) Brown splashed “Aegean Ware” (GR.GL.9) High-handled amphorae (TUR/GR.PL.1) Globular amphorae (TUR/GR.PL.2) “Flat-based” amphorae (TUR/GR.PL.3) Small imported amphorae (TUR/GR.PL.4) Genuine Zeuxippus Ware Class IA (TUR/GR.GL.1) Genuine Zeuxippus Ware Class II (TUR/GR.GL.2) “Zeuxippus influenced wares” (TUR/GR.GL.3) Proto-maiolica from Apulia (SIT.GL.2) Proto-maiolica from Gela (SIT.GL.3) Sicilian proto-maiolica (SIT.GL.4) “Ramina, Manganese, Rosso” proto-maiolica (SIT.GL.5) Possible Proto-maiolica of unknown provenance (SIT.GL.6) Catalonia monochrome glazed ware (CA.GL.1) Northern Italy and/or Southern France and/or Catalonia cooking ware (NIT/SFR/CA.CW) “North African Blue and Brown Ware” (TU.GL) Spain or North Africa plain ware (SP/NA.PL) Spain or North Africa glazed ware (SP/NA.GL) Sphero-conical vessels (VI.PL.2) Vessels with thin wash under a monochrome glaze (VI.GL.4) Unidentified TOTAL

Qty.33

Percent of Total

0

—

1 1 1 9 1 7 1 17 20 4 0 16 34 0

0.13% 0.13% 0.13% 1.14% 0.13% 0.89% 0.13% 2.16% 2.54% 0.51% — 2.03% 4.32% —

2

0.25%

0

—

1

0.13%

0 1 0 28 1 0 2 1 8 0 51 1 2 7 2 0

— — — 3.56% 0.13% — 0.25% 0.13% 1.02% — 6.48% — 0.25% 0.89% 0.25% —

1

0.13%

7 3 1 1 32 29 787

0.89% 0.38% 0.13% 0.13% 4.07% 3.68% 100.00%

Crusader Pottery

Ceramic Type Residual Intrusions

101

Qty.33 508 159

Percent of Total — —

102

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type VL.PL.1

Locus 1054

Basket/Sherd 10830/8

Form Basin

2

VL.PL.1

943

10138/1

Basin

3

VL.PL.5

1110

11062

Bowl

Description Surfaces and break 2.5YR 6/6 light red. Moderate medium black grits, sparse medium gray grits, and common fine white grits. Comb-incised. Surfaces and break 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Common very coarse red grits (grog?) and common very coarse yellow (limestone), moderate medium black grits, and sparse shells? Comb-incised. Exterior surface 7.5YR 7/3-7/4 pink. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red with light brown core. Common medium to coarse black grits, and common medium white (quartz?).

Crusader Pottery

Fig. 7.1. Handmade Basins and Bowls.

103

104

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type LMP.SL

Locus 976

Basket/Sherd 10335/1

Form Slipper lamp

2

LMP.SL.YH

1095

10957

Slipper lamp with Jaffa handle

3

LMP.SL.YH

1085

10882

Slipper lamp with Jaffa handle

Description Surfaces 7.5YR 7/3 pink. Break 7.5YR 6/4 light brown. Common fine to medium white limestone, and sparse coarse black grits. Molded pseudo-inscription. Surfaces 2.5YR 6/6 light red. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red with yellowish core. Common fine to very coarse white limestone, and sparse fine to medium red grits. Molded herringbone decorations. Surfaces 7.5YR 7/6 reddish yellow. Break 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Common fine to coarse white limestone, and sparse fine to medium black grits. Molded linear and herringbone decorations.

Crusader Pottery

Fig. 7.2. Slipper Lamps.

105

106

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type VL.PL.4

Locus 1120

Basket/Sherd 11144/6

Form Flask

2

AC.PL.1

915

10058

Bowl

3

AC.PL.1

1019

10607

Bowl

4

AC.PL.3

1120

11144/1

Jug

5

AC.PL.4

1102

11003/10

Krater

6

AC.PL.5

935

11069/1

Jar

7

AC.PL.5

1110

11054/1

Jar

8

LE.PL

451

5203/8

Amphora

9

LE.PL

1102

11014/3

Amphora

10

LE.PL

1102

11010/5

Amphora

Description 7.5YR 7/4 pink with yellow core. Surfaces 10YR 8/3 very pale brown. Sparse coarse white grits and very sparse coarse red grits. Surfaces 10YR 7/2 light gray. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red. Sparse coarse quartz sand, sparse coarse black grits. Light slip or wash. Surfaces 7.5YR 6/4 light brown. Break 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Abundant fine to medium black grits, common fine to medium white and gray quartz. Light slip or wash. Exterior surface 2.5Y 8/2 pale yellow. Break 10R 4/6 red with brown core. Abundant medium white and yellow limestone grits, burned out; and common medium black sand. Light slip or wash. Surfaces 10YR 7/2 light gray. Break 5YR 4/2 dark reddish gray with brown core. Abundant medium to coarse soft yellow limestone grits, many burned out. Light slip or wash. Surfaces 2.5Y 7/3 pale yellow. Break 2.5YR 4/4 reddish brown. Sparse coarse sand, moderate medium black grits, and sparse fine burned-out limestone. Surfaces 5YR 7/6 reddish yellow. Break 2.5YR 6/8 light red with light brown core. Abundant sand consisting of fine to medium gray and black grits, and sparse medium white grits. Surfaces 5YR 6/4 light reddish brown. Core 2.5YR 5/6 red to 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Common medium white limestone, sparse coarse white grits, and abundant fine gray and black grits. Slip or wash. Exterior surface 2.5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red to 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Common fine to medium white limestone, abundant fine to coarse black grits, sparse medium quartz, and sparse medium red grits (grog?). Light slip or wash. Exterior surface 2.5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red to 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Common fine to medium white limestone, abundant fine to coarse black grits, sparse medium quartz, and sparse medium red grits (grog?). Light slip or wash.

Crusader Pottery

Fig. 7.3. Local Mold-made and Wheel-made Wares.

107

108

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type BE.CW.O.thin

Locus 1027

Basket/Sherd 10628/3

Form Cooking pan

2

BE.CW.O.thick

1118

11148/5

Cooking pan

3

BE.CW.Cl.thin

1082

10893/24

Cooking pot

4

BE.CW.Cl.thin

1108

11045

Cooking pot

5

BE.CW.Cl.thick

103

1940/1

Cooking pot

6

BE.CW.Cl.thick

1118

11148/3

Cooking pot

7

BE.CW.Cl.thick

946

10185/1

Cooking pot

8

BE.CW.Cl.thick

1120

11149/15

Cooking pot

9

BE.CW.D

103

1940/2

Cooking pot

Description Exterior surface 2.5YR 4/6 red. Break 2.5YR 4/6 red. Interior surface 10R 2.5/2 very dusky red. Sparse medium to coarse quartz, and sparse fine black grits. Wet smoothed exterior. Glazed dark reddish brown (10R 2.5/2 very dusky red) on interior to rim. Cooking pan. Exterior surface 10R 4/6 red. Break 2.5YR 2.5/1 reddish black to 2.5YR 4/8 red. Interior surface 2.5YR 2.5/4 dark reddish brown. Common medium quartz, sparse coarse white inclusions, sparse medium to coarse black inclusions. Exterior wet smoothed. Interior glazed 2.5YR 2.5/4 dark reddish brown, splashed to rim. Surfaces 2.5YR 5/4 reddish brown. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red. Common fine to medium quartz, sparse fine black grits. Splashes of glaze on the interior, 2.5YR 2.5/2 very dusky red. Exterior surface 2.5YR 4/4 reddish brown. Break 2.5YR 4/6 red. Interior surface 10R 4/6 red. Moderate medium quartz, sparse fine black and white grits. Wet smoothed exterior. Exterior surface 2.5YR 4/1 dark reddish gray. Break 5YR 3/1 very dark gray, with reddish brown core. Interior surface 2.5YR 3/6 dark red. Common medium to coarse quartz. Exterior wet-smoothed, interior glazed 2.5YR 3/6 dark red. Surfaces 10R 4/4 weak red, break 2.5YR 4/8 red. Common medium to coarse quartz, moderate fine to medium black grits. Wet smoothed. Surfaces 2.5YR 4/3 reddish brown to 2.5YR 2.5/3 dark reddish brown. Core 2.5YR 4/8 red. Common medium to coarse quartz, sparse medium black grits. Exterior wet smoothed with finger-indented appliqué. Interior glazed dark brown. Exterior surface 10R 4/4 weak red. Break 7.5YR 3/2 dark brown to 2.5YR 4/6 red. Interior surface 2.5YR 2.5/3 dark reddish brown. Abundant fine to coarse quartz. Exterior wet smoothed. Interior and top of rim glazed 2.5YR 2.5/3 dark reddish brown. Surfaces and break 2.5YR 4/6 red with dark brown core. Moderate medium to coarse quartz, sparse medium black grits. Small splashes and dots of dark brown glaze on exterior and interior.

Crusader Pottery

Fig. 7.4. Local Cooking Wares.

109

110

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type BE.GL.1

Locus 956

Basket/Sherd 10324/6

Form Flask

2

BE.GL.1

102

1537/14

Jug

3

BE.GL.3

1107

11629

Bowl

4

BE.GL.3

1022

10588/6

Bowl

5

BE.GL.4

1107

11038

Bowl

6

BE.GL.4

931

10134/3

Bowl

7

BE.GL.7

956

10234/9

Bowl

8

VL.PL.2

1110

11062

Bowl

9

VL.GL.3

1053

10678

Bowl

Description Exterior surface 10R 2.5/2 very dusky red. Break and interior surface 2.5YR 4/8 red. Sparse medium to coarse quartz, sparse fine black grits. Glazed 10R 2.5/2 very dusky red on exterior of neck to rim. Exterior surface 10R 3/2 dusky red‒2.5YR 3/4 dark reddish brown. Break and interior surface 2.5YR 4/6 red. Sparse medium white grits, abundant fine to medium black grits, sparse medium quartz sand. Dark reddish brown glaze, 10R 3/2 dusky red where thickest, on exterior of neck and on handle. Exterior and break red. Light slip splashed on interior and rim. Interior yellow glaze with green splashes. Surfaces and break 2.5YR 4/8 red. Sparse medium to coarse quartz, moderate fine black grits. Interior white slip-paint, yellow glaze. Exterior surface and break red. Interior white slippaint, clear glaze, mostly flaked away. Surfaces and break 2.5YR 4/8 red. Common fine to medium quartz sand, sparse coarse medium to black grits, sparse medium white limestone. Interior white slip paint, clear glaze. Surfaces and breaks 10R 4/8 red. Moderate medium quartz, sparse coarse white lime, and common fine black grits. Interior slipped thin white, incised, glazed yellow. Exterior surface 7.5YR 7/3-7/4 pink. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red with light brown core. Common medium to coarse black grits, and common medium white (quartz?). Surfaces and break 2.5YR 4/8 red. Moderate medium to coarse quartz, and moderate fine black grits. Slippainted under yellow glaze.

Crusader Pottery

Fig. 7.5. Local Table Wares.

111

112

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type LMP.BH.GL

Locus 499

Basket/Sherd 5349

Form Beehive lamp

2

LMP.BH.GL

1054

10694

Beehive lamp

3

LMP.BH.PL.1

1008

10651

Beehive lamp

4

LMP.BH.GL

1085

10946

Beehive lamp

5

LMP.LN.GL

92

1615

Lamp with long nozzle

6

LMP.LN.GL

1107

11027

7

LMP.LN.GL

935

11069/2

Lamp with long nozzle Lamp with long nozzle

Description Surfaces 10R 2.5/1 reddish black. Break 10R 4/8 red. Common medium to coarse quartz, moderate fine to medium black grits. Exterior surface 10R 4/6 red. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red. Sparse medium quartz, sparse fine to coarse black grits. Slip paint covered with yellow glaze. Surfaces 5Y 8/2 pale yellow. Break 5Y 8/2 pale yellow and 2.5YR 6/4-6/6 light reddish brown-light red. Common fine to medium white limestone, sparse fine black grits. Light slip or wash. Surfaces 2.5YR 3/3 dark reddish brown. Break 10R 4/8 red. Common fine to medium quartz, moderate fine black grits. Brown glaze on exterior and interior. Exterior surface 2.5Y 7/1 light gray. Break and interior surface 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Sparse coarse quartz and white grits. Light gray or white slip on exterior and dripping into interior. Break 2.5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Sparse medium black grits. Light green glaze on interior and exterior. Break 2.5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Sparse medium sand. Bright green glaze on interior and exterior.

Crusader Pottery

Fig. 7.6. Beehive Lamps, Saucer Lamps, and Lamps with Long Nozzle.

113

114

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type NSY.GL.4

Locus 1011

Basket/Sherd 10508/2

Form Bowl

2

NSY.GL.4

1120

11144/2

Bowl

3

CY.PL

1011

10535/1

Jug

4

CY.CW

913

10021/1

Cooking pot

5

CY.GL.2

1120

11149/3, 14

Bowl

6

CY.GL.2

1118

11148/6

Bowl

7

CY.GL.3

1120

11149/9

Bowl

8

CY.GL.4

957

10439/14

Bowl

9

GR.GL.1

977

10282/7

Bowl

10

GR.GL.2

501

5407/13

Bowl

Description Exterior surface 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Break 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow to 7.5YR 7/4 pink. Sparse medium white grits, sparse medium black grits. Slipped white on the interior, incised decorations, and glazed pale green with touches of yellow-brown and green glaze. Exterior surface 10YR 7/4 very pale brown. Break 2.5Y 7/4 pale yellow to 7.5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Abundant fine to medium white, black, and red grits. Slipped white on the interior over the rim, incised decorations, and glazed pale yellow, decorated with touches of dark yellow and green glaze. Exterior surface GLEY1 4/N dark gray. Break 5YR 4/4 reddish brown with gray core. Interior surface 5YR 5/3 reddish brown. Common medium black grits, common fine to medium white grits. Wet smoothed exterior. Exterior surface GLEY1 4/N dark gray. Break 2.5YR 4/6 red to grey towards exterior. Core 10YR 6/3 pale brown, interior surface 2.5YR 4/6 red. Moderate medium white limestone, moderate very coarse gray and black grits. Wet smoothed exterior. Exterior surface 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Break 5YR 5/6 yellowish red to 7.5YR 4/1 dark gray with brown core. Moderate very fine to medium white limestone grits, moderate very fine to medium black grits. White slip painted decorations under a translucent yellowish-green glaze. Unpainted areas appear olive green. Exterior surface 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Break 10R 5/8 red. Moderate fine white grits, sparse coarse white grits. White slip painted decorations under a translucent yellowish-green glaze. Exterior surface 5YR 5/8 yellowish red. Break 5YR 5/8‒5/6 yellowish red. Common very fine to medium white limestone grits. Slipped white, incised decorations, glazed pale yellow to just over the rim. Exterior surface 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Break 5YR 5/6 yellowish red to 7.5YR 5/2 brown. Sparse fine white grits. Slipped white on the interior over the rim, incised decorations, glazed pale yellow, and decorated with touches of dark yellow glaze. Exterior surface 7.5YR 8/3 pink. Break 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Sparse medium to coarse quartz. Slipped pale pink inside and out, then glazed yellow inside and over rim. Exterior surface 5YR 6/4 light reddish brown. Break 2.5YR 5/8 red. Sparse coarse black inclusions, sparse coarse quartz. Interior slipped pale pink, then glazed yellow with splashes of green.

Crusader Pottery

No. 11

Type GR.GL.2

Locus 1049

Basket/Sherd 10701/1

Form Bowl

12

GR.GL.4

954

10235/2

Bowl

115

Description Exterior surface 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Break 5YR 5/6 yellowish red to 7.5YR 4/2 brown. Sparse coarse quartz. Slipped pale pink inside and over rim, and glazed pale yellow or clear with splashes of green. Exterior 5YR 8/3 pink. Break 2.5YR 5/8 red. Moderate very fine to medium white grits, sparse coarse quartz. Slipped pale pink inside and out, with fine incising on the interior. Interior covered with a yellow glaze.

Fig. 7.7. Northern Syrian, Cypriot, and Greek Imports.

116

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type GR.GL.8

Locus 1115

Basket/Sherd 11132

Form Bowl

Description Exterior surface 7.5YR 8/3 pink. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red. Abundant very fine to medium white grits. Interior slipped white, design excised in roundel, and glazed yellow.

No. 1

Type TUR/GR.PL.1

Locus 1090

Basket/Sherd 10969/10

Form Amphora

2

TUR/GR.PL.1

1120

11154

Amphora

3

TUR/GR.PL.1

1085

10914

Amphora

4

TUR/GR.PL.1

1107

11043

Amphora

5

TUR/GR.PL.1

1085

10916

Amphora

6

TUR/GR.PL.1

1111

11047/2

Amphora

7

TUR/GR.PL.4

926

10140/3

Amphora

Description Surfaces 2.5Y 7/2 light gray. Break 10R 5/6 red. Exterior surface 2.5Y 7/2 light gray. Break 5YR 5/4 reddish brown. Common fine to medium white grits, sparse coarse white grits. Surfaces and break 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Moderate medium yellow-white limestone, sparse medium dark grits. Surfaces and break 5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Moderate medium yellow-white limestone, sparse medium dark grits. Surfaces and break 5YR 6/4 light reddish brown with 2.5YR 5/6 red core. Abundant very fine to coarse yellow limestone grits, sparse coarse quartz, sparse dark red or black coarse grits. Surfaces and break 2.5YR 5/6 yellowish red. Abundant very fine to coarse white grits, sparse medium to coarse black grits. Surfaces and break 5YR 6/6-7/6 reddish yellow. Moderate very fine black grits, sparse medium white grits.

Crusader Pottery

Fig. 7.8. Byzantine Champlevé Ware.

Fig. 7.9. Black Sea Amphorae.

117

118

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type TUR/GR.GL.2

Locus 946

Basket/Sherd 10185/6

Form Bowl

2

TUR/GR.GL.2

103

1538/11

Bowl

3

SIT.GL.2

1063

10735/1

Bowl

4

SIT.GL.2

84

1480/3

Bowl

5

SIT.GL.2

1054

10832

Bowl

6

SIT.GL.2

1118

11148/1

Bowl

7

SIT.GL.2

1118

11148/2

Bowl

8

SIT.GL.2

1095

10956/6

Jug

9

SIT.GL.5

1062

10714/1

Bowl

Description Exterior surface 2.5YR 6/6 light red. Break 2.5YR 5/8 red. Sparse very fine white sand, sparse coarse dark grits. Slipped white on interior, incised decorations, glazed pale yellow, and decorated with additional touches of yellow glaze. Break 7.5YR 6/4 light brown. Sparse fine white grits. Slipped white on the interior with drips over the rim and onto exterior. Interior incised decorations, glazed pale yellow, and decorated with dark yellow/ brown glaze. Exterior surface 5Y 8/1 white. Break 5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Sparse medium dark grits. Interior and rim painted with dark brown, blue, and light brown. Clear glaze. Exterior surface 2.5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Break 2.5Y 8/3 pale yellow to 10YR 7/4 very pale brown. Sparse medium black and red grits. White opaque glaze inside and over rim, with three brown stripes at edge of rim and three at interior of rim. Cavetto has design outlined in brown and filled with yellow. Exterior surface and break pale yellow. White opaque glaze on interior and over rim, with brown and blue painted designs. Exterior surface 5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Break 10YR 7/3 very pale brown to 5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Sparse coarse black and red grits. White opaque glaze inside and just over rim, with brown and blue painted designs. Exterior surface 2.5Y 7/3 pale yellow. Break 2.5Y 7/3 pale yellow to 10YR 8/4 very pale brown. Sparse medium black and red grits. White opaque glaze inside. Decoration outlined in brown and filled in blue. Break 2.5Y 8/4 pale yellow. Sparse medium to coarse black and dark red grits. Exterior white slip with black stripes and black outlined design, with infilling in blue and brown, covered with a transparent glaze. Interior thick transparent glaze. Exterior surface 2.5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Break 7.5YR 7/4 pink to 2.5Y 8/3 pale yellow. Sparse medium to very coarse black and red grits. White opaque glaze inside and over rim, with brown and red painted designs.

Crusader Pottery

No. 10

Type SIT.GL.5

Locus 1028

Basket/Sherd 10667/6

Form Bowl

11

NIT/SFR/CA.CW

1113

11104

Cooking pot

119

Description Exterior surface 5Y 8/2 pale yellow. Break 5Y 8/2 pale yellow with 10YR 7/4 very pale brown core. Sparse fine black grits. Red and brown painted designs. Break 2.5YR 5/8 red. Common medium to coarse quartz, sparse coarse red grits. Glazed clear or pale yellow in and out, making surfaces appear 10R 4/6 red.

Fig. 7.10. Imports from Turkey or Greece, Italy, and Southern France or Catalonia.

120

Chapter 7

No. 1

Type SP/NA.PL

Locus 1102

Basket/Sherd 10995/2

Form Jar

No. 1

Type TU.GL

Locus 1085

Basket/Sherd 10883

Form Basin

2

TU.GL

976

10278

Basin

3

TU.GL

1110

11054/2

Bowl

4

VI.PL.2

1102

11003/5

Spheroconical vessel

5

VI.GL.4

1110

11046/5

Bowl

6

VI.GL.4

1090

10969/2

Bowl

7

VI.GL.4

983

10325/5

Bowl

Description Surfaces 2.5YR 5/6 red. Break 2.5YR 5/6 red with 7.5YR 6/4 light brown core. Moderate medium to very coarse white grits, moderate medium to coarse black grits, moderate mica. Exterior stamped floral decoration, over which remains of white slip.

Description Break 2.5Y 8/4 pale yellow. Sparse fine to coarse gray, black and red grits. White opaque glaze in and out, with dark brown painting on interior and exterior. Break 5Y 8/3 pale yellow with 7.5Y 7/4 pink core. Sparse medium to coarse light and dark grits. White opaque glaze in and out; well-preserved exterior decoration in blue and brown paint. Exterior surface 5Y 8/4 pale yellow. Break 5Y 8/4 pale yellow with 10YR 7/4 very pale brown core. Break 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow with GLEY2 6/10BG greenish gray core. Interior surface 5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Abundant fine to medium black grits, moderate medium to coarse white grits, sparse fine red grits. Dark gray slip on exterior, GLEY2 4/5PB dark bluish gray. Exterior surface 10YR 6/3 pale brown. Break 10YR 5/2 grayish brown to 2.5YR 6/4 light reddish brown with 2.5YR 5/6 red core. Common fine to medium white grits, moderate fine to medium red grits. Thin beige wash in and out, glazed green to rim. Exterior surface 5YR 6/4 light reddish brown. Break 2.5YR 5/8 red to 7.5YR 6/6 reddish yellow. Abundant medium white grits, sparse medium black grits. Thin beige wash in and out, glazed yellow on interior and over rim. Exterior surface 7.5YR 7/3 pink. Break 7.5YR 6/4 light brown with 2.5YR 5/6 red core. Moderate fine to medium white grits, moderate fine to medium red grits, sparse straw? Thin beige wash in and out, glazed yellow and green on interior to just over rim.

Crusader Pottery

Fig. 7:11. Spain/North Africa Plain Ware.

Fig. 7.12. North African and Unknown Imports.

121

122

Chapter 7

Plate 7.1. High-handled amphorae found in Area A, Square 35, Loci 1085, 1107, Pottery buckets 10914, 10916, 10927, 11039‒11043.

Plate 7.2. Basket 10358. Bodysherd of proto-maiolica dish (SIT.GL.2). Exterior surface and break 2.5Y 7/4 pale yellow with 7.5YR 7/4 pink core. Sparse coarse dark grits. Interior glazed white and painted in blue and black.

Crusader Pottery

123

Works Cited Adams, William Y. 2002 Meinarti III. The Late and Terminal Christian Phases, 9. Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication. Sudan Archaeological Research Society, London. Arnon, Yael D. 2004 Early Islamic Period Caesarea. Qadmoniot 37 (127): 23–33 (Hebrew). 2008 Caesarea Maritima, the Late Periods (700–1291 CE). British Archaeological Reports S1771. Archaeopress, Oxford. Avissar, Miriam 1996 The Medieval Pottery. In Yoqne’am I: The Late Periods, edited by A. Ben-Tor, et al., pp. 75–172. Qedem Reports 3, Jerusalem. 2005 The Pottery. In Tel Yoqne‘am: Excavations on the Acropolis, edited by M. Avissar, pp. 35–93. Israel Antiquities Authority Reports 25. Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. Avissar, Miriam, and Edna J. Stern 2005 Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk Periods in Israel. Israel Antiquities Authority Reports 26. Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. Blackman, M. James, and Scott Redford 2005 Neutron Activation Analysis of Medieval Ceramics from Kinet, Turkey, especially Port Saint Symeon Ware. Ancient Near Eastern Studies 42: 83–186. Brosh, Na’ama 1980 A Reexamination of Islamic ‘grenades’. ‘Atiqot 14: 114–15. Burke, Katherine Strange 2007 Archaeological Texts and Contexts on the Red Sea: The Sheikh’s House at Quseir al-Qadim. Ph.D., University of Chicago. In preparation Typology of the Crusader Pottery and Assemblages from Selected Loci. In Excavations on Jaffa’s Eastern Slopes (1995–2007), edited by M. Peilstöcker. Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 5. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Los Angeles. Forthcoming Crusader Ceramics from Excavations at HaTzorfim Street, Jaffa. 2011 Early Islamic and Crusader Whole and Reconstructed Vessels from the Ganor Compound. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa, edited by M. Peilstöcker and A. A. Burke, pp. 197‒210. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project 1. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Jerusalem and Los Angeles. Capelli, Claudio, Florence Parent, Catherine Richarte, Lucy Vallauri, and Roberto Cabella 2006 Ceramiche invetriate di importazione in provenza in epoca bassomedievale: dati archeologici e archeometrici. In Atti dei XXXVII e XXXVIII Convegno Internazionale della Ceramica, 2004 e 2005, Albisola, pp. 189–200. Firenze University Press, Florence. Démians d’Archimbaud, Gabrielle, and Lucy Vallauri 1998 Productions et importations de céramiques médiévales dans le Midi méditerranéen français. In Ceràmica medieval i postmedieval: circuits productius i seqüències culturales, edited by J. I. Padilla, et al., pp. 73–110. Monografies d’arqueologia medieval i postmedieval 4. Edicions Universitat Barcelona, Barcelona. Dumarçay, Jacques 1965 Éolipiles? Syria 42: 75–79. Ettinghausen, Richard 1965 The Uses of Sphero-Conical Vessels in the Muslim Near East. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 24: 218–229. Gabrieli, R. Smadar, Bernadette McCall, and J. Richard Green 2001 Medieval Kitchen Ware from the Theater Site at Nea Paphos. Report of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus 2001: 335–356.

124

Chapter 7

Ghouchani, ‘Abd Allah, and Chahryar Adle 1992 A Sphero-conical Vessel as Fuqqa’a, or a Gourd for ‘Beer’. Muqarnas 9: 72–92. Goren, Yuval 1997 Excavation of the Courthouse Site at ‘Akko: Petrographic Analysis of the Ceramics Assemblage. ‘Atiqot 31: 71–74. Günsenin, Nergis 1989 Recherches sur les amphores byzantines dans les musées turcs. In Recherches sur la céramique byzantine. Actes du Colloque Organisé par L’École Française d’Athènes et l’Université de Strasbourg II (Centre de Recherches sur l’Europe Centrale et Sud-Orientale), Athènes 8–10 avril 1987, edited by V. Déroche and J.-M. Spieser, pp. 267–276. Bulletin de Correspondance Hellènique Supplement 18. École Française d’Athènes, Athens. Hadad, Shulamit 1999 Oil Lamps from the Abbasid through the Mamluk Periods at Bet Shean, Israel. Levant 31: 203–224. Hayes, John W. 1992 Excavations at Saraçhane in Istanbul, Volume 2: The Pottery. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D. C. Hildburgh, Walter Leo 1951 Aeolipiles as fire-blowers. Archaeologia 94: 27–55. Irwin, Robert 1980 The Supply of Money and the Direction of Trade in Thirteenth-Century Syria. In Coinage in the Latin East. The Fourth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary History (Wolfson College, 1979), edited by P. W. Edbury and D. M. Metcalf, pp. 73–104. BAR International Series 77. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford. Jacoby, David 1997 The Venetian Privileges in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem: Twelfth and Thirteenth-century Interpretations and Implementation. In Montjoie: Studies in Crusade History in Honour of Hans Eberhard Mayer, edited by B. Z. Kedar, et al., pp. 155–175. Variorum, Aldershot. 1998 The Trade of Crusader Acre in the Levantine Context: An Overview. Archivio Storico del Sannio 1– 2: 103–120. 2005 The Economy of Latin Constantinople, 1204–1261. In Urbs Capta: The Fourth Crusade and its Consequences, edited by A. E. Laiou, pp. 195–214. Réalités Byzantines 10. Lethielleux, Paris. Jenkins, Marilyn 1992 Early Medieval Islamic Pottery: The Eleventh Century Reconsidered. Muqarnas 9: 56–66. Johns, Jeremy 1998 The Rise of Middle Islamic Hand-Made Geometrically-Painted Ware in Bilad al-Sham (11th–13th Centuries A.D.). In Colloque International d’Archeologie Islamique: IFAO, Le Caire, 3–7 fevrier 1993, edited by R.-P. Gayroud, pp. 65–93. Textes Arabes et Etudes Islamique 36. Institut Francais d’Archeologie Orientale, Cairo. Keall, Edward J. 1992a Smokers’ Pipes and the Fine Pottery Tradition of Hays. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 22: 29–46. 1992b A Smoking Coconut. Archaeologists May Have Discovered the Identity of Mystery Objects in a Puff of Smoke. Rotunda 12 (Spring): 12–17. 1993 One Man’s Mede is Another Man’s Persian; One Man’s Coconut is Another Man’s Grenade. Muqarnas 10: 275–285. Kletter, Raz 2004 Jaffa, Roslan Street. ‘Atiqot 47: 193–207. Kletter, Raz, and Edna J. Stern 2006 A Mamluk-Period Site at Khirbat Burin in the Eastern Sharon. ‘Atiqot 51: 173–214.

Crusader Pottery

125

Laiou, Angeliki E. 2002 Exchange and Trade, Seventh–Twelfth Centuries. In The Economic History of Byzantium from the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century, 2, edited by A. E. Laiou, pp. 697–770. Dumbarton Oaks Studies 39. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington. Lilie, Ralph-Johannes 1984 Handel und Politik zwischen dem byzantinischen Reich und den italienischen Kommunen Venedig, Pisa und Genua in der Epoche der Komenen und der Angeloi (1081–1204). A.M. Hakkert, Amsterdam. Marchesi, Henri, and Lucy Vallauri 1997 Structuration et évolution du quartier. In Marseille, les ateliers de potiers du XIIIe s. et le quartier Sainte-Barbe (Ve–XVIIe s.), edited by H. Marchesi, et al., pp. 19–108. Documents d’Archéologie Française 65, Paris. Mason, Robert B., and Michael S. Tite 1994 The Beginnings of Islamic Stonepaste Technology. Archaeometry 36 (1): 77–91. el-Masri, Sami 1997 Medieval Pottery from Beirut’s Downtown Excavations. The First Results. ARAM Periodical 9 (1– 2): 103–19. Pentz, Peter 1988 A Medieval Workshop for Producing ‘Greek fire’ Grenades. Antiquity 62: 89–93. Poulsen, Vaughn 1957 Grenades ou flacons a parfum? In Les verreries poteries médiévales, IV/2, pp. 275–78, figs. 1047– 58. Hama: Fouilles et recherches de la Fondation Carlsberg 1931–1938, Nationalmuseet, Copenhagen. Pringle, Denys 1986 Pottery as Evidence of Trade in the Crusader States. In I comuni Italiani nel Regno Crociato di Gerusalemme, edited by G. Airaldi and B. Z. Kedar, pp. 451–496, Genoa. Richard, Jean 1979 The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, A–B. Europe in the Middle Ages 11. North-Holland Pub. Co., Amsterdam. Rogers, J. Michael 1969 Aleopiles Again. In Forschungen zur Kunst asien: in memoriam Kurt Erdmann, 9 September 1901– 30 September 1964, edited by O. Aslanapa and R. Naumann, pp. 147‒158. Istanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi, Türk ve Islâm Sanati Kürsüsü, Istanbul. Roll, Israel 2007 The Encounter of Crusaders and Muslims at Apollonia-Arsuf as Reflected in the Archaeological Finds and Historical Sources. In The Encounter of Crusaders and Muslims in Palestine as Reflected in Arsuf, Sayyiduna ‘Ali and Other Coastal Sites, edited by I. Roll, O. Tal, and M. Winter, pp. 9– 103, Tel Aviv (Hebrew with English summary). Savage-Smith, Emilie 1997 Sphero-conical Vessels: A Typology of Forms and Functions. In Science, Tools and Magic, edited by Emilie Savage-Smith and Francis Maddison, pp. 324–337. The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art 12. The Nour Foundation in association with Azimuth Editions and Oxford University Press, London. Seyrig, Henri 1959 Antiquités Syriennes, 75 – Flacons? grenades? éolipiles? Syria 36: 81–89. Shapiro, Anastasia 2012 Petrographic Analysis of Crusader-Period Pottery. In ‘Akko I. The 1991–1998 Excavations The Crusader-Period Pottery (2 vols.), pp. 103–126. IAA Reports 51. Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem.

126

Chapter 7

2013 Petrographic Examination of Medieval Pottery, Tiberias. ‘Atiqot 76: 209–212. Sharvit, Jacob 2008 The Sphero-Conical Vessels. In Paneas, Volume II: Small Finds and Other Studies, edited by V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli, pp. 101–112. IAA Reports 38. Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. Stern, Edna J. 1997 Excavation of the Courthouse Site at ‘Akko: The Pottery of the Crusader and Ottoman Periods. ‘Atiqot 31: 35–70. 2007 Trade and Redistribution of Ceramics in the Mediterranean in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries as Reflected in the Excavations of Crusader Acre. Ph.D., Haifa University. 2009 Continuity and Change: A Survey of Medieval Ceramic Assemblages from Northern Israel. In: Actas del VIII Congreso Internacional de Cerámica Medieval del 27 de febrero al 3 de marzo de 2006 en Almagro, Ciudad Real, edited by J.Z. Stabel-Hansen, M. R. Velasco, Miguel Á. H. Herrera, and A. De Juan García, pp. 225–234. Asociación Española de Arqueología Medieval, Ciudad Real, Spain. 2012a ‘Akko I. The 1991–1998 Excavations The Crusader-Period Pottery (2 vols.) (Israel Antiquities Authority Reports 51). Israel Antiquities Authority Jerusalem 2012b Mi‘ilya: Evidence of an Early Crusader Settlement. 'Atiqot 70: 63‒76. 2013 Crusader, Mamluk and Ottoman-period remains in Tiberias. ‘Atiqot 76:183–208. In preparation Yafo, The French Hospital / Eden Hotel Site: Crusader-Period Pottery. Stern, Edna J., and Katherine Strange Burke In preparation Crusader Ceramics from Excavations at Ruslan Street, Jaffa. Stern, Edna J., and Yona Waksman 2003 Pottery from Crusader Acre: A Typological and Analytical Study. In VIIe Congrès International sur la Céramiqe Médiévale en Méditerranée, Thessaloniki, 11–16 Octobre 1999, edited by Ch. Bakirtzis, pp. 167–180. Ministère de la Culture Caisse des Recettes Archéologiques, Athens. Syon, Danny, and Ayelet Tatcher Forthcoming The Knights’ Hotel Site – Architecture and Stratigraphy. In ‘Akko, the Excavations of 1991– 1998 II: The Late Periods, edited by E. Stern and D. Syon. IAA Reports. Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. van der Steen, Eveline J. 1997–1998 What Happened to Arab-geometric Pottery in Beirut? ARAM Periodical 9 (1–2): 121–127. Vroom, Joanita 2003 After Antiquity. Ceramics and Society in the Aegean from the 7th to the 20th Century A.C.: A Case Study from Boeotia, Central Greece. Archaeological Studies Leiden University 10. Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden University, Leiden. Waksman, S. Yona, Edna J. Stern, Irina Segal, Naomi Porat, and Joseph Yellin 2008 Elemental and Petrographic Analyses of Local and Imported Ceramics from Crusader Acre. ‘Atiqot 59: 157–190.

CHAPTER 8: PORCELAIN AND CERAMIC VESSELS OF THE OTTOMAN PERIOD Anna de Vincenz W. F. Albright Institute, Jerusalem Preface and Methodology This chapter on Ottoman ceramics and porcelain was born as an effort to put the Ottoman period into the light that it deserves. During my work on Islamic ceramics I noticed that Turkish ceramic smoking pipes and porcelain were treated either as “interesting souvenirs” or “modern garbage.” Research on Ottoman period ceramics was mostly nonexistent from the archaeological excavation reports because it is not covered by the antiquities law. Only a few years ago the Ottoman period began to be treated as an historical period; artifacts began appearing in excavation reports and research began to be carried out on subjects concerning the Ottoman period (early sixteenth to the beginning of the twentieth century). Smoking pipes were finally recognized as important for dating and important studies were made. But it was only recently that the Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project, a joint project of the Israel Antiquities Authority and the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, commenced large scale excavations in the Old and New City of Jaffa. One of the excavations conducted was in the Ottoman Barracks of Jaffa – the Qishle. Immediately it became clear that this site was a “goldmine” for Ottoman period ceramics. Thanks to my friend and colleague Dr. Yoav Arbel, I took upon myself the task to study and publish the material from this site. While working on the material it became clear that this would be a huge undertaking. In my enthusiasm, I decided to set up a typology of porcelains, glazed wares, coffee cups, pipes and any other ceramic items that were found in the Qishle. This proved to be a difficult task since there was so little published comparanda. The work started with the known material, which was mainly about smoking pipes and Gaza Wares which have been extensively studied. Some research had been done on coffee cups from excavations in Syria and occasionally material dated to the Ottoman period can be found in excavation reports of the area. No extensive publication about porcelain and hard paste vessels found in excavations in the area existed and thus most of the research was done through the internet. This type of research on many occasions led to connections with researchers abroad such as in France, Italy, Turkey, England and Germany. I have thus approached experts and museum curators directly and found that everybody was very helpful in identifying the material. I have also looked at hundreds of auction sites to find parallels for items, which in Jaffa were only preserved in fragments. On many occasions, only through these sites was an identification of the vessel form possible, and additional research on an archaeological level was then conducted. Major Studies Used It has been mentioned that on an archaeological level very little has been published so far. Reports which deal with the Ottoman period are mentioned in the parallels. For this study, many books on porcelain have been used. For general descriptions of patterns or style, An Illustrated Dictionary of Ceramics by George Savage and Harold Newman (2000) was used. Many of the English porcelain patterns have been found on the Internet and especially on the site Lovers of Blue and White – Virtual Museum.34 This website allows searching for patterns by pattern name, color or even by makers’ name. The online ceramic resources by George Haggarty, who catalogued thousands of sherds from various Scottish salvage excavations, mainly on

34

http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum.asp.

128

Chapter 8

ceramic factory sites (2005–2011), provided a very useful catalogue for Scottish ceramics35 as well as dates for the material which was obtained through archaeological excavations. For Meissen porcelain I used Robert E. Röntgens’ The Book of Meissen (1996, 2nd edition). Moreover, I used several books on Chinese wares such as Li He’s Chinese Ceramics (2006) and John Carswell’s Blue and White, Chinese Porcelain around the World (2000). I used the Encyclopedia of British Transfer-Printed Pottery Patterns (Neale 2005) to identify patterns and sometimes factories. I dated factories with the help of the Encyclopedia of Marks (Kowalsky and Kowalsky 1999) and also with Deutsche Porzellanmarken (Röntgen 2007). The book Cent ans de faiences populaires peintes à Sarreguemines et à Digoin (Gauvin and Becker 2007) gave many explanations of techniques such as the sponge technique and helped also with the identification of patterns used by this specific factory. Boch Frères – Keramis (Cosyns and Bragard 2008) was useful in identifying patterns. Many additional books and articles have been used and are cited in the bibliography, and many useful websites of museums and collectors’ pages have been consulted and are cited in the footnotes. Finally I came across many sites of archaeological excavations, in Germany and Switzerland which helped me identify some of the material from Jaffa. The Typological System The typological groups were established by dividing the material into general groups such as porcelains and hard paste ware, followed by glazed earthen wares, coffee cups, stone ware, Gaza and coarse wares. At the end is a section on smoking pipes and I conclude with a small section on architectural items such as roof tiles. All of the types are preceded with a J (=Jaffa). The groups are then divided into sub-groups either by decoration (for example, TW stands for Transfer ware, TW-FB is Transfer ware in Flow Blue, WW is White Ware) or by provenance (ÇAN stands for Çanakkale wares and GROT for maiolica from Grottaglie). The vessel type is then added such as PL for plate, BL for bowl, CC for coffee cup, etc. The last item is a numeral, which defines the shape and can have an additional letter signifying a variant. A key to the system is provided at the end of the report and includes not only the types from the Qishle, but also types which have since been identified at other sites in Jaffa such as HaZorfim Street (Vincenz, forthcoming a), Ruslan Street (Vincenz, forthcoming b), the Harbor (Vincenz, forthcoming c) and others. Dating of the Material The ceramic material discussed here comes from the seven month salvage excavation carried out in 2007 in the Qishle compound of Jaffa. The compound was constructed in the 1880s and served as the regional headquarters of the Ottoman military force stationed in that town as well as a prison. It was used for the same purpose during the British Mandate (1920–1947) and from 1948 until 2005 by the Israeli police. The building was placed where the north-eastern bastion of the city walls, which were built by the Ottoman Turks in the early nineteenth century, once stood. The material came mainly from fills within the compound which were probably brought to the site during the construction of the building. Most of the Ottoman material found in these fills can be dated to the eighteenth and nineteenth century. A useful tool for dating the porcelain finds are the backstamps which are found on porcelain vessels and which indicate the factory. The study of the stamps is a research project by itself which yields information about place and date of production of the ceramic item. Several of these stamps have been found and are discussed separately by Arbel (Chapter 9, this volume). However, these stamps are not found on each vessel; moreover they are very often fragmentary and/or illegible which complicates the identification. In some cases it was possible to identify the pattern of porcelain vessels, and by researching the different manufacturers which produced the pattern it was possible to establish provenance and dating. A major problem was the dating of coarse ware

35

http://repository.nms.ac.uk/view/nmsauthors/Haggarty_=3AGeorge=3A=3A.html. The single catalogues can be downloaded as pdf files.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

129

since very little has been published hitherto. An attempt was made to correlate loci with coarse ware with dated porcelain and/or glazed material. Tables and Plates The material is illustrated on plates according to the groups in the discussion. The tables give additional information about the single sherds, such as ware colors which are defined according to the Munsell Color Charts (edition 1998), and dimensions. Munsell readings were not used on Porcelain, Hardpaste and sometimes Softpaste since they are usually white, nor were they used on pipes, for which only a description of the color has been given. 8.1. Porcelain and Fine Wares Introduction With the discovery of porcelain manufacturing in 1708 by Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus and Johann Friedrich Böttger, what was formerly a luxury item became more affordable and started to flood European markets. Huge quantities of porcelain were produced, first for the courts, then for high society and slowly also for the less affluent. Porcelain factories were opened all over Europe; some of them like Meissen became world leaders in their production. By the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries porcelain had become a common item and could be found in many households. It is thus not surprising to find porcelain items of European provenance in Jaffa, since pilgrims of European origin arrived in the Holy Land through this port. Many guest houses and pilgrim hostels were also situated in the port city run by European monks who certainly chose to have dishes of European origin for their guests. Transfer Printed Wares In the seventeenth and early eighteenth century most of the wealthy had some blue and white Oriental porcelain. When English manufacturers produced porcelain it was natural for them to turn to these examples for inspiration in shape and decoration. Worcester blue painted wares sold at a reasonable price and became very popular. This great and overwhelming demand led the factory to experiment in printing. By the 1760s, printing had been perfected, enabling Worcester to offer blue and white wares in larger quantities and at prices that competed with Chinese export porcelain. “Willow Pattern” Plates (Fig. 8.1A:1–10) Among the transfer printed porcelain plates the most common and well-known is probably the “Willow Pattern.”36 An English legend tells the story of a Mandarin who had a beautiful daughter. His male secretary fell in love with the daughter, a fact that angered the Mandarin, since in his eyes the secretary was unworthy of his daughter. So the Mandarin banished his secretary and built a fence around his garden so that the secretary wouldn’t be able to see the daughter while she was walking in the garden. When the daughter was given into marriage to a rich noble, she was unhappy because she was also in love with the secretary. During the festivities for her betrothal the two lovers managed to run away together and settled on a distant island. The Mandarin, however, did not give up and finally found and killed his secretary. The girl set fire to the house to join her lover in death. The gods were touched by their love and immortalized them as two doves flying in the skies together. This “legend” was invented in England to promote the sales of porcelain plates with this pattern and has no counterpart or predecessor in China or in Chinese tales. The effect was so striking 36

http://www.thepotteries.org/patterns/willow.html (accessed 21.12.2012).

130

Chapter 8

that at the beginning of the twentieth century a one-act comic opera was written by Basil Hood and Cecil Cook. The design was invented around 1760 but was used extensively only from the beginning of the nineteenth century on soft ware and hard ware porcelain in English factories. Initially the ‘Legend of the Willow’ was produced around 1780 by Thomas Minton for Thomas Turner. Later it was reproduced by underglaze transfer printing on soft and hard paste porcelain of different factories in England (for an extensive research on British Willow Pattern see Rogers 200437). Different producers have been identified at the Qishle and are discussed in the chapter about the producers’ marks (see Arbel, Chapter 9, this volume: cat. Nos. 9.1: 2, 9.1:5, 9.1:10, 9.1:16, 9.1:17,9.1:19). The pattern was mainly produced in blue, but exists also in red, green, black and brown. An example of a black Willow Pattern plate has a partially preserved stamp with an olive branch and the word “London” (cf. Arbel, Chapter 9, this volume, cat. 9.1:14). Type J-TW-PL-1 (Fig. 8.1A: 1–9, 11) Rim and body fragments of large deep dishes with upturned ledge rim. The decoration is applied in cobalt blue underglaze transfer printing. The pattern produced by different manufacturers differs in details, for example the rim decoration. A stamp, discussed by Yoav Arbel (this volume, cat. 9.1:18), has been identified on one of the bases (Fig. 8.1A:11). On the stamp the words “Iron Stone China” can be read. Iron stone china was invented by Miles Mason around 1780. In 1813 he and his son Charles received the patent for the invention. The body of this ware was of white clay with generous quantities of pulverized flint and slag from iron-smelting added. As a result it was very strong and not easily chipped. Though heavier than real porcelain, it was very popular in England and America for a half-century. Immediately other manufacturers started to copy the ware and include “iron stone china” in their marks. The rim pattern shown here is characteristic of the Spode factory38 and the pattern on the dish points to a date in the 1850s. At that time the Copeland family had already taken over the Spode factory. Plates decorated with the Willow Pattern and with the same rim pattern as those shown here were also produced by the Swansea factory, but there they were made of bone china.39 Suggested dating: around 1850. Comparison: Blue and White Museum: Ref. no. WLPT27640.40 Type J-TW-PL-2 (Fig. 8.1A: 10) Rim fragment of large deep dish with upturned ledge rim. The decoration is applied in red underglaze transfer printing. The pattern on this dish is the same as the one on the dishes before (Fig. 8.1A:1–9). After 1822, additional colors such as red/pink (shown here) were added to expand the market. Suggested Dating: after 1822. Comparison: Staffordshire plate with the Willow Pattern in red.41 Transfer Printed Wares in Colors other than Blue (Fig. 8.1B: 1–12) Transfer ware was not restricted to blue, although blue was the most common color, since it was produced with the aim to imitate Chinese Blue-on-White porcelain. Other colors, however, became popular as well. At the same time as blue, red was used for transfer printing but during most of the nineteenth century blue remained the favorite color. As has been mentioned above, Spode began using other colors such as green, brown, black and grey in 182242; pink and lilac were added later. Other factories used also different shades 37

In her book, The Illustrated Encyclopdia of British Willow Ware, she presents the history of this ware and its many producers. Photos of vessels, their stamps and the dating complete the exhaustive encyclopedia. 38 http://www.thepotteries.org/potters/spode.htm (accessed 21.12.2012). 39 http://www.glamorganantiques.co.uk/sp127.jpg (accessed 21.12.2012). 40 http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum.asp (accessed 21.12.2012). 41 http://www.etsy.com/listing/80791589/small-antique-red-willow-staffordshire? (accessed 23.12.2012). 42 http://spodeceramics.com/pottery/printed-designs/colors (accessed 23.12.2012).

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

131

of green, light (sky) blue, sepia and brown. From 1790 to 1815 potters in Liverpool became specialists in black transfer printing.43 Fragments of many colors can be found in the excavations. The small size of the fragments, usually lacking the manufacturers mark, makes it difficult to attribute them to a specific factory. The large number of patterns which each factory produced, with some produced by more than one factory, makes it additionally difficult to identify the provenance of specific sherds. Type J-TW-PL-3 (Fig. 8.1B: 1–2) Fragment of dish with everted ledge rim decorated with green transfer print. The pattern shows oriental sceneries. This pattern was called Syria and produced among others by Robert Cochran & Co., Verreville Pottery, Glasgow, around 1850.44 The rim decoration associated with that pattern, however, is different. Primavesi Swansea and Cardiff also produced the pattern around 1840,45 and here the rim pattern actually matches our example. The two fragments of our plate do not necessarily belong to the same vessel, but they do belong to the same pattern and were probably made in Wales or Scotland. Suggested dating: around 1850. Comparisons: Blue and White Museum: ref. no 19CN43263.46 Type J-TW-CUP-3 (Fig. 8.1B: 3) Rim and fragment of cup with green transfer print. The outside is decorated with floral and vegetal patterns while the upper part of the inner rim is covered with an arabesque. The second fragment shows a mythological scene (figure of nymph [?] in front of a temple). The inside is covered with florals and arabesque. The pattern could not be identified, but many factories used mythological scenes to decorate their vessels. It could be English. Suggested dating: middle of the eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-TW-PL-4 (Fig. 8.1B: 4) Fragment of plate with upturned ledge rim. It is made of rather thick iron stone china ware and covered with a thick white glaze and brown underglaze transfer print. The entire rim is decorated with a dotted background which leaves out small white crosses. There seems to be a band with geometric decoration between the rim and the body. Possibly of European manufacture. Suggested dating: after 1822. Type J-TW-PL-5 (Fig. 8.1B: 5–6) Two fragments of a plate with ledge rim decorated with black transfer print. The rim is decorated with oriental views (city with mosques and a boat) within decorated medallions. The plate fragment, which might have been from the same vessel, has an oriental harbor scene with people with musical instruments in the foreground. The vessel bears a stamp which reads “London” (Arbel, this volume: cat. 9.1:14). Although Liverpool manufacturers were the specialists in black transfer printing between the years 1790 to 1815, it is certainly possible that London-based manufacturers also produced black transfer printed vessels. Suggested dating: end of eighteenth century or early nineteenth century. Type J-TW-PL-5 (Fig. 8.1B: 7) Fragment of a plate with ledge rim decorated with black transfer print. The rim is decorated with two beaded bands, one at the edge of the rim, the other between the rim and the body. The rim itself is decorated with meanders and a star with four spikes inside four leaves. Possibly of English manufacture. 43

http://www.thepotteries.org/types/transfer_ware.htm (accessed 23.12.2012). http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum.asp?m=Cochran&p=Syria (accessed 23.12.2012). 45 http://www.glamorganantiques.co.uk/sp100.jpg (accessed 23.12.2012). 46 http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum.asp?m=Cochran&p=Syria (accessed 23.12.2012). 44

132

Chapter 8

Suggested dating: end of eighteenth century or early nineteenth century. Type J-TW-PL-5 (Fig. 8.1B: 8) Fragment of a plate with ledge rim decorated with black transfer print. The rim is decorated with round medallions with flowers inside. Rectangular medallions contain a criss-cross pattern with crosses. At the transition between the rim and the body is a garland of lines connected with dots and hanging drops. Possibly of English manufacture. Suggested dating: end of eighteenth century or early nineteenth century. Type J-TW-PL-5/6 (Fig. 8.1B: 9) Fragment of a dish with ledge rim decorated with sepia/black transfer print. The entire bowl is decorated with a Chinoiserie pattern of blossoming cherry trees and other flowers. Between that, on the edge of the rim, a criss-cross pattern with hanging dots. The pattern is traced in black and painted in a light sepia color. It is probably of European, maybe English origin. Suggested dating: end of eighteenth century or early nineteenth century. Type J-TW-PL-6 (Fig. 8.1B: 10) Fragment of base of a saucer decorated with purple transfer print. It is decorated with lotus flowers and shells. The base is outlined with a circle and scales.47 Suggested dating: after 1822. Type J-TW-CUP-6 (Fig. 8.1B: 11) Rim of large cup or maybe sugar pot. The vessel is decorated with light purple transfer print. Large flowers and leaves cover the entire vessel on the outside while the inside remains undecorated. It is possibly of European and maybe English provenance. Suggested dating: after 1822. Type J-TW-PL-3 (Fig. 8.1B: 12) A plate fragment has a green floral pattern and the name of the pattern on the backside: Asiatic Pheasants. This was one of the two most popular pattern during the Victorian era, as popular as the Willow Pattern and is still produced today. It originates in Staffordshire at the beginning of the nineteenth century, but the identity of the actual inventor of the pattern is still being debated. Many factories produced this pattern which consisted in floral patterns on the body with pheasants, butterflies and cartouches of floral bouquets on the rim (see also Arbel, this volume: cat. 9.3:9). It was produced in most colors, the most common being blue (cf. Neale 2005: 39). The stamp here mentions only the pattern without initials of the maker and thus we cannot assign this fragment to a particular factory.48 Suggested dating: after 1822. Blue-and-White Hard Paste Wares (Fig. 8.1C: 1–9) The immense demand of Blue-and-White decorated vessels led to a massive production all over Europe and especially in England. Many patterns were produced by the various factories. In the Worcester factory over 320 patterns have been recorded in the forty years of its existence.49 Many patterns, however, remain

47 For some purple transfer ware vessels see https://www.blueandwhite.com/museum.asp?p=Plum (accessed 27.6. 2020). 48 For more information on the pattern and its history, as well as makers’ marks see http://www.asiaticpheasants.co.uk/ (accessed 27.6.2020). 49 http://www.patricianantiques.com/Worcester%20blue.html (accessed 23.12.2012).

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

133

unrecorded and again, without a factory mark it is not easy to attribute the various fragments to a particular country of origin or factory of production. Type J-TW-BW-PL-1 (Fig. 8.1C: 1) Fragment of plate with ledge rim made of hard paste and decorated with the Wild Rose Pattern on the rim. The color is dark blue. The Wild Rose rim pattern was a very common pattern used in English factories during the first half of the nineteenth century, and was, for example, produced in Staffordshire workshops such as the workshop of Thomas Fell of Newcastle upon Tyne. Suggested dating: around 1825 or 1830. Comparison: A good comparison is the dish produced by Thomas Fell and Co. of Newcastle upon Tyne in around 1835 (Blue and White Museum: ref. no. 19CN2094550). Type J-TW-BW-PL-1 (Fig. 8.1C: 2) Fragment of plate with ledge rim made of hard paste and decorated with the Wild Rose Pattern on the rim. The color is light blue and the pattern is somewhat more naïve than the previous example. During the period of 1830 to 1850 this pattern was produced by many European factories such as the French faience manufacture Creil-Montereau. Examples of it have been found in Damascus (cf. François 2009: fig. 5:38). Petrus Regout, who founded his factory in 1836 in Maastricht, Holland, also decorated his plates with this pattern on the rim (from 1856 until 1909); he was famous for his Blue-and-White transfer printed ware and produced plates with the Willow Pattern among other well-known patterns. And finally the Société Céramique of the Boch brothers produced plates with the same border decoration from 1885–1955 (Cosyns and Bragard 2008: 20–21). Suggested dating: around 1840. Comparison: Patricia Antiques: ref. 20045 Wildrose51; Petrus Regout: Wildrose.52 Type J-TW-BW-PL-2 (Fig. 8.1C: 3) Fragment of deep dish with long ledge rim. It is made of hard paste and decorated with blue transfer printing featuring floral medallions. The background of the rim is covered with blue and a fine floral pattern featuring branches, flowers and buds. The middle of the plate was also decorated. The rim pattern with medallions filled with flowers usually accompanied the Oriental Pattern. This pattern, showing an oriental landscape, was produced by Staffordshire factories from the end of the eighteenth and during the nineteenth century by Ridgway, for example.53 A factory from Leeds, Holbeck and Moor, also produced this pattern as can be seen by several examples from the Blue-and-White Museum54 but which are dated by their backstamp to the beginning of the twentieth century. Suggested dating: end of the eighteenth century or nineteenth century. Comparison: For the rim pattern: Blue and White Museum: ref. no. HM29799 Oriental c 1917.55 Type J-TW-BW-PL-2 (Fig. 8.1C: 4) Fragment of large deep plate (possibly a soup dish) with ledge rim. It is made of hard paste and decorated with dark blue floral painting. The background of the rim is covered with dark blue. Like the previous example, this dish seems to be decorated with the same rim pattern as the one above, and thus maybe was decorated in the center with the Oriental Pattern.

50

http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum.asp (accessed 23.12.2012). http://www.patricianantiques.com/20054%20wildrose.html (accessed 23.12.2012). 52 https://nl.pinterest.com/pin/448671181606925969/ (accessed 27.6.2020). 53 http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum.asp (accessed 12.24.2012) reference RIDG44964. 54 http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum2.asp (accessed 12.24.2012) reference HM29799F. 55 http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum2.asp?p=images/products/HM29799F.jpg&t=H M and Co - Oriental - Plate c1917. 51

134

Chapter 8

Suggested dating: end of the eighteenth century or nineteenth century. Comparison: For the rim pattern: Blue and White Museum: ref. no. HM29799 Oriental c 1917.56 Type J-TW-BW-PL-3 (Fig. 8.1C: 5) Fragment of dish with ledge rim. Made of hard paste, it is decorated with very symmetrical transfer printed pattern. Close to the edge of the rim a band filled with shadowed circles. The main part of the rim is filled with pine cones (?) standing upright. A garland with small leaves connects them. The center of the plate is decorated with an Oriental scene and trees. This pattern, according to the backstamp on the plate, is called Agra. This stamp identifies the plate as being made by J&MP Bell &Co. from Glasgow, Scotland and has been discussed by Arbel (this volume, cat. 9.1:4). This pattern is common and has been found in Jaffa, albeit in small fragments. Dating: between 1850 and 1881. Comparison: Blue and White Museum: ref. no. 19CN43825 pattern Agra.57 Type J-TW-BW-PL-4 (Fig. 8.1C: 6) Fragment of dish with ledge rim. It is made of hard paste and is rather thin. The rim is decorated with a printed transfer pattern in dark blue. Next to the edge of the rim there is a band with criss-cross lines. The rim is filled with flowers and what looks like pineapples or pine cones. The pattern is outlined with a double line towards the body of the dish. It is possibly English. Suggested dating: after 1850. Type J-TW-BW-BL-1 (Fig. 8.1C: 7) Base of bowl decorated with a blue transfer printed pattern. The decoration consists of sailors, one of them wearing a hat, standing on a boat or ship, with sea and vegetation in the background. Shipping and sea patterns were quite common during the eighteenth and nineteenth century probably because they were associated with traveling and commerce. Our pattern could not be identified with certainty. A fragment of bowl with a boat and two sailors has been found in the excavations of the pottery workshops at Portobello, Glasgow. There the pattern is called Canton (Haggarty 2007: Ceramic Resources Disk 6: Box 1, FD.2006:1.16–17). It is not identical with our pattern, but could well be a rendition from a different factory. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Flow Blue (Fig. 8.1D: 1–11) Around 1820 English factories such as those of the Staffordshire area and others started producing Flow Blue, which was a special type of ware where the blue color was blurred to achieve the blurred effect. This effect was achieved by adding a cup of lime or ammonia to the kiln during the glazing process (Neale 2005: 135).58 Flow Blue was also produced in other European porcelain factories such as Petrus Regout & Co. in Holland. Flow Blue was used for transfer printed ware, but also for Sponge Ware or Hand Painted Ware. Type J-TW-FB-PL-1 (Fig. 8.1D: 1) Fragment of plate with ledge rim. Made of hard paste, it is covered with a thick white slip and glazed. The rim is painted with a dark blue flowing line. Plates with Blue Flow rim are sometimes decorated with floral patterns that do not cover the rim as can be seen on those made by Bishop and Stonier in 1896 (Blue and

56

http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum2.asp (accessed 12.24.2012) reference HM29799F. http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum2.asp (accessed 12.24.2012) reference 19CN43825F. 58 https://www.collectorsweekly.com/china-and-dinnerware/flow-blue (accessed 05.07.2020). 57

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

135

White Museum: ref. no. BISTO27891, Pattern Iris59). Our example looks very similar and could thus be of English production. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-TW-FB-PL-4 (Fig. 8.1D: 2) Fragment of base of plate made of hard paste. Inside decorated with luscious floral Chinoiserie pattern. No identification of the pattern was possible, but Chinoiserie patterns were very popular in Europe and especially in England in Blue-and-White and Flow Blue, so it is possible that this plate was produced in England (for a range of patterns see Neale 2005: 81–86). Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-TW-FB-PL-5 (Fig. 8.1D: 3) Fragment of plate with ledge rim. Made of hard paste and covered with a thick white slip, it is decorated with a floral pattern in Flow Blue/Grey. The pattern seems to be similar to the Belmont Pattern made by Weatherby for J.H..Weatherby & Sons from Tunstall and Hanley, Stoke-on-Trent around 1895. Our pattern is not identical and thus cannot be attributed to this factory; however it seems to be of English manufacture. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Comparison: Blue and White Museum: ref. no. WEATH41124.60 Type J-TW-FB-CUP-1 (Fig. 8.1D: 4) Rim of closed vessel decorated with Blue Flow both inside and outside. Inside only a blue band on the rim, which colors the inside light blue. On the outside there seems to be the Pebble decoration used on Carlton Ware produced by Wiltshaw and Robinson in 1899 in Stoke-on-Trent.61 They produced jugs and pitchers where the upper part of the rim was decorated with the Pebble Pattern. Our fragment might well belong to such a pitcher or jug. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Comparison: Blue and White Museum: ref.no. 20544.62 Type J-TW-FB-CUP-2 (Fig. 8.1D: 5) Rim of carinated cup, finely potted and decorated both in and outside with Flow Blue. The outside is decorated with a Chinese pagoda pattern (?) while a floral pattern decorates the part under the rim. Good quality glaze. The pattern seems to be the Geisha Pattern which was produced for example by Ford and Sons at the end of the nineteenth century (Kowalsky and Kowalsky 1999: 488). Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Comparison: RubyLane: item 294312-1286.63 Type J-TW-FB-SAU-2 (Fig. 8.1D: 6) Fragment of saucer which seems to belong to the above mentioned cup. The base is stamped but the stamp is only partial and can be read as Goodwin. The bird with the branch in its beak identifies it as belonging to John Goodwin from Liverpool (cf. Arbel, this volume, cat. No. 9.1:3). The Geisha Pattern which was identified above was not produced by any of the Goodwin factories (cf. Kowalsky and Kowalsky 1999: 418– 420), but they did produce several oriental patterns, of which this could be a fragment. Suggested dating: between 1852 and 1871.

59

http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum2.asp (accessed 24.12.2012) reference BISTO27891. http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum.asp?m=Weatherby&p=Belmont (accessed 24.12.2012). 61 Cf. CarltonWareWorld: History at http://www.carltonwareworld.com/history.htm (accessed 24.12.2012). 62 http://www.blueandwhite.com/museum2.asp (accessed 24.12.2012) reference CARL20544F. 63 http://www.rubylane.com/item/294312-1286/Flow-Blue-Cup-Saucer-Geisha. 60

136

Chapter 8

Type J-TW-FB-3-BOX (Fig. 8.1D: 7) Fragment of grooved rim to hold a lid. The fragment possibly belonged to a sugar box. The vessel is decorated on both sides with Flow Blue Chinoiserie pattern. It is made of hard paste and covered with a good quality glaze and nicely executed pattern. It is maybe of English manufacture. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Flow Blue vessels decorated in Sponge Technique or Free Hand (Fig. 8.1D: 8–11) To produce the decorations in sponge technique, first a stamp of the shape was made. It consisted in a rubber into which the requested shape was cut and after that, this stamp was fixed unto a roulette. With this roulette it was possible to produce on-going patterns, especially on the rim of plates (see Gauvin and Becker 2007: 27). Other vessels combined sponge technique with hand painted decoration. Type J-HP-FB-PL-1 (Fig. 8.1D: 8–9) Fragment of plate with ledge rim. It is made of hard paste and covered with a thick white slip and then glazed with a very good quality glaze. On the edge of the rim there is a blue line and the rim is decorated in Flow Blue technique with a hand-painted branch of leaves, half of them on the rim and the other half on the body. Plates with this type of decoration have been produced by Petrus Regout from Maastricht, Holland. Dating: nineteenth century. Comparison: ICollector: Flow Blue Plates.64 Type J-SPONGE-FB-PL-3 (Fig. 8.1D: 10) Fragment of rim of plate. Made of hard paste and decorated with Flow Blue: leaves and sponge rosettes. Around the edge of the rim there is a blue line. Sponge designs were produced in England and Scotland in the first half of the nineteenth century (Savage and Newman 2000: 270) and were then also used in other factories in Europe, in France as well as in Holland. Suggested dating: first half of the nineteenth century. Type J-SPONGE-FB-PL-1 (Fig. 8.1D: 11) Fragment of dish with ledge rim. Made of hard-paste, the dish is decorated with blue underglaze rhombs applied in sponge technique. A blue line outlines the rim and a double line the inner base in the Chinese manner (see Carswell 2000: 138, ill. 160a, b). The decoration consists of four rhombs grouped together and forming a garland on the rim and in the center of the dish. It could have been produced by a Turkish factory such as Yildiz Porcelain factory which made plates with geometric and floral patterns. This factory was established by Sultan Abdülhamid II in 1890 in Istanbul at the suggestion of the French ambassador M. Paul Cambon. The Turkish market at that time was importing European porcelain from German and French factories and thus it was only a matter of time when the first major local factory would have been founded. The Yildiz factory was opened with the help of French porcelain experts from Sèvres and Limoges. It produced porcelain with two brief interruptions until 1936 when the factory was closed.65 Suggested dating: very late nineteenth century at the earliest. White Glazed Wares (Fig. 8.1E: 1–9) Among the European imports is a group of both hardpaste and soft paste vessels that is entirely glazed white and lack any other decoration. They can, however, be entirely molded with floral (Fig. 8.1E: 7) or geometrical designs (Fig. 8.1E: 8). It is almost impossible to attribute these vessel fragments to any manufacture as the

64 65

http://www.icollector.com/FLOW-BLUE-PLATES_i5167098 (accessed 12.24.2012). http://www.ottomansouvenir.com/Porcelain/Porcelain.htm (accessed 24.12.2012).

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

137

mark is not preserved. As can be seen from the stamps found in Jaffa, many white glazed vessels were made in France (for example, Grigny; see also Arbel, chapter 9, this volume). By 1720 the Staffordshire potters started using a white clay and combined it with fusible rocks so as to produce a white ware which could compete with the Chinese porcelain. These vessels were decorated with low relief and piercing (Savage and Newman 2000). Type J-WW-BL-2A (Fig. 8.1E: 1) Simple bowl with ledge rim and flat base. Looks like a utilitarian mixing bowl or small kitchen mortar for grinding spices. The base has a stamp which reads “Ruwaha Foreign” (for the discussion on this stamp see Arbel, this volume, cat. 9.3:1). Suggested dating: early twentieth century. Type J-WW-PL-2A (Fig. 8.1E: 2) Fragment of soup plate with long ledge rim. The plate is finely potted and the white glaze is of excellent quality, adhering perfectly to the body of the vessel. The bowl is stamped with the mark of the Grigny porcelain factory (see Arbel, this volume, cat. 9.2.23). Several factories under the name of Grigny were producing hard paste and porcelain vessels (for a good overview of the history see the website Musée de Faïences de Grigny.66 Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-WW-PL-2A (Fig. 8.1E: 3) Fragment of soup plate with long ledge rim. The plate is finely potted and the white glaze is of excellent quality, adhering perfectly to the body of the vessel. It is possibly also French like the vessel above. Dating: nineteenth century. Type J-WW-PL-2A (Fig. 8.1E: 4–5) Two fragments of soup bowl with long ledge rim. The glaze is of poor quality and is not totally white but discolored gray (Fig. 8.1E: 4) and beige (Fig. 8.1E: 5). Dating: nineteenth or twentieth century. Type J-WW-BL-2A (Fig. 8.1E: 6) Almost complete small breakfast bowl made of rather thick hard paste. It bears the stamp of the Gien factory (for the stamp see Arbel, this volume, cat. 9.2:9). Dating: after 1875. Type J-WW-BL-2B (Fig. 8.1E: 7–8) Slop bowl with ring base. The bowls are mold made and decorated with acorn leaves and fruits (Fig. 8.1E:6) and has an arabesque pattern (Fig. 8.1E:7). The first one has a stamped B1 on the base, which could be the mark of the pattern of this series. Slop bowls were frequently part of tea sets and would hold the dregs or rinsings (Savage and Newman 2000: 266); they were small to medium-sized bowls without handles. They were probably inspired by Chinese tea bowls (The Art of Chinese Ceramics 2006: 183–184) and have been produced by many important factories, both in England and in Germany, such as Worcester67,68 and Meissen69 for example. The molded examples were very often left plain white but some are decorated additionally with blue over the molded

66

http://www.chateau-de-jarcieu.com/les_faienceries_de_grigny.htm (accessed 27.6.2020). https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/206116 (accessed 27.6.2020). 68 http://www.antiques.com/dealers/34554/Rosecroft-Antiques; item C-1765-70 (accessed 27.6.2020). 69 http://www.carters.com.au/index.cfm/item/160781-a-meissen-slop-bowl-18th-century-decorated-with-a-huntsmanon-ho/ (accessed 24.12.2012). 67

138

Chapter 8

pattern.70 In the German factory of Nymphenburg relief bowls or cups were produced already in the eighteenth century (cf. MB Antique Porcelain & Fine Ware: Nymphenburg Reliefflower Cup 271). Meissen produced plates with intricate relief patterns as early as 1839 (Röntgen 1996: 190–191). Our bowl cannot be assigned to any particular factory, but is certainly of European production. Comparison: although not the same pattern and with a gilded rim this bowl cf. Southstreet Antiques: Fine Regency Slop Bowl.72 Suggested dating: eighteenth century. Type J-WW-CHPOT-2A (Fig. 8.1E: 9) Fragment of chamber pot with flat ledge rim. During the eighteenth century chamber pots became fashionable and thus also the porcelain factories started to produce them. Many of them, like our examples, were plain white, but others had floral decorations73 which could be monochrome or polychrome. The French Utzschneider factory produced chamber pots with floral designs and the script A la mariée (= for the bride).74 These were part of a gift set for the bride that consisted of a washing bowl with a pitcher for the water, a soap box and a brush box75. The friends of the bride would hand her the chamber pot filled with hot chocolate and two or three pieces of biscuits and whipped cream. She then had to drink from the pot amidst loud laughing and shouting of the crowd! From the center of the pot an eye would stare at her! 76 Some of these chamberpots even had a matching lid (cf. Rubylane: item 357005-RL13018777). Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Comparison: Tias.com: Wood & Stone Ironstone Chamberpot.78 Type J-WW-KNOB-2A (Fig. 8.1E: 10) Fragment of lid with simple knob. Glazed with a thick white glaze but badly worn. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Feather Edge Wares (Fig. 8.1F: 1–4) This peculiar ware group was also named Shell Edge Ware. It was mainly produced in England in the Staffordshire and Leeds areas; Wedgewood was producing it on cream ware, soft paste, hard paste and porcelain. It had a molded border decoration “consisting in repeated feathery forms with barbs disposed diagonally to the edge.” (Savage and Newman 2000: 116 and 262). The edge was then colored mainly in blue, but green and red were also common. Fragments of Feather Edge Ware plates have been found in the Verreville glass and pottery manufactory in Glasgow and have been catalogued and made accessible online by George Haggarty (2006: Ceramic Resources Disk 4; 2011: Ceramic Resources Disk 5). The ceramic material recovered there dates mostly from the Kidston and Cochran periods; these were two of the owners of the factory who directed them between the years 1835 and 1869 (2006: 1). Fragments of blue glazed and bisque of Feather Edge Ware have been recorded (Haggarty 2006: Ceramic Resource Disk 4: Box 25). More fragments of blue glazed Feather Edge Ware has been found at Lancefield Quay on the banks of the River Clyde which most probably was a dumping ground in the 1850 for the nearby Verreville pottery (Haggarty 2011: Ceramic Resource Disk 5: Box 4). It seems that there was a precursor to this ware, which is mentioned 70

https://www.mfordcreech.com/First_Period_Worcester_Feather_Molded_Punch_Bowl.html (accessed 27.6.2020). http://www.porcelainbiz.com/porcelain/nymphenburgreliefflowercup2.htm. 72 http://southstreetantiques.com/porcelain_-_english. 73 Cf. Crown Devon Chamber Pot at http://www.tias.com/8731/PictPage/1922756939.html (accessed 24.12.2012). 74 Growing up in France, our family actually had two of these chamber pots, one of them like the one shown here http://www.micmacfrance.com/zoom_img.php?img=images/shop/mid/3632.jpg (accessed 27.6.2020). 75 https://www.expertissim.com/gien-ensemble-toilette-faience-12225222 (accessed 27.6.2020). 76 https://picclick.fr/Ancien-pot-de-la-mari%C3%A9e-en-porcelaine-moulin-261877968293.html (accessed 27.6.2020). 77 https://www.rubylane.com/item/357005-RL130187/Ironstone-China-Chamber-Pot-w-Daisy (accessed 27.6.2020). 78 http://www.tias.com/cgi-bin/rv.fcgi?itemKey=1923129591(accessed 24.12.2012). 71

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

139

by Hayes in his report on the Saraçhane Pottery; there, plates with molded rims glazed green looking like Feather Edge Ware are dated quite early, to the late seventeenth and eighteenth century (Hayes 1992: fig. 107:12.1). Type J-FW-PL-1 (Fig. 8.1F: 1) Two fragments of the same hard paste bowl. It is rather small with an upturned ledge rim. The rim is incised with short lines. The glaze is thick and grayish and not very good in quality. The above mentioned material from Glasgow looks quite similar. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Comparison: Haggarty 2006: Ceramic Resource Disk 4: Box 25. Type J-FW-PL-4 (Fig. 8.1F: 2–3) These are two fragments of two different deep plates with a feather edge decorated rim tinted green. The first one (Fig. 8.1F:2) is made of hard paste and covered with good quality grayish glaze; the rim is decorated with feather edge tinted green with a bluish tint. The second one (Fig. 8.1F:3) is also made of hard paste and the glaze is very white and of very good quality. The rim has a feather edge and is tinted grass green. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Comparisons: Comollo: creamplatter;79 Green Shell Edge Pearlware Plates.80 White Glazed Wares with Color Bands (Fig. 8.1G: 1–3) These are porcelain and hard paste plates which bear two or more colored bands next to the rim and one at the junction of body and rim. The bands are underglaze painted in different colors, mainly blue and red. Some of them have additional molded decorations. Plates, saucers and bowls with colored bands have been found in the excavation at Broomielaw, Glasgow (Haggarty 2011: Ceramic Resources Disk 11: Box 2). Type J-WCB-PL-1A (Fig. 8.1G: 1) Fragment of plate with long ledge rim. It is made of hard paste with a thick good quality white glaze. Two underglaze blue bands, one thick (0.3 cm) and one thin (0.1 cm) next to the rim, with an additional thin one positioned at the transition from rim to body. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-WCB-PL-2A (Fig. 8.1G: 2) Fragment of plate with ledge rim. It is made of rather thick hard paste with a thick good quality white glaze. Two underglaze red bands, one thick (0.4 cm) and one thin (0.1 cm) are painted next to the rim. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-WCB-PL-1B (Fig. 8.1G: 3) Fragment of bowl with short ledge rim. It is made of rather thick hard paste with a thick white glaze. A thin (0.1 cm) blue underglaze line is next to the rim. The rim is decorated with a relief bead pattern. Next to it, but already on the body, are two blue underglaze bands, one 0.6 cm wide, the other 0.1 cm. Beaded bowls and plates were produced, for example, in the Portobello pottery workshops in Glasgow, which were active from 1765 onwards (Haggarty 2007: Ceramic Resource Disk 6: Box 8, no. FD:2006:1.458). Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century.

79 80

http://www.comollo.com/images/creamplatt.jpg (accessed 25.12.2012). http://twipa.blogspot.com/2017/11/ (accessed 27.6.2020).

140

Chapter 8

Grands Déjeuners (Fig. 8.1H:1–8, 10–14) Breakfast Sets and Saucers (Fig. 8.1H: 9, 15–20) A production which was very successful during the eighteenth to early twentieth century was the breakfast set consisting of a tray with a cup and saucer and a small milk pitcher. The entire set is not preserved, but present are matching cup and saucer fragments (Fig. 8.1H:1–4, 13–16). These have been made by all the major European porcelain manufactures and exported widely. They are decorated in a large variety of patterns and can be made either of porcelain or of hard paste. Meissen made porcelain breakfast sets consisting of a tray, two cups and saucers, coffee pot, sugar bowl and milk pitcher (Röntgen 1996: pl. 97). Copeland also made these sets.81 There were also very elaborate breakfast sets like the one exhibited at the Metropolitan Museum of Art which was manufactured by the Sèvres factory.82 An item used in French breakfast culture is the bowl (bol) with little ring base for the morning milk coffee. These bowls are larger than a cup; their average diameter is 14 cm. They are similar to slop bowls. They used to come as a set together with a matching saucer.83 They were produced as porcelain, hard paste or even faience wares by the best French manufactures. One of the major producers was the Sarreguemines factory, which produced the so-called Opaque de Sarreguemines already in the late eighteenth century (cf. Gauvin and Becker 2007: 4–7). Several marks of this factory have been retrieved in the excavation (cf. Arbel, this volume, cat nos. 9.2:1–9.2:7). The vessels of this factory were decorated in free hand painting, the sponge technique or with rouletted decoration which was achieved by applying the pattern with a stamp which was cut into rubber and then fixed unto a roulette so as to be able to produce ongoing patterns, especially on rims of plates (cf. Gauvin and Becker 2007: 27). This way the production process was accelerated and more vessels could be made, but the execution of the decorative pattern was now more accurate than hand painted ones, which became an important factor in the modernization and industrialization of the factory. At the same time, in order to accelerate the production and to be able to make more intricate patterns the stencil technique was used. This technique was being used in Sarreguemines from 1845 on (Gauvin and Becker 2007: 29). These stencils were cut out of thin sheets of metal which were then positioned on the pottery vessel and the cut-out decoration was filled in with paint. In the beginning only the central motif was being made that way while the surrounding patterns were still hand painted. Later on, around 1870, when intricate landscapes became fashionable the stencils also became more complicated. For each color only one stencil could be used (cf. Gauvin and Becker 2007: 29–33). This technique was very long-lived and was used in Sarreguemines until the end of the workshops around World War II (Gauvin and Becker 2007: 31–33). Cups and saucers were produced by other French faienceries and in England, Scotland and Holland as well. They also used the sponge technique and floral patterns. The differences were in the rendition of the floral patterns and the color combination. Type J-GD-BL-1 and Type J-GD-SAU-1 (Fig. 8.1H: 1–2) Fragment of large round bowl with probable ring base (Fig. 8.1H:1). It is made of hard paste and finely potted. The thick glaze is of good quality and the decoration is underglaze and consists of a red line (0.2 cm) under the inner rim and large round blueberries with green leaves connected with red lines. The similar but not matching saucer (Fig. 8.1H: 2) has a ledge rim which is decorated with a red line at the edge of the rim (0.2 cm), the same large blueberries (seen from a different angle) and green leaves. But here the leaves are connected with blue lines. Blueberries are common in the Alsace region and have been a common pattern on porcelain and faience (Henri Gauvin, personal communication, Sarreguemines Passions). The ones on the bowl here were applied in the sponge technique which consisted in applying the color with a sponge in the shape of a blueberry, in this case, or in other shapes to create the pattern. The sponge technique was also used

81

https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/15999/lot/1/ (accessed 28.6.2020). http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/69.193.1-11 (accessed 25.12.2012). 83 http://www.etsy.com/listing/97041899/vintage-french-floral-porcelain-cafe-au?ref=exp_listing (accessed 25.12. 2012). 82

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

141

in England and Scotland during the nineteenth century (Savage and Newman 2000: 270). The shape of the bowl, however, suggests it was produced in France (cf. Gauvin and Becker 2007: 46). Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Comparison for the sponge technique: Gauvin and Becker 2007: 26, 66). Type J-GD-BL-2 and Type J-GD-SAU-2, 2A, 2B (Fig. 8.1H: 3–6) Fragment of large round bowl (Fig. 8.1H: 3) made of thick hard paste and covered with good quality white glaze and underglaze decoration which consists of panels. The upper panel is sunflower yellow with black star shaped flowers (?); the next panel is outlined with a red line (0.3 cm) on top and bottom and filled with purple leaves (?). On the inside there is a red line under the rim (0.2 cm). Several saucers are of the same style but none of them is a perfect match. The first one (Fig. 8.1H: 4) has a ledge rim which is decorated with a red floral pattern between two black lines (0.4 cm next to the rim and 0.3 cm on the body). The body is painted sunflower yellow and has a black decoration. The second (Fig. 8.1H: 5) has an upturned ledge rim which is decorated with a purple floral pattern and black drops between two red lines (0.3 cm each). The body is decorated with a blue pattern on white background. The third (Fig. 8.1H: 6) consists of a ledge rim fragment which is decorated with a purple geometric pattern and a red line (0.4 cm) next to the rim. The colors used on these bowls and saucers (black on yellow, purple and red) can be found in the export plates produced by Sarreguemines (Gauvin and Becker 2007: 211; pl. 52). The bowl published in the same book is a good parallel for the style of our bowl fragment (cf. Gauvin and Becker 2007: 52). The dating of the bowl according to its mark is from the late nineteenth to the early twentieth century. According to Henri Gauvin (Gauvin and Becker 2007), there was a production for the Balkans; in his book he published several plates where one can see vessels decorated with half moon and stars and other patterns that might have been appealing to local buyer in the Balkans (Gauvin and Becker 2007: Planches 51–53). The Balkans in the nineteenth century were still under Ottoman influence which might explain the half moon and star decoration. Also at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century there was a specific production destined for Romania which as a state had been founded in the nineteenth century and formerly had been part of the Ottoman Empire and was called Bessarabia. The plates show “Romanian Motifs” in the center with flowers on the rim (cf. Sarreguemines Passions: Les Roumains de Sarreguemines84). It is thus possible that our fragment was part of a bowl produced for export to the Ottoman Empire. Suggested dating: late nineteenth century. Type J-GD-SAU-2C (Fig. 8.1H: 7) Fragment of saucer with ledge rim. Made of rather thick hard paste with a thick white glaze and decorated with underglaze paint. Two pale red lines outline the rim; on the rim, on white background, is a blue star within a blue semi-circle. They are similar in decoration to the previous group, but differ in paste, and could thus be of a different workshop. Actually the decoration with the half moon and star could be a special decorative motif for the Turkish market. As has been mentioned above the Sarreguemines factories produced for the Balkan market (cf. Fig. 8.1H: 3–6). Suggested dating: late nineteenth century.

84

http://www.sarreguemines-passions.fr/index.php/lespacecollectionneur/archives-cc/133-roumains (accessed 12.25. 2012).

142

Chapter 8

Type J-GD-BL-3 (Fig. 8.1H: 8) Fragment of bowl made of hard paste and decorated with underglaze painted floral pattern in red. A red line decorates the inner and outer rim. The fragment could have possibly belonged to a Sarreguemines bowl, since the red flower pattern was very common in that faiencerie as a rim decoration for plates and also as a decoration on bowls (e.g., Gauvin and Becker 2007: 137: H-66, H-77, H-85). Suggested dating: end of the nineteenth century. Type J-P-SAU-1 (Fig. 8.1H: 9) Fragment of saucer made of hard paste and decorated with underglaze floral pattern in blue and red and green. A red line is on the rim and delimiting the base. On the base a possible underglaze potters’ mark: a line with two dots, one on each side. The saucer shown here does not find a perfect parallel, but again the style and colors would suggest Sarreguemines as its source. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-GD-BL-4 (Fig. 8.1H: 10) Fragment of bowl with ring base; it is made of hard paste and covered with a thick good quality glaze. The painted underglaze decoration consists of a dark green leaf in the center and red flowers and dark green leaves on the exterior. The stamp on the base identifies it as having been made by Creil et Montereau (Arbel, this volume, cat. 9.2:18) which was very active during the nineteenth century. Suggested dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Type J-GD-BL-5 (Fig. 8.1H: 11) Ring base fragment of large bowl made of hard paste and covered with a thick good quality glaze. The body is molded with an arabesque pattern and has additional underglaze painted flowers in blue and red. On the inside there is a red line outlining the base. The base has an impressed triangle (potter’s mark?). It could be a late nineteenth or early twentieth century French production. Similar bowls have been produced by Sarreguemines; they lack the intricate molding, but have a similar floral pattern which is called Décor Mary Lou.85 Suggested dating: late nineteenth century. Type J-GD-BL-4 (Fig. 8.1H: 12) A fragment of large London or Grecian shape cup or bowl probably with ring base. The term Grecian shape was first used by Wedgwood in 1802 in a manuscript book and then in 1846 Staffordshire potter’s price fixing list. The name “London shape” is used in the Spode turner’s shape book from around 1820. It seems that the term “London shape” is the commonly used term for these carinated handleless cups/bowls (cf. Miller 2011: 10–11). It also appears that this type of cup/bowl was mainly produced for the export market and was rarely found in England (2011: 11); it was commonly produced from around 1825 to 1840 (2011: 11). The bowl is made of rather thick hard paste and covered with a good quality white glaze and decorated underglaze with a thick black line under the rim (0.3 cm) and three-petalled blue flowers and green leaves connected with thin red lines. The pattern could not be identified; also it looks quite different in shape and glaze from all the other examples found at the Qishle. The glaze and paint are of very good quality; the decoration is applied in free-hand painting. A bowl similar in shape and somewhat similar in decoration has been found in an excavation in Maryland (Mechanic Street) which is dated 1813–1912.86 Suggested dating: early to mid-nineteenth to early twentieth century. 85

http://sarregueminesque.canalblog.com/archives/2010/05/25/18001545.html (accessed 27.6.2020). http://sarregueminesque.cahttps://www.rubylane.com/item/441414-AMT4678/Spongeware-Rabbitware-IronstonePlate-Adams-Rose?search=1&t=a8471b8e (accessed 27.6.2020).nalblog.com/archives/2010/05/25/18001545.html (accessed 27.6.2020). 86

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

143

Type J-GD-BL-7 and Type J-GD-SAU-7 (Fig. 8.1H: 13–14) Fragment of bowl (Fig. 1H:13). It is finely potted of hard ware and covered with thick good quality glazed. The decoration is underglaze and consists of green leaves and brown lines; the rest of the pattern is missing. The matching saucer (Fig. 8.1H:14) has a ledge rim and the rim is decorated with one red band (0.3cm) and red and blue flowers among green leaves connected with brown lines. The decoration is similar to the Adams’ Rose and/or Queens’ Rose pattern, which was a well-known decorative pattern in the pottery factories of Staffordshire during the nineteenth century.87 The rose style is a continuation of the blowsy tradition developed in the mid to late eighteenth century by European decorators mimicking more expensive enameled porcelains. During the eighteenth century the decoration was accomplished by overglaze enamels which were particularly susceptible to wear from use. In the nineteenth century the decoration was applied underglaze as can be seen in our example (Röntgen 1996: 195–204). Plates with similar flowers on the body were produced in northeastern France, not too far from Sarreguemines, by St. Clément in the commune of Lunéville.88 This manufacture was founded in 1730 by Jacques Chambrette and produces faience ever since. The decoration here consists of flowers spilling out of a basket. The style and color of the flowers and leaves is similar to our example. Thus it is difficult to identify this piece other than that it is of European provenance. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Comparison for the flowers: Villeroy&Boch;89 Cowans Auctions: ItemId 291,90 itemID 281,91 itemID 135,92 Chinons.fr: ancienne assiette St. Clément.93 Type J-SPONGE-BL-3 and Type J-SPONGE-SAU-3 (Fig. 8.1H: 15–16) Fragment of bowl with carination at the bottom (Fig. 8.1H: 15). The bowl is made of finely potted hard ware with thick good quality glaze and underglaze decoration in sponge technique: pale blue half circles under the rim on both sides and a blue line on the rim. The body is decorated with a garland of red flowers with green leaves. The matching saucer (Fig. 8.1H: 16) has a ledge rim which is decorated with the same pattern as the bowl: pale blue half circles and a garland of red flowers with green leaves. This kind of simple decoration, circles, half-circles were accomplished with “stamps” which in the beginning were made of wood and soaked in paint to stamp the vessel with the pattern (Gauvin and Becker 2007: 26 upper two rims of plates). The pattern, however, is not found among the published examples of Sarreguemines and also according to the author of the aforementioned book, Gauvin, it was not a pattern used in that specific faiencerie. The quality of the ware and the glaze as well as the decoration which resembles very much the examples from Sarreguemines would point to a French factory, maybe even one in the region of Alsace not far from Sarreguemines, maybe Lunéville. Cups and saucers with this pattern are very frequent and have been found abundantly in Jaffa.94 Suggested dating: middle to end of nineteenth century.

87

For the design see http://www.rubylane.com/item/6041-PS101213/Adams-Rose-Design-Splatter-Plate (accessed 25.12.2012). 88 http://www.infofaience.com/fr/luneville-hist (accessed 25.12.2012). 89 https://www.rubylane.com/item/200043-RL0005346/Villeroy-Boch-Stick-Spatterware-Luncheon-Plate?search=1 (accessed 28.6.2020). 90 https://www.cowanauctions.com/lot/13176 (accessed 28.6.2020). 91 https://www.cowanauctions.com/lot/18563 (accessed 28.6.2020). 92 https://www.cowanauctions.com/lot/23013 (accessed 28.6.2020). 93 http://www.chinons.fr/voirplus-386-assiette_ancienne_st_clement.html (25.12.2012). 94 Many fragments of saucers with this pattern have been retrieved in the excavations of Malon Eden, Jaffa – the French Hospital and are being published by the author. Unfortunately no pottery count was done during the excavation, but besides blue on white transfer pattern vessels this pattern seems to have been the most frequent pattern on hard paste ware.

144

Chapter 8

Type J-P-SAU-3 (Fig. 8.1H: 17) Fragment of saucer made of hard paste and decorated with underglaze fine green lines and overglaze light purple and yellow bands. Sometimes white porcelain or hard paste vessels with underglaze decoration such as the lines here were further decorated with overglaze patterns, and not necessarily in the factory itself, but by outside painters (cf. Röntgen 1996: 223–231). Although the manufacturer of the saucer could not be identified, it is quite possible that it is of European provenance, maybe English or German. Several fragments of bowls and saucers decorated with colors that recall those used on our saucer have been recovered from a small pit at the Portobello site in Scotland (Haggarty 2007: Ceramic Resources Disk 6: FD.2006:1.374). Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-P-CC-2F (Fig. 8.1H: 18) Fragment of hard paste coffee cup decorated with underglaze paint: green line on rim and medallions outlined in orange with knot. In the center there is a four petalled black flower with four green lines. A fragment of cup found at the Portobello site in Scotland is decorated in a very similar way (Haggarty 2007: Ceramic Resources Disk 6: FD.2006:1.387) Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-SPONGE-CC-1F (Fig. 8.1H: 19) Fragment of hard paste coffee cup with handle decorated in sponge technique: pale blue line on rim and upper inside and blue on handle. Many fragments of vessels decorated in monochrome sponge technique have been recovered from the Portobello pottery site in Scotland (Haggarty 2007: Ceramic Resources Disk 6: Box 8, FD:2006:1.413–421) and also from Lanceville Quay in Verreville Glasgow (Haggarty 2011: Ceramic Resources Disk 5: GM:2006:6:23–35). Suggested dating: middle or late nineteenth century. Type J-P-SAU-4 (Fig. 8.1H: 20) Fragment of barbotine hard paste saucer or small plate with vine leaf decoration glazed bright green on both sides. Around 1860 the first barbotine vessels were produced by Charles-Jean Avisseau, and became very fashionable thereafter (Heugel 2008: 51). Most of the French factories started to produce barbotine wares, among them the Choisy factory which became famous for its plates with vine leaf pattern (2008: 51). The exact parallel to our plate was sold on auction at Christies. It has been dated to the late nineteenth or early twentieth century with no provenance stated. It is thus possible that our example was made in Choisy-le-Roy. Suggested dating: late nineteenth century. Comparison: Christies Porcelain.95 Mocha Ware Bowls (Fig. 8.1J: 1–5) Mocha Ware is a group of pottery which started being produced around 1785 or before in England. The body was decorated with moss-like patterns which were achieved by dabbing the body with a brush which contained the liquid pigment (Savage and Newman 2000: 194). This name comes it seems from the Red Sea port of Mocha, which was known for the export of the Mocha stone.96 Banded Creamware is a type of Mocha Ware with horizontal bands of various colors. It was originally produced in the workshops of Staffordshire; later it was also produced in France (Savage and Newman 2000: 36). Creil and Montereau produced Mocha Ware but probably not the banded variant. Some of the Mocha

95

https://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot/a-set-of-ten-majolica-green-ground-grape-5389459-details.aspx?from =searchresults&intObjectID=5389459 (accessed 28.6.2020). 96 http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/~smorris/edl/mochaware/mochaware.html (accessed 25.12.2012).

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

145

Ware has additional decorations, either rouletted (Fig. 8.1J: 4) or checkered (Fig. 8.1J: 5). These were decorated before firing by mechanically turning the vessel on a lathe to produce the desired design. Type J-MOCHA-BL-1 (Fig. 8.1J: 1) Bowl with ring-base and a large blue band between three brown bands on each side. There is no potters’ mark and as such the identification is not certain. One of the factories which produced Banded Creamware was Sharpe’s Pottery, founded in 1821 by Thomas Sharpe in the South Derbyshire district. It closed in 1967 and is now a Museum.97 Banded Creamware and Mocha Ware seem to have been very popular in Scotland and have been found abundantly in the excavations of the pottery factories of Portobello (Haggarty 2011: Box 5, FD:2006:1.275–371) dated to after 1765. More Banded Creamware has been found at Bellfield Cuttle, Prestonpans, East Lothian also in Scotland (Haggarty 2009: Ceramic Resources Disk 8, Box 7, FD:2007.1.76–78a). A fragment with similar black and wide blue bands is recorded in the digital collection of the Florida Museum of Natural History.98 Suggested dating: late eighteenth to nineteenth century Comparison for pattern: Worth Point: English Mocha Ware blue and black banded bowl.99 Type J-MOCHA-BL-2 (Fig. 8.1J: 2) Fragment of rim of bowl decorated with multiple light blue bands and made of excellent quality pearl ware with a very shiny glaze. Pearlware was first introduced by Josiah Wedgwood in 1779; it was a type of earthenware which included more flint and white clay with some cobalt in the glaze to make it appear bluish (Savage and Newman 2000: 216). In our example one can see that the addition of cobalt gave the white glaze a bluish hue which accentuates the light blue bands. It was possibly made in Scotland in one of the pottery factories mentioned above. Suggested dating: late eighteenth to nineteenth century. Type J-MOCHA-BL-3 (Fig. 8.1J: 3) Fragment of rim of bowl decorated with wide and narrow bands in at least two different colors. This bowl is also made of Pearlware and has a rather shiny glaze. Like the fragment mentioned above, it is possibly of Scottish provenance. Suggested dating: late eighteenth to nineteenth century. Type J-MOCHA-JUG-3A (Fig. 8.1J: 4) Small rim fragment, possibly belonging to a jug (the diameter is only 10 cm). It is decorated with colored bands and a rouletted herringbone pattern. A similar pattern can be found on a vessel found at Morrisons Haven-East Cotham, Scotland (Haggarty 2008: Ceramic Resources Disk 7, Box 19, FD:2008.1.253). A fragment with an identical rim with green herringbone pattern is recorded in the digital collection of the Florida Museum of Natural History.100 Suggested dating: late eighteenth to nineteenth century. Comparison: for the herringbone pattern: Christies Porcelain.101 Type J-MOCHA-BL-2A (Fig. 8.1J: 5) Ring base fragment of large bowl, made of hard paste and covered with a thick good quality glaze. The body is molded in a checker pattern which additionally is glazed pale blue. The checker motif was also used as a 97

http://www.sharpespotterymuseum.org.uk/history.php (accessed 25.12.2012). http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/histarch/gallery_types/individual_display.asp?PhotoID=314 (accessed 4.10.2013). 99 http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/english-mochaware-blue-black-banded-bowl-c1850 (accessed 4.10.2013). 100 http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/histarch/gallery_types/individual_display.asp?PhotoID=305 (accessed 4.10.2013). 101 http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/LargeImage.aspx?image=/lotfinderimages/d44314/d4431440x.jpg (accessed 12.25.2012). 98

146

Chapter 8

rouletted pattern on Banded Mocha Ware around the middle of the nineteenth century as can be seen on a fragment found in Newbigging, Musselburgh, Scotland (Haggarty 2005: Ceramic Resources Disk 1, Illus 108, context U/S, FD2004.1.158) and is dated to the nineteenth and early twentieth century. Two fragments with a similar checker motif are recorded in the digital collection of the Florida Museum of Natural History.102 Suggested dating: nineteenth to early twentieth century. Chinese Wares (Fig. 8.1K: 1–2) In the assemblage of the Qishle few examples of authentic Chinese porcelain were identified. Two fragments of coffee (or tea cups) were found (Fig. 8.3E: 1–2) and are presented here. Type J-CHIN-2 (Fig. 8.1K: 1) Rim fragment of a Gaiwan tea cup with a blue underglaze decoration. Possibly prune blossom pattern. The white is tinted light bluish and there is a wide and a fine blue line under the rim on the inside. A Gaiwan is a traditional three-piece lidded teacup where the lid can be tilted to decant the leaves while pouring the tea into a different cup for consumption.103 Dating: early nineteenth century. Comparison for form: Gotheborg.com Glossary.104 Type J-CHIN-3 (Fig. 8.1K: 2) Fragment of a celadon plate or dish with molded and incised decoration. Celadon was produced in China during the Eastern Han reign in the first century C.E. The glaze consists of iron which is applied as a slip or wash before firing and thus gives the plate a vitreous appearance. It appears in all shades of green. The decorations are molded or incised or applied and include floral and vegetal patterns, animals, dragons and others (Savage and Newman 2000: 67–68). Chinese porcelain was exported as early as the eighth century. It seems that celadon wares reached the coasts of Israel.105 From the twelfth century on celadon was produced massively and exported to the West (Carswell 2000: 107–108). It was a sought after item in the court of the Ottoman sultans and many beautiful pieces are kept in the Topkapı Sarayı Museum in Istanbul; with more than 10,000 pieces it is the most important collection of Chinese porcelain outside China (Türkoğlu 1997: 26–29). It is said that celadon had the property to detect poison in food (1997: 26). Celadon was produced not only in different parts of China but also in Japan, Korea and other places in the Far East. The main difference is the color of the clay which can vary from all shades of green to shades of gray (cf. Carswell 2000: 107–117). Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. 8.2. Glazed Earthen Wares Introduction Besides porcelain and hard or soft paste glazed wares there is a large group of other glazed wares which usually have a body made of red or brown clay and are then painted and/or glazed with colored glazes. I was 102

http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/histarch/gallery_types/individual_display.asp?PhotoID=316 and http://www.flmnh.ufl. edu/histarch/gallery_types/individual_display.asp?PhotoID=317 (accessed 4.10.2013). 103 https://www.teavivre.com/pure-white-porcelain-gaiwan-pitcher.html (accessed 28.6.2020). 104 http://gotheborg.com/glossary/gaiwan.shtml (accessed 25.12.2012). 105 Fragments of celadon ware have been found in Ramla and Tiberias in contexts that are dated to the ninth or tenth century. The ceramic reports of those two excavations are being prepared by the author.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

147

able to distinguish many different types and origins, which not surprisingly point to Turkey and Greece as those countries that have been pottery producers for centuries and have a long history in the production of earthenware. It is also not surprising to find Turkish and Greek pottery in Jaffa, since these two countries were part of the Ottoman Empire and certainly exported items to other provinces of the Empire, of which Jaffa was part.106 Çanakkale Wares (Fig. 8.2A:1–15) Çanakkale is on the Asian coast of the Dardanelles (or Hellespont) at their narrowest point and has been known for its pottery production. In the town of Çanakkale, which actually in Turkish means “the bowlshaped fortress” (çanak means bowl in Turkish) there was an entire quarter called Çanakadika or Tsanakadika. The workshops of Turkish and Greek potters were located in this quarter (cf. François 1994: 382 and Vroom 2003: 180, with a detailed account of the origins of the ware). The vessels were produced mainly by Greek-speaking potters from the eighteenth century until their expulsion in 1922–1923 (Hayes 1992: 268–270). As for the production we also have the accounts of Vital Cuinet, a late nineteenth century French traveler who describes the composition and the production process (cf. François 1994: 382 and Cuinet 1894: 726). The profits derived from this business are aptly described by the eighteenth century British traveler R. Pococke who wrote that the potters “made here a sort of ware like that of Delft, which is exported to the value of fifteen thousand dollars a year” (Pococke 1743–1745: 104). We do not know the exact date when the production of this ware started. According to finds from Malia and Khania on Crete these vessels, mainly deep bowls, can be dated from the second half of the eighteenth to the first half of the nineteenth century (cf. François 1994: 383 and Hahn 1989: 227–229). Çanakkale Wares have been widely used and exported all over the Ottoman Empire and have been reported from various sites in Greece, Turkey, Egypt and even Tunisia (cf. Vroom 2003: 182), but mostly in rather small fragments. Jaffa has a good repertoire of forms and designs, but mainly of open vessels such as plates and bowls.107 The later forms for which Çanakkale is famous, such as jugs and animal figures (cf. for references Vroom 2003: 180), have not been identified in Jaffa except for two fragments of jugs or ewers with applied decorations (Fig. 2A: 14–15). The type most commonly found in Jaffa is the one decorated with a floral pattern (Fig. 8.2A: 1–9). It is painted in black manganese on a white slip and then glazed with a transparent or slightly yellow tinted lead glaze. The ware colors range from light reddish brown (2.5YR 6/4) to light red (2.5YR 6/6 and 10R 6/6) to red (2.5YR 5/6) to yellowish red (5YR 5/6) and reddish yellow (2.5YR 6/6). This type is dated by Hayes according to the stratigraphy in the Saraçhane Cami to the eighteenth century (Hayes 1992: 268). A second type found is the bowl with everted, cut-out foliate rim (Fig. 8.2A: 10–11). These vessels are actually glazed bowls with lids (Fig. 8.2A: 13 is possibly a lid belonging to such a vessel). They are sometimes decorated with overglaze painted floral decoration. They are dated to the late nineteenth or early twentieth century. In the archaeological records this type of bowl has not yet been reported. The bowl with wavy rim (Fig. 8.2A: 12) also belongs to this later stage. Type J-ÇAN-BL-3A (Fig. 8.2A: 1) Bowl with round body, low ring-base and everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. On the inside the vessel is covered with a thick white slip which also covers the rim, both inside and outside. The rim is decorated with two manganese painted bands; then the vessel is glazed with a transparent glaze. Suggested dating: first half of the nineteenth century.

106 107

http://www.larousse.fr/encyclopedie/autre-region/Empire_ottoman/136521 (accessed 25.12.2012). I wish to thank Kayhan Dörtlük, Director of the Kaleiçi Museum in Antalya, who identified the Çanakkale vessels.

148

Chapter 8

Type J-ÇAN-BL-3A (Fig. 8.2A: 2) Bowl with round body, low ring-base and everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. On the inside the bowl is covered with a thick white slip, also covering the rim and spilling unto the exterior of the rim. The rim is decorated with two manganese painted bands and the center with a manganese painted petalled flower. The inside was glazed with a transparent glaze. Suggested dating: first half of the nineteenth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 12.108 Type J-ÇAN-BL-3A (Fig. 8.2A: 3) Bowl with round body, low ring-base and everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. On the inside the bowl is covered with a thick white slip, also covering the rim and spilling unto the exterior of the rim and the body. The rim is decorated with two manganese bands and leaves. The inside is decorated with a stylized flower pattern. The inside is then covered with a transparent glaze. Suggested dating: first half of the nineteenth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 16.109 Type J-ÇAN-BL-3B (Fig. 8.2A: 4) Bowl with round body, low ring-base and everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. On the inside the bowl is covered with a thick white slip, also covering the rim and spilling unto the exterior of the rim and the body. The rim was probably decorated with two manganese bands and the center with a petalled flower; unfortunately the decoration is not clearly visible. The bowl is glazed with a transparent yellowish/ochre glaze. Suggested dating: first half of the nineteenth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 12.110 Type J-ÇAN-BL-3A (Fig. 8.2A: 5) Bowl with round body, low ring-base and everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. On the inside the bowl is covered with a thick white slip, also covering the rim and spilling unto the exterior of the rim and the body. The rim is decorated with two manganese bands and the center with a petalled flower. Unfortunately the central decoration is only partially preserved. The bowl is glazed with a transparent colorless glaze. Suggested dating: eighteenth to first half of nineteenth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 9.111 Type J-ÇAN-BL-3B (Fig. 8.2A: 6) Fragment of bowl with everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. On the inside the bowl is covered with a thick white slip, also covering the rim and spilling unto the exterior of the rim and the body. The rim is decorated with two manganese bands and criss-cross lines. The bowl is glazed with a transparent yellowish/ochre glaze. Suggested dating: first half of nineteenth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 17 ;112 François 2009: Fig. 4: 22; Hayes 1992: pl. 44: 4.

108

http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=12&page=2 (accessed 25.12.2012). http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=16&page=3 (accessed 25.12.2012). 110 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=12&page=2 (accessed 25.12.2012). 111 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=9&page=2 (accessed 25.12.2012). 112 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=17&page=3 (accessed 25.12.2012). 109

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

149

Type J-ÇAN-BL-3B (Fig. 8.2A: 7) Fragment of bowl with everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. On the inside the bowl is covered with a thick white slip, also covering the rim. No decoration is preserved on our fragment. The bowl is glazed with a transparent yellowish/ochre glaze. Suggested dating: first half of nineteenth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 93.113 Type J-ÇAN-BL-3A (Fig. 8.2A: 8) Fragment of ring-base of bowl. On the inside the bowl is covered with a thick white slip. The center is decorated with a petalled flower painted with thick strokes of manganese paint. The bowl is glazed with a transparent colorless glaze. On the inside a small piece of clay is attached from a different bowl; this happens when stacking the bowls one on top of the other in the kiln. On the backside of the base there is a potters’ mark “X” incised before firing, thus excluding the possibility of it to be a mark for “second-choice” vessels since such a mark would have been added after firing. Suggested dating: first half of nineteenth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 11.114 Type J-ÇAN-BL-3A (Fig. 8.2A: 9) Fragment of ring-base of bowl. On the inside the bowl is painted in white and black with strokes and a petalled flower. The bowl is glazed with a transparent colorless glaze. On the inside there is a small piece of clay attached as in the previous bowl discussed above (cf. Fig. 8.2A: 8). Suggested dating: first half of nineteenth century. Comparison: for the decoration: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 11.115 Type J-ÇAN-BL-5C (Fig. 8.2A: 10) Fragment of bowl with everted cut-out foliate rim. The inside of the vessel is covered with a thick white slip and then the vessel is glazed on both sides with a bright green glaze. The base was left unglazed. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth or early twentieth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 76.116 Type J-ÇAN-BL-5D (Fig. 8.2A: 11) Fragment of bowl with everted cut-out foliate rim. Both sides of the vessel are covered with a thick white slip and then glazed on both sides with a dark brown glaze. The base was probably left unglazed. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth or early twentieth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 74.117 Type J-ÇAN-BL-9C (Fig. 8.2A: 12) Bowl with straight rim which is decorated with thumb impressions, giving it a wavy appearance. The interior is slipped white and the rim is painted green under a transparent colorless glaze. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth or early twentieth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kiraç Collection: no. 243.118

113

http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=93&page=13 (accessed 25.12.2012). http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=11&page=2 (accessed 25.12.2012). 115 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=11&page=2 (accessed 25.12.2012). 116 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=76&page=11 (accessed 25.12.2012). 117 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=74&page=11 (accessed 25.12.2012). 118 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=243&page=33 (accessed 25.12.2012). 114

150

Chapter 8

Type J-ÇAN-LID-1C (Fig. 8.2A: 13) Small lid with simple knob and rounded rim with an internal groove. It is covered with a white slip and then glazed with a bright green glaze including the rim and the inner groove. The lid is in addition decorated with white painted leaves over the glaze. The paint has vanished, but the shadow of the leaves remains. Suggested dating: nineteenth or early twentieth century. Comparison: Hayes 1992: pl. 44: 4 (97.2). Type J-ÇAN-JUG-1C (Fig. 8.2A: 14) Fragment of neck of green glazed jug with an applied rosette. It could possibly belong to a jug with two handles and a bulbous body and flat base. There is one example in the Sunan-Inan Kıraç Collection which has the same type of applied rosettes on the body; it is dated to the late nineteenth century.119 Among the vessels published by Hayes from the Saraçhane Mosque is also a jug with applied rosettes and painted decoration (Hayes: 1992: pl. 44: 9). Suggested dating: late nineteenth century. Comparison: Suna-Inan Kıraç Collection no. 26.120 Type J-ÇAN-JUG-1C (Fig. 8.2A: 15) Fragment with applied rosettes. It is covered with a thick white slip and then with a grayish-brown glaze. It possibly belongs to a jug or jar or ewer like those that were produced in Çanakkale at the end of the nineteenth century and the twentieth century. These vessels usually have an elongated body and a low ring-base. Their neck is long and narrow. They do not have any handles. Their body is covered with applied decorations especially on the upper shoulder, where the rosettes are very protruding. Our fragment could be exactly this part of the vessel.121 Suggested dating: end of nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century. Comparison: Sunan-Inan Kıraç Collection no. 33.122 Faience Wares from Grottaglie and/or Corfu (Fig. 8.2B: 1–9) A rather large group of glazed wares from the Qishle has been identified as having been produced in southern Italy and specifically in the famous pottery production village of Grottaglie near Taranto in the region of Apulia. This ware is actually widespread and has been found on various sites in Austria, the Balkans, Greece and Turkey (cf. Vroom 2003: 182). Similar vessels were produced on Corfu; it has been reported that potters from Grottaglie emigrated and settled in Corfu and continued their profession there (cf. Vroom 2003). For example, Angeliki Charitonidou reported that the Apulian potter Vitto Gianfrante opened his pottery workshop on Corfu in the village of Mantouki in 1921. He produced Corfu-Grottaglie wares there, and when he died his son Silvestro took over the production, later moving it from Mantouki to the region of Garitsa (cf. Vroom 2003: 182 with the reference to Charitonidou). It seems that after the Nazis occupied Corfu he left the island with his Greek wife and children and returned to Grottaglie. The vessels from Grottaglie are made of fine clay which is rather hard with few inclusions (probably limestone). The color of the clay ranges from pink (5YR 7/4, 5YR 7/3 and 7.5YR 7/3) to pale yellow (2.5Y 8/4), very pale brown (10YR 7/4 and 10YR 7/3). The vessels are glazed on both sides with an opaque tin added lead glazed. The repertoire of decorations in Jaffa is rather limited: we encounter simple rosettes, lines and hanging drops painted in manganese, brown, light blue, yellow, and light green. 119

http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=26&page=4 (accessed 25.12.2012). http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=26&page=4 (accessed 25.12.2012). 121 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=33&page=5 (accessed 25.12.2012). 122 http://seramik.kaleicimuzesi.com/seramik_en.php?sid=33&page=5 (accessed 25.12.2012). 120

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

151

The material from Jaffa includes deep basins (Fig. 8.2B: 1–4), plates (Fig. 8.2B: 7–8) and shallow dishes with flat base (Fig. 8.2B: 5–6). One plate is glazed with a yellow glaze, but has a decoration which can be found on Grottaglie ware. The material from the Qishle can be dated to the middle of the nineteenth century. The website of the Museum of Grottaglie shows several pieces that are similar to the material that was found in the Qishle and they give vessel names, dating and also describing the use of the vessel (cf. https:// comunegrottaglie.it/museo/it/).123 Type J-GROT-BAS-1 (Fig. 8.2B: 1) Fragment of deep basin with everted upturned rim with hook. Both sides of the vessels are covered with an opaque lead glaze to which tin was added. The transition from rim to body is decorated with a brown band (0.4 cm). The inside of the basin is decorated with pale yellow festoons with hanging light green drops and light blue lines. The center is outlined with a brown line. Dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Comparison for festoon decoration: Vroom 2003: fig. 6:15: W 40.5. Type J-GROT-BAS-2 (Fig. 8.2B: 2) Fragment of deep basin with everted upturned rounded rim. Both sides of the vessels are covered with an opaque lead glaze to which tin was added. The transition from rim to body is decorated with a pale manganese band (0.3 cm). The inside of the basin is decorated with orange festoons with hanging long light green drops and light blue lines. Dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Comparison for festoon decoration and rim shape: Vroom 2003: fig. 6:15: W 40.5. Type J-GROT-BAS-3 (Fig. 8.2B: 3) Fragment of deep basin with everted upturned rounded rim. Both sides of the vessels are covered with an opaque lead glaze to which tin was added. The flat rim is decorated with a brown line in the middle and light blue seven-petaled rosettes and light green leaves. Dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Comparison for rim shape and decoration: Vroom 2003: fig. 6:15: W 40.4; although the brown line is missing and the color of the leaves is yellow ochre. Type J-GROT-BAS-4 (Fig. 8.2B: 4) Fragment of deep basin with everted upturned rounded rim. Both sides of the vessels are covered with an opaque lead glaze to which tin was added. The transition from rim to body is decorated with two pale manganese lines (0.3 cm each). The flat rim is decorated with light blue six-petaled rosettes and manganese eight-petaled flowers (?). The flowers find a good parallel in a basin from the Museum in Grottaglie, where they appear in light blue as a continuous decoration on the rim. Our example is a poor rendition of the design, which might point to an imitation. Moreover the ware is reddish yellow (5YR 7/4), different from the ware of the other vessels, possibly another indication that this vessel was made in Corfu.124 Dating: second half of the nineteenth century. Comparison for rim shape: Vroom 2003: Fig. 6:15: W 40.5. Comparison for decoration: Museo di Grottaglie: scheda oggeto 394.125 Type J-GROT-DISH-1 (Fig. 8.2B: 5) Fragment of shallow dish with everted upturned round rim. Both sides of the vessel are covered with tin added lead glaze. The edge of the rim is decorated with a brown line (0.3 cm) and another brown line (0.2 123

I wish to thank Dott.ssa De Vincentis, Director of the Museo di Grottaglie, for identifying the fragments. Looking at the ware color Dott.ssa De Vincentis confirmed that this could not be a vessel made in Grottaglie. 125 http://www.museogrottaglie.it/schedaoggettox.asp?id=394 (accessed 25.12.2012). 124

152

Chapter 8

cm) is situated at the transition from rim to body. On the rim brown line is a decoration (maybe floral?). The decoration of short lines can be found on a soup tureen of the Museum in Grottaglie, it is dated there to the first half of the nineteenth century.126 Dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Comparison for vessel shape: Vroom 2003: Fig. 6:15: W 40.3. Comparison for the decoration: Museo di Grottaglie: scheda oggeto 393.127 Type J-GROT-DISH-2 (Fig. 8.2B: 6) Fragment of shallow dish with everted upturned round rim. Both sides of the vessel are covered with tin added lead glaze. The edge of the rim is decorated with a pale manganese line (0.2 cm) and another two pale manganese lines (0.2 cm and 0.1 cm respectively) are situated at the transition from rim to body. On the rim are blue four-petaled rosettes. The ware of this vessel is reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) which is possibly an indication that this vessel was made in Corfu.128 Dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Comparison for vessel shape: Vroom 2003: Fig. 6:15: W 40.3. Type J-GROT-PL-1 (Fig. 8.2B: 7) Plate with everted upturned round rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. The edge of the rim is decorated with a brown line (0.3 cm) and another brown line (0.2 cm) is situated at the transition from rim to body. On the rim pale blue six-petaled rosettes. Dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Type J-GROT-PL-2 (Fig. 8.2B: 8) Plate with everted upturned round rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. The edge of the rim is decorated with a brown line (0.3 cm) and another brown line (0.2 cm) is situated at the transition from rim to body. On the rim, pale blue festoon decoration with brown drops. Dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Comparison: Villani, materiali di recupero antichi: no. 16.129 Type J-GROT-PL-3 (Fig. 8.2B: 9) Plate with everted upturned round rim. Covered with tin added yellow lead glaze. The edge of the rim is decorated with a brown line (0.4 cm) and another pale brown line (0.3 cm) is situated at the transition from rim to body. On the rim, brown festoon decoration with orange drops. Dating: middle of the nineteenth century. Comparison for the decoration: Vroom 2003: Fig. 6:15: W 40.3. Didymoteicho-Style Drip-Painted Wares (Fig. 8.2C: 1–8)130 A distinctive group of vessels is very common on Ottoman period sites throughout the region (for example, from excavations in the north of Israel at the site of Shallale (Avissar, Ben-Ephraim and Vincenz 2009: figs. 19: 1–3; 20: 10; 21: 10) and in the Ottoman village at Horvat 'Aqav (Boas 2000: pl. III: 1–4).

126

http://www.museogrottaglie.it/schedaoggettox.asp?id=393 (accessed 25.12.2012). http://www.museogrottaglie.it/schedaoggettox.asp?id=393(accessed 25.12.2012). 128 See note 87. 129 http://www.villanimaterialidirecupero.it/italiano/product.html?idarea=7&idtype=0&iditem=324&novita (accessed 25.12.2012). 127

130

The ware was identified as Didymoteicho ware at the time of this study, the type designation was DID; after it was clear that it is not all from Didymoteicho, it is now called DRIP for drip painted ware.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

153

One of the production centers was a city called Didymoteicho in Thrace (Megaw and Jones 1983: 244– 245, Pls. 29.3–4). This historical city has a long pottery production tradition which starts in the thirteenth– fourteenth century to the seventeenth century and then continues in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (cf. François 1995: 213; Vroom 2003: 184). According to the account of seventeenth century traveller Evliya Çelebi the city had 200 pottery kilns at that time (Bakirtzis 1980: 153). During excavations conducted near the main gate just outside the walls, several kilns were excavated and many kiln wasters were extracted. These finds have been dated to the early nineteenth century (1980: 152–153). Being so common, this group of green or yellow slip painted vessels has been the object of studies by ceramic experts and archaeologists recently (for example François 1995: 203–217). Its distribution is wide and examples have been found all over Greece, as can be seen from a map published by François (1995: 204), in Istanbul (1995: 215), Lebanon (1995: 215) and Egypt (1995: 215). In the citadel of Damascus these vessels have also been reported (François 2009: fig. 5:33). As has been mentioned above the ware is also common in Israel and many examples have been reported from various excavations in Jaffa.131 The ware of these vessels is not very hard and has few limestone inclusions. The color of the ware ranges from light red (2.5YR 6/4 and 2.5YR 6/6) to red (10R 5/6 and 10R 5/8) to reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). There are two colors of glazes: one is bright green and the other ochre yellow. The vessel was first slip-painted and then glazed, which makes the slip-painted decoration appear bright green or ochre yellow and the unslipped part darker. The decorations are free-hand criss-cross patterns dripping from the rim to the interior and not forming a specific pattern, but rather a “dripping“ of colors. It has already been suggested by Vroom and others that this type of pottery was imitated elsewhere (see Vroom 2003: 184). Recent petrological analysis has shown that many examples found in excavations in Jaffa were not produced at Didymoteicho, but in a production center, that mixed salt or brackich water into the clay. The production center has not yet been identified, but could be for example Çanakkale, where such ware was also produced.132 There are two types of bowls or dishes: the first one has a ring-base and the rim is folded over, creating a small flange (Fig. 8.2C: 1–6). This seems to be the more common type and appears both in green and yellow. The second type has an everted ledge rim which ends into a small hook (Fig. 8.2C: 7–8) and seems to appear only in green. In the excavations in Istanbul of the Saraçhane Mosque this type of ware has been found together with Kütahya and Çanakkale wares (see Hayes 1992: 271 and 276, pl. 51h) and has been dated by Hayes to 1860– 1880 (1992: 271). Type J-DRIP-PL-1A (Fig. 8.2C: 1–4) Fragments of bowls with folded rim creating an external flange (Fig. 2C: 1–3) and fragment of ring-base (Fig. 2C: 4). Slip-painted in white and glazed transparent bright green. The outside except the rim is left unglazed. The inside of the bowl shows signs of a tripod used to stack the pottery in the kiln. Dating: nineteenth to early twentieth century. Comparison: François 1995: pls. I–V and VI: 1, 3 lower sherd, 4–5. Type J-DRIP-PL-2A (Fig. 8.2C: 5–6) One large fragment of bowl with folded rim creating an external flange and a small ring-base (Fig. 2C: 5). The second fragment is a folded rim of a bowl (Fig. 2C: 6), slip-painted in white and glazed transparent ochre yellow. The outside except the rim is left unglazed. The inside of the bowl shows signs of a tripod used to stack the pottery in the kiln. 131

They have been found during the excavations of the French Hospital Malon Eden in Jaffa. The ceramic material has been studied by the author and was prepared for publication. 132 Petrological examinations were carried out in 2018 by Anastasia Shapiro of the IAA and were presented by me at the 12th Congress AIECM3 on Medieval and Modern Period Mediterranean Ceramics held in Athens, 21–27th of October 2018. The results of this research will be published in the proceedings of the congress.

154

Chapter 8

Dating: nineteenth to early twentieth century. Comparison: François 1995: pls. I–V. Type J-DRIP-PL-1B (Fig. 8.2C: 7–8) Two fragments belonging to bowls with everted ledge rim ending in a small hook. They are slip painted and glazed with transparent bright green glaze. The outside is left unglazed, although some dripping may occur (Fig. 8.2C: 8). This type of rim is not recorded among the published material, and it is possible that this was produced in some other workshop, maybe in Greece or even in Turkey. Dating: nineteenth to early twentieth century. Other Slip Painted Wares (Fig. 8.2D: 1–5) This group consists of deep bowls which are decorated with slip painted stripes under a colorless glaze (Fig. 8.2D: 1–3) or under a brown transparent glaze (Fig. 8.2D: 4–5). They are probably related to the Didymoteicho ware, but their thick glaze and style suggest that they were made in a different workshop. Type J-SLIP-BL-1A (Fig. 8.2D: 1) Fragmentary bowl with flat base and everted upturned rounded rim with a groove on it. Heavy ware. The body is painted with white slip covering the rim and dripping into the bowl. The interior and rim are covered with a transparent yellow ochre glaze. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-SLIP-BL-1B (Fig. 8.2D: 2) Fragment of bowl with everted rounded ledge rim. The bowl is thinly potted. The body is painted with white slip covering the rim and dripping into the bowl. The interior and rim are covered with a transparent yellow ochre glaze. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-SLIP-BL-1C (Fig. 8.2D: 3) Fragment of bowl with everted slightly pinched ledge rim. Heavy thick ware. The body is painted with white slipped lines on the body. The interior and rim are covered with a transparent glaze. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-SLIP-BL-2B (Fig. 8.2D: 4) Fragment of bowl with everted rounded ledge rim. The bowl is thinly potted. The body is painted with white slipped stripes. The interior and rim are covered with a transparent brown glaze. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-SLIP-BL-2C (Fig. 8.2D: 5) Fragment of bowl with everted slightly pinched ledge rim. Heavy thick ware. The body is painted with white slipped lines on the body. The interior and rim are covered with a transparent brown glaze. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Glazed Cooking Vessels from Vallauris (8.2E: 1–4) Several vessels were identified as cooking vessels and have been identified as having been imported from France. The entire region of Provence, Languedoc, the area of Marseille and down to the Ligurian coast featured pottery workshops of all sizes, some of them lasting until today while others disappeared with

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

155

modernization. Most if not all of the vessels here can be identified as coming from that area of Southern France and actually more specifically from Southern Provence and can be dated to the late nineteenth and twentieth century.133 Two villages among the many which are still active today are Vallauris and Cliousclat. Vallauris has rich clay deposits with a very plastic clay which also has refractory qualities and a high fire resistance. It thus seems natural that the potters of the village started specializing in the production of cooking vessels from very early on. During the fourteenth century the village was depopulated because of the Black Death and then in the sixteenth century Rainier Lascaris, the prior of Lérins, invited seventy families from Genova, among them also potters, to repopulate the village.134 The village specialized in the production of cooking vessels and other utilitarian pottery which was widely exported on the coast and into Italy. The cooking vessels were glazed only on the inside with a lead glaze mainly brown and ochre yellow in color. This glaze is called alquifoux in Vallauris.135 A shipwreck which carried a cargo of Vallauris cooking pots and was stranded in the Dor Lagoon documents the connection and the export of these vessels to the Levant (Kahanov, Cvikel and Wielinski 2012: fig. 9); several of them even had stamps of various potters from Vallauris (2012: fig.10). Type J-VAL-CP-1 (Fig. 8.2E: 1) Fragment of cooking pot with everted ledge rim forming a deep groove inside to hold the lid. It is made of rather thick ware with a thin dark brown glaze which is flaking inside and over the rim. This vessel has straight walls and a flat base, and sometimes two band-handles attached under the rim. The outside of the pot remains unglazed. In Vallauris this type of cooking vessel is called terrine and our vessel appears in the catalogues of the factory as no. 14 with a diameter of 21 cm and a capacity of 2.30 liters (Petrucci 1999: 379). They were used for dishes prepared in the oven or for warming up soups or other dishes on a stove.136 Dating: late nineteenth or early twentieth century. Type J-VAL-CP-2 (Fig. 8.2E: 2) Fragment of open cooking bowl (poëlon) with short everted rim and small external ridge. The pot is made of rather thin ware and covered on the inside and the rim with a thick bright brown glaze. The outside remains unglazed and shows traces of burning. This type is probably made in Vallauris (number 14) with a diameter of 21 cm and a capacity of 2.30 liters (Petrucci 1999: 341) and thus can be dated to the nineteenth or early twentieth century.137 Dating: late nineteenth or early twentieth century. Type J-VAL-CP-3 (Fig. 8.2E: 3) Fragment of open cooking bowl (poëlon) with wishbone handle. The rim is beveled to hold a lid. The inside, the rim and part of the handle are covered with a thick ochre yellow slip and then glazed with a transparent glaze of good quality, which is dark brown on the inside of the vessel. In Vallauris these vessels are called casserole Suisse and were produced since the end of the nineteenth century.138 The origin of the name is unsure, but could mean that the form of the vessel copied Swiss examples (cf. Petrucci 1999: 347). A poëlon of the same type with the same slip and glaze and with a Vallauris stamp belongs to Barbara Wilde residing in Provence and Paris.139

133

Personal communication by François Carrazé, Director of the Musée de la céramique méditerranéenne and archaeologist, who kindly examined the photographs and drawings. 134 http://www.vallauris-golfe-juan.fr/L-histoire-de-la-commune.html?lang=en (accessed 25.12.2012). 135 http://www.vallauris-golfe-juan.fr/Vallauris-cite-d-argile.html?lang=fr (accessed 04.07.2020). 136 The vessel was kindly identified by François Carrazé, see note 132. 137 This was confirmed by François Carrazé. He terms this type of vessel poëlon of the form “Toulouse.” 138 The vessel was kindly identified by François Carrazé. 139 I wish to thank Barbara Wilde for sharing her inventory of cooking utensils with me.

156

Chapter 8

Dating: late nineteenth or early twentieth century. Comparison: Vintage Vallauris Cooking Pot.140 Type J-VAL-CP-4 (Fig. 8.2E: 4–7) Fragments of cooking pots (marmites hautes) with a high body and wide handles with a thumb impression on top. The inside and the rim are slipped either with an ochre-yellow (Fig. 8.1E: 4, 7) or a brown slip (Fig. 8.1E: 5–6) and then glazed with a transparent lead glaze. Our cooking pots could come from Vallauris, where they would correspond to no. 12 (Fig. 8.1E: 4–5) with a capacity of 5 liters; no. 10 (Fig. 8.1E: 6) with a capacity of 8.10 liters or no. 6 (Fig. 8.1E: 7) with a capacity of 13.20 liters (cf. Petrucci 1999: 308). The largest cooking pots have four handles, all of them with a deep thumb impression (1999: 308). The vessels date to the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. Interesting enough, one of our fragments (Fig. 8.1E: 6) has a mending hole with a piece of metal wire still attached to it. One could argue that it was mended being an imported and therefore relatively expensive vessel. Dating: end of the nineteenth and early twentieth century. Comparison: Petrucci 1999: 309–310. Other Glazed Utilitarian Vessels (Fig. 8.2F: 1–5) In this section are included several glazed vessels of utilitarian use such as serving dishes (Fig. 8.2F: 1), basins for serving or washing (Fig. 8.2F: 2–4) and jugs (Fig. 8.2F: 5–6). Their provenance can only be ascertained by petrographic analysis, however these types of vessels were certainly common and produced in different parts of the Mediterranean and probably also locally. Type J-GL-PL-1 (Fig. 8.2F: 1) Fragment of serving dish or plate with a rolled rim. The vessel is covered with a dark brown slip and then with a transparent glaze of very good quality. Suggested dating: late nineteenth or early twentieth century. Type J-GL-CP-1 (Fig. 8.2F: 2) Fragment of open cooking bowl with heavy rim with inner groove to hold a lid. The inside and the rim are glazed with a coarse ochre yellow glaze. The rim is reminiscent of the traditional Moroccan tagine vessel or the Cypriot tawas, which is a clay cooking bowl with a dome-shaped lid.141 These vessels were entirely made of clay and can be painted or glazed. According to François Carrazé our vessel was called a “plat d'équipage" in Provence and could have been used for heating food and not directly for cooking. The black inclusions, which might be volcanic, could point to a provenance from Hérault, Languedoc.142 Suggested dating: end of nineteenth or early twentieth century. Type J-GL-BAS-1 (Fig. 8.2F: 3) Fragment of deep basin with triangular rim and flat base. It is made of heavy ware, finely levigated and covered with a transparent lead glaze which makes the clay appear bright brown. This type of vessel is called conque and was used for almost everything in Provence: from kneading dough, to preparing the meat for sausages, to wash dishes, to soak salted cod and also to bathe babies and anything else one can think of in a household. Many of these vessels were made for the factories of crystallized fruits.143 Some of them (mainly

140

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-vallauris-pottery-cook-pot-with-lid (accessed 25.12.2012). http://fantes.com/tagine.html (accessed 26.12.2012). 142 Personal communication by François Carrazé, based on photographs and drawings. 143 See note 102. 141

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

157

in the southwest), called grésale, have two small handles and a small spout.144 The clay and the glaze would suggest that the vessel was made in France, perhaps in Vallauris.145 Suggested dating: nineteenth or early twentieth century. Comparison: Petrucci 1999: photo 628, a tian which is narrower at the base. Type J-GL-BAS-2A and Type J-GL-BAS-2B (Fig. 8.2F: 4–5) Fragment of deep basin with a rolled rim. Made of heavy, well levigated clay it is covered with a thick beige slip and painted in brush strokes either in light and dark green (Fig. 8.2F: 4) or with dark green (Fig. 8.2F: 5) on the slip. Then it is covered with a transparent lead glaze, resulting in a mottled appearance. This type of basin with a wide flat base is called conque and was produced in Spanish Catalonia during the nineteenth and twentieth century.146 Suggested dating: nineteenth and twentieth century. Comparison: Liveauctioneers: item 5869335.147 Type J-GL-JUG-1 (Fig. 8.2F: 6) Fragment of a pitcher or alcarazas with high slightly flaring neck and round rim. The vessel is slipped with mustard colored slip on the inside and glazed with bright red-brown glaze outside and over the rim. These pitchers were used for carrying water and also for drinking. In Southern France these pitchers are called gargoulettes which apparently comes from Provençal gargouleto which means small pitcher. From the nineteenth century on they were produced all over Southern France, especially in the Valley of Huveaune and the Hérault. They are often slipped and usually have a spherical body with a small ring-base.148 Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-GL-JUG-2 (Fig. 8.2F: 7) Fragment of jug or drinking vessel with short neck and everted rim thickened outside. The outside is glazed with a transparent light brown glaze which spills over the rim inside. It was identified by François Carrazé as a dourgue which is basically a drinking jug, with a basket-handle over the rim, an additional handle and a spout on the body opposite the handle. The tradition of these jugs comes from the Valley of Huveaunne (especially St. Zacharie) and was copied in Vallauris at the end of the nineteenth century (Petrucci 1999: 374). St. Zacharie and Aubagne were two pottery production centers that produced utilitarian pottery of very good quality. St. Zacharie was very productive during the eighteenth century, while Aubagne had its peak period during the early nineteenth century. There were 16 pottery workshops in 1825 and 40 by 1878. At the beginning of the twentieth century a vessel called sifflet was produced in the region. It has a globular body, a basket-handle, an additional handle and a small spout opposite the handle. According to the catalogue of the workshop of Marius Decroix in 1907 these pitchers were for children (cruches d’enfants); I suggest that they were used as feeding-bottles. Apparently they existed in different sizes and had different names (cf. La France: une production très variée: Aubagne149). Dating: nineteenth and early twentieth century. Comparison: Petrucci 1999: 374.

144

See note 102. See note 102. 146 See note 102. 147 http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/5869335 (accessed 25.12.2012). 148 See note 102. 149 http://www.sifflets-en-terre-cuite.org/Html/France/Aubagne.html (accessed 12.26.2011). 145

158

Chapter 8

8.3. Coffee Cups Introduction “The Turks have a drink called Coffee (for they use no wine), so named of a berry as black as soot, and as bitter, (like that black drink which was in use amongst the Lacedaemonians, and perhaps the same), which they sip still off, and sup as warm as they can suffer; they spend much time in those Coffee-houses, which are somewhat like our Ale-houses or Taverns, and there they sit chatting and drinking to drive away the time, and to be merry together, because they find by experience that kind of drink so used helpeth digestion, and procureth alacrity.” (Robert Burton, “Medicines,” Anatomy of Melancholy, 2nd ed., 1632: 520). The most prominent item apart from the smoking pipe found on Ottoman period sites, are the small coffee cups which are still in use until today to drink so-called Turkish coffee. It is worth mentioning briefly the history of coffee production and expansion. It is in the fifteenth century that we have the first information about coffee trees or coffee drinking. They appear in the Sufi monasteries of Yemen (cf. Weinberg and Bealer 2001: 3–4). Coffee use spread rapidly. By the sixteenth century it had reached the other parts of the Muslim world, from where it spread to Italy and the rest of Europe. The same thing happened to coffee as to smoking; it was forbidden by the orthodox imams because it was believed to excite and stimulate the senses and consequently led to unorthodox behavior. But in 1524 Sultan Selim I published a fatwa that coffee was to be allowed (Schneider 2001: 193). The first coffee house opened in Istanbul in 1554 (Kafadar 2002). Discussion Different types of coffee cups have been found in the excavations at the Qishle in Jaffa. They are either made of soft paste, like the Kütahya coffee cups, or of porcelain or hard paste like imported coffee cups from Europe such as Meissen in Germany.

Kütahya Coffee Cups (Fig. 8.3A.1–11) One of the pottery production centers which became famous during the Ottoman period was Kütahya, situated in western Turkey. It was there that Sultan Selim I, after having defeated the Persians in 1514, resettled tile workers from Tabriz. And thus Kütahya became famous not only for its tile production but also for other vessels such as coffee cups (Pasinli and Balaman 1991: 106–107 and Ceramopolis150). Kütahya coffee cups are made of white and rather thin frit ware and are decorated with floral or vegetal patterns in different colors under a transparent glaze. Usually the painted patterns are in black, blue, red and green. Yellow as a color was introduced at the beginning of the eighteenth century, while purple appears only in the second quarter of the eighteenth century (Carswell 1972: 19). Some of them are decorated with blue patterns only, imitating Chinese Blue and White porcelain which was very fashionable at the time. Type J-KÜT-CC-1 (Fig. 8.3A.1) Small cup with straight walls and slightly pinched rim. Decorated with a light blue band with blue criss-cross pattern on whitish slip both on the interior and the exterior, just under the rim. Suggested dating: seventeenth or eighteenth century. Type J-KÜT-CC-1A (Fig. 8.3A.2) Small cup with straight walls and slightly pinched everted rim. Decorated with blue medallions with rosettes. Suggested dating: seventeenth or eighteenth century. 150

http://www.ceramopolis.com/?page_id=2063 (accessed 12.26.2012).

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

159

Type J-KÜT-CC-1B (Fig. 8.3A.3) Fragment of rim of spiral molded cup. It is decorated along the spirals with blue leaf garlands on white slip under transparent glaze and has a pale blue line under the rim. Suggested dating: eighteenth century or probably later (due to the coarse decoration). Type J-KÜT-CC-2 (Fig. 8.3A.4–5) Fragments of cup decorated with vegetal or floral patterns in black, blue, green and red dots. Similar decorations are discussed by Carswell (1972: 19). Suggested dating: late seventeenth or early eighteenth century. Comparison: Carswell 1972: fig. 3. Type J-KÜT-CC-3 (Fig. 8.3A.6–7) Base and rim fragment of two different cups. Both are decorated with black, blue and yellow colored patterns. Suggested dating: early eighteenth century. Comparison: Edelstein and Avissar 1997: 133 and color pl. III: 2 (also decorated in yellow). Type J-KÜT-CC-4 (Fig. 8.3A.8–9) Two rims of cups. The first (Fig. 8.3A: 8) is decorated with blue half-circles under the rim and between the half-circles hanging three blue branches with three purple cherries (?). The second (Fig. 8.3A: 9) is decorated with blue and purple half-circles filled with a blue net pattern. On the body is a pointed medallion (?) outlined in blue and filled in purple. Suggested dating: second half of eighteenth century or probably later (due to the coarse decoration). Type J-KÜT-CC-4A (Fig. 8.3A.10) Small shallow cup with flat rim (to hold lid?). Whitish slip and blue and purple painted medallions on body under transparent glaze. On inner base a flower (?) and a pseudo-Chinese mark. Suggested dating: eighteenth century or later. Type J-KÜT-CC-4 (Fig. 8.3A.11) Base of cup decorated with two blue bands inside and a purple flower in the base. The base is surrounded by a blue line on the exterior. The body is decorated with a geometric “Chinese” pattern in purple and has a potter’s mark on the base. Two lines surround the base inside and one outside like in Chinese prototypes.151 Suggested dating: after second quarter of eighteenth century. Comparison: Carswell 1972: for mark: p. 94 third from bottom. Meissen Coffee Cups (Fig. 8.3B.1–4) After the discovery of porcelain by Johann Friedrich Böttger and Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus, the Elector of Saxony Augustus the Strong founded in 1710 the porcelain factory in the Albrechtsburg at Meissen (Röntgen 1996: Chapter 2). From then on until modern times this porcelain manufacture was and remains one of the most famous in the world.152 Towards the end of the eighteenth century Meissen produced coffee cups – the so-called Türkenbecher – for the Turkish market, many of them not with the crossed-swords mark but with pseudo-Chinese signs on the bottom of the cup (Röntgen 1996: 259). It seems that some commercial agents requested that out of fear that the crossed-swords marks might be mistaken as a Christian symbol (cf. Milwright 2008: 137). A page in

151

For the blue lines around base and center see http://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/chinese-blue-and-white-ceramics (accessed 04.07.2020). 152 http://www.meissen.com/en (accessed 26.12.2012)

160

Chapter 8

the archive of the factory shows different shapes of coffee cups produced by them around 1830 (2008: fig. 567). It is rather complicated to identify “real” Meissen porcelain from excavations, first of all because they are fragmentary and the mark is not always preserved. Moreover the marks have also been faked which makes it even more problematic (cf. Röntgen 1996: 287–300). On the other hand some of the pieces are so characteristic that they can be identified with almost 100% certainty. Type J-M-CC-1A (Fig. 8.3B: 1) Base of cup with blue decoration on white slip. The interior is decorated with a stylized flower while on the exterior there are vertical double lines filled with flower garlands. This kind of cup is a good imitation of Chinese Blue-on-White porcelain.153 There seems to be a star on the base which is probably part of the mark, crossed swords and star below, used by Count Marcolini between 1775 and 1817 while he was the director of the factory (Röntgen 1996: 268, fig. 598). Dating: between 1775 and 1817. Type J-M-CC-1C (Fig. 8.3B: 2) Complete hard paste cup with relief decoration gebrochener Stab on straw-colored background. Otherwise the cup is undecorated and does not bear a potter’s mark. Cups with such a relief decoration have been produced by Meissen around 1750 and are commonly painted with blue on white interior decoration. Dating: around 1750 or a little earlier. Comparison: Sterba 1989: colorplate no. 9; Auktionshaus Bergmann: Kat. Nr. 340.154 Type J-M-CC-2B (Fig. 8.3B: 3–4) Base and rim fragment of small cup, decorated with blue underglaze on white. The patterns in blue are vertical bands, flowers and rosettes and a blue scale pattern under the rim. The red, orange, yellow and green painted decoration is overglazed, consisting of leaves and stylized flowers. These cups imitate the Imari style which in the eighteenth century was very fashionable in Europe and imitated by many porcelain factories. A cup and saucer decorated in this fashion has been reported from the ceramic collection of Dr. Edmund Müller in Beromünster in the canton of Lucerne in Switzerland (Bösch 2004: 29, Abb. 12). It was made by the Zürcher Porzellanmanufaktur which was active from 1763–1790 (2004: 27–34). Recently a fragment with the Meissen crossed swords backstamp was found in Jaffa.155 Suggested dating: late eighteenth century. Comparison: Denhams Auctioneers: 608.156 Type J-M-CC-2C (Fig. 8.3B: 5) Fragment of porcelain cup with spiral molded body with a red painted decoration inside the fluting which was produced by molding. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Comparison: François 2009: fig. 5: 31.

153

http://www.chinese-porcelain-art.com/acatalog/XXL570.jpg (accessed 26.12.2012) http://www.auktion-bergmann.de/ufItemInfo.aspx?a_id=66&i_id=71822&s_id=6103 (accessed 26.12.2012) 155 In the excavation of HaZorfim street: Fig. 13: 2. The material from these excavations have been studied by the author and prepared for publication. 156 https://chinese-porcelain-art.com/articles/anthony-gray-chinese-kangxi-blue-and-white-porcelain/ (accessed 04.07. 2020). 154

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

161

Type J-M-CC-3 (Fig. 8.3B: 6) Fragmentary porcelain cup with chocolate brown exterior and blue band under the rim on white interior. On the inner base is a blue floral pattern. No mark. Meissen produced vessels with brown exterior color and blueon-white interior decoration from 1720 to 1775, and this kind of Koppchen around 1740 (Röntgen 1996: 201, fig. 309). Suggested dating: mid-eighteenth century. Comparison: Sterba 1989: colorplate no. 6 for exterior color. For exterior color: Auktionshaus Bergmann: Kat. Nr. 313.157 For exterior color and interior blue band around rim: Richter und Kafitz Kunstauktionen Archiv: PK039.158 Type J-P-CC-2B (Fig. 8.3B: 7) Rim of porcelain coffee cup decorated with pale blue and red overglaze paint. The porcelain is translucent and very hard and of good quality. Possibly from a European factory. Suggested dating: eighteenth century. Type J-P-CC-2D (Fig. 8.3B: 8) Rim of porcelain coffee cup decorated with yellow, dark and light pink, green and pale blue in overglaze painting. Gold decoration is applied under the interior rim. Polychrome decorated coffee cups have also been produced in various European factories. The technique of gilding was applied after 1770 on porcelain with a technique called the “Meissen technique” (cf. Harris Cohen and Hess 1993: 37). The fragment is possibly a piece of Meissen porcelain or from some other European factory. Suggested dating: after 1770. Type J-P-CC-2E (Fig. 8.3B: 9) Base of small porcelain cup with coral red twig handles. Unfortunately it is unmarked, but twig handles were made, for example, at Capodimonte or in England by Edwin J.D. Bodley at Burslem. He took over the china division of Samuel Alcock's Hill Pottery together with Mr. Diggory in 1870, but by 1876 Bodley was running the factory on his own. It continued to produce quality porcelain until 1892 (cf. A-Z of Stoke-on-Trent Potters: Potters Index: B159). Dating: middle to late nineteenth century. Comparison: LiveAuctioneers: Lot 80;160 Bodley China Cup and Saucer.161 Blue-on-White Porcelain Coffee Cups (Fig. 8.3C: 1–9) Among the large amount of porcelain coffee cups found on sites in Israel and especially in Jaffa, there is one type of cup which is the most common. It is made of rather thick porcelain and decorated with blue underglaze paint both inside and out (Fig. 8.3C:1–4). Some of them have in addition orange and green overglaze decoration inside (Fig. 8.3C: 5) or outside (Fig. 8.3C: 8–9). These cups are decorated in the “Chinese” manner: they have a blue line around the inner and outer base and under the rim on the inside. Sometimes there is a band between blue lines. This band is then filled with floral, vegetal or geometric pattern, exactly like their Chinese prototypes. The cups are decorated with floral patterns such as flowers in a medallion (Fig. 8.3C: 1–4), or flowers with branches with buds and birds (Fig. 8.3C: 5–7). The inside of the bowl usually has

157

http://www.auktion-bergmann.de/ufItemInfo.aspx?a_id=89&i_id=281379&text=+&Katno=0&All=1 (accessed 26.12.2012). 158 https://www.richter-kafitz.de/details/objekt/koppchen-meissen-26-04-2008.html (accessed 04.07.2020). 159 http://www.thepotteries.org/allpotters/123.htm (accessed 26.12.2012). 160 http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/7645576 (accessed 26.12.2012). 161 http://www.thepotteries.org/ware/bodley/index.htm (accessed 04.07.2020).

162

Chapter 8

a more or less stylized flower in the center. Most of these cups do not have manufacture marks and are thus hard to identify. The eighteenth and nineteenth centuries saw an imitation of Chinese porcelain. Small tea or coffee cups were drawn from their Chinese prototype. During the Kangxi period small blue and white cups were made, and it is possible that they were imitated in later periods.162 During the nineteenth century the European porcelain manufacturers produced articles in the Chinese style, among them coffee cups for the Ottoman market, which usually were not marked. It stands to reason that the coffee cups found here were produced in Europe, and possibly in German factories which had excellent relations with the Ottoman Empire. Many German factories produced coffee cups for the Turkish market and it appears that a large percentage of their production during the eighteenth century were of such cups (cf. Rückert 1995: 74). With the help of the Turkish dealer Athanas the Meissen factory closed its first order of 24,000 cups as early as 1730, and later on, through the same dealer, put up an official contract for the yearly purchase of 3,600 dozens (sic!) of these coffee cups (Krieger 1966: 11). Other German and Austrian factories also produced these coffee cups for the Ottoman market and mainly smaller factories relied on this business (1966: 11). Many of these cups were not marked which is easily understood as this was mass-production for a popular market. Type J-CC-1A (Fig. 8.3C: 1–2) Small porcelain coffee cups decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze paint. Cobalt blue was not easy to use and if there are impurities the shade of color changes (Savage and Newman 2000: 79). For example, it can appear as light blue (Fig. 3C: 1) or dark blue (Fig. 3C: 2). No exact parallel has been found, but these cups were possibly made in one of the German factories. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-CC-1A (Fig. 8.3C: 3) Base of small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze paint appearing light blue. It was possibly made in a German factory. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-CC-1A (Fig. 3C: 4) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze paint. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Comparison: The flower in the medallion finds a good parallel in a Meissen cup dated to the middle of the eighteenth century by the backstamp (Auktionshaus Bergmann: Kat. Nr. 310163). Type J-CC-1B (Fig. 8.3C: 5) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted flowers, branches with buds and birds. The inside is also decorated with a flower with branches and buds and overglaze orange flowers and green branches and leaves. Band under the rim is decorated with half-circle pattern and groups of short lines (grass?) between a line and a double line. The base is outlined like in the Chinese prototypes. Coffee cups with birds in blue and white only or with additional polychrome overglaze decoration were produced by the Ansbacher-Bruckberger Manufaktur in Germany during the years 1757 until 1860 (Krieger 1966: 11 and Abb. 8). Some of them even have an imitated Meissen crossed swords backstamp (1966: Abb. 8). Suggested dating: mid-eighteenth and nineteenth century.

162

http://www.chinese-porcelain-art.com/acatalog/XXQ145.jpg (accessed 26.12.2012). http://www.auktion-bergmann.de/ufItemInfo.aspx?a_id=89&i_id=281376&text=koppchen&Katno=0 (accessed 26.12.2012). 163

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

163

Type J-CC-1B (Fig. 8.3C: 6) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted flowers, branches with buds. A band under the rim is decorated with a half-circle pattern between a line and a double line. It is of the same type as above. Suggested dating: mid-eighteenth and nineteenth century. Type J-CC-1B (Fig. 8.3C: 7) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted branches with buds and birds. The band under the inner rim is decorated with a half-circle pattern between a line and a double line. It is of the same type as above. Suggested dating: mid-eighteenth and nineteenth century. Type J-CC-1C (Fig. 8.3C: 8) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted branches with buds. Additional orange flowers are added in overglaze paint. The band under the inner rim is decorated with hanging a half-circle pattern below a line. The base is outlined with several lines. Suggested dating: mid-eighteenth and nineteenth century. Type J-CC-1C (Fig. 8.3C: 9) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted flowers and branches with buds. Additional orange flowers are added in overglaze paint. The band under the inner rim is decorated with a half-circle pattern and groups of short lines between a line and a double line. It is of the same type as above. Suggested dating: mid-eighteenth and nineteenth century. Soft-Paste Blue-on-White Coffee Cups (Fig. 8.3D: 1–6) First variant (Fig. 8.3D:1–4): This variant is very frequent at Ottoman sites in the region and is made of a soft paste of rather thick ware slipped with a thick white slip and then decorated with cobalt blue underglaze painted floral patterns. Again they imitate Chinese prototypes with the blue lines around the base and under the rim both inside and outside. The inner base is also decorated with a blue flower. There is usually no manufacture mark. Second variant (Fig. 8.3D:5–6): This variant is made of thinner soft paste and decorated with a welldrawn outlined flower in the center of the cup and on the outside three flowers. No lines outline the base. The flowers are painted with underglaze cobalt blue (or transfer painted?). They look very much like some of the flowers to be found on European porcelain or soft paste vessels. All the variants seem to imitate Chinese prototypes made of the Blue-and-White family of the Kangxi period (Qing dynasty 1662–1722). Soft-paste vessels have a long tradition in this area, having been produced in Egypt and Syria from the twelfth century on and possibly also in local workshops (Avissar and Stern 2005: 25), and many vessels seem to imitate Chinese Blue-on-White wares (2005: pl. X). It is thus quite possible that these soft-paste cups were produced locally or in a neighboring country such as Syria or Turkey. Soft-Paste Sheet decorated Blue-on-White Coffee Cups (Fig. 8.3D: 7–8) Third variant (Fig. 8.2D: 7): a small cup made of soft paste and decorated on both sides with a small rosette sheet pattern. Fourth variant (Fig. 8.2D: 8): a small cup with blue underglaze decoration. The floral transfer pattern is on the exterior while and arabesque sheet pattern covers the interior.

164

Chapter 8

The sheet pattern is the same technique of transfer printing, but instead of cutting out the single pattern, the entire pattern was used and applied as a sheet to the vessel to be decorated (Savage and Newman 2000: 296). Type J-CC-2A (Fig. 8.3D: 1) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted flower in a medallion. The interior has a stylized flower in the center of the cup. There is a blue line under the rim on the outside and inside and an additional line around the base. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-CC-2A (Fig. 8.3D: 2) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted flower in a medallion. The interior has a stylized flower in the center of the cup. There is a blue line under the rim on the outside and inside and an additional line around the base. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-CC-2A (Fig. 8.3D: 3) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted flower in a medallion. The interior has a stylized flower in the center of the cup. There is a blue line under the rim on the outside and inside and an additional line around the base. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-CC-2A (Fig. 8.3D: 4) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated in the Chinese style with cobalt blue underglaze painted flower in a medallion. The interior has a stylized flower in the center of the cup. There is a blue line under the rim on the outside and inside and an additional line around the base. The entire cup is tinted blue, possibly due to a firing problem with the cobalt blue color (cf. Savage and Newman 2000: 79). Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-CC-3A (Fig. 8.3D: 5) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated with three cobalt blue underglaze printed flowers and a flower in the center of the cup. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-CC-3A (Fig. 8.3D: 6) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated with three cobalt blue underglaze printed flowers and a flower in the center of the cup. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Type J-CC-5A (Fig. 8.3D: 7) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated with cobalt blue underglaze rosette sheet pattern both on the outside and on the inside covering the entire cup. Vessels decorated with sheet decoration have been produced, for example, in Scotland; there they have been found in the excavations at Lancefield Quay on the banks of the River Clyde which in 1850 was almost certainly a dumping ground for the nearby Verreville, Glasgow pottery (Haggarty 2011: Ceramic Resources Disk 5: Box 3, GM:2006:6:79 in blue and GM:2006:6:80 in green). These vessels were also found in the excavations of the Portobello, Edinburgh pottery sites where several workshops were active from around 1765 to the twentieth century (Haggarty 2007: Ceramic Resources Disk

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

165

6: Box 2, FD: 2006:1.139 in blue and green) and moreover at Campbellfield, Scotland (Haggarty 2006: Ceramic Resources Disk 9: Box 2, K:2010.83.29 in black). Suggested dating: late eighteenth and nineteenth century. Type J-CC-5B (Fig. 8.3D: 8) Small porcelain coffee cup decorated with cobalt blue underglaze floral transfer pattern on the outside and on the inside with a sheet transfer pattern with arabesques. Suggested dating: late eighteenth and nineteenth century. Chinese/Asian Cup (Fig. 8.3E: 1) As has been mentioned above, Chinese or other Asian imports are rare in the Qishle excavations (cf. Fig. 8.1K). One fragment of a coffee or tea cup has been identified as being genuinely Chinese. Type J-Chin-1 (Fig. 8.3E: 1) This small cup is made of distinctively pure porcelain, very hard and with the glaze adhering completely to the body. It is slipped white with a slight shade of blue and decorated with the traditional double line under the rim on inside and outside and around the base. During the Qing Dynasty, in the Kangxi period (1662– 1722) tea cups with landscapes have been produced (He Li 2006: 288, fig. 585) while floral decorations were prominent in the Qianlong period (1736–1795) of the same Qing Dynasty (Li He 2006: 291, fig. 596). It is possible that similar cups were produced later as well; without a manufacture mark it is impossible to date this cup more precisely. Suggested dating: eighteenth or nineteenth century. Comparison: Kangxi Teabowl and Saucer164 and Qianglong Teabowl and Saucer.165 8.4. Stoneware Bottles and Tankard Introduction Stoneware was first introduced to England in the late seventeenth century by John Dwight although in Germany it was common already in the Medieval period (Savage and Newman 2000: 275–276). It is made of clay and silica and fired at around 1200 degrees Celsius so that it vitrifies partially and thus becomes impervious to liquids. However, unlike porcelain it is usually opaque and does not need a glaze (Savage and Newman 2000: 275–276). Stoneware was used for the production of bottles: whiskey bottles, soda bottles etc. Some of them have stamps which are discussed by Yoav Arbel (this volume, Chapter 9). Stoneware bottles were also produced for holding other liquids such as seltzer, vinegar and even ink. Stoneware with salt glaze was used to produce tankards. A tankard was a drinking vessel, cylindrical in shape with a single handle and sometimes with a lid (Savage and Newman 2000: 284). Some of them have the measure stamped or engraved on them. They were used for drinking beer and cider and produced in England and Germany. Type J-STONE-BTL-1A (Fig. 8.4: 1) Bottle with elongated body, folded rim and possible flat base. The upper part is glazed with an ochre-yellow transparent glaze, which drips over the rim on the inner side of the vessel. John MacIntyre from Liverpool produced ginger beer and exported it in these bottles; they can be found with the name stamped on them.

164 165

http://www.chinese-porcelain-art.com/acatalog/XXN531.jpg (accessed 27.12.2012). https://d2mpxrrcad19ou.cloudfront.net/item_images/271001/7205583_fullsize.jpg (accessed 27.12.2012).

166

Chapter 8

Besides producing and exporting ginger beer, John MacIntyre was Kirkintilloch’s first aerated water manufacturer. He began his business in 1888 with ‘Lemonade’, ‘Ginger Ale’, ‘Ginger Beer’ and ‘Soda Water’ but by the turn of the century his range included ‘Hot Tom’, ‘Zolakone’ and ‘Football Punch’. Popular with young boys was the ‘Codd’ bottle which incorporated a glass marble in the neck of the bottle to prevent the gas from escaping. After its contents were drunk, the bottle would be broken and the marble released. Nobody asked what would happen to all the broken bottles.166 During excavations in Rutherglen remains of the Caledonian Pottery were excavated. It was one of Glasgow’s great industrial potteries and was established at Garngadhill, in the north of Glasgow, around 1800. Between 1872 and 1874 it moved to Rutherglen and was under the joint ownership of William F. Murray and John MacIntyre under the name of Murray and Co.167 Suggested dating: end of nineteenth and early twentieth century. Comparison: MacIntyre & Co Bottle.168 Type J-STONE-BTL-1B (Fig. 8.4: 2) This bottle has an elongated body, a folded rim with groove and probable flat base. The bottle is glazed with a transparent glaze. Similar to the previous one except for the grooved rim, it was probably used for the same purpose, for ginger beer or similar. It was possibly made by John MacIntyre like the one above. An additional site which yielded hundreds of these bottles was excavated at Newbigging, Musselburgh. Two groups have been found at the site: the first group comes from a stoneware dump and consisted mainly of ginger beer bottles, stouts and jars, while the second group comes from a cellar which contained mainly kiln waster (Haggarty & McIntyre 1996: 957, ill. 13). Suggested dating: end of nineteenth and early twentieth century. Comparison: botellasdecerveza.com.ar type 2B169 and Haggarty 2005: Ceramic Resources Disk 1: FD:2004.1.38 with upper part of bottle slipped yellow. Type J-STONE-BTL-2 (Fig. 8.4: 3) A bottle with flat base and cylindrical body. The neck is long and narrow and the rim is broken. The entire vessel is unevenly slipped dark brown and glazed with a transparent glaze except the base which remains unglazed. Suggested dating: end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century. Type J-STONE-BTL-3 (Fig. 8.4: 4) Fragment of rim of bottle made of stoneware and slipped light brown on both sides and glazed on the outside. It is a fragment of a long bottle produced in Germany for mineral water, the so-called Selters which comes from the mineral springs in Niederselters in the area of the Taunus in Germany. The German physician and botanist Theodorus Tabernaemontanus170 mentioned the curative properties of the spring water of Niederselters in his work Der Neuw Wasserschatz written in 1581. Already in the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century the water was bottled in stoneware bottles and exported. These bottles were called 166

http://rls.org.uk/database/record.php?usi=000-000-001-439-L (accessed 27.12.2012). https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/961182 (accessed 04.07.2020). 168 https://historysmc.pastperfectonline.com/webobject/7CCBA8CC-7EF6-49BA-95F6-111647006146 (accessed 04.07.2020). 169 http://www.botellasdecerveza.com.ar/Fabricas_1/generica2.jpg (accessed 27.12.2012). 170 Jacob Theodor, also known as Tabernaemontanus (named after his home town Bergzabern), was born in 1525 and died in Heidelberg in 1590. He was first mentioned as Hieronymus Bock's student in 1545. Theodor became the personal physician of Count Philipp III. of Nassau-Saarbrücken-Weilburg in 1549 and started studying in Heidelberg in 1562. In 1564 he became the personal physician of the Bishop of Speyer, Marquard von Hattstein, and later the senior physician of the free city Worms. Tabernaemontanus's most important work is Neuwe Kreuterbuch (published in 1588), a sumptuous folio with more than 2300 woodcut illustrations of plants. The author worked on them his whole life. This work was published in several editions and printed until the eighteenth century. 167

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

167

Selterswasserflasche which simple means “bottles of Selters water.” Later on the bottles were stamped with the name of the water. Other German spring water exporters also used stoneware bottles and stamped them with the name of the spring. A bottom of stoneware bottle with the stamp AMSTERDAM could have served as a mineral water bottle (cf. Arbel, this volume, cat. No. 5.1). In the excavations in the city of Lüneburg, many Selterswasserflaschen were found; they are similar to our example although their neck is slightly higher. In that excavation they are dated to the eighteenth century (Kühlborn 2002: 40–41). In an excavation in Bern, Switzerland bottles with the same neck and rim have been found. It appears that after 1879 these bottles were produced on the so-called Stone Ware Bottle Press which pressed the body of the bottle into a cylindrical shape (cf. Adler 2005: 353), which can be seen on the inner side of the bottle (as in our example). The only part of the bottle which was thrown on the potter’s wheel was the rim and the neck (cf. Heege 2009: 65, Abb. 73). Suggested dating: after 1879. Comparison: Heege 2009: Abb. 73. Type J-STONE-BTL-4 (Fig. 8.4: 5) This large bottle (preserved height 22 cm) has a carinated cylindrical body, a short very narrow neck and thick flat rim with a pouring spout. The entire vessel is salt glazed brown. This vessel appears to be a master ink bottle like those produced for the indelible Stephens’ Ink in the middle of the nineteenth century.171 Suggested dating: middle of nineteenth to twentieth century. Comparison: The Fountain Pen Network: September 8th 2009.172 Type J-STONE-TAN-1 (Fig. 8.4: 6) This last fragment consists of a base made of stone ware and salt glazed brown. It is decorated with rouletted bands, one with lines and the other with pellets. It seems to belong to a tankard, possibly from Germany, where beer tankards were heavily decorated items. It possibly belongs to a Bienenkorb-Humpen, which is a tankard in shape of a beehive which was common in Germany and Switzerland after the sixteenth century (cf. Heege 2009: Abb. 20). The fragments found in Schloss Hallwil, Aargau, Switzerland were found in a twentieth century (1914) context but this type seems to have been common already from the sixteenth century on. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth and twentieth century. 8.5. Coarse Wares Introduction “The small objects found were of no great interest … . Most of the pottery was Medieval Arabic of the usual types and so no particular mention is required (Figs. 96–97)” (Yiannis E. Meimaris 1989, pp. 38–39). With such a statement it is no wonder that the coarse ware vessels of the Ottoman period have not properly been studied for a long time. This attitude, however, has changed. Studies on Ottoman period material can be found in excavation reports and articles on various ware and vessel groups are appearing more frequently in the literature. An important research was undertaken by Yigal Israel (2006) who studied the group of so-

171

Of Dr. Stephens from Finchley it is said: “Dr. Henry Stephens was the inventor (in 1832) of the famous “Blue-Black Writing Fluid”, later developed into ink. The family firm manufacturing the ink and various accessories laid the foundations of a considerable family fortune. His son, Henry Charles Stephens, continued the development of the family business. He was a Member of Parliament and during his lifetime fought numerous battles on behalf of local interests. His involvement in local affairs and his nickname “Inky” Stephens have since remained familiar to several generations of Finchley people” http://www.london-northwest.com/sites/Stephens/ (accessed 27.12.2012). 172 http://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/index.php?/topic/122871-fs-stephens-stoneware-ink-bottle-c-1860s/ (accessed 27.12.2012).

168

Chapter 8

called Gaza Ware vessels from Israel for his Ph.D. These vessels, which appear in a characteristic black or dark gray color ware, were very common during the Ottoman period until the twentieth century. Katia Cytryn-Silverman has studied the Islamic period in north Sinai and includes vessels from the Ottoman period (1996). Moreover, Ottoman period Gaza Ware from Be’er Sheva has been published by Yulia Ustinova and Pirhiya Nahshoni (1994). Adrian Boas (2000) studied the finds from the Late Ottoman and Early Zionist settlement at Horvat ‘Eleq (Zichron Yaakov). Richard P. Harper and Denis Pringle worked at the Belmont Castle and came across Ottoman material which was studied by Anthony Grey (2000). The Muslim cemetery in Tell el Hesi yielded important information about material culture of the Ottoman period (Toombs 1995). Coarse wares from Ti’innik, Palestine were studied by G. Ziadeh (1995). An Ottoman and Napoleonic fortress on the Red Sea coast of Egypt called Quseir has been investigated by C. Le Quesne (2007). Ottoman material from Damascus was studied in depth by Véronique François (2002, 2007, 2008, 2009). Not included in this list are smaller reports which appear in journals and local excavation reports of the area. Gaza Ware Vessels (Figs. 8.5A.1–8.5A.5) As has been said above, black or dark gray Gaza Ware has been associated with Ottoman sites, but its origin and first appearance is still disputed. Gibson (1991) ascribes the Gaza Ware from Sataf to the seventeenth century, but other scholars such as Rosen and Goodfriend (1993) go even further and push the date of its appearance to the sixteenth century. Israel (2006) dates it from the seventeenth to the twentieth century. Gaza Ware vessels appear in all shapes that were used in the household and are found at all Ottoman sites. Bowls (Fig. 8.5A.1: 1–5) Bowls appear in three sizes: small (14–16 cm diam.), medium (18–24 cm diam.) and large (26 cm or more). These bowls have different names according to their sizes and to their use, which have been researched and discussed by Israel (2006: 201–206). The small bowls are mainly called zebdyie with a diameter of 14–20 cm, middle sized ones are called kashkul with a diameter of 20–28 cm and the large ones are called leken with a diameter larger than 28 cm (2006: 201–206). It also seems that the zebdyie bowl was the most common bowl used for eating and serving food. Parallels will be stated with each type and the suggested dating refers specifically to the Qishle site, where most of the material is dated from the eighteenth to the early twentieth century. Small Bowls–Zebdyie (Fig. 8.5A.1: 1–3) Type J-GAZA-BL-1A (Fig. 8.5A.1: 1) Bowl with sloping walls and sharply incurved rim which is pinched at the top. The shape of the base is unknown, but it stands to reason that it was flat or a ring-base like in other small size bowls. This zebdyie, with a diameter of 14 cm, is the smallest bowl made of Gaza Ware found at the Qishle. It seems to be a very common bowl form found on many sites with Ottoman occupation levels (Kletter 2004: Fig. 10:1). In Y. Israel’s typology it is a zebdyie sub-type 2 which is dated from 1700 to 1950 (Israel 2006: 206–207). Suggested dating: middle to end of nineteenth century Comparison: Kletter 2004: Fig. 10: 1. Type J-GAZA-BL-1B (Fig. 8.5A.1: 2) Bowl with almost straight walls and an incurved rim which is thickened on the exterior. The base is not preserved, but it stands to reason that it was a ring-base like in the slightly larger example (Fig. 8.5A.1: 3). This is also a small size zebdyie and has a diameter of 14 cm. Our example has a mending hole. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

169

Type J-GAZA-BL-1B (Fig. 8.5A.1: 3) Bowl with almost straight walls and an incurved rim which is thickened on the exterior. The base is a ringbase. This is also a small zebdyie with a slightly larger diameter of 16 cm. It was found together with Vallauris cooking vessels and fragment of Flow Blue plates. These are all dated to the end of the nineteenth century. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-GAZA-BL-1C (Fig. 8.5A.1: 4) Bowl with almost straight walls and an incurved rim which is thickened on the exterior forming a short flange. The base is probably a ring-base like in the smaller examples. This bowl is a middle-sized zebdyie with a diameter of 18 cm. It is similar to Y. Israel’s zebdyie subtype 6 (Israel 2006: 209). Suggested dating: probably end of the nineteenth century. Type J-GAZA-BL-1D (Fig. 8.5A.1: 5) Bowl with sloping walls with an almost straight rim with an exterior flange. Among the small size bowls this is probably the largest with a diameter of 23 cm. It appears in Y. Israel’s report as zebdyie subtype 6 which is also decorated with thumb impressions on the flange (Israel 2006: 208–209). Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Comparison: Boas 2000: pl. II: 9–10. Mortars (Fig. 8.5A.1: 6–8) Gaza Ware mortars copy mortars made of brass or porcelain or earthenware too expensive to buy for the common household (Israel 2006: 197). The mortars were used to grind coffee beans, spices and other ingredients used in the production of medicines. They have the shape and dimensions of a bowl but usually they have multiple handles. Y. Israel distinguishes four subtypes, in different sizes (Israel 2006: 197–199). Type J-GAZA-MRT-1 (Fig. 8.5A.1: 6–8) This mortar has the shape of a round bowl with hammerhead rim and a ring-base. The most striking characteristic of this mortar is its vertical handles. Its diameter ranges from 20 to 24 cm. It corresponds to Y. Israel’s subtype 3 with eight handles (Israel 2006: 198). Suggested dating: middle of nineteenth century. Basins or Kneading and Mixing Bowls (Fig. 8.5A.2: 1–4) This vessel, usually called a basin, is actually a mixing and kneading bowl used during the preparation of bread (cf. Israel 2006: 183). They are rather large and range from 40 to over 50 cm diameter. Their main shape is a large deep bowl with a ledge or arched rim. They are usually undecorated, but can have incised decorations on the rim (Fig. 8.5A.2: 2, 4) and the body (Fig. 8.5A.2: 2, 4) or even painted decorations on the body (Fig. 8.5A.2: 3). Type J-GAZA-BAS-1 (Fig. 8.5A.2: 1) Fragment of a deep bowl with an arched rim with one ridge. The diameter of this vessel is around 40 cm. They have a ring base. Our example corresponds to Y. Israel’s mixing bowl type 1 (Israel 2006: Fig. 184) Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-GAZA-BAS-2B (Fig. 8.5A.2: 2) Fragment of a deep bowl with an arched rim with two ridges and a ring base. The diameter of this vessel is around 50 cm. Our example is decorated with incised nicks on the rim and the body. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century.

170

Chapter 8

Comparison: Kletter 2004: fig. 10: 2. Type J-GAZA-BAS-2C (Fig. 8.5A.2: 3) Fragment of a deep bowl with an arched rim with two ridges. The diameter of this vessel is around 45 cm. Our example is decorated with white painted circles on the body. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-GAZA-BAS-3B (Fig. 8.5A.2: 4) Fragment of a deep bowl with an arched rim with three ridges. The diameter of this vessel is around 43 cm. The rim and body are decorated with incised nicks. It is probably related to Y. Israel’s mixing bowl type 4 (Israel 2006: Fig. 191). Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Burnyie: Jars for the Storage of Leben-cheese (Fig. 8.5A.3: 1–2) These jars, which are shaped like a cooking pot, with an ovoid body and a ledge rim with a deep groove to hold a lid, were used especially for the storage of leben, cheese made of fermented milk (cf. Israel 2006: 231). Type J-GAZA-JR-1A (Fig. 8.5A.3: 1) Fragments of burnyie with an ovoid body and everted rim with groove. Two loop-handles are drawn from right under the rim to the body. This type corresponds to Y. Israel’s burnyie subtype 1 (Israel 2006: 234) Suggested dating: middle of nineteenth century. Type J-GAZA-JR-1B (Fig. 8.5A.3: 2) Fragment of burnyie with an ovoid body with a slight carination where the handles are positioned. The handles are drawn from under the rim to the carination. This type corresponds to Y. Israel’s burnyie subtype 3 (Israel 2006: 235). Suggested dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century. Sabil – Large Jar (Fig. 8.5A.3: 3) Large jar with two large coarse handles used for carrying water. A rope was drawn from the handles so that it was easier to carry (cf. Israel 2006: 114). Type J-GAZA-JR-2 (Fig. 8.5A.3: 3) Fragment of large jar with probable ovoid body. The rim is inverted and beveled. Two coarse handles are drawn from the rim to the upper body. It is probably a fragment of a sabil which was used for carrying water (Israel 2006: 114 and Fig. 79). Suggested dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century. Jarra – Large Jar (Fig. 8.5A.3: 4) This unusually large jar with a mouth diameter of 16 cm belongs to the group of the so-called jarra which have a long neck and a bag-shaped body with a rounded base. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck to the upper part of the body. The neck can be decorated with pie-crust bands and thumb impressions. These jars exist in many variations (cf. Israel 2006: 86–106). They were used mainly for carrying water.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

171

Type J-GAZA-JR-4 (Fig. 8.5A.3: 4) Fragment of jarra with high wide neck which is decorated with pie-crust decorated band and combed straight and wavy lines on the body. The rim is folded and forms a flange. Dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century. Comparison: Boas 2000: pl. II: 1–5. Pouring Vessels – Kuz (Fig. 8.5A.4: 1–4) The kuz is a one-handled jug which was used for pouring liquids. The neck is flaring to make pouring easier. The jug has an ovoid body and a ring-base or a flat base. Some of them have spouts and others have a filter in the neck to keep insects out of the liquid. They can be decorated or undecorated. Type J-GAZA-JUG-1A (Fig. 8.5A.4: 1) Fragment of kuz with flaring neck and everted rounded rim. A filter is positioned at the bottom of the neck. One handle is drawn from the bottom of the neck to the upper part of the body. This example is undecorated. Suggested dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century. Comparison: Boas 2000: pl. I: 12. Type J-GAZA-JUG-1B (Fig. 8.5A.4: 2) Fragment of kuz with flaring neck and everted rounded rim. A filter is positioned at the bottom of the neck. One handle is drawn from the bottom of the neck to the upper part of the body. The neck and probably also the body are decorated with yellowish slip painted decoration consisting of lines. Suggested dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century. Type J-GAZA-JUG-1C Fig. 8.5A.4: 3 Fragment of kuz with flaring neck. It seems to be similar to the two vessels discussed above. The neck is decorated with incised decorations which were made with a sharp pointed tool. Suggested dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century. Type J-GAZA-JUG-2A (Fig. 8.5A.4: 4) Fragment of kuz with flaring neck and triangular rim. One handle is drawn from the bottom of the neck to the upper part of the body. Undecorated. Suggested dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century. Comparison: Grey 2000: fig. 6:2: 49. Flask – Kuraz (Fig. 8.5A.4: 5) This vessel is a jug with an ovoid body on a ring-base. It has a straight neck and two handles positioned at the bottom of the neck. It lacks the long spout for drinking, characteristic of the ibrik (see below) but has a small spout on the rim. Type J-GAZA-JUG-3A (Fig. 8.5A.4: 5) Fragment of kuraz with slightly bulging neck and inverted neck with inner flange. Two handles are positioned at the bottom of the neck. Suggested dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century.

172

Chapter 8

Drinking Jug – Ibrik (Fig. 8.5A.4: 6–11) The best known vessel of the Ottoman period is the drinking jug, the ibrik or brik (Israel 2006: 146–161). It is a jug with an ovoid body, a ring-base and a long neck. Its most distinctive feature are the two handles drawn from the base of the neck to the upper body. Next to one of the handles is a long spout which was used for pouring or/and drinking. These jugs can be traced back to the Crusader and Mamluk periods (Avissar and Stern 2005: Figs. 45: 4–5, 9; 46: 2). They appear in various shapes and with painted decorations. Type J-GAZA-JUG-4A (Fig. 8.5A.4: 6) Fragment of ibrik with long stepped neck ending in everted thickened rim. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck to the upper body. Suggested dating: eighteenth and nineteenth century. Comparison: Ustinova and Nahshoni 1994: fig. 14: 9. Type J-GAZA-JUG-5A (Fig. 8.5A.4: 7) Fragment of ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in everted externally thickened rim. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck to the upper body. Related to Y. Israel’s ibrik subtype 6 (Israel 2006: Fig. 136). Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Comparison: Boas 2000: pl.I: 14. Type J-GAZA-JUG-6A (Fig. 8.5A.4: 8) Fragment of ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in inverted externally thickened rim. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck to the upper body. Suggested dating: nineteenth century. Type J-GAZA-JUG-7A (Fig. 8.5A.4: 9) Ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in internally beveled rim. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck to the upper body. One handle has also a long drinking spout. Related to Y. Israel’s ibrik subtype 4 (Israel 2006: Fig. 134). Suggested dating: eighteenth to twentieth century. Type J-GAZA-JUG (Fig. 8.5A.4: 10–11) These two fragmentary ibrik could belong to any of the above described types since all of them have the same ovoid body with a ring-base. The difference is in the neck and rim shape. Suggested dating: nineteenth to twentieth century. Lamps (Fig. 8.5A.5: 1–4) During the Ottoman period there was still the need for a cheap lamp and thus the clay oil lamp remained in production. It is a basic open saucer lamp with a pinched end to hold the wick. These lamps were also produced in Gaza ware (Fig. 8.5A.5: 1–2); Israel mentions them in his research (2006: 146–251). They were also made of coarse ware (Fig. 8.5A.5: 3–4). Suggested dating: eighteenth to twentieth century. Comparison: Kletter 2004: fig. 10:4.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

173

Other Coarse Ware Vessels (Figs. 8.5B.1 and 8.5B.2) This section includes all vessels that are not made of the characteristic Black Gaza Ware. They are made of brown, red, or buff colored clay. The shapes include bowls, storage vessels, jars, jugs and bottles. Parallels are added for each type where they have been found and the suggested dating refers specifically to the Qishle where most of the material dates from the eighteenth to early twentieth century. Type J-BL-1C (Fig. 8.5B.1: 1) Bowl with sharply inverted rim and ring-base. The shape is similar to the bowl made of Black Gaza Ware (Fig. 6A1: 1), but this vessel is made of pink ware. Suggested dating: nineteenth and twentieth century. Type J-CP-2B (Fig. 8.5B.1: 2) Fragment of neckless cooking pot. The shape of the vessel continues the Mamluk tradition of handmade cooking vessels, but now most of the vessels are holemouth with a rolled rim. It is decorated with incised circles forming a floral pattern. Suggested dating: nineteenth and twentieth century. Type J-JR-2 (Fig. 8.5B.1: 3) Fragment of jar with carination on the upper part of the body. The rim is everted and rounded. A band of incised nicks decorates the jar at the point of carination. The entire vessel is slipped white and the band of nicks is slipped yellowish. Suggested dating: nineteenth and twentieth century. Type J-JR-3 (Fig. 8.5B.1: 4) Fragment of large jar with inverted rounded rim. The upper body is decorated with a band with a pie-crust decoration. Suggested dating: nineteenth and twentieth century. Type J-JR-4 (Fig. 8.5B.1: 5) Fragment of very large jar or pithos with inverted upper part of body with multiple protruding grooves on body forming steps. The vessel is covered with a thick whitish slip. Suggested dating: nineteenth and twentieth century. Type J-JR-5 (Fig. 8.5B.2: 1) Fragment of jar with bulging neck and slightly everted rounded rim. Two handles are drawn from the bottom of the neck to the upper body. The body seems to be ovoid and has incised lines. It is made of pink ware and similar in shape to Y. Israel’s jarra type 3 made of Gaza Ware (cf. Israel 2006: Fig. 55). Suggested dating: nineteenth and twentieth century. Type J-JUG-1A (Fig. 8.5B.2: 2) Jug with a long and narrow neck ending in an everted rounded rim. It is made of pink ware. It could be part of what is called a sherbe, which is a drinking jug without handles and without a spout (for the description of this vessel cf. Israel 2006: 136–140). Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century.

174

Chapter 8

Type J-JUG-1B (Fig. 8.5B.2: 3) Jug with a long and narrow neck ending in an everted rim. It is made of buff ware. The base is a low ringbase. There is a strainer in the neck. It may be identified as a sherbe, the drinking jug without handles. This example is decorated with combed zigzag lines and wavy lines forming an intricate pattern on the entire vessel. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Lids (Fig. 8.5B.3: 1–7) For obvious reasons vessels need lids to cover them. Several lids made of coarse ware have been found and they are all of the same basic type: a small saucer with everted walls and a flat base. Such lids have been used for centuries and can be traced back to earlier periods. Israel has defined three types: all of them have the shape of a small bowl but the first one has a central handle, while the second one has a thick base which can be used as a handle. The third type is a small saucer with a flat base (Israel 2006: 244–245). Type J-LID-1A (Fig. 8.5B.3: 1–2) This small saucer has flaring walls ending in a sharply inverted rim. The base is flat, or distorted since the lids are handmade. Suggested dating: eighteenth to twentieth century. Type J-LID-1B (Fig. 8.5B.3: 3) This small saucer is handmade with flaring walls ending in a slightly pinched rim. The base is flat and decorated with an incised “X”. Suggested dating: eighteenth to twentieth century. Type J-LID-1C (Fig. 8.5B.3: 4–6) This small saucer is handmade and rather coarse with flaring walls ending in an everted rim. The base is flat, or distorted since the lids are handmade. Suggested dating: eighteenth to twentieth century. Fig. 8.5B.3: 7 Lid or stopper made of ring-base of green glazed soft paste vessel, maybe a plate. Suggested dating: eighteenth to twentieth century. 8.6. Smoking Pipes, Narghile and Smoking Implements Introduction As may be read in the travel journal of Master Thomas Ballam, pipe smoking was practiced in the Levant as early as 1599 (Bent 1893: 49, note 1). It was introduced into Egypt between 1601 and 1603, became common in Turkey by 1605, and spread rapidly through the Ottoman Empire. Although in the beginning smoking was practiced strictly for medical reasons, people soon became addicted to it and in 1612 it was prohibited by Sultan Ahmet I. A severe prohibition was set by Murat IV in 1633 and many people were executed as a result. In spite of the prohibition, several districts of Istanbul were completely burnt down in 1637 due to a burning pipe; one has to bear in mind that the houses during the Ottoman period were built mostly of wood and as such would easily catch fire. In 1646 Sultan Mehmet IV lifted the prohibitions on smoking because the government saw in it an important source of income. From then on the use of tobacco and smoking spread rapidly and as a consequence pipe production centers were opened in many towns. The town of Lüleburgaz got its name from the numerous pipe workshops situated there. Other workshops were situated in Istanbul,

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

175

Sivas, Konya, Kayseri. Diyarbakır, Kütahya and Iznik (Bakla 2007: 363). By the middle of the eighteenth century, pipe-smoking was in fashion for men and women regardless of age or social position. Aside for pipe smoking another fashion that soon became popular was smoking of the narghile which was introduced already in the reign of Murat IV. A special tobacco called tumbak was smoked in these water pipes (Bakla 2007: 362). As an outcome of westernization, by the twentieth century cigarettes had become fashionable and pipe smoking declined. The last pipe workshop, or atölye, which was owned by Omer Usta, closed in 1928. The atölye were owned by a master pipe maker (usta) who employed several workers who would have different tasks in the pipe production. There were the apprentices who would prepare the clay and fashion the pipe into the mold, the carvers who would hollow the pipe, the engraver and the gilder (see below). Pipe smoking disappeared while narghile smoking continues to the present. The smoking pipes that were in use across Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean, the so-called chibouks, are small, attractive items with miniature decorations, comprising a bowl with a separate stem. They are found at all archaeological sites with Ottoman occupation layers. Until recently very few were found in clearly dated contexts. Pipes have been recovered as far distant as Russia, in tombs dated to the nineteenth century (Stančeva 1975/76: 129–137). Most smoking pipes are in private collections, and have rarely attracted the interest of archaeologists. But in recent years the study of Ottoman pipes has begun to attract scholars. Major studies have been conducted on pipes from Athens and Corinth (Robinson 1983; 1985) and Saraçhane in Istanbul (Hayes 1980; 1992: 391–395). An important study on the pipes from Tophane, Istanbul was published by Erdinç Bakla (2007). This study dealt not only with pipes, but with the entire pipe smoking and coffee drinking culture of the Ottoman period. Kocabaş (1963) analyzed pipes and the Tophane workshops. Previously in Israel, Ottoman pipes were included in excavation reports as isolated finds. So, for example, Avissar has published a number of pipes from Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996) and pipes have been mentioned from Akko (Edelstein and Avissar 1997). Nowadays pipes are well studied and researched; see especially Uzi Baram’s Ph.D. dissertation (Baram 1996) and his study in connection with coffee cups (Baram 1999). Smoking pipes from Jerusalem have been studied by St John Simpson (2008); the same scholar has studied the pipes from Tell Jezreel (2002). A study has been published on the pipes of Banias in northern Israel, stating that it was a production center for pipes during the Ottoman period (Dekkel 2008: 117–118). Pipes have been found in shipwrecks such as the Sharm al-Sheikh shipwreck dated to the eighteenth century (Raban 1971), and from the Red Sea shipwreck at the Sadana island (Ward 2002). Clay Tobacco Pipes Clay pipes were used for smoking tobacco; traces of tobacco have actually been found on some examples. Some pipes bear the inscription dûhane, which means tobacco in Turkish (Hayes 1992: 391). The Turkish pipe called lüle consists of a bowl in various shapes with a short stem into which the long reed or metal tube was inserted for smoking. This reed is called çubuk or chibouk and could be made of different suitable woods. Jasmine was the favored wood since it is said to absorb nicotine (Bakla 2007: 367), but rose, cherry and hazelnut wood were also used. At the end of the reed is the mouthpiece, which could be of semi-precious stone such as amber. These mouthpieces are rarely recovered in archaeological excavations and the reed tube is usually not preserved. The part that is usually found in excavations is the bowl. It may be made of metal, wood, stone or clay, clay being the preferred material. The bowl was usually mold-made in two parts, dried to leather hardness and then the shank opening and the bowl were carved out. After applying a slip to the surface, the bowl would be decorated with carved, stamped, rouletted, incised or inlaid decorations. Some decorations may have been carved into the molds. The finish could be another layer of slip, polishing of the surface, burnishing, gilding or even glazing. Then the pipe was ready for final firing. The decorations on the pipes are varied and include geometric, floral and vegetal designs such as triangles, circles, leaves, palmettes, rosettes and other stylized flowers. Even inscriptions were used to decorate the

176

Chapter 8

pipes, usually appearing around the shank, as can be seen in a pipe from Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996: photos XVI.5–8: no. 4), an example from Ramle (Vincenz 2011: fig. 21) and another from the excavations at the Western Wall Plaza in Jerusalem (Vincenz, forthcoming d). The inscriptions may consist of a blessing or a citation from a poem. Potter’s marks such as rosettes or initials are found on later pipes, when some artists specialized in the making of pipes, such as the famous Tophane pipe-makers (Kocabaş 1963:12–13). Tobacco Pipes from the Qishle Approximately 350 complete and fragmentary Ottoman pipes have been found in the Qishle excavations. Occupation layers of the seventeenth century are absent, and thus earlier pipes dated to the seventeenth century have not been identified in the assemblage except for a few examples. Most of the pipes are dated to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries which supports the dating of the ceramic finds found in the complex. It also seems that the late, twentieth century type pipe is basically absent from the assemblage. Jaffa as a Pipe Production Center Pipes were very much in fashion during the Ottoman period and one could assume that they could have also been produced at Jaffa for the local market. Many of them could have been imported from Turkey/Istanbul and it seems certain for types produced in Tophane (Types 19A, 19C, 19D, 19F); however only petrographic analysis could prove this with certainty. Until now no pipe production workshop has been discovered in Jaffa itself. However, Mary Eliza Rogers (1865) who arrived in the Holy Land in 1855 and lived there for some time, describes pipe smoking on several occasions: “… then washed their hands, and smoked chibouques and narghilés.” (p.22) “They, as well as the ladies, were smoking narghilés.” (p. 25) And on her visit to the bazaar in Jaffa she observed: “…. – pipe makers, modeling red clay bowls for chibouques –….” (p. 24) This indication however is not the only one which describes pipe production taking place in Jaffa. A brief mention about pipe making in Jaffa can be found in the travelogue by the German traveler Ulrich Jasper Seetzen (1854) who visited Jaffa on his way to Acre “…. und verfertigt Pfeifenköpfe. Tabak wird ziemlich viel umhergebaut.” (p. 71)173 Pipe production is attested in Jerusalem by the same nineteenth century traveler who describes it in detail (Seetzen 1854: 22): “Pfeifenköpfe werden in grosser Menge und von vorzüglicher Güte bereitet, wodurch etwa 50 Christen und 20 Mohammedaner beschäftigt werden. Man verfertigt zweierley Arten, die in hinsicht ihrer Güte verschieden sind. Die eine geringere Art bereitet man aus einem Thon, den man von Kástal, einem Dörfchen am Wege nach Ramle bringt; zu der besseren aber lässt man den Thon von Beirut bringen. Um dem Pfeifenthon eine grössere Stärke zu geben, mischt man ihm Ràszùcht bey, welches calcinirtes Kupfer seyn soll. Um ihnen eine röthere Farbe zu geben, setzt man ihm Múghra, eine Art Röthel, zu, und die Politur giebt man den Köpfen endlich durch Kúrrbahárr und A’sbahan.” (p. 22)174 For the production of pipes a very fine clay, which is not readily available everywhere in Israel, is necessary. Seetzens’ description suggests that there were such clay deposits in a village named Kastal on the way to Ramle (Seetzen 1854: 22). Seetzen also tells us that for the “better pipes” a clay brought from Beirut 173

“… and pipe heads are being produced. Tobacco is being cultivated quite a lot.” (Translation by the author). “Pipe heads are being produced in large quantities and of an excellent quality, through which around 50 Christians and 20 Muslims are given work. Two kinds are being produced, which are different in their quality. The one of lower quality is made of clay which is been brought from the Kastal, a small village on the way to Ramla, for the better one the clay is being brought from Beirut. To make the pipe clay stronger ràszùcht is mixed in; this seems to be calcined copper. And to give it a redder color, mughra, a kind of red chalk is added and the burnishing is given to the heads by means of kúrrbahárr and a’sbahan.” (Translation by the author).

174

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

177

was used (1854: 22). As has been shown by Dekkel there are deposits in northern Israel which were substantially used in the Banias pipe production (cf. Dekkel 2008: 117). Thus clay could have been transported to Jaffa, as was the case for the clay mentioned by Seetzen brought to Jerusalem from Beirut. That clay suitable for pipe production was sometimes transported from far away is attested in the Tophane pipe production in Istanbul where some of the clay was brought from as far as Lake Van in eastern Anatolia. Seetzen described two types of pipe clays, one made of local clay from Kastal and the other from imported Syrian clay. Such an arrangement could easily apply to the pipes made in Jaffa. It is however also possible that finished pipes were brought from Turkey as some of the pipemaker stamps would suggest (Babalık and Şişmanyan who were well-known pipemakers in Istanbul). Seetzen mentions Christian and Muslim pipemakers, or rather people who work in that industry (Seetzen 1854: 22). Armenian Christian pipemakers were known in Istanbul and some of them became rather famous such as Mihail Lüleci, Ohannes Lüleci and others (Bakla 2007: 343–344). They could have been originally from Kütahya which was also a renowned ceramic production center and which sent some of its potters to Jerusalem. Among them could have been also pipe makers. Seetzen tells us also that tobacco was grown around Jaffa (1854: 71), seemingly indicating a high demand for pipes and tobacco. That Europeans have brought their smoking implements with them is proved by two finds from the Qishle excavations. Two European style white pipes, one of them with a potters’ mark, have been found within the Qishle compound (cf. Fig.4: 53, 54). A large number of narghile heads was also found at the Qishle, all of them made of clay. Methods of Study of the Jaffa Pipe Assemblage The pipes from the Qishle were retrieved from most loci in the excavation; they were separated from the ceramic assemblage and were treated separately. Pipes have been sorted typologically and compared with other well-studied sites. Furthermore the conclusions in the dating have been correlated with the site stratigraphy and the ceramic and porcelain finds that have been associated with the pipes. How Were Pipes Made? – the Production Process The production process of a lüle or chibouk was long and tedious. First the clay had to be very fine and clean without too many inclusions (see above). Dekkel states that the clay had to be from shale of the Lower Cretaceous period which is not readily available everywhere (Dekkel 2008: 117). Moreover a two-part mold was made either of hard-baked clay or, what seems far more practical, metal such as brass. Molds made of brass can be seen in the Pipe Museum in Amsterdam (Bakla 2007: 145: N1-5). Once the clay was pressed into the mold it was then left to dry. With the clay being leather hard the inside of the bowl was cut out and the shank perforated. Special tools for that were needed (Bakla 2007: 146: N2-2, N2-3, N2-4). The pipe was then dipped into a slip, which could either be of the same clay or of a different one. This happens during the eighteenth century when pipes were made of grayish clay and were slipped red. Tophane pipes were slipped with the same clay as that of the bowl. Other decorations such as marks, engraved or rouletted patterns were also applied. For this the engravers (hakkaklar) had special tools, knives, pointed tools (Bakla 2007: 147 N31, N3-2), rolls (2007: 149: N3-4, N5-3) and stamps (2007: 150: N5-8). Only then was the pipe ready to be fired. After the firing the pipe could once more be slipped, polished or burnished and even gilded by the gilder (yaldızcı). After that the final firing took place at a low temperature (muffle fired) and only at this point was the pipe ready for market (Bakla 2007: 195, 283–286). It is understandable that such a long process was divided among several craftsmen: those who prepared the clay and those who pressed the clay into the mold could be the same persons. Then the carver would hollow the pipe. But the most important people in this process were the engraver and the gilder. They actually did the artistic work. There was of course the usta or master of the workshop, overseeing the entire process and taking most of the credit for the production. Sometimes, however, the engraver would leave his mark

178

Chapter 8

also on the pipe, so that one would have the pipe makers’ and the engravers’ stamp side by side on one pipe. Most of the engravers, however, remain anonymous. One of the pipes from the Qishle bears a triple stamp with two different names, the pipe maker and the engraver (Fig. 8.6A: 18). Pipe Makers’ Marks from Jaffa175 (Fig. 8.6A) As for porcelain or ceramic vessels, the pipe maker wanted to sign his work and make sure that the customer would know where the pipe was produced. For that, he would apply a seal with his name to the pipe. In the beginning the marks were geometric or floral. One of the common marks among the eighteenth-century pipes were rosettes (Fig. 8.6A:1–2). They are usually multiple dots grouped around a central dot, thus forming the pattern. They are positioned on the shank of the pipe. Another very common mark is the dotted crescent (Fig. 8.6A:3–5). Multiple dots are aligned in a semicircular way, sometimes there is a dot in the middle and sometimes a line as in Fig. 8.6A:5. A variation of the dotted crescent is the lined crescent (Fig. 8.6A:6). Concentric circles on the base of the bowl can also be found (Fig. 8.6A:7). The combination of a mark on the base with a mark on the shank can be noticed on some pipes (Fig. 8.6A:8). And here the question arises: if these two marks are different (Fig. 8.6A:9), does one represent the pipe maker and the other the engraver, a practice which later on in the nineteenth century will be common? And what to make of two, or even three marks found on the same pipe (Bakla 2007: 285: S7)? Rosette or leaf stamps were still used in the nineteenth century; they become more elaborate and are usually on the base of the pipe. We are still not sure if they were indeed marks or mere decorations. The rosettes of the nineteenth century become symmetrical and spiked (Fig. 8.6A:10–11). Bases are decorated often with intricate leaves (Fig. 8.6A:12–14). A quite peculiar decoration of the base consists of intertwined lines (Fig. 8.6A:15). Pipe Makers’ Marks176 (Fig. 8.6A: 16–26) Bakla provides a list of pipemakers’ names with dates; the earliest one, dated to 1646, names the pipemaker Nigahi (Bakla 2007: 288). Pipes with stamped names became common during the nineteenth century. Pipe workshops existed also in Kütahya which was well-known for the pottery production, but which also had pipe making workshops with some well-known pipe makers like Mihail Lüleci, Ohannes Lüleci and others (Bakla 2007: 343–344).Some of the pipe makers even achieved great fame such as Babalık (Bakla 2007: 302) and Şişman (2007: 344). Pipes with the stamps of Babalık have indeed been found in the Qishle (Fig. 8.6A:16). Unfortunately we do not have any information about this pipe maker except that he and his workshop produced a large quantity of pipes (Bakla 2007: 302). Two pipes with Şişman’s stamp have been identified (Fig. 8.6A:17–18). On the first pipe for some reason the stamps appears three times (Fig. 8.6A:17). Perhaps the pipe maker was also the engraver. On the other pipe the name Şişman is followed by Dede and the next name is Amin which might have been the engraver (Fig. 8.6A:18). Şişman was also called Şişmanyan which would suggest that he was Armenian (= Christian) since the suffix -ian or -yan usually has the meaning of “the family of” or “son of” in Armenian last names.177 Thus

175

All stamps were photographed by Clara Amit of the IAA. I have been able to identify several of the names, comparing them to the photographs and lists of stamps in Erdinç Bakla’s book (2007). I am, however, deeply grateful to Issa Sarie of Jerusalem who confirmed my readings and who deciphered those that were not mentioned in Bakla’s book. All marks were photographed by Clara Amit of the IAA, except Figs. 8.6A:17–18 photographed by the author and Fig. 8.6A:26 photographed and drawn by Katharina Streit of the Hebrew University. 177 http://bayazet.ru/en/culture/armenian-language/surname-birth.html (accessed 31.12.2012). 176

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

179

Şişmanyan would be “the son of the fat,” şişman meaning “fat” in Turkish. It is therefore quite possible that the pipe maker with such a name was a corpulent Armenian, or the son of one. In his recent Ph.D. dissertation, K.N. Batchvarov discusses the Şişman stamp which was found on several pipes from the “Kitten shipwreck,” located in the southern Bay of Kitten, in the lee of Cape Urdoviza, Bulgaria. The stamps on these pipes were read by Azam Halabi; he identified the script as mirror script Arabic based on photographs of the pipes. He read all of them as “Allah”. A closer look at the photographs from the Kitten wreck (Batchvarov 2009: figs. 93–95) and those published by Bakla (2007: 285, S6 and 286, S9) suggests that the pipes from the Kitten shipwreck are all stamped with the name of Şişman. Obviously now there are two options: one of the readings is wrong, or both are right and the pipe maker Şişmanyan knew that his abbreviated name Şişman could be read “Allah” in mirror script! If the latter is the case, it would be quite a fascinating discovery. Reading the stamps on the pipes is difficult given their small size – they are usually between 0.5–1 cm in size. Moreover, being written in Arabic letters rendering Turkish names makes it all the more complicated. And the possibility that some of them might have been stamped in mirror script would render the entire subject even more mysterious and problematic. Other stamps with names of the makers have been identified: The stamp of Babaq or maybe Babalik (Fig. 8.6A:19). The stamp of Huseyin Hassan (Fig. 8.6A:20). The stamp reads: “work of Huseyin Hassan 118.” The dating of this pipe to the nineteenth century (Fig. 8.6B:67) could suggest that pipes were made in series already and that the number would thus be a series number. One pipe seems to have a series number: Series Number 15 (Fig. 8.6A:21). The pipe is dated to the latter part of the nineteenth century, and it is quite possible that at that time pipes were produced in series. A stamp of Hassan was also identified (Fig. 8.6A:22), as well as a stamp of Babza, probably a female pipe maker (Fig. 8.6A:23). Other stamps seems to be purely decorative as they do not represent any name (Fig. 8.6A: 24-25). A peculiar stamp (Fig. 8.6A:26) shows a woman sitting on her toes with the arms raised in adoration to the sun, which is depicted as a star.178 Inscriptions on Pipes179 (Fig. 8.6A: 27–28) Some of the pipes are decorated with verses from poems or dedications. These are usually situated around the shank end and were applied with a metal roulette (Bakla 2007: 149: N5-3). Some inscriptions are in Arabic, but others are in Ottoman Turkish (osmanlıca). Two known inscriptions read (not found so far in Jaffa): Your fortune shall not be lost by ordering a pipe. So enjoy yourself by smoking May you enjoy yourself with this souvenir of mine and give me joy by not losing it Two pipes from the Qishle have a rouletted verse written on them (Fig. 8.6A: 27–28). The inscription on both of them reads as follows: shifah al-qulub, liqah al-mahbub= the joy of the heart, is the meeting of the lover.180 This verse is well-known and has been found previously on a pipe from Jerusalem181 and another one from Ramla (Vincenz 2011: fig. 2: 21). It certainly indicates the love of the pipe smoker for his pipe and could be classified as an ironic Sufi poem182 which were much in fashion or, simply as a love poem. This verse is also mentioned by Bakla where it reads: Şifa-el kulup, lifa-el maklup. He states that verses were added onto pipes and on other items such as coffee cups, coffee and tea pots by means of a small roller (rulo) that impressed the verses (Bakla 2007: 289–290). 178

The stamp was photographed and drawn by Katharina Streit of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. The inscriptions were drawn by Irena Lidsky. 180 I wish to thank Issa Sarie for reading these two inscriptions. 181 This pipe is still unpublished but was found in the Western Wall Plaza excavations carried out by the IAA; B. 3400. This pipe is being published by the author (Vincenz forthcoming d). 182 I wish to thank Issa Sarie for sharing this idea with me. 179

180

Chapter 8

Typology of the Jaffa Pipe Types The pipes have been divided into chronological types; in addition, an attempt has been made to build a typology which could be used in the future for other pipes found in the various excavations in and around Jaffa. The designation reads as follows: Type J(affo) 17(th cent) and A etc. (type number). It has already proved useful for additional excavations in Jaffa. Catalogue of the Qishle Assemblage183 (Fig. 8.6B) Seventeenth Century Pipes Types J-17A-B-C (Figs. 8.6B: 1 – 8.6B: 3) Only very few seventeenth century types have been retrieved. These pipes are very small in dimension and have a small rounded bowl and a short shank with a stepped ring. The decorations are usually stamped, but rouletted bands are also common. Their ware is light gray or pinkish white in hue. As to the dating, they are commonly dated to the seventeenth century, but probably continue into the very beginning of the eighteenth century. They are in any case the earliest type of pipe, small in dimension, probably because of the fact that tobacco was still a rather expensive commodity. Fig. 8.6B: 1. Locus 088, Basket 1589 Type J-17A Complete shank and part of bowl. Short shank with wreath and stepped ring. The wreath is rounded and decorated with stamped leaves. The part of shank between the shank and the bowl is decorated with incised lines and a band of single rouletting. The bowl is small and decorated with a rouletted band. Next to the shank there is a stamped pipe maker mark– star. Light brown ware and dark gray slip. Length of shank (LS): 2 cm; Shank opening (SO): 0.8 cm. Dating: late seventeenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2000: fig. 13.2: 22–26; Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.4: 4; Simpson 2008: fig. 268: 7–11. Fig. 8.6B: 2. Locus 536, Basket 1152/2. Type J-17B Fragmentary pipe with small round bowl. Short shank with stepped end with incised nicks. The bowl is decorated with incised vertical lines and the keel is outlined with a wavy line. Light gray ware with dark gray slip. LS: 3 cm; SO: 0.9 cm. Dating: late seventeenth to early eighteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2000: 13.1: 4; Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.5: 12. Fig. 8.6B: 3. Locus 191, Basket 2049 Type J-17C Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Short curved shank ending in rounded wreath and stepped ring. Two fine incised lines under wreath. The shank is off-set by a fine incised line. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The bowl is undecorated. Light gray ware and pale red slip and burnishing. LS: 3.4 cm; SO: 1 cm. Dating: end of seventeenth and early eighteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2008: 268: 4.

183

All photographs are by Clara Amit of the IAA except 2, 28, 29, 38, 40, 47, 48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 81, 86, 87, 89, 90, 94, 96, 102, 103, 106, 111, 113, 114, 115, 116, 119, 127, 132 which are by the author.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

181

Eighteenth Century Pipes Types J-18A (Figs. 8.6.4–8.6.18) These pipes are dated to the eighteenth century and are very common at the Qishle. Their characteristics are a large round bowl with a straight upper part. They have a short curved shank with a stepped ring. The keel is not formed yet but usually outlined either by incised lines or rouletted bands. The decorations consist in rouletted bands and incised lines. All of these pipes have stamped potters’ marks (?), mainly rosettes and dotted half moons. Fig. 8.6B: 4. Locus 194, Basket 2046/2 Type J-18A Fragmentary pipe with broken shank. Short curved shank ending in a narrow biconical wreath and a stepped ring. The bowl is rounded and shank is set-off by a band of rouletting and two fine incised lines. The lower part of the bowl is round with a straight upper part. The upper part of the rounded part of the bowl is decorated with a wide band of rouletting and the middle of the straight part is also decorated with a band of rouletting and under the rim is a single line of rouletting. On the shank there is a pipe maker’s mark: probably a dotted half circle. Light gray ware with dark red-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4 cm; SO: 1 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Edelstein and Avissar 1997: Fig. 3a–b. Fig. 8.6B: 5. Locus 111, Basket 1666/4 Type J-18A Fragmentary pipe with broken shank. Short curved shank ending in a narrow biconical wreath and a stepped ring. The bowl is rounded and shank is set-off by a band of rouletting and fine incised lines. The lower part of the bowl is round with a straight upper part. The upper part of the rounded part of the bowl is decorated with a wide band of rouletting and the middle part of the straight part is also decorated with a band of rouletting and incised lines. On the shank there is a pipe maker’s mark: five dotted rosette. Light gray ware with red brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4 cm; SO: 1.4 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Edelstein and Avissar 1997: Fig. 3a–b. Fig. 8.6B: 6. Locus 183, Basket 2037, Type J-18A Fragmentary pipe with broken shank. Short curved shank ending in a narrow biconical wreath and a stepped ring. The bowl is rounded and shank is set-off by a band of rouletting and fine incised lines. The lower part of the bowl is round with a straight upper part. The upper part of the rounded part of the bowl is decorated with a wide band of rouletting and the middle part of the straight part is also decorated with a band of rouletting and incised lines. On the shank there is a pipe maker’s mark: two dots. Light gray ware with brown slip and burnishing. LS: 3.7 cm, SO: 1.4 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Edelstein and Avissar 1997: Fig. 3a–b. Fig. 8.6B: 7. Locus 064, Basket 1432/2 Type J-18A Complete shank and part of bowl. Short curved shank ending in a narrow biconical wreath and a stepped ring. The bowl is rounded and the shank is set-off by a band of rouletting. The bowl is decorated with incised vertical lines. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: dotted crescent (Fig. 8.6A:4). Light gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 5 cm; SO: 1.3 cm.

182

Chapter 8

Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 8. Locus 460, Basket 5178/2 Type J-18A Complete shank and almost complete bowl. Upper part broken. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side while the upper part is set-off by a rouletted criss-cross band. The upper register is stepped and decorated with rouletting (?). Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: dotted crescent (Fig. 8.6A:3). Light gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.6 cm; SO: 1.2 cm; Diam. of bowl: 2.8 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 9. Locus 075, Basket 1492/1 Type J-18A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Upper part broken. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. While the rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side, the upper part is set-off by a rouletted criss-cross band. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: dotted crescent with a central dot (Fig. 8.6A:2). Light gray ware and dark brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.3 cm; SO: 1.2 cm; Diam. of bowl: 3 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 10. Locus 236, Basket 3123/3 Type J-18A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Upper part broken. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted criss-cross band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side whereas the upper part is set-off by a rouletted criss-cross band. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: six dots forming a rosette with a central dot (Fig. 8.6A:1). Light gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.7 cm; SO: 1.3 cm; Diam. of bowl: 3 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 11. Locus 107, Basket 1654/2 Type J-18A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Upper part broken. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted criss-cross band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side while the upper part is set-off by a rouletted criss-cross band. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: dotted crescent with a central dot. Light gray ware and dark brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.1 cm; SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Edelstein and Avissar 1997: Fig. 3a–b. Fig. 8.6B: 12. Locus 815, Basket 9143/2 Type J-18A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted criss-cross band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. While the rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side, the upper part is set-off by a rouletted criss-cross band. The bowl is divided into two registers divided by rouletted criss-cross bands. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: dotted crescent with a central dot.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

183

Light gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.5 cm; SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Edelstein and Avissar 1997: Fig. 3a–b. Fig. 8.6B: 13. Locus 201, Basket 1621/2 Type J-18A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted criss-cross band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side while the upper part is set-off by a rouletted criss-cross band. The bowl is divided into two registers divided by rouletted criss-cross bands. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: two dots. Light gray ware and dark orange-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.3 cm; SO: 1.4 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Edelstein and Avissar 1997: Fig. 3a–b. Fig. 8.6B: 14. Locus 460, Basket 5174/7 Type J-18A Fragmentary shank and fragmentary bowl. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring (the ring is broken). No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted criss-cross band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side whereas the upper part is set-off by a rouletted criss-cross band. The bowl is divided into registers divided by rouletted criss-cross bands. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: six dots forming a rosette with central dot. Light gray ware and dark orange-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 3.6 cm; SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Edelstein and Avissar 1997: Fig. 3a–b. Fig. 8.6B: 15. Locus 028, Basket 1295 Type J-18A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a wide rouletted criss-cross band and incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side while the upper part is set-off by a rouletted criss-cross band. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe maker mark: dotted crescent. Gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4 cm; SO: 1.4 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 16. Locus 521, Basket 9178/5 Type J-18A Almost complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring (the ring is chipped). No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: five dots forming a rosette with central dot. Light gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 3.8 cm; SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: eighteenth century.

184

Chapter 8

Fig. 8.6B: 17. Locus 988, Basket 1051/8 Type J-18A Fragmentary shank and fragmentary bowl. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring (half shank broken). No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with incised lines outlining the undeveloped keel. The rounded bowl is undecorated on the lower side. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe maker mark: four dots forming a rosette with central dot. Light gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4 cm; SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 18. Locus 160, Basket 1937/1 Type J-18A Complete shank, bowl broken. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. Lower part of shank carved to form a keel. Keel outlined with incised lines. Lower part decorated with vertical incised lines. Bowl divided into registers by rouletted criss-cross band. Next to wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: six dots forming a half moon (Fig. 8.6A:5). Light gray ware with dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 3.8 cm; SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Type J-18B (Figs. 8.6B: 19 – 8.6B: 20) These bowls are characterized by a short curved shank with a stepped ring. There is a pipe maker’s mark on the shank either a dotted crescent or a rosette. The ware is light gray with a yellowish slip. Fig. 8.6B: 19. Locus 141, Basket 1809/1 Type J-18B Complete shank, bowl is broken off. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. Next to wreath a stamped pipe makers’ mark: half moon with lines (cf. Fig. 8.6A:6). Light gray ware with orange slip and burnishing. LS: 3.9 cm; SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2000: fig. 13.3: 43. Fig. 8.6B: 20. Locus Topsoil, Basket 1425 Type J-18B Complete shank, bowl is broken off. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. Next to wreath a stamped pipe maker mark: half moon with eight dots Light gray ware with light brown slip and burnishing. LS: 3.7 cm; SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Type J-18C (Fig. 8.6B: 21) Pipe with large bowl, decorated with three small impressed rosettes. The keel is outlined by a rouletted line. Fig. 8.6B: 21. Locus 813, Basket 9245/2 Type J-18C Pipe with large round bowl and straight upper part. The shank is short and curved and ends in a stepped ring with rouletted band. The body is plain except for small impressed rosettes, one on each side altogether three. The keel is outlined by a rouletted line. Gray ware with orange-brown slip and burnishing. LS: 3.9 cm; SO: 1.4 cm Dating: eighteenth century.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

185

Type J-18D (Fig. 8.6B: 22) Pipe with short curved shank with a rounded pipe maker’s mark on the keel. Fig. 8.6B: 22. Locus 147, Basket 1892/1 Type J-18D Complete shank, bowl is broken. Short curved shank with biconical wreath and stepped ring. Incised line under wreath. No keel but the lower part of the bowl is decorated with a stamped pipe makers’ mark: circle (Fig. 8.6A:8). The rounded bowl seems to be decorated with very fine incised vertical lines. Next to the wreath there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark: four dots forming a half moon with two central dots. Light gray ware and dark brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.2 cm; SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2000: fig. 13.3: 43. Type J-18E (Fig. 8.6B: 23) Pipe with large round bowl and straight upper part. The body is plain except for impressed rosettes, one each side altogether three. The keel is outlined by a rouletted line. Fig. 8.6B: 23. Locus 120, Basket 1722 Type J-18E Partial bowl decorated with stamped rosette. Other small stamped decorations on body such as dotted triangles. Light gray ware and dark purple slip and burnishing. Dating: eighteenth century. Type J-18F (Figs. 8.6B: 24 – 8.6B: 26) Also dated to the eighteenth century these pipes have a round body which is carved on the lower part with the upper straight part divided into two registers. The shank is short and curved. Fig. 8.6B: 24. Locus 1093; Basket 10949 Type J-18F Large round bowl with carved vertical lines as decoration. The lines meet on the keel. The upper part of the bowl is set-off from the lower register by a fine incised line. The shank is short and curved with a stepped ring. Light gray ware with brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.5 cm, SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison (although not identical, but of the same type): Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.9: 48. Fig. 8.6B: 25. Locus 252; Basket 3203/5 Type J-18F Large round bowl with deeply carved rhombs. The upper register is set-off by a band of impressed rosettes and the upper register is empty except for two fine rouletted lines. The shank is short and curved with a stepped ring. The keel is outlined by a fine rouletted line. Light gray ware with dark brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4 cm; SO: 1 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.8: 43 for decoration of lower register. Fig. 8.6B: 26. Locus 1112, Basket 11119/4 Type J-18F Partial bowl divided into registers. Lower register molded and decorated with incised lines forming branches. The bowl is set-off from the shank by a rouletted band. The second register is decorated with a rouletted criss-cross band. The upper register is empty. The registers are divided by lines.

186

Chapter 8

Light gray ware and orange slip and burnishing. Dating: eighteenth century. Type J-18G (Fig. 8.6B: 27) Pipe with round bowl and straight upper part. The base bears a pipe maker’s mark and a flat keel. Fig. 8.6B: 27. Locus Topsoil, Basket 1134 Type J-18G Complete shank and broken bowl. Short curved shank ending in round wreath and stepped ring. The undeveloped keel is decorated with stamped potter’s mark: concentric circle which forms a flat base. The mark is repeated on the outer side of the bowl opposite the shank. The bowl is rounded and divided into registers. The lower register is undecorated while the upper bears a carved band. Dark gray ware and brown slip and burnishing. SL: 4.8 cm; SO: 1.4 cm. Diam. 2.4 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Type J-18H (Figs. 8.6B: 28 – 8.6B: 29) They basically belong to the same category as Type J-18A-C with a large round bowl and a short curved shank. Their distinguishing characteristic is the Arabic inscription around the shank. The inscription can be either in Arabic or in Ottoman Turkish, which complicates the reading of it. Fig. 8.6B: 28. Locus 811, Basket 9082 Type J-18H Complete shank and broken bowl. Short curved shank ending in conical wreath and stepped ring. The shank is decorated with an inscription in Arabic (Fig. 8.6A:28). The bowl is rounded and set-off from the hank with deeply incised lines and divided into registers. The upper register is broken. Light gray ware and orange-brown slip and burnishing. SL: 4 cm; SO: 1.2 cm; Diam. 2.6 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 29. Locus 158, Basket 2082 Type J-18H Complete shank and almost complete bowl (upper register broken). Short curved shank ending in conical wreath and stepped ring. The shank is decorated with an inscription in Arabic (Fig. 8.6A:29). The bowl is molded and divided into registers. The upper register is broken. Next to the shank there is a very small pipe maker mark (probably not a name, but just a decorative pattern imitating Arabic letters). Light gray ware and orange-brown slip and burnishing. SL: 2.6 cm; SO: 1 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century. Type J-18J (Figs. 8.6B: 30 – 8.6B: 36) A group of pipes which are all glazed. They are also very similar in shape, with a rounded body and no keel, short but straight shank ending in a stepped, undecorated ring. The bowls are either plain (Figs. 8.6B:30–33) or gadrooned (Figs. 8.6B:34–36). Decorations on the bowls consist of horizontal rouletted bands. The glaze is yellow to deep yellow to yellowish green. Glazed pipes are not very common in Ottoman lands, although further north such as in Czechia and Poland they are rather common; as Robinson states, this feature might be a sideline product of the pipemaker or an import from the north (Robinson 1983: 273). At the Qishle ten glazed pipes were found; they are all of the same type, made of what appears to be the same clay and glazed in various shades of yellow. In comparison, at Belmont, several pipes and fragments of pipes were found but unlike the Qishle pipes they are mostly glazed green or mottled green (Simpson 2000: 152). We still do not know if these pipes were locally made or imported; only petrographic analysis can tell.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

187

Fig. 8.6B: 30. Locus 254, Basket 3204/6 Type J-18J-A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is round and undecorated and the shank is short and almost horizontal, ending in a thickened wreath with ring. Two incised lines decorated the shank. The pipe was glazed deep yellow. A small piece of clay and glaze is attached to the body where it touched another pipe in the kiln. Pinkish ware, unslipped but glazed yellow. LS: 3.2 cm; SO: 1.1 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 31. Locus 197, Basket 2062/3 Type J-18J-A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is round with a straight upper part and undecorated. The shank is short and only slightly curved, ending in a thickened wreath and ring. The keel is outlined by a rouletted line. The pipe is glazed deep yellow. Grayish pink ware, unslipped but yellow glazed. LS: 3.6 cm, SO: 0.9 cm. Dating eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 32. Locus 160, Basket 1937/3 Type J-18J-A Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is round with a straight upper part and undecorated. The shank is short and slightly upturned and ending in a thickened wreath with ring with a rouletted line. The keel is outlined with a coarse rouletted line and the shank bears a deeply incised line on the lower side. The pipe is glazed with a deep yellow glaze. Pinkish ware, unslipped but yellow glazed. LS: 3.5 cm, SO: 1.1 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 33. Locus 120, Basket 1770/1 Type J-18J-A Broken shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is rounded with the upper part broken and decorated with six rouletted lines. The shank is short and slightly upturned and ending in a thickened wreath with ring. Only one side of the keel is outlined with short incised line. The pipe was probably glazed with a bright yellow glaze as can be seen by the splashes of glaze on the body. Pinkish ware, unslipped but yellow glazed. LS: 3.4 cm, SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 34. Locus 055, Basket 1358 Type J-18J-B Broken shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is round and the straight upper part is only minimally preserved. The body is gadrooned and the shank short and upturned, ending in a thickened wreath with ring. The bowl is decorated with five rouletted lines and glazed with a deep yellowish-brown thick glossy glaze. Pinkish ware, unslipped but glazed yellowish-brown. LS: 3.9 cm, SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Comparison: Vincenz 2011: Fig.3:29 (from Ramla), for an unglazed one cf. Robinson 1983: Taf. 53: 20. Fig. 8.6B: 35. Locus 1103, Basket 11099/8 Type J-18J-B Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is round with a straight upper part which is partially preserved. The body is gadrooned and the shank short and slightly upturned ending in a thickened wreath and ring. The body is decorated with four rouletted lines and glazed with a greenish yellow thick glaze. Pinkish ware, unslipped but glazed.

188

Chapter 8

LS: 3.5 cm, SO: 0.9 cm. Dating: eighteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 36: Locus 111, Basket 1653/5 Type J-18J-B Only bowl preserved. It is rounded and gadrooned and decorated with six rouletted lines. Moreover it has remains of yellow glaze. Beige ware, slipped light brown and burnished and glazed. Dating: eighteenth century. Type J-18K (Fig. 8.6B: 37) Although it belongs to the same family with large bowl as the types before, examples of this type have a flat base and a bowl that is not totally rounded. Fig. 8.6B: 37. Locus 1084, Basket 1111/2 Type J-18K Almost complete bowl. Shank is broken. Very short shank ending in biconical wreath without ring. The ending is decorated with rouletted net pattern. The shanks connects to the bowl and forms under the bowl a flat round base. There is no keel but there are fine incised lines on the base marking where it should have been. The bowl is round and high with an upper register set-off by a carved or molded pattern. Three stamped arabesques are on the lower part of the bowl, two next to the shank and one opposite. Light gray ware and red brown slip and burnishing. SL: 3 cm; Diam. 2.4 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century. Type J-18L-A (Fig. 8.6B: 38) Large bowl made of very fine ware similar to the red clay of the Tophane pipes, but different in color. The pipe is not slipped, only highly burnished, so as to give the appearance of burnt ivory. The decoration, consisting of small leaves, palmettes, etc., is minute and very delicate and intricate. This type of bowl was produced by Şişman Usta (Şişmanyan) as can be seen from the triple potters’ mark. Similar pipes come from Corinth and some of them have the stamp of the pipe maker clearly visible on the shank (Robinson 1985: pl. 56: C95). Fig. 8.6B: 38. Locus 034, Basket 1083 Type J-18L-A Broken shank and complete bowl. Short curved shank, knife pared ending in a simple ring. The bowl is shallow and round and the upper part straight. Both parts are decorated with stamped patterns: half moons with vertical lines, palmettes and decorated triangles. Next to the shank three pipe makers’ marks in Arabic letters = Şişman (Şişmanyan). Light orange ware and burnishing. SL: 3 cm; SO: 1.2 cm; Diam. 2.6 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century. Comparison: A similar pipe comes from the Athenian Agora. While it does not bear a stamp it seems to be of the same series as our example (Robinson 1985: pl. 62: A20). Similar pipes with the pipe maker mark also come from Corinth (Robinson 1985: pl. 56: C93,-C99).184 Type J-18L-B (Fig. 8.6B: 39) Large bowl made of very fine ware similar to the red clay of the Tophane pipes, but different in color. The pipe is not slipped, only highly burnished, so as to give the appearance of burnt ivory. The decoration (small

184

Robinson could not make out the seal or potters’ name and states that it is an idiosyncratic meaningless seal (Robinson 1985: 186).

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

189

leaves, palmettes, etc.) is minute, very delicate and intricate. A similar pipe comes from the Athenian Agora. While it does not bear a stamp, it seems to be of the same series as our example (Robinson 1985: pl. 62: A21). From the same series are six pipes which were found in the Kitten shipwreck in Bulgaria (Batchvarov 2009: figs. 93–95). Fig. 8.6B: 39. Locus 618, Basket 7070 Type J-18L-B Partly preserved bowl. The bowl is shallow and round and the upper part straight. Both parts are decorated with stamped patterns: half moons with vertical lines, palmettes and decorated triangles. Next to the shank are three stamped marks in Arabic letters consisting of two different names, one the pipe maker Şişman (Şişmanyan) with the nickname Dede, and the other Amin, probably the engraver. Light orange ware and burnishing. Diam. 2.6 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century. Comparison: A similar pipe comes from the Athenian Agora. While it does not bear a stamp it seems to be of the same series as our example (Robinson 1985: pl. 62: A20). Similar pipes with the pipe maker mark also come from Corinth (Robinson 1985: pl. 56: C93,-C99). Of the same series are six pipes which were found in the Kitten shipwreck in Bulgaria (Batchvarov 2009: figs. 93–95). Late eighteenth century pipes Type J-18M (Figs. 8.6B: 40 – 8.6B: 43) Large pipe with large round bowl and short upturned shank. The body is decorated with carved floral and arabesque decorations and rouletting. The shank is also decorated with a rouletted band and the ring is carved to form petals. The keel is pronounced and outlined by rouletted bands. Fig. 8.6B: 40. Locus 153, Basket 2035 Type J-18M Broken shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is large and rounded and decorated with carved leaves that give it the appearance of a flower. The upper part is straight and decorated with carvings and rouletted bands. The shank is short and slightly upturned with a thickened end with a rouletted band and leaf-shaped end. The keel is only outlined by rouletting. Light gray ware with light brown slip and burnishing. LS: 3.5 cm, SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 41. Locus 158, Basket 2076/4 Type J-18M Broken shank and fragmentary bowl. Large round and heavy bowl with short everted rim. The body is entirely carved with arabesque and the other spaces are filled with rouletting. The keel is pronounced and outlined by two incised lines and rouletting. The shank is very short and ends in a crenellated carved rim with a rouletted band. Gray ware with reddish brown slip and burnishing. LS: 3.5 cm, SO: 1.1 cm. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 42. Locus 147, Basket 1892/2 Type J-18M Half bowl preserved. It is of the same type as above. Entirely carved with arabesques and the empty spaces filled with rouletting. Light gray ware with dark red brown slip and burnishing. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century.

190

Chapter 8

Fig. 8.6B: 43. Locus 194, Basket 2057/2 Type J-18M Shank broken and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is large and rounded; the straight upper part is broken. The lower part of the bowl is undecorated while the upper part is covered with a stamped pattern. The two registers are set apart by a carved wavy line which gives the bowl the appearance that it was put together in two parts. The keel is outlined by a rouletted line. The short shank is broken. Gray ware with dark red brown slip and burnishing. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Type J-18N (Figs. 8.6B: 44 – 8.6B: 45) Large pipe with large round bowl and very short upturned shank. The body is decorated with medallions with arabesques, flowers or leaves. The shank end is thickened and carved (crenellated). The keel is either not existent (No. 8.6.44) or pronounced and outlined with a rouletted band (No. 8.6.45). Fig. 8.6B: 44. Topsoil, Basket 1126 Type J-18N Half bowl and slightly chipped shank. The bowl is large and round with deeply carved arabesque decoration. The shank is very short and upturned decorated with carved crenellation giving the appearance of leaves. There is also rouletting between the leaves. Light gray ware with dark red slip and burnishing. The slip does not cover the entire pipe, only the upper part and the shank, while the lower part remains unslipped. LS: 4 cm, SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 45. Locus 194, Basket 2057/1 Type J-18N Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is large and round; decorated with carved flowers in medallions. The straight upper part is set-off by a rouletted band. The keel is now pronounced and outlined by a wide rouletted band. The short shank is upturned and the end is thickened and carved. Light gray ware with dark red slip and burnishing. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Type J-18O (Figs. 8.6B: 46 – 8.6B: 48) Large pipe similar to previous types but with a flat decorated base. The body is carved and the base incised. A similar pipe has been reported from Banias (Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.10: 58). Fig. 8.6B: 46. Locus 813, Basket 9245/1 Type J-18O Half bowl and part of keel preserved. The bowl is large and rounded and decorated with rosettes in high relief. The keel is a thick flat base decorated with deeply incised wavy lines. Light gray ware with dark purple brown slip and burnishing. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Comparison: Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.10: 58. Fig. 8.6B: 47. Locus 461, Basket 5251/6 Type J-18O Bowl slightly chipped and complete shank preserved. The bowl is large and rounded and decorated with rosettes in high relief. The keel is a thick flat base decorated with deeply incised wavy lines. The shank is short upturned and ending in a stepped ring. Light gray ware with dark purple brown slip and burnishing. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Comparison: Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.10: 58.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

191

Fig. 8.6B: 48. Locus 900, Basket 10339 Type J-18O Bowl slightly chipped and shank broken. The bowl is large and rounded and decorated with deeply carved lines and rosettes in high relief. The keel is a thick flat base decorated with deeply incised wavy lines. Light gray ware with dark purple brown slip and burnishing. Dating: end of eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Comparison: Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.10: 58. Type J-18P (Fig. 8.6B: 49) The bowl of this type of pipe is still large and round. The bowl is decorated with deeply carved lines and the keel is pronounced with two incised lines. The shank is extremely short and upturned. Fig. 8.6B: 49. Locus 158, Basket 2076/3 Type J-18P Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is large and heavy with deep vertical carvings. The upper straight part of the bowl is broken but was set-off by a carved crenellation. The shank is short with stepped ending and an incised line. The pronounced keel is outlined with a double incised line. Gray ware with reddish brown slip and burnishing. SL: 2.5 cm, SO: 1.1 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century. Type J-18Q (Fig. 8.6B: 50) This pipe still has a large bowl which is decorated with deep carvings, floral or vegetal patterns. The shank again is very short and its end is thickened and set off with two fine incised lines. Fig. 8.6B: 50. Locus 185, Basket 2047/1 Type J-18Q Half bowl and complete shank. The bowl is round with carved petals and drops. The keel is outlined by and double rouletted line. The shank is very short and thickened and set-off from the body by a double very thin incised line. Light gray ware with dark red brown slip and burnishing. SL: 1.6 cm, SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century. Comparison: Robinson 1983: Taf. 52: nr. 4. Type J-18R (Fig. 8.6B: 51) Only the shank of this pipe is preserved. It seems to have a large bowl which is decorated with deeply carved lines. The shank is short and upturned and biconical with rouletted and carved decoration. Fig. 8.6B: 51. Locus 081, Basket 1767/1 Type J-18R Complete shank and broken bowl. Very short shank ending in biconical wreath without ring. There is a double rouletted band of vertical lines and a rouletted band with net pattern. Above there are incised nicks. The bowl is molded. Next to the shank is a pipe makers’ mark: six dotted rosette with central dot. Light gray ware and orange–brown slip and burnishing. SL: 4 cm; SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century. Type J-18S (Figs. 8.6B:52–8.6B: 54) The pipe has a large bowl with deeply carved arabesques. The shank is very short and upturned with a biconical ending with incised lines around the shank and the opening.

192

Chapter 8

Fig. 8.6B: 52. Locus 146, Basket 1880 Type J-18S Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is large and round, the upper straight part is missing. The bowl is decorated with carved arabesque and vertical lines. The shank is very short and upturned. The end is flaring and cut-off and decorated with incised lines around the opening and on the shank. The keel is pronounced, but not outlined. Grayish brown ware probably slipped but badly worn. SL: 2 cm, SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 53. Locus 197, Basket 2062/2 Type J-18S Complete shank preserved. The shank is very short and upturned. The end is flaring and cut-off and decorated with incised lines around the opening and on the shank. The keel is pronounced. Grayish brown ware with dark brown slip and highly burnished. SL: 3.5 cm, SO: 1.8 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 54. Locus 032, Basket 1301/3 Type J-18S Complete shank preserved. The shank is very short and upturned. The end is flaring and cut-off and decorated with incised lines around the opening and on the shank. Grayish brown ware with dark brown slip and highly burnished. SL: 4 cm, SO: 1.8 cm. Dating: late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century. Nineteenth Century Pipes Type J-19A (Figs. 8.6B: 55 – 8.6B: 57) This is the most common type of the nineteenth century, being well-known from Istanbul and the Tophane pipemakers. They are made of the characteristic red clay and slipped with the very fine clay from Lake Van. They have a disk and a conical bowl that is usually decorated with intricate rouletted patterns such as grape clusters and wine leaves (No. 8.6.55) or fleur-de-lis (No. 8.6.56) and other such as herringbone patterns or oblique lines. Pipe maker marks in Arabic letters are common. Similar pipes are known from Saraçhane in Istanbul (Hayes 1992: pl. 50: h). Fig. 8.6B: 55. Locus 048, Basket 1423 Type J-19A Almost complete pipe. Shank broken, bowl and disk slightly chipped. The bowl, positioned centrally on a flat disk, is cone shaped with flaring walls. The shank is long and straight and forms a flat cone under the disk. The disk is decorated with three bands of rouletting– oblique lines and herringbone pattern. The bowl is decorated with two bands of rouletting: oblique lines and within a band with vine tendrils, grape clusters and wine leaves. The same pattern is repeated on the shank. Next to the rim a stamped pipe makers’ mark in Arabic letters = Babalık (Fig. 8.6A: 16). Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 4 cm; SO: 11.4 cm; Diam. 3.5 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 56. Locus 465, Basket 5260/21 Type J-19A Almost complete pipe. Part of disk broken. The bowl, positioned centrally on a flat disk, is cone shaped with flaring walls. The shank is long and straight and the end is decorated with carved notches as is the disk edge. The bowl is decorated with two bands of rouletting: oblique lines and within a band with fleur-de-lis pattern.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

193

Next to the rim a stamped pipe maker mark in Arabic letters = Babaq which seems to be another seal of Babalık (Fig. 8.6A: 19). Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 3.5 cm; SO: 1.4 cm; Diam: 3.3 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 57. Locus 127, Basket 1828/2 Type J-19A The shank is long and straight and the end simple. It is decorated with two bands of rouletted pattern– oblique lines and within a band of herringbone pattern. Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 3.4 cm; SO: 1.4 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Type J-19B (Figs. 8.6B: 58 – 8.6B: 59) Very similar to the previous type in ware and decoration but here the disk under the bowl is missing. Pipe maker marks in Arabic letters are common on these pipes. Fig. 8.6B: 58. Locus 213, Basket n/a Type J-19B Fragmentary bowl. The shank is completely broken off. The shank forms a flat base under the small disk. The bowl is positioned centrally on the disk and is cone shaped with flaring walls. The base of the bowl is decorated with two rouletted bands and another one is under the rim – vertical lines. An arabesque stamp is positioned opposite the shank. Light orange ware and dark orange slip and burnishing. Diam. 3 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Comparison: Robinson 1985: pl. 57: C107–108. Fig. 8.6B: 59. Locus 026, Basket 1019/8 Type J-19B-1 Fragmentary pipe. The bowl is partially broken as is the shank. The shank forms a slightly pointed almost flat base under the bowl, creating a small disk. The bowl is positioned centrally on the disk and is cone shaped with flaring walls. The base of the bowl is decorated with one rouletted band and another one is under the rim. Between them are drop-shaped decorations filled with net pattern. Light orange ware and dark orange slip and burnishing. Dating: nineteenth century. Type J-19C (Fig. 8.6B: 60) This type is very similar in ware to the one above. The decoration consists of rouletted bands of lines. The pipe is smaller in size than the previous examples. The disk is missing and the shank now forms a long pointed keel under the bowl. Pipe maker marks in Arabic letters are common on these pipes. Fig. 8.6B: 60. Locus 127, Basket 1890/1 Type J-19C Almost complete pipe. Bowl partly broken. The shank is long and curved, forming a pointed keel. The bowl is very small with a conical upper part with flaring walls. The shank end is simple and decorated with two rouletted bands – vertical lines. The keel is outlined by two rouletted bands. The bowl is decorated with a rouletted band – vertical lines and twisted lines. Above an additional rouletted bands – vertical lines. The bowl is undecorated. Next to the shank end a mark with a person sitting on her knees and holding her hands up to a star or sun (Fig. 8.6A: 26). Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 3.6 cm; SO: 1.5 cm, Diam. 3.1 cm. Dating: nineteenth century.

194

Chapter 8

Type J-19D (Fig. 8.6B: 61) Similar in size, ware and decoration. The shank is shorter than in the previous type. Pipe maker marks in Arabic letters are common on these pipes. Fig. 8.6B: 61. Locus 042, Basket 1389/2 Type J-19D Complete shank, bowl is broken. The shank is short and curved forming a pointed keel under the bowl. The bowl is very small with a straight upper part. The keel is outlined by a rouletted band – vertical lines. The shank is decorated with a rouletted band of vertical lines under the end and two additional rouletted bands of vertical lines on the shank. Under the rim there is a stamped pipe makers’ mark in Arabic letters = Babza (Fig. 8.6A: 23). Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 2.9 cm; SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Type J-19E (Fig. 8.6B: 62) Small pipe with round bowl and short shank. Similar in ware and decoration to the previous type. Pipe maker marks in Arabic letters are common on these pipes. Fig. 8.6B: 62. Locus Topsoil, Basket 10040 Type J-19E Almost complete pipe. Shank end broken and upper part of bowl. Short curved shank with conical end, the shank forms a pointed keel, which is outlined by incised lines and a rouletted band of vertical lines. The lower part of the bowl is round and the upper straight. The rounded bowl is set off from the upper part by a rouletted band of vertical lines and several finely incised lines. The shank end is decorated with three bands of rouletted vertical lines. Next to the bowl is a stamped illegible pipe maker mark in Arabic letters. Orange ware and orange slip and burnishing. SL: 2.5 cm; SO: 1.2 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Type J-19F (Figs. 8.6B: 63 – 8.6B: 65) Small pipe with a mold-made bowl shaped like a flower with petals. The shank end is also shaped differently than the other types; it ends in an octagon with pressed-in sides. The ware is similar as those in previous types. Pipe maker marks in Arabic letters are common on these pipes. Fig. 8.6B: 63. Locus 828, Basket 9198/1 Type J-19F Almost complete pipe. Upper part of bowl is broken. The shank is long and straight and ends into a wide octagon with pressed in sides (maybe pressed with a finger and nail). The small bowl is molded and resembles a grape cluster. The upper part of the bowl is flaring and shaped like petals of a flower. In each “petal” is a stamped rhomb. The shank bears two incised lines and a stamped unreadable pipe makers’ mark consisting of two Arabic letters (Fig. 8.6A: 24). Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 4 cm; SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 64. Locus 042, Basket 1434/2 Type J-19F Almost complete pipe, upper part of bowl broken. The shank is long and curved and ends into a wide octagon with pressed-in sides (maybe pressed with a finger and nail). The small bowl is molded and looks like a flower bud. The upper part of the bowl flares out like petals of a blossoming flower. On the lower part in each “petal” there is a stamped leaf. The shank bears two incised lines and a stamped pipe makers’ mark in Arabic letters =Babalik (Fig. 8.6A: 16).

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

195

Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 4.7 cm; SO: 1.6 cm; Diam. 1.6 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Comparison: Robinson 1983: Taf. 56: no. 54 Fig. 8.6B: 65. Locus 229, Basket 3180/1 Type J-19F Complete shank. The shank is long and curved and ends into a wide octagon with pressed-in sides (maybe pressed with a finger and nail). The shank bears two incised lines and a stamped unreadable pipe makers’ mark consisting of two Arabic letters. Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 3.8 cm; SO: 1.4 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 66. Locus 114, Basket 1690 Type J-19F-1 Pipe with faceted bowl. The shank is missing. The faceted parts are also decorated with stamped leaves or palmettes. It is similar to the Tophane pipes of Type J-19F. Pale orange ware with self slip and burnishing. Proposed dating: end of the nineteenth century. Type J-19G (Fig. 8.6B: 67) Of this type only the shank is preserved of one example. It is made of a different ware, but the shank is shaped like closed petals of a flower. Pipe maker marks in Arabic letters are common on these pipes. Fig. 8.6B: 67. Locus 029, Basket 1297/2 Type J-19G Fragment of shank. The shank is formed like a flower with closed petals. It ends into a swollen shank end with a molded ring showing small leaves or buds in relief. The shank bears a stamped pipe makers’ mark in Arabic letters =work of Husseyin Hassan (Fig. 8.6A: 20). Light gray ware and dark gray slip and burnishing. SL: 3.4 cm; SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Type J-19H (Fig. 8.6B: 68) Although made of the same ware as the red clay pipes the shape is totally different. The lower part of the bowl is so shallow as to almost form a disk. The shank which is shaped like closed petals, continues under the bowl and forms a raised base which is decorated. The decoration of this pipe is entirely incised. Fig. 8.6B: 68. Locus 467, Basket 5280/8 Type J-19H Fragmentary pipe. The shank end is broken and the upper part of the bowl. The shank is long and curved and forms a flat standing keel. The keel is outlined by a rouletted band of lines. The lower part of the bowl is very shallow almost forming a disk. The upper part is straight, probably ending in a flaring rim. At its end, the shank is shaped like a flower with closed petals and is set off from the rest by a rouletted band of vertical lines. The base is decorated with an incised spiral motif (Fig. 8.6A: 15) and the bowl is also decorated with incised motifs– spirals and lines. The shank bears a stamped pipe makers’ mark: rosette. Light orange ware and bright orange slip and burnishing SL: 4 cm; SO: 1 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Comparison: Dekkel 2008: 4.13: 76 (same keel decoration and rosette but different ware and shape of bowl).

196

Chapter 8

Type J-19J (Figs. 8.6B: 69– 8.6B: 72) These pipes are characteristic of the later part of the nineteenth century. They are made of a variety of clays, from the red clay to gray clays which are then slipped with red or reddish slip and burnished. The shank is long and swollen at the end and decorated with several rouletted bands of vertical lines. The bowls are usually small and shallow with a vertical upper part and also decorated with rouletting. The shank usually forms a small base under the bowl which is decorated with a stamped mark, stars in our case. Some of them have stamped pipe maker marks in Arabic letters. Fig. 8.6B: 69. Locus 032, Basket 1301/6 Type J-19J Almost complete pipe, upper part of bowl broken. The shank is long and curved and ends into a swollen shank end divided by a thin incised line and decorated with three rouletted bands of vertical lines. The shank forms a keel which is rather a small base with a stamped star with eleven spikes and a central dot (Fig. 8.6A: 10). The bowl is small and shallow and its upper part is slightly flaring. The upper part is set off from the lower by a rouletted band of vertical lines. Light gray ware and orange-brown slip and burnishing. SL: 5.4 cm; SO: 1.6 cm; Diam. 2 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 70. Locus 18, Basket 1011/10 Type J-19J Fragmentary pipe. Upper part of bowl and shank end are broken. The shank is probably long and curved. The shank forms a keel which is rather a small base with a stamped star with fourteen spikes and a thick central dot (Fig. 8.6A; 11) set off from the bowl by a rouletted band of vertical lines. The bowl is small and shallow and its upper part is slightly flaring. The upper part is set off from the lower by a rouletted band of vertical lines. Light orange ware and light orange slip and burnishing. SL: 3.6 cm; SO: 1 cm; Diam. 2 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 71. Locus 821, Basket 9159/2 Type J-19J Only bowl partly preserved. The bowl is small and shallow and its upper part is slightly flaring. The shank forms a keel which is rather a small base with a stamped star with eleven spikes and a thick central dot (Fig. 8.6A; 11) set off from the bowl by a rouletted band of vertical lines. Light orange ware and light orange slip and burnishing. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 72. Locus 813, Basket 9246/2 Type J-19J Only bowl partly preserved. The bowl is small, shallow and carinated; its upper part is slightly flaring. The curved shank forms a keel which is rather a small base with a stamped star with twelve spikes and a thick central dot set off from the bowl by a rouletted band of vertical lines. The upper part of the bowl is set off by a rouletted band of vertical lines. Light gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. SL: 2.2 cm; SO: 0.9 cm; Diam: 2.1 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Type J-19K (Fig. 8.6B: 73) This pipe has the shape of a tulip. Its shank is long and swollen at the end and decorated with several rouletted bands of vertical lines. The bowl is only scarcely decorated. The keel is outlined but still not prominent.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

197

Fig. 8.6B: 73. Locus 465, Basket 5260/7 Type J-19K Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. Large tulip-shaped bowl with incised oblique lines as decoration. The shank is long and upturned and ends into a swollen shank end divided by a thin incised line and decorated with a double rouletted band of vertical lines. The keel is set off from the body with a double semi-circular line. Light gray ware with orange slip burnished to brown. LS: 5.4 cm, SO: 1.6 cm. Dating: late nineteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2000: fig.13.6: 125. Type J-19L (Figs. 8.6B: 74 – 8.6B: 79) This is the second type of pipe characteristic of the later part of the nineteenth century. It is made of a variety of clays, from the red clay to other gray clays which are then slipped with red or reddish slip and burnished. The shank is long and swollen at the end and decorated with several rouletted bands of vertical lines forming petals. The bowls are usually tulip shaped and decorated with rouletting and stamping. The shank usually forms a small base under the bowl which is decorated with a stamped mark consisting mainly of palmettes. Fig. 8.6B: 74. Locus 465, Basket 5288 Type J-19L Almost complete pipe. The shank is long and almost at a right angle with the bowl. The shank ends in a simple ring and is decorated with incised lines dividing the entire length of the shank into petals (like a closed flower). Between the “petals” are stamped leaves. The bowl is large and tulip-shaped but with an exaggeratedly flaring upper part and rim. The entire bowl is decorated with rosettes inside rhombs. The edge of the rim is decorated with a band of rouletted net-pattern. The keel is rounded and outlined with a rouletted band. The keel itself is marked with incised lines. Light gray ware slipped dark red highly burnished and polished to imitate Tophane pipes. LS: 6 cm, SO: 1.5 cm. Dating: late nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 75. Locus 466, Basket 5279/1 Type J-19L Only the bowl is preserved. Very small tulip-shaped bowl decorated with rosette in rhombs and under the rim a rouletted band of net pattern (like pipe Fig. 8.6B: 73). Light gray ware slipped dark red highly burnished and polished to imitate Tophane pipes. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. The dimensions of these two pipes are interesting and the question arises if there was a reason to produce very large pipes on the one hand and very small ones on the other hand. One of the theories that has been put forward is that tobacco was smoked in the large pipes while other substances such as hashish were smoked in the small ones. Another possible reason is that small pipes were for ladies and large ones for gentlemen. Fig. 8.6B: 76. Locus 176, Basket 1988/2 Type J-19L Shank and part of bowl preserved. The shank is 69 mm long and almost straight, forming a small round flat base stamped with a leaf pattern (Fig. 8.6A: 12). The shank ends in a simple ring and is decorated with incised lines dividing the entire length of the shank into petals (like a closed flower). Between the “petals” are stamped leaves, and the ring is set-off with a rouletted band of vertical lines. Light gray ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. SL: 5.6 cm; SO: 1.6 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century.

198

Chapter 8

Fig. 8.6B: 77. Locus Topsoil, Basket 1134/1 Type J-19L Shank and part of bowl preserved. The shank is long and almost straight, forming a small round flat base stamped with a leaf pattern (Fig. 8.6A: 13). The shank ends in a simple ring and is decorated with incised lines dividing the entire length of the shank into petals (like a closed flower). Between the “petals” are stamped triangles. The ring is set-off with two thin incised lines. The lower part of the small bowl is decorated with rouletted bands of vertical lines. Light orange ware and dark purple-brown slip and burnishing. SL: 6 cm; SO: 1.6 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 78. Locus Topsoil, Basket 1908 Type J-19L Broken shank and broken bowl. Curved shank. The undeveloped keel is decorated with a stamped mark: palmette (Fig. 8.6A: 14). The lower part of the bowl is small and not clearly off-set from the shank; moreover, it is decorated with rouletted bands of short vertical lines. Light gray ware and orange slip and burnishing. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 79. Locus 18, Basket 1011 Type J-19L Only bowl preserved. Very large tulip-shaped bowl with exaggeratedly flaring rim. The bowl is undecorated but was probably part of the same type as described above. Light gray ware slipped dark red highly burnished and polished to imitate Tophane pipes. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2000: fig. 13.6: 125. Fig. 8.6B: 80. Locus 032, Basket 1299 Type J-19L-1 Shank preserved. The shank is long and almost straight, ending in a simple ring and decorated with incised lines on the entire length of the shank. The ring is set-off with a rouletted band of vertical lines. Next to the bowl is a stamped four petalled rosette. Light gray ware and dark brown slip and burnishing. SL: 6:4 cm; SO: 1.6 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 81. Locus 272, Basket 3280 Type J-19L-1 Pipe made of hard, even metallic ware. The bowl and shank are partially broken. The bowl is tulip shaped with a small disc. The keel is outlined by rouletted lines. The bowl is decorated with rouletted bands forming a net pattern which covers the entire bowl. The shank is rather long and the end is flaring and decorated with a band of rouletted “V”s. Dark gray ware, not slipped and not burnished. LS: 4.5 cm, SO: 1.5 cm. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 82. Locus 032, Basket 1299/2 Type J-19L-2 Fragmentary pipe with partly broken bowl. The bowl is tulip shaped, standing on a small base with an impressed leaf. The bowl is decorated in registers with rouletted bands and oblique rouletted leaves. The shank is upturned and also decorated with stamped leaves. The shank end is stepped and bears incised nicks. Light gray ware with dark brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.6 cm, SO: 1.5 cm. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

199

Fig. 8.6B: 83. Locus 294, Basket 3359 Type J-19L-3 Large with only bowl preserved. It is decorated with stamped circles forming a rhomb and additional circles and lines in a wide band. The edge is decorated with semicircles and thumb impressions. The keel forms a small base. Light brown ware with orange slip and burnishing. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-19M (Figs. 8.6B: 84–85) Similar in ware and treatment to the previous types. The shank is shorter, ending in a swollen shank end. The end is also decorated with incised lines forming closed petals and rouletted bands of vertical lines. Some of the pipes have pipe maker marks in Arabic letters. Fig. 8.6B: 84. Locus 495, Basket 5385 Type J-19M Shank preserved. The shank is long and upward curved, ending in a thickened end with a simple ring. The shank is decorated with lines giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The ring is set-off by a rouletted band of vertical lines as is the lower part of the “petals.” It seems that the base of the bowl is setoff by an incised line (?). Next to the bowl is a stamped pipe makers’ mark in Arabic letters = Al-Hassan (Fig. 8.6A: 22). Light gray ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. SL: 6:7 cm; SO: 1.7 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 85. Locus 048, Basket 1427 Type J-19M-1 Shank preserved. The shank is long and upward curved, ending in a thickened end with a simple ring. The shank is decorated with lines. The ring is set-off by a rouletted band of vertical lines as is the lower part of the lines. The base of the bowl is set-off by a deeply incised line. Next to the bowl is a stamped pipe makers’ mark in Arabic numerals reading 15 which might be a series number (Fig. 8.6A: 21). Dark gray ware, dark brown slip and burnishing. SL: 4.8 cm; SO: 1.8 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Type J-19N (Figs. 8.6B: 86 – 8.6B: 90) Heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The lines are setoff from the ring and the body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated with incised wavy lines, while the bowl is decorated with protruding bands with rouletting. The bottom of the base is decorated with two lines and rouletted lines imitating a keel. Fig. 8.6B: 86. Locus 127, Basket 1766/3 Type J-19N Almost complete pipe, shank broken. Heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl with flaring rim. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. Here it is more stylized than in the examples above. The lower part of the bowl is decorated with incised lines, while the bowl is decorated with two protruding bands with rouletting. The bottom of the base is decorated with two lines and rouletted lines imitating a keel. On the shank next to the base is a pipe maker’s mark in the form of a rosette. Light gray ware and bright red slip, highly burnished, an attempt to obtain the color of Tophane pipes. LS: 5 cm, SO: not preserved. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2000: fig. 13.7: 171–178; 2008: fig. 269: 51–52.

200

Chapter 8

Fig. 8.6B: 87. Locus 620, Basket 7077/5 Type J-19N Almost complete pipe, bowl broken. Heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The lines are set-off from the ring and the body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated with incised wavy lines, while the bowl is decorated with four protruding bands with rouletting. The bottom of the base is decorated with two lines and rouletted lines imitating a keel. Orange ware and dark red-brown slip, highly burnished in an attempt to obtain the color of Tophane pipes. LS: 5.2 cm, SO: 1.6 cm Dating: second half of nineteenth century Comparison: Al-Houdalieh 2008: plate 7: no. 17. Fig. 8.6B: 88. Locus 461, Basket 5243/8 Type J-19N Fragmentary pipe. Bowl broken and shank only partially preserved. Heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The lines are set-off from body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated with wavy incised lines, while the bowl is decorated with four protruding bands with rouletting. The bottom of the base is decorated with two lines and rouletted lines imitating a keel. Light brown ware and orange slip and imitating the color of Tophane pipes. LS: 5 cm preserved, SO: not preserved. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 89. Locus 066, Basket 1477/1 Type J-19N-1 Partly preserved bowl. It seems to be related to Type J-19N with a similar base. The bowl, however, is conical with flaring rim. Outside of the incised lines on the lower part, the pipe is undecorated. Gray ware with dark orange slip and burnishing. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 90. Locus 131, Basket 1764/2 Type J-19N-1 Fragment of bowl. It also seems to be related to Type J-19N but it is made of a hard ware, almost metallic. The lower part is decorated in the same style as the pipes of Type J-19N. Dark gray ware with dark red-brown slip and burnishing. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-19O (Figs. 8.6B: 91 – 8.6B: 93) Heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The lines are setoff from the ring by ovolos or carved lines, and from the body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated with incised wavy lines and the edge is crenellated, while the bowl is decorated with carved floral or arabesque pattern. The bottom of the base is undecorated. Fig. 8.6B: 91. Locus 952, Basket 10391/20 Type J-19O Almost complete pipe, upper part of bowl is broken. Heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with double lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The lines are set-off from the ring by oblique incised lines and from the body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated at the edges with incised half circles and the edge is crenellated. The bowl itself is decorated with carved geometric or arabesque patterns. Dark brown ware with remains of red brown slip and burnishing. LS: 5.6 cm, SO: 1.6 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

201

Fig. 8.6B: 92. Locus 821, Basket 9159/1 Type J-19O Almost complete pipe, part of bowl is broken. Heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with double lines giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The lines are set-off from the ring by ovolos between rouletted lines and from the body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated at the edges with incised half circles and the edge is crenellated. The bowl itself is decorated with carved geometric or arabesque patterns. Brown ware with dark purplish brown slip and burnishing. LS: 5.6 cm, SO: 1.8 cm. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 93. Locus 834, Basket 9244/1 Type J-19O Fragmentary pipe, shank and upper part of bowl are broken. Heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with double lines. The lines are set-off from the body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated at the edges with incised half circles and the edge is crenellated. The bowl itself is decorated with carved geometric or arabesque patterns. Brown ware with dark purplish brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.5 cm preserved SO: not preserved. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Type J-19P (Fig. 8.6B: 94) Similar to the previous two types but of a finer execution. The base is decorated with rouletted lines outlining the keel. The bowl is decorated with ovolos in high relief and incised lines on the lower part. The shank has incised lines as in the examples before. Fig. 8.6B: 94. Locus 430, Basket 5091.4 Type J-19P Fragmentary pipe. Shank and part of the bowl are broken. This pipe is certainly related to the previous types. It has a flat base with two rouletted lines marking the keel. The bowl is high and narrow and decorated with incised lines. The lower part of the bowl is decorated with ovolos in high relief. The shank is probably long and is decorated with incised lines. Next to the shank is an illegible potter’s mark in pseudo Arabic letters. Light gray ware with bright orange slip and burnishing. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Type J-19P-1 (Figs. 8.6B: 95 – 8.6B: 96) Similar to the previous two types but of a finer execution, probably a subtype. In the first example (no. 8.6.95) the base is decorated with incised half circles and the edge is crenellated. The body is decorated with incised lines and band of ovolos. The second example is similar (no. 8.6.96) with two rouletted lines on the base outlining the keel and an undecorated bowl except for a fine rouletted line. Fig. 8.6B: 95. Locus 178, Basket 2026/1 Type J-19P-1 Fragmentary pipe, shank is broken. This bowl is related to the previous types and is probably a subtype. Pipe with flat base and high bowl. The bowl is narrow and the rim is flaring. The lower part of the bowl, the base, is decorated at the edges with incised half circles and the edge is crenellated. The bowl itself is decorated with incised vertical double lines and the rim is set-off by a band of ovolos. Light gray ware with pale orange brown slip and burnishing. Dating: second half of nineteenth century.

202

Chapter 8

Fig. 8.6B: 96. Locus 032, Basket 1100/2 Type J-19P-1 Fragmentary pipe, shank and bowl are broken. This bowl is related to the previous types and is probably a subtype. Pipe with flat base and vertical bowl. The bowl is standing on a flat base which is decorated on the bottom with two rouletted lines marking the keel. The bowl itself seems to be undecorated except for a rouletted line at its bottom. Light orange ware with self slip and burnishing. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Type J-19Q (Figs. 8.6B: 97 – 8.6B: 98) Small size variant of Type J-19O. Fig. 8.6B: 97. Locus 057, Basket 5087 Type J-19Q Related to the previous types, it seems to be the small size version of Type J-19O. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with double lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The lines are set-off from the ring by ovolos between rouletted lines and from the body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated at the edges with incised half circles and the edge is crenellated. The bowl itself is decorated with carved lines. LS: 5.5 cm, SO: 1.6 cm. Light gray ware with dark red brown slip and burnishing. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 98. Locus 178, Basket 2026/2 Type J-19Q Related to the types above, it seems to be a small size version of Type J-19O. The shank is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. The shank itself is decorated with double lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. The lines are set-off from the ring by incised ovolos between rouletted lines and from the body by a rouletted line. The lower part of the bowl is decorated at the edges with incised half circles and the edge is crenellated. The bowl itself is decorated with carved lines and ovolos. LS: 4.5 cm, SO: 1.4 cm. Light gray ware with dark red brown slip and burnishing. Dating: second half of nineteenth century. Type J-19R (Fig. 8.6B: 99) Star-shaped pipe very similar to Tophane pipes. Mold-made with pronounced keel but otherwise undecorated Fig. 8.6B: 99. Locus 148, Basket 1813 Type J-19R Moldmade pipe in the shape of a flower with eight petals. The keel is pronounced. The shank is broken as is the upper part of the bowl. From complete examples from Tophane it seems that the bowl was either Vshaped or with a flaring rim (cf. Bakla 2007: 170: O1–49). Bakla’s examples are all heavily decorated and gilded, while our example is undecorated. Pinkish ware with self-slip and burnishing. Dating: end of the nineteenth century. Type J-19S (Figs. 8.6B: 100 – 8.6B: 103) Star-shaped pipes which are not mold-made. The “pushing-back” of the clay is clearly visible on the back of the pipe and fits a finger of an adult. They are decorated with incised lines and rouletted. The shank is long and decorated with incised lines forming petals, with small rosettes between the petals and set-off from the ring by a rouletted line.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

203

Fig. 8.6B: 100. Locus 432, Basket 5116/3 Type J-19S Almost complete pipe with complete shank and broken bowl. The bowl is handmade in shape of a flower. The petals are made by pushing back the clay probably with the finger; the petals are also outlined with a carved semicircle on both sides. The bowl could have been V-shaped or with a flaring rim as in the previous type. The shank is long and decorated with double lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. Small rosettes are positioned between the petals and a rouletted line sets them off from the ring. The keel is only slightly pronounced and outlined by a rouletted line. Light gray ware with orange red slip and burnishing. LS: 5 cm, SO: 1.5 cm. Dating: end of the nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 101. Locus 495, Basket 5385 Type J-19S Fragmentary pipe with broken shank and broken bowl. The bowl is of the same type as the previous one and was similarly fashioned. The bowl could have been V-shaped or with a flaring rim as in the previous type. The shank is long and decorated with double lines, giving it the appearance of a flower with closed petals. A line sets them off from the ring. The keel is pronounced and outlined by a coarse rouletted line. Light gray ware with orange red slip and burnishing. LS: 4 cm, SO: 1.3 cm. Dating: end of the nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 102. Locus 127, Basket 1890/2 Type J-19S This is the smallest pipe of this series. Almost complete pipe; the shank is complete and the upper part of the bowl is broken. It was made the same way like the two pipes mentioned above. The bowl and the shank are decorated with coarse rouletted bands and incised lines. The keel is pronounced and outlined by a coarse rouletted line. Light gray ware with orange red slip and burnishing. LS: 2.3 cm preserved, SO: not preserved. Dating: end of the nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 103. Locus 156, Basket 2076/1 Type J-19S This pipe is a variant of the previous ones in the series. Although it is shaped like a flower it is not flat like the previous ones. Between the petals are incises lines (perhaps fashioned from a tool or from a fingernail while pinching the petal). The upper part of the bowl is broken and the shank is also missing. Light gray ware with red-brown slip and burnishing. Dating: end of the nineteenth century. Type J-19T (Figs. 8.6B: 104 – 8.6B: 106) Pipes in elaborate shape of stars or flowers. They are decorated with rouletting and incised lines and carved patterns forming flowers and leaves. Drilled holes are also common. The shank is rather short and swollen and decorated with incised lines forming petals. Rouletted lines set-off the vertical lines. The pipes are slipped and burnished. Fig. 8.6B: 104. Locus 829, Basket 9221 Type J-19T Complete shank and fragmentary bowl. The bowl is shaped in the form of a flower (probably ten petals). These are decorated with carved lines forming a leaf pattern on the upper part of the petal. The bowl is setoff by a rouletted line. The base is flat and the keel rectangular and pronounced. The edges are delineated by incised semicircles. The shank is long and swollen with incised vertical lines which form the usual closed petals of the flower. They are uplifted towards the bowl and set-off by rouletted lines. This type again recalls

204

Chapter 8

the elaborate pipes from Tophane in the decoration (Bakla 2007: 173: O1-67) which it seems to imitate also in the slip color. Light gray ware with dark red brown slip and burnishing. LS: 4.1 cm, SO: 2 cm. Dating: middle or end of the nineteenth century. Comparison: Bakla 2007: 173: O1-67; this pipe is black but the petals are decorated in the same way as our pipe. Fig. 8.6B: 105. Locus 270, Basket 5293/7 Type J-19T Fragmentary pipe. No shank preserved and upper part of bowl is broken. The pipe is shaped in form of a flower. The petals are stylized and pointed. Moreover there are drilled holes. The lower part of the bowl is decorated with incised half circles and a rouletted line which outlines the swollen keel. The small preserved part of the upper side of the bowl is decorated with rouletting. At Tophane, flower-shaped pipes with drilled holes were produced; it is possible that it was the intention of the pipemaker to imitate again a Tophane pipe (Bakla 2007: 163: O1-21 central pipe, 169: O1-48). Beige ware with red slip and burnishing. Dating: end of the nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 106. Locus 043, Basket 1370 Type J-19T Fragmentary pipe with partial shank and upper part of bowl broken. The pipe was shaped in the form of a flower but the petals are broken. They are not carefully made and only decorated with rouletted lines that outline the petal. The base is decorated with double semicircles. The shank is broken but seems to have been decorated with lines forming a flower with closed petals. The rouletted line which sets it off from the bowl is preserved. The keel is swollen and decorated with rouletted lines and lines and incised dots. Light gray with dark red slip and burnishing. LS: 2.5 cm preserved, SO: not preserved. Dating: end of the nineteenth century. Type J-19U (Figs. 8.6B: 107 – 8.6B: 110) Small rounded pipes made of different wares with short shank and thickened wreath. Decorations are stamped, carved and incised. They can be highly burnished and polished. Fig. 8.6B: 107. Locus 156, Basket 2076/2 Type J-19U Small round pipe with broken upper part of bowl. The shank is short and upturned and the shank end is swollen and decorated with incised dots. The bowl is decorated with incised lines dividing the bowl in registers which are decorated with incised and rouletted patterns and drilled holes. The middle of the base bears a pipe maker’s mark in form of a leaf (?). Light gray ware with brownish slip and highly burnished. LS: 3 cm, SO: 1 cm. Dating: probably late nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 108. Locus 107, Basket 1654/1 Type J-19U Small round pipe. The upper part of the bowl and the shank are broken. The bowl is decorated with stamped leaves forming a garland around the body of the bowl. The keel is pronounced and outlined by rouletted lines and incised fine lines. Orange ware, highly burnished. Dating: probably late nineteenth century.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

205

Fig. 8.6B: 109. Locus 157, Basket 1896 Type J-19U Small round pipe. The upper part of the bowl and the shank are broken. The bowl is decorated with stamped rosettes forming a garland between two incised fine lines. The keel is outlined with two fine incised lines. Light grayish ware with dark red slip and burnishing. Dating: probably late nineteenth century Fig. 8.6B: 110. Locus 178, Basket 2026/3 Type J-19U Small pipe. The bowl was probably supposed to be round but is almost square, probably as a result of handling when it was still leather hard. It is undecorated and coarse. The shank is short and ends in a stepped ring. Dark gray ware, unslipped and not burnished. LS: 2 cm, SO: 0.9 cm. Dating: probably late nineteenth century. Type J-19V (Figs. 8.6B: 111 – 8.6B: 113) Large pipes with large bowl with off-set upper part which is flaring. The lower part of the bowl is decorated with incised lines and the upper part plain with a rouletted band. The keel is pronounced and outlined with rouletted bands. The shank is long and ends in a thickened end with a double rouletted band and an incised line. Fig. 8.6B: 111. Locus 467, Basket 5280/7 Type J-19V Large tulip-shaped pipe with almost complete shank and upper part of bowl broken divided into registers. The lower part is decorated with oblique deeply incised lines set off by a rouletted line from the undecorated register and another rouletted band. The shank is long and upturned. The shank end is swollen with a double rouletted band and an incised fine line. The keel is pronounced and outlined with a coarse rouletted line. Light gray ware with dark reddish brown slip and burnishing. LS: 7 cm, SO: 1.5 cm. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2008: fig. 270: 62. Fig. 8.6B: 112. Locus 056, Basket 1436/1 Type J-19V Fragment of bowl. Large tulip-shaped bowl divided into registers. The lower part is decorated with incised lines forming the petals of a flower; at the end of each petal is an incised dot. Then follows a band of oblique incised lines and a rouletted line. The undecorated upper part is divided from the next part by rouletted lines. The keel is outlined by a rouletted band. Light gray ware with dark red-brown slip and burnishing. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Comparison: Simpson 2008: fig. 270: 63. Fig. 8.6B: 113. Locus 461, Basket 5179/2 Type J-19V Fragment of pipe similar to the two examples above. The difference is in the bowl decoration which here consists of intricate rouletted registers in net pattern and straight lines. Light gray ware with deep red slip and burnishing. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-19W (Fig. 8.6B: 114) Heavy pipe with bowl that on the lower part forms a thick bulge which is decorated with incised lines. The bowl is narrow and probably high and decorated with incised patterns. The shank is long and the end bulging and decorated with carved lines and two incised lines at the end. The keel is pronounced and outlined with two deep incised lines, and the edge of the base bears incised nicks.

206

Chapter 8

Fig. 8.6B: 114. Locus 1032, Basket 1007/8 Type J-19W Heavy pipe with bowl that on the lower part forms a thick bulge which is decorated with incised lines. The bowl is narrow and probably high and decorated with incised patterns. The shank is long and the end bulging and decorated with carved lines and two incised lines at the end. The keel is now pronounced and outlined with two deep incised lines and the edge of the base bears incised nicks. Dark gray ware and black slip and burnishing. LS: 4.7 cm, SO: 1.9 cm. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-19W-1 (Figs. 8.6B: 115 – 8.6B: 116) This is a variant of the previous type. The lower part from the keel on is decorated with carved lines. The bowl is set-off with a rouletted line. The shank is long but only the end is bulged and decorated with carved lines. Fig. 8.6B: 115. Locus 495, Basket 5385/5 Type J-19W-1 This is a variant of the previous example Fig. 8.6B:114. The lower part from the keel on is decorated with carved lines. The bowl is set-off with a rouletted line and is decorated with carved lines. The shank is long but only the end is bulged and decorated with carved lines. Dark gray ware and black slip and burnishing. LS: 4.7 cm, SO: 1.9 cm. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 116. Locus 465, Basket 5260/22 Type J-19W-1 This also is a variant of the previous example Fig. 8.6B:114. The lower part from the keel on is decorated with carved lines. The bowl is set-off with a rouletted line and is undecorated. The shank is long but only the end is bulged and decorated with carved lines. Dark gray ware with black slip and burnishing. LS: 5.4 cm, SO: 1.9 cm. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-19X (Figs. 8.6B: 117 – 8.6B: 120) These pipes have a flat base with a sloping bowl and a shank which is attached at an angle to the bowl. The shank and the bowl are decorated with fine incised lines. The keel is marked with several rouletted lines. Fig. 8.6B: 117. Locus 178, Basket 2011 Type J-19X This pipe is made of orange ware with gray slip. Proposed dating: second half of nineteenth century. Comparison: Dekkel 2008: fig. 4.14: 80 Fig. 8.6B: 118. Locus 148, Basket 1813/1 Type J-19X Same as above, only different ware. Pale orange ware and highly burnished. Proposed dating: second half of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 119. Locus 439, Basket 5094/2 Type J-19X Same as above but smaller size and the bowl is decorated with wavy incised lines. Light gray ware with light orange slip and burnishing. Proposed dating: second half of nineteenth century.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

207

Fig. 8.6B: 120. Locus 834, Basket 9232/3 Type J-19X Heavy coarse bowl with flat base and pointed pronounced keel outlined by rouletted line. The shank is broken. The bowl is slightly conical with an oblique lower part with incised lines. The oblique part is set off by a rouletted line. The bow itself is not decorated. Pale pinkish ware with self slip and burnishing. Proposed dating: end of the nineteenth century. Type J-19Y (Figs. 8.6B: 121 – 8.6B: 124) Small pipe with disc and narrow bowl. The disc has a flat raised base. The bowl is decorated on the lower part with a rouletted band. The shank is long and flaring at the end. Fig. 8.6B: 121. Locus 821, Basket 9159/3 Type J-19Y Small pipe with disc and narrow bowl. The disc has a flat raised base. The bowl is broken but decorated on the lower part with a rouletted band. The shank is long and flaring at the end and decorated with incised lines and a rouletted band. Light orange ware with slip? LS: 3.7 cm, SO: 1.8 cm. Proposed dating: end of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 122. Locus 177, Basket 1986/1 Type J-19Y Small pipe with flat disc and flat base continuing the shank. The pipe is not decorated except for a rouletted line next to the bottom of the bowl. The bowl is broken. Pale orange ware with self slip and burnishing. LS: 3 cm, SO: 1.1 cm. Proposed dating: nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 123. Locus 455, Basket 5209/15 Type J-19Y Small pipe with flat disc and flat base continuing the shank. The bowl is broken. The pipe is not decorated except for a rouletted line next to the bottom of the bowl. Light beige ware, unslipped and not burnished. LS: 3 cm, SO: 1.5 cm. Proposed dating: end of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6B: 124. Locus 658, Basket 1245 Type J-19Y Large pipe with complete shank. Upper part of bowl is broken. The lower part of the bowl forms a disc which is sloping from the bowl to the edge of the disc. The bowl is decorated with a rouletted line and incised vertical lines. The shank is long and undecorated except for a fine line around the edge of it. The keel is pronounced by incised and rouletted lines. Light gray ware with red slip and burnishing. LS: 5 cm, SO: 1.8 cm. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-19Z (Fig. 8.6B: 125) Made from hard, even metallic ware. The disc is flat and standing on the keel which is pointed and outlined by a rouletted line. The edge of the disc is crenellated. The bowl is decorated with lines and rouletted leaves. The shank flaring at the end with a band of rouletted drops between rouletted lines. Fig. 8.6B: 125. Locus 105, Basket 1652 Type J-19Z Light gray ware and dark brown slip and burnishing.

208

Chapter 8

LS: 4.2 cm, SO: 1.8 cm. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-19AA (Fig. 8.6B: 126) Large pipe but of the style of the seventeenth century pipes with stamped decorations on the bowl. The keel, however, is pronounced and outlined with incised and rouletted lines. There is a stamped leaf on the middle of the base. The shank is swollen and bears incised lines with small palmettes and the end of those lines. The shank is also decorated with impressed circles. Fig. 8.6B: 126. Locus 101, Basket 2070 Type J-19AA Light gray ware with self slip. LS: 5.6 cm, SO: 1 cm. Suggested dating: nineteenth century? Type J-19AB (Fig. 8.6B: 127) Heavy coarse bowl with keel forming a small base which on the sides has incised half circles. The bowl is probably tulip shaped and decorated with incised lines and herringbone pattern. Fig. 8.6B: 127. Locus 230, Basket 3151/7 Type J-19AB Light gray ware with self slip and no burnishing. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth century. Type J-19AC (Figs. 8.6B: 128 – 8.6B: 129) Long shank probably belonging to a large pipe with swollen end and decorated with rouletted band of palmettes and semicircles. Fig. 8.6B: 128. Locus 463, Basket 5250/3 Type J-19AC Light gray ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. LS: 6:4 cm, SO: 1.7 cm. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth or twentieth century. Fig. 8.6B: 129. Locus 834, Basket 9244/3 Type J-19AC Long shank probably belonging to a large pipe with swollen end and decorated with rouletted band. Light gray ware and bright orange slip and burnishing. LS: 4.8 cm, SO: 1.3 cm. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth or twentieth century. Type J-19AD (Fig. 8.6B: 130) Long shank probably belonging to a large pipe with simple shank end decorated with rouletted bands and stamped drops. Fig. 8.6B: 130. Locus 834, Basket 9232/4 Type J-19AD Light orange ware and dark brownish slip and burnishing. LS: 4.6 cm, SO: 1.6 cm. Suggested dating: end of nineteenth or twentieth century. Type J-19AE (Fig. 8.6B: 131) Shank of large bowl. Stepped end with incised nicks and stamped leaves.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

209

Fig. 8.6B: 131. Locus 081, Basket 1802/1 Type J-19AE Pink ware with whitish slip and burnishing. LS: 5 cm, SO: 1.4 cm. No dating proposed. Type J-19AF (Fig. 8.6B: 132) Shank of rounded bowl with thickened end which is faceted. The keel is outlined by incised and rouletted lines. Fig. 8.6B: 132. Locus 160, Basket 1937/2 Type J-19AF Dark gray ware with dark brown slip and highly burnished. LS: 4.8 cm, SO: 1.4 cm. No dating proposed. Statistical Analysis of the Clay Pipe Assemblage Pipes by Centuries (Chart 1) 496 pipe fragments were collected in the Qishle excavations, of which 62% (306 fragments) are dated to the nineteenth century, 180 or 36% to the eighteenth century, and only 10 fragments (2%) can be identified as seventeenth century pipes (Chart 1).

Pipes by Centuries 350 306 300 250 200

180 Pipes by Centuries

150 100 50 10 0 Seventeenth Century

Eighteenth Century

Nineteenth Century

Chart 1: Pipes by Centuries Eighteenth Century Pipes by Types (Chart 2) Of the 180 pipe fragments dated to the eighteenth century, 143 could be assigned to a particular type. Type J-18A is the most prominent type (62 fragments) in this century at the Qishle. The characterized by a large round bowl with a straight upper part and a short curved shank with a stepped ring. They are usually red slipped. The keel is not formed yet but is usually outlined either by incised lines or rouletted bands. The decorations consist of rouletted bands and incised lines. All of these pipes have stamped potters’ marks (?),

210

Chapter 8

mainly rosettes and dotted half moons. In other excavations in Jaffa this type has been identified as well.185 Interesting enough, this pipe type seems to match the description of Seetzen (1854: 22) who wrote about red slipped pipes produced at Jaffa. An additional rather large group consists of round pipes which are glazed yellow (Type J-18J). Fourteen fragments were assigned to this type. They are of two basic types, one decorated and the other one plain, but they are both made of what seems to be the same clay (petrographic analysis in this case would be helpful) and different shades of yellow glaze. This type was among the types of pipes found also in other excavations in Jaffa.186 The third type (Type J-18M) is characterized by carved decorations on the bowl and the shank end. Fourteen fragments were assigned to this type. The last type (10 examples) is Type J-18F which has a small round bowl is decorated with carved geometric patterns and a short-stepped shank. These four groups of pipes seem to be characteristic of Jaffa since no parallels have been identified elsewhere. Petrographic analysis could help identifying where the clay came from and if they were produced at Jaffa itself. All the types are represented by 1 to 7 examples. It cannot be said if these are indeed “types” or if some of them are subtypes of the main types. There are, however, two types which are worth mentioning here: Type J-18H and Type 18L. The first one bears a rouletted inscription around the shank in Arabic, as has been found previously on pipes from Ramla (see above). The second type is made of very fine clay of a light buff color and highly polished/burnished so as to reach the effect of burnt ivory. It is decorated with very elaborated stamped patterns. These have been found more than once in Jaffa and even at Corinth and Athens (Robinson 1985: C95–C98 and A19, A20). Their provenance is still unknown; it has been suggested that they were made outside of Istanbul on the basis of the seal which some scholars thought of being imitations of Arabic (Stančeva 1972: 83–84). However, as we have identified the pipemaker as being Şişmanyan, possibly an Armenian, we cannot rule out that the pipe was made in Turkey, maybe Kütahya or even Jerusalem, which had several Armenian potters. Until now, no petrographic analysis has been conducted to reveal the provenance of the clay.

18th Century Pipes 70

62

60 50 40 30

Type 18D

7

7 1

2

3

2

6 1

1

3 Type 18S

Type 18C

4

Type 18R

1

Type 18H

3

Type 18G

2 Type 18B

10

14

14

10

Type 18Q

20

Chart 2: Eighteenth Century Pipe Types

185 186

HaZorfim Street and Ruslan Street (Vincenz forthcoming a and b). See note 149.

Type 18P

Type 18O

Type 18N

Type 18M

Type 18L

Type 18K

Type 18J

Type 18F

Type 18E

Type 18A

0

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

211

Nineteenth Century Pipes by Types (Chart 3) 306 fragments have been dated to the nineteenth century, of which 212 could be assigned to types. The remaining fragments were shanks which can be dated, but which cannot be assigned to specific types. The type which was the prominent in this century is Type J-19L, of which 40 examples have been found, and Type J-19K of which 25 examples were found. The main characteristic of these two types is the tulip-shaped bowl. These pipes are made of a variety of clays, from the red clay to other gray clays which are then slipped with red or reddish slip and burnished. There are variations in the bowl which can be left plain or decorated with stamped patterns. The shank also can be of different shapes such as the one which is in shape of a closed flower, or those that have a thickened end which is then decorated with rouletted bands. This group is the major group and has been found at many other sites, including Jerusalem (Simpson 2008: fig. 269: 43–50) and Suba (Simpson 2000: figs. 13.5: 106–121; 13.6: 122–137). Type J-19V has been identified 20 times and seems to be another variant of the tulip-shaped pipe, where the lower part of the bowl is heavily decorated while the upper part remains plain. They are rather common in Jaffa. Another very common type during the nineteenth century is that of a heavy pipe with flat base and high bowl called Type J-19N. There are several subtypes in this group, but its main characteristics are a flat base, high bowl and shank which is long and attached obliquely to half of the bowl. 35 examples belonging to these four types Type J-19N, Type J-19O, Type 19P and Type J-19Q have been identified. They have been found outside Jaffa at Suba (Simpson 2000: figs. 13.7: 171; 13.8: 172–178) and Jerusalem (Simpson 2008: fig. 269: 51–53). Moreover, another common group (Type J-19U) consists of small pipes with round bowl and with various decorations that are mostly stamped and rouletted. These pipes are made of a variety of clays and are highly polished/burnished. Their size could possibly indicate that they were made for ladies. There is a group of pipes which were probably imported from Istanbul (Tophane) and which are easily recognized because of the clay and slip and also because of the shape and decoration (Types J-19A, Type J19C, Type J-19D, Type J-19E, Type J-19F). The prominent type with the flat disc under the bowl is wellknown from Istanbul and appears with pipe makers’ marks. Other types also have marks and can be traced back to Istanbul. It would be interesting to check the clay to be sure that these are authentic Tophane pipes.

19th Century Pipes 45

40

40 35 30 23

25 20

25

23

20

17

16

2

3

5

5

Type 19T

5

Type 19S

5

Type 19R

1

Type 19Q

Type 19E

1

Type 19H

1

Type 19G

1

Type 19P

5

5

2

Type 19D

4

5

Type 19C

10

Type 19O

15 3

Chart 3: Nineteenth Century Pipe Types

Type 19W

Type 19V

Type 19U

Type 19N

Type 19M

Type 19L

Type 19K

Type 19J

Type 19F

Type 19B

Type 19A

0

212

Chapter 8

Various Other Pipes and Mouthpieces (Figs. 8.6C: 133–8.6C: 138) Several pipes made of white kaolin-clay and one made of stone have also been found in the Qishle. Moreover, several mouthpieces were identified; all these objects are discussed below. Venetian Pipe Fig. 8.6C: 133. Locus 146, Basket 1889 This rather curious pipe made on the wheel consists of a shallow reservoir for the smoke and a small bowl with three holes where the tobacco and the charcoal were placed, and probably a higher rim, which in our case is broken. The small shank is rather narrow and broken. Our example bears traces of gilding. This type of pipe seems to be related to Venetian-type pipes which are dated between 1670 and 1750. Like the Turkish pipe, these pipes were smoked with a wooden stem. Pipes of this type have been found near Marseille (Gosse 2007: 7). SL: 3 cm, SO: 0.7 cm, Bowl diam. 2 cm. Stone Pipe Fig. 8.6C: 134. Locus 167, Basket 1989 A large pipe made of light grayish-green stone. The shank is short and sharply curved and the bowl is straight and narrow. The rim is decorated with and incised criss-cross pattern and a herringbone pattern at the junction of the bowl with the shank. SL: 3 cm; SO: 1.2 cm; Diam. 1.8 cm. Stone pipes are rather rare in archaeological contexts of the Ottoman period. An example made of gray marble has been reported from Banias and is dated to the seventeenth century or even earlier (Dekkel 2008: fig. 4. 4: 7). Another example, of a decorated type, comes from Bulgaria and is made of a dark green rock (Stoyanova, Vitov and Marinova 2008). An additional stone pipe made of green serpentine stone has been found in Stralsund, Germany, dated to the eighteenth century (Ansorge 2009). The shape is similar to our item. Our pipe resembles a Bedouin clay pipe which has been published by Y. Israel (2007: 257 and fig. 275). It has decorations on the rim similar to our stone pipe. Suggested dating: nineteenth or twentieth century. European Pipes – Dutch Gouda Pipes Two fragments of such pipes have been found at Jaffa. They are made of white backing clay and have a narrow long stem and a narrow bowl with a small heel which sometimes bears a mark. These pipes are commonly dated from the seventeenth century to the twentieth century. Fig. 8.6C: 135. Locus 191, Basket 2042 This pipe bears a mark on the heel,187 probably a Fortuna = Tyche goddess of good fortune or an angel.188 Pipes with Fortuna marks have been produced in Holland by different pipe makers from 1677 to 1893 (van der Meulen 2003: 34).189 SL: 3 cm; SO: 0.3 cm; Diam. 1.4 cm Fig. 8.6C: 136: Locus 284, Basket 3322. Only the bowl is preserved. Diam. 1.5 cm.

187

Photo and drawing of the stamp are by Katharina Streit of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. http://www.goudapipes.nl/books/Meulen/catalog/db/Finds.php?mark=fortuin#fortuin (possibly similar to our mark) (accessed 1.1.2012). 189 http://www.goudapipes.nl/books/Meulen/catalog/beeldmerken.php (list of pipe makers) (accessed 1.1.2013). 188

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

213

Mouthpieces Mouthpieces are a rare find on archaeological excavations. They are frequently made of ivory or a precious stone such as amber. The German nineteenth century traveler Ulrich Jasper Seetzen mentions that “glass mouthpieces for pipe-rods are being sold” in the market in front of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher (1854: 15): “… allerhand Glaswaaren von Hebron, als Rosenkränze, Halskorallen, Armringe, Fingerringe und Mundstücke zu Pfeifenröhren” (p. 15)190. An amber mouth piece and one made of ivory have been found on the Kitten shipwreck in Bulgaria (Batchvarov 2009: figs. 98–99). They have been found together with a decorated cherry wood stem which is a quite unusual find. Mouthpieces appear in a variety of shapes. Fig. 8.6C: 137. Locus 042, Basket 1327/1 This elaborate mouthpiece is made of ivory. The upper part is shaped like a drop with a small disk with notched edge followed by another drop with a notched end where the reed was inserted. The ivory is highly polished. Similar mouthpieces made of amber come from collections in Istanbul (Bakla 2007: 180: O4-4). Height: 5.1 cm; Diam. of opening on mouth side: 0.3 cm; Diam. of opening on reed side: 0.9 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Fig. 8.6C: 138. Locus 042, Basket 1327/2. Short mouthpiece made of ivory. One side carved with a twisted pattern, the other end is incised, forming a groove. The mouthpiece broke when the hole was drilled. Elaborate mouthpieces of this shape can be found in Istanbul (Bakla 2007: 168: O1-45). Height: 3.2 cm; Diam. of opening: 0.3 cm. Dating: nineteenth century. Narghile Smoking Pipes (Figs. 8.6D: 139 – 8.6D: 156)191 The smoking of a special kind of tobacco called shisha, tombac or tumbak was introduced in Istanbul during the reign of Sultan Murat IV (Bakla 2007: 362). For that a special kind of pipe was used which was the narghile or water-pipe where the smoke was filtered and cooled through water. It seems that the origin of the narghile can be found in India from where it travelled through Iran, reaching Turkey and the Ottoman world (Bakla 2007: 64). The narghile consists of a container for the water, a metal stem with a ceramic or porcelain top for the tobacco and coals and a rigid reed through which the smoke was inhaled. This rigid reed was soon replaced by a flexible tube. The reed and tube are then fitted with a mouthpiece made of precious stone such as amber or of ivory. Narghile bowls are found in excavation reports. Two from Akko are mentioned by Edelstein and Avissar (1997: fig. 3), one from Suba (Simpson 2000: fig. 13.9: 198) and two from Tel Jezreel (Simpson 2002: fig. 3: 22–23). Narghile heads are also reported from Saraçhane (Hayes 1992: plate 51: j,k). Y. Israel discusses narghile ceramic heads in his dissertation (2007: fig. 278). Ceramic heads belonging to narghile have been found in the Qishle excavations together with chibouk type pipes. Unfortunately, unlike the pipes, narghile heads were not counted. Most of the heads are made of Black Gaza Ware, but a few other types have also been found. These are shown below. The narghile heads can be divided into five types according to their ware:

190

“… various glass items from Hebron, as rosaries, beads, bracelets, finger-rings and mouth-pieces for pipe-stems;” translation by the author. 191 Photographs are by Clara Amit, IAA.

214

Chapter 8

Type J-NAR-1 (Figs. 8.6D: 139 – 8.6D: 144) This type is made of black or dark gray ware which is well-known from Gaza Ware vessels (cf. Part 5); some of them are burnished. There are several variants (J-NAR-1A-1B-1C-1D-1E-1F). Fig. 8.6D: 139. Locus 290, Basket 3345/11 Type J-NAR-1A The bowl is undecorated while the flange bears incised lines like petals. The stem has ridges for better grip. Comparison: Simpson 2002: 163, fig.3: 23 Fig. 8.6D: 140. Locus 212, Basket 3039 Type J- NAR-1B This type is made of black or dark gray ware and the upper part of the bowl is decorated with a rouletted band. The flange bears incised lines like petals; these are set off from the body by a rouletted band. The stem has ridges for better grip. Fig. 8.6D: 141. Locus 268, Basket 3269/2 Type J- NAR-1C This type is made of black or dark gray ware and the body and bowl are undecorated. The flange bears incised lines and the edge is crenellated. The stem has ridges for better grip. Fig. 8.6D: 142. Locus 605, Basket 7055/5 Type J- NAR-1D This type is made of black or dark gray ware and the bowl is spiral-shaped with incised lines. The body is undecorated and the flange has incised lines forming petals. The stem has ridges for better grip. Fig. 8.6D: 143. Locus 605, Basket 6022/8 Type J- NAR-1E This type is made of black or dark gray ware and the bowl is undecorated while the body is covered with a net pattern between rouletted bands. The flange bears deeply carved lines and forms petals. The stem has ridges for better grip. Fig. 8.6D: 144. Locus 834, Basket 9220/11 Type J- NAR-1F This type is made of black or dark gray ware and the flange is petal shaped. The upper part is possibly similar to one of the above discussed types. Type J- NAR-2 (Figs. 8.6D: 145 – 8.6D: 149) Made of light red ware (2.5YR 7/6 light red) and is usually not burnished. Four variants have been identified (J-NAR-2A-2B-2C-2D). Fig. 8.6D: 145. Locus 465, Basket 5260/12 Type J- NAR-2A The body is long, decorated with stamped palmettes and ending into a spiral shaped bowl. The flange is carved to form petals and the edge bears incised lines. The stem is ridged for better grip. Fig. 8.6D: 146: Locus 879, Basket 8073/1 Type J- NAR-2B Same type as above; the body is undecorated here. Comparison: Simpson 2002: 163, fig.3: 22 Fig. 8.6D: 147. Locus 816, Basket 9159/6 Type J- NAR-2C The body is short without a pronounced bowl. The rim is just slightly flaring. The body is decorated with three rouletted bands. The flange is down-turned and bears carved lines so as to form petals. The stem is ridged for better grip.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

215

Fig. 8.6D: 148. Locus 495, Basket 5385 Type J- NAR-2C The body is of the same type as above with a rouletted band at the base. The flange has carved lines and forms petals. The stem is broken. Fig. 8.6D: 149. Locus 270, Basket 3236/7 Type J- NAR-2D Large narghile head with long body and everted rim (maybe petal-shaped, but the edge is broken). The body is decorated with rouletted bands and deeply stamped palmettes. The flange is down-turned and has also stamped palmettes of the same type as on the body. The stem is plain. Type J- NAR-3 (Figs 8.6D: 150 – 8.6D: 153) Made of different brown (5YR 6/4 light reddish brown) or light gray wares. They are slipped red-brown or brown and burnished. Several variants can be discerned (J-NAR-3A-3B-3C-3D). Fig. 8.6D: 150. Locus 127, Basket 1679/10 Type J- NAR-3A Narghile head with short body with flaring rim. It is decorated with two rouletted bands of net pattern. The flange is down-turned and bears carved lines; its edge has incised nicks. The stem has rouletted bands for better grip. The entire narghile head is burnished. Fig. 8.6D: 151. Locus 952, Basket 10391/10 Type J- NAR-3B Similar to the previous one. The body is decorated with two rouletted bands, one under the rim, the other at the base of the body. The flange bears deeply incised lines forming petals, and the edge has nicks. The stem bears two deeply incised lines for better grip. The narghile is burnished. Fig. 8.6D: 152. Locus 209, Basket 3058/4 Type J- NAR-3C Only body and bowl preserved. The body bears and incised line under the rim and below stamped palmettes. The body is decorated with net pattern. The flange and stem are broken. The narghile is slipped reddishbrown. Fig. 8.6D: 153. Locus 309, Basket 9026/3 Type J-3D Narghile head with very narrow body. The bowl is probably flaring. The body is undecorated, with a ridge at its base. The flange is wide and decorated with deeply incised lines and drilled holes. The stem is ridged for better grip. The narghile is burnished. Type J- NAR-4 (Fig. 8.6D: 154) This type is made of brown ware and highly burnished. Fig. 8.6D: 154. Locus 605, Basket 7022/9 Type J- NAR-4 Almost complete narghile head with narrow body and flaring bowl. The bowl is decorated with an incised criss-cross pattern and a rouletted band. The body is undecorated. The flange is down-turned and decorated with deeply carved lines forming petals and giving the edge a crenellated appearance. The upper part of the flange bears a rouletted band. The stem has multiple ridges for better grip. The entire narghile is burnished. Type J- NAR-5 (Figs. 8.6D: 155 – 8.6D: 156) This type is made of the same ware as the Tophane pipes of Type J-19A/B/C. They are also highly burnished and probably polished.

216

Chapter 8

Fig. 8.6D: 155. Locus 495, Basket 5385/1 Type J- NAR-5 Almost complete narghile head. The bowl is broken. The body is crenellated and petal shaped, which seems to mean that the bowl was in shape of an open lotus flower. The lower part of the body has a band of ovolos in high relief. The flange is slightly over-hanging forming petals. The stem has ridges for better grip. The ware is similar to that of the Tophane pipes, and indeed narghile heads were also produced there (Bakla 2007: 176: O1-O9). Fig. 8.6D: 156: Locus 209, Basket 3034/6 Type J- NAR-5 Similar as above, only the body is plain. The flange has the same shape and the stem is also ridged. 8.7. Roof Tiles, Tiles, Kuzan and Antilia Marseille Roof Tiles and Tiles (Figs. 8.7: 1–5) In 1841 the Gilardoni brothers, Joseph and Xaver from Altkirch, Alsace patented what would become the most popular roof tile produced, the heart tile. A few years later several manufacturers in and around Marseille started to mass produce and export these tiles. They were exported all over the world, including Palestine where they were used abundantly and are found at many excavations, including in Jaffa.192 The manufacturers that are known and of which roof tiles have been found in Palestine are many. All of them have a stamp on the tile with the name of the manufacturer and a symbol (which can be an animal or another motif). A pioneer in the research on Marseille roof tiles is Etan Ayalon (Ayalon 2000, 2002). Moreover, tiles have been published by Raveh and Kingsley from a shipwreck from the harbor at Dor/Tantura (1992), and Gérald Finkielsztejn has begun to publish roof tiles from excavations in Jerusalem (2008).193 More research needs to be done as far as dating is concerned. As far as we know the tiles were produced after the middle of the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth century. Many of these factories still produce tiles. In the Qishle excavations only a few tile fragments have been retrieved. Fig. 8.7: 1 Fragment of tile with an impressed heart. The heart was the stamp used by the Roux Brothers who produced tiles in St. Henri, Marseille. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.7: 2 Fragment of tile with the monogram JM within a vegetal garland. MARS is also preserved in one corner. The monogram belongs to J.M. Mouraille who also was active in St. Henri, Marseille. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.7: 3 Edge fragment of a tile with the letters RAND F preserved. Dating: end of nineteenth century.

192

HaZorfim Street, Ruslan Street, the Harbor (all of them Vincenz forthcoming a, b and c). Hadashot Arkheologyot online number 120, Jerusalem, Sonnenfeld Street http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_ detail_eng.asp?id=935&mag_id=114.

193

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

217

Fig. 8.7: 4 Fragment with lines in relief and impressed anchor in the corner and what appears to be a star. Floor tiles of Antoine Saccoman had a star as a symbol, but not in combination with an anchor. The lines in relief suggest that it is a floor tile, as can be seen on such tiles found elsewhere. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Fig. 8.7: 5 Fragment of tile made of thick very coarse ware. A stamp with two circles and a middle line decorates the tile. As has been mentioned before there were tile and roof tile factories in Jerusalem and probably also in other parts of the country (see above Fig. 7: 4). This tile is probably locally made. Dating: end of nineteenth century. Kuzan Vessels (Figs. 8.7: 6–7) Fig. 8.7: 6–7 The kuzan is a clay vessel similar to a tube with a wide opening on one side and a very narrow on the other which was used in the construction of domes or vaults. Y. Israel discusses them in his dissertation; they can still be seen in older Palestinian houses of the villages (Israel 2006: 275–285, with illustrations), as well as in mosques in Jaffa, Ramla, and other places. Antilia Jug (Fig. 8.7: 8) The jug shown here belonged to an antilia wheel which is characteristic of the Late Ottoman period and common in Jaffa. Etan Ayalon, who studied this type of vessel and the installations to which they belong published a jug of the exact same type from Yavne-Yam (Ayalon 2000: fig. 3: 10). Our jug is ca. 55 cm high with an approx. width of 20 cm and a capacity of about 20 l. Acknowledgments I feel very privileged to have been able to write this report on the Ottoman ceramics and porcelains of the Qishle in Jaffa. I am most grateful to Uzi Dahari who recognized the importance of this period and gave me the opportunity to do research in this “virgin field” and to Yoav Arbel, the excavator of the Qishle who helped me in all the stages of the report, whether it be with the bureaucratic aspects or the technical aspects of drawings, restoration and other tasks connected to the IAA. I am also grateful to Martin Peilstöcker and Aaron Burke, the Directors of the Jaffa Cultural Heritage Project and the editors of the JCHP publication series. I wish to thank Clara Amit and the photo laboratory of the IAA for the photographs and also Marina Zeltser and Irena Lidsky who illustrated the finds. During my research I was very lucky to have received the help of many colleagues. Among my Israeli friends and colleagues I wish to thank Shimon Gibson, Gérald Finkielsztejn and Lior Rauchberger for their comments, suggestions and bibliographical references. Furthermore my thanks go to Ruth Kark with whom I spent considerable time discussing pipe production in Jaffa and Jerusalem. Moreover I wish to thank my friend and colleague Issa Sarie for helping me with the reading of the inscriptions and stamps on the Turkish smoking pipes. From France my special thanks go to Henri Gauvin of Passions Sarreguemines with whom I had lengthy email communications and who examined drawings and photographs of the sherds from the Qishle and who helped identify them. Moreover I wish to thank him for sending me bibliographical material connected to Sarreguemines porcelains. I also wish to thank François Carrazé, Director of the Musée de la céramique méditerranéenne and archaeologist who was very kind to examine photographs, drawings and Munsell readings in order to help identify the pottery sherds. My gratitude goes to Elise Bonnefille and Joëlle Déjardin

218

Chapter 8

of the Grasse Museum, Isabel and Nicolas of Poterie Cliou, Alain Costes who referred me to François Carrazé, and Christine Refalo of the Musée de la céramique méditerranéenne. I am grateful to Véronique François who shared her articles on the excavations in Damascus with me. I also wish to thank Barbara Wilde whose webpage proved very helpful and for sending me photographs of vessels from the website. From Belgium I wish to thank Patrick de Mayer the former director of the Boch, Keramis factory in La Louvière for providing me with important information and for sending me a book on the Boch-Keramis factory which was extremely helpful in my research. From Italy I wish to thank Daniela De Vincentis, Director of the Grottaglie Museum who through photographs, drawings and Munsell readings identified several of the sherds as originating from Grottaglie, and who hinted that others might originate from Corfu, which will have to be tested by petrographic analysis. Moreover I am grateful to Carmen Ravanelli of the Museo Internazionale delle Ceramiche of Faenza for references. Ezio Tino, a specialist in Italian faience vessels, took the time to look at many photographs and drawings of my faience vessels and provided me many useful suggestions concerning where to look for the provenance of the vessels from the Qishle. I am very grateful to him. In Turkey I would like to express my gratitude to Samira Kortantamer of Ege University in Izmir who provided me with readings of the pipe verses, and to my friend and colleague Onur Gülbey who helped me translate several articles into English and who made the contact with Dr. Kortantamer. Moreover I wish to thank Kayhan Dörtlük, Director of the Kaleici Museum in Antalya, who helped me identify the Çanakkale wares among my sherds. Last but not least I wish to thank Danny Syon, IAA, for reading the first draft of this manuscript and for all his helpful comments. My thanks also go to my friend and colleague Benjamin Saidel who meticulously went through the first draft and made sure that all websites were up and running and who commented and helped out with many aspects of this report. I am also grateful to Adrian Boas who read the manuscript and offered many useful suggestions and corrections, I am very grateful for all his work. I wish to thank Sam Wolff who proofread the manuscript and corrected my English and made suggestions on how to improve the report. This report would not have been possible without the help of all these people. I am deeply indebted to all of them. Apologies to those I may have neglected to mention. May this work be a founding stone for the future research on the Ottoman period in Israel.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

219

Works Cited Adler, Beatrice 2005 Early Stoneware Steins from the Les Paul Collection. Dillingen. Al-Houdalieh, Salah H.A. 2008 Ottoman Clay Pipes. Berytus 58: 455–477. Ansorge, Jörg 2009 Eine Tabakspfeife aus sächsischem Serpentinstein – ein Fund aus der Hansestadt Stralsund. Knasterkopf, Band 20/2009: 110–113. Avissar, Miriam 1996 The Clay Tobacco Pipes. In A. Ben-Tor, M. Avissar and Y. Portugali. Yokne‘am I: The Late Periods, pp. 198–201. Qedem Reports 3. Jerusalem. Avissar, Miriam, Yigal Ben-Ephraim and Anna de Vincenz 2009 The Pottery Assemblage From H. Shallale. In Shallalle, Ancient City of the Carmel, edited by Shimon Dar, pp. 252–297. British Archaeological Reports International Series 1897. Archaeopress, Oxford. Avissar, Miriam, and Edna J. Stern 2005 Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk Periods in Israel. Israel Antiquities Authority Reports 26: Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. Ayalon, Etan 2000 Typology and Chronology of Water-Wheel (sāqiya) Pottery Pots from Israel. IEJ 50: 216–226: 2002a Roof Tiles from the Land of Israel. In Gabriel Barkay and Avi Shiller, Landscapes of the Land of Israel, Jerusalem: 126–131 (Hebrew). 2002b Marseille Roof Tiles and their Imitations in Israel. In Armonot Nistarim, Eretz Israel Museum. Tel Aviv: 78–82 (Hebrew). Bakirtzis, Charalambos 1980 “Didymoteichon”: un centre de céramique post-byzantine. Balkan Studies 21: 147–153. Bakla, Erdinç 2007 Tophane Lüleciliği, Antik A.Ş., Istanbul (Turkish). Baram, Uzi 1996 Material Culture, Commodities, and Consumption in Palestine, 1500–1900. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Amherst. 1999 Clay Tobacco Pipes and Coffee Cup Sherds in the Archaeology of the Middle East: Artifacts of Social Tensions from the Ottoman Past. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 3(3): 137– 151. Batchvarov, Kroum Nickolaev 2009 The Kitten Shipwreck. Archaeology and Reconstruction of a Black Sea Merchantman. Ph.D. dissertation. Texas A & M University. College Station, Texas. Bent, J. Theodore (edited and commented) 1893 Early Voyages and Travels in the Levant. I. The Dairy of Master Thomas Dallam, 1599–1600; II. Extracts from the Diaries of Dr. John Covel, 1670–1679 . London. Boas, Adrian 2000 Pottery and Small Finds from the Late Ottoman Village and the Early Zionist Settlement. In Y. Hirschfeld Ramat Hanadiv Excavations, pp. 547–582. Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem. Bösch, Franz 2004 Die Zürcher Porzellanmanufaktur, 1763–1790. In Sara Stocker Steinke and Franz Bösch, Service! Fayencen, Porzellan und Zinn in der Sammlung Dr. Edmund Müller. Helyas Verlag, Beromünster. Burton, Robert 1632 Anatomy of Melancholy, 2nd ed., He. Crips & Lodo Lloyd. London.

220

Chapter 8

Carswell John 1972 Kütahya Tiles and Pottery from the Armenian Cathedral of St. James, Jerusalem, Clarendon Press, Oxford. 2000 Blue and White. Chinese Porcelain around the World. British Museum Press, London. Chaffers, William 1994 Marks and Monograms on Pottery and Porcelain. Wordsworth Reference, Hertfordshire. Cosyns, Etienne and Léopold Bragard 2008 Boch Frères, Keramis. Gramme, Battice. Cuinet, Vital 1894 La Turquie d’Asie. Géographie administrative, statistique, descriptive et raisonée de chaque province de l’Asie-Mineure III. Paris. Cytryn-Silverman, Katia 1996 The Islamic Period in North Sinai. The Pottery Evidence. M.A. thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Dekkel, Amir 2008 The Ottoman Clay Pipes. In Paneas Volume II. Small Finds and Other Studies edited by V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli, pp. 113–164. IAA Reports 38. Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. Edelstein, Gershon and Avissar, Miriam 1997 A Sounding in Old Acre. ‘Atiqot 31: 129–136: François, Véronique 1994 La céramique à glacure à Malia: productions médiévales italiennes et productions ottomans. Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 118: 375–387. 1995 Byzantine ou Ottomane? Une céramique peinte à l’engobe découverte en méditéranée orientale. Anatolia Antiqua III: 204–217. 2002 Production et consommation de vaisselle à Damas à l’époque ottomane. Bulletin d’Études Orientales 53–54. Supplément: études et travaux à la citadelle de Damas, 2000–2001: un premier bilan: 157– 170. 2007 Éléments pour une biographie des tasses à café dans l’empire ottoman. Turcica 39: 293–320. 2008 Jarres, terrailles, faiences et porcelains européennes dans l’empire ottoman (XVIIIe–XIXe siècles). Turcica 40: 81–120. 2009 Céramique d’époque ottomane à la citadelle de Damas, al-Rāfidān 30: 53–66. Gauvin, Henri and Jean-Jacques Becker 2007 Cent ans de faiences populaires peintes à Sarreguemines et à Digoin. Sarreguemines-passions, Sarreguemines. Gibson, Shimon 1991 The Sataf Project of Landscape Archaeology in the Judaean Hills: A Preliminary Report on Four Seasons of Survey and Excavation (1987–89), Levant 23: 29–55. Gosse, Philippe 2007 Les pipes de la quarantaine; Fouilles du port antique de Pomègues (Marseille). In The Archaeology of the Clay Tobacco Pipe 19, edited by P. Davey, pp. 1–13. BAR International Series 1590. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford. Grey, Anthony 2000 The Unglazed Pottery. In Belmont Castle: The Excavation of a Crusader Stronghold in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, edited by R. P. Harper and D. Pringle, pp. 87–100. Council for British Research in the Levant, Oxford. Haggarty, George and Alison McIntyre 1996 Excavations and Watching Brief at Newbigging Pottery, Musselburgh, East Lothian, in Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, Vol. 126-2 (1996), 943–962.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

221

Hahn, Margrete 1989 Byzantine and Postbyzantine Pottery from the Greek-Swedish Excavations at Khania, Crete. In Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, edited by V. Déroche and J.-M. Spieser, pp. 227–232. Bulletin de Corrrespondance Héllénique, Supplément 18. Harper, Richard P. and Denys Pringle. 2000 Belmont Castle: The Excavation of a Crusader Stronghold in the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Council for British Research in the Levant, Oxford. Harris Cohen, David and Catherine Hess 1993 Looking at European Ceramics. A Guide to Technical Terms. British Museum Press, London. Hayes, John W. 1980 Turkish Clay Pipes: A Provisional Typology. In The Archaeology of the Clay Pipe IV, edited by P. Davey, pp. 3–10. BAR International Series 62. British Archaeological Reports Oxford. 1992 Excavations at Saraçhane in Istanbul, Volume 2: The Pottery. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D. C. Heege, Andreas 2009 Steinzeug in der Schweiz (14.–20. Jh.). Archäologischer Dienst des Kanton Bern, Bern. Heugel, Ines 2008 Laying the Elegant Table. Rizzoli, New York. Israel, Yigal 2006 The Black Gaza Ware from the Ottoman Period, Ph.D. diss. Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Be’er Sheva (Hebrew, English summary, pp. IV–XII) Kafadar, Cemal 2002 A History of Coffee, Economic History Congress XIII, Buenos Aires. Kahanov, Yaacov, Deborah Cvikel and Amir Wielinski 2012 Dor C Shipwreck, Dor Lagoon, Israel. Evidence for Maritime Connections Between France and the Holy Land at the End of the XIXth Century: Building Materials and Ceramics from Marseilles, Vallauris and the Vicinity. Cahiers d’archéologie subaquatique 19: 173–212. Kletter, Raz 2004 Jaffa, Roslan Street. ‘Atiqot 47: 193–207. Kocabaş, Hüseyin 1963 Tophane Pipe Making. Türk etnografya dergisi V, 1962: 12–13 (Turkish). Kowalsky, Arnold A. and Dorothy E. Kowalsky 1999 Encyclopedia of Marks on American, English and European Eartheware, Ironstone, and Stoneware 1780–1980. Schiffer Publishing, Atglen, PA. Krieger, Martin 1966 Türcken-Kopgen und Türckische Figuren. Keramos 32: 3–14. Kühlborn, Marc 2002 Baumstraße / Im Wendischen Dorfe. Bauvorbereitende Untersuchung, 1998. In Denkmalpflege in Lüneburg, edited by Edgar Ring, pp. 40–41. Lüneburger Stadtarchäologie e.V. Lüneburg. Le Quesne, Charles 2007 Quseir: An Ottoman and Napoleonic Fortress on the Red Sea Coast of Egypt. American University in Cairo Press, Cairo. Li He 1996 Chinese Ceramics. Thames and Hudson, London. Megaw, Arthur Hubert Stanley and Richard E. Jones 1983 Byzantine and Allied Pottery: A Contribution by Chemical Analysis to Problems of Origin and Distribution. Annual of the British School in Athens 78: 253–263. Meimaris, Yannis E. 1989 The Monastery of Saint Euthymios the Great at Khan el-Ahmar, in the Wilderness of Judaea: Rescue Excavations and Basic Protection Measures, 1976–1979. Heptalophos, Athens.

222

Chapter 8

Miller, George L. 2011 Common Staffordshire Cup and Bowl Shapes. Project for the Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory at Jefferson Patterson Park and Museum in St. Leonard, Maryland. Milwright, Marcus 2008 Imported Pottery in Bilad al-Sham. Turcica 40: 121–152. Munsell 1998 Munsell Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, NY. Neale, Gillian 2005 British Transfer-Printed Pottery Patterns 1790–1930. Miller’s, London. Pasinli, Alpay and Saliha Balaman 1991 Turkish Tiles and Ceramics, Çinili Köşk. A Turizm Yayınları Ltd. Şti, Istanbul. Petrucci, Jean-Ferdinand 1999 Les Poteries et les Potiers de Vallauris 1501–1945, Ph.D., Université Paris 1, Sorbonne. Pococke, Richard 1743–1745 A Description of the East and of Some other Countries II, Book the Second of Asia Minor, chap. XXI. London. Raban, Avner 1971 The Shipwreck off Sharm-el-Sheikh. Archaeology 24: 146–155. Rauchberger, Lior 2017 Ottoman Clay Tobacco Pipes from the Seawall Excavations in Jaffa. In The History and Archaeology of Jaffa 2, edited by M. Peilstöcker and A.A. Burke, pp. 249–269. The Jaffa Cultural Heritage Projects 2. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Jerusalem and Los Angeles. Raveh, Kurt and Sean A. Kingsley 1992 The Wreck Complex at the Entrance to Dor Harbour, Israel Preliminary details. In Nautical Archaeology 21(4): 309–315. Robinson, Rebecca C. 1983 Clay Tobacco Pipes from the Kerameikos. Athenische Mitteilungen 98: 265–285. 1985 Tobacco Pipes of Corinth and of the Athenian Agora. Hesperia 54/2: 149–203. Röntgen, Robert E. 1996 The Book of Meissen (2nd Edition). Schiffer, Atglen, PA. 2007 Deutsche Porzellanmarken von 1710 bis heute. Battenberg Verlag, Regensburg. Rogers, Connie 2004 The Illustrated Encyclopedia of British Willow Ware. Schiffer Publishing, Atglen, PA. Rogers, Mary Eliza 1865 Domestic Life in Palestine. Poe and Hitchcock, Cincinnati. Rosen, Steven A. and Glenn A. Goodfriend 1993 An Early Date for Gaza Ware from the Northern Negev, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 125: 143– 148. Rückert, Rainer 1995 Wiener und Meissener Porzellangeschirr des 18. Jahrhunderts “alla Turca”. Keramos 147: 3–94. Savage, George and Harold Newman 2000 An Illustrated Dictionary of Ceramics. Thames and Hudson, London. Schneider, Irene 2001 Ebussuud. In Michael Stolleis editor, Juristen: ein biographisches Lexikon; von der Antike bis zum 20. Jahrhundert, Beck, München. Seetzen, Ulrich Jasper 1854 Reisen durch Syrien, Palästina, Phönizien, die Transjordan-Länder, Arabia Petraea und UnterAegypten, editor Friedrich Kruse. Reimer, Berlin.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

223

Simpson St John 2000 The Clay Pipes. In Belmont Castle, The Excavation of a Crusader Stronghold in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, edited by R.P. Harper and D. Pringle, pp. 147–171. CBRL, Oxford University Press. Oxford. 2002 Ottoman Pipes from Zir’in (Tell Jezreel), Levant 34: 159–174. 2008 The Ottoman Pipes from Jerusalem. In Excavations by K.M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967, Vol. V, Discoveries in Hellenistic to Ottoman Jerusalem, edited by K. Prag. Pp. 443–446. Oxbow, Oxford. Stančeva, Magdalina 1975/6 La confection de pipes en Bulgarie. Muzej Primenjene Umetnosi, Muzejske Zbirke 19/20: 129–137. Sterba, Günther 1989 Meissener Tafelgeschirr. Geschichte, Herstellung, Dekor des berühmten Gebrauchsporzellans. Stuttgart. Stoyanova, Rosita, Oleg Vitov and Irina Kircheva Marinova 2008 Study of the Composition of a Stone Tobacco Pipe from the Archaeological Reserve “PautaliaVelbuzhd-Kyustendil:, Geoarchaeology and Archaeomineralogy: 141–146 The Art of Chinese Ceramics 2006 The Art of Chinese Ceramics. An Illustrated History Featuring 150 Pieces from the Palace Museum in Beijing. Long River Press, South San Francisco, CA. Toombs, Lawrence E. 1985 Tell el Hesi: Modern Military Trenching and Muslim Cemetery in Field I, Strata I–II. The Joint Archaeological Expedition to Tell el Hesi 2. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Ontario. Türkoğlu, Sabahattin 1997 Il palazzo di Topkapı. Net, Istanbul. Ustinova, Yulia and Nahshoni, Pirhiya 1994 Salvage excavations in Ramot Nof, Be’er Sheva. ‘Atiqot 25: 157–177. Van der Meulen, Jan 2003 Goudse Pijpenmakers en Hun Merken. de Pijpelogische Kring Nederland, Leiden. Vincenz, Anna de 2011 Ottoman Clay Tobacco Pipes from Ramla. ‘Atiqot 67: *43–54. Forthcoming a Ottoman Pottery Assemblages – HaZorfim Street, Jaffa. Forthcoming b Ottoman Pottery Assemblages from Ruslan Street, Jaffa. Forthcoming c Pottery Assemblages from the Excavations at the Harbor in Jaffa and Surrounding Buildings. Forthcoming d Ceramics from the Western Wall Plaza in Jerusalem. Vroom, Joanita 2003 After Antiquity: Ceramics and Society in the Aegean from the 7th to the 20th Century A.C.; A Case Study from Boeotia, Central Greece. Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden University, Leiden. Ward, Cheryl 2002 The Sadana Island Shipwreck. A Mid-Eighteenth-Century Treasure Trove. In A Historical Archaeology of the Ottoman Empire, edited by U. Baram and L. Carroll, pp. 185–202. Kluwer Academic-Plenum Publishers, New York. Weinberg, Bennett Alan and Bonnie K. Bealer 2001 The World of Caffeine, Routledge. Ziadeh, Ghada 1995 Ottoman Ceramics from Ti’innik, Palestine. Levant 27: 209–245.

224

Chapter 8

Appendix 1: The Typological System-Abbreviations and Key194 J: Jaffa Chinese Cups and other Chinese Wares CHIN Type J-CHIN-1: Small cup decorated with blue lines on inner and outer rim and floral pattern Type J-CHIN-1A: Cup decorated with blue lines on inner and outer rim and floral pattern and Chinese stamp on base. Type J-CHIN-1B: Cup decorated with blue lines on inner and outer rim and base. Floral pattern on ext. Flower in center. Type J-CHIN-1C: Cup decorated with blue lines on inner and outer rim and base. Criss cross pattern on ext. “X” in center. Type J-CHIN-1D: Cup decorated with blue lines on inner and outer rim and base. Chinese landscape on ext. Flower (?) in center. Type J-CHIN-1E: Cup decorated with rolled rim and blue floral pattern. Type J-CHIN-1F: Cup decorated with blue lines on inner and outer base. Ext. with blue geometric pattern. Type J-CHIN-2: Gaiwan tea cup with blue-on-white underglaze prune blossom pattern. Type J-CHIN-3: Celadon plate with molded decoration Type J-CHIN-4: Plate decorated with blue lines inside and on base. Interior and exterior decorated with floral pattern. Type J-CHIN-4A: Plate decorated with blue lines inside and central motif. Exterior decorated with stylized floral pattern. Type J-CHIN-5: Indented rim with abstract pattern. Type J-CHIN-6: Sherd with molded decoration. Type J-CHIN-7: Bowl with blue lines inside. Abstract floral pattern on exterior. Kütahya Coffee Cups KÜT Type J-KÜT-CC-1: Coffee cup decorated with blue. Type J-KÜT-CC-1A: Coffee cup decorated with blue with everted pinched rim. Type J-KÜT-CC-1B: Coffee cup decorated with blue with spiral molded body. Type J-KÜT-CC-2: Coffee cup decorated with black, blue, red and green. Type J-KÜT-CC-2A: Ring base decorated with black, blue and turquoise. Type J-KÜT-CC-2B: Coffee cup decorated with black and pale blue. Type J-KÜT-CC-3: Coffee cup decorated; yellow color added. Type J-KÜT-CC-4: Coffee cup decorated; purple color added. Type J-KÜT-CC-4A: Coffee cup decorated; purple color added with flat rim. Type J-KÜT-CC-5: Coffee cup painted green with black decoration. Type J-KÜT-CC-6: Plain undecorated. Type J-KÜT-CC-6A: Fluted undecorated. Kütahya Wares KÜT Type J-KÜT-BL-1: Bowl with blue decoration. Type J-KÜT-BL-4: Bowl with ring-base and polychrome decoration (black, red, blue, purple and turquoise). Type J-KÜT-CUP-1: Large deep cup made of soft paste. Exterior decorated with painted purple geometric pattern and palmettes. A blue painted line is under the outer and inner rim.

194

The typological system includes types found in the excavations of the Qishle as well as in other excavations in Jaffa. The present version was updated in October 2016; since then many new types have been added from recent excavations in Jaffa.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

225

Type J-KÜT-CUP-2: Deep cup made of soft paste. Exterior and interior painted pale green and ext. decorated with painted blue geometric pattern and palmettes. A blue painted line is under the outer and inner rim. Type J-KÜT-CUP-1B: Cup with spiraled body and little foot and handle. Decorated black. Type J-KÜT-PL: Ledge rim of plate made of soft paste and decorated underglaze with a thick and thin blue painted band on the rim. Type J-KÜT-PL-1: Plate decorated with floral blue decoration. Type J-KÜT-JUG-1A: Jug with blue decoration outlined in black. Type J-KÜT-JUG-4: Jug with blue, turquoise and purple decoration Softpaste Coffee Cups CC Type J-CC-2A: Small coffee cup made of rather soft paste decorated with cobalt blue underglaze paint. Type J-CC-3A: Small coffee cup made of rather soft paste decorated with cobalt blue underglaze paint or transfer paint. Type J-CC-5A: Small coffee cup made of soft paste decorated on both sides with underglaze cobalt Sheet printed painted rosette pattern Type J-CC-5B: Small coffee cup made of soft paste decorated on both sides with underglaze cobalt sheet printed pattern outlined dark. Earthenware Coffee Cup Type JER-CC-6B (formerly JER-CC-5B): Earthenware coffee cup int. and ext. monochrome glazed. Meissen Coffee Cups M Type J-M-CC-1A: Hardpaste coffee cup decorated with blue on white. Type J-M-CC-1C: Hardpaste spiral molded coffee cup undecorated. Type J-M-CC-2A: Porcelain coffee cup decorated with blue on white. Type J-M-CC-2B: Porcelain coffee cup decorated with blue on white and polychrome. Type J-M-CC-2C: Porcelain spiral molded coffee cup decorated with red. Type J-M-CC-2D: Porcelain coffee cup decorated with blue on white and polychrome and gold. Type J-M-CC-3: Porcelain coffee cup decorated blue on white on interior and chocolate brown exterior. Type J-M-CC-3A: Porcelain coffee cup with medallions with black and blue decoration on chocolate brown background. Hard Paste and Porcelain Coffee Cups P Type J-P-CC-1A: Porcelain coffee cup decorated blue on white. Type J-P-CC-1B: Porcelain coffee cup decorated ext. blue on white. Int. blue on white with polychrome overglaze decoration. Type J-P-CC-1C: Porcelain coffee cup decorated int. blue on white. ext. blue on white with polychrome overglaze decoration. Type J-P-CC-1D: Porcelain coffee cup decorated int. and ext. blue on white with polychrome overglaze decoration. Type J-P-CC-1E: Hardpaste small (coffee) cup made with handle decorated with pale blue underglaze paint on handle and rim. Type J-P-CC-1F: Porcelain coffee cup decorated int. blue on white. ext. blue on white with polychrome overglaze decoration and gold enhancing. Type J-P-CC-1G: Porcelain coffee cup decorated very dark blue/black on white. Type J-P-CC-2A: Porcelain coffee cup decorated gold. Type J-P-CC-2B: Porcelain coffee cup decorated polychrome.

226

Chapter 8

Type J-P-CC-2C: Porcelain coffee cup with spiral molded body and blue and gold, and silver overglaze paint. Type J-P-CC-2D: Porcelain coffee cup decorated polychrome and gold or silver. Type J-P-CC-2E: Porcelain coffee cup decorated polychrome with handle. Type J-P-CC-2F: Hardpaste coffee cup decorated polychrome. Type J-P-CC-2G: Porcelain coffee cup decorated polychrome. Type J-P-CC-2H: Porcelain coffee cup with wavy rim and gold over glaze painted decoration. Type J-P-CC-2J: Porcelain coffee cup with wide overglaze colored band and stenciled floral pattern with polychrome overglaze paint. Type J-P-CC-3A: Hardpaste coffee cup with polychrome decoration. Type J-P-CC-3B: Porcelain coffee cup decorated with overglaze green painted decoration. Type J-P-CC-3C: Faceted coffee cup decorated polychrome. Type J-P-CC-3D (formerly J-CC-4D): Faceted coffee cup with green and gold. Type J-P-CC-3E: Faceted coffee cup decorated polychrome with handle. Type JER-P-CC-4A: Porcelain coffee cup with decal decoration. Type JER-P-CC-5A: Porcelain coffee cup with luster metallic painted bands. Type JER-P-CC-5C: Porcelain coffee cup with spiral molded body and luster metallic painted bands. Type JER-P-CC-5B: Porcelain coffee cup with monochrome metallic luster painted int. and ext. Type JER-P-CC-6A: Hardpaste coffee cup with cobalt blue underglaze vertical bands. Type J-P-CC-7: Porcelain coffee cup undecorated. Type JER-P-CC-7A (formerly JER P-CC-6A): Thick porcelain coffee cup undecorated. Type JER-P-CC-7C: Porcelain coffee cup with faceted body and handle. Type J-P-CC-7D: Porcelain coffee cup with faceted body undecorated. Type JER-P-CC-8: Porcelain coffee cup made of thick ware, faceted body undecorated. Type JER-P-CC-8A: Porcelain coffee cup made of thick ware, faceted body with blue and gold or red and gold overglaze painting. Type JER-P-CC-8B: Porcelain coffee cup made of thick ware, faceted body with blue, red and gold overglaze decoration. Type JER-P-CC-8C: Hardpaste coffee cup made of thick ware, faceted body with red and silver overglaze decoration. Stamped. Porcelain Cups P-CUP Type J-P-CUP-1: Porcelain cup undecorated. Type J-P-HANDLE-1: Porcelain/hardpaste cup handle undecorated. Type J-P-CUP-1A: Porcelain cup decorated gold. Type J-P-CUP-1B: Porcelain cup decorated blue on white and polychrome. Type J-P-CUP-1C: Porcelain cup decorated polychrome. Type J-P-CUP-1D: Porcelain cup decorated with polychrome and gold decoration. Type J-P-CUP-1E: Porcelain cup decorated with decal and gold decoration. Type J-P-CUP-1J: Porcelain cup painted overglaze red. Type J-P-CUP-2: Porcelain cup with blue transfer printed pattern and handle. Type J-P-CUP-2A: Porcelain cup with gold luster band at rim and handle. Type JER-P-CUP-2E: Porcelain cup with polychrome decoration and handle. Type J-P-CUP-3: Fluted cup undecorated. Type J-P-CUP-3A: Fluted cup with gold decoration. Type J-P-CUP-3D: Fluted cup with blue and gold decoration. Type J-P-CUP-3F: Fluted cup with decal decoration. Type JER-P-CUP-3H: Faceted porcelain cup polychrome underglaze decoration and luster overglaze.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

227

Japanese Wares JAP Type J-JAP-P-SAU-1: Japanese saucer, thin porcelain, undecorated with “made in Japan” red underglaze stamp. Type J-JAP-P-CUP-7: Japanese polychrome export porcelain with “made in Japan” stamp. Type J-JAP-P-CUP-7A: Japanese eggshell-thin lusterware teacup with polychrome decoration. Type J-JAP-P-SAU-7A: Japanese eggshell-thin lusterware teacup with polychrome decoration. Type JER-JAP-P-CUP-7B: Japanese Lusterware cup with overglaze polychrome decoration. Type J-JAP-P-BL-7B: Japanese Lusterware slop bowl with overglaze polychrome decoration. Type J-JAP-P-PL-7B: Japanese Lusterware plate with overglaze polychrome decoration. Type J-JAP-P-SAU-7B: Japanese Lusterware saucer with overglaze polychrome decoration. Type J-JAP-P-CUP-7C: Japanese Lusterware faceted cup with overglaze polychrome decoration. Type J-JAP-P-SAU-7C: Japanese Lusterware saucer with wavy rim, overglaze polychrome decoration. Type J-JAP-P-CUP-7D: Japanese porcelain cup with transfer printed polychrome geometric pattern. Type J-JAP-P-SAU-7E: Japanese porcelain saucer with transfer printed polychrome geometric pattern and colored enhancing. Type J-JAP-P-PL-7E: Japanese porcelain plate with transfer printed polychrome floral pattern and colored enhancing. Type J-JAP-P-ASH-7E: Japanese lusterware Ashtray with black transfer printed pattern, polychrome enhanced. Black underglaze stamp: “made in Japan”. Type J-JAP-P-SAU-7F: Japanese porcelain saucer with transfer printed polychrome Geisha pattern and colored enhancing. Type J-JAP-P-BL-7G: Japanese lusterware porcelain slop bowl with transfer printed geometric pattern in one color. Type J-JAP-P-GREEN-1: Tile with overglaze painted floral pattern. Type J-JAP-P-GREEN-2: Container with black overglaze script. Hardpaste Cups CUP Type J-CUP-1: Hardpaste cup with blue on white decoration. Porcelain Plates P-PL Type J-P-PL-1: Porcelain plate with blue on white decoration. Type J-P-PL-1A: Porcelain plate undecorated white. Type J-P-PL-1B: Porcelain plate white with gold line. Type JER-P-PL-3: Porcelain plate with decal decoration. Porcelain or Hardpaste Saucers P-SAU Type J-P-SAU-1: Hardpaste saucer decorated with underglaze green fine lines and overglaze light purple and yellow bands. Type J-P-SAU-1A: Porcelain saucer undecorated white. Type J-P-SAU-1B: Porcelain saucer white with gold line/s. Type J-P-SAU-1C: Porcelain saucer white with silver line/s. Type J-P-SAU-2: Hardpaste saucer decorated with underglaze floral pattern in blue and red and green. Type J-P-SAU-2A: Hardpaste/porcelain saucer decorated with underglaze floral pattern in blue. Type J-P-SAU-2B: Hardpaste/porcelain saucer decorated blue drop underglaze. Type J-P-SAU-2C: Hardpaste/porcelain saucer decorated with blue geometric/floral sponge pattern. Type J-P-SAU-3: Saucer with underglaze green lines and overglaze yellow and purple bands. Type J-P-SAU-4: Hardpaste saucer or small plate with molded leaf decoration glazed bright green on both sides. Type J-P-SAU-5: Shallow saucer with transfer pictured roses.

228

Chapter 8

Type J-P-SAU-6: Shallow saucer with pink, purple flowers and green leaves. Type J-P-SAU-6: Shallow saucer with pink flowers and leaves. Type J-P-SAU-7: Porcelain saucer with blue and gold overglaze and gold underglaze decoration. Stamp Victoria China Czechoslovakia. Type J-P-SAU-7A: Porcelain saucer with blue and gold overglaze, gold and silver overglaze decoration. Type J-P-SAU-8: Porcelain saucer with black Underglaze decoration. Stamp 1792 H&C Schlaggenwald. Type J-P-SAU-9: Porcelain saucer decorated polychrome overglaze. Gold background. Type J-P-SAU-9A: Porcelain saucer decorated polychrome overglaze. Pink background. Type J-P-SAU-10: Porcelain saucer with faceted body and scalloped rim. Painted pale blue with cut-out decoration. Type J-P-SAU-10A: Porcelain saucer with faceted body and silver lines/bands. Type J-P-SAU-10B: Porcelain saucer with faceted body and silver lines/bands and lilac luster. Type J-P-SAU-11 also JER-P-SAU-11: Porcelain saucer with painted overglaze blue and gold line. Type J-P-SAU-12: Porcelain saucer with polychrome overglaze decoration. Type J-P-SAU-12A: Porcelain saucer with monochrome overglaze decoration in red. Type J-P-SAU-13: Hardpaste saucer with red painted band and cut-out rosettes. Type J-P-SAU-14: Porcelain saucer with underglaze cobalt blue band and overglaze gold bands. Porcelain Bowls P- BL Type J-P-BL-2: Bowl with blue semi circles on int. and ext. rim. Body with free hand painted red flowers connected with green leaves. Type J-P-TW-BL-3: Porcelain bowl with green transfer pattern. Type J-P-TW-BL-3A: Porcelain bowl with green transfer pattern and red overglaze enhancement. Type J-P-TW-BL-4: Porcelain bowl with brown transfer pattern. Type J-P-TW-BL-5: Porcelain bowl with black transfer pattern. Various Porcelain Vessels J-EGGCUP-1A: Eggcup made of white porcelain undecorated. J-P-POT-1A: Porcelain tea pot with gold paint. J-P-BOX-1E: Porcelain sugar box with grooved rim to hold a lid decorated polychrome and gold. J-P-LID-1A: Porcelain lid with gold paint. J-P-LID-1C: Porcelain lid with one color and gold paint. J-P-LID-1E: Porcelain lid with cobalt underglaze and gold overglaze and decal decoration. Pharmacy Vessels J-PHARM-1: Small barrel shaped container. J-PHARM-SPAT: Spatula. Sarreguemines Plates SARRE Type J-SARRE-PL-1: Plate with ledge rim with blue and white decoration with half moon and stars Bande étoilée no. 5. Type J-SARRE-PL-1A: Plate with ledge rim and blue, white and other color (yellow, brown) decoration with half moon and stars. Type J-SARRE-PL-2: Plate with ledge rim and red and white decoration with half moon and stars. Bande étoilée no. 5. Type J-SARRE-PL-3: Plate with ledge rim and green and white decoration with half moon and stars. Bande étoilée no. 5. Type J-SARRE-PL-3A: Plate with ledge rim and green and white decoration with half moon and stars. Additional colored filets.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

229

Type J-SARRE-PL-4: Plate with ledge rim and blue band and red flowers in sponge technique. Type J-SARRE-PL-4A: Plate with ledge rim and pink line at rim and beginning of body. Blue sponge pattern on rim. Black sponge patterns on yellow background on body. Type J-SARRE-PL-5: Plate with ledge rim and red band and red buds and green leaves and blue flowers in sponge technique. Type J-SARRE-PL-5A: Plate with ledge rim and red band and fine green lines on rim. Type J-SARRE-PL-6: Plate with ledge rim and red band on rim. Red flowers and green leaves with black line. Type J-SARRE-PL-6A: Plate with ledge rim and black band on rim. Red? flowers, blue buds and green leaves with green line. Sarreguemines décor 59. Type JER-SARRE-PL-7: Plate with purple line (filet), stamped rosettes in red and green. Type J-SARRE-PL-8: Plate with ledge rim with blue band and red and green filet. Sarreguemines décor 661. Type J-SARRE-PL-9: Plate with ledge rim and ring base with red band and blue line on rim with black sponge leaves and blue sponge rosettes. Yellow band with black sponge leaves and black lines on body. Type J-SARRE-GD-BL-1: Slop bowl with blue and white decoration with half moon and stars Bande étoilée no. 5. Type JER-SARRE-GD-BL-2: Bowl with brown transfer pattern Bryonia Mulberry. Type J-SARRE-GD-BL-3: Slop bowl with green and white decoration with half moon and stars Bande étoilée no. 5. Type J-SARRE-GD-BL-4: Bowl with blue-green-red bands. Sponge decoration in black on the green band. Sarreguemines Décor Hanging No. 2. Type J-SARRE-GD-BL-7: Slop bowl with molded upper part and decorated with red and black bands. Stamped Sarreguemines. Type JER-SARRE-CUP-2: Teacup with brown transfer pattern Bryonia Mulberry. Type J-SARRE-SAU-2: Saucer with brown transfer pattern Bryonia Mulberry. Type J-SARRE-GD-SAU-1 : Small saucer with round rim and blue and white decoration with half moon and stars Bande étoilée no. 5. Type J-SARRE-GD-SAU-2: Small saucer with wide colored bands and polychrome narrow bands. Type J-SARRE-BL-1: Bowl with ring-base and black underglaze stamp. Type J-SARRE-SAU-1: Saucer with black underglaze stamp. Grand Dejeuner Breakfast Sets (Bowls and Saucer); Hardpaste GD-BL, GD-SAU Type J-GD-BL-1: Slop Bowl with blueberries in sponge technique and painted green leaves. Type J-GD-SAU-1: Saucer with ledge rim with blueberries in sponge technique and painted green leaves. Type J-GD-BL-2: Slop bowl with two registers: upper with yellow background and black stars, lower with purple leaves within red lines. Export Sarreguemines. Type J-GD-BL-2A: Slop bowl with different colored bands with sponge stamps on middle band. Type J-GD-SAU-2: Saucer with ledge rim with red flowers in sponge technique, in center yellow register with black flowers (?). Export Sarreguemines. Type J-GD-SAU-2A: Saucer with ledge rim with free-hand painted purple flowers, painted blue flowers (?) Export Sarreguemines. Type J-GD-SAU-2B: Saucer with ledge rim with purple zigzag pattern within red lines. Export Sarreguemines. Type J-GD-SAU-2C: Saucer with ledge rim with free-hand painted blue star and half-moon within red lines. Export Sarreguemines. Type J-GD-SAU-2D: Saucer with ledge rim and multiple black bands and fine red lines, yellow band decorated with black sponge rosettes. Export Sarreguemines. Type J-GD-BL-3: Slop bowl with painted red leaves belonging to flower.

230

Chapter 8

Type J-GD-BL-3A: Slop bowl with painted green leaves. Type J-GD-BL-4: Slop bowl with painted red and dark green outside and green leaf in center. Creil et Montereau. Type J-GD-BL-4A: Bowl with painted pink and green flower in center. Type J-GD-BL-5: Slop bowl with molded arabesque pattern and painted flowers, leaves and tendrils. Type J-GD-BL-6: Slop bowl with black line and three petalled blue flowers with green leaves. Type J-GD-BL-7: Slop bowl with red multi petalled flower and blue flower and green leaves. Adam’s Rose. Type J-GD-SAU-7: Saucer with red multi petalled flower and blue flower and green leaves. Adam’s Rose. Type J-GD-SAU-7A: Saucer with ledge rim decorated with large red flower and blue rosettes on rim. Blue rosettes and green leaves on interior. Type J-GD-BL-8: Bowl with large multipetalled red flowers with yellow centre, green leaves and green and black tendrils. Black line on inside. Stamp with anchor: Lindner. Type J-GD-BL-9: Carinated slop bowl with blue decoration in sponge technique outside and inner rim. Type JER-GD-BL-10: Slop bowl with green chequer pattern. Type JER-GD-BL-11: Bowl with red flowers in free hand and blueberries in sponge. Type J-GD-BL-12: Bowl with large blue flower and mark. Type J-GD-BL-13: Bowl with registers divided with black lines and decorated with flower pattern. Type J-GD-BL-14: Bowl with colored exterior and one red line 8under rim. Type J-GD-FB-BL-1: Slop bowl with blue decoration in flow blue technique. Type J-GD-STEN-BL-1: Bowl with blue decoration. Type J-GD-STEN-SAU-1: Saucer with blue decoration. White Ware WW Type J-WW-CC-1: Small coffee cup, white glazed undecorated. Type J-WW-CC-3: Faceted mold made coffee cup with high ring-base. Type J-WW-SAU-1: Saucer with simple round rim. Type J-WW-SAU-3: Moldmade faceted small saucer. Type J-WW-PL-2A: Plate with ledge rim, covered with thick white glaze. Type J-WW-PL-2B: Plate with molded, beaded ledge rim, covered with thick white glaze. Type J-WW-PL-2C: Plate with grooved ledge rim, covered with white glaze. Type J-WW-PL-2D: Plate with molded interior. Type J-WW-PL-3: Deep plate with grooved low ring base with stamp. Type J-WW-PL-3A: Plate with low ring base with stamp. Type J-WW-PL-3B: Plate with low ring base with impressed stamp Type J-WW-CUP-1A: Cup with molded body. Type J-WW-CUP-1B: Deep cup, possibly for chocolate made of porcelain. The body is spiral molded and undecorated. Type J-WW-CUP-2A: Deep cup, possibly for chocolate made of hard paste. The body is covered with a thick white glaze and is undecorated. Type J-WW-BL-2B: Bowl with high ring base (breakfast bowl) with molded body and covered with thick white glaze. Type J-WW-BL-2A: Bowl with thick white glaze. Undecorated. Type J-WW-BL-2A-Stamp 1: Bowl with ring base covered with thick white glaze; the base is stamped and printed. Type J-WW-BL-2B-Stamp 2: Bowl with ring base covered with thick white glaze, the body is molded. The base is marked with an underglaze stamp. Type J-WW-LBL-2A: Large bowl with ring base glazed white undecorated. Type J-WW-PL-2-Stamp 3: Plate with shallow ring base of plate covered with thick white glaze. Type J-WW-PL-2-Stamp 4: Plate with shallow ring-base glazed white. Stamp Rhone et Cie.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

231

Type J-WW-TUR-2B: Vegetable or stew tureen, made of hard paste covered with thick white glaze. Lion’s head appliqué. Type J-WW-TUR-2C: Vegetable or stew tureen, made of hard paste covered with thick white glaze. The handles are molded in shape of a leaf and have a hole below. Type J-WW-CHPOT-2: Chamber pot with flat everted ledge rim. Covered with thick white glaze. TYPE J-WW-KNOB-2A: Simple knob of box, tureen or similar, covered with thick white glaze. TYPE J-WW-KNOB-2B: Knob or appliqué in shape of leaf, covered with thick white glaze. Type J-WW-HANDLE-2: Handle of Tureen, covered with thick white glaze. Transfer Ware TW Type J-TW-CUP-3 (green): Rounded cup with green underglaze transfer decoration of mythological scenes and floral motifs. The upper rim is also decorated with a band of arabesques. Type J-TW-CUP-4 (brown): Rounded cup with brown underglaze transfer decoration of floral motifs. The upper rim is also decorated with a band of arabesques. Type J-STR-3 (green): Strainer with green transfer pattern. Type J-TW-PL-1 (blue): Ledge rim fragment of hard paste plate with underglaze transfer print in blue. Willow Pattern. Type J-TW-PL-1A (blue): Ledge rim fragment of hard paste plate with underglaze transfer print in blue. Type J-TW-CUP-1 (blue): Molded hard paste cup with underglaze transfer print in blue. Willow Pattern. Type J-TW-SAU-1 (blue): Faceted hard paste saucer with scalloped rim and with underglaze transfer print in blue. Willow Pattern. Type J-TW-PL-2 (red): Plate with underglaze transfer print in red. Willow Pattern. Type J-TW-PL-2A (red): Plate with underglaze transfer print in red. Type J-TW-PL-3 (green): Plate with underglaze transfer print in green. Willow Pattern. Type J-TW-PL-3A (green): Plate with underglaze transfer print in green. Type J-TW-PL-4 (brown): Plate with underglaze transfer print in brown. Willow Pattern. Type J-TW-PL-4A (brown): Plate with underglaze transfer print in brown. Type J-TW-PL-5 (black): Plate with underglaze transfer print in black. Willow Pattern. Type J-TW-PL-5A (black): Plate with underglaze transfer print in black. Type J-TW-PL-5B (black): Plate with underglaze transfer print in black over orangy luster. Type J-TW-PL-6 (purple): Plate with underglaze transfer print in purple. Willow Pattern. Type J-TW-PL-6A (purple): Plate with underglaze transfer print in purple. Type J-TW-BL-2A: Bowl with underglaze print in red. Type J-TW-BL-2B: Bowl with underglaze transfer print in red with blue overglaze paint. Type J-TW-LBL-5: Large bowl with wavy rim and black transfer pattern on exterior. Transfer Ware with Blue-on-White Decoration TW-BW Type J-TW-BW-PL-1: Plate with Wild Rose decoration. Type J-TW-BW-PL-2: Plate with a flower decoration in medallions. Similar to Holbeck Moor Pottery Oriental Pattern. Type J-TW-BW-PL-3: Plate with a band filled with shadowed circles at the rim. The main part of the rim is filled with pine cones (?) standing upright. A garland with small leaves connects them. The decoration continues into the body of the plate. Agra Pattern. Type J-TW-BW-PL-4: Plate with a band with criss cross lines next to the rim. The rim is filled with flowers and what looks like pineapples or pine cones. The pattern is outlined with a double line towards the body of the dish. Agra Pattern. Type J-TW-BW-PL-5: Plate with groups of four rhombs on the rim and around the inner base. The rim and base are outlined by a line. Type J-TW-BW-PL-6: Plate with oriental scenery and two people on horses. Damascus Pattern.

232

Chapter 8

Type J-TW-BW-PL-6A: Plate with oriental scenery and two people on horse. Backstamp with pagoda and script DAMASUS (sic!). Type J-TW-BW-PL-7: Plate with Seaweed Pattern. Type J-TW-BW-BL-1A: Bowl with underglaze print in blue; floral pattern. Type J-TW-BW-SAU-1: Saucer with floral and geometric pattern. Stamp Luneville. Transfer Ware with Flow Blue TW-FB Type J-TW-FB-PL-1: Plate with simple flowing line at edge of rim. Type J-TW-FB-PL-2: Plate with finely drawn floral pattern. Type J-TW-FB-PL-3: Plate with blue band at rim with arabesque. Type J-TW-FB-PL-4: Plate with central Chinoiserie motif. Type J-TW-FB-PL-4A: Plate with wavy rim and central Chinoiserie motif. Type J-TW-FB-PL-5: Plate with finely drawn floral pattern and arabesques. Type J-TW-FB-PL-6: Plate with dark blue circles on rim and body. Type J-TW-FB-PL-7: Plate with geometric pattern on rim and flowers on body. Type J-TW-FB-PL-8: Plate with intricate floral pattern and amphora on rim. Type J-TW-FB-SAU-1: Saucer with floral pattern. Type J-TW-FB-CUP-1: Deep cup with dark blue floral pattern, undecorated inside. Type J-TW-FB-CUP-2: Deep cup with finely drawn Chinoiserie (pagoda) on exterior. Interior is decorated with floral pattern. Type J-TW-FB-CUP-3: Deep cup with oriental scenery on both sides. Type J-TW-FB-LID-1: Lid with wavy flow blue line at bottom. Type J-TW-FB-BOX: Box with grooved rim to hold lid decorated with Chinoiserie both sides. Handpainted in Flow Blue HP-FB J-HP-FB-PL-1: Plate with dark blue petals turning away from line where the rim starts. J-HP-FB-PL-1A: Plate with dark blue petals turning away from line where the rim starts, red and green overglaze leaves. J-HP-FB-PL-2: Plate with dark blue stylized floral pattern. Handpainted HP J-HP-PL-1: Plate with handpainted decoration in blue. J-HP-PL-1A: Plate with handpainted decoration in blue and one additional color. J-HP-PL-2: Plate with handpainted decoration in one color. J-HP-PL-2A: Plate with handpainted decoration in two colors. J-HP-PL-2B: Plate with handpainted decoration in three colors. J-HP-PL-2C: Plate with handpainted decoration in four or more colors. J-HP-PL-3: Plate with uniform colored background and handpainted decoration on interior. J-HP-BL-1: Bowl with handpainted decoration in blue. J-HP-BL-2: Bowl with rolled rim with handpainted decoration in one color. J-HP-BL-2A: Bowl with rolled rim with handpainted decoration in two colors. J-HP-BL-2B: Bowl with rolled rim with handpainted decoration in three colors. J-HP-CUP-2A: Cup with thickened rim with handpainted decoration in two colors. J-HP-SAU-2: Saucer with handpainted decoration in one color. J-HP-SAU-2A: Saucer with handpainted decoration in two colors. Molded Wares MOLD Type J-MOLD-PL-3: Plate with ledge rim with green glaze and molded pattern on rim.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

233

Sponge Ware SPONGE Type J-SPONGE-FB-BL-1: Large bowl with geometric pattern painted and sponged on exterior and upper inner rim. Type J-SPONGE-FB-PL-1: Plate with ledge rim and dark flow blue sponged floral decoration. Type J-HP-FB-PL-1: Plate with dark blue petals turning away from line where the rim starts. Type J-SPONGE-FB-PL-3: Plate with dark blue petals and groups of three stylized rosettes. Type J-SPONGE-FB-PL-4: Plate with dark blue cut-out sponge leaves between lines. Type J-SPONGE-FB-PL-5: Plate with cut out rosettes and freehand painted leaves. Type J-SPONGE-FB-PL-6: Plate with blue flow blue flowers, freehand painted red flowers and leaves. Type J-SPONGE-PL-1: Plate with ledge rim and sponge decoration in one color. Type J-SPONGE-PL-2: Plate with ledge rim and sponge decoration in two colors. Type J-SPONGE-PL-3: Plate with ledge rim and sponge decoration in three or more colors. Type J-SPONGE-PL-3A: Plate with ledge rim, sponge and free-hand decoration in three or more colors. Type J-SPONGE-BL-1: Bowl with sponge decoration in blue. Type J-SPONGE-BL-2: Bowl with sponge decoration in two colors. Type J-SPONGE-BL-3: Bowl with sponge decoration in three or more colors. Type J-SPONGE-BL-3B: Bowl with sponge decoration in three or more colors and beaded rim. Type J-SPONGE-SAU-3: Saucer with ledge rim and sponge decoration in three or more colors. Stencil Wares STEN Type J-GD-STEN-BL-1: Bowl with blue decoration. Type J-GD-STEN-SAU-1: Saucer with blue decoration. Type J-STEN-SAU-1A: Fluted saucer with blue decoration. Type J-STEN-SAU-1B: Saucer with pale blue decoration. Type J-STEN-BL-3: Bowl with green decoration. Airbrush Wares BRUSH J-BRUSH-JUG-3: Jug with green glaze and pattern. Feather Edge Decorated Wares FW Type J-FW-PL-1: Plate with ledge rim decorated with feather edge, no color. Type J-FW-PL-2: Plate with ledge rim decorated with feather edge, blue paint. Type J-FW-PL-2A: Plate with ledge rim decorated with feather edge, blue paint, but no nicks. Type J-FW-PL-3: Plate with ledge rim decorated with feather edge, red paint. Type J-FW-PL-4: Plate with ledge rim decorated with feather edge, green paint. White Glazed Ware with Colored Bands on Rim and Body WCB Type J-WCB-PL-1A: Plate with ledge rim decorated with blue bands on rim and transition from rim to body. Type J-WCB-PL-1B: Plate with ledge rim decorated with blue bands on rim and transition from rim to body and additional molded decoration on rim. Type J-WCB-PL-1C: Plate with ledge rim decorated with one blue band near rim. Type J-WCB-PL-2A: Plate with ledge rim decorated with red bands on rim and transition from rim to body. Type J-WCB-PL-5C: Plate with ledge rim decorated with green bands on rim and red dots on body. Type J-WCB-BL-2B: Bowl with molded body and red bands and lines at rim. Mocha Ware or Banded Cream Ware MOCHA Type J-MOCHA-BL-1: Bowl with ring-base decorated with wide colored band flanked on both sides by 2 or 3 bands of a different color.

234

Chapter 8

Type J-MOCHA-BL-2: Bowl with ring-base decorated with multiple colored bands Type J-MOCHA-BL-2A: Bowl with ring-base decorated with multiple colored bands and lathe-cut decoration. Type J-MOCHA-BL-3: Bowl with ring-base decorated with wide colored bands and narrow bands of a different color. Type J-MOCHA-BL-4: Bowl with wide band with earthworm decoration. Type J-MOCHA-BL-5: Bowl decorated with wide colored band and flanked on both sides with narrow bands of different color. Type J-MOCHA-BL-5A: Bowl decorated with wide colored band and flanked on both sides with narrow bands of different color. Rim molded and colored. Type J-MOCHA-BL-5B: Bowl decorated with alternating colored bands. Type J-MOCHA-JUG-3: Jug or pitcher decorated with wide colored bands and narrow bands of a different color. In addition there is a molded decoration under the rim. Lathe-cut Decorated LATHE Type J-LATHE-BL-1: Bowl with blue glaze and lathe cut decoration. Type J-LATHE-SAU-4: Saucer with brown glaze and lathe cut decoration. Didymoteicho-Style Ware DRIP (changed from DID) Type J-DRIP-BL-1A: Bowl with folded rim and decorated with bright green glaze. Type J-DRIP-BL-1B: Bowl with hooked-ledge rim and decorated with bright green glaze. Type J-DRIP-BL-1C: Bowl with folded rim and decorated with pale green glaze. Type J-DRIP-BL-2A: Bowl with folded rim and decorated with ochre-yellowish glaze. Type J-DRIP-BL-2B: Bowl with hooked-ledge rim and decorated ochre-yellowish glaze. Type J-DRIP-BL-2C: Bowl with folded rim and decorated with ochre-yellowish glaze. Type J-DRIP-BL-2D: Bowl with flaring walls and round rim. Yellow transparent glaze. Çanakkale Ware ÇAN Type J-ÇAN-BL-3A: Bowl with everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. Manganese painted decoration on white slip, under transparent glaze. Type J-ÇAN-BL-3B: Bowl with everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. Manganese painted decoration on white slip, under yellowish/ochre transparent glaze. Type J-ÇAN-BL-3C: Bowl with everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. Manganese painted decoration on white slip, under greenish transparent glaze. Type J-ÇAN-BL-4B: Bowl with everted upturned ledge rim ending in a small hook. Transparent glaze over yellowish/ochre thick slip. Type J-ÇAN-BL-5C: Bowl with everted cut-out foliate rim. Bright green glaze. Type J-ÇAN-BL-5D: Bowl with everted cut-out foliate rim. Dark brown glaze. Type J-ÇAN-BL-6E: Bowl with everted rim with double pie-crust and white slip white green/manganese spotted glaze. Type J-ÇAN-BL-9A: Bowl with ledge rim with thumb impression at edge giving it a wavy appearance. Interior and over rim slipped white and glazed deep green. Type J-ÇAN-BL-9C: Bowl with straight rim which is decorated with thumb impressions, giving it a wavy appearance. Interior is slipped white and the rim is painted green; the interior is glazed with a transparent colorless glaze. Type J- ÇAN-LID-1B: Lid with knob. Glazed with bright green glaze over thick white slip. Type J-ÇAN-LID-1C: Lid with folded rim with inner groove. Glazed with bright green glaze. Overglaze white floral decoration. Type J-ÇAN-JR-1: Jar with bulging neck and glazed brown and painted yellow.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

235

Grottaglie Ware GROT Type J-GROT-PL-1: Plate with everted upturned round rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Rim decorated with brown painted lines and pale blue rosettes. Type J-GROT-PL-2: Plate with everted upturned round rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Rim decorated with brown painted lines and pale blue festoon decoration with brown drops. Type J-GROT-BAS-1: Deep basin with everted upturned rim with hook. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Decorated in brown, light blue and green and yellow. Type J-GROT-BAS-1A: Deep basin with everted upturned rim with hook. Covered with tin added yellow lead glaze. Decorated in brown and yellow. Type J-GROT-BAS-2: Deep basin with everted upturned rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze and decorated in brown, light blue and green and orange. Type J-GROT-BAS-3: Deep basin with everted upturned rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Rim decorated with brown and light blue and green floral pattern. Type J-GROT-BAS-4: Deep basin with everted upturned rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Rim decorated with brown and light blue and manganese floral decoration. Type J-GROT-BAS-5: Deep basin with horizontal thickened ledge rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Rim decorated with brown line and light olive green and yellow. Type J-GROT-DISH-1: Shallow dish with everted upturned round rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Rim decorated with brown painted lines. Type J-GROT-DISH-2: Shallow dish with everted upturned round rim. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Rim decorated with pale manganese lines and pale blue rosettes. Type J-GROT-CUP-1: Cup with round rim and handle. Covered with tin added lead glaze. Rim decorated with olive green band and body with blue rosettes. Glazed Ware from Albisola ALB Type J-ALB-BL-1: Shallow serving bowls with ledge rim and dark brown slip with black strokes under colorless transparent glaze. Ottoman Marbled Ware MARM (Same BLS as BAS) Type J-MARM-BAS-1A: Basin with ledge rim. Two colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-BAS-1B: Basin with hooked ledge rim. Two colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-BAS-1C: Base of basin. Two colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-BAS-1D: Body sherd of basin. Two colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-BAS-2A: Basin with ledge rim. Three colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-BAS-2B: Basin with hooked ledge rim. Three colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-BAS-2C: Base of basin. Three colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-BAS-2D: Body sherd of basin. Three colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-BL-1A: Bowl with ledge rim. Two colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-PL-2C: Base of carinated plate. Three colors, mottled. Transparent or yellow transparent glaze. Type J-MARM-JUG-1: Jug with low ring base. Three colors, mottled. Transparent yellow glaze.

236

Chapter 8

Maculata Ware MAC Type J-MAC-PL-1B: Plate with hooked ledge rim. Splashed with one color under transparent glaze. Type J-MAC-PL-1C: Base of plate. Splashed with one color under transparent glaze. Type J-MAC-PL-2A: Plate with ledge rim. Splashed with two colors under transparent glaze. Type J-MAC-LID-1: Lid splashed with one color under transparent glaze. Marbled Ware MAR Type J-MAR-CUP-1: Cup made of hard paste and decorated on the outside with underglaze polychrome paint giving a marbled effect. Interior remains undecorated white. Type J-MAR-BL-1: Bowl made of earthenware decorated on the inside with underglaze polychrome (at least two) colors mottle together giving a marbled effect. Exterior not mottled. Type J-MAR-BL-2: Bowl made of earthenware decorated on both sides with underglaze polychrome (at least two) colors mottle together giving a marbled effect. Type J-MAR-BL-2A: Bowl with simple pinched rim made of earthenware decorated on both sides with underglaze polychrome (at least two) colors mottle together giving a marbled effect. Type J-MAR-BL-2B: Bowl with up-turned ledge rim made of earthenware decorated on both sides with underglaze polychrome (at least two) colors mottle together giving a marbled effect. Type J-MAR-BL-2C: Bowl with sharply up-turned ledge rim made of earthenware decorated on both sides with underglaze polychrome (at least two) colors mottle together giving a marbled effect. Slip-Painted Wares SLIP Type J-SLIP-BL-1A: Deep bowl with rounded ledge rim with inner groove decorated with slip painted lines under transparent yellow ochre glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-1B: Deep bowl with rounded ledge rim and decorated with slip painted lines under transparent yellow ochre glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-1C: Deep bowl with slightly pinched ledge rim and decorated with slip painted lines under transparent glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-1G: Bowl with carinated body and round rim. Decorated with abstract white slip painted pattern under transparent ochre-yellow glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-2A: Deep bowl with slightly hooked ledge rim and decorated with thick transparent bright brown glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-2B: Deep bowl with rounded ledge rim and decorated with slip painted lines under transparent brown glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-2C: Deep bowl with slightly pinched ledge rim and decorated with slip painted lines under transparent brown glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-2D: Deep bowl with hooked ledge rim and decorated with slip painted lines under transparent yellow ochre glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-2F: Bowl with sharply carinated body and round rim. Slip painted under transparent pale yellow glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-3A: Bowl with ledge rim and decorated with slip painted lines under transparent green glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-3B: Bowl with hooked ledge rim and decorated with slip painted lines under transparent green glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-3C: Bowl with ledge rim and decorated with green glazed band. Type J-SLIP-BL-3E: Deep bowl with molded rim with flange glazed with a transparent dark green glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-3F: Bowl with sharply carinated body and round rim. Slip painted under transparent bright green glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-3G: Bowl with hooked ledge rim. Thick white slip with green glazed dots. Type J-SLIP-BL-3H: Bowl with hooked ledge rim. Thick white slip with green glazed stripes.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

237

Type J-SLIP-BL-4A: Deep bowl with slightly hooked ledge rim covered with white slip under transparent yellow glaze. The exterior appears bright brown. Type J-SLIP-BL-5A: Bowl with simple round rim and green glazed bands. Type J-SLIP-BL-5C: Bowl with simple round rim. Slip painted under transparent glaze. Type J-SLIP-BL-5E: Bowl with inverted pinched rim. Thick white slip, sgraffito decoration under light yellow transparent glaze. Type J-SLIP-BAS-1A: Deep large basin with flat ledge rim. Int. and rim: thick white slip and transparent light yellow glaze. Ext.: transparent light yellow glaze. Type J-SLIP-JUG-1A: Jug with yellow glaze. Type J-SLIP-JAR-4: Carinated jar with everted rim with groove. Ext.: yellow and green stripes under transparent glaze. Int. green glaze. Vallauris Glazed Cooking Pots VAL-CP Type J-VAL-CP-1: Globular cooking pot with everted ledge rim forming a deep groove inside to hold the lid. Glazed inside. Type J-VAL-CP-2: Open cooking bowl with short everted rim with small external ridge. Glazed inside. Type J-VAL-CP-3: Open cooking bowl with wishbone handle. The rim is beveled. Inside glazed. Type J-VAL-CP-4: Ovoid cooking pot with inverted rim with a ridge below. Four handles with thumb imprint. Glazed inside. Type J-VAL-CP-4A: Ovoid cooking pot with round rim with a ridge below. Four handles with thumb imprint. Glazed inside. Type J-VAL-CP-4B: Ovoid cooking pot with folded flat rim with a ridge below. Four handles with thumb imprint. Glazed inside. Type J-VAL-CP-5: Globular cooking pot with everted flat rim. Glazed inside. Monochrome Glazed Wares MONO Type J-MONO-BL-1A: Green glazed bowl with ledge rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1B: Green glazed bowl with hooked ledge rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1C: Green glazed bowl with ledge rim with incised nicks. Type J-MONO-BL-1D: Green glazed bowl with hooked crenellated ledge rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1E: Green glazed bowl with simple round rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1F: Green glazed bowl with inverted pinched rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1G: Green glazed bowl with everted pinched rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1H: Green glazed carinated bowl with straight rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1J: Round bowl with short ledge rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1K: Round bowl with short everted round rim. Type J-MONO-BL-1L: Deep bowl with ribbed body and sharply inverted flanged rim. Similar to GAZABL-1A or BL-1A, green glazed. Type J-MONO-BL-1M: Green glazed bowl with flanged rim with incised nicks. Type J-MONO-BL-2A: Yellow glazed bowl with ledge rim. Type J-MONO-BL-2B: Yellow glazed bowl with hooked ledge rim. Type J-MONO-BL-2E: Yellow glazed bowl with simple round rim. Type J-MONO-BL-2F: Yellow glazed bowl with sharply inverted pinched rim. Type J-MONO-BL-2G: Yellow glazed bowl with profiled rim and ring-base. Type J-MONO-BL-3: Deep brown glazed shallow bowl with round ledge rim and flat base. Type J-MONO-BL-3A: Deep brown glazed bowl with simple round rim. Type J-MONO-BL-3B: Deep brown glazed bowl with everted upturned ledge rim. Type J-MONO-LID-1: Green glazed lid. Type J-MONO-LID-3: Brown glazed lid.

238

Chapter 8

Type J-MONO-JUG-2: Jug with flat base. Yellow glaze on interior and splashes on exterior. Type J-MONO-JAR-3: Carinated jar with flat unglazed rim. Deep brown saltglaze. Other Glazed Utilitarian Wares GL Type J-GL-PL-1: Serving dish or plate with a rolled rim. Covered with a dark brown slip under a transparent glaze. Type J-GL-BL-2A: Bowl with a rolled rim. Covered with a thick beige slip, and with a transparent yellowish-green glaze. Type J-GL-BL-2B: Bowl with a rolled rim. Covered with a thick beige slip, and on rim painted green triangles under a transparent glaze. Type J-GL-CP-1: Shallow cooking bowl with heavy everted triangular rim with groove to hold a lid. Glazed inside only. Type J-GL-CP-2: Deep cooking pot with short flanged rim with groove to hold a lid. Glazed with yellow glaze inside and on the rim with small brown spots. Type J-GL-CP-3: Globular cooking pot with beveled rim. Int. and rim glazed with bright brown glaze, dripping on exterior. Type J-GL-CP-4: Deep cooking bowl with flaring walls and slightly beveled rim, possible handles. Type J-GL-BAS-1: Deep basin with triangular rim and flat base. It is made of heavy ware, finely levigated and covered with a transparent lead glaze which makes the clay appear bright brown. Type J-GL-BAS-1B: Deep basin with a rolled rim. Covered with a thick beige slip, painted in dark green and covered with a transparent lead glaze. Mottled appearance. Type J-GL-BAS-2A: Deep basin with flaring walls and a rolled rim. Covered with a thick beige slip, painted in light and dark green and covered with a transparent lead glaze. Mottled appearance. Type J-GL-BAS-2B: Deep basin with a rolled rim. Covered with a thick beige slip, painted in light and dark green and covered with a transparent lead glaze. Mottled appearance. Type J-GL-BAS-3: Shallow basin with straight pinched rim. Green glaze. Type J-GL-JUG-1: Jug or pitcher with high slight flaring neck and round rim. Slipped with mustard colored slip on the inside and glazed with bright red-brown glaze outside and over the rim. Type J-GL-JUG-2: Fragment of jug with short neck and everted rim thickened outside. The outside is glazed with a transparent light brown glaze which spills over the rim inside. Gaza Ware Vessels GAZA Type J-GAZA-BL-1A: Small bowl with a 14 cm diam., with sharply inverted rim. Y. Israel’s zebdyie subtype 2. Type J-GAZA-BL-1B: Small bowl with a 14–16 cm diam., with an inverted rim thickened on the outside. Type J-GAZA-BL-1C: Bowl with a 18 cm diam., with almost straight walls and an incurved rim which is thickened on the exterior forming a short flange. Related to Y. Israel’s zebdyie subtype 6. Type J-GAZA-BL-1D: Bowl with a 23 cm diam., with sloping walls with an almost straight rim with an exterior flange. Related to Y. Israel’s zebdyie subtype 6. Type J-GAZA-BL-1E: Large bowl with everted triangular rim (42 cm diam.). Body decorated with band of pie-crust decoration and combed wavy lines. Type J-GAZA-BL-1F: Bowl with a 21 cm diam., with sloping walls with an inverted rim thickened on exterior. Related to Y. Israel’s zebdyie subtype 6. Type J-GAZA-BL-1G: Bowl with straight round rim externally thickened forming groove. Type J-GAZA-BL-1H: Bowl with inverted rim forming interior groove and with exterior ribbed with short flange. Type J-GAZA-BL-1J: Bowl with a 22 cm diam. with inverted round rim. A narrow groove under rim and a wider one below.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

239

Type J-GAZA-BL-1K: Bowl with almost straight rim slightly grooved with external flange decorated with pie-crust. Related to Y. Israel’s zebdyie subtype 3. Type J-GAZA-BL-1L: Bowl with inverted ribbed upper part ending in beveled rim. Not found in Y. Israel’s’ typology. Type J-GAZA-BL-2: Large bowl with hooked ledge rim. Type J-GAZA-BL-3: Small simple bowl with round rim. Type J-GAZA-BL-3A: Small simple bowl with thick round rim. Type J-GAZA-MRT-1: Round bowl with hammerhead rim and a ring-base. Diam. ranges from 20 to 24 cm Six to eight vertical shelf-handles. Corresponds to Y. Israel’s mortar subtype 3. Type J-GAZA-BAS-1: Deep bowl with an arched-rim with one ridge. Diam. around 40 cm. Corresponds to Y. Israel’s mixing bowl type 1. Type J-GAZA-BAS-1A: Deep bowl with rounded ledge rim. Small diam. Type J-GAZA-BAS-1B: Deep bowl with horizontal ledge rim with one narrow groove. Israel’s type 2. Type J-GAZA-BAS-1C: Deep bowl with horizontal ledge rim. Type J-GAZA-BAS-1D: Deep bowl with round ledge rim. Large diam. Type J-GAZA-BAS-1E: Deep bowl with ledge rim. Small diam. Type J-GAZA-BAS-1F: Deep bowl with horizontal ledge rim with hook. Type J-GAZA-BAS-2A: Deep bowl with an arched-rim with two ridges. Undecorated. Type J-GAZA-BAS-2B: Deep bowl with an arched-rim with two ridges. Diam. around 43 cm. Decorated with incised nicks on body. Type J-GAZA-BAS-2C: Deep bowl with an arched-rim with two ridges. Diam. around 45 cm. Decorated with white painted decoration on body. Type J-GAZA-BAS-3A: Deep bowl with an arched-rim with three ridges. Undecorated. Type J-GAZA-BAS-3B: Deep bowl with an arched-rim with three ridges. Diam. over 50 cm. Decorated with incised nicks on body. Type J-GAZA-BAS-3C: Deep bowl with an arched-rim with deep groove with incised decoration. Type J-GAZA-BAS-4: Deep bowl with flaring walls and short flanged rim. Type J-GAZA-BAS-4A: Large bowl with hammerhead rim, deep groove inside for lid. Type J-GAZA-BAS-4B: Deep bowl with flaring walls with thickened rim and internal groove. Type J-GAZA-BAS-4C: Deep bowl with flaring walls with short externally thickened rim and internal groove. Type J-GAZA-BAS-5: Large basin with round rim; incised wavy and straight lines on body. Y. Israel’s kashkul 2. Type J-GAZA-BAS-5A: Large basin with round rim; undecorated. Type J-GAZA-BAS-6: Larger version of BL-1H. leken large. Type J-GAZA-BAS-6A: Larger version of BL-1H. leken large; pie-crust and straight ribbed upper part. Type J-GAZA-BAS-7: Large basin with round ridged body and short upturned ledge rim. Type J-GAZA-JR-1A: Burnyie with an ovoid body and everted rim with groove and two loop-handles from right under the rim to the body. Y. Israel’s burnyie subtype 1. Type J-GAZA-JR-1B: Burnyie with an ovoid body with a slight carination. Two handles from right under the rim to the carination. Y. Israel’s burnyie subtype 3. Type J-GAZA-JR-1C: Burnyie with an ovoid body with a sharp carination. (Two handles from right under the rim to the carination. Y. Israel’s burnyie subtype 3. Type J-GAZA-JR-1D: Burnyie Type J-GAZA-JR-2: Large jar with ovoid body with inverted and beveled rim. Two coarse handles from rim to the upper body. Type J-GAZA-JR-3 : Jarra Type J-GAZA-JR-4: Large jarra with high wide neck decorated with pie-crust band and combed straight and wavy lines on the body. The rim is folded and forms a flange.

240

Chapter 8

Type J-GAZA-JR-5: Y. Israel’s jarra 3. Type J-GAZA-JR-5A: Y. Israel’s jarra 6. Type J-GAZA-JR-6: Y. Israel’s jarra 7. Type J-GAZA-JR-6A: Y. Israel’s jarra 9. Type J-GAZA-JR-7: Jar with straight neck and externally thickened round rim. Two handles are drawn from the neck. Type J-GAZA-JR-9: Y. Israel’s asslyie 2. Type J-GAZA-JR-9A: Y. Israel’s asslyie 2, but with additional ridge under rim. Type J-GAZA-JR-10: Wide necked jar with internally and externally grooved rim. Ribbed neck. Type J-GAZA-JR-11: Y. Israel’s jarra 2. Type J-GAZA-JUG-1A: Kuz with flaring neck with filter and everted rounded rim. One handle from bottom of the neck to upper part of body. Undecorated. Type J-GAZA-JUG-1B: Kuz with flaring neck with filter and everted rounded rim. One handle at bottom of neck to upper part body. Decorated with yellowish/or pink slip painted line decoration. Type J-GAZA-JUG-1C: Kuz with flaring neck. Similar to the two vessels discussed above. The neck is decorated with incised decorations. Type J-GAZA-JUG-2A: Kuz with flaring neck and triangular rim. One handle from bottom of neck to upper part of body. Undecorated. Type J-GAZA-JUG-2B: This jug has a narrow neck and an everted folded rim which sometimes is thickened. Type J-GAZA-JUG-2C: Jug with flaring neck and internally thickened rim. The handle is drawn from the base of the neck. Type J-GAZA-JUG-2G: Kuz with narrow neck and sharply everted triangular rim. Lower part of neck is decorated with carved nicks. Two handles drawn from above the carved decoration. Filter in neck. Type J-GAZA-JUG-3A: Kuraz with slightly bulging neck and inverted neck with inner flange. Two handles are positioned at the bottom of the neck. Type J-GAZA-JUG-4A: Ibrik with long stepped neck and everted thickened rim. Two handles from bottom of neck. Type J-GAZA-JUG-5A: Ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in everted externally thickened rim. Two handles from bottom of neck. Related to Y. Israel’s ibrik subtype 8. Type J-GAZA-JUG-5B: Ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in everted externally thickened rim. Two handles from bottom of neck. Related to Y. Israel’s ibrik subtype 8. Pink painted decoration. Type J-GAZA-JUG-6A: Ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in inverted externally thickened rim. Two handles from bottom of neck. Related to Y. Israel’s ibrik subtype 6. Type J-GAZA-JUG-7A: Ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in internally beveled rim. Two handles are drawn from bottom of neck. One handle has also a long drinking spout. Related to Y. Israel’s ibrik subtype 4. Type J-GAZA-JUG-8A: Ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in everted rolled rim. Two handles are drawn from bottom of neck. One handle has also a long drinking spout. Related to Y. Israel’s ibrik subtype 5. Type J-GAZA-JUG-8B: Ibrik with long slightly flaring neck ending in everted rolled rim. Two handles are drawn from bottom of neck. One handle has also a long drinking spout. Painted decoration. Related to Y. Israel’s ibrik subtype 5. Type J-GAZA-LMP: Saucer lamp with pinched end forming a wick hole. Type J-GAZA-LID: Lid with circular central knob. Coarse Ware Type J-LMP: Saucer lamp with pinched end forming a wick hole. Not of Gaza ware. Type J-BL-1: Bowl with sharply inverted rim and ring-base.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

241

Type J-BL-1A: Bowl with sharply inverted thickened rim and ring-base. Type J-BL-1B: Bowl with inverted flanged rim. Type J-BL-1C: Bowl with inverted round rim. Type J-BL-1D: Corresponds to GAZA-BL-1D. Type J-BL-1E: Bowl with everted round rim with flange. Type J-BL-1F: Bowl/lid with everted flat rim with groove. Type J-BL-1G: Handmade bowl with sharply inverted rim. Type J-BL-2: Bowl with sharply inverted round rim. Type J-BL-2A: Bowl with sharply inverted round rim and pie-crust decoration. Type J-BL-2B: Bowl with inverted flat rim and pie-crust decoration. Type J-BL-3: Bowl with inverted flanged rim, arched rim with inner and outer flange. Type J-BL-4: Bowl with high carination and straight thickened rim. Type J-BL-4A: Bowl with high carination and straight flat rim. Type J-BL-4B: Bowl with high carination and straight round rim. Type J-BL-5: Deep bowl with high carination and sharply everted round rim. Type J-BL-6: Deep bowl with inverted externally flanged round rim. Type J-BL-7: Deep bowl with everted thickened rim and thick flat base. Maybe used as lamp. Type J-BL-8: Bowl with flat rim with short flanges externally and internally. Type J-BL-9: Bowl with round rim with short flanges externally and internally. Type J-BL-10A: Small bowl with flat string cut base and pinched rim. Type JER-BL-10A: Small bowl with flat string cut base and inverted round rim. Type J-BL-11: Deep bowl with everted upturned ledge rim. Type J-BL-12: Deep bowl with flaring walls and flanged beveled grooved rim. Type J-BAS-1: Deep basin with hammerhead rim. Type J-BAS-2: Deep basin with thick round rim. Type J-BAS-3: Deep basin with round flanged rim. Type J-BAS-4: Basin? With wide ledge rim with incised wavy and straight lines. Type J-JR-1: Neckless jar made of beige ware and decorated with incised circles forming a floral pattern. Type J-JR-2: Carinated jar with everted rounded rim made of brown ware. A band of incised nicks decorates the jar at the point of carination. The entire vessel is slipped white and the band of nicks is slipped yellowish. Type J-JR-3: Large jar with round rim. The upper body is decorated with two bands with a pie-crust decoration. Type J-JR-3A: Large jar with inverted rounded rim made of brown ware. The upper body is decorated with a band with a pie-crust decoration. Type J-JR-3B: Large jar with everted round rim and ridge at neck. Type J-JR-4: Very large jar or pithos made of orange ware with inverted upper part of body with multiple protruding grooves on body forming steps. The vessel is covered with a thick whitish slip. Type J-JR-5: Jar with bulging neck and slightly everted rounded rim made of pink ware. It has an ovoid body with incised lines and two handles from bottom of neck. Similar in shape to Israel’s jarra type 3 made of Gaza Ware. Type J-JR-6: Jar with bulging neck and round rim. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck. Type J-JR-6A: Jar with bulging neck and inverted beveled rim with external flange. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck. Type J-JR-6B: Jar with bulging neck and inverted round rim with external flange. Type J-JR-6C: Jar with bulging neck and grooved rim. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck. Type J-JR-6D: Jar with bulging neck and inverted round thickened rim. Protruding ridge at mid-neck. Type JER-JR-6E: Jar with bulging neck and inverted folded rim. Type J-JR-6F: Jar with bulging neck and inverted round rim and pie-crust decoration.

242

Chapter 8

Type J-JR-6G: Jar with bulging neck and everted beveled rim and pie-crust decoration. Type J-JR-7: Jar with short bulging or flaring neck with round or beveled rim. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck. Type J-JR-7A: Jar with short bulging neck and round rim. Type J-JR-7B: Jar with short grooved neck and externally thickened round rim. Type J-JR-7C: Jar with flaring neck and incised vegetal decoration on body. Two handles are drawn from the base of the neck. Type J-JR-8: Similar to J-GAZA-JR-4A. Type J-JR-9: Jar with straight neck and everted ledge rim. Type J-JR-9A: Jar with slightly bulging neck and short ledge rim. Type J-JR-10: Jar with long straight neck and everted folded rim with deep groove below. Type J-JR-11: Corresponds to J-GAZA-JR-1B. Type J-JR-12: Jar with long neck and beveled rim. Several deep ridges on neck. Type J-JR-12A: Jar with long neck and beveled rim, protruding ridge on neck. Type J-JR-13: Holemouth jar with slightly everted rounded rim. Ridge on interior. Type J-JR-13A: Wide mouth jar with thickened rounded rim. Incised zigzag pattern. Type J-JR-14: Corresponds to assliye 3. Type J-JR-15: Jar with straight neck and round rim. Upper part of neck decorated with carved fluting. Type J-FL-POT-1: Flower pot with folded rim and pierced base. Type J-FL-POT-1A: Flower pot with folded rim. Type J-FL-POT-2: Flower pot with everted rim with double pie-crust decorated rim. Type J-ZIR-1: Large jar with straight walls and thick round rim. Type J-JUG-1A: Jug with a long and narrow neck and everted rounded rim made of pink ware. Maybe a sherbe, which is a drinking jug without handles and without a spout. Type J-JUG-1B: Jug made of buff ware with a long and narrow neck with strainer and everted rim. The base is a low ring-base. Possibly a sherbe, the drinking jug without handles. Decorated with combed zigzag lines and wavy lines forming an intricate pattern on the entire vessel. Type J-JUG-1C: Jug with long narrow neck stepped at the upper end and ending in everted round rim. Neck bears traces of a painted leaf garland. Type J-JUG-2: Jug with long ridged neck ending in everted round rim. Two handles are drawn from the bottom of the neck. Type J-JUG-2A: Jug with long ridged neck ending in everted round rim. Two handles are drawn from the bottom of the neck. Strainer in neck. Type J-JUG-2B: Jug with long ridged neck ending in everted round rim. Type J-JUG-2C: Jug with flaring neck ending in folded rim. Type J-JUG-2D: Jug with flaring neck and everted round rim and one loop handle. Type J-JUG-2E: Jug with long slightly ribbed neck ending in everted triangular rim. Type J-JUG-3: Jug with long neck with two ridges and everted round rim. A handle is drawn from mid neck. Thick brown glaze on exterior and over rim. Type J-JUG-4: Jug with long flaring neck with slightly inverted round rim with external ridge. Probable handles at bottom of neck. Type J-FL-1 Type J-FL-2: Ovoid jug with ring base, straight neck with thickened rim. Band handles from base of neck. Type J-CP-1: Large cooking pot with everted neck and round rim. Wide handles similar to Vallauris CP, but not glazed. Type J-CP-1A: Large cooking pot with everted neck and round rim. Wide band-handles similar to Vallauris CP, but not glazed. Slipped black and burnished. Type J-CP-2: Handmade cooking pot, neckless with round rim. Type J-CP-2A: Handmade cooking pot with very short neck and round rim, pinprick decoration.

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

243

Type J-CP-2B: Handmade neckless cooking pot with round rim and pinprick decoration. Type J-CP-2C: Handmade cooking pot with high neck and round rim. Type J-CP-3D: Handmade handles with pinprick decoration. Type J-CP-3: Neckless cooking pot with rolled rim. Type J-CP-4: Large cooking pot with molded rim. Type J-CP-5: Cooking pot with short everted rim, slight carination, similar to JR-2 with loop handles. Lids LID Type J-LID-1A: Small handmade saucer with flaring walls ending in a sharply inverted rim. The base is flat or distorted. Type J-LID-1B: Small handmade saucer with flaring walls ending in an everted pinched rim. The base is flat or distorted. Type J-LID-1C: Small handmade saucer with flaring walls ending in an everted rim. The base is flat or distorted. Type J-LID-2: Lid made of ring-base of green glazed vessel, possibly plate (?) Type J-LID-3: Bell shaped lid with pinched rim. Type J-LID-4: Coarse wheel made saucer with flat base and round rim. Type J-LID-4A: Wheel made saucer (reworked base?) with round rim and flat base. Type J-LID-5: Wheel made lid with hollow knob and incised decoration. Type J-LID-6: Coarse lid with thick flat base and everted hooked rim. Type J-LID-6A: Heavy lid with thick knob. Type J-LID-7: Flat lid with small knob with stamp. Stone Ware Bottles STONE BTL J-STONE-BTL-1A: Bottle with stepped rim, upper part brownish. J-STONE-BTL-1B: Bottle with stepped rim, one color. J-STONE-BTL-1C: Flat base of bottle, light beige, stamped. J-STONE-BTL-1E: Flat base of bottle, light beige, glazed. J-STONE-BTL-2: Bottle with flat base. Dark brown. J-STONE-BTL-2A: Bottle with flat base. Brown. J-STONE-BTL-3: Bottle with short stepped rim, yellowish brown. J-STONE-BTL-3A: Bottle with stepped flat rim, Dark brown. J-STONE-BTL-3B: Bottle with stepped rim with screw top. Yellowish brown. J-STONE-BTL-3C: Flat base of small bottle, yellowish brown. J-STONE-BTL-4: Bottle with short spouted rim. Dark brown. Ink bottle. J-STONE-BTL-4A: Body sherd of dark brown bottle. J-STONE-JAR-2: Body fragment of jar with light brown glaze and black letters. J-STONE-LID: Lid made of stone ware. J-STONE-LID-2: Stone ware lid brown glazed with impressed “4”. J-STONE-COB: Stone ware vessel glazed cobalt on both sides and gilded and yellow overglaze pattern.

244

Chapter 8

DESCRIPTIVE TABLES FOR POTTERY PLATES Fig. 8.1A: Willow Pattern: Blue on White (1–9) and Red on White (10) No.

Bucket No. Locus No. B.3034/2 L.213

Ware Vessel Type Description Description White hard Type J-TW-PL- Fragment: white slip. Border: paste 1 blue intricate geometric and floral decoration. Inside: Willow Pattern, Chinese story.

2

B.3043/1 L.213

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL1

3

B.3372/1 L.306

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL1

4

B.3213/5 L.226

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL1

5

B.3328/6 L.290

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL1

6

B.3101/1 L.218

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL1

7

B.3244 L.268

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL1

8

B.3184/3 L.250

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL1

9

B.3203/1 L.252

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL1

10

B.3171/1 L.229

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL2

11

B.1876

White hard paste

J-TW-PL-1

1

Dimensions

Preserved Height: 4.6 cm Diam. 26 cm Rim: 17.5 % Thickness.: 0.5 cm Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 2.7 cm blue intricate geometric and flo- Base diam.12 cm ral decoration. Inside: Willow Th. 0.4 cm Pattern, Chinese story. Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 6.8 cm blue intricate geometric and flo- Base diam.12 cm ral decoration. Inside: Willow Th. 0.5 cm Pattern, Chinese story. Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 6.1 cm blue intricate geometric and flo- Diam. 14 cm ral decoration. Inside: Willow Rim: 5% Pattern, Chinese story. Th. 0.5 cm Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 7.1 cm blue intricate geometric and flo- Base diam. 8 cm ral decoration. Inside: Willow Th. 0.35 cm Pattern, Chinese story. Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 4.8 cm blue intricate geometric and flo- Base diam.14 cm ral decoration. Inside: Willow Th. 0.5 cm Pattern, Chinese story. Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 4.5 cm blue intricate geometric and flo- Diam. 22 cm ral decoration. Rim: 8 % Th. 0.5 cm Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 4.6 cm blue intricate geometric and flo- Diam. 24 cm ral decoration. Willow Pattern, Rim: 7.5 % Chinese story. Th. 0.4 cm Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 4.6 cm blue intricate geometric and flo- Diam. 22 cm ral decoration. Willow Pattern, Rim: 8.5 % Chinese story. Th. 0.45 cm Fragment: white slip. Border: PH: 5.3 cm red intricate geometric and floral Diam. 20 cm decoration. Willow Pattern, Chi- Rim: 24 % nese story. Th. 0.5 cm Fragment: white slip. Blue geo- PH: 6.8 cm metric decoration. Blue underBase diam.12 cm glaze stamp (Arbel, this volume, Th. 0.5 cm Chapter 9, Fig. 9.2).

Porcelain and Ceramic Vessels of the Ottoman Period

245

Fig. 8.1B: Transfer Pattern: Other Colors No. 1

Bucket No. Locus No. B.3300/2 L.284

Ware Vessel Type Description Description White hard Type J-TW-PL- Fragment: white slip. Border: paste 3 green intricate geometric and floral decoration. Oriental landscape on rim. White hard Type J-TW-PL- Fragment: white slip. Oriental paste 3 landscape with trees (acacia).

2

B.5424 L.495

3

L.834/2

White hard paste

4

B.1639/1 L.114

White hard paste

5

B.3110/6 L.227

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL- Fragment: white slip. Border: 5 black view with boat and oriental city view.

6

B.10262 L.952

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL- Fragment: white slip. Oriental 5 harbor landscape.

7

B.9214/12 L.834

White hard paste

8

B.9035/2 L.804

White hard paste

Type J-TW-PL- Fragment: white slip. Border: 5 black intricate geometric and floral decoration. Bead pattern on edge of rim and between rim and body. Type J-TW-PL- Fragment: white slip. Border: 5 black intricate geometric and floral decoration.

9

B.3008/1 L.205

White hard paste

10

B.9220 L.834

White hard paste

11

B.1616/1 L.123

White hard paste

12

n/a

White hard paste

Type J-TWCUP-3

Fragment: white slip. Border: pale green intricate floral pattern. Exterior: female figure sitting in front of temple (?). Type J-TW-PL- Fragment: white slip. Border: 4 brown dotted background with white crosses.

Dimensions PH: 3.8 cm Diam. 22 cm Rim: 6.5 % Th. 0.65 cm PH: 7 cm Base diam. 12 cm Th. 0.5 cm PH: 3.8 cm Diam. ca. 20 cm Rim: