The Assemblage of Bone and Ivory Artifacts from Caesarea Maritima, Israel, 1st - 13th Centuries CE 9781841718958, 9781407329048

Citation preview

BAR S1457 2005 AYALON BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA

B A R

The Assemblage of Bone and Ivory Artifacts from Caesarea Maritima, Israel st th 1 -13 Centuries CE Etan Ayalon

BAR International Series 1457 2005

The Assemblage of Bone and Ivory Artifacts from Caesarea Maritima, Israel st th 1 -13 Centuries CE Etan Ayalon

BAR International Series 1457 2005

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 1457 The Assemblage of Bone and Ivory Artifacts from Caesarea Maritima, Israel, 1st 13th Centuries CE © E Ayalon and the Publisher 2005 The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781841718958 paperback ISBN 9781407329048 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841718958 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2005. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS Part I List of Figures Plates and Photographs.....................................................................................…………………………..iii Foreword..................................................................................................................................…………………………….v Introduction ......................................................................................................................…………………………....….vii CHAPTER I: CAESAREA – HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF EXCAVATIONS………………………..............…1 CHAPTER II: HISTORY OF THE RESEARCH ON BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS ...............……………………………......…..3 CHAPTER III: BONE AND IVORY AND THEIR PROPERTIES AS RAW MATERIALS.......………………………………........….5 CHAPTER IV: TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE VARIOUS BONE OBJECTS:................…………………………...…..9 (9) Introduction; (10) handles; (18) working tools, including weaving instruments and dress items; (35) rods; (36) writing implements; (37) weapons parts; (39) boxes and hinges; (46) body grooming objects; (51) jewelry; (69) musical instruments; (71) gaming pieces; (80) dolls\ figurines; (86) religious and art objects; (88) carved pieces, inlays and furniture mounts; (106) miscellanea; (108) production waste. CHAPTER V: TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE IVORY OBJECTS...........................…………………………......….117 CHAPTER VI: THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY (GENERAL).........………………………......….....…131 CHAPTER VII: THE BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY AT CAESAREA.......................................…………………………...…145 CHAPTER VIII: THE PLACE OF THE ARTISAN IN THE FABRIC OF THE CITY......................………………………..…...…157 CHAPTER IX: BONE TOOLS IN THE JEWISH SOURCES ......................................................……………………….…....…161 CONCLUSIONS…………………………....................................................................................................................…...163 Bibliography ……………………………………............................................................................................................167 Index ......................…........................................…..............................................…………………………....…………183

Part II Figures, Plates and Photographs.................……………………………………………………………..….............…...197 Catalogue: Tables of the Finds..................................…......……………………………………………….……………337

i

LIST OF FIGURES, PLATES AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figures Figure 1: Figure 2: Figure 3: Figure 4: Figure 5: Figure 6: Figure 7: Figure 8: Figure 9: Figure 10: Figure 11: Figure 12: Figure 13: Figure 14: Figure 15: Figure 16: Figure 17: Figure 18: Figure 19: Figure 20: Figure 21: Figure 22: Figure 23: Figure 24: Figure 25: Figure 26: Figure 27: Figure 28: Figure 29: Figure 30: Figure 31: Figure 32: Figure 33: Figure 34: Figure 35: Figure 36: Figure 37: Figure 38: Figure 39: Figure 40: Figure 41: Figure 42: Figure 43: Figure 44: Figure 45: Figure 46: Figure 47: Figure 48: Figure 49: Figure 50: Figure 51: Figure 52: Figure 53: Figure 54: Figure 55:

Handles...............................................................……………................................…………….......... 201 Handles (cont.) ................................................................................................………………… ........203 Handles (cont.) ................................................................................................………………… ........205 Utensils................................................................................................………………………….........207 Utensils (cont.)................................................................................................…………………. ........209 Whorls\buttons…………………………………………………………………………………. ........211 Whorls\buttons (cont.) ...........................................................................................…………….. .......213 Spinning, weaving & clothing implements.............................................................................….........215 Needles................................................................................................………………………….........217 Rods, styli................................................................................................………………………….....219 Weapon parts................................................................................................……………………........221 Boxes................................................................................................……………………………........223 Boxes (cont.) ................................................................................................…………………… .......225 Boxes (cont.) ................................................................................................…………………… .......227 Hinges................................................................................................…………………………… ......229 Body grooming objects................................................................................................……….…. ......231 Body grooming objects (cont.) .............................................................................……………….......233 Body grooming objects (cont.) ..............................................................................………………......235 Pins................................................................................................……………………………….......237 Pins (cont.) ................................................................................................……………………… ......239 Pins (cont.) ................................................................................................………………………. .....241 Pins (cont.) ................................................................................................………………………. .....243 Pins (cont.) ................................................................................................………………………. .....245 Jewelry................................................................................................…………………………… .....247 Jewelry (cont.) ................................................................................................…………………….....249 Musical instruments................................................................................................……………… .....251 Astragalus, dice, throwing sticks............................................................................……………… .....253 Round gaming pieces, “theater tickets”...................................................................……………… ....255 Cylindrical gaming pieces................................................................................................………........257 Decorated gaming pieces, domino.......................................................................................…... .........259 Dolls\figurines................................................................................................……………………......261 Dolls\figurines (cont.) ................................................................................................…………… .....263 Dolls\figurines (cont.) ................................................................................................…………… .....265 Dolls\figurines (cont.), religious and art objects..................................................................................267 Carved pieces: human figures.........................................................................…………………… .....269 Carved pieces: human figures (cont.) ............................................................……………………......271 Carved pieces: architectural designs...............................................................…………………… .....273 Carved pieces: architectural designs (cont.) ..................................................……………………......275 Carved pieces: floral designs................................................................................................…….. .....277 Various carved pieces and inlays.............................................................................................. ...........279 Various carved pieces and inlays (cont.) .......................................................……………………......281 Geometrical inlays................................................................................................……………….. .....283 Ajouré inlays................................................................................................……………………… ....285 Ajouré inlays (cont.) ................................................................................................………………....287 Furniture mounts................................................................................................………………… ......289 Furniture mounts (cont.) ................................................................................................…………......291 Miscellanea................................................................................................………………………. .....293 Blanks and unfinished objects...............................................................................……………….......295 Blanks and unfinished objects (cont.) ....................................................................………………. ....297 Waste of lathe carving, drilling and dice production..............................................………………..…301 Ring production waste.......................................................................................………………….......303 Industrial waste................................................................................................…………………… ....305 Industrial waste (cont.) .........................................................................................……………….......307 Industrial waste (cont.) ..........................................................................................………………......309 Ivory objects: handles.............................................................................................………………. ....311

iii

Figure 56: Figure 57: Figure 58: Figure 59: Figure 60: Figure 61:

Ivory objects: double buttons, whorls\buttons, boxes..…......................................…………………..313 Ivory objects: tool heads, stopper, combs, jewelry.............……...........................…………………. .315 Ivory objects: gaming pieces, writing tablets, inlays.............................................…………………. .317 Ivory objects: inlays, carved pieces.....................…..............................................…………………. . 319 Ivory objects: Decorated objects, miscellenea.................…......................................…………..…….321 Ivory objects: rods, blanks, unfinished objects, waste........…...............................…………………. .323

Plates Plate 1: Plate 2: Plate 3: Plate 4: Plate 5: Plate 6: Plate 7: Plate 8: Plate 9: Plate 10: Plate 11: Plate 12: Plate 13: Plate 14. Plate 15:

Map of Caesarea and the Excavated Areas (after Holum, Raban and Patrich 1999) .........………… 323 Cattle skeleton: principal bones mentioned in the text (after MacGregor 1985 Fig. 7) .........…….....324 Handle No. 518, made from hippopotamus ivory. Photograph: Y. Dray.........………………….….. 324 Bone divider in a belt made in India from bone beads threaded on strings. ………………………... 325 The dividers held the strings in place (Eretz Israel Museum collection. Photograph: L. Pedrul) Lace production as exhibited in the Textile Museum, Barcelona 2002. ............................………….325 The wooden handles on left resemble the bone “shuttles” from Caesarea (Photograph: E. Ayalon) Reconstructed use of the bone lock (Drawing: Y. Dray) .........……………………………………….326 Gilded bone pin No. 217 (Photograph: L. Pedrul) .........……………………………………………. 326 Wooden chest inlayed with mother-of-pearl (the design) and bone (the frames) pieces, Damascus, 20th century (Eretz Israel Collection. Photograph: L. Pedrul) .........…………………….327 Wooden mirror frame decorated with meshrebiyya rods, Cairo, 20th century……………………….328 (Photograph: L. Pedrul) Rosary bead workshop, Germany (?), 17th century (after Gróf and Gróh 2001 Fig. 5) .........……….329 Traditional mother-of-pearl workshop, Bethlehem, 19th century (after Wilson 1880: 133) .......…....329 Bone artist V. Kurov carving bone by a knife, 1999 (Photograph: L. Pedrul) .........……………….. 330 Small frame saw of the mother-of-pearl artisan, Bethlehem, 1970'; .......... …………………………330 similar saws were probably used by bone and ivory craftsmen (Courtesy: Y. Shadur; Photograph: L. Pedrul) Reconstructed stages of cutting rings from a long bone diaphysis on a lathe ……………………….331 (reconstruction: Y. Dray) Reconstruction of the use of a bow-driven lathe (Drawing: S. Sawadi) .........………………………332

Photographs Photograph 1: Photograph 2: Photograph 3:

Various objects illustrating production and wear marks (Photograph: Y. Dray)…………………333 Enlarged look at various objects illustrating production and wear marks (Photograph: Y. Dray).334 A selection of inlays and waste pieces from Raban's basket 0105, Locus 269, Area I2, Early Arab period (Photograph: Y. Dray)……………………………………………….335

iv

FOREWORD This book has its roots in the “Bare Bones, Ancient Artifacts from Animal Bones” exhibition, accompanied by a catalog with color plates, which was prepared in the Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv (Ayalon and Sorek 1999). The surprising fact was that only prehistoric bone artifacts have been thoroughly analyzed to date in Israel (see below, Chapter II). Worked bone from later periods, especially those from the “late” periods (Roman-Byzantine and later) basically represented a terra icognita and were never discussed except as a very limited and specific subject or as finds from a particular excavation. There is no convincing explanation for this neglect – except probably scholarly concentration on pottery and coins – especially compared to the progress in this field of research in Europe and in the United States. Beyond the desire to deal with such a relatively unknown subject there was also the attraction of this modest raw material, “The jewelry of the poor” (Plattt 1978: 23; see Barbier 1988: 49), from which almost any item which comes in mind could be manufactured. At this point of time Prof. Shimon Dar, the Chair of the Martin (Szusz) Department of Land of Israel Studies and Archaeology at the Bar Ilan University, brought to my attention special scholarships which the university President proposed for Ph.D. students. With the help, encouragement and recommendation of both Prof. Dar and the Dean of the Faculty of Jewish Studies, Prof. Moshe Garsiel, I indeed received a generous scholarship, donated by Mrs. and Mr. Miller of New York, which has enabled me to carry out the present research. For giving me this wonderful opportunity I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the President of the University, Prof. Mosheh Kaveh, to the Dean, Prof. Garsiel, to the Academic Secretary, Mr. Motty Mishan, to the Miller family of New York – the donors – and especially to Prof. Dar, my supervisor, who was of so much help to me along the way in every aspect, all this and more in his quiet but thorough way. The memory of rare remains from the production of bone artifacts which were discovered at Caesarea Maritima by Dr. Yosef Porath guided me towards the subject of this book. In the last dozen years very large-scale excavations have been carried out at that site by three different teams (see Chapter I.B below). As Caesarea was a major city and port and in light of the impressive scale of the excavations in all senses, it was obvious that the assemblage of worked bone items found there would be of great importance for the establishment of this line of research in Israel. Within a short time all expedition directors – the late Prof. Avner Raban (who passed away during the preparation of this book) and Prof. Joseph Patrich from Haifa University and Dr. Yosef Porath from the Israel Antiquities Authority, and later also Prof. Kenneth Holum from the University of Maryland, U.S. – agreed to give me the bone and ivory artifacts found by them to investigate and publish as a Ph.D. thesis and later as the material for the present book. The actual work began in October 1999 and lasted exactly three years. Thanks are due to the expedition directors for their approval and help, as well as Dr. Yael Arnon of the Raban expedition and Pitter Gendlman, Amnon Qidron and Hasia Azimi from the Porath team for their help and good spirits. I wish to thank the Israel Antiquities Authority, who controls all the finds excavated in the country, for permitting me to publish these objects. Technical work needed for the publication of the finds, especially their drawing and photographing, have been financed by several grants received from funds of the Department of the Land of Israel Studies and Archaeology: the Koshitzk Fund, the Moskovich Chair, the Krauthammer Chair for Archaeology, and the Rivlin Institute for the History of EretzIsrael and its Settlement. I would like to express my gratitude to Prof. Shimon Dar, Prof. Amos Kloner, Prof. Zeev Safrai and Dr. Zohar Amar for their help in receiving those grants. The help given by the Eretz Israel Museum in Tel Aviv, where I work as a curator, was invaluable: the many free days I was given for the research, financial help to carry out certain assignments, technical aid in photographing and drawing finds and above all – the continuous encouragement by the Director General, Ilan Cohen, and his deputy, Zachi Baker, to finish the project. Chagit Sorek, my assistant who replaced me during these years, helped a lot to provide me with free time. Much help was received from Tzvika Shacham, director of the museum’s library, and especially from Ettyana Felix, the librarian, who never failed to find me the needed books. As the remains of bone and ivory industry are one of the most significant (and no doubt – less known in Israel) aspects of the Caesarea assemblage, there is great importance in the understanding of the ancient technologies used by the local artisans. Basically I am not a technical person and find it difficult to decipher the practical codes of production processes. This is where Yehoshua (Yeshu) Dray, an expert in ancient technologies and in reconstructing ancient installations, and an old friend, came into the picture. His technical senses, intuitive understanding and powers of

v

observation are unbelievable. He taught me how the ancient artisans worked, how to identify the marks left on bone items by their tools, and to differentiate between manufacturing and use wear. More than once, he correctly identified an object completely unknown to him. Only later did it turn out that he had been right! Dray even took the trouble to train himself in the manufacture of bone tools in order to achieve better understanding of the ancient techniques. His contribution to this research is comprehensive, and so is my gratitude to him. We have published some of the first conclusions about the bone industry of Caesarea together (Ayalon and Dray 2002) and no doubt more works will follow. As this subject has been completely neglected in Israel a need arose to get help from researches abroad. The first individual who opened my eyes to many aspects of the subject – and this still while preparing the exhibition – was Dr. Paula Wapnish-Hesse from Alabama University, then participating in the Ashkelon expedition led by Prof. Larry Stager. Later on, she examined, together with Yeshu Dray, some of the Caesarea finds and offered some important remarks and observations. During a conference in Israel we met Dr. Alice Choyke of the Aquincum Museum in Budapest. Her professionalism, will to help and generosity contributed a lot to this work. She, her husband Dr. László Bartosiewicz and Dr. Maria Bíró – both (at that time) from the Institute of Archaeology at the Eötvös Loránd University in Budapest – hosted Yeshu Dray and myself in Budapest in November of 2000 and together with other scholars we held a most useful workshop on bone tools and bone industry. Alice also supplied me with the bibliography of worked bone research organized within the Worked Bone Research Group, and with her warm recommendation some of the members provided me with important help, especially with the professional publications missing in the Israeli libraries. These kind people include Mark Barbier as well as Dr. Jean-Claude Béal of the Lyon University, France; Dr. Sabine Deschler-Erb from Basel University, Switzerland; Dr. Daniella Ciougudean of the National Museum in Alba-Julia, Romania; Dr. Arthur MacGregor of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, U.K.; Prof. Anthony Cutler, University of Pennsylvania, Prof. Archer St. Clair, Rutgers University, New Jersey, from the United States. Prof. François Poplin of the Musée National d’Histoire Naturelle in Paris, France, should be given special mention since – beyond supplying a lot of literature – he arrived at Israel in July 2001 on his own expense and during an exhausting week examined much of the Caesarea assemblage, identified the osteological background of many finds (see Chapters III and VII and Tables in Part II) and contributed a lot from his vast experience to our understanding of the production methods and the use of many bone tools. Much help was also received from local scholars. Some showed me unpublished bone finds, among them Dr. Paula Wapnish-Hesse (Ashkelon), Prof. Israel Roll (Apollonia), Azriel Siegelmann (Kastra), Hillel Geva (The Jewish Quarter, Jerusalem), Moshe Hartal (Golan Heights), and Yotam Tepper (Shuni). Dr. Rivka Gersht and Dr. Shua Amorai Stark (who is working on the Caesarea jewelry, including some objects made from bone and ivory) helped in the field of Roman-Byzantine art, while Naama Brosh and Ayala Lester assisted with the Islamic finds. Ofra Rimon and Ornit Babani of the Hecht Museum in Haifa helped with the Islamic bone artifacts from Caesarea which were displayed there, while Rina and Arnon Engart did the same with the finds in the Caesarea Museum at Kibbutz Sdot-Yam. Yonel Charvit helped me very much in translating the French literature while Yigal Sitri opened my eyes in questions regarding the techniques used by ancient carpenters, which are comparable to those used by the artisans working in bone. Thanks are also due to the librarians of the Mayer Museum of Islam and the Israel Antiquities Authority, both in Jerusalem, for their help and patience. The bone and ivory artifacts were drawn by several draftspeople over the years, so it was impossible to avoid some differences in their work, mainly regarding the sections. The draftspeople include: Marina Aranov Shwiskaya, Sappir Ad, Tatyana Kophian, Boris Haimov, and Shlomo Sawadi. The photographs were taken by Leonid Pedrul Kvitkovsky and Yehoshua Dray. From the beginning, the plan was to translate this work into English. Based on warm recommendations by Prof. Dar, Dr. Choyke and Dr. MacGregor, Dr. David Davison agreed to publish it for BAR. Prof. Dar even succeeded in organizing a month's stay for me at Yarnton Manor, Oxford, ran by the Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies, based on more recommendations from the above-mentioned scholars. During November 2002 I enjoyed the generous and warm hospitality of the CHJS team and used this opportunity both for benefiting from the rich Oxford libraries and – mainly – for preparing part of the first translated draft of this book. The book was edited by Dr. Choyke, who put aside her many tasks and took upon herself to help in this difficult job. I also received much help at Oxford from Dr. MacGregor, Dr. Martin Henig, Dr. James Allan and Prof. Alan Jones, all of whom agreed to meet with me at short notice and to look into the Caesarea finds. All these kind people deserve my gratitude. Finally – many thanks and warm feelings to my family and especially to my wife Rivka, who – herself dealing with a very complicated Ph.D. thesis – always found time and energy to support and believe in me.

vi

INTRODUCTION badly corroded (Oleson noted that bone tools were always rare in underwater digs at Caesarea – Oleson et al. 1994: 86; not even one bone tool was published from the debris of the sunken ship at Yassi Ada – Bass and Van Doorninck 1982).

This research deals with all the finds made from “skeletal materials” (bone, ivory and antler) from the work of the three teams excavating at Caesarea over the last years, which I was able to study. These expeditions include: The Israel Antiquities Authority team headed by Dr. Yosef Porath; The combined expedition team of the Rekanati Center for Maritime Studies, University of Haifa and the Department of History, University of Maryland in the United States, led by the late Prof. Avner Raban and by Prof. Kenneth Holum; and the expedition of the Zienman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, led by Prof. Joseph Patrich. The assemblage includes about 3,900 finds and fragments1 – a large and multi-period collection, which can serve as a solid basis for a thorough discussion and comparison with similar finds from Israel and abroad. To these items were added the bone objects displayed in the Caesarea Museum at Sdot-Yam, which – while having no chronological value as all were collected from the surface – include some items with no typological parallels within the main assemblage.

Sometimes it is even difficult to define whether such objects are tools or natural bone fragments. Various bone artifacts mentioned in the excavation find lists could not be found in the store rooms for various reasons. Some of them had been drawn in the past and so could be included in this work without actually checking them by hand, a fact which has been mentioned specifically. The material examined by Prof. Poplin in 2001 for osteological identification included – because of technical problems – all Porath's finds but only about two thirds of the material from Raban and Patrich expeditions. This, besides the ever existing problem that it is usually impossible to identify the raw material of nicely worked bone objects (Wapnish 1991: 61) and sometimes even to distinguish between bone and ivory.

The fact that this book deals with the items given to me for publication was not emphasized above for no reason. Over the years the bone and ivory finds have been separated, identified and given the code W (worked bone) by the excavators as well as they could. They also separated them from unworked bones – simple food remains – which received the code Z (zoology; see Cope 1999). However, as Caesarea was a large center of bone industry for hundreds of years, it is rich with manufacturing remains such as sawn pieces, blanks, unfinished items and waste. Many of those were recorded as 'Z' finds and sent to the osteologists and, thus, could not be included in the present work. This assemblage is therefore relatively rich with production waste from the final stages of the manufacturing process, but includes only few large pieces of sawn bones representing the first stage in artisan production. Such bones are typically very numerous (Emery 2001: 76, Fig. 20; for a parallel situation see Dijkman and Ervynk 1998: 7; De Cupere 2001). During the course of the present research project it was impossible to re-check the osteological finds but it is known (Cope, pers. comm.) that they consisted of many sawn bones. Some other bone and ivory items have been recorded under various categories such as “miscellaneous finds” or “jewelry”. This is the case with several dozen items from Porath’s excavations which were given to Dr. Amorai Stark for publication and shown to me when this work was finished. Thus, such pieces have been excluded from this book except in comparative remarks.

Another known shortcoming, which is not limited to the Caesarea assemblage, is the difficulty in identifying the exact use and purpose of various items. Some of them are broken or only part of a whole object whose other components have disappeared (like bone mounts from wooden furniture), so we can only guess what their original location and use might have been. Other finds have a very basic shape and could have served several purposes (Béal 1978: 15; Bíró 1994: 7; see Chapter IV below). Basically, objects were identified as to their possible use based on comparisons with finds from other sites and countries and technological and practical considerations. On rare occasions, items can be identified based on ancient iconography (where they are usually too small to be exactly defined). Ethnographic parallels can also be used, even from remote cultures, as demonstrated, for instance, in the case of musical instruments (cf. Ayalon 1999: 46-47). The final Figures include about 600 out of the 3,900 objects, each of them the unique representative of its type, if it is actually a real type. Drawings received priority over photographs as experience has taught that many important details on those small objects can be shown in the drawing but are lost in a photograph. The sections are a good example of the drawing’s superiority. It is worth noting that the choice of prototypes shown in the Figures has been made as the work progressed: first the different find types brought to light by the Porath expedition, then those of Patrich’s team, Raban’s finds and finally the Museum objects. As soon as a certain type of tool from Porath’s finds had been chosen, none of the other objects of the same type were drawn. For this reason they are naturally over-represented in the Figures. At the same time, in certain respects the division of the

There were other restrictions to this work: many finds have been unearthed in underwater excavations or in fills which have lain under sea water in the past and were 1

Porath found approximately 1670 items, Raban – 1600, Patrich – 600, and 45 objects are displayed in the museum (these figures do not include small splinters and fragments).

vii

items in the Figures per expedition does have some statistical meaning. For instance, most of the Early Arab and Crusader finds were unearthed by Raban, while only few were found by Patrich.

completely useless here. It is amazing how sharp the cultural cut-off was between East\South and West\North during this period, at least as regards the bone and ivory finds (compare, for instance, the Caesarea finds from the 7th-13th centuries to those from Medieval York, England: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999). As the publications of Early Arab bone and ivory finds from Moslem countries are few, it was extremely difficult to find comparisons for our finds.

One of the most important aspects of the finds is their absolute dating. An artifact can be dated using two main criteria: the date of the locus in which it was found (usually established by its relative stratigraphy and by the coins and pottery found in the same context), and by comparison with similar objects published elsewhere. As for the first point, it is typical for a large city as Caesarea that it underwent large-scale building and repairing work, destructions and cleaning of the port’s bottom where the debris was thrown on the land nearby, etc. Therefore, a large proportion of the bone finds originated from secondary contexts – fills under floors and pavements and in wells and cisterns, garbage heaps and such, and not in ‘clean’ and well dated, primary loci (compare: Crummy 1979: 157-159; Béal 1983b: 608).

The picture concerning the Crusader period is even more complicated. First, a rather low number of artifacts from Caesarea itself were found in loci which also contained Crusader pottery and coins (and still this is not a definite proof that those pieces are not relics from earlier periods). Secondly, it is difficult to define the material culture of that period – is it a continuation of the Early Arab period or does it represent a European influence? Thirdly, very few bone artifacts of that period have been published to date in Israel (see recently Rosenberg 1999). The search through publications from European countries where the Crusades originated did not yield good parallels to the Caesarea items, which were probably locally made. Finally, some artifacts such as domino pieces probably originated from the Bosnian village established in Caesarea in the 1870s, as they were not yet in use when the city was destroyed in the 13th century.

Another problem is the known fact that small bone objects and their fragments tend to be carried away and change their location after their initial deposition. Precious items such as those made of ivory or pieces with great sentimental value could have been kept in the family for generations, thus, losing their chronological importance for the archaeologist. In addition, many finds originated from undefined loci or from as yet undated contexts because the final stratigraphical reports are still under preparation. In many cases therefore a definite date for the finds has not yet been decided upon.

The large-scale local bone industry was easier to define. It came into light in the form of many sawn bones, blanks, unfinished objects and production waste. One probable production center, insula W2S3 along Cardo W1 – where a large concentration of industrial remains was found, some of them in a pit in one of the houses – was even mentioned in a preliminary report (Porat 2000: 37*; see Chapter VII). The finds show that this industry continued during all periods of the city's history. Until now only one other such concentration has been recognized in Israel – at Ashkelon, as yet mostly unpublished (Wapnish 1991, 1997). This is why an attempt was made here to thoroughly discuss the bone industry in general and the local remains in particular, so as to fill in some of the gaps in common knowledge.

During any discussion of the chronology of the comparative pieces, the different periods should be treated separately. During the Roman and Byzantine (at least in its first part) periods, when Palestine was part of the Empire as a whole, many bone tools were produced “by the book” and the artisans were apparently influenced by their colleagues from main cultural centers such as Alexandria (see Béal 1983b: 607; Bíró 1994: 9; Petković 1995: 126). The similarity between finds of this period from Caesarea and those from sites throughout the Roman Empire, from Hungary to England, is quite impressive. Therefore it was easier to establish a chronological basis for this part of the local assemblage, as well as to identify the use of the objects.

“Skeletal materials” in general include bone and antler, ivory, horn and canine teeth. This book includes all bone and ivory artifacts available to the author. Only one piece of worked antler was identified, possibly a pendant (No. 257). Others may have been sent to the osteologists. The existence of species of the Cervidea family in the nearby Carmel mountains, northeast from Caesarea, is well known (Horwitz 2000, 2004; Horwitz, Tchernov and Dar 1990; Choyke, pers. comm. based on the finds from nearby Tel Dor). Considering the advantages of deer antler as a raw material it was natural to expect the presence of more antler items at Caesarea; the subject will be discussed below. The ivory finds are more numerous as would be expected in a large city like Caesarea. No artifacts made from canine teeth were found.

During later periods, however, the picture changes radically. In the later part of the Byzantine period, Palestine was under artistic and stylistic influence of “Coptic” Egypt, a phenomena which continued into the Early Arab period. At the beginning of this period very little changed in the material culture, excluding perhaps a tendency towards schematization of the motives (Dimand 1958: 124). This fact creates a difficulty in dating the artifacts, not to mention the debate among scholars about the “Coptic” culture, its chronology and scale (Ibid.). The huge numbers of Early Arab finds from Caesarea found rather fewer parallels, as the rich European literature is viii

A few bone and ivory artifacts from Caesarea have already been published in the preliminary reports (Porath, Raban and Patrich 1998 Fig. 24; Raban et al. 1999: 153155, Fig. 2; Patrich 2003a: 83, 2003b Fig. 19). Others have been displayed in two exhibitions at the Hecht Museum in Haifa (Rimon 1995; 1999), in addition to those permanently exhibited in the Caesarea Museum at Sdot-Yam. Recently a preliminary paper on the local bone industry has been published as a result of the present study (Ayalon and Dray 2002). Most of the Caesarea worked bone and ivory finds, however, are published here for the first time.

Part I of the book closes with Conclusions, Bibliography and Index. Part II includes the illustrations and the detailed catalogue of all the bone, ivory, and antler finds from Caesarea. Technical information Codes for the origin of the finds: S = Israel Antiquities Authority expedition, Dr. Yosef Porath P = Zinmam Institute of Archaeology expedition, Prof. Joseph Patrich A = Center of Maritime Studies expedition, Prof. Avner Raban M = Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam

Chapter I describes shortly the history of Caesarea and the excavations conducted there. Chapter II deals with the history of research of bone and ivory artifacts in Israel and especially abroad. Chapter III describes the characteristics of bone and ivory as raw materials, the animal species and skeletal elements preferred by ancient artisans and their suitability to their needs. Chapter IV, the nucleus of the work, includes a detailed description of about 530 prototypical bone artifacts, defining them by use and period and providing morphological analogies to them from sites in Israel and abroad. Chapter V does the same with about 55 ivory objects. Chapter VI generally deals with the bone and ivory industry including technologies, manufacturing tools etc. Chapter VII concentrates on the bone and ivory production at Caesarea in particular, based on the finds introduced in Chapters IV and V and the conclusions from Chapter VI. Chapter VIII discusses the place of the bone and ivory artisans in the fabric of the city - physically, economically and socially, based on archaeological finds, historical sources as well as ethnographic and historic comparisons. Chapter IX is a short summary of the few mentions of bone artifacts in the ancient Jewish sources (based on Baruch 1999; Barukh 2001).

All the drawings are drawn on a 1:1 scale unless stated differently. All measurements are in millimeters unless otherwise specified. The given measurement is always the largest one unless otherwise specified. Measurements abbreviations: l = length; w = width; t = thickness; h = height; d = diameter; de = depth. Other abbreviations: L = locus; I, II = First or second half of the century (i.e. 5II = second half of the fifth century). Abbreviations for period names: P = Persian; H = Hellenistic; R = Roman; ER = Early Roman (including Herodian); LR = Late Roman; RB = Roman-Byzantine; B = Byzantine; EB, LB = Early Byzantine, Late Byzantine; A = Early Arab; C = Crusader; M = Mameluk; Ot = Ottoman. All dates mentioned are CE unless specified BCE.

ix

PART I THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL, 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

CHAPTER I CAESAREA - HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF EXCAVATIONS I.A. CAESAREA – THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

period, the city lost much of its significance. It was conquered and completely destroyed by the Mameluk leader Bibars, and never resettled except for a small Bosnian village founded on the ruins in 1878 and detached from it in 1948 (Vann 1989).

Caesarea Maritima is located on the Israeli coast between modern Netanya and ancient Tel Dor. Its history has been described in length (cf. Negev et al. 1993: 270-291; Tsafrir, Di Segni and Green 1994: 94-96; Fritsch 1975; Levine 1975a, 1975b; Ringel 1975; Holum et al. 1988; Holum 1989), so a short summary will be sufficient here.

I.B. CAESAREA EXCAVATIONS

–

HISTORY

OF

RESEARCH

AND

Detailed surveys have been conducted on the site since the mid-19th century, many finds were collected from the surface (now displayed in the Caesarea Museum) and many small-scale salvage excavations were carried out throughout the city (for instance, Peleg and Reich 1992). Large-scale and systematic excavations began on the site in the late 1950s, but unfortunately only a few of them have been completely published (see, with additional bibliography: Negev et al. 1993; Frova et al. 1966; Porath, Raban and Patrich 1998; Rimon 1995, 1999; Porat 2000; Levine and Netzer 1986; Holum et al. 1988; Raban 1989; Vann 1992; Oleson et al. 1994; Porath 1995a, 2003; Raban and Holum 1996; Holum, Raban and Patrich 1999; Patrich 2001, 2003a, 2003b; Holum 2004). A Jewish synagogue was unearthed on the northern coast in the 1940s. From 1959-1963, an Italian expedition headed by Frova excavated the southern theater and the northern early fortifications. From 1960-1962 Negev unearthed the Crusader city and earlier remains as part of the preparation of the site to be opened to visitors. Both Avi-Yonah and Negev excavated in 1956 and 1962 in the vicinity of the synagogue and in the early settlement (Straton’s Tower). Levine and Netzer dug in the 1970s in the central and southern parts of the city, and meanwhile the American “Combined Expedition” headed by R. Bull began long term operations which continued in the 1970s-1980s. The recent official and planned excavation work started in 1992 as part of the new initiative to enlarge the visiting area. Three expeditions (listed in the Introduction above) took part in this large project. It continues on a small scale until today (especially by Raban until his recent sudden death), while Porath was responsible for salvage excavations, the need for which never ends at such a site. The bone and ivory finds from those three expeditions plus finds from the Caesarea Museum represent the subject of this book.

The first significant settlement at the site, called Straton’s Tower, was founded by the Phoenicians at the end of the Persian or the beginning of the Hellenistic period. It was located, more or less, within the limits of the later Crusader walled city and mainly to its north and had its own harbor or anchorage (for the different components of the city and the main excavated fields see Pl. 1). There are very few bone finds from this period because of later building activities and the depth these remains are found under later strata. In the years 22-10\9 BCE Herod the Great built a new city on the site called Caesarea, whose main components were a network of straight streets organized according to a Hippodamian plan (see Robertson 1929: 187ff), a very large and well equipped port called Sebastos, fortifications, a central temple, theater, amphitheater\hippodrome by the shore, and a palace. During the Roman period, the significance of the city increased and it was granted the rank of a Roman Colony and Metropolis. New building activities included, inter alia, the Roman Governors’ palace, the “high” aqueduct, the eastern hippodrome, another theater or odeon, many villas etc., as well as a Jewish synagogue in the northern part of the city. Roman and Byzantine Caesarea was the capital of the country or parts of it and an important Christian center and also included large Jewish and Samaritan communities (Holum 1998). During the Byzantine period an octagonal central church, the “low” aqueduct, a large administrative unit, baths, new fortifications and a fortress, etc. were erected. However, parts of the port were already below the sea or filled-up with sand (Kingsley 2004: 132-138). The Moslems conquered the city in 639 CE. Its significance and especially its size decreased as it was no longer the capital (Holum 1989: 95-96), but both the historical sources and the archaeological finds – like the large deposit of Fatimid metal objects (Lester, Arnon and Polak 1999) – show that it was a rich city. It was surrounded by a new city wall and a large mosque replaced the central church. Caesarea was taken by the Crusaders in 1101. They built a new cathedral and a fortress there, and towards the end of the period, rebuilt the fortification system on a very large scale. During this

While research on the land was taking place, underwater surveys and excavations in the ancient port were also conducted. Herod’s port has been described in detail in the work of Josephus Flavius, a fact which focused much attention of scholars from all around the world on this city. Methodical research began in 1960 by Link and was 1

CAESAREA - HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF EXCAVATIONS continued in the 1960s by Israeli archaeologists. Since 1975, a team from the Haifa Center of Marine Studies, headed for most of this time by Raban, has been active in this underwater research. This team also excavated the

inner Herodian port which had filled-in with sand and become part of the populated area since the Byzantine period (area I).

2

CHAPTER II HISTORY OF THE RESEARCH ON BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS II.A. HISTORY OF RESEARCH IN ISRAEL

showing an artisan working in bone. It is to be hoped that the exhibition, the catalogue which accompanied it and the present book will stir the Israeli archaeologists and make them pay more attention to these humble but nice finds.

As mentioned above, research on bone and ivory objects has been neglected in Israel until the present, especially finds dating from the post-Biblical periods. Actually, the later the period, the few finds have been studied (see, for instance, recently Killebrew 2000: 102)1.

II.B. HISTORY OF RESEARCH ABROAD

Bone objects from Israel in the prehistoric era have been published in detail in the past, either in excavation reports (such as Marshall 1982; Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988) or in essays dealing with special periods or subjects, including technological aspects (Campana 1989; Rabinovich and Nadel 1994-5). Bone and especially ivory finds from the Biblical era (Bronze and Iron Ages and Persian period) have been rather thoroughly studied, again – some in excavations reports (in particular Ariel 1990, also Kenyon 1957; Marshall 1982; Brandl 1993; and others) or in specific works (such as Zarzecki-Peleg 1992; Liebowitz 1977; Platt 1978; Fischer and Herrmann 1995), but the overall engagement with the subject, compared to that of the previous era, was smaller. The technical aspect was not dealt with at all.

As opposed to the scarcity of local publications on bone and ivory items, research beyond the borders of Israel, mainly in Europe, has made impressive progress in the last couple of decades, even though there too it failed to consider the treatment of other raw materials and finds (Bíró 1987: 25; Verhagen 1993: 339, 412; Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001: III). In many of the excavation reports of sites in Europe and the Mediterranean Basin the bone and ivory tools have been consigned – if they were published at all – to a short appendix at the end of the volume, often with items made from other materials (Parker 1999: 167). However, despite this situation, many scholars in those countries studied various aspects of the skeletal materials, including objects from museum exhibitions (Sautot 1978). Recently, researchers have even founded the “Worked Bone Research Group” and organized professional conferences discussing the new achievements in the field (see recently Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, also the important symposium discussing ivory – Fitton 1992; see also Béal and Goyon 2000). This research embraces all “skeletal materials” as in Europe many items were manufactured from antler and less often discovered – from horn (see Chapter III) while objects made of canine teeth, mainly as jewelry or amulets, are also more numerous there than in Israel.

The situation of the research concerning the “late” periods – Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine – is much more extreme. Most of the published data consists solely of short descriptions of bone and ivory finds within excavation reports, usually as grave finds (such as in Rahmani 1960a) or in museum collections (Idem 1981b; Dayagi-Mendels 1989). Usually, they have been dealt with very shortly with no more than a couple of parallels described, sometimes even without attempting to define their function. The few specific papers published to date about such archaeological finds, dealt with carved pieces or mounts (for example Rosenthal 1976; Goldfus and Bowes 2000); others focused on the issue of bone implements in the Jewish sources (Baruch 1999; Barukh 2001). Bone artifacts from later periods have almost no reference material at all, except as notes in some reports (cf. Agadi 1996) or when dealing with a specific subject (like Sebbane 1999). Wapnish’s two short articles (1991, 1997) about the Ashkelon finds are the only ones which deal with the production of the tools as well other interesting questions.

As for ivory, since the establishment of the Roman Empire in the region, prestige objects made from ivory were gathered and concentrated there. Research work on these finds has been intensive too, dealing both with artistic, religious and technological aspects (for instance Cutler’s works). Other scholars investigated ivory (also bone) implements from both early and late Middle Eastern periods (see Barnett 1957, 1982; Marangou 1976). Among those engaged with the typology and chronology of tools whose publications have been used here (see the bibliographical list) are MacGregor in England; Béal, Poplin and Sautot in France; Deschler-Erb in Switzerland; Bíró and Choyke in Hungary and others. Cutler, St. Clair and Reese among others should be mentioned from the United States. Many scholars have worked in the Middle East and the eastern Mediterranean, such as Davidson, Goldman and Scanlon, and recently – the Polish archaeologists working in Alexandria, E. and M. Rodziewicz and Jablonowska-Taracha. Others (like Dalton, Dimand, Krzyszkowska, Marangou, and

The Bare Bones, Ancient Artifacts from Animal Bones exhibition held in the Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv (1999-2001), where the author is curator, displayed about 450 bone objects from all periods, most of them from Israel. It also dealt with technological aspects and included a reconstructed bone workshop and a video film 1

I thank Magen Broshi who showed me this article.

3

HISTORY OF THE RESEARCH ON BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS Weitzmann) investigated in depth prestigious artistic and religious artifacts from museums’ collections. Many papers dealing with specific subjects have been published (see, for example, Elderkin 1930; Liu 1978; Bíró 1999, 2002). Barbier from France has reconstructed a bone workshop and extensively experimented with ancient manufacturing technologies (Barbier 1988, 1992, 19941995). Self-experience is slowly gaining ground among modern researchers who try to understand the technical problems faced by ancient artisans (Sadek-Kooros 1972; Crummy 1981; Sussman 1988). Some of the scholars mentioned above have also given a great deal of thought to the technological aspects of bone, ivory and antler industries, a subject to which a long chapter is now dedicated in almost every book on the subject. Other publications are based on very thorough examination of the tools under a microscope, looking for the marks left on them both during their manufacture and their use life (for example Semenov 1964; Sussman 1988).

related to this industry: The place of the bone and ivory artisan – whether itinerate or permanent – in the physical, economic and social life of the city; the relationship between city size and the extent of the industry; the international trade of prestige artifacts and their long distance influences; were prototypes from one manufacturing center copied in far-flung places (did they have “pattern books?”) or were all such objects produced in a main center and marketed abroad?; the possible connection between certain objects and ethnic or religious identity (such as items brought by soldiers of the Roman army from their country of origin to the forts where they were in service – Bíró 1994: 13); what is the cultural meaning behind the fact that absolutely identical objects were produced in bone and from raw materials such as stone or metal; the two-way relationship between the bone artisan and other craftsmen (like the metal knife maker who needed a bone or ivory handle); as well as other questions (see for example Ibid.: 11-12; Wapnish 1997; Emery 2001). Some of these questions will be treated in the next chapters, while for others no definite answers are available in this initial stage of the research. In addition, much use has been made of ethnographic studies conducted in traditional societies such as the Inuit and the Native Americans of North America, groups who also produced and used bone and ivory tools (i.e. Flayderman 1972; Stewart 1973; Whiteford 1973). A clear expression of these new trends in the research can be found, among others, in Choyke and Bartociewicz (2001).

Research in Arab countries is, however, more similar to the Israeli one so it was very difficult to locate parallels for the Caesarea Islamic finds. The 1906-1955 Index Islamicus (Pearson 1958) mentions only about ten works on Islamic ivory, most of which deal with very narrow aspects of the subject, and do not refer to bone objects at all. Aside from chronological dating and typological sorting, research has also been oriented towards other subjects

4

CHAPTER III BONE AND IVORY AND THEIR PROPERTIES AS RAW MATERIALS Various animal pieces have supplied humankind with five hard osseous raw materials suitable for working: bone, teeth, ivory and antler and horn. These have been called “skeletal materials” by MacGregor (1985) and “matières dures animals” by Poplin (1974). Each of these osseous materials has its own special characteristics and their study can help us understand why the artisan chose to produce certain objects from one material and not from another. The Caesarea assemblage includes nothing made from canine and only one object produced from antler (No. 257), although the osteological finds contained many pieces of fallow deer (Dama mesopotamica) antler (Carol Cope, pers. comm.). Therefore these two raw materials will not be dealt here except in the form of a question, why the local artisans at Cesearea did not exploit antler, which is a more durable and valuable raw material than bone (Wapnish 1991: 62 n. 1). III.A. BONE AND CHARACTERISTICS

IVORY

–

STRUCTURE

them sometimes help in the identification of the skeletal part even when the object is completely worked and smoothed. Solid bone – especially segments of large ungulate animal metapodia – were preferred by the craftsmen, mainly for the production of large objects (Wapnish 1991: 58; see below and in Chapter VI). The nature of the bone carving was limited by the dimensions, shape, and elasticity of the skeletal element chosen for working (Bíró 1994: 9), so the final shape and character of the object were the result of the characteristics of the raw material and the artisan’s talent. The animal skeleton (Pl. 2) is the mechanical system which moves the body, bears its weight and protects its inner parts. It consists of four types of bones: 1. Long bones – the limb bones, which are solid and hard cylinders whose medullar cavity holds the bone marrow. The curved shape of the wall of this cavity can often be observed on the back or bottom of the artifacts. Near its ends (the epiphysis) the bone is usually spongy. Very narrow canals through which nerves and blood vessels pass run along the bone, distinguishing it from ivory. The main long bones are: in the fore limb – the humerus, radius, ulna and metacarpus; in the hind limb – femur, tibia, and metatarsus. Both limbs also include finger bones (phalanx). 2. Flat bones – parts of the skull, scapula, pelvis and ribs. The ribs are composed of a solid layer (compacta) and a spongy one. The scapula and the pelvis are also composed of two solid layers of compacta and a spongy fill between them. 3. Compact bones – the short carpalia and tarsalia bones situated in the roots of the fore and hind limbs. 4. The vertebrae – the short and almost square bones of the body, through the center of which passes the canal for the spinal nerves.

AND

Bone is composed of three components (Halstead and Middleton 1972: 4-18; Poulain 1976; MacGregor 1985: 1-29): water, inorganic materials (minerals), and organic materials. Their relative quantities differ between the soft cartilage (which has more water and fewer minerals) and the hard bone, and also depends on the age of the animal. One of the organic materials is collagen, which is a hard, resistant fibrous protein. In the past and until recently, high quality glue was made from it (MacGregor 1985: 46, n. 3; Newman and Serpico 2000; Ciugudean 2001: 63; Wulff 1966: 86). The minerals appear as crystals which unite those of the collagen. Thanks to this structure, bone is a hard material (the minerals) but at the same time its elasticity (from the collagen) represents one of its main advantages, besides the fact that it is easy to carve and the fact that it is particularly suitable for working materials such as leather and textile (Verhagen 1993: 343).

Some scholars claim that the younger the animal is the brighter its bones will be after being worked (Bíró 1987: 48, 1994: 9). Similar information was received from Arab bone workers from southern Jordan.

A disadvantage of bone is the fact that it cannot be used in molds for producing identical exemplars. Each object has to be carved based on the shape of the blank and the craftsman’s ability, which makes it more difficult to find exact parallels for certain items (Marangou 1976: 70; Johnson 1985: 4*).

Ivory in the Levant originated either from elephant or hippopotamus. Ivory differs from bone in that it does not have blood and nerve canals and in its layer-onlayer structure (lamellae), as it grows from the center outwards (MacGregor 1985: 14; Engemann 1987 Abb. 3; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 321). In longitudinal section these layers are laid parallel to the perimeter of the tooth, while in a latitudinal section they look like concentric, oval identically spaced rings. When ivory dries out or gets old the layers tend to crack and to flake off like an onion or a cone inside a cone,

The structure of the minerals in the bone prevents it from cracking because the cracks begin in the spaces between cells. Bone consists of solid and strong parts as well as spongy and soft ones. The differences between

5

BONE AND IVORY AND THEIR PROPERTIES AS RAW MATERIALS along the length in the longitudinal axis and concentrically in the latitudinal axis (Krzyszkowska 1990: 5, 34, 36). Sometimes – depending on the angle at which the piece has been sawn off the tooth – the inner net-like structure looks like a diamond model or like rounded arcs crossing each other (Ibid.) – one of the ways to distinguish between elephant and hippopotamus ivory, which lacks this phenomena.

is easy to recognize: in a longitudinal section the lines are wavy and discontinuous (unlike the well formed layers in elephant ivory) while in a latitudinal section incomplete and non-successive concentric and wavy rings can be observed (Krzyszkowska 1990: 38-39). III.B. SOURCES OF RAW MATERIAL Bone was purchased according to the craftsman’s needs from several sources: within the city from the slaughter house, the skinner, and the butcher or straight from the villagers. It was an easily available raw material with no need to transport it from remote places. In times when the industry flourished it was probably necessary to organize the supply centrally (Wapnish 1991).

Each piece of ivory differs from the other and the artisan had to make use of its advantages and characteristics. Up to one third or half way up the tusks length, ivory has a cavity which narrows towards its end (Engemann 1987 Taf. 18c-d). As the tooth grows from the inside outwards, the part surrounding the cavity is fresh and soft and so is unfit for carving. The outer layer is of better quality but full of parallel cracks caused by the way the ivory accumulated and by wear, so little use was made of it (Krzyszkowska 1992: 26). Therefore the best raw material was taken from the middle parts of the ivory, which comprise less than 60% of its volume (Cutler 1985: 1-6, 38-39).

Elephant ivory was imported from northeast and northwest Africa or from India (Krzyszkowska 1990: 1516; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 322-323), mainly through Egypt (MacGregor 1985: 38) (see also Chapters V-VI below). It is virtually impossible to distinguish between African and Indian ivory (Krzyszkowska 1990: 12, Fig. 1).

Ivory has a certain shine originating from the collagen and gelatin found in it, which is why it is so easily burnished (Ibid.: 7-17; Krzyszkowska 1990: 5, 36). The accumulated arcs are not laid each year and are never identical, so the craftsman could not actually know their shape in advance in order to plan the carving in harmony with them, but had to rely on experience. Elephant ivory from archaeological layers tends to have a yellowish patina on which dark and light rings can be observed. When ivory is exposed to fire it splits and becomes dark brown or black in color (Ibid.: 36).

Hippopotamus, in contrast, existed in Syria and in Palestine until the Iron Age or even the Hellenistic period (Ibid.: 20; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 326) and thus, would have been the main ivory source here at least until the end of the Bronze Age (Caubet and Poplin 1995). Later on, its ivory was probably imported from Africa, particularly from the Nile region, where it survived in the Delta until the 17th century and up river until the 19th century (Krzyszkowska 1990: 20; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 320, 326). III.C. EXPLOITATION OF BONE

Differentiating between elephant and hippopotamus ivories is not easy and usually a microscope or a good magnifying glass is needed. The former has a crossed structure (see above) while the other displays parallel lines (Pl. 3). However these materials may also look different in various objects according to the angle at which the piece was cut from the tusk (Ibid.: 5, 36). Elephant ivory is a little softer and easier to carve than bone. The African Bush elephant has large tusks of which pieces up to 400mm long could be produced. The tusks of the Indian elephant do not exceed 110mm in diameter. Despite this fact, Diocletian’s edict did not specify different types of ivory (Cutler 1985: 22, 26, 1993: 172).

Bone was a handy and cheap raw material because people ate meat all the time. Through many generations of experience artisans learned how to choose the right bone suitable to their needs, an experience lost in recent generations (MacGregor 1985: 1). A tool made in an adhoc way “by the user” probably demanded very little effort on his side and was made from any bone found lying around which had the basic shape needed. Professional craftsmen and workshops, however, were more careful in the choice of certain bones which fit their requirements. Those bones were supplied by the slaughter houses, skinners, tanners and butchers, who often operated near the bone workshops (Béal 1978: 15). All those sometimes had to work outside the city or at least away from its center due to their unpleasant smell (in the bone workshop – mainly while boiling or heating the bones in order to clean or soften them; see Chapter VI. On the environmental aspect generally, both in historical sources and in the archaeological finds, see Ayalon 1997). This may be one of the reasons why bone workshops are seldom unearthed in situ, if at all (Wapnish 1997). The large industrial centers probably organized a system for bone supply (perhaps

Hippopotamus ivory originates from its canine and the two lower teeth. The canine can obtain a diameter of 5060mm and it, too, has an inner cavity. As these teeth grow continuously they can be considered as ivory. Their dentine is denser, brighter (a characteristic the artisans loved), and less inclined to lose its natural color or become stained than elephant ivory. Parts of it are coated with a very hard outer layer (enamel) which tends to dry out, and it is a little more difficult to carve (Krzyszkowska 1990: 8, 36; Wapnish 1997; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 328). Its inner structure 6

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE concentrating on certain preferred bones), whose resources spread through the city’s hinterland, but the data concerning such arrangements is scarce.

the main consideration was their size – the larger the better. Therefore cattle and horse bones were always preferred and in certain sites (including Caesarea) cattle and horse metapodia were the most numerous among the finds, even if in reality sheep and goats considerably outnumbered the cattle (Deschler-Erb 1997: 74; Provenzano 2001: 95-96). Camel bones were also preferred where possible, as in Ashkelon (Wapnish 1991: 60), but at Caesarea they are very rare. The obvious preference for cattle – and to a lesser extent those of horse – metatarsus at Caesarea hints to the existence of an organized supply system.

The bone craftsmen preferred certain bones for the production of each type of object (Wapnish 1991: 58-60), as confirmed by the osteological identification of Caesarea’s bone objects. The limb bones of large mammals such as cattle, horse and when available also camel, and especially the metapodia, were the most sought after as they are straight, large, strong and have little meat on them and therefore they were not wanted by the butchers (Campana 1989: 23; MacGregor 1985: 30; Poulain and Poulain 1978: 9; Reese 1987: 261-262; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 551). The hollow shaft of these bones was particularly suitable for the manufacture of handles, boxes, hinges, gaming pieces, large dice, dolls and flutes. The artisan made many carved objects from the solid compacta of the walls of these bones, beginning with decorated mounts (experience showed that relatively large pieces can be obtained from those bones – Barbier 1999: 204-205) and ending with in pins, needles, counters and many other objects. The semi-spherical femur caput fits the convex shape of spindle whorls or buttons which were often produced from it. Flat bones were ideal for the manufacture of tools such as spatulae, knives and scrapers, as well as inlays and round counters. The complete scapula could be used as a shovel (Mishna Shabat 8, 6) and as a writing tablet. The compact bones were used to make small items such as jewelry and buttons while the use of the astragalus (part of the tarsalia) as gaming pieces is well known. The vertebra and most parts of the skull were seldom exploited.

The small bones of sheep\goat and cervidae were used only for the production of small objects such as awls and flutes (Mishna Kinim 3, 6) (but compare: Vermeule 1989: 271), and indeed they are very few of such worked bones at Caesarea. Bones of smaller animals were almost totally neglected except for the sporadic manufacture of whistles or flutes from the bones of large fowls, which apparently were especially suitable for that purpose. Certain bones could be used without any treatment at all, like the sharp fibulae of pig or the second metapodials of horse (see item No. 44) used as awls or pins (MacGregor 1985: 9; Provenzano 2001: 95), the scapula used as a shovel (Ayalon 1999 Fig. 8) and the astragalus employed as a gaming piece. Pig bones were seldom used (only two out of 121 in the discussed assemblage, despite their large number in the food waste at Caesarea – Cope 1997) as they are small and their twisted structure is unsuitable for carving (Wapnish-Hesse, pers. comm.). The production methods and technologies are discussed below in detail in Chapter VI.

As for the species of animals whose bones were used,

7

BONE AND IVORY AND THEIR PROPERTIES AS RAW MATERIALS 1. Defined objects divided by type families. Miscellanea, 109 Handles, 73 Working tools and weapon parts, 39 Weaving and dress, 204

Religious and art objects, 858

Rods and writing implements, 48 Boxes and hinges, 55 Body grooming objects, 34

Jewelry, 422

Gaming pieces, 125

Musical instruments, 34

2. Quantitative relation among defined objects, pin/needle fragments, and production waste. Pin/needle fragments, 730

Defined objects, 2001 Production waste, 958

8

CHAPTER IV TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.A. INTRODUCTION

based on iconography and style alone.

The definition of the function of the finds (typology) and their dating (chronology), aspects which lie at the heart of any research dealing with ancient objects, is a very complex task. First, as mentioned previously, there are no comprehensive reports on bone and ivory tools from later periods from Israel with the exception of a few articles concerned with specific subjects. The typological definition of an object relies heavily on analogies, on the use wear marks left on it, on technological common sense, and on ethnographic comparisons. However, scholars often disagree as to the use of certain objects (two well known examples include the whorl\button and the pin\needle debates), and it is difficult to decide on function in cases where the Caesarea objects find no new angle to add to the debate. Chapters VI-VII contain discussion on manufacturing marks with the aim of reconstructing industrial technologies. The present chapter considers the use wear marks on the bone objects to help identify their function (Griffitts 2001). This way the absence of intensive use wear signs on needles supported the suggestion of some researchers that they were actually dress pins. In the short introductions to the various groups and in the discussions of the objects, an effort has been made to justify the reasons behind their definition.

For these reasons no attempt was made here to establish a firm date for each object beyond the bare facts – the date of the locus and that of the analogies. All the above is also valid for the ivory objects discussed in Chapter V. Quantitative analysis of the finds. The two “pies” (see page 8 above) represent the relative quantities of the bone and ivory objects according to two criteria: 1. Defined objects divided by type families; 2. Quantitative relation among defined objects, pin\needle fragments, and production waste. As in many cases there is a statistical misleading in this division. The largest group is that of religious and art objects because of the numerous (about 600) inlay fragments of the Early Arab period. The second one is that of body grooming items, which includes almost 400 defined pins, while the third group – weaving instruments and dress items – consists of c. 100 “needles”, which could have been used as pins too. Contents of this chapter: introduction to each group of objects, division into sub-groups, and the details of each find in the following fixed order: definition, description and interpretation including dimensions (in millimeters), species\skeletal element, locus date, morphological analogies, notes.

Turning to the chronological aspect, the core of the problem lies in the fact that many objects were found in secondary positions and not in “clean or primary” well dated loci. Others, mainly precious objects such as those made of ivory, may have been handed down from generation to generation within a family. In such a case, stratigraphic position has a limited dating value (Rodziewicz 1978: 319). Despite all this, the date of the locus in which the object was found is mentioned here as (and if) received from the excavators (the final date of many loci has not yet been fixed and many others are of a mixed character). This was done mainly as regards the illustrated objects in the sense that they are used here to represent other parallel finds.

Each object is numbered serially in the text with the same number as in the figure; the number on the left includes (from left to right): the figure number \ the expedition code \ basket number. Order of the analogies: Land of Israel (chronologically if possible, with the site name only), neighboring countries, North Africa, Eastern Europe, Western Europe. Between square brackets the author’s remarks, unless these are brackets within brackets ([]). Finds abbreviations: S = Porath’s expedition; P = Patrich’s expedition; A = Raban’s expedition; M = Museum finds. Measurements abbreviations: l = length; w = width; h = height; t = thickness; h = height; d = diameter; de = depth. Other abbreviations: L = locus; cent. = century; I, II = first or second half of the century (i.e. 5II = second half of fifth century). Abbreviations for period names: P = Persian; H = Hellenistic; R = Roman; ER = Early Roman (including Herodian); LR = Late Roman; RB = Roman-Byzantine; B = Byzantine; EB, LB = Early Byzantine, Late Byzantine; A = Early Arab; C = Crusader; M = Mameluk; Ot = Ottoman. All dates mentioned are CE unless specified BCE.

It is difficult to date objects employing morphological comparisons alone. In a few cases (such as the flat and decorated small spoons and the flutes) the typological data (i.e. that of the analogies) is similar to the stratigraphical one. In most of the cases, however, the analogies also span broad chronological periods because relying on drawings alone could be misleading since similar objects are dated differently in various countries, etc. In addition, many objects, especially the more valuable ones, are museum pieces whose origin and date have been decided upon

9

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.B. UTENSILS AND DAILY TOOLS

North America: Flayderman 1972: 139).

IV.b.1. Handles. The 73 handles can be divided into two main groups: 51 handles with a round section (represented by Nos. 1-23), and thirteen with a rectangular or elliptic section (Nos. 24-30). Nine miscellaneous handles (Nos. 31-32) and handle parts (Nos. 33-38) were also found. The first group can be divided into three sub-groups: hollow handles made from cylindrical bones (Nos. 1-7), those made from the diaphysis wall of the bone with a drilled socket and therefore of limited dimensions (Nos. 8-18), and socketless handles (Nos. 19-23) which terminate in a narrow solid cylinder upon which the blade or tool has been mounted, sometimes with an additional metal ring as reinforcement (Béal 1983a: 147; Deschler-Erb 1998 Taf. 5: 62-64, 6: 65-71). Several handles have a perforation for a metal rivet which attached the blade to the handle. The rivet is still present in one specimen (No. 15). Other ways of attaching the blade included filling the space inside the socket with wood and wetting it, pushing the blade into the wood with force (sometimes after heating the tang – Theophilus, De Diversis Artibus, XCIII, p. 167), glueing (Béal 1983a: 147; MacGregor 1985: 167-168), or using rivets attached at 90 degrees to the end of the handle – the T-shape type (Dray, pers. comm., see No. 28). Many handles broke along the sockets, which represented the weak part in their construction. Some have a globular projection at the rear, serving both as decoration and perhaps also to improve the grip.

The main problem concerning many handles is their identification as such. A hollow cylinder made from a leg bone may also be a furniture mount, a hinge, a box (when equipped with a base and sometimes a lid), a tall gaming piece (Ayalon 1999 Figs. 64, 97-98), a drinking or sniffing spout (Ibid. Fig. 100) and a whistle (Nos. 6-7?), etc. The criteria used here to distinguish between them are as follows: the first assumption is that the inner space of a box will be as large as possible, well carved, and its walls relatively smooth. At both its edges there will be an inner or outer carved flange for attaching a glued base (always needed) and a glued or moveable lid (not always necessary). A handle does not have flanges and its inner space is usually intentionally unworked in order to improve the hold of the blade tang, while in a gaming piece the inner space is completely unimportant. A whistle was usually made of a thin-walled small bone, was nicely carved and has one or two holes drilled in its center, while in a handle the rivet perforation is in most cases near one end. A whistle and a drinking spout (which was also made of a thin bone; see Stewart 1973: 15) do not have flanges. A handle should also be comfortable to hold, therefore the hesitation in the definition of Nos. 2 and perhaps 4 (is the decoration too projecting?) or Nos. 6-7 (too smooth to hold or even too thin and weak?) as handles.

Everywhere in the ancient world, hollow handles were usually made from mammalian leg bones (MacGregor 1985: 168; MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1971). Interestingly, there were no handles where one of the epiphysis was retained as a means to improve the grip, as known from earlier periods (Ayalon 1999 Fig. 14). Where the handles were relatively narrow or the sockets too wide it may be presumed that first the artisan drilled the socket and only then carved the outside shape, to avoid breaking the object (Wapnish-Hesse and Dray, pers. comm.). Many cylindrical handles were formed on a lathe, a fact that contributed to their nice appearance. Carved decorations improved the grip of the handle as it was held in the sweating hand (Semenov 1964: 151).

1. Definition: Cylindrical hollow handle decorated with mouldings 1\P\0098 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical hollow handle made from a limb bone shaft whose edges were sawn away. The medullar cavity is clean but not round, symmetrical and well worked as in boxes, nor are there flanges to fit a base and/or lid. It was decorated on a lathe with three groups of mouldings separated by a furrow, another wide moulding near the edge and convex parts. The object retains the sulcus running naturally down the dorsal surface of the cattle metatarsus; it was not smoothed over, perhaps in order to improve the grip. Two sides of the front (left) end are smooth and worn as a result of friction and it seems that the blade widened here (T-shaped) to improve its attachment to the handle and to protect the hand. This is why this must have been the front edge. The other two sides are damaged, probably by use. There is also a smoothed part at the rear edge so it seems that the back edge of the blade tang was curved here to keep it from slipping out. The handle is worn from use. Six items of this type were found. L. 104mm, d. 27mm. Species/skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Petra, LB 6th cent., with one flange for lid, furniture mount?: Bikai 2001: 422, No. 25. France, R, bed leg decoration?: Béal 1986: 113: H, Fig. 8: 25, 1991a: 289, Fig. 1: 15. France, Lyon,

Some of those handles may have been produced in Caesarea (see Chapter VII).

Where osteological origin of handles could be identified there is an obvious preference, like with furniture mounts and hinges, of cattle and horse metatarsus (nine out of ten specimens). Six handles were made from cattle metatarsus, two from horse metatarsus and one specimen was made from cattle or horse. One handle was made from a cattle metacarpus. It is difficult to define the tool to which a handle belonged when the blade does not survive. Some of the cylindrical handles are rather small and perhaps belonged to delicate instruments like kohl sticks or a tool used to trim lamp wicks (see the ethnographic comparison from 10

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE R, cylinder: Sautot 1978: 60, Pl. 27: 8; R (the same?): Béal 1983a Pl. 11: 310; R, unfinished? furniture mount?: Ibid.: 97-99, Pl. 24: 119. Notes: None.

4. Definition: Cylindrical hollow decorated handle 1\A\0128 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical hollow handle made from a limb bone diaphysis. The inside is thoroughly smoothed but asymmetrical and has no base or lid flanges. The two ends were cleanly sawn but are heavily worn. The central part was carved on a lathe with convex parts divided by coupled mouldings separated by grooves. Each of the five convex or half convex parts is decorated with a line of two-circle-and-dot motifs (d. 4.5mm), some of which were placed along a line which was engraved beforehand for that purpose (although the artisan did not always put the tool’s tip exactly on the line). Designs in the rear section are bordered by two grooves on each side. Two perforations for a rivet (d. 3mm) were drilled (a little diagonally) near the front end, one opposite the other. Two items of this type were found. L. 77mm, d. 20mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Early Arab, 9th-11th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

2. Definition: Cylindrical hollow lathe-turned handle 1\S\33574 Description and interpretation: Handle made from a hollowed limb bone diaphysis well turned on a lathe. The medullar cavity is asymmetrical, roughly smoothed with some natural projections still present. This fact and the absence of flanges show that it is not a box. Both ends are cleanly sawn and smoothed. The walls are also well smoothed. The lathe-produced decoration includes mouldings and convex or concave parts of various widths. Drilled after the lathe work was finished, there is a perforation (d. 4mm) very close to the narrower end. Nearby but lower and diagonally sidewards there is another, larger and asymmetrical hole (7 x 4.5mm). Both holes were intended for a rivet. The perforations were perhaps drilled by an amateur since they weakened the handle end and the rivet did not hold firmly in this diagonal situation. Several similar objects were found at Caesarea, some painted red, but it is not sure they were all handles. Morphologically they remind of large metal candlesticks of the Early Arab period, some of which were found at Caesarea (Arnon 1996 Fig. 92; Lester, Arnon and Polak 1999). This is the only item of its type. L. 77mm, d. 25mm. Species/skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

5. Definition: Cylindrical hollow decorated handle 1\A\0159 Description and interpretation: Piece of a small cylindrical hollow handle. Approximately half is missing. The medullar cavity is conical (d. 3-4mm) and a little elliptical in cross-section showing that it is natural. At the complete end there is a very short projecting rim. The object was carved on a lathe. The decoration consists of groups of mouldings separated by full and half herringbone designs. The handle probably belonged to a prestigious small tool. It may also be part of a large bead. This is the only item of its type. L. 40mm, d. 11 x 9mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, 7th-1st cent. BCE, from a grave, pot handle: Barkai 1984: 102-103. England, York, 13th-14th cent., thread-reel or needle box?: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1968-1969, Fig. 925: 6691. Notes: None.

3. Definition: Cylindrical handle (?) decorated with petals 1\A\0777 Description and interpretation: Part of a hollow cylindrical lathe-turned object, of which less than half the diameter was preserved. It is not clear whether it was not originally cut into two halves and then, of course, it is not a handle. The inside is thoroughly smoothed but has no flanges and the space diameter is not symmetrical lengthwise, so it is not a box. The rear end is sawn straight. The body was decorated on a lathe with groups of mouldings and grooves in various dimensions and numbers. The front end is decorated with a rounded petal motif, partly separated from the body by a groove. The object may also have been a furniture mount. Three items of this type were found. L. 102mm, d. 28mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Kh. ‘Asida (near Hebron), B 5th cent., with Early Arab finds: Baramki and Avi-Yonah 1934 Pl. 12: 2. Oboda, Nabatean (H-ER), end missing: Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997: 208, Pl. 4: 32. Cyprus, Salamis, H, handle, end missing, rust stains from blade inside: Chavane 1975: 49, Pls. 16: 135, 62: 135. France, R, bed leg decoration?: Béal 1986: 113: H, Fig. 8: 25, 1991a: 289, Fig. 1: 15. Notes: None.

6. Definition: Thin cylindrical hollow handle? 1\A\0158 Description and interpretation: Small thin-walled, hollow cylinder, elliptical in cross-section. Both ends are cleanly sawn. A large part of the wall on one side is missing and seems to have been cut away for an unknown purpose with a sharp tool (knife?). Its face is smoothed although very shallow planing marks remained on it. As a whole cylinder it may have served as a handle for a delicate tool (although the wall seems a little too thin and there is no sign as to the way the blade was inserted in it) or a drinking or sniffing spout. In its present form, the object could have served as a small spoon for spices or medicines, etc. This is the only item of its type. L. 80mm, d. 12 x 10mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? 11

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Morphological analogies: Holland,Valkenburg, R, hunting whistle with a hole at center, made from the limb bone of a fowl: Verhagen 1993: 363, 365, Fig. 10: 59, 6162. Notes: None.

Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 10. Definition: Simple cylindrical handle with blocked socket 2\S\18411 Description and interpretation: Simple cylindrical handle whose front part is broken off. The body is straight and thoroughly smoothed, but not necessarily carved on a lathe. The rear end is strengthened with a slightly projecting ridge. A hollow cavity – the socket – runs along the entire body but it is not clear whether it is natural or drilled. At the rear end it was completely closed with a rude bone plug, the end of which is not flush with the handle end, creating a shallow depression. Remains of the iron tang are still stuck in the front part of the socket. Two items of this type were found. L. 57mm, d. 10mm, socket d. 3.5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

7. Definition: Small cylindrical hollow handle? 1\S\39936 Description and interpretation: Small cylindrical hollow object made from the diaphysis wall of a large bone. The asymmetrical socket was drilled with a sure hand from both ends (Poplin, pers. comm.) but is offcenter. The body is a little thicker in the center than at the ends. It is decorated with two coupled grooves made by an unsteady hand. Near one end, were drilled two perforations on two opposite sides, one a little larger than the other. It was probably used as a handle for a small and delicate tool, although other possibilities can not be ruled out including use as a whistle or even a hinge. Two items of this type were found. L. 56mm, d. 8-9mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Switzerland, Augusta Raurica, R, hinge: Deschler-Erb 1998 Taf. 50: 4433; whistle with hole in the center: Ibid.: Taf. 28: 1975-1976. Notes: None.

11. Definition: Decorated cylindrical handle with plugged socket 2\S\38396 Description and interpretation: Short cylindrical handle. The body is thicker in the front third, a little thinner towards the front edge decreasing in thickness towards the rear end too. It was decorated on a lathe with three groups of mouldings and grooves. A cleanly worked and smoothed hollow cavity runs down the whole length of the handle, which is also narrower towards the rear, where it is filled with a close fitting bone plug. The width of the cavity increases towards the front. It is not clear whether this cavity is natural or drilled. Two small perforations for a rivet were drilled opposite each other near the front end. The handle probably belonged to a relatively small and delicate tool. Three items of this type were found. L. 57mm, d. 7mm, socket d. in front 5.5mm, in rear 4.5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

8. Definition: Handle with round cross-section and drilled socket 1\S\81264 Photos 1:2, 2:9 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical handle made from the diaphysis wall of a large limb bone. Its maximum diameter is near the front end, where the socket was drilled, and it sharpens towards the back end which is missing. Decorated with five grooves running around the circumference of the front edge. The socket is round but drilled off-center; it narrows towards the inside. The circular drill marks can be clearly seen on its wall (see section). Two items of this type were found. L. 129mm, d. 10mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 9. Definition: Simple cylindrical handle with drilled socket 2\S\3015 Description and interpretation: Simple undecorated cylindrical handle, made – judging from its diameter – from the diaphysis wall of a very large limb bone. It was turned and smoothed on a lathe, as testified by its symmetry and the lathe indentation at the rear end. A round and not too deep socket was drilled at the front end. Adjacent to its rim there is another, smaller depression, in which a pin was inserted in order to hold the cylinder in place on the lathe during turning (Poplin and Dray, pers. comm.). The handle is worn and part of the wall along its socket is missing. Two items of this type were found. L. 85mm, d. 15mm. The socket l. 27mm, d. 4.5mm.

12. Definition: Decorated cylindrical handle with drilled socket 2\S\81279 Description and interpretation: Solid cylindrical handle made from the diaphysis wall of a large limb bone. The body is thicker in the center, a little bit narrower in the front part, decreasing in thickness again towards the rear. It was decorated on a lathe with single and double mouldings separated by grooves which were intended to emphasize them. A rounded depression was cut in the front end, in which a narrow socket was drilled to an unknown depth. A thin (d. 3mm) bone pin is inserted in it, whose continuation is missing. The pin may have been part of the complete tool (kohl stick, awl, plaiting tool? See L’art copte: Nos. 262a-b) or may have functioned 12

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE only during its manufacture, i.e. as an adaptor for the lathe. The rear end is a little damaged. Several other objects with such a pin have been found at Caesarea. Three items of this type were found. L. 80mm, d. 11mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Maon, LB 6th cent., from the synagogue, probably a handle or perhaps a marker (yad) for reading the Torah: Rahmani 1960b: 83, Fig. 1: 5. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent., lathe turned: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 567, 578, Fig. 18: 58. Notes: None.

socket is completely filled with the remains of the iron tang. An iron rivet survived in the wall, 12mm from the edge (not drawn), which caused the edge to crack. The object may have been the handle of a small knife or another nice and prestigious tool. Five items of this type were found. L. 63mm, d. 9mm, socket d. 4.5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, R, handle or furniture mount (no rivet)?: Davidson 1952: 189, 192, Pl. 86: 1426. Notes: None. 16. Definition: Moulded cylindrical handle with drilled socket 2\P\0176 Description and interpretation: Narrow cylindrical handle fully decorated on a lathe with parallel grooves becoming denser towards the rear. The rear end terminates in a rounded projection. This end and the projection are worn and shiny from handling use and may have been used to crush various materials. The front part is missing except the end of the drilled socket. This part is stained with a dark material, probably remains of the metal tang or glue. The object is covered with patina. Four items of this type were found. L. 53mm, d. 11mm, socket d. 4mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

13. Definition: Cylindrical handle with drilled socket 2\S\31107 Description and interpretation: Delicate cylindrical handle, lathe carved and polished so well it resembles ivory. The rear end is bullet-shaped; it is followed by a flattened ball and then stepped mouldings. The body is thicker towards the rear and thinner towards the front. The front end, itself a little thicker for reinforcement, is cylindrical and decorated with mouldings. The socket is relatively long and wide, taking up most of the diameter – no doubt the work of a skilled artisan although this technical solution weakened the handle. Scratches can be seen inside the socket, probably caused by the blade which was forced into it. The handle is a little worn. This is the only item of its type. L. 70mm, d. 8mm, socket l. 46mm, d. 4mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine (and Ottoman). Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

17. Definition: Small decorated cylindrical handle 2\S\59014 Description and interpretation: Very small cylindrical handle made from the diaphysis wall of a limb bone. Only about half its perimeter remains, as if it was cut along its length. The rich decoration includes groups of lathe formed grooves; among them – a band with zigzag decoration and a band of “cup” motifs in high relief; remnants of red paint, especially in the grooves. The socket is cylindrical with a rounded end, as must have been the shape of the drill head. MacGregor (pers. comm.) claims that it is too small to serve as a complete handle and another section, possibly of different material, was used to attach it to the tool. This is the only item of its type. L. 30mm, d. 9mm, socket l. 16mm, d. 4.5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Austria, Rabenstein, R, hollow handle with tattooing needle inside: Gostenčnik 2001: 386, Fig. 10: 1. Notes: None.

14. Definition: Socketed cylindrical handle 2\P\0223 Description and interpretation: Rear part of a narrow lathe-turned handle so thoroughly polished that it resembles ivory. The rear end appears like a rounded pommel with a lathe indentation. The body is cylindrical, widening a little towards the center and decorated with separate groups of grooves. The front part is missing but the drilled socket end survived. This end has a sharpened form, similar to the shape of the drill. Two items of this type were found. L. 38mm, d. 10mm, socket d. 5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 15. Definition: Grooved cylindrical handle with drilled socket 2\S\71757 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical handle made from the diaphysis wall of a thick bone and fully decorated on the lathe. The back end looks like a flattened ball adjacent to a projecting moulding, with a relatively large lathe indentation on its head. Most of the body is decorated with narrow, sharp and dense mouldings separated by depressions. The front end is a little narrower and decorated with tiny mouldings. The

18. Definition: Fragment of cylindrical hollow handle? 2\A\1532 Description and interpretation: Small fragment of a hollow cylindrical bone, of which only part of the wall and one end survived. A crooked groove was carved near the end and three bands filled with diagonal grooves were carelessly carved by hand on the body at various 13

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS intervals: the first is medium wide, the others (close to each other) are narrow and wide in that order. The piece is rather soft and worn. It may be a simple handle, or – if this was the complete object, a pointed tool. This is the only item of its type. L. 61mm, w. 10mm, t. 3mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Holland, Maastricht, R 2nd-3rd cent., pin-beater?: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 45, 74, Fig. 30: 1-2. Notes: None.

Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: See the previous object. Notes: See the previous object. 21. Definition: Cylindrical handle (?) with narrow attachment end 2\S\12314-1 Description and interpretation: Solid cylindrical handle (?) turned on a lathe and completely polished until it resembles ivory. The body is conical, narrowing towards the rear end and decorated with two groups of grooves. The flattened globular head is separated from the body by a projecting moulding, and has a lathe indentation on its end. On the other end, the conical part terminates with a straight cut. The continuation narrowed: either the socketed blade was attached to it or it was itself part of a tool like a spoon, stylus, etc. Two items of this type were found. L. 43mm, d. 10mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: France, Lyon, R, the tool was attached to the narrow end: Béal 1983a: 147-148, Pl. 13: 345. Notes: Found with mount No. 424. An entirely identical handle, probably made by the same craftsman (and perhaps both were part of a set of tools) is S, B. 12369, L. 12369.

19. Definition: Cylindrical handle shaped like a cloven hoof 2\S\400207 Description and interpretation: The handle rod is cylindrical and a little thicker at the center. The front section is missing. The rear section is shaped like a ruminant’s cloven hoof (Poplin, pers. comm., who also identified it as a handle). This part is triangular with one tip broken. Along its center, on both sides, runs a deep groove made with a saw. On the back were cut two short, diagonal side grooves. The triangular “foot sole” has a narrower “neck” which is separated from the cylindrical rod by a wider perpendicular piece. The object is completely polished. It no doubt belonged to a special tool. This and No. 20 are the only items of this type. L. 77mm, w. 9mm, t. 7.5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Syria, Tell Nebi Mend, H-R, double-toothed fork: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 1q. Turkey, Tarsus, H-R, animal foot-shaped spoon handle: Goldman 1950: 397, Fig. 271: 7-8. Turkey, R, in the Ephesos Museum, ivory spoon handle for medicinal use: Uzel 1999: 212, Taf. 27: 14. Greece, Corinth, one from the 1st cent., one R: Davidson 1952: 195, Pl. 89: 14841485. Notes: Compare to the boar foot shown in a 2nd cent. mosaic from Antioch: Weitzmann 1981 Pl. 67, Fig. 140 panel D.

22. Definition: Cylindrical handle (?) with narrow attachment end 2\S\69577 Description and interpretation: A handle similar to the former but fully decorated on a lathe with dense mouldings and grooves in varying widths, except at the ends. There is a relatively large and deep lathe indentation on its globular head. Additionally, there is a hint of a perforation for a rivet at the broken end, which had been heavily smoothed. This is the only item of its type. L. 49mm, d. 9mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Turkey, Tarsus, H, no mouldings, bobbin?: Goldman 1950: 400, Fig. 273: 93. France, Autun, R, ivory: Sautot 1978: 32, Pl. 9: 19. France, Lyon, R, fewer mouldings with the tool part attached to the narrow end of the handle: Béal 1983a: 147, Pl. 25: 344. Notes: None.

20. Definition: Cylindrical handle shaped like a cloven hoof 2\S\89967-1 Description and interpretation: Solid cylindrical handle, with the front end missing. Vertical knife scraping marks may be seen on the body. The rear section was carved with a knife in the shape of a ruminant’s cloven hoof (Poplin, pers. comm., who also identified it as a handle). It is flat on one side and convex on the other (it is unclear which side represents the back and which side represents the bottom). Its shape is triangular, with a sawn groove running along its center on both sides. This part joins the cylindrical rod with the connecting point reinforced with two mouldings (see cross-section). Another moulding, situated between two depressions, was carved on the handle itself, with a convex projection on the opposite side. This too was no doubt a prestigious and elegant tool. This and No. 19 are the only items of this type. L. 73mm, w. 10mm, t. 5mm. Species/skeletal element: ?

23. Definition: Solid cylindrical handle? 2\S\5548 Description and interpretation: Solid cylindrical handle (?) well turned on a lathe. It does not sit securely on its base (so it could not be a gaming piece) since while it was sawn (in second use? Poplin, pers. comm.) part of the end broke and the remaining projecting scar was not smoothed over. Three marks left by the gripping teeth of the lathe (Dray, pers. comm.; see Chapter VI) are barely visible near the base. The maximum thickness of the handle is near the base and the body narrows towards the head. The head is decorated with two mouldings with a flattened ball sitting on it. A projecting scar was left on its end when it was sawn. The tool may belong to the 14

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE type described above (Nos. 21-22). Two items of this type were found. L. 51mm, d. 8mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

present rectangular shape. The front end is straight. The socket is cylindrical and its end shows that the drill had a rounded head. The front part is broken along the socket. This is the only item of its type. L. 87mm, w. 20mm, t. 7.5mm, socket l. 42mm, d. 4mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: England, Verulamium, R: MacGregor 1985 Fig. 88: c. Notes: None.

24. Definition: Handle with rectangular\elliptical crosssection and drilled socket 3\S\31557 Description and interpretation: Handmade handle carved from the diaphysis wall of a thick limb bone. The thoroughly smoothed body is elongated with an elliptical cross-section at the ends and a rectangular cross-section in the center, which is the thickest part. It narrows towards the rear end, where it terminates in a moulding and a globular projection. The front end terminates in a slanting rim separated from the body by a groove in which there is a small natural hole. The cylindrical socket was drilled off center in the tool, thus, risking breaking its thin wall. The handle is worn (especially towards the rear) and is covered with patina. Its shape resembles that of the handles of the folding pocket-knives (Nos. 31-32) and may have been produced in the same place and period. Two items of this type were found. L. 84mm, w. 13mm, t. 9mm. The socket l. 65mm, d. 6mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Turkey, Tarsus, R, ivory: Goldman 1950: 396, Fig. 270: 3. Notes: None.

27. Definition: Rectangular handle with elliptical crosssection 3\A\0655-1 Description and interpretation: Rectangular well smoothed handle with flattened elliptical cross-section, made from the diaphysis wall of a large limb bone. The rear end is round and wider than the front end. The socket is cylindrical, cleanly drilled and narrows towards the inner end. It comprises almost the whole diameter of the object. Although this probably demanded much skill on the part of the artisan to avoid breaking the thin wall, it also weakened the handle. The front end is narrower than the rest and stained with rust left by the iron tang. Two items of this type were found. L. 55mm, w. 16mm, t. 6mm, socket l. 20mm, d. 4.5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 28. Definition: Rectangular handle with drilled socket and adjusting groove 3\S\37547 Description and interpretation: Rectangular well smoothed handle (identified as such by Poplin, pers. comm.) with a rectangular cross-section. Both ends are straight. In the remaining part of the front end can be observed a deep and wide groove, which originally continued on both sides of the socket (T shape). It contained projections attached to the blade and thus improved its attachment to the handle. They may also have protected the hand. Part of the object along the socket is missing. This is the only item of its type. L. 65mm, w. 13mm, t. 4mm, socket l. 23mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a: 75, Pl. 12: 77. Notes: None.

25. Definition: Rectangular handle with elliptical section 3\P\0104 Description and interpretation: Well smoothed rectangular handle with straight ends and sides. Its crosssection is elliptical with curving sides. The rear end is covered with sawing striations. Much of the front part is missing but the rear end of the round socket remained. It was drilled off center through the body. The handle is decorated with deep parallel longitudinal grooves and with projecting mouldings of varying width between them. These components no doubt improved the handle’s grip. This is the only item of its type. L. 95mm, w. 19mm, t. 9mm, socket l. 45mm, d. 4mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a: 150, Pl. 25: 352. England, York, Medieval: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1971, Fig. 927: 8026. Notes: None.

29. Definition: Elliptical decorated handle 3\A\0171 Description and interpretation: Fragment from a handle, elliptical both from the front and in cross-section. It was probably carved from the diaphysis wall of a thick limb bone. The socket was drilled with a pointed drill, as its end shows. The circular marks left by the drill can be seen along the socket, which is partly broken. The rear end is rounded and very worn out, while the front part is missing. The decoration motifs, carved with various drills and center-bits, are organized in a line and consist of the following: a shallow depression, in the center of which a

26. Definition: Rectangular handle with drilled socket 3\S\2647 Description and interpretation: Rectangular handle with a rectangular section, made from the diaphysis wall of a thick limb bone. Two depressions carved in the rear end create three projections, the central wider than the others. In the central projection a lathe indentation remained which shows that first a thick bone cylinder was turned on a lathe. Only later was it carved by hand to the 15

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS dot produced by the tool’s tip can be seen, surrounded by two concentric circles; three circle-and-dot motifs arranged across the width; a relatively large circle-anddot motif with six smaller ones inside it; and repeated again. This was no doubt the handle of a delicate tool. Three items like Nos. 29-30 were found. L. 63mm, w. 13mm, t. 7mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 7th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

its type. L. 83mm, w. 14mm, t. 9mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Hungary, Szőny, not identical: Bíró 1994: 99-100, Pl. 55: 479. Yugoslavia, 3rd-4th cent.: Petković 1995: 102, Taf. 36: 3. England, Shakenoak, end of 4th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 169, Fig. 88: I. Notes: None. 32. Definition: Folding pocket-knife handle 3\S\53917 Description and interpretation: A flat and basically rectangular handle. Filing striations may be seen on the wide sides. The back narrow side (opposite that of the folding blade) is straight and very smooth. The rear part narrows towards the end which is shaped like a round piece on top of two side projections. The front end broke at the point where the blade was attached with a rivet. Part of the perforation survived. This section is separated from the rest of the body by a groove. A wide and deep groove which runs along the handle bottom, including the rounded head, served to hold the folded blade. Remains of the bronze blade are still preserved there, showing that the knife was detached with the blade folded. The bottom is curved today, but this obviously occurred after it stopped being used, otherwise the blade could not have been folded in. This specimen shows that flat bone objects can bent over the years. This is the only item of its type. L. 67mm, w. 13mm, t. 5.5mm, the blade groove w. 1.5mm, de. 7mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Hungary, Szőny, not identical: Bíró 1994: 99-100, Pl. 55: 479. Switzerland, Augusta Raurica, R: Deschler-Erb 1998 Taf. 6: 76. England, Verulamium, R (only the head shape): MacGregor 1985: 169, Fig. 88: h. Notes: None.

30. Definition: Decorated rectangular handle with drilled socket 3\S\34641 Description and interpretation: Solid rectangular handle with an elliptical-rounded cross-section, carefully smoothed and beautifully decorated. The rear end is shaped like a truncated point, while the front end is straight. The socket is rectangular in cross-section, and, as the drill always rotates in a circular movement, it seems that at first a cylindrical cavity was drilled and then it was carved by hand to its present form. The end of the socket shows that the drill had a short and truncated head. The two sides are rounded. The decoration is multicomponent: the lateral sides are decorated with circleand-dot motifs in a repeating order of one large and a group of three small ones. The wide facets have the same motifs: three wide and deep parallel grooves running down their lengths with the central one longer than the others and probably with colored inlays in them formerly (Poplin, pers. comm.). The central groove is surrounded on three sides with a line of small drilled spots (larger towards the back), in the center of each a tiny depression was left by the drill’s tip. The rear section was decorated like the lateral sides. Remains of red and black paint can be seen in the decorative components, but it is not clear whether the whole handle was painted or only the designs. The object broke along the socket. The handle no doubt belonged to a special tool. Three items like Nos. 29-30 were found. L. 119mm, w. 19mm, t. 10mm, socket l. 57mm, w. 4mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

33. Definition: Part of handle with rivet perforations 3\P\0189 Description and interpretation: Piece of a side facet of a square flat handle with rivet holes. The outer side (uppermost in the drawing) and the head were very carefully smoothed. In the inner part, oriented towards the blade, the broken thicker section (right in the drawing) was originally the back part of the handle which was held in the hand, and broke from it. The narrower section (left in the drawing) was the front part of the handle; it has a wide groove in it where the blade was attached. This part was smoothed but less so than the outer side. Three rivet perforations (probably out of a total of four at least) survived; a small dark ring left by the rivet can be seen around one of them. The holes show that the blade was rather large (at least 20mm wide), and the shape of the installing groove demonstrates that its back end was straight. This is the only example of its type (of knife?) at Caesarea, while in Roman England it is the commonest (MacGregor 1985: 169). L. 55mm, w. 19mm, t. 4mm. The perforations d. 2mm. Species/skeletal element: ?

31. Definition: Folding pocket-knife handle 3\S\400879 Description and interpretation: Well made handle, although some marks of the original carving remained on it. The rear end is round and projects outwards, probably functioning both as a decoration and a way to improve the grip. The object widens towards the front end, which is narrower, thinner and separated from the body by a groove. It still has smoothing marks on it which cannot be seen on this part which was probably covered with a reinforcing metal ring. This section has a perforation (d. 2mm) for a rivet for fixing the tang to the handle. Along the narrow bottom there is a deep (maximum de. 9mm, w. 1mm) groove into which the blade folded. Parts of one of the sides are missing at both ends. This is the only item of 16

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Locus date: Early Roman, 1st cent. BCE-1st cent. CE. Morphological analogies: France, Les Bolards, R, handle coating: Sautot 1978: 39, Pl. 21: 7. England, Verulamium, R, knife handle: MacGregor 1985 fig. 88: h. Notes: None.

around the forks; b) the body of a toy horseman whose head is missing and the ‘forks’ are his legs, who sits on a very thin toy horse, attached to it by a rivet passing through the perforations in his legs (see wooden analogies). This is the only item of its type. L. 35mm, d. 10mm, the holes d. 2mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Hungary, Aquincum, R: Choyke (pers. comm.). Switzerland, Augusta Raurica, R: Deschler-Erb 1998 Taf. 6: 74. England, R, tuning peg: MacGregor 1985 Fig. 77: c,e. Notes: Bronze rouletting tools, Israel, 1st-2nd cent.?: Levy 1985. Wooden parallel, toy horseman, Egypt, Karanis, B: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 218, No. 270a. The same, Egypt, Antinoé, R or “Coptic”: Rutschowscaya 1986: 86, No. 291. Bronze parallel, England, Verulamium, 4th cent., perforated pendant?: Goodburn and Grew 1984b: 37, Fig. 13: 97. The same, England, Colchester, “modern”, with a perforation for hanging: Crummy 1988 Fig. 102: 3613. Recent comparison, England: dotting wheel for cakes (pastry crimper): Halstead and Middleton 1972: 64.

34. Definition: Handle (?) fragment 3\P\044 Description and interpretation: Small rectangular piece with a large square hole. The tablet’s edges are worn and rounded because of intensive use suggesting that originally they projected outside the tool. The piece is asymmetrical: one of the long sides is a little rounded and one short side is not parallel to the other. The hole is even less well made: it is asymmetrical as well, its facets are not straight and parts of them look as if they were cut at a later stage. The front of the piece is carefully smoothed except for the scars left around the hole. The back is roughly straightened and many filing striations can be seen on it. It is obvious therefore that both back and hole were not meant to be seen when the piece was in use. It was perhaps incorporated in a handle (possibly on its end) composed of several parts (such as alternating wooden or leather and bone pieces), which explains the rude hole and the worn edges. This is the only item of its type. L. 32mm, w. 25mm, t. 3mm, the hole side l. 12mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman, 1st cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

36. Definition: Cylindrical handle for box lid? 3\S\73961 Description and interpretation: Solid cylindrical small and thin object, made from the diaphysis wall of a thick limb bone. The typical indentations on both ends show that it was turned separately on a lathe. Its upper part is shaped like a column with a base and capital (compare to pin No. 226). The lower section narrows towards the bottom and is smooth and peg-like, as if to make it possible to insert it in a hole. It may have been the handle for a box lid (see below) or of another object, a gaming piece for a board equipped with holes, a stopper for a vessel with a very narrow mouth or a peg in a frame on which hides were stretched (Salaman 1986: 294-296, Fig. 13: 16, 18). This is the only item of its type. L. 19mm, d. 5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-4th cent., handle of a cylindrical gaming piece: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 187 No. 201. England, London, R 2nd cent.?, hinge head stuck in a whorl-like stopper: Barber and Bowsher 2000: 155, No. 8. Notes: Compare to the next object.

35. Definition: Forked handle? 3\S\52240 Description and interpretation: Part of a cylindrical, lathe turned object with parallel forks at one end. The back end may have been broken at a weak spot in the groove between two mouldings. If that is the case, the original length is unknown. This may, however, also be the original end which was cut on the lathe around its outer perimeter after which the central part was broken. The back section is decorated with two double mouldings separated by a convex section, while the front is undecorated. It comprises two parallel arms, one thicker than the other. To create them the craftsman first drilled a perforation through the center of the piece and then sawed from the end towards the hole. Small scratches made by the saw can be seen in the perimeter of the hole. A small perforation was then drilled in each fork, one opposite the other, so that a single rivet could pass through them. It is not clear how this object functioned. Poplin (pers. comm.) thinks it may have been part of a roulette (dotting wheel, pattern roll) used, for instance, to decorate pottery, food or leather (Salaman 1986: 6), with a longer handle and a wheel running on the rivet. Dray (pers. comm.) suggested that may have been a handle which hung down, as an example, on a drawer, pulled when in use and hanging vertically when released. It may also have been part of a longer handle, with another part attached between the forks and a blade or a tool placed in the now broken end. Other possibilities include: a) a variation of a tuning peg from a musical instrument (see below), in which the string was tied through the holes or

37. Definition: Cylindrical handle for box lid? 3\A\5005 Description and interpretation: Small, thin cylindrical object turned on a lathe. Its upper part is shaped like a flattened ball on top of two mouldings. The other part of the rod turned with it was crudely broken, leaving a scar. But it may also be a later break, which means that the original object was longer. The lower section, which narrows towards the bottom, is straight and very smooth, as if to enable to insert it like a peg in a hole. There is a lathe indentation on the bottom. For the different possible uses see the above object. This is the only item of its type. L. 18mm, d. 8mm. 17

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jordan, Jerash, 4th-5th cent.?, stopper?: Clark and Bowsher 1986: 264-266, Pl. 27.1: a. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-4th cent., handle or stopper for a gaming piece: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 146, Fig. 15. Holland, Valkenburg, R post 2ndII cent., handle or stopper for a hollow distaff lid: Verhagen 1993: 345, Fig. 5: 11-15. Notes: None.

in other periods (mostly – earlier ones) and at other sites. It is possible that in the periods discussed here bone spatulae were replaced by metal tools. Some of the flat utensils have marks of scraping and smoothing on their long sides, possibly the result of working leather (Dray, pers. comm.). An English source from 1548 mentions that the hairy side of skins was scraped using cattle ribs, as metal knives tore them (MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1913). Eskimos in Alaska used various scrapers made of bone, ivory and antler for processing skins (Fitzhugh and Kaplan 1982: 131).

38. Definition: Cylindrical lid handle? 3\A\0496 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical, latheturned small object made from the diaphysis wall of a thick limb bone. The thicker (upper?) part is decorated on its center with two mouldings separated by a convex section. Above them the object widens a little towards the end. The lower part is straight and smooth. It was probably meant to be inserted peg-like in a hole or a socket. A hollow, funnel-like at the top and cylindrical below, was drilled into the upper section. Its bottom shows it was drilled with a round-headed drill. It is unclear whether this was intended as a socket to attach it to another object or just a decorative element. For its possible uses see No. 36 above. This is the only item of its type. L. 26mm, d. 11mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 7th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

Instruments whose osteological identity could be determined include a rod (distaff?) made from a cattle metatarsus, a point manufactured from a horse II or IV metapodial, four scraper-like tools from ribs (two – of cattle) and two from scapula (one cattle and one horse). The utensils were divided into two categories based on their shape: pointed objects (Nos. 39-45) and flat ones (Nos. 46-56) because of the difficulty in defining their use. Tools and objects which are definitely connected with weaving activities are dealt with separately below, as well as those used for treating the body and for writing. 39. Definition: Carved decorated point 4\M\98-7130 Description and interpretation: A nicely decorated point. The head is globular but very worn. Beneath it is a narrow neck. The handle was decorated, probably by hand carving, with a spirally fluted design bordered on each end with a moulding. Between the handle and the tip there are two more mouldings. The tip is smooth and polished (from use?), while the upper section is covered with patina. The use of this object is unclear; it could be a stylus with the globular head used to erase the wax surface, a cosmetics or medicines applicator, a pin-beater for lace making (Dray, pers. comm.), a “hand” for pointing at the line being read (Bíró, pers. comm.), etc. It is too thick to be a pin. This is the only item of its type. L. 116mm, d. 9mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Egypt, Antinoé, LR, with depressions on the handle, tip stained, kohl stick: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 211, No. 256. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A1, 14th cent., general similarity, stylus: Oldenburg 1969: 114, Fig. 47: 6. Austria, Magdalensberg, 50 BCE-50 CE, not identical, stylus: Gostenčnik 2001: 384, Fig. 3. England, York, post-1080, pin, not identical: MacGregor 1995: 414, Fig. 157: 1.11-12. Notes: Exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam.

IV.b.2. Working tools. The number of objects at Caesarea defined as utensils (35) is relatively small. The reason may be found in the fact that many of the tools in these periods were made from metal. Most of the worked bone tools (except Nos. 39 and 46) are very simple objects which were only slightly or not at all worked to allow them to be used. Such tools are defined as having been made in an ad-hoc manner “by the user”. This, and the fact that some of them were eroded by seawater or wind and sand make their definition quite difficult. Some of them may not be tools at all. Some may have been used temporarily without any previous manufacturing, but in the absence of wear marks it is impossible to demonstrate it. The pointed tools may have been used for a variety of purposes such as engraving on wet clay, plaster or wax; boring through leather, cloth or papyrus; plaiting or weaving; or applying medicines or cosmetics (Becker 2001). The flat objects could have been used to burnish or scrape leather, plaster or pottery; for light crushing and applying of medicines, cosmetics or colors; to erase wax on writing tablets; in weaving, in book making and binding (Salaman 1986: 6e; Fig. 1: 11; Meyers and Hoglund 1998: 279) etc.; in all – these are the whole repertoire of actions which may be proposed for the enigmatic tool called the ‘spatula’ (Ariel 1990: 127-134). It is worth noting that only a few tools at Caesarea (see No. 49) resemble a typical spatula, which is so common

40. Definition: Point with conical head 4\S\97417 Description and interpretation: Long, thin cylindrical point. The upper end is conical and short. Vertical scraping marks may be seen over the whole surface of the object. The tip is one-sided and was probably resharpened after it broke. The tool may have been used as 18

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE an awl, graver, hair pin (see below) or a stylus, with the head used as an eraser. This is the only item of its type. L. 112mm, d. 7mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Egypt, R, pin: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 44. Tunisia, Carthage, 4th cent., spindle or pin: Hurst and Henig 1994: 22-23, 272, Fig. 14.13: 22. Hungary, Szőny and Dunapentele, 1st-5th cent., hair pins: Bíró 1994: 78-79, 126, Pls. 14-15: 134-151. Notes: None.

Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Syria, Tell Nebi Mend, H-R: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 2i. Tunisia, Carthage, probably a pin-beater: Henig 1984: 191, Fig. 62: 63. Hungary, Szőny, R-LR, shuttle or pin-beater: Bíró 1994: 51, 102, Pl. 61: 531-533. Holland, Maastricht, 5thI cent., spindle?: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 45, 74, Fig. 30: 79. England, York, Medieval, pin-beater for a warpweighted loom (no longer in use in the 10th cent.): MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1967, Fig. 923: 6669, 7721; tip: Ibid.: 1990, Fig. 946: 7194. Notes: None.

41. Definition: Solid cylindrical point 4\A\0293 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical tool made from the diaphysis wall of a thick limb bone. The thick end is sawn straight. The tip is centralized and slightly blunt, not really sharp. It is unclear whether it was latheturned. Four items of this type were found. L. 108mm, d. 8-9mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Hungary, Szőny and Dunapentele, 1st-3rd cent., hair pin: Bíró 1994: 76-77, Pls. 12-14: 99-117, 128-133. Holland, Maastricht, 7th cent?, decorated awl: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 47, 74, Fig. 30: 3. Holland, Valkenburg, R, weaving pin beater: Verhahen 1993: 347, 356, Figs. 8: 28, 9: 31. France, Villers le Sec, 8th-9th cent., point\awl for basket weaving or a pin\spindle for weaving (internet). France, Strasburg, 4th cent., decorated double-point knot opener or a weaving tool: Béal and Fouet 1987 Fig. 3 left. England, Southampton, weaving pin beater: MacGregor 1985: 188-189, Fig. 101: 15, 17. England, York, 10th-12th cent., pin beater: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1967-1968, Fig. 923: 7721. Notes: Ethnographic comparison: tool used to engrave pottery vessels, Native Americans: Whiteford 1973: 16: 5-17: 5R.

44. Definition: Point? 4\S\14002 Description and interpretation: Long natural point. Some projections may have been removed from its thick head in order to ease the grip, which would show it was actually a tool. The lower part has a round section and is suitable for use as an awl, but the end is missing so it is impossible to check it for use wear. Similar tools were still used by basket makers in 1930’ England, claiming that wooden awls were too weak and metal ones – too tough (Jenkins 1967: 142-143). Some scholars think it is not a tool but the natural shape of the metapodial II and IV of equids (Poplin, Bíró and Choyke, pers. comm.). This is the only item of its type. L. 96mm, w. 20mm, t. 14mm. Species\skeletal element: Horse metapodial II or IV. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Samaria-Sebaste, weaving needle: Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924: 28 No. 6, Pl. 90c9. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 1st-2nd cent.: Bíró 1987 Figs. 3: 6-7, 7: 12-13; end of 2nd-middle 3rd cent.: Ibid. Figs. 12: 101, 15: 130, 19: 169-171; 4th cent.: Ibid. Fig. 27: 235. France, Les Bolards, R, blank for pin\needle production: Sautot 1978: 48, Pl. 20: 18. England, York, [Medieval], point: MacGregor 1995: 416, Fig. 157: 5.1; Medieval, awl made from metatarsal IV of a horse: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1990-1991, Fig. 946: 7193. Notes: None.

42. Definition: Small thin point with a square crosssection 4\P\0048 Description and interpretation: Complete solid point with a square or slightly trapezoid section. The thick end is straight. The tip narrows but is neither centralized or really sharp, and may be secondary. The tool is slightly worn, perhaps by seawater. It is a typical tool made “by the user” with minimal effort and perhaps used for a short time for any purpose. Four items of this type were found. L. 73mm, w. 4.5mm, t. 3.5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

45. Definition: Awl? 4\S\27837-1 Description and interpretation: A short solid object with a thick tip, completely worn, probably by seawater. Its sides were roughly cut – a typical ad-hoc tool made “by the user”. The rear section is wider and, more or less, rectangular. The tip is triangular but not centralized, solid and originally must have been pretty sharp, suitable to punch through thick leather, for instance. Three items of this type were found. L. 55mm, w. 20mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Late Roman, 2nd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

43. Definition: Double point 4\S\97772 Description and interpretation: Small, thin double point, thicker in the center where its section is trapezoid. Poplin (pers. comm.) suggests it is unworked. For the various uses of such a point see Becker 2001. Two items of this type were found. L. 77mm, w. 5mm, t. 4mm.

46. Definition: Thin knife with decorated handle 4\S\65444 Description and interpretation: A nice, thin knife, hand 19

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS carved from a single piece of bone. The handle is cylindrical, widening a bit towards the blade and smoothed. The rear is decorated with two mouldings and two grooves. The handle is decorated with a spirally fluted design. The blade broke near it. Its back is thicker for reinforcement and the cutting edge thin and sharp, i.e. it has a triangular section. Such knives probably served for medical treatments, cutting soft food such as fruit (till the end of Medieval times only knives were used as eating utensils – Béal 1983a: 19; Bíró 1994: 45) or treating paper or similar materials. This is the only item of its type. The handle l. 49mm, d. 9mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: France, Nîmes, R?, from Diana’s temple, decorated with animal head: Béal 1984: 40 No. 133. Notes: A bone knife for processing medicinal plants is mentioned in a Roman source (Milne 1976: 17).

flat tool with one end rounded and the other diagonal. One long side is thickened while the other is sharp with use wear marks. It probably served for smoothing, scraping or polishing, for instance clay vessels before firing or leather bands or for erasing the writing on a waxed tablet (Bíró, pers. comm.). The rounded edge is damaged. Three items of this type were found. L. 103mm, w. 18mm, t. 4mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Muraba’at Cave, R 2nd cent.: Killebrew 2000: 102. Hungary, Aquincum, R: Choyke (pers. comm.). France, Les Bolards, R, scraper: Sautot 1978: 40, Pl. 19: 9. Notes: Ethnographic comparison: Weaving and plaiting bone tool with worn edges, Canadian Native Americans: Stewart 1973: 120. 50. Definition: Solid triangular tool 4\P\0105 Description and interpretation: A solid triangular object made from the diaphysis wall of a cylindrical limb bone, as its concave bottom testifies. The rear edge and the long sides were sawn straight. The front triangular part is thicker than the rear (which probably served as a handle), with a ridge of bone separating them. The edge was sharpened using a saw and it is a little blunt. The object is covered with patina. Two items of this type were found. L. 92mm, w. 25mm, t. 9mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine, 3rd-6th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

47. Definition: Knife blade with attachment teeth? 4\S\101251 Description and interpretation: A thin and flat rectangular piece, broken at both ends. Both sides are sawn. Back and bottom are smooth, with filing marks at the edges. Several notches were carved on the two sides of one end, non-identical in shape and size. It may have been a knife blade with the notched part attached to the handle (the recesses strengthening its attachment). The notched part could also have been used to card wool or other fibers. This is the only item of its type. L. 60mm, w. 19mm, t. 2mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

51. Definition: Burnisher or blade? 4\S\97494-1 Description and interpretation: Elongated tool with a thickened back and a thin blade, probably made from a flat bone. The rear edge narrows towards the end and is comfortable to hold. The front one narrows but is not really sharp. The blade is worn from use and no longer sharp although its front part is thin enough to cut or engrave soft materials such as food or clay. Professional potters claim it is convenient to use for finishing the vessel before firing but was too soft for burnishing the surface (as suggested by Bíró, pers. comm.).1 Poplin (pers. comm.) thinks it is a fragment of unmodified bone. Two items of this type were found. L. 86mm, w. 16mm, t. 5mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Kh. Asfaneh (Jalame), LR, burnishing or scraping tool made from a rib: Berry 1988: 235; Ayalon 1999 Fig. 22. Notes: None.

48. Definition: Leather working tool? 4\S\86905 Description and interpretation: Flat and pointed tool, rather smooth, which – judging by its concave base – was made from the diaphysis wall of a cylindrical limb bone. The back end is rather straight with rounded corners. The tip is narrow but a bit rounded, not really sharp. It is unclear whether this was the original shape or just the result of water wear. Poplin (pers. comm.) suggests it is an unmodified bone fragment. The tool could have been used for processing leather bands or edges (with the concave long side), as a solid awl or puncher, or as a weaving pin-beater (with the pointed tip). Three items of this type were found. L. 78mm, w. 16mm, t. 4mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: Kfar Saba, A: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 2 (right). Tunisia, Carthage, 2ndI cent., a pin-beater?, tip worn: Hurst and Henig 1994: 22-23, 275, Fig. 14.14: 36. Notes: None.

52. Definition: Burnisher? 5\S\84290 Description and interpretation: A triangular tool, probably made from a flat bone (rib?). Remains of the spongy layer can be seen on its bottom. The rear end is

49. Definition: Spatula or smoothing tool? 4\S\84046 Description and interpretation: An elongated, thin and

1

20

I would like to thank Marcia Ofri and Lilia Lvovsky for this information.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE wide, flat and thin with rounded corners. The front one narrows but is a little rounded too at the tip, not really sharp, and worn out. Poplin (pers. comm.) thinks it is a natural piece worn by seawater. Dray (pers. comm.) claims it could have been used for working leather bands or edges, burnishing clay vessels, etc. Three items like Nos. 52-53 were found. L. 116mm, w. 34mm, t. 7mm. Species/skeletal element: Rib? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Tunisia, Carthage, 4th cent., pin-beater?, with worn tip: Hurst and Henig 1994: 22-23, 275, Fig. 14.14: 34. England, York, pin-beater: MacGregor 1985: 188-189, Fig. 101: 16. Notes: Ethnographic comparison: Burnisher for pottery vessels before firing, Native Americans: Whiteford 1973: 14.

55. Definition: A recessed smooth tool 5\S\100031-1 Photo 1: 3 Description and interpretation: A long, flat and thin blade, very smooth, almost polished, including the long sides. One narrow end is straight with diagonal parallel sawing lines retained on it. There is a relatively deep indentation off-center at the other narrow end. The whole of this area is glossy from handling wear. It could have been used as a pin-beater in weaving or to work leather laces, to smooth ropes, etc. This is the only item of its type. L. 150mm, w. 20mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, weaving tool: Gostenčnik 2001 Fig. 5: 8. France, Lyon, R., potter’s tool?: Béal 1983a: 375, Pl. 63: 1334; R, 1st-2nd cent., one end denticulate, the other with an indentation, weaver’s blade: Ibid.: 371, Pls. 61: 1323-1324, 62: 1325. Notes: A similar metal or wooden tool with a recessed end was used to push hair, wool, flock, etc. to saddles and similar harness components (Salaman 1986: 275).

53. Definition: Scraper? 5\S\11105 Description and interpretation: Elongated triangular tool with a triangular cross-section, made from the diaphysis wall of a cylindrical limb bone. The thicker rear part served as a handle. The front section narrows but is not really sharp, and is worn out from use. The object could have served as a scraper, for instance, in working leather. Three items like Nos. 52-53 were found. L. 97mm, w. 15mm, t. 10mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

56. Definition: Weaving tool? 5\S\12281 Description and interpretation: Fragment of a large flat bone with a thick ridge running along its back. Its identification as a tool is not sure. The intact end tapers a little and its edges are smooth. The other end and part of the back are missing. Today, the bone is convex but the original shape is unknown. It could have served as a weaving or plaiting tool or in one of the uses suggested for a spatula. The object is dark with soot. This is the only item of its type. L. 182mm, w. 36mm, t. 7mm. Species/skeletal element: Cattle rib. Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Shiqmona, H: Elgavish 1974 Pl. 8 and Nos. 216, 307. Norway, similar but more convex (as related to the natural shape) objects: MacGregor 1985: 188. Notes: None.

54. Definition: Burnisher or scraper? 5\P\0019 Description and interpretation: A triangular tool made from the diaphysis wall of a cylindrical limb bone. The rear part is fairly round with a natural hole running through it, which may have been used to hang the object. The long sides are smooth (except for one jagged point). It could have been used to scrape leather, make fishing nets, etc. On the other hand, it may also be just a naturally formed bone fragment eroded by seawater. Two items of this type were found. L. 120mm, w. 21mm, t. 10mm. Species/skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Kh. Asfaneh (Jalame), LR: Berry 1988: 235, Pl. 8-3: 60; Ayalon 1999 Fig. 7. Notes: None.

21

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.B.3. SPINNING, WEAVING AND CLOTHING OBJECTS.

comparisons show that the whorl can be very small and light (Ibid. contra Elderkin 1928: 342).

This group includes 204 items clearly connected with textile works, to which should perhaps be added some of the tools discussed above. For general discussions on the subject (excluding bone tools) in Antiquity and ethnography see for instance Wulff 1966; Wild 1976. It should be remembered that some of those objects, especially the needles (if they are not pins), were also used in leather works and plaiting. It seems that bone was a preferred raw material for textile working tools because of its characteristics: easy to carve but strong and tends to become smoother during work (MacGregor 1985: 185). The objects included in this group are: one spindle and 73 whorls\buttons (Nos. 57-87), 28 weaving and clothing implements including weaving tablets or belt dividers (Nos. 88-89), bobbins\fasteners (Nos. 90-91), brooch (No. 92), shuttles? (Nos. 93-96), buckles (Nos. 97-99), and 103 definable needles (Nos. 100-112).

Whorls\buttons were usually made from the wall of a cylindrical bone, but sometimes the work was saved by making them from the semi-spherical end of the femur bone, which has naturally the exact needed shape (MacGregor 1985: 187; Maldre 2001). Whorls\buttons were made from all available raw materials (Liu 1978). One way to differentiate between a whorl and a button is by its shape: the whorl (a swing weight) must be horizontal and balanced, and its perforation centralized (Ibid.), or the spindle will not rotate properly (MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1982). Usually its bottom is flat for the same reason (Liu 1978). The same is true for use wear marks in the perforation and\or on the bottom: once the whorl was mounted on the spindle it remained a long time in the same position. Thus wear marks on it mean that it is a button or a bead. Also, the central hole should be large enough to hold the ralatively thick spindle, so a very small perforation means again a button or a bead (Davidson 1952: 172). A hole that was drilled from both sides and has a bi-conical (hourglass) shape is not suitable for good attachment of the spindle, although glue was also used (Liu 1978).

Spinning tools: spindle and whorls\buttons. The discussion of this enigmatic item should open with the question of nomenclature: The distaff is a long decorated rod on which the fibers are held during the spinning process, and which is usually held upwards in one hand or stuck in the belt. There is no solid proof of its use in ancient Israel. The spindle is a smaller rod on which a weight – the whorl – is mounted; the fiber is attached to it and when the spindle rotates (with the aid of the weight) the fiber is plaited into a string. Then it is wrapped up on the same spindle until a whole package is ready. All these items appear on ancient iconography (cf. Bíró 1994 Figs. 19-22; Sheffer and Druks 2000: 64-65). For a comparison between ancient and traditional items and self-experiencing see Crowfoot 1931.

These items tend to break in the weak point – the perforation. Many whorls\buttons were carved on a lathe and are therefore very symmetric and nicely decorated. The decoration, which naturally covers only the back, usually consists of grooves and circle-and-dot designs in many variations, of which only the main ones are illustrated here. Painted objects were probably buttons and not whorls, as the ancients used sometimes to paint the buttons on statues too (Elderkin 1928: 345). See also there (Ibid: 341) on the methods used to attach buttons to the clothes. The division used below of the whorls\buttons to types according to their shape or decoration may be typological but has rarely any chronological value (Davidson 1952: 297; Oldenburg 1969: 127).

The spindle is a rod about 150-250mm long, almost always equipped with a slot (see No. 57) or a twisted metal hook on its head for holding the fiber. Some scholars (like Davidson 1952: 172) claim that this phenomena is crucial but ethnographic comparisons show it is not. However without such a device there is no way to differentiate between a spindle and a rod.

Weaving tablet\belt divider. The weaving tablet used to weave bands and strips appear in two main shapes (Wild 1976: 173; Collingwood 1982: 8-30): 1. A series of elongated narrow tablets, each equipped with a hole in the center, mounted together in a bronze frame; 2. A square or triangular tablet made of cardboard, wood or bone, in which several holes were drilled, one in each corner and sometimes another one in the center for an additional thread or for inserting a rod with which the tablet was held (MacGregor 1985: 191). The warp threads or fibers passed through the holes and by bending the tablet or a series of them a space was created among the strings, through which the weft thread was transferred (Wild 1976: 173; Collingwood 1982: 8-30; Crowfoot 1924: 100 and Fig. 3). This is a very old technique which is still in use today. 25 similar wooden tablets, each equipped with four perforations and probably dated to the 4th-6th cent. were found in Egypt (Ibid.: 100).

The whorl (weight) is a very problematic item (Béal 1983a: 327). This is why the term whorl\button is often used in the literature when impossible to differentiate. This item could serve for other uses such as a decoration on clothes, gaming piece, bead, lid for a cosmetic box with a hole for the stick, inlay, etc. (see, among others, Davidson 1952 172ff, 296ff; Liu 1978; Ariel 1990: 121124; on similar items defined as buttons see Elderkin 1928). Most scholars agree that a light whorl served for spinning thin fibers like linen, while a heavy one or even two were needed for dealing with thick and strong fiber such as wool (Liu 1978; Brandl 1993: 237). Shamir and Beginski (1998: 54) have different definitions: a light whorl for short fibers like wool, and a heavy one for long fibers as linen (for exactly the opposite opinion see Crowfoot 1957: 399). In any case the ethnographic 22

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE The belt divider is an elongated piece in which several holes were drilled in a straight line. It served as part of a decorative band, belt or necklace which were made of several strings or laces carrying beads or other items. The divider made sure the strings do not interweave (Fitzhugh and Kaplan 1982: 23, 144; Ayalon 1999: 29, Fig. 25). A nice belt made in India from bone beads threaded on strings is equipped with several bone dividers to hold the strings in place (Pl. 4). It could also be used in a musical instrument to separate the strings (Hogarth 1908: 194, Pl. 37: 7-8).

itself so as to prevent it from being interwoven while the end of the tool was under operation or being transferred through the cloth. Such a method (somehow reminding the way the thread is passed through the needle in a home sewing machine) is suitable for the production of a coarse cloth or a net. In the Textile Museum at Barcelona, Spain, an exhibition on 2001 included a reconstruction of lace production technique. Wooden rods, very similar in shape and dimensions to the discussed bone items (except they are not hollow) were used there as ‘handles’ by which the threads tied to the lace were knitted (Pl. 5). Such items were also made of bone (Halstead and Middleton 1972: 61). The problem is that no lace is known from the discussed period (Roman-Byzantine) although it was already known to Rashi in France during the 11th cent. (Cattan 1997: 59 – ‘lacediz’). It may be just some similar technique, such as of knitting hairnets. Knitting napkins in the crouché style also begins with a hollow knitting needle equipped with a side opening (C. Arnon, pers. comm.).

The bobbin\fastener – a kind of button – was known at least since the Middle Bronze Age (Ariel 1990: 121, Fig. 9A: BI 19). The four objects found at Caesarea belong to the type in which the central part is narrower than the extremes. Some defined it as a bobbin – a reel on which thin threads were mounted for weaving or sewing (Goldman 1963: 385; MacGregor 1985: 183-185). However in this case they seem too small for that purpose, even for thin threads. Others suggested they were belt decorations, with bronze parallels (Béal 1983a: 237-238). Their definition as buttons (Petrie 1930: 13; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 587 – dumbbell button) seems most reasonable, and as such they are still in use today in coats, bags etc. (in Alaska – Fitzhugh and Kaplan 1982: 110, 130-133). They were attached to the cloth or leather by sewing around the central narrow part while the edges were interlocked in the loop on the other part.

Poplin (pers. comm.) claims that this item is a drinking or sniffing tube, probably more associated with liquid than with gas. The reason for drilling the outlet not in the end but on the side close to it is double-purposed: to avoid weakening of the tool end, and to avoid drinking or sniffing the remains left at the bottom of the container. The Eskimos used to sniff tobacco through a hollow decorated tube (Halstead and Middleton 1972: 68, 69: f). This object could also be used to take liquid samples from a vessel by inserting it in until it fills up, than removing it with a finger firmly closing the upper opening so the contains do not pour out; when it is put in the new container the finger is removed and the liquid will empty (for a Roman pottery vessel operated according to the same principle see Zevulun and Olenik 1978: 51). A bone “funnel” used to taste wine is mentioned in the Mishna (Kelim 2, 4) and the Tosephta (Kelim 2, 4, [Zuckermandel p. 570]), both of the Roman period (Sperber 1993: 123-125). Farmers in Cyprus still check the wine fermenting in huge jars – dolia – using a tube with a side opening, which is pushed inside through a small opening in the lid (P. Theophanis, Phini Museum, pers. comm.). This was an old habit in the Greek world (Sperber 1993: 125 note 574).

A bodkin. This short and solid point could be used in various ways: to fasten clothes (less logical based on its thickness, unless used with loops or holes made in advance); to stretch skins on a frame for cleaning; to punch leather or cloth; to prepare a net or a mat (ethnographic comparisons: Flayderman 1972: 226); to tie strings in a musical instrument; etc. Shuttle?. This is a very rare item, as shown by the few analogies quoted below, and difficult to define. At Hammat Gader it was defined as a pin or netting bobbin with no explanation. At Barcelona, Spain, it was described (with reserve and no comparison) as a shuttle used to pass the weft thread in a loom. In Salamis, Cyprus, the author thought it was a handle or a furniture baluster decoration but probably misunderstood it completely. He noted that signs of rust on the object testify that it was attached to a metallic part, but it seems to be just a coincidence. A thorough observation of the Caesarea broken items and the complete one from Hammat Gader with a microscope showed wear marks in the upper funnel-like end, of a kind that a stretched thread could leave on the soft bone. Based on these Dray (pers. comm.) concluded that it was a shuttle in which the thin thread (probably wrapped up around the grooved part of the body) was transferred through the inner space, pulled out via the side opening and then was used in some weaving, netting or tying process, perhaps together with another thread. The thread had to be pulled from a side opening and not from the edge

A third possibility of using this instrument is in medicinal treatment, for instance to drain extra liquids from the body, as a clyster, etc. Similar metal tools (fistula aenea) were found among doctors’ equipment, especially in their graves, but no such bone objects are known (Jackson 1986: 126, Fig. 3, 1990 Fig. 6; Künzl 1999 Taf. 21: 32). A small modern tool, amazingly reminding the bone one, is presently used to open obstructions in cows’ teats (Poplin, pers. comm.). The discussed bone object may have a medicinal use unfamiliar to us right now. This unique implement could also be used in music. Similar bronze objects of the 1st-2nd cent. found in England were defined as mouth-pieces of wind-instruments (Wangh and 23

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Goodburn 1972: 130, Fig. 40; Crummy 1992a: 168 No. 975, Fig. 5.25).

Greek pottery vessel shows a woman applying kohl on her eye using a needle-like tool equipped with an eye (Chavane 1975 Fig. 6e), which is another possible function of this object. The Babylonian Talmud (Shabath 60, 1) mentions a woman using a needle (with or without an eye) to treat her hair, as with a pin (Zevulun and Olenik 1978: 101). In Europe this assumption was already raised a long time ago, but mainly concerning the three-eyed needles found there in large numbers (unlike the situation at Caesarea), as sewing does not need three eyes. An opposed theory was that the eyes were needed for different kinds of thread (Chavane 1975: 103; Béal 1983a: 163). Thus the use of “needles” as hair or clothes pins (either for decorative purpose or for practical one – combining together pieces of clothing) was suggested, with a string or a thin and delicate chain passing through the eye and tied around the object to avoid it from slipping out (Bíró 1994 Fig. 11). Indeed, “needles” were found in Europe equipped with such a chain, which could also be used to attach a hair mantle (Ibid. Fig. 16; Maldre 2001: 21; Tamla and Maldre 2001 Fig. 16). Such a pin was found in a tomb in the Caucasus (Henschel-Simon 1938: 171). Another hint for the definition of the “needles” as pins emerges from their date. Most of these items found at Caesarea were dated to the Roman period – like the bone pins. If they were regular simple working tools one could expect to find them in later periods too.

Buckles for belts and other cloth or leather artifacts were usually made of metal (cf. Eger 2003), and those of ivory and bone probably imitate them. They are often rather elegant and decorated. Bone buckles tended to break near the hinges, where most of the pressure took place (MacGregor 1985: 103). It has not been proven that they are (only) military equipment. Needle. These 103 objects were included here due to our conservative mind, although many claim that all or most of them were pins (for the hair or the clothes), and the Caesarea finds seem to confirm it. A variety of the types found is shown and discussed below (for a typology according to the shape of the head and eye see Davidson 1952: 174; Bíró 1994: 48-49). Although in first glance it seems to be one of the easiest objects to identify, based on its similarity to metal needles, the research showed that it is more complicated. First of all, no persuasive typology of the differently shaped needles according to the various crafts they were involved in (textile sewing, plaiting [Kenyon 1957: 461], medicine [Milne 1976: 17, 76], etc.) was found, nor an explanation of the shape\use relationship (MacGregor 1985: 193; Verhagen 1993: 345; see also Béal 1983a: 163). In Caesarea, for instance, when a needle is equipped with two eyes the lower is always smaller than the upper one, while in most of the European finds the contrary happens. Secondly, during the Roman period metal needles largely replaced the bone ones, both in sewing and in medicine (Davidson 1952: 173; MacGregor 1985: 193; Künzl 1999 Taf. 21: 37-38; Uzel 1999 Taf. 26: 5-6). About 400 Early Roman metal needles were found at Magdalensberg, Austria, while the three eyed bone “needles” were defined there as hair pins (Gostenčnik 2001: 385, Fig. 5: 14-15). Thirdly, a close examination of the Caesarea needles showed that none of them bear use wear marks in and around the eye, supposedly caused by the thread (for the same conclusion see MacGregor 1985: 193) or on the shaft (because of the continuous rubbing with the cloth). On the contrary, the shaft was often intentionally left rough, a phenomena observed in pins (below), to avoid them of falling out of the hair or the clothes. Bone needles usually lack the typical depression located between the eye and the end of the head (known from metal needles), in which the thread was tied and so did not enlarge the hole made in the cloth (Dray, pers. comm.; compare, for instance, to Crummy 1983 Fig. 70: 1991, 1993; Manning 1985 Pl. 15: D16, 22, 25, 33; Boardman 1989 Pl. 31: 65-1 center).

The pins\needles are delicate items which break easily. The objects discussed here hint the original point was centralized, while a secondary one, made after it broke, was prepared with less care and usually was one-sided. Unlike many pins, none of the needles had a lathe indentation on the head, but it is not clear whether they were all handmade or their heads were so well worked and smoothed that the indentation disappeared. 57. Definition: Slotted spindle and a decorated whorl 6\M\66-120 Description and interpretation: A complete spindle – rod and weight. The rod is cylindrical and was probably made from the wall of a large bone. Its head is sawn straight. The lower end is missing. A slot was sawn diagonally upwards under the upper end, penetrating almost half the diameter of the stick, so as not to weaken it. The whorl is mounted under the slot. It is a little convex and the bottom is flat. It is decorated with circumferential low mouldings and grooves. Finding a complete implement like this is quite rare (see below) and it proves that at least some of these objects were indeed whorls. This is the only item of its type. The rod l. 65mm, d. 5mm, the whorl d. 34mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Acre, R, in a grave: Tzaferis 1986 Pl. 10 bottom left. France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a: 152-153, Pl. 27: 355-357, 1173. France, Baron, R: Béal 1984: 81, Pl. 16: 335. Spain, Barcelona, R, 1st-3rd cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 142 Fig. 7 left, 192 No.

Many of those “needles” have, as can be seen in the drawings, a relatively wide or thick head which would have no doubt caused a very large hole in the cloth, larger than the sewing could fix (Davidson [1952: 173] suggested that the thread was transferred through perforations made in advance). Some of the needle heads at Caesarea are worn out at the tip which mean that some work was done with them. A drawing on a 24

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 218. England, Southwark, R: MacGregor 1985: 185-187, Fig. 101: 2. Notes: Exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam. Wooden comparison, Muraba’at Cave (Judaean Desert), R, slotted: Benoit, Milik and de Vaux 1961: 43, Pl. 13: 8; The same, with a metal hook: Ibid.: 43, Pl. 13: 9.

nicely smoothed. The bottom is flat and decorated with two grooves (see section). The perforation is relatively large. On the top it is surrounded by a low moulding and its upper part is shaped like a funnel. The shoulder is convex and rounded, with a groove near the bottom. The edge is flat and thin, worn out in some spots. The object may also be a lid of a kohl box with a hole for the stick (Poplin, pers. comm.). Two items of this type were found. D. 35mm, t. 4mm, the hole d. 5.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Masada, ER 1st cent.: Yadin 1966: 145. Greece, Corinth, R 1st cent., button, ivory: Davidson 1952: 299, Pl. 123: 2519-2520, Fig. 67. France, Lyon, R, whorl: Sautot 1978: 61, Pl. 30: 6; R, 1st2nd cent., whorl: Béal 1983a: 327, Pl. 55: 1174. Notes: Liu Type H7 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

58. Definition: Button, plano-convex, undecorated 6\P\0082 Description and interpretation: Rudely handmade and undecorated button made from large Capo-femuri. The bottom is roughly worked and partly spongy. The top is unsmoothed and irregular. The hole is surrounded by a depression. The item was perhaps a button and not a whorl because its rude production made it unbalanced and as the hole is too small for the spindle. Parts of its perimeter are damaged. Six items like Nos. 58-59 were found. D. 39mm, t. 4mm, the hole d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: Large femur. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Liu Type G5 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

62. Definition: Whorl\button, rounded and grooved 6\P\0233 Description and interpretation: Delicate and light whorl\button with a spongy and little concave bottom. It was turned and well smoothed on a lathe. On the top the hole is surrounded by a moulding and beyond it there is a circumferential groove. The shoulder is convex-rounded, with another moulding and a groove in the bottom. The edge is a little rounded. This is the only item of its type. D. 28mm, t. 4mm, the hole d. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: Large femur? Locus date: Roman, 2nd-3rd cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 209, Taf. 19 No. 8916. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-2nd cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 191 No. 216. Notes: None.

59. Definition: Whorl\button, plano-convex, undecorated 6\S\5175 Description and interpretation: Undecorated handmade (?) whorl\button made from the wall of a thick bone, as attested by the slightly concave bottom. The top is convex and the shoulders rounded. The perforation was well drilled and is conical, meaning it was drilled from the top. Six items like Nos. 58-59 were found. D. 35mm, h. 5mm, the hole d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David, Stratum 6, Late H-ER, decorated button: Ariel 1990: 139, Fig. 20: BI 165. France, Lyon, R, whorl?: Béal 1983a: 339, Pl. 56: 1213-1216. Notes: Liu Type G5 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

63. Definition: Whorl\button, thick, moulded 6\S\33760 Description and interpretation: Rounded and relatively thick whorl\button, well made on a lathe. The bottom is flat and rather rough. At some stage small flakes were removed from the bottom’s perimeter, possibly in order to balance the object (which could prove it is a whorl). The top is well smoothed and the shoulders nicely polished. Three mouldings circling the perforation are emphasized by the wide grooves carved among them. Two items of this type were found. D. 29mm, t. 8mm, the hole d. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David, Stratum 6, Late H-ER, button, lathe-made: Ariel 1990: 139, Fig. 20: BI 166. Castra, B, from a grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 10: 2c. Notes: Corinth Profile XI (Davidson 1952 Fig. 68).

60. Definition: Whorl\button, convex, grooved 6\S\88286 Description and interpretation: Whorl\button of which only half is preserved. The bottom is flat, the top convex and low and the edges flat and thin. Decorated with two mouldings separated by a groove, circling the fairly large hole which was drilled from both directions. A natural small hole (nutrient foramen) in the edge proves that it was made from the wall of a cylindrical bone (compare: MacGregor 1985: 115, Fig. 64: 37). Three items of this type were found. D. 27mm, t. 4mm, the perforation d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-2nd cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 191 No. 215. Notes: Liu Type G1 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

64. Definition: Whorl\button, convex and decorated 6\S\20629 Description and interpretation: A rather common whorl\button. It is convex, with a low rounded shoulder. The bottom is flat and relatively rough, with scratches and grooves left on it. The top decoration includes

61. Definition: Whorl\button, low and convex 6\S\91401 Description and interpretation: Low convex whorl\button, undecorated but well made on a lathe and 25

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS (compare to Photos 1: 18, 2: 6).2 This proves that it is a button. Colored buttons are known from other countries. Two items of this type were found. D. 30mm, t. 8mm, the perforation d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David Stratum IIIG1, button: Ariel 1990: 139-140, Fig. 20: BI 168. Nessana, B\A, ivory: Colt 1962: 51, Pl. 21: 7. Hammat Gader, LB-A: Coen Uzzieli 1997: 448, Pl. I: 9. Hammat Tiberias, LB-A, different decoration: Johnson 2000: 84, Fig. 24: 42. Egypt, now in Hungary, whorl or loom weight [sic!], painted black: Török 1993: 69, Pl. 103: R 9; whorl, partly painted red, different decoration: Ibid.: 68, Pl. 103: R 7. Greece, Corinth, B: Davidson 1952: 301, Fig. 123: 2554. Notes: Liu Type G1 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

grooves around the perimeter and the rather large perforation, and six circle-and-dot designs between them. The top is a little worn out. Five items of this type were found. D. 37mm, t. 7mm, the hole d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER: Ben Dov 1982: 164 (center bottom); Geva 2003: 345, Pl. 13.1: B6. Masada, ER: Yadin 1966: 145. Gamla, ER: Gutman 1994: 149. Samaria, ER: Crowfoot 1957: 399, Fig. 92a: 19. Jerusalem, City of David, Stratum 5, R: Ariel 1990: 139, Fig. 20: BI 167. Dor, R: Stern 1994 Fig. 225. Castra, B, from a grave: Siegelmann in preparation, Figs. 10: 2a, 8. Horvat Eqev, Ramat Hanadiv: Sidi 2000: 183, Fig 7a, Pl. 3: 3 [the relevant text appears under Fig. 7b]. Hammat Tiberias, end of B-A, small: Johnson 2000: 84, Fig. 24: 41. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A4, 7th-12th cent., button?: Oldenburg 1969: 120, 128, Fig. 45: 8. Syria, Dura Europos, H-R: Matheson 1992 Fig. 16 bottom. Greece, Corinth, until 12th cent.: Davidson 1952: 301, Fig. 123: 2550. Notes: Liu Type G1 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

67. Definition: Button, convex, decorated and painted 6\A\0168 Description and interpretation: Convex\rounded button. The bottom is flat and smoothed. The perforation is surrounded on the top by a moulding and a groove. The decoration includes: strips of circle-and-dot designs in two dimensions (the outer larger than the inner ones, the lower one is not in line), stretching from beside the hole towards the lower perimeter. Each strip is bordered by two parallel lines. Between each couple of lines there is one circle-and-dot design, from which a line stretches upwards and terminates in a tiny depression. Strong red color of in-organic origin remained on the bottom, mainly in the shape of dense parallel lines, perhaps the impression of the cloth fibers. It seems probable that originally the whole button was painted. For the reasons why it is a button and not a whorl see above. This is the only item of its type. D. 25mm, t. 6mm, the hole d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Liu Type G1 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

65. Definition: Button, convex and decorated 6\S\18697-1 Description and interpretation: Convex thick button, a little asymmetrical – thicker on one side than on the other (proving it is a button). The bottom is not flat, as its edge is a little higher than the center. A natural concave stretch proves that the item was made from the wall of a cylindrical bone. It is smooth but a little spongy. Near the hole (on the bottom) four parallel incisions exist, two on each side (not shown in the drawing), perhaps to mark where it should be drilled. The top is better smoothed. The decoration includes two circumferential grooves around the perforation and two in the perimeter. Between them are circle-and-dot designs in three groups of two or three, with irregular intervals among them. Some of them overlap, showing that in some cases the inner design was first engraved and in others – the outer one. Sometimes they even cross the outer grooves, which were made beforehand. This is the only item of its type. D. 33mm, t. 8mm, the hole d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, R: Bagatti and Milik 1958 Fot. 128: 10. Yugoslavia, end of 4th-5thI cent., general similarity: Petković 1995: 90-9185, Taf. 19: 4. Notes: Liu Type G1 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

68. Definition: Whorl\button, fine engraving decoration 6\A\0256 Description and interpretation: Flat whorl\button with rounded shoulders. The bottom is flat and very smooth. The top is also well smoothed and decorated in a special technique of very shallow and delicate engraving, which is rather difficult to see. It consists of four branches bearing leaves, which stretch from the central perforation towards the perimeter. Between each couple of branches a bow or two were incised near the edges. This is the only item of its type. D. 35mm, t. 4mm, the hole d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine-Early Arab, 6th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Fustat, “Coptic”, no bows, whorl, bone?: Crowfoot 1931 Pl. 44 3rd row, 3rd

66. Definition: Button, convex, decorated and painted 6\S\0626 Description and interpretation: Convex\rounded button, only the half of which remained. The bottom is flat. The perforation was drilled from both sides. The top is decorated with two grooves around the hole and circleand-dot alternating designs, four of each type: a large one (d. 8mm) of four-circles-and-dot and a group of 4-5 small (d. 3.5mm) designs, some of which overlap the others. The whole item was painted by strong red color of inorganic origin, which survived mainly on the bottom

2

26

The objects were checked by Prof. Zvi Koren of the Shenkar College of Textile Technology and Fashion, Ramat Gan. See Porath and Ilani 1993.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Notes: Liu Type G13 (Liu 1978 Table 1). Corinth Profile VIII (Davidson 1952 Fig. 68).

from left. Notes: Liu Type G1 (Liu 1978 Table 1). This decoration technique appears also on three boxes (Nos 137-138).

72. Definition: Whorl\button, tall and decorated 7\A\0323 Description and interpretation: Small but relatively tall whorl\button in the shape of a truncated cone. The bottom is flat and smoothed with a shallow depression around the perforation, probably resulting from the lathe work. The shoulder is convex\rounded. A projecting moulding surrounds the hole with a step at its bottom. A groove runs around the perimeter. The shoulder decoration includes circle-and-dot designs with two parallel diagonal lines between each couple, sometimes with one perpendicular line. Six items of this type were found. D. 13mm, t. 8mm, the hole d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Muraba’at Cave, R, button: Benoit, Milik and de Vaux 1961: 44, Fig. 12: 4, Pl. 14: 7. Hammat Gader, B, 4th-6th cent.: Coen Uzzieli 1997: 449, Pl. 1: 11. Tel Yoqne’am, A: Agadi 1996: 236, Pl. 19.1: 2, Fig. 19.1: 2. Egypt, Fustat, “Coptic”, whorl, bone?: Crowfoot 1931 Pl. 44 2nd raw, 2nd from left and 2nd from right. Egypt, now in Hungary, whorl: Török 1993: 68, Pl. 102: R 2. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 208, Taf. 19 No. 8909. Greece, Corinth, B until 11th cent.: Davidson 1952: 300, Fig. 123: 2544-2547. Notes: Liu Type E1 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

69. Definition: Whorl\button, convex, incised 6\S\53241 Description and interpretation: Small convex whorl\button with rounded shoulders. The bottom is flat and bears many striations. In a later stage three small flakes, more or less evenly situated around the perimeter, were removed, probably in order to balance it. If so, it proves that this is a whorl. The top is very smooth, and very shallow circumferential lathe circles can be seen on it. It is decorated with radial incised long lines, with two bows between each couple in the center (spider’s web design) and short grooves around the perimeter. This is the only item of its type. D. 29mm, t. 6mm, the perforation d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, pre-12th cent., painted red, Profile III: Davidson 1952: 300, Fig. 123: 2541. Notes: Liu Type G5 (Liu 1978 Table 1). 70. Definition: Whorl\button, convex, incised 6\A\0807 Description and interpretation: Convex whorl\button with rounded shoulders. The bottom is flat and partly spongy. A low and wide moulding bordered by a groove surrounds the perforation on the top. Couples of asymmetrical crossed lines were incised by hand on the shoulder. Each two are parallel and were probably engraved by a tool equipped with two points. Part of the edge is missing. Five items of this type were found. D. 29mm, t. 6mm, the hole d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 9th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Liu Type G5 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

73. Definition: Button, convex and decorated 7\A\1308 Description and interpretation: Convex button with rounded shoulder. Only half of it remained. The bottom is flat and smooth. The perforation is very shiny; probably use wear, which means it is a button (Dray, pers. comm.). It is surrounded on the top with a moulding. The shoulder is decorated with 4-5 groups of small circle-and-dot designs arranged around a large one, but not always in a complete circle due to bad planning. Between each couple of designs run pairs of parallel lines, diagonally crossing each other. They were probably engraved with a double-pointed tool. Two items of this type were found. D. 25mm, t. 8mm, the hole d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

71. Definition: Whorl\button, conical, grooved 7\S\54687 Description and interpretation: Conical whorl\button with an asymmetrical triangular section. The bottom is very smooth and a little spongy, with circumferential projecting and sunken lathe strips. The top is well smoothed. The lathe-made decoration consists of asymmetrical grooves (a failure in operating the lathe?) around the perforation and the perimeter. A small part of the edge is missing. This is the only item of its type. D. 32mm, t. 10mm, the hole d. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Beth Shan: Fitzgerald 1931: 44, Pl. 40: 24. Jerusalem, Middle Ages, button: Tushingham 1985: 151, Fig. 68: 9. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A1-3, end of 12th-14th cent. and earlier: Oldenburg 1969: 118, Fig. 44: 10-14. Hungary, Budapest, 1st-2ndI cent., cosmetic box lid: Bíró 1994: 98, 127, Pl. 52: 448. England, Portchester, R: MacGregor 1985: 185-187, Fig. 101: 7.

74. Definition: Button, convex, decorated with birds 7\A\0331 Description and interpretation: Convex button, a little asymmetric in section. The bottom is smooth with very shallow circumferential lathe marks. The top bears a groove around the perforation and another one in the perimeter. The decoration is especially nice: three large birds standing around the shoulder, facing left. Two of them are so close that one’s head touches the other’s body. Their bodies are composed of tiny circle-and-dot designs. Each bird has a full and rounded body of a 27

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS partridge, but the artist perhaps meant to illustrate peacocks and the rounded shape of the back could be the spread tail of the male. The neck is low and its lower part is thicker than the upper one. The head is also made of a small circle-and-dot design to which a tiny triangular beak was added. Two small-incised feet are barely seen under the body. The two adjacent birds are separated by a dot. On each side of the single bird a tiny bird was incised. It was made of 2-3 circle-and-dot designs plus short lines representing beak, feet and tail. One of those birds is clear while the other is very schematic. They remind the “space phobia” known from Greek art, which caused the artist to fill in gaps even if unnecessary to the scene. Although the final result is nice, the small details leave the impression of rather provincial performance, like the absence of pre-planning of the space, the differences between the birds’ dimensions, etc. This is the only item of its type. D. 25mm, t. 9mm, the perforation d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 9th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Patrich’s expedition found an exact parallel to this item made of stone. There is little doubt that both were made in the same workshop or even by the same artisan, at least copying the same prototype. This theory adds to the issue of craftsmen working with different raw materials in the same workshop (see Chapter VIII). Morphological comparison to the birds, Egypt, c. 600, carved in open work on wooden combs: Ägypten Schätze: 189, No. 181a,d; Friedman 1989: 149, No. 59.

perforation is surrounded on the top by a projecting moulding and a groove. Another groove was incised around the edge. The shoulder decoration consists of four couples of parallel, vertical lines, each of them enclosing two circle-and-dot designs, one above the other, with two dots between them. Between each couple of this design exists a larger circle-and-dot motif, encircled by a trapezoid shape, rudely and carelessly made of three lines. Part of the edge is missing, looking as if it was removed by a knife. Three items of this type were found. D. 19mm, t. 13mm, the hole d. 3.3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 77. Definition: Whorl\button, thick and flat 7\P\0222 Description and interpretation: Whorl\button shaped like a thick, flat disk with a somewhat trapezoid section – the upper part wider than the lower one. The bottom is not completely flat or horizontal, although many circumferential marks prove it was made on a lathe. The item may be the work of an inexperienced worker, who did not hold the engraver stabilized. The side is very smooth and so is the top, which is decorated with two grooves of different depth around the perimeter. Today it is fairly eroded. It could be a lid of a cosmetic box with a hole for the stick. Its dimensions, however, and the smooth side weaken this theory. It could also be a bead. Four items of this type were found. D. 23mm, t. 4mm, the hole d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David, Stratum 8, P-H, buttons, No. 160 of ivory: Ariel 1990: 139, Fig. 20: BI 159, 160, 162-163. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 568, 581, Fig. 20: 70. Notes: Liu Type H8 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

75. Definition: Whorl\button, convex and decorated 7\A\0161 Description and interpretation: Small, convex and relatively tall whorl\button. The bottom is flat. The perforation is surrounded on the top by a wide flat moulding. The shoulder is decorated with three triangles, their bases adjacent to the hole and the point – to a circleand-dot design incised on the edge. The triangles, composed of two parallel lines, were engraved with a pointed tool. Each one contains three tiny circle-and-dot designs. The scene looks from top as a flower with open petal leaves, with the perforation representing the stamen or pistil. Between each couple of triangles a larger circleand-dot design was incised. This is the only item of its type. D. 18mm, t. 9mm, the hole d. 5.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Hellenistic? Morphological analogies: Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, non-identical: Strzygowski 1904: 208, Taf. 19 N. 8906; Gayet 1902: 55, 2nd from right. Greece, Corinth, 14th cent., non-identical: Davidson 1952: 301, Pl. 124: 2567. Afganistan, Islamic period: Liu 1978 Fig. 13. Notes: Liu Type E2 (Ibid. Table 1).

78. Definition: Whorl\button with wavy section 7\S\89213-4 Description and interpretation: Light and thin whorl\button with a wavy or wings-like section. It was accurately carved on a lathe. The perforation is fairly large and surrounded on the top by a moulding. Opposite mouldings and grooves were engraved on a lathe on the top and the bottom – moulding opposite groove and vice versa. Part of the edge is missing. Four items of this type were found. D. 30mm, t. 3.5mm, the hole d. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Horvat ‘Eleq, ER?, disk: KolYaakov 2000: 491, Pl. 7: 16. Jordan, Petra, inlay: Murray 1940: 15, No. 8. France, Autun, R, disk: Sautot 1978: 34, Pl. 9: 5. Notes: Liu Type H5 (approximately) (Liu 1978 Table 1).

76. Definition: Whorl\button, convex and decorated 7\A\0414 Description and interpretation: Medium-sized, convex and relatively tall whorl\button. The bottom is flat. The

79. Definition: Whorl\button, disk-shaped 7\P\0161 Description and interpretation: Part of a whorl\button 28

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE shaped like a small disk. A depression was carved in the bottom center and two grooves around the perimeter. The hole is surrounded on the top by a thin rim, a groove and a depression. The edge is a little thicker than the rest. The item broke near the perforation and more than its half is missing. It was fairly light and perhaps served for spinning light fibers (silk?). It could also be a gaming piece or a bead. Three items of this type were found. D. 24mm, t. 2.5mm, the hole d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Castra, B, 2 in a grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 10: 9b. Notes: Liu Type H5 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Liu Type G1 (Liu 1978 Table 1). 83. Definition: Button, lentil-like and asymmetric 7\A\1249 Description and interpretation: Thickened, convex and asymmetric button with a lentil-like section – the bottom is not flat but rises towards the edge. The perforation was drilled from both sides and thus has a bi-conical section. The top is smooth and undecorated. The hole is surrounded by a funnel-like depression, a moulding and a groove. The edge is a little damaged. Three items of this type were found. D. 35mm, t. 14mm, the hole d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 7th cent. Morphological analogies: Holland, Valkenburg, R: Verhagen 1993 Fig. 5: 1. Notes: Not checked by eye-sight. Liu Type G1? (Liu 1978 Table 1).

80. Definition: Button?, asymmetric, grooved side 7\P\0176 Description and interpretation: Round asymmetric item, thicker in one side than in the other and a little oblique. The bottom is rude and unfinished, as if broken. The perforation is relatively large. The top is smooth. A groove was incised around the side. It certainly is not a whorl, which must be balanced, but could be a cosmetic box lid, bead, etc, or simply an unfinished object. This is the only item of its type. D. 24mm, t. 5mm, the hole d. 7.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

84. Definition: Button, lentil-shaped and grooved 7\P\0163 Description and interpretation: Thickened, lentilshaped and asymmetric button. The bottom is not flat but rises towards the edge. It is very worn out of use, especially in one part of the perimeter and around the edge. The top too is asymmetric, thicker in one part. It is decorated with two groups of grooves, one around the perforation and the other in the perimeter. The outer groove disappears in some points because of use wear. The shape and the wear prove that it is a button and not a whorl (Poplin, pers. comm.). This is the only item of its type. D. 30-32mm, t. 9mm, the hole d. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 2nd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

81. Definition: Whorl\button, disk-shaped 7\A\0117 Description and interpretation: Whorl\button shaped like a flat disk with rounded shoulders. The bottom is flat and roughly smoothed, with remains of the spongy layer. The top is smooth, with shallow circumferential lathe marks near the edge. The handmade decoration is very shallow and asymmetric. It includes four couples of incised bows around the perforation which create a very schematic cross. Additional grooves can be observed. The thickness of this item is uneven so it might be a button and not a whorl. This is the only item of its type. D. 29mm, t. 3.5mm, the hole d. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 7th cent. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Mount Nebo, B-A, unfinished - the perforation was only marked: Saller 1941: 304 No. 4, Pl. 134: 1st raw 2nd center. Notes: Liu Type H5 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

85. Definition: Button?, thickened and smooth 7\P\0108 Description and interpretation: Button shaped like a thickened and asymmetric disk. The bottom is fairly rough because of the spongy layer and lack of enough smoothing. Filing marks run from one edge to the other. The undecorated top is better smoothed. Shallow lathe marks remained on it. On both sides the outer part is oblique towards the edge and the center thicker. The asymmetry proves that it is a button, bead or lid. This is the only item of its type. D. 20mm, t. 5mm, the hole d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 6th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

82. Definition: Button, small and asymmetric 7\S\72093 Description and interpretation: Part of a circular item, very asymmetric in thickness. Sawing marks can be seen on the bottom. The top is well smoothed. The section of the perforation shows that it was drilled from top. The object is unevenly sooted and was probably near fire. It is not balanced and was therefore defined as a button. Three items of this type were found. D. 19mm, t. 5mm, the hole d. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman.

86. Definition: Button, small lentil-like and smoothed 7\P\0141-2 Description and interpretation: Small lentil-shaped and smoothed button with asymmetric section. The bottom is very smooth near the edge, with remains of the spongy layer. Besides the central perforation a smaller one was 29

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Description and interpretation: Elongated and flat tablet, elliptical in section (i.e. the sides are rounded) and narrowing in one end. It is rather well smoothed. Identical holes were drilled along its center, but not in a straight line. Both ends are broken. It may also be an inlay or a decoration. This is the only item of its type. L. 37mm, w. 11mm, t. 3mm, the holes d. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Israel: Ayalon 1999: 29, Fig. 25. Israel: Shamir and Beginski 1998: 62. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A3, end of 12th-13thI cent., furniture mount, 8 larger holes: Oldenburg 1969: 110-111, Fig. 43: 7. England, R: Brock and Mackworth Young 1949: 25. England, R: Wild 1976: 173. Notes: None.

drilled near the edge. The undecorated top is very smooth. It is obviously not a whorl, but the purpose of the side hole is unclear. May be a small decorative element was attached there. This is the only item of its type. D. 19mm, t. 4mm, holes d. 4 and 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 6th-7th cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David, Stratum 7, H, button, ivory: Ariel 1990: 139, Fig. 20: BI 161. Jerusalem, ER, button: Geva 2003: 345, Pl. 13.1: B4. Notes: Liu Type H9 (Liu 1978 Table 1). 87. Definition: Button? 7\P\0167 Description and interpretation: Large undecorated and asymmetric object. The bottom is flat in the center but rises towards the edge, thus it is thicker in the center. A shallow funnel-like depression surrounds the perforation on the top. The shoulder slants towards the edge, where it is lined with a groove. The item broke along the hole and almost half is missing. It might be a cosmetic box lid with a hole for the stick. Two items of this type were found. D. 50mm, t. 8mm, the hole d. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Not checked by eye-sight. Liu Type G5 (Liu 1978 Table 1).

90-91. Definition: Fastener 8\S\53441; 82233 Description and interpretation: Two items, identical in shape and use but with small differences in size and decoration. The object is small, its central part is thinner and completely cylindrical, while both side parts are shaped like a truncated cone (in No. 91 they are grooved), with each narrow end turned outside. This part ends with a circular head; in No. 90 one is flattened and the other thicker, while in No. 91 the ends are flat and divided from the cones by mouldings and grooves. Both objects have a lathe indentation on one end while the other end is sawn (straight in No. 90 while in the other the outer part was cut on the lathe and the center broken leaving a scar). It means that several items were made on a lathe on the same rod and only later separated from each other. Both items are smoothed. These are probably fasteners. Four items of this type were found. No. 90: L. 34mm, d. 9mm. No. 91: L. 21mm, d. 5.5-6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine (both). Morphological analogies: Dor, R: Stern 1994 Fig. 225. Castra, B, 2 from grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 10: 2d. Jordan, Mt. Nebo, B-A, for small furniture (identified by photograph only): Saller 1941: 304 No. 11, Pl. 134: 1 bottom, 5th. Syria, Tell Nebi Mend, H-R: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 1f. Turkey, Tarsus, Middle Iron Age: Goldman 1963: 381-382, Pl. 178: 28-29. Greece, Corinth, 14th cent., 5 from grave, buttons: Davidson 1952: 302, Pl. 124: 2589. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thIIbeginning of 5th cent., toggle: Henig 1984: 86, 191, Fig. 63: 68-70; dumbbell button: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 569, 582, Fig. 20: 72-73. France, Lyon, R, 18: Sautot 1978: 62-63, Pl. 29: 6; R end of 2nd (745) until 11th cent., belt decoration or bridle peg?: Béal 1983a: 237-238, Pl. 41: 744-745; belt decoration: Béal 1984: 61, Pl. 11: 90. Notes: No. 91 was found with a lot of small finds, including several mirrors. Wooden comparison, Egypt: Whitcomb 1979 Pl. 70: n. Bronze comparisons: Elgavish 1994 Fig. 128; Béal 1983a: 237.

88. Definition: Weaving tablet? 8\M\55-262 Description and interpretation: Square and flat tablet made from a flat bone. The spongy layer situated between two solid layers can be observed in its sides. The bottom remained rough but the top was smoothed. Five holes were drilled in the tablet – one in each corner and one in the center. One of the corner holes was drilled only from the bottom and thus its diameter is smaller in the top (see section). Unfinished? This assumption is strengthened by the fact that the holes’ perimeters are not worn out of work. The tablet is not a real square, its production is lousy, its thickness is not even and today it is also a little bent. Even if the object was meant to serve as a weaving tablet (Bíró, pers. comm.) it was probably never finished and never used. It might also be a rough inlay. This is the only item of its type. L. 50mm, w. 48mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle (?) scapula. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Czechoslovakia, Starom Meste, 9th cent., from bone workshop, two tablets with 5 unworn holes: Collingwood 1982: 25, Pl. 6. Holland, Maastricht, 6th-7th cent.?, antler weaving tablet, 4 worn holes: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 45, 71, Fig. 29: 1-2. Germany or England, R, bone or metal, 4 holes: Ferdière 1986: 27-28, Fig. 3. England?, Friesland, R 1st cent., 5 holes: Collingwood 1982: 24. England, R, 6 holes, decorated: McWhirr 1982 Fig. 13. Ireland, Dublin, 11th-13th cent., 6 tablets, one with 5 holes: MacGregor 1985: 191. Notes: Exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam.

92. Definition: Brooch 8\A\1382 Description and interpretation: Pointed cylindrical brooch, perhaps imitating the shape of a Roman dagger

89. Definition: Weaving tablet or belt divider? 8\P\0107 30

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE (G. Stiebel, pers. comm.). The round head is thicker than the body and has a large and deep lathe indentation on the top. Under it there is a narrower neck on two mouldings. The upper part of the shaft and the head were made and smoothed on a lathe, while the lower section was roughly cut and intentionally left unsmoothed. The point is blunt, possibly of use wear. Such an item is usually defined as a brooch or pin for holding a garment, which suits its rough lower part, meant to avoid slipping out. Judging by its diameter it was probably used through previously made loops or perforations. It could also serve as a peg, for example to tie hides while being dried and cleaned, to stretch warp threads in a loom or strings in a musical instrument. This is the only item of its type. L. 48mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Tiberias, R-B: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 30. Nessana, B-A, pin or – preferably – peg: Colt 1962: 52, Pl. 21: 10. Egypt, A-Tur, kohl stick: Kawatoko 1995 Pl. 38: 4, 1996 Pl. 41: 11. Cyprus, Kourion, LR (365 CE), 200 such unfinished brooches found in a room in the market, used according to the locals for lace work [but were supposed not to be existing in that period]: Soren 1988: 47, 53. Greece, Corinth, LR-B, non-identical, similar to a modern lace perforator, but it is not clear if used for that purpose: Davidson 1952: 174, 177, Pl. 79: 1263. Yugoslavia, 6th cent.: Petković 1995: 107, Taf. 41: 1. France, Alésia, R, peg\stopper: Sautot 1978: 28, Pl. 6: 8-10. France, Lyon, R, non-identical: Béal 1983a: 144, Pl. 42: 342. England, Verulamium, end of 3rd cent.: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 73, Fig. 31: 274. Notes: Ethnographic comparison from North America, a bodkin used to pass the thread, to make nets or mats and to punch thick cloth: Flayderman 1972: 226.

wall. For the object’s possible uses see the introduction above. The dimensions of the complete example from Hammat Gader are: l. 151mm, the hole l. 3mm, w. 2mm. The Caesarea objects: No. 93: l. 75mm, d. 12mm; No. 94: l. 70mm, d. 11mm; No. 95: l. 40mm, d. 14mm, worn and covered with patina; No. 96 (probably the central part of the largest example of this kind): l. 40mm, d. 16mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 93 – Roman, 1st-2nd cent.; 95-96 – Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Hammat Gader, LB-A, complete, pin or netting bobbin: Coen Uzzieli 1997: 448, Pl. 1: 2. Shiqmona, B?, in the Ein Dor Museum, very thin, only the upper part. Cyprus, Salamis, H-R, only the upper part, with rust remains, unknown use [published upside down; all parallels refer to wrong objects]: Chavane 1975: 50, Pls. 16: 137, 62: 137. Spain, Barcelona, R, complete, shuttle (Lanzadera, radius): Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 142, Fig. 6 top, 190 No. 213. Notes: None. 97. Definition: Buckle 8\S\30082 Description and interpretation: Belt buckle of the Dshaped type, made from the wall of a large cylindrical bone as shown by its concave bottom, which bears vertical planing marks. The top is smooth. The front part is rounded, with a groove running along the edge. An elongated depression in its center, lined on both sides with grooves creating a triangular shape, was aimed to receive the tongue. The shoulders are rounded. The central part, whose right wing is missing, is decorated with three mouldings separated by grooves. The hole for the tongue’s metal axle is preserved on the left side. On the right (broken) side only the end of the parallel and longer hole can be seen. The rear section has the shape of an upside down L; the whole right side and half of the left one are missing. It seems that the buckle was attached to the belt in its rear part, equipped with two parallel arms. The other end of the belt passed through the elliptic space, where the tongue was inserted into the belt hole. It is not clear whether it is military equipment. Another buckle of the same general shape was found. L. 35mm, w. 35mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, R: Bagatti and Milik 1958 Fot. 128: 11. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A1, 14th cent.: Oldenburg 1969: 130, Fig. 49: 1. France, Lyon, R esp. 1st cent., non-identical, military object: Béal 1983a: 255, 381, Pl. 44: 1341. England, London, R: Smith 1859 Pl. 34 No. 9. England, Goltho, Middle Ages, with rectangular tablet in rear: MacGregor 1985: 105, Fig. 60: J. Notes: Bronze comparisons: Béal 1983a: 381-382, n. 4; Metal analogies, Jordan, B: Eger 2003.

93-96. Definition: Shuttle? 8\S\28201; 1947; P\0123; 0021 Photo 1:1 Description and interpretation: A hollow cylindrical item, with one part (called below “upper” although it is not sure) thicker and carved and the other (“lower”) cylindrical, narrower and smooth. At least 14 such objects were found at Caesarea, varying a little in small details. Only the upper – thicker and stronger – part survived in them, while the lower thin tubes disappeared. The head is a relatively wide cylinder, always decorated with thin grooves. Inside it is funnel-shaped with one (Nos. 93-94) or two (No. 95) slanting or concave steps. The funnel opens in the bottom to a cylindrical hollow tube, closed at the end. On the outside the upper section consists of several lathe-turned parts: under the wider head there is always a narrow neck, usually cylindrical but sometimes widening at the top (No. 96). Then there is a thickenedrounded part (No. 93) or another cylindrical wider section, carved as one piece, as two different steps (No. 94) or as two mouldings separated by a groove (Nos. 95-96), under which comes the rounded part. The item is smoothed. According to the two whole objects found (see below) the narrow end is closed, rounded and a little thicker than the tube. Near it an elliptical elongated opening was cut in the

98. Definition: Decorated buckle 8\M\55-429 Description and interpretation: Decorated buckle. The bottom is fairly smooth but some sawing marks can be seen on it. The front part is circular. There is a T31

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS R?: Barrett 1998: 311, Fig. 6: 111. Cyprus, Salamis, R 2nd3rd cent: Chavane 1975: 104, Pls. 30: 315, 65: 315. Greece, Corinth, R (1253 2nd cent.): Davidson 1952: 174, 177, Pl. 78: 1253, 1259. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 2nd-middle 3rd cent.,: Bíró 1987 Fig. 12: 99. England, York, Middle Ages, pin-beater: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1967, Fig. 923: 6687. Spain, Barcelona, R 4th cent., 2: Miró Alaix 2001: 124 Nos. 27-28. Notes: None.

shaped space in its center with an additional front arm (creating together a cross), carved only half through, to receive the buckle tongue. On both sides of the lower arm of the T are two holes for the metal axle of the tongue (not preserved). The round part is decorated on the top with four circle-and-dot designs and tiny dots. The central rectangular section is decorated – in addition to the above – with short grooves on its sides. The rear part is circular and smaller than the front one. A small hole was drilled from side to side through the narrow “neck” created between it and the rectangular section. This part is decorated with three engraved concentric circles and a deep depression, caused by the point of the center-bit, in the center, and short grooves around the edges. A projection with rectangular section and a small hole running from side to side makes the rear part. It broke along the hole so it is not clear how it terminated. It seems that the two rear holes served to attach the buckle to the belt in sewing or with metal axles, while the other, narrow end of the belt passed through the horizontal arm of the T, where the tongue was inserted in its hole. This is the only item of its type. L. 50mm, w. 25mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam. Bronze parallel, Turkey, Antioch, B: Kondoleon 2000: 125, No. 14; Metal analogies, Jordan, B: Eger 2003.

101. Definition: Needle, triangular head, large round eye 9\S\74293 Description and interpretation: Upper part of a needle with a triangular head from front and rectangular in section. The eye is round and relatively large. The shaft is flattened-elliptical in section. It could be used for plaiting, and the pointed head could take part in the work. Four items of this type were found. L. 54mm, w. 5mm, t. 2mm, the eye d. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Samaria-Sebaste, R? (only the head shape): Kenyon 1957: 461, Fig. 114: 44. Nahef, LR 3rd-4th cent., from tomb: Sussman 1982 Pl. 12: 3 (7 from right). Meiron, Stratum V, B: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.20: 25-26. Sepphoris, B?: Yeivin 1937: 33, Pl. 1 Fig. 2. Yugoslavia, 4th-5th cent.: Petković 1995: 98, Taf. 18: 6. Holland, Maastricht, 5th cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 45, 74, Fig. 29: 4. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 26, Pl. 2: 14. France, Les Bolards, R: Ibid.: 41, Pl. 19: 6-7, 11, 14. England, Colchester, R onward, painted green like certain pins: Crummy 1983: 65, Fig. 70: 1959. Notes: None.

99. Definition: Buckle tongue 8\S\27784 Description and interpretation: A well-smoothed item with a wide, rounded rear end. Sawing marks remained on the top, bottom and parts of the sides, proving that most of it was unseen. In the rear end, but off-center, there is a hole. From the rounded section a curved taillike piece projects, which narrows towards the broken end. This was probably a buckle tongue, and the hole was for the metal axle. Two items of this type were found. L. 25mm, d. 10mm, the hole d. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman, 1st cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

102. Definition: Needle, pointed head, 8-shaped eye 9\P\0169 Description and interpretation: Complete needle with a pointed head whose end is truncated from front and flattened in section. The eye is elongated and 8-shaped as it consists of two holes drilled close to each other and then united by sawing the separating partition. The point is centralized, blunt and rather thick, so the needle probably served for rough work. Covered with patina. Two items of this type were found. L. 125mm, w. 4mm, t. 3mm, each hole in the eye d. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman, 1st cent. BCE-2nd cent. CE. Morphological analogies: Samaria-Sebaste, R: Kenyon 1957: 461, Fig. 114: 45-46. Castra, B, from grave, pin: Siegelmann in preparation, Fig. 8: 1. Greece, Corinth, R 2nd cent.?: Davidson 1952: 174, 177, Pl. 78: 1257. Hungary, Gorsium, probably 2nd-4th cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 22: 195; 4th cent., sharper, for leather?: Ibid.: 48, Fig. 32: 293-294, 296; Bíró 1994: 102, Pl. 60: 517-518. Switzerland, R 1st-3rd cent.: Deschler-Erb 2001 Figs. 6: 2929, 7: 996. France, Nîmes, R?: Béal 1984: 44-45, Pl. 7: 155. Spain, Barcelona, R 2nd-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 194 Nos. 239-240. Notes: None.

100. Definition: Needle, rounded head, large round eye 9\P\0210 Description and interpretation: Relatively large and thick needle, very bright in color. The head is rounded from front and a little flattened in section. The eye is round, rather large and well drilled. The point is missing. Served probably for rough sewing. 58 items of this type were found – the most common needle at Caesarea. L. 125mm, w. 7mm, t. 5mm, the eye d. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 6th cent. Morphological analogies: Horvat Shema’, R-B: Meyers, Kraabel and Strange 1976: 103-107, Pl. 8.8. 26. Sepphoris, B?: Yeivin 1937: 33, Pl. 1 Fig. 2. Castra, B, 9 in a grave, pin: Siegelmann in preparation, Fig. 8: 2. Jordan, Petra, 32

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 103. Definition: Needle, conic head, 8-shaped eye 9\A\0085 Description and interpretation: Short complete needle with a conic head whose end is even sharper than the point. The head is worn out and shiny and was perhaps in some use. The shaft is smooth. The eye is elongated, 8shaped and not parallel to the item’s axle. The point is blunt, not centralized and very worn out. By its shape and the length of the needle it seems that this is a secondary point, made after the first broke. Three items of this type were found. L. 72mm, d. 3.5mm, the eye each hole d. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Cyprus, Salamis, R 2nd-3rd cent.: Chavane 1975: 104, Pls. 30: 317, 65: 317. Hungary, Gorsium, 2ndI cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 9: 49-50, 52; probably 2nd-4th cent.: Ibid.: Fig. 22: 196, 198. Hungary, Syrmium, 3rd-4th cent.: Saranovic-Svetek 1980: 132, Fig. 3: 6. Yugoslavia, end of 4th-5thI cent.: Petković 1995: 98, Taf. 18: 5. France, Lyon, R esp. 2nd cent.: Béal 1983a: 164, Pl. 31: 395. France, Orange, R?: Béal 1984: 44, Pl. 7: 152. France, R: Barbier 1992: 124, Pl. 91: 545. England, York: MacGregor 1985 Fig. 101: 25. England, Verulamium, R beginning of 2nd cent.: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 73, Fig. 31: 280. England, Colchester, R and 2nd cent. respectively: Crummy 1983: 65, Fig. 70: 1963, 1974. Spain, Barcelona, R 2nd-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 194 Nos. 236-237. Notes: None.

the needle (if it is such) was used for rough sewing, but it could also serve as a pin with a hole to tie it (Bíró 1987: 48). Eleven items of this type were found. L. 80mm, w. 6mm, t. 4mm, each hole in the eye d. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman, 1st-2nd cent. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, ER 1st cent., smaller eye: Davidson 1952: 174, 176, Pl. 78: 1249. Hungary, Gorsium, 2ndI cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 9: 54; probably 2nd-4th cent.: Ibid. Fig. 22: 197; 4th cent.: Ibid. Fig. 28: 247-249; end of 2nd-middle 3rd cent.: Ibid. Fig. 18: 162. Hungary, Szőny, R-LR?: Bíró 1994: 101, Pl. 59: 501. Yugoslavia, ER 1st cent.: Petković 1995: 95-96, Taf. 17: 5, 9, 10. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 25, Pl. 2: 11. France, Les Bolards, R: Ibid.: 41, Pl. 19: 5. France, Lyon, R 1st-5th cent.: Béal 1983a: 170-171, Pl. 31: 430. Holland, Valkenburg, R: Verhagen 1993: 354, Fig. 6: 18. England, York, post-1080, pin: MacGregor 1985: 120, Fig. 64: 37; 1995: 416, Fig. 157: 1.20; needle: Ibid. Fig. 101: 24. England, Colchester, 1st-3rd\4th cent.: Crummy 1983: 65, Fig. 70: 1982. Notes: Bronze parallel, England, Colchester, 1st-3rd\4th cent.: Ibid.: 65, Fig. 70: 1977. 106-107. Definition: Needle, rounded head, elliptical eye 9\S\97495; P\0111 Description and interpretation: Two needles with a rounded head, elliptical-flattened in section. Uniting two adjacent holes made the elongated elliptical eye. The shafts have a round section. No. 106: The lower edge of the eye slants towards the bottom, testifying that it was enlarged with a file. The shaft is roughly smoothed. The point is missing. L. 70mm, w. 6mm, t. 4mm, each hole in the eye d. 2mm. No. 107: Complete but rather short needle. The head is worn out, as if from work. The point is close to the thick part of the shaft and carelessly made, in two flakes to the width and a diagonal one. It seems to be a secondary point. Six items of this type were found. L. 94mm, w. 6mm, t. 3mm, each hole in the eye d. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 106 – Roman. Morphological analogies: Dor, R: Stern 1994 Fig. 225. Sepphoris, R: Martin Nagy et al. 1996: 235, No. 151. Meiron, Stratum IV, LR: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.20: 14, 16-17. Lebanon, Byblos, H-R, pin: Dunand 1954: 138, Fig. 130: 2. Cyprus, Salamis, R 2nd3rd cent.: Chavane 1975: 104, Pls. 30: 316, 65: 316. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent.: Davidson 1952: 174, 177, Pl. 78: 1255. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 2nd-middle 3rd cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 12: 100; probably 2nd-4th cent.: Ibid. Fig. 22: 199. Hungary, Dunapentele: Bíró 1994: 101, Pl. 59: 512. Hungary, Syrmium, 3rd-4th cent.: Saranovic-Svetek 1980: 132, Fig. 3: 7-8. Hungary, Szőny: Bíró 1994: 102, Pl. 60: 523. Yugoslavia, 3rd cent.: Petković 1995: 94, Taf. 17: 1. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER: Gostenčnik 2001 Fig. 5: 13. France, R: Barbier 1992: 124, Pl. 91: 546. Spain, Barcelona, R 2nd-5th cent.: Baltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 194 No. 231. Holland, Valkenburg, R: Verhagen 1993 Fig. 6: 19. England, York: MacGregor 1995: 416, Fig. 157: 2.1.

104. Definition: Needle, triangular truncated head, 8shaped eye 9\S\401123 Description and interpretation: Complete needle (the broken point was not drawn) with a triangular truncated head, flattened and thin in section. The eye is elongated and 8-shaped. The shaft is rough and diagonal filing marks can be seen on it. Two items of this type were found. L. 135mm, w. 5mm, the eye each hole d. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER: Ben Dov 1982: 164. Spain, Barcelona, R 2nd-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 194 No. 232. Notes: None. 105. Definition: Needle, straight flat head, elongated eye 9\P\0178 Description and interpretation: Needle with a flat head, slightly widening from front and thin – like a blade – in section. The elongated eye was made by uniting two adjacent holes. Its sides are rough as they were not smoothed after being sawn. The upper side of the eye is vertical but its lower one is diagonal, as a result of enlarging it with a file (Béal 1983a: 170). The eye is relatively far from the end, a fact which supports the feeling that the blade-like head was in some use. The shaft is smooth but scratches – probably use wear – can be seen on one side. The point is missing. The width of the head (which can cause holes in the cloth) hints that 33

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Notes: None.

Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Sepphoris, B?: Yeivin 1937: 33, Pl. 1 Fig. 2. Syria, Hamma, R-B: Ploug 1985: 238, Fig. 59: k. Greece, Corinth, R: Davidson 1952: 174, Pl. 147b; R not later than 2nd cent., unusual – the only one with a small eye under the large one: Ibid.: 177, Pl. 78: 1258. Yugoslavia, R 2nd cent.: Petković 1995: 96, Taf. 17: 14. France, Lyon, R, 3rd-4th cent., small eye above the large one: Béal 1983a: 171, Pl. 31: 432. Notes: None.

108. Definition: Needle, triangular head, elliptical eye 9\S\38632 Description and interpretation: Needle with triangular head, flat in section. The eye is elongated and elliptical, probably the result of uniting two adjacent holes. The shaft is flattened-elliptical in section in its central part and round towards the point, which is missing. Two items of this type were found. L. 81mm, w. 6.5mm, t. 3mm, the eye l. 5mm, w. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, 3rd cent., from tomb: Hamilton and Husseini 1935 Pl. 81: 25. Beit Nattif, 3rd(-4th) cent.: Baramki 1936 Pl. 5: 8. Algeria, Sétif, R: Guéry 1985 Pl. 68: 251f. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 2ndmiddle 3rd cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 12: 92. Switzerland, R 1st3rd cent.: Deschler-Erb 2001 Fig. 6: 3394. France, Orange, R?: Béal 1984: 44, Pl. 7: 149. Spain, Barcelona, R 2nd-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 194 No. 235. Holland, Valkenburg, R: Verhagen 1993 Fig. 6: 17. Notes: Not checked by eye-sight.

111. Definition: Needle, pointed head, three eyes 9\S\25560 Description and interpretation: Complete needle with pointed thin head. Beneath the point where the head narrows, three eyes were drilled. The upper eye is round and small, the central elongated and elliptical, probably made by uniting two holes, and the lower also round and small. The shaft curves a little and is round in section. Three items of this type were found. L. 144mm, w. 4mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Gorsium, middle of 1st-end of 2nd cent., clothes pin: Bíró 1987: 34, 60, Figs. 8: 32, 9: 55-60, 10: 71-72, 11; end of 2nd-middle 3rd cent.: Ibid. Fig. 18: 157-159. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 26, Pl. 2: 12. France, Lyon, R middle 1st-middle 4th cent., 437 painted: Béal 1983a: 172, Pl. 31: 435, 437. France, Orange, R?: Béal 1984: 45, Pl. 8: 159. England, Colchester, 1st-3rd cent.: Crummy 1992b: 214, Fig. 6.9: 111. Spain, Barcelona, R 2nd-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 194 No. 228. Notes: None.

109. Definition: Needle, rounded head, two eyes 9\S\401030-1 Description and interpretation: Needle with rounded head, flat in section. It has two eyes: the upper one is elongated, 8-shaped and the lower one small and round. The shaft is round in section. The point is missing. 10 items of this type were found. L. 92mm, w. 5mm, t. 4mm, the upper eye each hole d. 2mm, lower one d. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Kafr Sha’ab, R end of 2ndbeginning of 3rd cent., from tomb: Aviam 1997 Fig. 2: 3. Cyprus, Salamis, R 2nd-3rd cent.: Chavane 1975: 104, Pls. 30: 318, 65: 318. Turkey, Tarsus, R: Goldman 1950: 398, Fig. 272: 42. France, Les Bolards, R, head missing: Sautot 1978: 41, Pl. 19: 1. Notes: None.

112. Definition: Needle?, grooved 9\S\95858 Description and interpretation: A complete, short, rude, handmade needle (?), elliptical in section and smoothed. The asymmetrical head is separated from the shaft by two short notches cut with a knife or a saw, one on each side. It could be a simple needle, in which the thread was tied around the head, an unfinished brooch (compare to No. 92) or an awl. This is the only item of its type. L. 53mm, w. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David, Strata 6-7A, H: Ariel 1990: 140, Fig. 20: BI 172. Notes: None.

110. Definition: Needle, truncated triangular head, two eyes 9\S\401393-1 Description and interpretation: Needle with truncated triangular head, flat in section. It has two eyes: the upper one is elongated, rectangular with one round end, made of two adjacent holes united together and then filed into a rectangular shape. The lower one is small and round. The shaft is round in section, a little curved and roughly smoothed, with diagonal smoothing marks. The point is missing. This is the only item of its type. L. 112mm, w. 5mm, t. 4mm, upper eye l. 4.5mm, w. 2mm, lower eye d. 1.5mm.

34

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE IV.B.4. RODS.

which are separated from the shaft by two notches. The tip is missing. A kohl stick (Henig, pers. comm.) or a pin? The notches could be used to tie a string to the item (MacGregor, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 96mm, w. 6mm, t. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 7th cent. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, feather decoration: Davidson 1952: 195, Pl. 89: 1486. Algeria, Sétif, R, pin: Guéry 1985 Pl. 68: 156f. Notes: Reminiscent of a “yad” (hand) used for pointing at the line while reading the Bible, already known among the Jews in the time of Rashi – 11th cent. (Cattan 1997: 102-103).

Nine solid, cylindrical objects were grouped under this general definition as there is no clear evidence as for the way they were used. Six of them are discussed below. The thin ones (Nos. 115, 117) may be pins (compare: Petrie 1927 Pl. 19; Davidson 1952 Pl. 120), kohl sticks or styli. The thicker rods could have served as pin-beaters (for which the local Bedouins used goat or gazelle horn – Ayalon 1999 Fig. 26), plaiting or burnishing tools (i.e. for clay vessels), spindles or distaffs for spinning, handles (ligula), etc. 113. Definition: Solid cylindrical rod 10\P\0120 Description and interpretation: A solid, cylindrical, carefully smoothed rod, broken at both ends and heavy relatively to its dimensions. It is thickest near the center. It narrows a little bit upwards, ending in a moulding on which is a broken globular (?) part. It is unclear whether this represents the top. The lower part narrows even more and perhaps terminated in a point. Three objects of this type were found. L. 202mm, d. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Massada, 1st cent., spindle?: Yadin 1966: 145. Cyprus, Salamis, B 6th-7th cent., pin?, perhaps used as a kohl stick: Chavane 1975: 167, 171172, Pls. 48: 493, 70: 493. France, Nîmes and Orange, No. 350 - end of 1st-beginning of 2nd cent., spindles?: Béal 1984: 35, 85, Nos. 350-354, Pl. 5: 123. England, London, R: MacGregor 1985: 185-187, Fig. 101: 3. Notes: None.

116. Definition: Solid cylindrical rod with decorated head 10\A\1029 Description and interpretation: Upper part of a solid cylindrical handmade rod. The crudely rounded top is worn out. Beneath it is a section decorated with diagonal fluted grooves (in imitation of architectural columns? See Nos. 346-350 below), bordered on each side by a wide moulding between two deep grooves. The bottom is very worn out and the lower section is missing. This is the only object of its type. L. 57mm, d. 8-9mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 117. Definition: Cylindrical rod with a spiral design 10\S\16115-1 Description and interpretation: Upper part of a solid cylindrical rod. The head is shaped like a truncated cone and beneath it there is a smooth section. The rest was produced by hand with a spirally fluted motif. Pin or handle? This is the only object of its type. L. 63mm, d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 184 No. 182. Notes: None.

114. Definition: Solid, decorated cylindrical rod 10\S\33612 Description and interpretation: A solid cylindrical (the upper part is elliptical in cross-section) decorated rod. The upper part consists of two projecting mouldings on top of which a cylindrical part is surmounted by a biconical (both from the front and in cross-section) unit whose end is broken. Part of the central element, bordered by two groups of three mouldings, is decorated with four engraved lines arranged in a herring bone pattern, each consisting of three parallel lines. The lower section narrows and the tip is broken. The object is irregularly smudged with soot. Two objects of this type were found. L. 100mm, on top w. 10mm, t. 6mm, in center d. 9mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

118. Definition: Decorated cylindrical rod 10\A\0075 Description and interpretation: Lower part of a solid cylindrical rod, decorated by hand engraving with irregular marks: an alternating series of circumferential grooves and herringbone patterns comprising two parallel lines filled with short lines in different directions. Some of the grooves cross each other. The tip is short, worn out and shiny from use. It may have been used in working leather or as a pin-beater. This is the only object of its type. L. 52mm, d. 7-8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

115. Definition: Thin flat rod with pointed top 10\A\1204 Description and interpretation: Thin, flat rod, its crosssection almost triangular in the upper part and cylindrical in the lower. The triangular head was carelessly carved by hand and is asymmetrical. Underneath it there is a narrow neck on top of two shoulder-like projections, 35

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.B.5. WRITING IMPLEMENTS – STYLI.

120. Definition: Stylus? 10\P\0187 Description and interpretation: Short, cylindrical worn out rod. The thick end is sawn straight. Vertical planing marks remained on the shaft. The narrow end is slanting. It could be a stylus in which the slanting end was used both for erasing and – by changing its direction 90 degrees – for writing (Bíró 1994: 53), or used for mixing and applying cosmetic and medicinal materials. Two objects of this type were found. L. 60mm, d. 8-9mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman, 1st-3rd cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

Two types of finds have connections to writing: writing tablets (Nos. 551-552 below) coated with wax, and styli, used for engraving it. The use of both writing tablets and styli appear in Roman wall paintings (i.e. Maiuri 1953: 100). The typical stylus, usually made from metal (MacGregor 1985: 122-124), was a thin cylindrical rod equipped with a point for engraving in the wax and an oblique or truncated top used to smooth out the writing. Both ends are sometimes stained and it is possible they were warmed in a fire before inscribing (Davidson 1952: 185-186). Metal and bone styli characterize governing3, administrative and commercial centers (Gostenčnick 2001: 384) like Casarea, and it may not be a coincidence that most of those objects were found during Patrich’s excavation of the administrative center. The following objects were defined as styli based on their cylindrical shape, the stained tip (wax?) and their truncated upper end. Other functional possibilities, however, such as kohl sticks, pins, pin-beaters, medical tools, etc. cannot be ruled out.

121. Definition: Stylus? 10\A\1073 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical rod whose upper part is missing. The shaft is smoothed. It narrows towards the blunt tip which is stained by a dark substance. Lacking the upper part its identification as a stylus is not sure, although it seems too thick for a pin. 16 objects like Nos. 121-122 were found. L. 147mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: England, Colchester, R-LR, pin, stylus, skewer, eating implement, etc.: Crummy 1983: 162, Fig. 199, Pl. 171: 4749. Notes: None.

119. Definition: Stylus 10\P\0127 Description and interpretation: Complete, cylindrical, carefully smoothed rod. The top was truncated by two opposing chops, creating a thin, flat erasing edge. The tip is one-sided, blunt and thick. Both ends are stained by a dark substance, the tip more than the top. It could also serve as a kohl stick, with the top used to grind the material and the tip - to apply it. Ten objects of this type were found. L. 105mm, the blade w. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER: Ben Dov 1982: 164 (3 from right). Samaria-Sebaste: Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924: 28 No. 7, Pl. 90c: 15-16. Israel: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 71. Greece, Corinth, LR end of 4th cent., the top worn out: Davidson 1952: 185-187, Pl. 83: 1363. Hungary, Szőny and Dunapentele, 1st-5th cent., hair pins: Bíró 1994: 78-79, 126, Pls. 14-15: 134-151. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st cent. BCE: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 170 No. 126. Notes: Metal comparison, R, stylus used in medicine: Rimon 1997: 62, Fig. 7.

3

122. Definition: Stylus? 10\P\0131-2 Description and interpretation: Carefully smoothed rod whose upper part is missing. The tip is rounded, worn out and stained with dark substance. It may also have been used as a kohl stick. 16 objects like Nos. 121-122 were found. L. 68mm, d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman, 1st-4th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

200 metal styli and wooden writing tablets were found in the Roman fortress of Vindolanda, England: Birley, Birley and Birley 1993: 16, Fig. 5.

36

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE IV.B.6. WEAPON PARTS.

downwards. The horizontal marks made by the drill can be seen inside them, as well as the sign of its rounded head at their bottoms. Later, the partitions between them were removed, creating an inner cavity in which the sheath’s end was inserted and attached with the rivets. The broken facade and the unsmoothed cavity show that the object broke during manufacture and was discarded. This is the only object of its type. L. 58mm, w. 42mm, t. at least 10mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 2nd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Almásfüzitő, 3rdII4thI cent., not identical: Bíró 1994: 71, 125, Pl. 5: 23. Germany?, end of 2nd-3rd cent.: MacGregor 1985: 163, Fig. 86: f-g. Switzerland, Augusta Raurica, R 3rdII cent., 4, ivory: Deschler-Erb 2000: 127, Pl. 3: 9. Notes: None.

Finding weapon parts at a city like Caesarea is not surprising, as it was a governing and military center for hundreds of years. The four objects included in this group represent standard equipment in the Roman army, found at every military post. All are connected to a sword or a dagger. Other objects should perhaps also be included here, such as hinge\tool heads (Nos. 537-538) and double buttons (Nos. 526-527), but scholars do not agree on their military context. 123. Definition: Scabbard chap 11\S\401471 Description and interpretation: Trapezoid-shaped smoothed tablet. The upper part was carved by hand in the shape of three wide projections separated by round recesses. The lower end was sawn straight. An inner rectangular cavity was created in the center of the lower part by drilling several deep parallel holes, breaking through the partitions between them and by smoothing the walls (Poplin, pers. comm.; see next object). The end of the sheath was inserted there. The facade was carelessly decorated by hand with five wide and deep vertical grooves – three in the center and one on each side. A small perforation was drilled near the center of the bottom for the rivet which attached it to the sheath. The back is flat and carefully smoothed. Some spongiosa was retained in the center. This represents the rear of the coupled matching tablets serving to strengthen the sheath’s end. It is possible that a metal piece was also added for reinforcement. Such bone objects of a trapezoid shape appeared in the 3rd cent. (Bishop and Coulston 1993: 130). This is the only object of its type. L. 50mm, w. 42mm, t. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: Long bone of a large ruminant. Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Szőny 2nd-3rd cent., from a Roman fortress: Bíró 1994: 70, 125, Pl. 4: 20. Hungary, Brigetio, from a Roman fortress: Bíró 1997 No. 8. Holland, Valkenburg, R 2nd-3rd cent.: Verhagen 1993: 367-369, Fig. 15: 72, 76. England and Germany, end of 2nd-3rd cent.: MacGregor 1985: 163, Fig. 86: c-d. England, York, R: MacGregor 1995: 417-419, Fig. 158: 9.1. England, Colchester, 3rd cent., differently decorated: Bishop and Coulston 1993: 130, Fig. 90: 10. Notes: Bronze parallel, Turkey, Tarsus, part of a buckle: Goldman 1950: 393, Pl. 266:111.

125. Definition: Scabbard slide \ Suspension loop 11\P\0085 Description and interpretation: A handle-like object manufactured by hand, equipped with two projecting “tongues”. Many diagonal sawing or filing striations remained on the long sides. The upper part was probably better smoothed than the lower, but today the object is worn out and covered with patina. The central part projects beyond the “tongues”, creating a recess in which the sheath belt passed. The “tongues” are not identical: the lower is simple and has one concave step while the upper one is better designed and has two steps, the larger rounded and convex. It seems that this is how the soldier differentiated between upper and lower edges when fixing it on his belt. The complete “tongue” is relatively pointed, the other one broken. This loop was fastened with its “tongues” to the main belt while the separate belt or suspension loop of the sword sheath passed through its recess. This is the only object of its type. L. 65mm, w. 17mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Hungary, Szőny 2nd-3rd cent.: Bíró 1994: 70, 125, Pl. 4: 19. Hungary, Brigetio, from a Roman fortress: Bíró 1997 No. 9. Germany (?) and Denmark, LR: MacGregor 1985: 163-165, Fig. 86: j-m. Germany, Mainz, R: Béal and Feugère 1987 Fig. 5: 2. Denmark, Fyn, R, ivory: Carnap-Bornheim 1996 Fig. 4. Notes: None.

124. Definition: Scabbard chap 11\P\0174 Description and interpretation: A rounded, rather flat tablet with an inner cavity. Filing striations remained on its back and sides. The top is rather straight while the lower edge and sides are rounded. The front, slightly convex and carefully smoothed, is divided by two vertical parallel lines. The back is flat and rather smooth. A rivet perforation was drilled in the center of its upper part. Another perforation, of which only half remained, may be observed in the broken edge of the front (on left), and it is probable that a similar hole was drilled on the right side. Six vertical parallel holes were drilled from the top

126. Definition: Dagger’s guard 11\P\0167 Description and interpretation: A rectangular, partly fragmented tablet with an elongated perforation in its center. The back is flat but only roughly smoothed, with many filing striations running in all directions, and was probably unseen. The sides are very carefully smoothed. A groove was sawn all around them but off-center. Remnants of a green color testify that this guard had lain near a copper or bronze object. The front is less carefully smoothed than the sides although the filing striations remained only on its edges. There is a small and irregular depression on one of its sides. The central perforation is 37

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS rectangular with rounded corners. It was carelessly sawn, its walls are not straight and filing striations remained on the sides. A ‘Z’-shaped sign engraved on one of the long sides possibly had a magic meaning (compare: Friedman 1989: 168, No. 77). This object is a dagger guard (Poplin, pers. comm.) located on the front end of the hilt and intended to protect the hand gripping it. The base of the blade passed through the central perforation and widened beyond it for stabilization. It is for this reason that a depression was required there. It seems that two such identical tablets, attached together, made up the guard for this dagger. Thus it was not necessary to finish the back

of this object. The carefully smoothed outer sides, on the other hand, testify that this dagger was considered a nice object and that much attention was given to the way it appeared. This is the only object of its type. L. 53mm, w. 18mm, t. 8mm, the perforation l. 15mm, w. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 6th cent. Morphological analogies: England and Europe, 5th-11th cent., elliptical: MacGregor 1985: 165-167, Fig. 87: f (lower part), k. Notes: None.

38

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE IV.C. PERSONAL OBJECTS OBJECTS

BODY GROOMING

grooves. Such boxes were used to hold personal objects such as jewelry (Béal 2000).

IV.c.1. Boxes and hinges. Boxes. The boxes (46 objects) fall into two main types: 1. Cylindrical boxes (28), usually made from long bone diaphyses which are essentially hollow and therefore require separate bottoms and lids (Nos. 127-132, 137-138). 2. Rectangular pencase-shaped boxes (9), in which each wall was separately made (Nos. 139-145). Lids, locks and other closing devices (9) are also included in this group (Nos. 133-136, 146-151).

127. Definition: Short cylindrical grooved box (pyxis) 12\P\0040 Description and interpretation: Part of a low, relatively wide cylindrical box. The medullar cavity is carefully smoothed although irregular chisel or knife striations remained on the wall. Two flanges for the lid and bottom are carved along the inner edges. The outer wall is slightly convex and carefully smoothed. It is decorated with lathe-made grooves, one beneath the rim and two dense groups in the center and bottom. Parts of the rim were flaked in the past for an unknown reason. This is the only object of its type. H. 40mm, estimated d. 52mm, wall t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jordan, Petra, short handle, one outer flange and one inside, no grooves: Murray 1940: 15, No. 1. France, Lyon, R 2nd cent., 2, no grooves, inner flanges, inner cavity unworked or crudely enlarged: Sautot 1978: 58, Pl. 30: 1, 3; Béal 1983a: 80-81, Pl. 14: 85-86. Notes: Another box from Lyon, similar in shape but different in detail, contained a crimson powder (Sautot 1978: 59, Pl. 30: 2 [incorrectly printed as 31: 2]).

AND

The cylindrical boxes were divided into several sub-types: short, wide boxes (pyxis; Nos. 127-128); tall, narrow, simply decorated boxes (Nos. 129-130); medium-sized nicely decorated boxes (Nos. 131-132); and lovely boxes with a shallowly incised ornament (Nos. 137-138). It should be noted that not all the cylindrical objects shown here were definitely boxes (see the discussion of the handles above). A worked cylinder was defined here as a box based on two main characteristics: the inner space should be carefully worked and as large as possible and the existence of outer or inner flanges for the bottom and lid. The circular lids sometimes have a hole in the center for a kohl stick (Dayagi-Mendels 1989: 54; see modern ethnographic comparison: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 45) or for a small handle, so it is easy to confuse them with gaming disks, buttons, etc. The sidewalls of such lids and bottoms, which were usually pushed into the cylinder and thus unseen, were only roughly smoothed, which also improved their connection to the wall. The cylindrical boxes were used to hold cosmetic materials (Narthecium – Bíró 1987: 60), medicines (Milne 1976: 17), ink (see ethnographic comparison from North America: Flayderman 1972: 139), paints (Béal 1983a: 79), needles (such boxes made from turkey limb bones were sold in Bethlehem until the 1970s – S. Ben Yosef, pers. comm.), dice (see the Pompeiian mural: Kraus 1975 Fig. 222), jewelry, spices (Béal 1983a: 79), etc. Such boxes were sometimes reinforced with a bronze coating on their upper or lower parts, like one from the 4th-5th cent., containing a carbonized material and with the kohl stick found stuck in situ in the lid, brought to light in Jordan (Piccirilo and Alliata 1994: 287 No. 13, T. 31). In the description of the flanges mentioned below, the upper one will be discussed first and then the lower one.

128. Definition: Simple low cylindrical box (pyxis) 12\P\0095 Description and interpretation: Part of the concave wall of a low, simple cylindrical box, lathe-made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity is roughly smoothed. The upper flange is inside while the lower one is outside, adapted to a bottom with a depression around the box’s perimeter and a projecting rim. The outer wall was better smoothed but is covered today with patina. It is decorated with two parallel grooves beneath the rim. This is the only object of its type. H. 30mm, d. 35mm, wall t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Israel?: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 44. Greece, Corinth, R, outer and inner flanges: Davidson 1952: 136, Pl. 69: 965. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, for cosmetics, inner and outer flanges: Gostenčnik 2001: 385, Fig. 4: 27. France, Vienne, R: Sautot 1978: 77, Pl. 47: 6. France, Lyon, R 2ndII cent., taller, flaring rim, inner flanges: Béal 1983a: 83, Pl. 16: 92; R 1st-beginning of 3rd cent., outer flanges, thicker wall, cup or furniture decoration?: Ibid.: 91, Pl. 18: 101. France, Nîmes, R end of 1st-beginning of 2nd cent.: Béal 1984: 19, Pl. 2: 30. Italy? 1st BCE-1st CE cent., purchased with couch mounts, with glued base and lid: Nicholls 1979 Fig. 7, Pl. 10 b bottom. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-3rd cent., for cosmetics or needles: Betrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 176 No. 144. Notes: Wooden analogies, Nubia, Karanog, 3rd-4th cent., from graves, for cosmetics, with hole in lid for kohl stick or handle: Wooley and Randall-Maciver 1910: 71-72, Pl. 23: 7526-7527, 7622.

Two boxes were identified osteologically: one was made of cattle femur and the other from a cattle or horse metacarpus. Only some of the walls remained of the rectangular boxes. Grooves run along their long sides; the next walls were glued onto the side ones. The lid moved along the upper part of the sidewalls. Small triangular bone pegs, placed in tiny open notches cut in the edges of the short walls, reinforced the attachment. The edges of some walls, mainly the short ones, and the edges of the lids (No. 139) are oblique, to ease their movement in the 39

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 129. Definition: Moulded, polished cylindrical box 8\S\18787-4 Description and interpretation: About half the circumference of a cylindrical box (actually slightly conical following the natural shape of the long bone). The medullar cavity was smoothed but remained somewhat rough because of the bone’s structure. Originally there were two inner flanges but at a later phase the lower edge was neatly planed on the inside creating a slanting edge with scattered remains of the flange. It is possible that the box was then used upside down without a permanent lid. The outer wall was decorated on a lathe with two groups of five mouldings each (only four remained in the lower one). The central part is a little convex. The box was very carefully polished on the outside, probably on a lathe (perhaps imitating marble – Béal 1983a: 80-81). This is the only object of its type. H. 67mm (originally c. 70mm), d. 37mm, wall t. 9mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Halusa, LR 4th-5th cent., outer flange [wrongly interpreted as a mechanism for connecting several such parts to decorate furniture]: Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 188, Fig. 2. Egypt, 4th cent., with incised decoration on the central part: Ägypten Schätze: 196-197. France, R, decoration for couch leg?: Béal 1986: 113, H, Fig. 8: 24; 1991a: 289. Fig. 1: 15. Notes: Found together with carved ivory pieces No. 564.

imported?: Verhagen 1993: 369, Fig. 17: 77. Notes: Metal comparison, Masada, ER, probably for Roman doctor’s instruments: Hershkowicz 1996: 353354, Figs. 6A, 7. Bronze analogy, Jordan, Pella, 6th cent., from grave, with lid and a kohl stick in its hole: Smith 1973 Pls. 66: 308a-c, 85: 308. Metal analogy, doctor’s implement: Jackson 1986 Fig. 5: 36-37. Wooden analogy, Cave of Horor, R 2nd cent.: Aharoni 1962 Pl. 25F. Wooden analogy, En Gedi, ER: Hadas 1994: 51, Fig. 61: 21-22. 131. Definition: Grooved cylindrical box 12\A\0066 Description and interpretation: Part of the wall of a cylindrical box, lathe-carved from a long bone diaphysis. The inner cavity was roughly worked, with small natural projections and chisel marks still visible – an unusual phenomenon in boxes. However, the thin wall, large inner cavity and two flanges (carefully-smoothed inner one and an outer one) define it as a box. The lower end is better smoothed than the upper one. The outer wall was originally smoothed but today is worn down. The decoration includes, from the top down: A group of dense grooves, circle-and-dot designs, three grooves, a wide and very smooth band with very shallow (roulette-made?) parallel marks along its edges (not shown in the drawing), four grooves, and near the bottom again a band of marks similar to those made by a roulette. This is the only object of its type. H. 61mm, estimated d. 35mm, wall t. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Nessana, B-A, ivory, no circle-and-dot designs, for kohl: Colt 1962: 52, Pl. 21: 25. Egypt, Quseir al-Qadim, R, ivory: Whitcomb 1979: 37, Pl. 70: b. Egypt, no circle-and-dot design: Marangou 1976: 62, Pl. 64 g. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A2, 13thII cent. or earlier, outer and inner flanges: Oldenburg 1969: 130, Fig. 48: 6. Hungary, R, dice box: Bíró 1994: 108, Pl. 77: 637. France, R, couch leg mount?: Béal 1986: 113: H, Fig. 8: 24; 1991a: 289, Fig. 1: 15. France, Marseille, R, box? Undecorated: Reynaud 1998: 249, Pl. 208 No. 410. Notes: None.

130. Definition: Tall simple cylindrical box 12\S\8971 Description and interpretation: Tall, relatively narrow, cylindrical box made from a long bone diaphysis. The natural medullar cavity was enlarged with vertical chisel (blade w. 4mm) blows from both ends, so that the wall is thicker in the central part. Both ends are damaged but the inner flanges can just barely be observed. The outer wall was smoothed and decorated near the bottom (defined so because it is a little wider than the other end following the natural shape of the bone). The decoration includes two parallel lathe-made grooves separated by a convex part and six very narrow and shallow grooves above them. The box may have been used for holding cosmetics, needles, dice, etc. Seven objects of this type came to light. H. 100mm, d. 30mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Nessana, B-A, for kohl: Colt 1962: 52, Pl. 21: 26. Simple cylindrical boxes, R, with lid equipped with a hole for a stick or handle: DayagiMendels 1989: 54. Jordan, Pella, B 6th cent., in grave, with mouldings and two flanges, handle or box: Smith 1973: 229, Pl. 66: 370. Egypt, Alexandria, mid. 7th cent., unfinished pyxis? [if it is not ring production waste – see below]: Rodziewicz 1969b: 148, Fig 4. Tunisia, Carthage, end of 2nd cent., part of cosmetic box or cabinet leg, better decorated: Henig 1984: 86, 188, Fig. 61: 6. France, Lyon, R, holster, sometimes defined as a handle, not identical: Béal 1983a: 89, Pl. 16: 96-97; R, couch leg decoration?: Béal 1986: 113: H, Fig. 8: 24; 1991a: 289, Fig. 1: 15. Holland, Valkenburg, R post-150, military dagger or sword’s handle,

132. Definition: Decorated cylindrical box 12\S\21042 Description and interpretation: Part of the wall of a cylindrical box, lathe-carved from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity was carefully smoothed although some chisel marks remained on its lower part. It has outer and inner flanges of different length. The box was lathedecorated almost entirely with groups of dense grooves separated by circle-and-dot designs, which were not engraved in a straight line, equal distance or symmetrically. Two objects of this type were found. H. 50mm, d. 37mm, wall t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Gorsium, 4th cent., richer decoration: Bíró 1987 Fig. 27: 236. France, R: Béal 1986: 113: H, Fig. 8: 24; 1991a: 289, Fig. 1: 15. Notes: None. 40

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Notes: None.

133-134. Definition: Simple lathe-made bottom 12\S\10000; 12302 Description and interpretation: Two lathe-made disks, probably made from a flat bone (the bottom of No. 133 still has remains of spongiosa on it). Both have lathe indentations on the top and bottom. Both were smoothed, the top better than the bottom while the side slants a bit to improve its attachment in the box’s flange. No. 133 is decorated with a wide and deep groove around its center and a narrower and shallower one in the perimeter. It is better made than No. 134. Both could also be gaming pieces or counters. Nine objects of this type were found. No. 133: d. 28mm, t. 3.5mm. No. 134: d. 23mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 134: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Cyprus, Salamis, B 5th cent., box lid [preferably – gaming piece lid]: Chavane 1975: 176, 178, Pls. 49: 510-512, 71: 510-512. Greece, Corinth, R, with central perforation? probably a box lid: Davidson 1952: 136, Pl. 69: 966; R 1st-beginning of 2nd cent., gaming piece, ivory: Ibid.: 217, 219, Pl. 99: 1682. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent., gaming piece: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 568, 581, Fig. 20: 65. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 1st-end of 2nd cent., gaming piece or counter: Bíró 1987 Figs. 8: 28-29, 9: 42. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, gaming piece: Gostenčnik 2001: 384, Fig. 4: 2, 5. France, Lyon, R 1st-3rd cent., gaming piece or counter: Béal 1983a: 297, Pl. 50: 1002, 1005. France, Nîmes, R?, gaming piece: Béal 1984: 75, Type 7. Holland, Valkenburg, R, gaming piece: Verhagen 1993: 378, Fig. 20: 89. Holland, Ubbergen, R, lid: van Vilsteren 1987: 36, No. 33. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-3rd cent., lid: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 176 No. 145. Notes: None.

136. Definition: Round lid with a central perforation 12\P\0179 Description and interpretation: Rather large and thick lathe-made lid with a large central perforation for a kohl stick or a handle. The bottom is pretty rough and carelessly smoothed, as it was not seen. Three lathe-made grooves surround its lower projecting section, the part of the lid, which fit the vessel’s mouth. The sides of this section are covered with a white substance, possibly glue. The sides of the upper section and the top are very carefully smoothed. A low funnel-shaped step encircles the central hole. A groove runs around the perimeter. This was probably a cosmetic box lid with a perforation for the kohl stick or a small spoon (see below). This is the only object of its type. D. 38mm, t. 8mm, the hole d. 13mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 137. Definition: Fine cylindrical box, engraved and painted 13\S\12268 Description and interpretation: Half the perimeter of a tall, narrow cylindrical box made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity was carefully smoothed. The upper rim broke along one of the grooves decorating it so it is not possible to say whether there was a flange there and how much of the box is missing. Near the edge there is a natural hole, which caused the artisan to leave a thicker wall at that point. An inner flange for fitting the base was carved in the bottom. The outer wall was smoothed so carefully that it resembles ivory. Its central section was nicely decorated with very shallow and delicate engraving in plant motifs, so delicate they are almost invisible. Faint remains of red color can be seen and it is possible that the decoration was designed to border painted sections. This band is bordered with a carelessly hand produced groove running around the circumference on each side. Beneath this part is a convex section bordered with deep lathe-made grooves while another one was engraved near the bottom. Such special decoration also appears on two other boxes from Caesarea (No. 138 and box No. 55-252 exhibited in the Caesarea Museum) and on a whorl\button (No. 68). According to J. Allan (pers. comm.) similar decoration appears on Islamic metal implements from Egypt. The exact use of these beautiful boxes is unknown. H. 89mm, d. 35mm. Species/Skeletal element: Cattle femur diaphysis. Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Pelusion, end of Bbeginning of A?, from robbed grave, bottom and lid (with stick hole) in situ, with remains of a yellowish-rose powder: Jaritz et al. 1996: 72, 291, Fig. 27. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, with bottom and lid flanges: Strzygowski 1904: 216-217, No. 8959. Hungary, 4th cent.: Bíró, pers. comm. Notes: None.

135. Definition: Stepped stopper with stick perforation 12\P\0173 Description and interpretation: Elegant, round and stepped stopper with a central perforation. Its lower section is cylindrical and less carefully smoothed than the rest. The same is true for the first step above it, which has lathing marks around its circumference. This part of the object was inserted into the mouth of the container, thus, the carelessness of its finishing. The upper section is mushroom-shaped and highly polished, as is the top, on which a narrow groove and round lathe marks can be seen. This carefully made stopper probably belonged to a vessel containing expensive oils, perfumes, etc. A very narrow mouth in order to avoid waste or leaking characterizes such containers. A kohl stick or small handle was inserted in the central hole. It is also possible that the stopper was pulled out only in order to refill the vessel, and in daily use the contents were dripped or poured through the hole, which was then blocked by a small stopper (such as Nos. 36-38 above). This is the only object of its type. D. 21mm, h. 9mm, the hole d. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine, 2nd-5th cent. Morphological analogies: Hungary, 1st-middle 2nd cent., cosmetic box lid: Bíró 1994: 98, 127, Pl. 52: 449. 41

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 138. Definition: Fine cylindrical box (?) with engraving and ajouré? 13\S\86518 Description and interpretation: Part of a beautifully decorated cylindrical box (?). The medullar cavity was roughly worked with a chisel (blade w. 4-6mm). Its center is thicker than the edges so it cannot be a handle. The rough cavity is not typical for boxes but there are two flanges at the inner ends, a vertical one for a lid and a slanting one for the bottom. Some projections remained on the top, perhaps originally forming bows, which are reminiscent of the ajouré (lace-like open work) style. It is not clear what the original height of this decoration was or its complete shape, but if it was indeed a box then it obviously protruded above its rim, creating difficulties in the removal of the lid and refilling of the box. The outer wall was carefully smoothed and two groups of dense grooves were engraved near both ends. The central part was elegantly decorated with plant motifs, engraved very shallowly (see No. 137). It may be part of furniture decoration and not a box. Three objects of this type were found. H. 65mm, estimated d. 45mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: See No. 137. Notes: None.

the bottom. Small recesses were obliquely sawn in the short sides, in which tiny triangular pegs were stuck for attachment to the other wall. These are the only objects of this type. No. 140: one corner is broken. L. 57mm, w. 29mm, t. 3mm. No. 141: This object was very carefully smoothed so it resembled ivory, especially the outer side. A narrow line (not shown in the drawing) was engraved on the inside, parallel to the deeper groove which runs along the opposite side, probably serving as a guiding line for the bottom or another groove which was not utilized (because the corner broke during manufacture?). L. 53mm, w. 33mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 140: Roman, 1st-2nd cent.; No. 141: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Turkey, Tarsus: Goldman 1950: 400, Fig. 273: 106. Greece, Corinth, R 3rd cent., with bronze handle: Davidson 1952: 135, Pl. 68: 943. Hungary, Budapest, R: Bíró, pers. comm. France, Lyon, R end of 2nd cent.: Béal 1983a: 365-366, Pl. 65: 1318. Dumbarton Oaks Collection, 6th cent., ivory, with engraved figures: Cutler 1985: 26, Fig. 25a. Notes: Wooden analogy, Muraba’at Cave, R: Benoit, Milik and de Vaux 1961: 41, Pl. 10: 10. Wooden analogy, Egypt, R: Petrie 1927 Pl. 54: 551, 563. Antler analogies, France: Béal 1983a: 366.

139. Definition: Cover for a rectangular box 13\P\0034 Description and interpretation: Lid of a rectangular box or pen-case, made from a large flat bone. The bottom is flat and the top a little convex in cross-section. A thicker band was left in the rear edge to serve as a handle. It is decorated with several parallel grooves at its center, bordered by convex sections. The two long sides and the front short edge are thinner than the rest to enable them to move easily in the grooves prepared in the sidewalls. These edges are worn out and smooth as a result of their rubbing in the grooves, while the rest of the cover is covered with patina. It could show that the box was discarded with the lid in situ. A small recess was intentionally cut in one of the sides for a tiny peg which held the cover in place (see in Nos. 140-141). The top is decorated with two fairly large (d. 12mm) and asymmetrical circle-and-dot designs. The edges are damaged at several spots. This is the only object of its type. L. 72mm, w. 41mm, t. 4mm. Species/skeletal element: Large species flat bone. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: France, Nîmes, H-R until 3rd cent., undecorated: Béal 1984: 92 top, 93-94, Pl. 19: 366. France, 1stII-2ndI cent., ivory, from grave: Béal 2000: 107-109, Pl. 3. Notes: None.

142. Definition: Wall\cover of rectangular box? 13\S\76725 Description and interpretation: Small, thin rectangular piece. One short side is thicker and sawn straight, while the other is thin (to fit into the groove in the other wall?). Two long, narrow parallel indentations – one longer and deeper than the other – were engraved on the bottom. On the top, the opposite exists – two parallel convex strips and a ridge bordered with two grooves. The object may be the cover or wall of a small rectangular box, handle cover, etc. This is the only object of its type. L. 53mm, w. 12mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: England, Colchester, R mid1st cent., inlay: Crummy 1983: 82, Fig. 87: 2152. Notes: The raw material may not be bone (Poplin, pers. comm.). 143. Definition: Wall\cover of a rectangular box? 13\S\37564 Description and interpretation: A thin, almost complete trapezoid tablet made from the flat bone of a large species. The bottom is roughly smooth and spongy not intended to be seen. The top is concave in crosssection and carefully smoothed. It could be a box wall or cover, simple inlay or inlay blank. One corner is damaged. This is the only object of its type. L. 73mm, w. 31mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: France, Les Bolards, R, box covers: Sautot 1978: 47, Pls. 21: 1, 22: 1. Notes: None.

140-141. Definition: Wall of rectangular box\pen-case 13\S\27034; 26285 Description and interpretation: Two walls of a rectangular box or pen-case made from flat bones from large species. Both have slanting edges for attachment to the adjacent walls. In both, a deep groove was sawn along the inner side of one long side for receiving the cover or 42

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 144. Definition: Decorated box wall? 14\S\80158 Description and interpretation: Complete rectangular tablet made from solid bone. Two holes were drilled in one long narrow side, probably for attaching it to another tablet with bone or wooden pins. The top is decorated with pairs of crossed diagonal lines creating rhomboid designs filled with X-shapes. Two carelessly engraved lines edge the decoration near each end. It may be part of a chest with a strip of small columns (baluster) between two pieces like the one discussed here with holes drilled for their joints or tongues (see Nos. 426-429 and references there such as Kühnel [1971] Taf. 85: 84). This is the only object of its type. L. 70mm, w. 19mm, t. 6mm, the holes d. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Southern Yemen, Shabwa, 4th cent. the earliest, ivory, decoration imitating ashlar courses: Béal 1991b: 196, Fig. 3: 39-40. Dumbarton Oaks Collection, 6th cent., ivory box with human figures: Cutler 1985: 26, Fig. 25c. Notes: None.

when it is moved forward. A shallow round depression, with a smaller one in its center, was carved in the rear part. A perforation was drilled beneath it to the width of the bottom, parallel to the previously discussed groove. The metal pin which attached the lock permanently to the object (a belt?) passed through this hole. At the other end of the object was a square metal ring, which was inserted, in the lateral groove in the lock base, and then the slide was moved until it covered the ring. To secure the lock, the shallow depression, which was now revealed behind the slide, could be filled with wax, which was stamped. The wax could be easily removed when the time came to unlock the object. (The locking system was reconstructed by Béal [1983a: 355-356], who suggested the lock belonged to a wooden chest, and by Dray – pers. comm. – who thought that it was attached to a leather belt, used for instance to lock a book [Pl. 6]). L. 34mm, w. 24mm, h. 17mm. No. 147: A lock base, identical in shape to the former but smaller. L. 26mm, w. 13mm, h. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Hungary, R-LR?: Bíró 1994: 99, Pl. 54: 472. France, Les Bolards, R: Sautot 1978: 42, Pl. 21: 5. France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a: 355-356, Pl. 59: 1301. Notes: Both objects are exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam. No. 146 has been published: Ayalon 1999: 60, Fig. 84. Bone, wood and bronze analogies: Béal 1983a: 356. See also British Museum Guide 1929: 155, Fig. 191.

145. Definition: Wall of rectangular box\pen-case 14\S\8626 Description and interpretation: Badly preserved rectangular tablet, trapezoid in cross-section as the inner side is oblique. A wide and deep U-shaped groove runs along the wider narrow side. A similar groove, not extending to the edge, passes along the lower part of the inner side. Its bottom is stepped, probably because it was made by repeated strikes with a chisel. At one end the chisel penetrated too deeply, through to the other side. The thicker part of the inner side, where the tablet is broken (left in the drawing), was sawn obliquely. A thin pin could be inserted at that point into the wall set in the groove to lock it in place. One edge is broken. It may also be the movable cover of a pen-case (Poplin and Dray, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 41mm, w. 13mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Found together with ivory stopper (?) No. 539.

148. Definition: Door-shaped decorated cover 14\A\0596 Description and interpretation: Rectangular, flat (thicker at the center) tablet made from the flat bone of a large species. Both top and bottom are smooth. The top is densely decorated with circle-and-dot designs: Small (d. 4mm) designs are organized in two large X shapes, six in each arm, and large designs (d. 5-7mm) between the arms. Narrow hinges project from two corners, one longer than the other. This is probably a door-like cover for a rectangular box. This is the only object of its type. L. 70mm, w. 27mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab (but see the dated analogies). Morphological analogies: Cyprus, Salamis, RB, lid: Chavane 1975: 178-179, Pls. 49: 513, 71: 513. Tunisia, Carthage, casket inlay, one hinge missing, less decorated: Hurst and Henig 1994: 277, Fig. 14.17: 44. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, lid, with perforations: Gostenčnik 2001: 385, Fig. 4: 28. France, Lyon, R 2nd cent., no hinges, decorated on bottom too, lid or decorated tablet?: Béal 1983a: 373, Pl. 62: 1326. Notes: At a different spot in Caesarea, Porath’s expedition found – in a Byzantine locus – a very similar object made of lead. It is also equipped with two hinges but decorated with eight perforations of different sizes and two open triangles (l. 92mm, w. 30mm, t. 2mm). The circle-and-dot decoration on the bone object may be

146-147. Definition: Lock and lock base 14\M\98-7134 Description and interpretation: A complete rectangular lock and the base of another. These are the only objects of this type. No. 146: The lock includes a stationary basis and a moving slide attached to it by a metal rivet installed with its head downwards. The slide is shaped like a truncated pyramid and has a square head, separated from it by a groove which serves to move the sledge forward and backward. The bottom (compare to No. 147) is rectangular and has an elliptic perforation in its bottom, which widens down to the sides. The rivet’s broad head could move along this widening without falling out in order to move the slide. A wide and deep groove runs along the width of the front part of the bottom and is covered by the slide 43

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS initiations of the open holes in the metal box.

Bíró 1994: 57-58, Pls. 69-70), Israel (i.e. Dothan 1971 Fig. 30: 3; Ariel 1990: 125-126, Figs. 11: 36-37, 13: 56; Wapnish 1991)4, and the neighboring countries (Clark and Boesher 1986: 264-266, Pl. 27.1: d; Dunand 1954: 16, 103, Figs. 12 No. 685, 127 No. 7469). Some long cylindrical bone objects found at Caesarea could perhaps be defined as hinge parts. The osteological origin of some of these objects was determined: all were made from cattle metatarsus, which were probably well fitted to the needs.

149. Definition: Square lid with stick hole 14\P\0037 Description and interpretation: Half a square, flat and thin tablet. The bottom is smooth and the top – even smoother. The lathe-made decoration includes a moulding bordered by two parallel grooves. A round (originally probably elliptic; d. 10mm) hole was drilled by hand off-center. The hole was encircled by a moulding and a groove. This is probably the lid of a square box with a hole for a kohl stick or small spoon although it could also be an inlay. Two objects of this type were found. Estimated l. 34mm, w. 20mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

152. Definition: Hinge? 15\S\83281 Description and interpretation: A long cylinder made from a hollow bone (compare: MacGregor 1985: 203), nicely carved on a lathe. Less than half its perimeter survived. The medullar cavity was partly cleaned by vertical chisel strikes and partly remained untouched with the inner thin sections still in place, so it is obvious that no object was fixed into this part of it. At one end there is an inside flange, probably for another cylinder which joined it. Two holes, one opposite the other, were drilled just beneath it, so one rivet could be inserted and hold the two cylinders together. The object is decorated with couples of mouldings separated by a convex part. The flanged end is rounded while the other one is narrower, a little conical and carefully smoothed. This was the “female” end, which was inserted into the socket of the next cylinder. The object is too uncomfortable to have been used as a handle. It might be a furniture mount, with several parts joined together (Henig, pers. comm.). Dray (pers. comm.) observed wear marks inside the cylinder’s end, so the possibility that it was part of a long hinge is reasonable. This is the only object of its type. L. 117mm, d. 24mm. Species/skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: France, Lyon, R, furniture mount? with rivet holes, red painted: Béal 1983a: 95-96, Pl. 24: 106; R, couch leg mount?: Béal 1986: 113: H, Fig. 8: 24; 1991a: 289, Fig. 1: 15. Notes: None.

150-151. Definition: Moveable lid locking peg? 14\S\38402; 80301 Description and interpretation: Elongated pegs equipped with a hole. They have a flat bottom, a convex top and a slanting front part. No. 150: Smaller than the other, rectangular and carefully smoothed. Two lateral lines were engraved on the front part. The perforation was drilled in the thick edge but a little off-center. L. 25mm, w. 8mm, t. 4mm, the hole d. 3mm. No. 151: Larger, its back edge is rounded and the front one was perhaps originally longer and pointed. L. 40mm, w. 14mm, t. 5.5mm, the hole d. 4mm. Such a peg was possibly fixed with a rivet to the top of the box. By moving it horizontally it locked the lid in place (Poplin, pers. comm.). Three objects of this type were found. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 150: Early Arab; No. 151: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. Hinges. Bone hinges of boxes, chests etc. are frequently encountered. The common type is a short or long hollow cylinder with one or two holes in its wall. It was used as follows (see reconstructions by Fremersdorf 1940; Bíró 1994: 57-58; Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 140-141, Fig. 3): Several parts were mounted on a wooden rod which held them in place while they could rotate on it, with their holes at right angles to each other (Lancel 1982: 178, Fig. 225; MacGregor 1985 Fig. 110: d, f). The rod was attached to the chest or box. Wooden, bone or metal pins (Béal 1983a: 141, Pl. 49: 334-336) were stuck in the holes of the hinge on one end and in the door or lid on the other, so it could be opened or closed with the hinges moving on the wooden rod. The ends of the bone parts were probably “oiled” with wax to reduce friction (MacGregor 1985: 203), but even so they were worn out. The hinge top was plugged with a thin head or a lid into which such a head was stuck. A double-doored chest found at Pompeii had 36 hinge parts on each door (Ibid.).

153. Definition: Hinge head\furniture mount? 15\S\80368 Description and interpretation: Head of a cylindrical object, carefully smoothed and lathe-decorated with wide and narrow mouldings separated by grooves. Only the upper part remained. The medullar cavity is roughly smoothed and asymmetrical: in lateral cross-section it is wider on one side than the other, while in longitudinal cross-section it is conical. The object could also be part of a furniture mount or a tall gaming piece. Three objects of this type were found. L. 33mm, d. 28mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

Not even one hinge of the common short type was found in Caesarea even though it is so common in Europe (cf

4

44

Similar Early Roman wooden hinges were found in Jericho: Hachlili and Killebrew 1999 Fig. 3.5: 3.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 154. Definition: Hinge head? 15\P\0126 Description and interpretation: A cylindrical lathecarved object made from a long bone diaphysis. The inside is carefully smoothed but its walls are not as straight and parallel as would be necessary for inserting a wooden rod. The object has two parts separated by a projecting, circumferential slanting moulding. The upper part is convex and rounded while the lower is conical – narrowing towards the bottom – and has a rivet hole drilled near the edge. The upper rim is worn out. Dray (pers. comm.) suggests that the object was attached to the

top of a hinge while another item locked it on its top (which caused it to become worn). It could also have been the head of a tool, furniture decoration or handle pommel. Three objects of this type were found. L. 31mm, d. 25mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Apollonia, R (unpublished)5. Hungary, Aquincum, R (Choyke, pers. comm.). Notes: None.

5

45

The Roman bone objects from Apollonia will be published by the author with permission of Prof. Israel Roll.

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.C.2. BODY GROOMING OBJECTS.

thick teeth?), removing lice (with the thin teeth? See Mumcouglu and Zias 1989), decorating the hair, hair dressing (small one-sided combs like No. 155? See Bíró 1987: 36, Fig. 14), etc. Petrie (1927: 25-26) connected the abundance of combs in the Roman world to the invention of improved thin, strong iron saws. A special saw used to produce combs (megera) is mentioned by Rashi in the 11 cent. (Cattan 1997: 94). These artifacts had some religious-symbolic meaning in Europe and were therefore left in many graves (MacGregor 1985: 74, a custom also mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud [Berachot 18 2, 2]), and are carved on tombstones together with mirrors, chests, pins and spindles (Bíró 1994: 35-39, Fig. 11; 2002). In Israel the comb – in an unknown material – appears, for instance, on a local Roman pottery lamp (Sussman 2002a: 74-75, Fig. 7: 2; 2002b: 368, Fig. 36).

This group (of 34 artifacts) includes five types of bone objects: combs (Nos. 155-158), tools for grinding cosmetics and medicines (Nos. 159-160), spoons (Nos. 161-164), small spoons (Nos. 165-166), and “small ear spoons” (Nos. 167-169). Other objects such as needles, probes (Rimon 1997: 60), spatulae, simple sticks (Dayagi-Mendels 1989: 36, 41), and pins with tips stained with some dark material could also have been used for these purposes. There is some confusion in the scholarship about connections between the archaeological finds, the tools mentioned in ancient sources and their actual use (Béal 1983a: 241-242). Bone was a preferred raw material for these needs as it was easy to keep clean and sterile (metal, for instance, rusts when cleaned with water). Hygiene was carefully observed in Roman cities, and in a place like Caesarea many such related objects may be expected.

Grinding tools. The small grinding bowl (No. 159) is a known type, sometimes with a decorated depression. These bone and ivory vessels were always made on a lathe. A bowl of this sort in an unknown material and two spoons (possibly demonstrating their connection with cosmetics?) appear on a 3rd-4th cent. Samaritan pottery lamp (Sussman 2002b: 368, Fig. 38). A similar, larger bowl made of mother-of-pearl was also found at Caesarea (Ayalon 2003 No. 581). The flat tablet (No. 160) was included here with some reservation as there is no proof that it was used to grind cosmetics or medicines. There are, however, parallels to such use of similar tablets and the stains left on it strengthen this assumption.

The 12 bone combs include most of the common types: the one-sided comb, the two-sided comb, and two other more unusual combs. All these types have many wooden parallels found in arid zones, and it appears that they were more numerous than the bone and ivory objects, but did not survive in the humid parts of the country (Sitri 2001). The single-unit combs (Nos. 155-156) do not display anything new in their shape, production methods and decorations. They were made from large flat bones, the teeth were sawn with different saws for the wide teeth and for the narrow ones, the sawing done diagonally and from both sides. This technique made the comb teeth stronger at the base (MacGregor 1985: 43ff, quoting Ulbricht). Sometimes a straight guideline was engraved in advance along the comb to show the craftsman how far up the teeth should be sawn (compare: Crummy 1988: 23, Pl. 24: 1853). However, in many cases this line was ignored (the same is true for wooden combs, see Rutschowscaya 1986: 32, No. 26). In a later stage of production the teeth ends were carved and rounded with a knife (Ambrosiani 1981 Fig. 16; Sitri 2001). The common decoration was variations of circle-and-dot designs.

Spoons. The exact uses for the large and medium-sized spoons are difficult to define. It was probably some kind of work, judging by the effort made to strengthen the point where the handle joined the bowl. It may have been used to prepare, mix and use medicines, cosmetics and paints. It seems that bone tools were sometimes preferred to metal ones because certain materials do not wear the bone and it is easy to clean (Bíró 1994: 454). The spoons were probably not used for eating (excluding perhaps oysters, cochlear and eggs – Davidson 1952: 189; Chavane 1975: 48; Béal 1983a: 249), as this use of spoons is a later custom. Sometimes wear on the pointed ends of undecorated spoon handles indicate that they were also used. Experiments showed that it takes about 35 hours to produce a spoon (Barbier 1992: 125, Pl. 91: 553). Such objects were also made of wood (e.g. in Egypt) and metal (Béal 1983a: 252-253, Pl. 46: 794-795; a decorated silver spoon was found in a Byzantine building at Caesarea: Patrich 2002: 27, Fig. 7). The thin handle breaks easily so broken rods, pins or handles discussed here could actually have been spoon handles. The emphasizing of the joining point where the handle connects to the bowl by angled sawing on both sides may be in imitation of the soldering in metal spoons.

The composite combs are more interesting: only one small part of such an object was found at Caesarea (No. 157), while in Europe this is the most common type, usually made of antler (e.g. Ambrosiani 1981; Bíró 1994: 35-39; 2002). It seems that the relatively small dimensions of pieces achieved from antler (Ambrosiani 1981: 41ff) forced the European artisan to create combs composed of several tablets. In our region, the craftsman had no problem in getting large flat pieces of scapula or pelvis to make whole combs. The composite comb known in this region is different than the European one: it was made of 2-3 tablets running to its whole width, attached together with metal pins (No. 158). Combs of this type are still manufactured in Damascus and Cairo.

The small spoons could be typologically separated only on the basis of differences in their dimensions. The various names given to spoons in the Roman world probably refer to the various shapes: ligula – the spoon

The combs had several uses: combing the hair (with the 46

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE with pear-shaped bowl, cochlear – a spoon with a round bowl (Davidson 1952: 189; Chavane 1975: 48). Their exact uses, however, are debated: for cosmetics, perfumes, cooking (measuring out spices for example), eating (see above), medicines (measuring, transforming and mixing), etc. (Davidson 1952: 189; Milne 1976: 17, 78; Béal 1983a: 249; Bíró 1994: 42-45). Round bowls are most common, but without the decoration which exists on No. 166, and often there is a lathe indentation in the center of the bowl. Small spoons were common throughout the entire Roman period, but the flat, decorated type (No. 165) is found in Israel in the Early Roman period only and has no parallel in Europe. A bowl and two spoons (possibly demonstrating their connection with cosmetics?) appear on a 3rd-4th cent. Samaritan lamp (Sussman 2002b: 368, Fig. 38).

densely spaced teeth were preserved, few of them broken. The spaces among the teeth were sawn diagonally. The saw used for the thick teeth was 0.6mm wide, while the saw for the thin teeth was 0.2mm wide. A guide line was engraved in advance along the comb on both sides, indicating the limit of the sawing. On the side with the thick teeth the artisan preserved the line, but on the other side the teeth were all sawn up to another, imaginative line. Part of the comb is missing. It was decorated with different variants of the small circle-and-dot design: eight of them were grouped in a pyramidal shape at the edge, nine are grouped in the center in an I-shape and there was another design at the broken edge left of the middle group. Three objects of this type were found. L. 39mm, w. 25mm, t. 5mm, thick teeth l. 12mm, thin teeth l. 15mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER: Ben Dov 1982: 164 (upper left, with holes for pins for attachment to another piece). Banias, B, 2: Israeli 2001: 31, 60, Nos. 68-69. Capernaum Stratum III, A middle 8th-middle 9th cent.: Tzaferis et al. 1989 Fig. 72: 56; Ayalon 1999 Fig. 48. Jerusalem, Medieval, different decoration: Tushingham 1985: 151, Fig. 68: 14. Greece, Corinth, LRB, ivory, undecorated: Davidson 1952: 179, 182, Pls. 80: 1300, 81: 1305. Sweden, Upsala, 11th-12th cent., rectangular: MacGregor 1985: 81, Fig. 47: a. Notes: Wooden analogies, En Gedi, ER: Hadas 1994: 5152. Wooden analogies, The Cave of Horor, R. 2nd cent.: Aharoni 1962 Pl. 26 C-D. Wooden analogy, Egypt, “Coptic”: Rutscowscaya 1986: 32, No. 26.

The “ear probes\spoons” are very delicate and thin and were no doubt used in activities where force was not necessary like taking or applying cosmetics (Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 584; Rimon 1997: 66*), removing dirt and wax from the ears (Davidson 1952: 182) or treat them with liquids (Rimon 1997: 66*). All were handmade. The flat or concave working end is a little raised and inclined relative to the shaft. This phenomenon is certainly connected with the special use of the tool, though it is unclear whether the two types had different uses. Davidson (op. cit.) claims – without evidence – that the first was used for mixing cosmetics and the second for cleaning ears or applying cosmetics. Crummy (1983: 59) thinks the opposite is true. The shafts often terminate in a point, which could also be used.

157. Definition: Fragment of composite comb 16\S\6231 Description and interpretation: A small piece of the central side-plate from a composite comb – the only one at Caesarea. The guide line for sawing the teeth is preserved on one side, as well as the ends of the spaces between them, to which it extended. Two rivet holes partly survived on the other side, stained with green color left by the bronze or copper rivets. L. 24mm, w. 10mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Late Roman. Morphological analogies: Estonia, Varbola, 13th cent.: Tamla and Maldre 2001: 373, Fig. 7. Germany, Münster, 8th cent., from bone comb workshop: MacGregor 1989: 110, Fig. 1. England, York, Medieval: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999 Fig. 883: 7531. Notes: None.

155. Definition: Straight, one-sided decorated comb 16\M\98-7147 Description and interpretation: Half of a one-sided medium-sized comb. Both sides are identical in their treatment and decoration. The complete side is straight. The teeth are thick and evenly spaced. The spaces were sawn from both sides, as the cross-section shows, although the sawing angle is different. No guideline was marked for the teeth. The comb was decorated with circle-and-dot designs, probably several small and one large (composed of two circles) alternatively. Two objects of this type were found. L. 47mm, w. 21mm, t. 4mm, tooth l. 20mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER: Ben Dov 1982: 164 lower left. France, Vienne, R, undecorated: Sautot 1978: 77, Pl. 47: 9. Notes: Exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam.

158. Definition: Composite two-sided comb with pins 16\A\0009 Description and interpretation: Section of a composite comb of the type common in the Levant even today. Two or three such segments were attached to each other with metal pins. Two iron pins, one thick and one thin, survived on both sides. Six out of seven thick, evenly spaced teeth remained on one facet. Eleven thin and densely spaced teeth and the roots of three more probably represent all of

156. Definition: Straight, two-sided decorated comb 16\A\0157 Description and interpretation: Two-sided comb, thicker in the center than at the edges. The remaining side is straight and thicker than usual. There are five thick, evenly spaced teeth surviving on one side as well as the bases of five more. On the other side many thin and 47

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS the thin teeth for this section. They were diagonally sawn from both directions. Guidelines were engraved before sawing on both sides and both facets although sometimes the artisan ignored them. Two objects of this type were found. L. 74mm, w. 17mm, t. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER: Ben Dov 1982: 164 (upper left, with two holes for metal pins). Sepphoris, RB, with pins and a metal band (Kibbutz Shamir collection, exhibited in the Ein Dor Museum). Notes: Ethnographic analogies: Lod, Ottoman: Torgë 2003. Damascus, recent: Strodeur 1980. Cairo, recent: purchased by the Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv.

Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Nessana, H 2nd-1st cent. BCE?, palette: Colt 1962: 51-52, Pl. 21: 23; Ayalon 1999 fig. 40. Notes: None. 161. Definition: Large spoon with an oval bowl 17\S\24036 Description and interpretation: The oval bowl of a large, carefully made spoon. The handle was broken off in Antiquity. Its dimensions and concave shape (in crosssection) show that it was made from a large long bone diaphysis. The base of the tapering handle extends 1/3 up the length of the bowl from its base. Its sides were sawn diagonally. The bowl is a little worn. Three items of this type were found. L. 83mm, w. 34mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 6th cent. Morphological analogies: Dor, R: Stern 1994 Fig. 225. Meiron, strustum IV, LR: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.6: 5. Castra, LR 2nd-4th cent.: Yeivin and Finkielsztejn 1999: 50 No. 1; B, from a grave: Siegelmann in preparation, Fig. 10: 5A. Sepphoris, B?: Yeivin 1937: 33, Pl. 1 Fig. 2. Greece, Corinth, R 1st cent., ligula: Davidson 1952: 189-190, Pl. 84: 1393. Turkey, Ephesos, R, ivory, cloven hoof-shaped handle, for medical use: Uzel 1999: 212, Taf. 27: 14. Hungary, Szőny, beginning of 1st-middle 2nd cent., decorated: Bíró 1994: 99, 127, Pl. 54: 473. Hungary, Brigetio, from Roman fortress: Bíró 1997 No. 27. Yugoslavia, 1st-2nd (Nos. 1-2), end of 4th-5thI (No. 3) cent.: Petković 1995: 83, Taf. 20: 1-3. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, ligula: Gostenčnik 2001: 384-385, Fig. 4: 23. France, R: Barbier 1992: 125, Pl. 91: 553. France, Lyon, R: Sautot 1978: 64, Pl. 28: 7; R 3rd cent. BCE-3rd CE, ligula: Béal 1983a: 252-253, Pl. 46: 794-795. England, York, Medieval: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1973, Fig. 929: 7062. Notes: None.

159. Definition: Bowl for grinding cosmetics 16\P\0117 Description and interpretation: Small and delicate bowl, only half of which was preserved. The center base was carved as two stepped circles, the outer deliberately blurred towards the edge, where filing marks remained. The reason for this alteration is unclear. The bowl’s rim appears square from the top, but the sunken lathe-turned bowl is circular. The indentation from the lathe may still be seen on the bottom. Instead of a parallel indentation in the center of the bowl, a round projection (d. 6mm) surrounded by a groove remained there. This part was probably held against the opposite point of the lathe during the turning work (see Chapter VI). Later, that uncarved part was removed by hand with the exception of this low projection, which was not completely smoothed. The bowl has a projecting rim surrounded by a ridge. The edge is flat. One corner is broken. These bowls are rather common and were probably used to grind and prepare cosmetics and medicines. This is the only object of its type. L. 40mm, w. 18mm, h. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Nessana, B-A, ivory: Colt 1962: 52, Pl. 21: 15. Horvat Migdal (Tsur Natan), B-A, ivory: author’s excavation, unpublished. Israel: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 41. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, toothed edges: Strzygowski 1904: 213, Taf. 20 No. 8934. Egypt, today in Hungary, rectangular, depressions on edges: Török 1993: 66, Pl. 99: Q 7. Notes: None.

162. Definition: Medium-sized spoon with oval bowl 17\A\0636 Description and interpretation: Medium-sized, smoothed spoon with an oval bowl and a broken handle. The rear edge is slightly higher than the handle, which is attached to the base of the bowl. Two parallel grooves were engraved across the width of the handle. Two objects of this type were found. L. 66mm, the bowl l. 38mm, w. 16mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Meiron, LR 3th -4th cent.: Feig 2002: 98, Fig. 10: 2. Notes: None.

160. Definition: Tablet for grinding cosmetics? 16\A\0016-1 Description and interpretation: Piece of a flattened scapula with a very evenly smoothed surface and with the narrow edge sawn off. The broader, proximal end is broken. Three designs of two-circles-and-dot were engraved on the back near the sawn edge. Around them and in the center are brown stains from some unknown material. Many scratches, produced by a pointed tool may be seen in the center. It was possibly a palette on which cosmetics; medicines, spices etc. were cut and ground. This is the only object of its type. L. 125mm, w. 70mm, t. 20mm. Species\skeletal element: Large scapula.

163. Definition: Medium-sized spoon with an almondshaped bowl 17\P\0119 Description and interpretation: Medium-sized spoon broken into two parts, which do not fit together but doubtless, belonged to the same object. The handle is 48

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE broken. The bowl is shaped like an almond or a pear, with the narrow edge attached to the handle. This point was weak so the artisan left it thicker both at its top (where it is higher than the bowl rim and decorated with two parallel grooves) and on its base, where it is stepped. The lower thickening continues along the bottom of the bowl and gradually projects from it. Two objects of this type were found. L. 126mm, the bowl l. 50mm, w. 23mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman, 3rd cent. Morphological analogies: Cyprus, Salamis, 2nd-3rd cent., ligula: Chavane 1975: 47-48, Pl. 15: 131. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER: Gostenčnik 2001: 385, Fig. 4: 2425. France, Lyon, R, 1st-3rd cent.: Béal 1983a: 253, Pl. 46: 796. England, York, Medieval, with tiny bowl on handle end: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1973, Fig. 929: 7063. Notes: Silver analogies, Cyprus, 6th cent.: Dalton 1911 Fig. 359.

Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Masada, ER: Yadin 1966: 145. Jerusalem, ER: Geva 2003: 346, Pl. 13.1: B11. Jerusalem, ER: Ben Dov 1982: 164 (top center, round shape). Jerusalem, City of David Stratum 5, R, for eating, better decorated: Ariel 1990: 142, Fig. 23: BI 195. Muraba’at Cave, R, rounded: Benoit, Milik and de Vaux 1961: 43, Fig. 12: 1, Pl. 14: 5. Beth Shan, R?, not identical, ivory: Fitzgerald 1931: 44, Pl. 40: 29. Israel, R?: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 43 (2nd from top). Notes: Unknown outside Israel? (cf. also Geva 2003: 346). 166. Definition: Circular concave small spoon 18\P\0164 Description and interpretation: Almost complete (except the end of the handle) small spoon with a circular concave bowl. It was carved on a lathe but the lathe indentation was completely smoothed away. The attachment of the handle to the bowl was reinforced by making it triangular and thickened, decorated with five parallel grooves on the top and three on the bottom. Its base on the bowl’s base is straight and short. The handle was carefully smoothed. The edge of the bowl is a little worn. Three objects of this type were found (the other two are undecorated). L. 131mm, d. 24mm, t. 5.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER, with lathe indentation: Avigad 1983 Pl. 236 (lower center). Jerusalem, ER 1st cent., from grave, undecorated: Kloner and Zissu 2003: 64, Fig. 41: 3. Masada, ER: Yadin 1966: 145. Caesarea, RB, with lathe indentation: Holum et al. 1988 Fig. 120. Meiron, Stratum IV, LR: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.6: 2. Asherat, LR 3rd-beginning of 4th cent., from grave: Smithline 1997 Fig. 12: 1. Jordan, Mukawwar, ER 1st cent., undecorated: Loffreda 2000 Tav. 30. Syria, Hamma, R., undecorated: Ploug 1985: 239, Fig. 59: o. Syria, Tell Nebi Mend, H-R, undecorated, with lathe indentation: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 2b. Syria, Dura Europos, H-R, undecorated: Matheson 1992 Fig. 16 top. Turkey, Tarsus, HR, 4-5 with lathe indentations: Goldman 1950: 397, Fig. 271: 4-6. Turkey, Ephesos, in the museum, undecorated, for medicines or cosmetics: Uzel 1999: 212, Taf. 28: 17. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., undecorated: Davidson 1952: 189, 191, Pl. 85: 1396-1397. Hungary, Gorsium, 4th cent., undecorated: Bíró 1987 Fig. 30: 284. Hungary, Szőny, beginning of 1st-middle 2nd cent., different decoration: Bíró 1994: 99, 127, Pl. 55: 475. Yugoslavia, 2nd cent., undecorated, for cosmetics: Petković 1995: 82, Taf. 19: 1-2, 4. France, Alésia, R, undecorated: Sautot 1978: 24, Pl. 3: 4. France, Les Bolards, R, undecorated: Ibid.: 40-41, Pl. 23: 13, 5-6. France, Malain, R, undecorated: Ibid.: 65, Pl. 39: 2, 4. France, Lyon, 3rd cent. BCE-4th CE, undecorated, cochlear, some with lathe indentation: Béal 1983a: 249-251, Pls. 44-45: 781-782, 787, 789-790. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st3rd cent., undecorated, with lathe indentation, for mixing cosmetics and medicines and eating cochlear: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 175 No. 142. England, Wilcote, R 1st-

164. Definition: Spoon bowl with carved tangs at base 17\A\0175 Description and interpretation: Spoon bowl (the handle is missing except for its thick base), better designed and worked than the previous examples. The front part is rounded and thin (to enable it to pick substances; see cross-section) while the rear is straight. The inner part follows the outer shape and is deeper than usual, especially towards the back. Two tang-like projections were carved there by filing diagonally from the base backward. A semi-circular groove was engraved on the base around the base of the tangs. The rear edge is somewhat higher than the handle. This is the only object of its type. L. 52mm, w. 28mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 165. Definition: Flat decorated small spoon 18\S\73044 Description and interpretation: A small, flat, carefully smoothed and nicely decorated spoon. The handle is broken and the remaining section is partly decorated with an engraved reticular design and three grooves. The base of the handle on the bowl is lined with two diagonal asymmetrical grooves which cross each other and continue beyond it. The bowl, shaped like a drop or a leaf, is at the same level as the handle. Its flat face is decorated with a three-leaf rosette enclosed in a circle, made with a chisel-compass which left an indentation in the center. The leaves were created by three bows incised from different directions. The work was done carelessly: the end of one leaf does not extend to the enclosing circle while the tip of another crosses it. A line of the third leaf was incised in an incorrect diameter and does not fit the general layout, so another line had to be added. Three circle-and-dot designs were asymmetrically engraved between the leaves with another one on the pointed end of the bowl (in most parallels this one is missing). This is the only object of its type. L. 80mm, w. 20mm, t. 6mm. 49

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 2nd I cent.: Hands 1993: 13, Fig. 83: 7. England, Verulamium, end of 1st-beginning of 2nd cent. and end of 3rdbeginning of 4th cent. respectively: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 73, Fig. 31: 282-283. England, Colchester, 4thI cent., undecorated: Wangh and Goodburn 1972: 152, Fig. 55: 206; 1st-3rd cent., undecorated: Crummy 1992b: 215, Fig. 6.11: 122. England, various sites, R 1st-4th cent., undecorated: MacGregor 1985: 181-182, Fig. 98: a-c. England, London, R: Smith 1859 Pl. 34 No. 21. Notes: Bronze analogy, Masada, ER, among doctor’s tools, ligula: Hershkovitz 1996 Fig. 2c. Bronze analogy, among doctor’s tools: Künzl 1983 Fig. 18: 13-14. The same, insufflator: Jackson 1990 Fig. 4: 12. The same, England, Wilcote, R 1st-2ndI cent., ligula: Hands 1993: 13, Fig. 27: 34.

and Reese 1988: 566, 575, Fig. 15: 35-37. Lybia, Leptis Magna, 1st cent., ivory: Ashton 1997: 65, Fig. 9. France, Les Bolards, R, pin: Sautot 1978: 42, Pl. 17: 6. France, Malain, R, spatula for preparing and applying cosmetics, paints and medicines: Ibid.: 65, Pl. 39: 1. France, Lyon, R end of 1st-beginning of 2nd cent.: Béal 1983a: 241-242, Pl. 42: 762-764. France, Nîmes and Orange, R: Béal 1984: 63-64, Pl. 12: 249-250. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-3rd cent., sonda-spatula for probing bodies internally: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 174, Nos. 139-140 (No. 138 – similar bronze tool). Notes: Bronze analogy, 4th cent., cosmetic tool found inside glass vessel in grave: Barag 1974 Fig. 2: 1; Zevulun and Olenik 1978 Fig. 277. Bronze\copper comparisons, ear probe – doctor’s tool, ligula, oricularium specillum: Künzl 1983 Figs. 3 (Pompeii), 16: 30-36 (Asia), 18: 11 (Ephesos); Jackson 1990 Fig. 4: 910; Hands 1993: 13, 19, Fig. 26: 12-15 (England).

167-168. Definition: Flat “ear-probe” 18\P\0188-1; S\87763 Description and interpretation: Two small, delicate, carefully smoothed handmade spoons, almost complete except the ends of the handles. Both have a flat “bowl”, round from the top and inclined in relationship to the handle. Seven objects of this type were found. No. 167: l. 108mm, w. 4.5mm, t. 1.5mm. No. 168: l. 107mm, the bowl d. 5mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 167: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Oboda, H-R until 3rd cent., for cosmetics or medicine: Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997: 208, Pl. 4: 36. Egypt, Alexandria, 6th-7th cent., from bath, ear spoon: Rodziewicz M. 1979b: 136, Taf. V.2. Egypt, Karanis, R, for cosmetics: Friedman 1989: 147 No. 57. Turkey, Ephesos, in the museum, ligula; auriscalpa\oricularia for treating the ear: Uzel 1999: 212-213, Taf. 30: 27-32. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., No. 1347 – 4th cent., 1338 and 1343 with sooty tips, for cosmetics: Davidson 1952: 182, Pl. 83: 1336-1338, 13431347. Tunisia, Carthage, end of 2nd cent., cosmeticsapplying spoon: Henig 1984: 86, 188, Fig. 62: 21; 4thIIbeginning of 5th cent., ligula, some decorated: Hutchinson

169. Definition: Concave “ear-probe” 18\S\25513 Description and interpretation: Small, delicate handmade spoon. The handle is broken. The tiny bowl is concave with a fairly pointed depression on the bottom. It is round from the top but asymmetrical relative to the handle. Vertical scraping marks can still be seen on the handle. This is the only object of its type. L. 79mm, the bowl d. 4mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 4th-5th cent. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, R, 1326 no later than 2nd cent., 1327 1st - beginning of 2nd cent., ear probe or for cosmetics: Davidson 1952: 181, Pl. 82: 1325-1327. Yugoslavia, 3rd-4th cent., cosmetic spatula: Petković 1995: 84, Taf. 21: 2-3. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st5th cent., for cosmetics or perfumes: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 174 No. 137. Notes: Bronze parallels: Greece, Corinth, R: Davidson 1952: 181, Pl. 82: 1318-1324.

50

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE IV.C.3. JEWELRY.

(Nos. 246-247); human figure-shaped (Nos. 248-249); unidentifiable (No. 250). The shape of many bone pins probably imitates that of pins made in metal and other materials (Crummy 1983: 20).

This general headline embraces several groups of objects, the majority of them – the pins, consist of about a quarter of the whole Caesarea assemblage. Other finds include pendants, rings, bracelets, beads, etc.

Although the pin is a definite find appearing in both written sources and iconography, scholars debate on the way these objects were used. These artifacts probably had several functions (Béal 1983a: 183). One opinion is that they were used for designing and holding dressed hair, for attaching veils, hairnets or diadems to it (WardPerkins and Claridge 1978: 138; Bíró 1987: 60, 1994 Fig. 8) or just for decorating the hair (Rahmani 1960a: 144145). Others claim that they served to fasten clothes (for their uses in 11th cent. France as attested by Rashi, see Cattan 1997: 66). Pins were found in Roman period graves adjacent to the head, strengthening the first view (Amman, Jordan: Ibrahim and Gordon 1987; Fayyum, Egypt: Béal 1983a: 183; Hungary: Bíró, pers. comm.; Colchester, England: Crummy 1983: 19; York, England: MacGregor 1985: 113). In other tombs, however, they were found near the arm or other parts of the body, suggesting that they were used to fasten garments (Bíró 1994: 23-25, 81). Bíró (op. cit.), based on the appearance of pins in Hellenistic and Roman iconography (e.g. Chavane 1975 Figs. 6a, 6d) claims that long ones were used with clothes and short pins – with hair. The fact that in most pins from Caesarea the shaft was deliberately left rough (compare to Berry 1988: 229 No. 14) does not help here, as in both cases it was unseen (so smoothing was unneeded), and being rough helped in keeping the pin fixed in the hair or the clothes.6 Pins with delicate metal chains attached to their heads, found in several countries do not help either, as the chain could have been used to stabilize the pin in both cases. Native American groups in Canada customarily held blankets around their shoulders using decorated pins (Stewart 1973: 142).

IV.c.3.1. Pins. 386 identifiable pins were counted, in addition to about 730 shaft pieces which may have come from pins, needles, kohl sticks, etc. If the needles also served as clothing pins (see above) this group will become even larger. It is surprising and inexplicable that only one or two pins were made of ivory (No. 543; compare to St. Claire 1996 Pl. 7). Bone pins were very common in the Roman Empire; many scholars have proposed different ways to divide them into types. They mainly relied on the shape of the head which has numerous variations, some decorative and others with religious or symbolic meaning. Perhaps both practical and symbolic aspects guided the pins manufacturers and users (Johns 1996: 115). Bíró (1994: 33, 80) noted the similarity among pins – especially those with a decorated head – throughout the Roman Empire and concluded that the artisans used common ‘pattern books’. This phenomenon exists in the Caesarea assemblage too. Some pins were painted (at Caesarea – only S\18871-2, which possibly got its green color from a nearby bronze or copper object) or gilded (below). The extreme processing of the pins in most cases does not permit the identification of the bone from which they were made. However, the blanks and unfinished pins (below) suggest that they were usually made from pieces of long bone diaphyses. The division used here is mainly that suggested by Bíró (1994: 24-35), with necessary alternations related to the local assemblage. Three groups of pins were defined, in addition to the introductory collection of heads and shafts which were manufactured separately (see below and in Chapters VI-VII): simple pins, pins with geometrically-shaped heads, and special pins. The subtypes are: Introductory group: heads and shafts made separately (Nos. 170-176). Handmade simple pins, the head shapes are: conical (Nos. 177-178); polygonal (Nos. 179-181); and round, elliptical, olive-shaped, mushroom, etc. (Nos. 182-190). Pins with geometrically-shaped heads: globular, cylindrical, domed, etc., on a grooved collar or not (Nos. 191-201); globular, elliptic, etc. on mouldings (Nos. 202-209); domed or round (Nos. 210-212); stamp-like (Nos. 213214); drop\pear-shaped on grooved collar (Nos. 215220); bottle\jar-shaped (Nos. 221-225); “bead-andreels” and column(?)-shaped (Nos. 226-227). Special pins with carved heads: globular, pear-shaped or cylindrical (Nos. 228-230); cone (Nos. 231-234); dropshaped (Nos. 235-236); cylindrical (Nos. 237-238); feather(?)-shaped (No. 239); poppy-shaped (Nos. 240241); hollow tower-shaped (Nos. 242- 243); amphorashaped (Nos. 244-245); hand holding an object-shaped

A third proposition relies on the fact that the pin tip is often stained with a dark substance (see Photo 1: 15-16) suggesting their use to apply kohl or wax (Davidson 1952: 279; Berry 1988: 229). A stained pin from Carthage was checked and the stain was found to be caused by an in-organic material (Hurst and Henig 1994: 159, 270, Figs. 14\11: 2, 14\12). Another claim in this connection is that the thin pins would easily break when stuck in the hair or clothes, but not in applying kohl. Bone and metal kohl boxes with decorated-headed application sticks are still common in southwest Asia (Ayalon 1999 Fig. 45). Béal (1983a: 221) claims that the stained tip may have originated in the custom of heating bone tips in fire in order to harden them. There is another possibility: such a bone point could be used to trim the wick in an oil lamp (Tosephta Kelim Baba Metzi’a 1, 8; Zevulun and Olenik 1978: 77, 60*, Ill. 198 – metal implements). 6

51

Davidson (1952:278) claimed that the rough pins were never finished but their large numbers and the fact that many broke during use and were resharpened contradict this idea.

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS graves, 18: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 1:12. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., ivory?: Davidson 1952: 284, Pl. 118: 2312. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent., less pointed, some unfinished, with shafts: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 571, 573, Figs. 12: 19, 32, 14: 17-19, 32. Hungary, Szőny and Dunapentele, 4th cent.: Bíró 1994: 87, 126, Pl. 28: 304, 306. No. 171: Hungary, Gorsium, 2nd-4th cent., with grooved neck: Bíró 1987 Fig. 22: 190. Notes: None.

The fact that many broken pins were found in graves – where usually objects remain intact – may be explained not only by their fragility but also as part of an intended act of ritual magic. Six pinecone-shaped pin heads found in a grave at Intercisa, Hungary, were probably broken to symbolize mourning (Bíró 1994: 64). Arthur (1977: 368372) discussed the magic and ritual aspects of pins with figurative heads. For portraits and paintings showing the use of pins in hair and clothes see, among others: British Museum Guide 1921: 94, Pl. 15, 1929: 116-117, Figs. 121-122; Davidson 1952 Pl. 148a; L’Orange 1965 Fig. 52; Bíró 1994: 23, Fig. 5; Walker and Bierbrier 1997: 5759, 110, Nos. 33, 35, 104.

172. Definition: Drop-shaped head and its shaft 19\P\0178 Description and interpretation: A large drop-shaped head and its shaft. The head is covered with lathe-made parallel incisions. The part of the shaft pushed into the head is narrower and better smoothed. Three parallel grooves were incised beneath it. Two objects of this type were found. The head l. 18mm, d. 10mm, the hole l. 9mm, d. 3.5mm, the shaft l. 14mm, the part pushed into the hole l. 4mm (i.e. it filled only half of it, perhaps a secondary shaft). Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 5th cent. Morphological analogies: Meiron, Stratum V, B: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.7: 36. Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908 Pl. 33: 9. Hungary, Szőny end of 2nd-middle of 3rd cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 12: 98. Notes: None.

It is usually easy to differentiate between simple handmade pins and the nice lathe-turned ones. Sometimes, however, the handmade pins are also very carefully made, probably by an experienced artisan. The lathe-carved pins at Caesarea are very numerous, unlike the situation in Europe; in Colchester, England, for instance, all 342 Roman period pins were handmade (Crummy 1983: 19). A large number of the handmade pins at Caesarea were produced head and shaft in one piece, while in many lathe-made ones they were carved separately. This claim, however, needs more research. The separate production of head and shaft (Hogarth 1908: 187; Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997: 193, 208) demands more skill on behalf of the craftsman, because of the need to good adjustment (contra Béal 1983a: 202), but it gives the user some advantages. When the weak shaft broke, it could be easily replaced, saving the more complicated work of carving a new head too. Indeed some of these pins give the impression that the head and shaft were not manufactured together as they are not identical in shape and color. One shaft (S\18844) bears some dark material on its top, probably glue with which the head was attached to it. A secondary use is revealed in the tips too: the original tip of a pin seems to be centralized, but when it broke it was repointed but this time it was usually onesided. These pins are characterized by a short shaft.

173-176. Definition: Pin shafts (one gilded) 19\A\01751; S\83314-1; 88289; 16248-2 Photos 1: 12, 2: 4 Description and interpretation: Four pin shafts prepared separately from the heads. No. 173: Cylindrical smooth stick whose lower part is broken off. The top, which tapers in order to mount the head on it, is made in two sections: the lower is conical and tapers towards the top, ending in a small moulding with five grooves incised on it. Its lower part is gilded, indicating that originally the head was coated with gold. The upper part is also conical with a small lathe indentation on its top. L. 19mm, d. 3mm. No. 174: Handmade cylindrical stick tapering downwards, where the tip is missing. The top terminates in a straight end except for a short, thin pin or jointtongue with which the head could be attached. Four objects like Nos. 173-174 were found. L. 75mm, d. 5mm. No. 175: Complete shaft. The one-sided tip is probably secondary, made after the original broke. Most of the shaft was left rough. Only the upper part and the collar were smoothed, possibly on the lathe. The collar is conical and three grooves decorate its lower section. Above it is a short cylindrical section on which the head was mounted. Two lines, which do not run around the whole circumference, can be observed near its base. They possibly resulted when the head was pressed into place. Ten objects of this type were found. L. 85mm, d. 4mm. No. 176: The upper part of a pin shaft whose tip is missing. It is smoothed and narrows from the top towards the bottom. There is a narrower grooved section in its upper part, and above it a wider rough cylinder with a

Introductory group: heads and shafts made separately 170-171. Definition: Drop- and bottle-shaped pin head 19\S\84138-1; A\0218 Description and interpretation: Two pin heads made separately on a lathe. Three objects of this type were found. No. 170: Rather large drop-shaped and carefully smoothed head with a hole in its bottom for the shaft. L. 21mm, d. 11mm, the hole l. 8mm, d. 4mm. No. 171: Small bottle-shaped head with a large lathe indentation on its top and a hole in its bottom for the shaft. Part of the side is flat (original shape of the bone?). L. 11mm, d. 7mm, the hole l. 5mm, d. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 170: Late Roman-Byzantine; No. 171: Byzantine-Early Arab, 6th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 170: Oboda, H-R until 3rd cent.: Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997: 208, Pl. 4: 35. Beth Shan, R?: Fitzgerald 1931: 44, Pl. 40: 25. Castra, B, from 52

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Simple handmade pins

178. Definition: Pin? Conical head, grooved 19\S\38295 Description and interpretation: A rather large pin (?). It is smoothed and narrows towards the broken tip. The top is shaped like a truncated cone mounted on a short cylinder, and one facet of it was cut. Beneath it the shaft is decorated with two groups of circumferential grooves bordering a herringbone design. Similar objects from Ashkelon were identified as handles (ligulae; WapnishHesse, pers. comm.), but it could also be a large pin (to hold dressed hair?) or a stylus, in which case the truncated part of the top was used to erase the writing. Two objects of this type were found. L. 154mm, d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, A, different grooves: Ayalon 1999: 20, Fig. 4. Notes: None.

177. Definition: Simple pin with pointed conical head 19\S\23926 Description and interpretation: Complete, simple, carefully smoothed pin with a pointed conical head continuing straight from the shaft. The shaft narrows from under the top down to the centered tip. The pin is worn. This type is very common in Europe but not in Israel. It may have had other uses: as a stylus, a kohl stick (Verhagen 1993: 379), etc. 18 objects of this type were found (compare also to No. 40). L. 130mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Sepphoris, B?: Yeivin 1937: 33, Pl. 1 Fig. 2. Egypt, R: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 45. Tunisia, Carthage, 2nd-3rd cent., small spindle?: Hurst and Henig 1994: 23, 165-166, 270, Fig. 14.11: 3. Cyprus, Salamis, R 1st-3rd cent., for holding dressed hair (Fig. 6a): Chavane 1975: 169, Pls. 47: 477, 480-481, 70: 480-481. Greece, Corinth, LR-B: Davidson 1952: 287, Pl. 120: 2387. Turkey, Tarsus, H-R: Goldman 1950: 397, Fig. 271: 13. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 1st-end of 2nd cent.: Bíró 1987 Figs. 7: 22, 10: 63-64; probably 2nd-4th cent.: Ibid. Fig. 22: 203. Hungary, Szőny and Dunapentele, 1st5th cent., hair pins: Bíró 1994: 78-79, 126, Pls. 14-15: 134-151. Yugoslavia, 2nd-middle 4th cent.: Petković 1995 Tab. 14: 12, Taf. 15: 1-5. Switzerland, R 1st-3rd cent.: Deschler-Erb 2001 Fig. 7: 1638, 1002. Holland, Maastricht, beginning of 5th cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 39, 73, Fig. 25: 2. Holland, Valkenburg, R, for hair or garments, with worn tip: Verhagen 1993: 383, Fig. 23: 95. France, Alésia, R, 5: Sautot 1978: 24, Pl. 2: 2. France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a: 187, Pl. 33: 597, 600. France, Nîmes, R?: Béal 1984: 50, Pl. 9: 182. France, R, needle\point: Barbier 1992: 124, Pl. 91: 547. England, York, R 1st-3rdI cent.: MacGregor 1985: 116, Fig. 64: 1. England, Colchester, 1st-4th cent.: Crummy 1983: 20, Fig. 17: 122. England, Verulamium, beginning of 3rd cent. and end of 4th-beginning of 5th cent. respectively: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 73, Fig. 31: 278-279. England, several sites, from 70 to 200\250, simple type, therefore the oldest: Crummy 1979: 159-160, Fig. 1: 1.

179-181. Definition: Handmade pin, polygonal head 19\S\26850-1; P\0041-2; 0056 Description and interpretation: Three variations of a pin with a polygonal (“diamond-shaped”) head, which is quite common at Caesarea. All were simple, handmade, and even crudely made. All were made with the head and shaft carved together. The thickest point is usually at the center of the shaft narrowing towards the head and the tip. The polygonal carving was sometimes carried out (with a knife?) even on the top of the head. The shape of the head may differ – some are long and narrow while others are squat and thick, sometimes almost round. These pins are very common in Europe and usually relatively late – 3rd\4th-5th cent. No. 179: complete, with vertical planing marks on the shaft. Judging by its length, the pin probably broke in the past and was re-sharpened. The facets on the head were only partly smoothed. L. 87mm, the head l. 12mm, d. 9mm. No. 180: Similar pin lacking its tip. The shaft is smooth. The facets on the head are triangular and rhomboidshaped. L. 76mm, the head l. 13mm, w. 6mm. No. 181: The upper part of a similar pin. The remaining shaft is smooth, but filing striations remained on the head. The facets on the head are triangular and rhomboid-shaped. L. 23mm, the head l. 14mm, w. 6mm. Thirteen objects of this type were found. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Nos. 179-180: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent.; No. 181: Roman, 2nd-3rd cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, R: Bagatti and Milik 1958 Fot. 128: 17. Beit Nattif, 3rd[-4th] cent.: Baramki 1936 Pl. 9: 16. Samaria, LR: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 27. Jerusalem, R-B, from a grave: Baramki 1931 Pl. 10: 11. Caesarea, R-B: Holum et al. 1988 Fig. 120. Sepphoris, B?: Yeivin 1937: 33, Pl. 1 Fig. 2. Jordan, Amman, R 2nd-3rd cent., from graves: Ibrahim and Gordon 1987 Pl. 29: 1-4. Jordan, Jerash, R 3rd cent.: Clark and Bowsher 1986: 264-266, Pl. 26.1: c. Egypt, R: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 37. Tunisia, Carthage, 4th cent.: Hurst and Henig 1994: 272, Fig. 14.11: 4. Hungary, Szőny: Bíró 1994: 87, Pl. 22: 295. Hungary, Szőny and Dunapentele,

straight end, with no lathe indentation. This means that there was a continuation here – either another rod or a lathe rough-out end (see below). It is unclear whether the head was mounted on this cylinder or whether the artisan planned to carve a narrow head from it. The first possibility seems more reasonable. Four objects of this type were found. L. 60mm, d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Nos. 174-176: Late Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 175: Oboda, R middle 1st cent. [mistakenly identified as a complete pin]: Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997: 193, 208, Pl. 4: 34. Meiron, Stratum V, LR-B: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.7: 33. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent.: Davidson 1952: 278 n. 61, Pl. 148b. Notes: None.

53

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 4th cent.: Ibid.: 91, 127, Pl. 33: 363-367. Hungary, Syrmium, 3rd-4th cent., from pin workshop, handmade: Saranovic-Svetek 1980: 132, Fig. 3: 1-2. Yugoslavia, the comparison to No. 180 – 4th-5thI cent., typical to the Roman limes, local production: Petković 1995: 131, Tab. 14: I, Taf. 11: 1-17. Holland, Maastricht, 4th cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 39, 73, Fig. 25: 7. Holland, Valkenburg, R 3rd cent., unfinished: Verhagen 1993: 384, Fig. 23: 105. France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent., from pin workshop: Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Fig. 5: 13. France, Malain, R: Sautot 1978: 66, Pl. 33: 2, 5. France, Lyon, R, end of 1st-5th cent., 695-696, 699 – middle 2nd-middle 3rd cent. [defined as having a round head but, in fact, it is polygonal]: Béal 1983a: 196-199, Pl. 35: 677, 695-696, 699. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 184 No. 190; 6th-7th cent.: Ripoll López 2001: 226 No. 280. England, various sites, middle 3rd-end of 4th\beginning of 5th cent.: Crummy 1979: 161162, Fig. 1: 5. England, Colchester, 4th cent. onward: Crummy 1983: 22-23, Fig. 20: 385. England, Portchester, R especially middle 3rd-5th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 117, Fig. 64: 11. England, York, 9th-13th cent.: MacGregor 1995: 414, Fig. 157: 1.9-1.10. England, Verulamium, 5th cent.: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 71, Fig. 30: 265. Notes: No. 180 was published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 2: 1. Jet analogies: McWhirr 1982 Pls. 16, 30 (right). Silver comparison, Carthage, 7th cent.: Henig 1984: 23, 56, Fig. 58: 3.

134: 20. Greece, Corinth, R 2nd-3rd cent., head latheturned, shaft made separately by hand: Davidson 1952: 284, Pl. 118: 2322; R 3rd-4th cent., head almost cylindrical: Ibid.: 2320. Hungary, Budapest and Dunapentele, 2nd-3rd cent.: Bíró 1994: 80-81,126, Pls. 1718: 175, 181, 183, 187. France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a: 201, Pl. 36: 708. No. 183: Nahf, LR 3rd-4th cent., from grave: Sussman 1982 Pl. 8: 12 (left). Kisra, B, from grave, kohl stick: Stern 1997: 128, Fig. 15: 79. Silet edh-Dhahr, LR-B, from grave: Sellers and Baramki 1953, Fig. 19: 279. Castra, B, from graves, 5, one gilded: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 3: 2. Samaria-Sebaste: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 12. Jordan, Jerash, 4th-5th cent.: Clark and Bowsher 1986: 264-266, Pl. 26.1: i. Egypt, R: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 39, 41. Syria, Hamma, RB: Ploug 1985: 238, Fig. 59: h. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., head and neck lathe-turned, unfinished: Davidson 1952: 284, Pl. 119: 2326; 278 n. 61, Pl. 148b; 3rd-4th cent.: Ibid.: 2326. Tunisia, Carthage, 5th cent. onwards: Henig 1984: 188, Fig. 62: 36, 50; 4thII-beginning of 5th cent., some unfinished: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 571, Figs. 12: 16, 13: 7, 9-10, 14-16; 6th cent.?: Hurst and Henig 1994: 25-26, 272, Fig. 14.11: 12. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 1st-end of 2nd cent.: Bíró 1987 Figs. 7: 1718, 8: 33-34; end of 2nd-middle 3rd cent.: Ibid. Figs. 15: 106, 108-121, 124-125, 127, 18: 144-148; 4th cent.: Ibid. Figs. 26: 221, 29: 256-270, 273. Hungary, Szőny, 2nd-3rd cent.: Bíró 1994: 79-80, 126, Pls. 16-17: 155-157, 163, 166 etc. Yugoslavia, 2nd-4th cent.: Petković 1995 Tab. 14: 3\2, Taf. 12: 1-12. Holland, Maastricht, 4th cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 39, 73, Fig. 25: 4, 16. Holland, Voorburg, R: van Vilsteren 1987: 40, No. 44. France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent., blank from pin workshop: Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Fig. 5: 31. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 25, Pl. 2: 7. France, Les Bolards, R: Ibid.: 42, Pl. 17: 7, 15. France, R, in the Dijon Museum: Ibid.: 79, Pl. 49: 2. France, Lyon, R, end of 1st-5th cent., 679-680 – 2ndII, 686 – middle 2nd-middle 3rd cent.: Béal 1983a: 191, 196, 199, Pl. 34: 628, 679-680, 686. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 184 No. 186. England, Verulamium, 4thI cent.: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 73, Fig. 31: 277. England, York, post-Roman: MacGregor 1995: 414, Fig. 157: 1.6. England, Colchester, 3rdII cent.: Crummy 1983: 22, Fig. 19: 276.

182-184. Definition: Handmade pin, globular\elliptical head 20\P\0266; 0143-1; 0133-2 Description and interpretation: Handmade pins, head and shaft carved in one piece, with an elliptical or globular head. The shaft is usually thicker below the top. They are very common in Europe and date from the 2nd\3rd cent. onwards. In the Levant they appear even later. No. 182: Complete pin with ovoid head, flattened from the top. The shaft is smooth, with two parallel scratches in its thickest part. As the pin is rather short its tip may be secondary, although it is centered and well sharpened. Fourteen objects of this type were found. L. 74mm, the head l. 14mm, w. 9mm, t. 7mm. No. 183: Pin with a small globular head and a one-sided tip – possibly a secondary one. Vertical planing marks can be seen on the shaft. 38 objects of this type were found. L. 65mm, the head d. 4mm. No. 184: Complete pin with a large, thick, almost globular head. Vertical planing marks remained on the shaft. The broken tip is stained with a dark substance. Seventeen objects of this type were found. L. 100mm, the head l. 9mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 182: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent.; No. 184: Roman. Morphological analogies: No. 182: Meiron, Stratum IV, LR: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.7: 24. Shiqmona B, from grave, inside glass kohl vessel with two more pins and a bronze stick [accidentally?]: Elgavish 1994 Fig. 142. Gush Halav, LR 4th cent., from grave: Vitto and Edelstein 1974: 54 (left). Jordan, Pella, LR, from grave: McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982 Pl.

No. 184: Meiron, Stratum V, B: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.7: 23. Nessana, B-A: Colt 1962: 51, Pl. 21: 24. Samaria-Sebaste: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 11. Jordan, Jerash, R 3rd cent.: Clark and Bowsher 1986: 264266, Pl. 26.1: g. Jordan, Pella, 8th cent., ivory: Smith and Day 1989: 118, Pl. 62: 12. Syria, Dura Europos, H-R: Matheson 1992 Fig. 16. Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 17. Egypt, Alexandria, B 5th-7th cent.: Rodziewicz 1998: 143, Fig. 10. Lybia, Ptolemais, 4th-5th cent.: Kraeling 1962: 271 n. 303, Pl. 64 A. Tunisia, Carthage, 5th cent. onward, pin or cosmetic tool: Henig 1984: 188, Fig. 62: 33-35, 49, 51-52; 4thII-beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 569, 571, Fig. 13: 4-5, 7. Turkey, Tarsus [H-R]: Goldman 1950: 398, Fig. 54

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 271: 21-22, 26-27, 32, 34. Hungary, Gorsium, 2nd-4th cent. (esp. 4th): Bíró 1987 Figs. 15: 107, 126, 18: 150, 27: 232233, 29: 271-272, 274. Hungary, Szőny 2nd-3rd cent.: Bíró 1994: 79, 126, Pl. 16: 160. Hungary, Syrmium, 3rd-4th cent., from bone workshop with pin production waste: Saranovic-Svetek 1980: 132, Fig. 3: 3-4. Yugoslavia, 3rdII4th cent.: Petković 1995 Tab. 14: 3\1, Taf. 12: 13, 15. France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent., blank from bone workshop: Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Fig. 5: 4. France, R: Barbier 1992: 124, Pl. 91: 541, 543. France, Les Bolards, R: Sautot 1978: 42, Pl. 17: 5. France, Malain, R: Ibid.: 66, Pl. 33: 1. France, R, in the Dijon Museum: Ibid.: 79, Pl. 49: 5. France, Lyon, R end of 1st-5th cent.: Béal 1983a: 189-193, 199, 200, Pl. 34: 612-613, 616-617, 625, 627, 704. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 184 No. 184. Holland, Valkenburg, R 3rd cent.: Verhagen 1993: 381, Fig. 23: 93. Holland, Voorburg, R: van Vilsteren 1987: 40, Nos. 45-46. England, various sites, from 200 - end of 4th\beginning of 5th cent.: Crummy 1979: 161, Fig. 1: 3. England, Colchester, 3rdII cent.: Crummy 1983: 22, Fig. 19: 252, 275. England, Chalk, R, esp. middle 2nd-5th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 117, Fig. 64: 8. England, Vindolanda, R: Birley 1977 Pl. 6. England, Verulamium, end of 3rd cent.: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 73, Fig. 31: 276. England, York, post Roman, very common: MacGregor 1995: 414, Fig. 157: 1.5; 2nd10th cent. with no typological change: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1949-1950, Fig. 907: 6817, 6824. Notes: None.

this type were found. L. 98mm, the head l. 5mm, w. 4.5mm, t. 3mm. No. 188: The upper section of a thin delicate pin. The head is asymmetrical and semi-globular. The tip is missing. This is the only object of its type. L. 48mm, the head l. 3mm, d. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 188: Roman. Morphological analogies: No. 186: Jerusalem: Geva 2003: 347, Pl. 13.1: B15. Egypt, Alexandria, B 5th-7th cent.: Rodziewicz 1998: 143, Fig. 10. Cyprus, Salamis, R 1st-3rd cent.: Chavane 1975: 170-171, Pls. 47: 487490, 70: 487-490. Hungary, Gorsium, 4th cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 26: 220. France, Alésia, end of 1st-4th cent.: Béal 1984: 52-53, Pl. 9: 206. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 184 No. 185. No. 187: Jordan, Jerash, B 4th-5th cent.: Clark and Bowsher 1986: 264-266, Pl. 26.1: h-j. Egypt, Alexandria, B 5th-7th cent.: Rodziewicz 1998: 143, Fig. 10. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 206, Taf. 19 No. 8895. Cyprus, Salamis, R 1st-3rd cent.: Chavane 1975: 171, Pl. 48: 491. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 24, Pl. 2: 10. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 184 No. 187. No. 188: Samaria-Sebaste, R: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 9-10, 13-14. Castra, B, from grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 3: 11. Egypt, R: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 36. Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 21. Libya, Ptolemais, 4th-5th cent.: Kraeling 1962: 271 n. 303, Pl. 64 A. Tunisia, Carthage: Henig 1984: 188, Fig. 62: 36. Turkey, Tarsus [H-R?]: Goldman 1950: 397398, Fig. 271: 16, 18, 23, 28-31. Hungary, Gorsium, 4th cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 29: 255. Switzerland, R 1st-3rd cent.: Deschler-Erb 2001 Fig. 6: 2835, 2758. France, Lyon, R end of 1st-2ndI cent.: Béal 1983a: 188-189, Pl. 34: 610-611. Holland, Maastricht, 4th cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 39, 73, Fig. 25: 5. Notes: None.

185. Definition: Handmade pin, olive-shaped head 20\P\0141 Description and interpretation: Handmade pin with an elongated, asymmetrical olive-shaped head. The shaft tapers a bit towards the head. The tip is missing. The pin was originally carefully smoothed but today it is worn out and covered with patina. Eight objects of this type were found. L. 86mm, the head l. 16mm, d. 6.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jordan, Amman, R 2nd-3rd cent., from grave: Ibrahim and Gordon 1987 Pl. 28: 5. France, Les Bolards, R: Sautot 1978 Pl. 17: 3. England, Colchester: Crummy 1983: 25, Fig. 23: 437. Notes: None.

189-190. Definition: Handmade pin with a nailheadshaped head 20\P\0133-1; S\26992 Description and interpretation: Simple handmade pins with the head and shaft carved in one piece and a small nailhead-shaped head. No. 189: The shaft is relatively thin and delicate with its thickest point in the center. The tip is missing. The head looks like an asymmetrical pentagon from the top and like a convex disk in side cross-section. The scar remaining from where it broke off from the rod can be seen on its top. Three objects of this type were found. L. 64mm, the head l. 1.5mm, w. 4mm. No. 190: A cylindrical pin with a missing tip. The shaft is carefully smoothed and straight, and only its top was narrowed a little by carving with a knife. The head is very short, with the same diameter, flat in side cross-section and disk-shaped from top. A scar on its top is the result of breaking it from the rod or a carved head (figure), in which case the “head” is only a base (compare to No. 208). Four objects of this type were found. L. 85mm, the head l. 3mm, d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 189: Late Roman, 2nd-4th cent.; No. 190:

186-188. Definition: Handmade pin, semiglobular\elliptical head 20\P\0145; 0064; S\66324 Description and interpretation: Simple handmade pins with semi-globular or semi-ovoid head with a flat base. The head and shaft were carved in one piece. The thickest point in the shaft is beneath the head. No. 186: The head is elongated, ovoid from the front and flattened in side cross-section. The shaft is round in cross-section and worn out. The tip is missing. Seven objects of this type were found. L. 82mm, the head l. 7mm, w. 4.5mm. No. 187: Complete but worn out pin. Its head is semi-globular from the front and flattened in side cross-section and from the top. Its tip is blunt and centered. Eight objects of 55

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 189: Egypt, Shurafa, LRB: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 22. Turkey, Ephesos, PH?: Hogarth 1908: 189, Pl. 34: 38. Hungary, Gorsium, middle 2nd cent., needle, rare, common in Noricum around 200: Bíró 1987: 34, Fig. 10: 73; 4th cent.: Ibid. Fig. 29: 253. Yugoslavia, 2nd-3rd cent.: Petković 1995 Tab. 14: 9, Taf. 14: 6. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 24, Pl. 2: 3. France, Les Bolards, R: Ibid.: 42, Pl. 17: 11, 1314. France, Lyon, R (1st) 2nd-4th cent.: Béal 1983a: 187188, Pl. 34: 601, 605. Holland, Maastricht, 4th-5thI cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 39, Fig. 25: 3, 17. England, Colchester, R: Crummy 1983: 24, Fig. 20: 423. No. 190: Hungary, Szőny, 4th cent.: Bíró 1994: 88, 126, Pl. 29: 314-316. Notes: None.

patina. This is the only object of its type. L. 86mm, the head l. 4.5mm, d. 5mm. No. 194: Complete pin with a barrel-like head, polygonal from the top and carved in one piece with the shaft. The head and the cylindrical collar are better smoothed than the shaft on which vertical planing marks and diagonal filing striations remained. Two grooves are incised around the center of the collar. The thickest point of the shaft falls beneath the collar. The tip is slightly blunted. Nine objects of this type were found. L. 110mm, the head l. 6.5mm, d. 7mm. No. 195: Upper part of a pin. Head and shaft were made separately. The head is roughly hexagonal seen from the top with a truncated cone on its top. Beneath it is an almost cylindrical collar with three grooves around its base and another one separating it from the shaft. The head and the collar were smoothed, while the shaft was kept rough with vertical planing marks. Two objects of this type were found. L. 75mm, the head l. 6.5mm, d. 6mm. No. 196: Upper part of a delicate pin with a mushroom- or nail-shaped head and a narrow, conical grooved collar. This is the only object of its type. L. 15mm, the head l. 3.5mm, d. 5.5mm. No. 197: Pin with a globular head, probably made separately from the shaft and a conical grooved collar. The top of the shaft narrows a little beneath the wider collar. The head, the collar and the top of the shaft were smoothed, while the remainder was kept rough. Its thickest point falls in the upper third of the shaft. The tip is missing. Three objects of this type were found. L. 65mm, the head d. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 193: Byzantine, 5th cent.; Nos. 194, 196: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 194: Egypt, Alexandria, 6th-7th cent., from bath, no collar: Rodziewicz M. 1979b: 136, Taf. 5.3-4. France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent., blank from pin workshop: Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Fig. 5: 1. No. 195: Hungary, Gorsium, end of 2ndmiddle 3rd cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 15: 128. No. 196: Holland, Maastricht, 4th cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 39, 73, Fig. 25: 6, 8, 10, 20. France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent., from pin workshop: Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Fig. 6: 15-16. France, Malain, R: Sautot 1978: 66, Pl. 33: 7. England, Chalk, R 3rd-4th and 7th-9th cent. onwards: MacGregor 1985: 117-118, Fig. 64: 13. England, Colchester, post Roman, handmade: Crummy 1983: 22, Fig. 19: 254. Notes: None.

Pins with geometrically-shaped head 191-192. Definition: Pin, globular head and grooved collar 20\S\40212-1; 28222 Description and interpretation: Lathe-turned pins with globular heads with a lathe indentation on their tops (not drawn in No. 192), both missing their tips. The thickest point of the shaft is in the upper third. Its narrower top is decorated with parallel grooves. No. 191: The head and the shaft were made separately and are a little different in color and texture, so the shaft is probably secondary. The head is large and carefully smoothed. Five objects of this type were found. L. 65mm, the head d. 11mm. No. 192: Head and shaft were probably made separately. This is the only object of its type. L. 90mm, d. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 191: Byzantine-Early Arab; No. 192: Early Roman, 1st cent. Morphological analogies: Sepphoris, R: Martin Nagy et al. 1996: 235, No. 150. Jerusalem, R, 3rd cent., handmade, from grave: Hamilton and Husseini 1935 Pl. 81: 24. Meiron Stratum IV, LR: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.7: 31-32. Castra, B, 7, from graves: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 3: 3. Egypt, Shurafa, LRB: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 19. Hungary, Szőny, 4th cent.: Bíró 1994: 79, 126 Pl. 16: 152-153. No. 192: Egypt, today in Hungary, clothing pin: Török 1993: 69, Pl. 104: S 2. Notes: None. 193-197. Definition: Pin with a round\squared head and a grooved collar 20\P\0131; S\26021; 6732; A\0012; S\74294 Description and interpretation: Lathe-made pins with a lathe indentation on their tops, with rounded heads and conical grooved collars. No. 193: A complete pin with a small globular (pomegranate-shaped?) head made separately from the shaft. The collar is fairly large, carefully smoothed, decorated with many grooves and bordered by a wider and deeper groove below it. The shaft is roughly smoothed; its thickest point is beneath the collar. Vertical planing marks and diagonal filing striations can be seen on it. The pin is covered with

198. Definition: Pin with cylindrical-conical head 20\S\87114 Description and interpretation: Lathe-made pin. The head, smoothed on a lathe, is a small cylinder\cone and cut straight on top with a lathe indentation. It is separated from the shaft by a wide and deep groove. The shaft is covered with vertical (knife?) marks. Its thickest point lies in its upper part. The tip is missing. The pin is very simple or unfinished. Six objects of this type were found. L. 74mm, the head l. 5mm, d. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? 56

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Hogarth 1908: 188, Pl. 33: 30. Turkey, Tarsus [H-R?]: Goldman 1950: 398, Fig. 271: 25. Greece, Corinth, beginning of 4th cent.: Davidson 1952: 285, Pl. 119: 2332; R 3rd-4th cent.: Ibid.: 2333. Hungary, Szőny: Bíró 1994: 88, Pl. 29: 317. Holland, Maastricht, 4th cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 39, 73, Fig. 25: 14. No. 202: Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 188, Pl. 34: 10, 31. Tunisia, Carthage, 4th II-beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 573, Figs. 12: 30, 15: 30. Libya, Ptolemais, 4th-5th cent.: Kraeling 1962: 271 n. 303, Pl. 64 A. Notes: Bronze comparison to No. 202: England, Wilcote, R 1st-2nd cent.:Hands 1993: 12, Fig. 26: 5, 7. Bronze analogy, Egypt? 5th-6th cent., lampstand decorated with Aphrodite using a similar kohl stick: Friedman 1989: 17, 143, No. 51.

Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 199. Definition: Pin, flattened cylindrical\barrel-shaped head 20\S\59495 Description and interpretation: Lathe-turned pin with an indentation on its top, the head and shaft carved together. The head is barrel-shaped and short. The shaft is thickest in its upper section and covered with diagonal filing striations. The upper, narrower part of the shaft and the head were better smoothed. Five objects of this type were found. L. 69mm, the head l. 4mm, d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER?, Geva 2003: 347, Pl. 13.1: B14. Jalame, LR: Berry 1988: 229, Pl. 8-1: 14. Castra, B, from grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 6: 4. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 206, Taf. 19 No. 8893. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-5th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 184 No. 188. Notes: None.

203. Definition: Pin with a bi-conical head on a collar 21\S\38298 Description and interpretation: Complete wellsmoothed pin with the head and body carved in one piece. The head is bi-conical, resting on a wide collar. The thickest point of the shaft is at its center. The tip is blunt. Two objects of this type were found. L. 92mm, the head l. 10mm, d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., unfinished: Davidson 1952: 278 n. 61, Pl. 148b. Hungary, Dunapentele, not identical: Bíró 1994: 89, Pl. 30: 333. France, Les Bolards, R: Sautot 1978: 42, Pl. 17: 2. England, various sites, 250 - end of 4th\ beginning of 5th cent.: Crummy 1979: 162, Fig. 1: 7. England, Colchester, 3rdII cent. onward: Crummy 1983: 24, Fig. 20: 395, 402. England, Portchester, esp. 3rd-4th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 116, Fig. 64: 4. England, Verulamium, 4th cent.: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 71, Fig. 30: 270. Notes: None.

200. Definition: Pin with a domed head on a thick collar 20\P\0082 Description and interpretation: Upper part of a pin, head and shaft carved in one piece. The head is domed, with a large lathe indentation on its top and a thick collar beneath it. This part was carefully smoothed. After it broke the piece may have been used as some kind of a stopper (cf. Nos. 36-37). This is the only object of its type. L. 13mm, the head l. 8mm, d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Gush Halav, LR 4th cent., from grave: Vitto and Edelstein 1974: 54 (3 from right). Castra, B, from grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 3: 10. Egypt, R: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 35. Tunisia, Carthage, 4th II-beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 569, 571, Figs. 12: 1, 13: 3. Hungary, Szőny, 2nd-3rd cent.: Bíró 1994: 81, 126, Pl. 19: 192-193, 195. Notes: None.

204-206. Definition: Pin with an ovoid/cylindrical head on multiple collar(s), one gilded 21\S\73643-2; 92502; P\0161 Description and interpretation: Simple, rather crude pins, probably handmade with the head and body carved in one piece. The head is elongated and rests on one or two collars. Their identification as pins is not certain (especially No. 206). It is possible that they are handles, for instance of spoons.7 No. 204: Pin with ovoid/cylindrical head on top of a collar. The shaft narrows a little towards the head. The tip is missing. Three objects of this type were found. L. 69mm, the head l. 13mm, d. 6mm. No. 205: Pin with a crudely formed olive-shaped head on top of two collars separated by a groove. The shaft narrows a little towards the head. This is the only object of its type. L. 27mm, the head l. 10.5mm, d. 6mm. No. 206: Pin with ovoid head, somewhat flattened in its side cross-section, with vertical

201-202. Definition: Pin with globular head on a moulding 21\P\0136; S\14070 Description and interpretation: Complete pins carved in one piece with the head. No. 201: Thick handmade pin with an asymmetrical head and collar. The head is a little worn. The smoothed cylindrical shaft tapers only towards the thick, centered tip. Two objects of this type were found. L. 100mm, the head l. 9mm, d. 8mm. No. 202: Thin delicate pin, possibly made on a lathe. The shaft is thickest in the two thirds of its height, bearing vertical planing marks. Two objects of this type were found. L. 95mm, the head l. 3.5mm, d. 5.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 201: Roman, 1st-2nd cent.; No. 202: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 201: Samaria-Sebaste: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 17. Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?:

7

57

A Roman spoon with a similar handle was found in Apollonia (will be published by the author).

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS France, Lyon, R 2ndII cent., base for woman protoma: Béal 1983a: 228-229, Pl. 36: 739. England, Wilcote, R 2nd-4th cent., a base?: Hands 1993: 13, Fig. 83: 5. England, Bury, 10th-11th cent., base for a cross: MacGregor 1985: 120, Fig. 64: 30. England, Verulamium, mid-2nd cent., base for woman protoma: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 71, Fig. 30: 263. Notes: None.

planing marks. Beneath it are two collars separated by a groove. The crudely formed shaft has vertical planing marks and diagonal filing striations. The tip is missing. Three objects of this type were found and one of these was gilded. L. 92mm, the head l. 9mm, w. 6mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 204: Late Roman-Byzantine; No. 206: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 205: Samaria-Sebaste: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 18. Silet edh-Dhahr, LR-B: from grave, with three collars: Sellers and Baramki 1953 Fig. 19: 252. Castra, B, from grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 3: 8. Egypt, Karanis, R, “Coptic”: Friedman 1989: 147 No. 57. Lybia, Ptolemais, 4th-5th cent.: Kraeling 1962: 271 n. 303, Pl. 64 A. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent.: Davidson 1952: 284, Pl. 118: 2325. Yugoslavia, R-LR, with a short head: Petković 1995 Taf. 13: 8, 15: 9. No. 206: Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 188, Pl. 34: 6. Hungary, 4th cent.: Bíró 1994: 88, 126, Pl. 29: 319. England, Colchester, 1st-2nd cent.: Crummy 1983: 21, Fig. 18: 194. Notes: No. 205 was found in a grave.

209. Definition: Globular pin head (?) on collar 21\S\86785 Description and interpretation: A somewhat flattened globular head with a groove around its middle. Beneath it is a large grooved collar. The top of a cylindrical shaft projects from it, but the rest is missing. The object was probably lathe-carved. It may be a pin head (Dray, pers. comm.), a stopper (possibly a combination of a stopper and the top of a kohl stick - L’Art copte No. 262a), or a gaming piece for a perforated board, either from the beginning or secondarily used like one. This is the only object of its type. L. 15mm, d. 13mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Egypt, B, ivory, gaming piece for a perforated gaming board: L’Art copte No. 273. Syria, Palmira, 2nd cent., 7, from tomb: Higuchi and Izumi 1994: 90, Fig. 66: 40-46, Fig. 37, Pl. 57: 40-46. France, Nîmes, end of 1st-beginning of 2nd cent., box foot: Béal 1984: 71-72, Pl. 14: 275-276. Notes: None.

207. Definition: Pin with a tiny domed head on a collar 21\S\39799 Description and interpretation: Smoothed pin, probably handmade, with a tiny domed head on top of a collar bordered by two grooves. The thickest point of the shaft is in its center. The tip is missing. Two objects of this type were found. L. 78mm, the head l. 2.5mm, d. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, R: Bagatti and Milik 1958 Fot. 128: 16. Hungary, Koronco, 4th cent.: Bíró 1994: 88, 126, Pl. 29: 318. England, Colchester, R, middle 2nd-4th\beginning of 5th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 116, Fig. 64: 5. Notes: None.

210. Definition: Domed pin head? 21\P\0136 Description and interpretation: A semi-globular lathemanufactured object which is symmetrical and well smoothed. A large lathe indentation can be seen on top of the head. The base is flat and bears round lathe marks, with a smoothed-over round scar (d. 5.5mm) in its center. It may be the remains of a broken shaft, making it a pin (Dray, pers. comm.), or several such objects were carved on the lathe on the same rod, then cut off one by one. After it broke the head was re-used as a gaming piece or inlay. This is the only object of its type. L. 9mm, d. 15mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 5th-6th cent. Morphological analogies: Nessana, B-A, ivory: Colt 1962: 52, Pl. 21: 20. Egypt, B, ivory, gaming piece with a leg stuck in holes in the gaming board: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 219, No. 273. Italy, Rome, Palatin Hill: St. Claire 1996 Pl. 8 (center). Notes: None.

208. Definition: Pin with square-collard head (or base?) 21\A\169 Description and interpretation: Complete pin (unless the head is missing), handmade but quite nice. The top is square, with two wide and deep grooves incised separately at different levels on each side. Its upper part looks like an asymmetric dome, on top of which remained the scar resulting from breaking its continuation. It is possible that it was actually a base for a human or animal figure (compare to No. 248). The shaft is nicely smoothed with its thickest point falling beneath the head. The tip is blunt. Two objects of this type were found. L. 94mm, the head l. 6mm, w. 7mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 188, Pl. 34: 2. Italy, Pompeii, 1st cent., ivory, square collard base for goddess head: WardPerkins and Claridge 1978: 138, Fig. 60 a, d. France, Alésia, R, base for goddess protoma: Sautot 1978 Pl. 5: 1.

211. Definition: Round, perforated pin head? 1\S\83152 Description and interpretation: Short, heavily smoothed, barrel-like pin head (?). Two grooves are engraved off-center around it. A rather large perforation was drilled through its middle. It may have been a pin head made separately from the shaft (Dray, pers. comm.) or a bead. This is the only object of its type. H. 6mm, d. 10mm, the hole d. 3.5mm. 58

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 206, Taf. 19 No. 8894. Notes: None.

215-218. Definition: Pin with a drop-shaped head on a grooved collar, one gilded specimen 21\A\0103; P\0215; S\39533; 10837 Plate 7 Description and interpretation: Pin with a drop-shaped head on a grooved collar, a common type at Caesarea but less so at other sites, especially in Europe.8 Almost all were at least partly lathe-turned and in many the head and shaft were made separately. The thickest point of the shaft is usually beneath the collar. No. 215: Complete pin with a lathe indentation on the head which was probably made separately from the shaft. Two grooves border the collar. The blunt tip is stained. Six objects of this type were found. L. 102mm, the head l. 7mm, d. 3.5mm. No. 216: Upper part of a pin with a large head made separately from the shaft. The collar is a little conical and has two groups of four grooves each on it. Fifty objects of this type were found. L. 45mm, the head l. 15mm, d. 7mm. No. 217: Pin with a small head and a grooved conical collar. It is not clear whether head and shaft were manufactured in one piece. The thickest point of the shaft falls beneath the collar. The tip is missing. The head and the collar were coated with gold by pressing gold leaf to the pin with a wooden tip while it rotated on the lathe (Dray, pers. comm.). The pressing caused the shape of the bone object to show through the thin golden coating, including the grooves on the collar (compare to No. 173 above). Fifteen ungilded objects of this type were found. L. 58mm, the head l. 8mm, d. 5mm. No. 218: Pin with a large head, part of which is missing, which was produced separately from the shaft. The lathe-carved collar is divided into two parts, both grooved: the upper section is conical while the lower one is cylindrical. The shaft was also smoothed on the lathe. Four items of this type were found. L. 84mm, the head l. 13mm, d. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 217: Byzantine; No. 218: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: No. 216: Sepphoris, R: Martin Nagy et al. 1996: 235, No. 149. Metulla, LR-B, from grave: Tzaferis 1982 Pl. 7: 4 center. Beth Shan, R?, ivory: Fitzgerald 1931: 44, Pl. 40: 25. Jordan, Pella, LR, from grave: McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982 Pl. 134: 1819. Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 20. Syria, Hamma, R-B, ungrooved shaft: Ploug 1985: 238, Fig. 59: i. Cyprus, Salamis, R 3rd cent., pear-shaped head, abundant in the first centuries: Chavane 1975: 171, Pls. 48: 492, 70: 492. Hungary, Szőny, 4th cent.: Bíró 1994: 87-88, 126, Pl. 28: 307-309. No. 217: Jerusalem, R, from grave, some with small round heads, one with large, grooved head, all gilded, for decorating the hair: Rahmani 1960a: 144-145, Pl. 20: E. Castra, B, from grave, small round head: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 3: 2. Hungary, Tata, R, in the Brigetio Museum, with round head. Notes: No. 215 was not eye-checked.

212. Definition: Round capital-like pin head? 21\S\80208 Description and interpretation: A lathe-turned low disk, possibly a pin head (Dray, pers. comm.). A deep, wide groove was incised around the side surface. The top is fairly flat with a lathe indentation in its center and two grooves around the perimeter. The base was very heavily smoothed (probably during its carving on the lathe). It slants towards the center where there is the top of a broken shaft. This is the only object of its type. H. 6mm, d. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 213-214. Definition: Pin with a cruciform-decorated top \ stamp 21\S\37456; P\0129 Description and interpretation: Two handmade pins carved with the head and shaft in one piece. The head is cylindrical, of the same diameter as the shaft or even narrower. Four radial slots create the shape of a cross on the top. These may be pins or tools used to stamp pottery or other materials with cross shapes (Poplin, pers. comm.). Three objects of this type were found. No. 213: The radial slots continue vertically from the top down the sides of the head. The head is separated from the shaft by two hand-formed unparallel grooves. The well smoothed shaft is thicker than usual, mostly at its middle. The tip is broken off. L. 100mm, d. 9mm. No. 214: The upper section of a pin with a tower-like head sitting on three collars – the central wider than the others – separated by grooves, rudely made with a knife. The shaft is covered with diagonal filing marks. L. 32mm, the head l. 3mm, d. 5.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 213: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Tel Jezreel, R 3rd-4th cent., from grave: Zori 1977 Pl. 7: 5 (right). Ashkelon: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 52, 2nd from bottom. Samaria-Sebaste, decorated: Kenyon 1957: 461, Fig. 114: 31. Syria, Tell Nebi Mend, H-R: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 1p. Benelux countries, 4th-7th cent., cylindrical pottery stamps (no cross design): Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 61, Fig. 37. England, 5th cent. onward, cylindrical, made from antler, for pottery stamping: MacGregor 1985: 194, Fig. 104: a. England, Verulamium, 1stII cent., base for a decoration: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 71, Fig. 30: 264. Notes: Clay comparison, Jerusalem, R, stamp for pottery vessels from the Tenth Legion pottery kilns: Goldfuss and Arubas 2001: 117, 118 bottom.

8

59

Their large numbers at Caesarea (they are rather uncommon elsewhere in Israel; were they produced at Caesarea?) suggest that the few similar pins found in Europe, such as those from the fort of Intercisa in Hungary, were brought to the site by the Syrian soldiers of the Roman Legion who served there (Bíró, pers. comm.).

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 219-220. Definition: Pin, drop-shaped head with a cone on a grooved collar 21\S\73634-1; 18905-1 Description and interpretation: Sub-type of the above pin: a drop-shaped head on top of a spirally grooved collar, plus an addition on the head. It is broken in No. 219 and shaped like a small pointed cone in No. 220. Head and the well smoothed shaft were made in one piece. The thickest point of the shaft is a little beneath the collar. The point is missing. Three items of this type were found. No. 219: l. 94mm, the head l. 5.5mm, d. 4.5mm. No. 220: l. 40mm, the head l. 10mm, d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 219: Late Roman; No. 220: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 219: Jordan, Pella, 8th cent., ivory, kohl stick: Smith and Day 1989: 118, Pl. 60: 6. Syria, Tell Nebi Mend, H-R: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 1 o. No. 220: England, Scole, R 1st-3rdI cent., grooved: MacGregor 1985: 116, Fig. 64: 3. England, Colchester, mid-2nd-mid-3rd cent.: Crummy 1983: 25, Fig. 23: 442. Notes: None.

Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 188, Pl. 34: 26. Greece, Corinth, R 3rd-4th cent.: Davidson 1952: 284-285, Pl. 119: 2330. Notes: None. 224. Definition: Pin with a grooved bottle-shaped head 22\S\16032-3 Description and interpretation: Complete pin with a grooved bottle-shaped head, carved together in one piece with the shaft and a simple collar. The grooves cover most of the head but are not parallel and look – as the head itself, despite the lathe indentation – as if it had been carelessly made by hand. One facet is partly missing on the head, collar and upper part of the shaft as a result of the natural shape of the bone. The shaft is rough and its thickest point falls slightly beneath the collar. The tip is one-sided and is probably secondary. This is the only object of its type. L. 89mm, the head l. 12mm, d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Found together with the antler pendant No. 257 and piece No. 459.

221-223. Definition: Pin with a bottle-like head on a grooved collar 22\P\0147; 0214-1; 0183 Description and interpretation: Pin with a bottle-like head in various dimensions and shapes on top of a grooved conical collar. The head and shaft could be carved in one piece (Nos. 221-222) or separately (No. 223). All have lathe indentations on the top of their heads. The top of the shaft was tapered by hand towards the collar. This section of the shaft, the collar and the head were cleanly smoothed while most of the shaft remained rough, with vertical planing and diagonal filing marks. Its thickest point falls beneath the collar and narrows downwards (Nos. 221-222) or is almost cylindrical (No. 223). The tip is missing. No. 221: Relatively large and thick pin. Eight objects of this type were found. L. 57mm, the head l. 14mm, d. 6mm. No. 222: A rounded moulding lined by grooves at the base of the collar. The pin is very light in color. Four objects of this type were found. L. 68mm, the head l. 7mm, d. 5mm. No. 223: The bottle’s rim is formed from two collars separated by a groove, and the top is cut diagonally. Thirteen objects of this type were found. L. 70mm, the head l. 7mm, d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 221: Roman-Byzantine, 2nd-5th cent.; No. 222: Early Roman, 1st cent.; No. 223: RomanByzantine, 2nd-7th cent. Morphological analogies: Nos. 221-222: Tel Jezreel, R 3rd-4th cent., from grave: Zori 1977 Pl. 7: 5 (2nd from left). Castra, LR-B 3rd-5th cent.: Yevin and Finkielsztejn 1999: 50 No. 2. Egypt, Lahun, R, vase shaped: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 33. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, stylus: Gostenčnik 2001: 384, Fig. 7: 1. No. 223: Castra, B, from graves, 10: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 2: 5. Bet Yerah (Kh. al-Karak), B-A?: Delougaz and Haines 1960: 49, Pl. 47: 17. Egypt, R: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 47. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, doll head?: Strzygowski 1904: 206, Taf. 19 No. 8892. Turkey,

225. Definition: Pin with grooved jar-like head and collar 22\P\0052 Description and interpretation: Pin with a jar-like grooved head and a grooved collar. The top of the head is cut diagonally and has a lathe indentation (see section). The top of the shaft was carved diagonally towards the collar and its thickest point falls just beneath it. From that point upwards the object is smoothed, and downwards it is rough with vertical planing and diagonal filing marks. The tip is missing. Five objects of this type were found. L. 70mm, the head l. 7mm, d. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The pin was published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 2: 2. 226. Definition: Pin, “bead-and-reel”-shaped head 22\S\25224 Description and interpretation: Pin with a head with a swollen center between two disks - “bead-and-reel” or “astragalus” design. It is simple, asymmetric and handmade with the head and shaft carved in one piece. Planing marks may still be seen on both parts of the pin. The lower part is missing. This is the only object of this type. L. 62mm, the head l. 9mm, d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Samaria-Sebaste: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 25. Castra, B, from grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 7: 5. Egypt, Shurafa, LRB: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 15-16. Egypt, Alexandria, 6thI cent.: Rodziewicz 1984: 173-174, Fig. 199. Egypt, Fustat, A 8th-9th cent., ivory: Scanlon 1981: 73, Fig. 22. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 205, Taf. 19 No. 8889. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII60

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 573, Fig. 15: 29. Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 188, Pl. 34: 11, 28. Turkey, Sardis, 6th-7th cent.: Stephens Crawford 1990 Fig. 544. Hungary, Gorsium, 4th cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 29: 252. France, Malain, R: Sautot 1978: 66, Pl. 33: 9. England, various sites, from 200-end of 4thbeginning of 5th cent.: Crummy 1979: 162, Fig. 1: 8. England, Colchester, 3rdII cent. onward: Crummy 1983: 24, Fig. 20: 419, 422. England, Chalk, R, 3rd4th\beginning of 5th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 117, Fig. 64: 4. England, York, Middle Ages: MacGregor 1995: 414, Fig. 157: 1.2. Notes: None.

grooved around its middle. A pyramid-like nipple was carved on the top. The conical collar is very short. The thickest upper part of the shaft is decorated with delicate grooves. The (secondary?) tip is one-sided. Two objects of this type were found. L. 83mm, the head l. 10mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., pommegranate shape: Davidson 1952: 282-283, Pl. 118: 2293, 2297. Hungary, Keszthely: Bíró 1994: 87, Pl. 28: 303. Notes: None.

227. Definition: Pin with columnar head 22\P\0073 Description and interpretation: Pin with columnar head: low base, thicker middle and a ‘capital’ composed of three parts separated by grooves. The head and shaft were carved in one piece. The head is cleanly smoothed and has a lathe indentation on it. The thickest point of the shaft, decorated with three grooves, falls beneath the head. Vertical filing marks remained on the shaft. The lower part is missing. Six objects of this type were found. L. 45mm, the head l. 15mm, d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Castra, B, from grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 7: 4. Hammat Gader, LBA, general similarity: Coen Uzzieli 1997: 448, Pl. I: 5. Sepphoris, B?: Yeivin 1937: 33, Pl. 1 Fig. 2. Jordan, Dibon, B-A?: Winnett 1964: 27, Pl. 19: 8. France, R?, absent from southern France: Béal 1984: 53, Pl. 10: 211. England, Vindolanda, R, not identical: Birley 1977 Pl. 6. Notes: None.

230. Definition: Pin with a grooved box-shaped head and collar 22\A\1536 Description and interpretation: Pin with an almost cylindrical grooved box-shaped head. Head and shaft were carved together in one piece. The top is flat and smooth, separated from the rest of the head by a large groove, possibly in imitation of a lid. The collar narrows towards the head, and has a moulding and five grooves on its base. The lower part of the smooth shaft is missing. Six objects of this type were found. L. 39mm, the head l. 6mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine, 2nd-5th cent. Morphological analogies: Gabba\Tell Abu Shusha, ER, from grave: Siegelmann 1988 Fig. 58. France, Malain, R: Sautot 1978: 66, Pl. 33: 4. Notes: None. 231-233. Definition: Pin with a pinecone-shaped head with a reticular design 22\S\84102-2; P\0162-1; A\0375-1 Description and interpretation: Pins whose head symbolizes a pinecone both in its general shape and in the reticular decoration. The head was carved with the shaft in a single piece. Those pins were common in the Roman Empire as the pinecone had ritual meanings including a connection to immortality (Béal 1983a: 221; Lane 1986; Bíró 1994: 34, 64) or as a symbol of the thyrsus, such as the one held by Bacchus (Henig 1977: 361, Pl. 15 4d). No. 231: The head was engraved with a reticular design of vertical and horizontal crossed lines. The upper part of the shaft is cylindrical while the lower is missing. The pin is worn. Two objects of this type were found. L. 36mm, the head l. 10.5mm, d. 6mm. No. 232: Pin with an elongated and pointed head engraved with diagonal crossing lines which create rhombus or diamond shapes (clearer on the pin’s back side). Two mouldings separated by grooves were carved beneath the head. The thickest point of the shaft, which has vertical planing marks on it is at its top. The tip is missing. This is the only object of its type. L. 54mm, the head l. 16mm, d. 5mm. No. 233: The pinecone-shaped head was engraved with a reticular design of diagonal crossing lines on its lower section and circumferential grooves on the upper section. This is probably the only lathe-carved pin in this group, as shown by its symmetry and the lathe indentation on the

Special pins 228. Definition: Pin, globular head with a reticular design 22\S\18720-1 Description and interpretation: Asymmetrical handmade pin with the head and shaft carved in one piece. The head is globular and engraved (except on the top) with a reticular design creating rhombus shapes. The shaft is decorated beneath the head with a spirally fluted design. It is cleanly smoothed with its thickest point falling beneath the grooves. The lower part is missing. This is the only object of its type. L. 53mm, the head l. 15mm, d. 10mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, R 3rd-4th cent.: Davidson 1952: 285, Pl. 119: 2334. France, R, cone head: Barbier 1992: 123, Pl. 91: 539. Notes: None. 229. Definition: Pin, grooved pear-shaped head with a collar and nipple 22\P\0141-1 Description and interpretation: Complete, thin and delicate pin with the lathe-turned head and shaft carved together. The head is shaped like a truncated pear and 61

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS top. The thickest point of the shaft falls at the two thirds point along its length. Four grooves decorate its top. The lower section is missing. This is the only object of its type. L. 49mm, the head l. 7mm, d. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 231: Roman-Byzantine; No. 232: Roman; No. 233: Roman- Byzantine, 3rd-7th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 231: Hungary, Brigetio, in Roman legionary fortress: Bíró 1997 No. 42. No. 232: Meiron Stratum IV, LR: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.7: 40-41. Samaria-Sebaste, R 3rd cent.: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 20. Castra, B, 14, from grave: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 1: 2. Jerusalem, RB, from grave: Baramki 1931 Pl. 9: 4. Jordan, Amman, R 2nd-3rd cent., from grave: Ibrahim and Gordon 1987 Pl. 28: 8. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 571, Figs. 12: 20, 14: 20. Libya, Ptolemais, 4th-5th cent.: Kraeling 1962: 271 n. 303, Pl. 64 A. Hungary, Szőny, 3rd-4th cent.: Bíró 1994: 89, 126, Pl. 30: 335-338. Yugoslavia, R-LR: Petković 1995 Tab. 14: 10, Taf. 15: 8. France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent., from pin workshop: Bourgeois and TuffreauLibre 1981 Fig. 5: 10. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 25, Pl. 2: 6. France, Sources de la Seine, R: Ibid.: 72, Pl. 44: 5. France, Lyon, R 3rd cent.: Béal 1983a: 222-223, Pl. 39: 729. No. 233: Castra, B 4th-6th cent., 2: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 1: 4. Gezer, B, from grave: Macalister 1912 Pl. 86. Tunisia, Carthage, general similarity: Henig 1984: 86, 188, Fig. 62: 29. Notes: None.

mouldings separate the head from the shaft, whose thickest point is just beneath them. This is the only object of its type. L. 63mm, the head l. 12mm, d. 6mm. No. 236: Delicate and well-made pin. A tiny lathe indentation (or a breaking point where it continued) remained on the top. The upper tapering section of the shaft is decorated with two grooves, imitating a collar. The thickest point of the shaft falls beneath this part. Seven objects of this type were found. L. 58mm, the head l. 11mm, d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 235: Turkey, Ephesos, PH?: Hogarth 1908 Pl. 34: 27. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thIIbeginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 573, Figs. 12: 24, 14: 24. Holland, Maastricht, 4th cent.: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 39, 73, Fig. 25: 11. No. 236: Austria, Magdalensberg, ER: Gostenčnik 2001, Fig. 5: 16. Notes: None. 237-238. Definition: Pin with a grooved cylindrical head on a collar 22\S\86312; P\0239 Description and interpretation: Two asymmetrical and carelessly handmade pins. Both cylindrical heads are decorated with diagonal, unparallel grooves and rest on a deep groove and a moulding. The thickest point of the shaft falls a little beneath the head. The lower part is missing. No. 237: The turban-like head has a smooth, slanting top separated from it by a groove. Vertical planing marks can be seen on the shaft. This is the only object of its type. L. 58mm, the head l. 16mm, d. 8mm. No. 238: The cylindrical head is a little flattened as seen from the top, and is mounted by a small pyramid, separated from it by a groove (compare to No. 229). The density of the diagonal grooves differs from one facet to the other. Three objects of this type were found. L. 103mm, the head l. 9mm, w. 6.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 237: Byzantine; No. 238: RomanByzantine, 3rd-7th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 237: Turkey, Tarsus [HR?]: Goldman 1950: 398, Fig. 272: 39. Hungary, Gorsium, 4th cent., common: Bíró 1987: 48, Fig. 28: 244. Hungary, end of 3rd-4th cent., stamp-like: Bíró 1994: 91, 127, Pl. 33: 361. Yugoslavia, 4th cent.: Petković 1995 Tab. 14: 6\3, Taf. 13: 15. No. 238: Hungary, Gorsium, 4th cent., common: Bíró 1987: 48, Fig. 28: 245. England, Portchester, 1st-3rdI cent.: MacGregor 1985: 116, Fig. 64: 4. Notes: None.

234. Definition: Pin with a crude pinecone-shaped (?) head 22\S\59102 Description and interpretation: Complete handmade asymmetrical pin with the head and shaft carved in one piece. The conical elongated head is decorated with rough knife-cut recesses reminiscent of a pinecone. The thickest point of the shaft falls beneath the head. The one-sided tip is probably secondary. Three objects of this type were found. L. 98mm, the head l. 18mm, w. 5.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, R: Bagatti and Milik 1958 Fig. 37: 30, Fot. 128: 15. Gezer, LR, from grave: Macalister 1912 Pl. 115. Castra, B, 10, from graves, mouldings between head and shaft: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 1: 11. Notes: None. 235-236. Definition: Pin with a grooved drop-shaped head 22\A\1077; P\0134-1 Description and interpretation: Pins with a grooved, drop-shaped lathe-turned head. This head may also symbolize a schematized pinecone. Head and shaft were carved separately. The head and upper part of the shaft are well smoothed while the remainder is rough with vertical planing marks (No. 235) or many diagonal filing striations (No. 236). The lower parts are missing. No. 235: The head was decorated with rather deep horizontal grooves resembling mouldings. A narrow neck and three

239. Definition: Pin (?) with a feather-like head and a spirally fluted shaft 23\M\98-7144 Description and interpretation: Upper part of a pin (?), with both ends broken. The upper part is carved in a feather (or leaf?)-shape. The shaft tapers upwards. The lower part of it is spirally fluted. It may also be a stylus, kohl stick, etc. This is the only object of its type. L. 42mm, w. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? 62

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE that colored inlays were placed in the holes (compare: Bíró 1994: 91, 127, Pl. 34: 371). This is the only object of its type. L. 62mm, the head l. 18mm, w. 7mm, t. 5mm, the holes d. 1-1.5mm. No. 243: A rounded conical addition exists on the top, surrounded by a spirally fluted engraved line. The ‘windows’ cut in all facets are not identical. Part of a hole in the corner of a ‘window’ shows that first a hole was drilled and then the ‘window’ was sawn from it. This is the only object of its type. L. 46mm, the head l. 16mm, w. 6mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 242: Late Roman-Byzantine; No. 243: Byzantine, 4th-5th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 242: Castra, LR-B 4th-6th cent.: Yevin and Finkielsztejn 1999: 50 No. 4. H. Shema‘, 4th cent., two holes and a grooved cone: Meyers, Kraabel and Strange 1976: 103-107, Pl. 8.8. 24. Meiron Stratum V, B: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.7: 38. Jordan, Petra, R?: Barrett 1998: 312, Fig. 6: 115. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 205, Taf. 19 No. 8887. Notes: None.

Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Hammat Gader, LB-A (up to 8th cent.; only the fluted shaft): Coen Uzzieli 1997: 448, Pl. 1: 3. Greece, Corinth, R: Davidson 1952: 195, Pl. 89: 1486. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 2nd-middle 3rd cent., smooth shaft, two mouldings: Bíró 1987 Fig. 12: 102. Notes: Exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam. 240-241. Definition: Pin, poppy-shaped head 23\S\25528; 86644-1 Description and interpretation: Two lathe-turned pins with an indentation on the top of the poppy-shaped head.9 Both have conical collars separated from the shaft by a deep groove. Head, collar and top shaft are cleanly smoothed, while the rest (in No. 240) is rough and with diagonal filing striations. Most of the shaft is missing. The poppy with its many seeds and the medicinal uses and narcotic effects of its product – the opium – was a symbol of fertility and an attribute of Demeter and Persephone in the Eleusinian Mysteries (Meshorer 1982: 20-22; Gersht 2001: 98; for a general discussion see Merlin 1984). No. 240: Thin and delicate pin. The poppy head-shape is smooth. The head and shaft were carved separately. Eight objects of this type were found. L. 34mm, the head l. 6mm, d. 6mm. No. 241: The poppy is decorated with two groups of grooves while its center is smooth. Head and shaft were carved together in one piece. This is the only object of its type. L. 25mm, the head l. 7mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, No. 240: 4th-5th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 240: Gezer, LR: Macalister 1912 Pls. 69: 15, 115: 3. Castra, B, from graves: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 2: 3-4. Jordan, Dibon: Reed 1964: 79, Pl. 81: 12. Turkey, Ephesos, PH?: Hogarth 1908: 187, Pl. 33: 2. Greece, Corinth, H or earlier, ivory, pomegranate: Davidson 1952: 282, Pl. 118: 2291; R, 1st-2nd cent., pomegranate: Ibid.: 2294; unfinished head: Ibid.: 278 n. 61, Pl. 148b. No. 241: Kisra, B, from grave, kohl stick: Stern 1997: 128, Fig. 15: 81. Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 187, Pl. 33: 2. Notes: None.

244-245. Definition: Pin with an amphora-shaped head 23\S\38719; 20628 Description and interpretation: Pins, one of them complete, with an amphora-shaped head (Dray, pers. comm.). Both have lathe indentation on top. The top of the shaft tapers a little and is bordered by several grooves. Head and shaft were carved in a single piece. Four objects of this type were found. No. 244: Delicate, symmetrical and well made. The upper section is well smoothed. The top looks like the flared rim of the vessel, beneath it are a neck and two ‘handles’, a globular body and a slanting grooved base. The shaft is cylindrical and has some striations on it. The lower part is missing. L. 69mm, the head l. 13mm, d. 5mm. No. 245: Complete, less well made than the first. The ‘rim’ is grooved, the body more elongated and the base rounded. The tip is blunt. L. 131mm, the head l. 17mm, d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 245: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Gezer, LR, from grave: Macalister 1912 Pl. 115: 4. Qastra, owl-like head: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 8: 3; Ayalon 1999 Fig. 52, 2nd from top. Egypt, R, vase-shaped: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 42-43, 59-60. Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 11-12. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 205, Taf. 19 No. 8888. Turkey, Tarsus [H-R?]: Goldman 1950: 397, Fig. 271: 4-6. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent.: Davidson 1952: 285, Pl. 119. Notes: Egypt, today in Hungary, bone amulet of identical shape, symbolizing a female body?: Török 1993: 67, Pl. C: Q 12.

242-243. Definition: Pin with a head like a perforated tower 23\S\75330; P\0104 Description and interpretation: Two asymmetrical handmade pins with the head and shaft carved together in one piece. The head is like a perforated tower with an addition on top. The head is wider in the front view than the side view. The shaft is relatively cylindrical and the lower part is missing. No. 242: Three open-ended holes were drilled in a vertical line from the front to back. They are off-center and their dimensions differ in front where they are placed within an elongated depression and the back. Three round depressions were drilled on each side. A pyramid-shaped element rests on the top. It is possible 9

246-247. Definition: Pin with a head shaped as a hand holding an object 23\S\19225-1; P\0129 Description and interpretation: Pins with heads carved like a right hand holding an object (broken in No. 247). They are nicely made by hand with the head and shaft

It is difficult to distinguish in artwork between a poppy and a pomegranate. Basically the poppy's upper part is complete while in the pomegranate it has several leaves (Meshorer 1982: 20-22).

63

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS beginning of 2nd cent., holding a female bust, hair-pin: MacGregor 1985: 118, Fig. 64: 18. Notes: Bronze comparison, R, holding a ball: Béal 1983a: 222.

carved in one piece. The spaces between the fingers were sawn diagonally from the outside. The thumb is situated opposite the other fingers to hold the object. Lines engraved on the inner side of the palm imitate ones on actual hands. The hand widens at its base like a glove, probably for reinforcement. The lower part of the cylindrical shaft is missing. Four objects of this type were found. No. 246: The hand holds an undefined object with parallel lines continuing the fingers on its back and base. It could be an unsuccessful attempt to carve a comb, which appears often on such hands (Henig, pers. comm.). A guide line was incised on the back of the hand before the fingers were sawn although sometimes the artisan ignored it. Three lines engraved to the width of the little finger imitate the knuckles. L. 45mm, w. 7mm, t. 4mm. No. 247: The little finger is missing, and the edges of the others are broken in a straight slanting line demonstrating that the hand originally held an object. L. 34mm, w. 7mm, t. 5mm. A hand holding an object (pinecone, ball, egg, pomegranate, poppy, comb, etc.) is common among pin heads in the Roman Empire (cf. Petrie 1927 24, Pl. 19: 54, 58; Henig 1977: 399, Pl. 15 VIa; Johns 1996). A right hand with streched fingers symbolized protection (Béal 1983a: 221). A hand holding a pinecone symbolized the god Sabazius, and was more commonly made in metal (Lane 1986). Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 246: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 246: Acre, R 1st-2nd cent., from grave, holding a comb?: Tzaferis 1986 Fig. 10 Pl. 13 third from top. Castra, B 4th-5th cent., from grave, holding a murex snail?: Yevin and Finkielsztejn 1999: 50 No. 8. Cyprus, R until middle of 3rd cent., in the Nicosia Museum, ivory, holding a pinecone?: Lane 1986: 199, Pl. 42: 5-7. Egypt, R, holding a ball: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 29, 56. Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 9-10. Egypt, 3rd-4th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 205, Taf. 19 No. 8885; “Coptic”, ivory: Gayet 1902: 55. Hungary, 4th cent., 374 – hand holding a cone: Bíró 1994: 92, 127, Pl. 34: 373374. France, Lyon and other sites, R 3rd-4th cent., holding a shell or cone: Béal 1983a: 221, 225-226, Pl. 39: 735. Italy, Pompeii, 1st cent.: Ward-Perkins and Claridge 1978 Fig. 71: c, e. Holland: van Vilsteren 1987: 70, No. 130. England, R: Arthur 1977 Pl. 16.Ia. England, London, R, bust of Isis on a ball held by hand: Henig 1977: 359, Pl. 15VIa. No. 247: Samaria-Sebaste: Kenyon 1957: 461, Fig. 114: 39. Jordan, Pella, LR, from grave, holding a comb: McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982 Pl. 134: 28. Greece, Corinth, H? until 1st cent.: Davidson 1952: 286, Pl. 119: 2351. Yugoslavia, 1st-middle of 3rd cent.: Petković 1995 Tab. 14: 14, Taf. 16: 1-3. France, Les Bolards, R: Sautot 1978: 42, Pl. 19: 8. France, Lyon, R, with snake on the shaft: Ibid.: 58, Pl. 31: 6. France, Nîmes, end of 1stbeginning of 2nd cent.: Béal 1984: 56 (left), 57, Pl. 11: 238. Italy, Pompeii, 1st cent., ivory: Ward-Perkins and Claridge 1978: 138, Pl. 60c. England, London, R 1st-

248. Definition: Pin head (?) with Aphrodite Pudica 23\S\26496 Description and interpretation: A small object shaped like a naked woman. A scar at its base suggests that originally it was connected to a shaft or base. Its dimensions and parallels to it show that it could have been the head of a pin or distaff head. The woman faces front, supported on a chair whose back is engraved with crossed lines, possibly imitating plaiting. The hair style is high and projects in the front although this may also represent a head covering. Three vertical lines on the chest symbolize the breasts, covered by the right hand. The left hand covers her nakedness (compare to No. 339). Two small holes separate the arms from the body. The thighs are wide, the feet joined together and resting on a kind of a stool. This is the only object of its type. H. 29mm, w. 6mm. Human and godly figures such as Aphrodite Pudica covering her nakedness are very common in the GreekRoman iconography as, for instance, on pins (Henig 1977; Bíró 1999). MacGregor (1985: 118) has suggested that these pins were used in the hair and were not intended for garments. On the Aphrodite cult in the Land of Israel see recently Friedheim 2002. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Gurob, R: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 30; R, on thicker distaff: Ibid.: 24, 28, Pls. 19: 64, 23: 67; end of 3rd-beginning of 4th cent.: Marangou 1976: 40, 80, Pls. 41a,d, 42c, 43b. Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B, on distaff and pin, different hair dressings: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 49: 6-7. Egypt, 4th cent. or later, Dumbarton Oaks Exhibition: Weitzmann 1972: 26, Pl. 13 No. 15. Hungary, end of 3rd-4th cent.: Bíró 1994: 92, 127, Pl. 33: 385. Italy, Pompeii, 1st cent., different hat or hairstyle: Ward-Perkins and Claridge 1978 Fig. 71: f. Notes: None. 249. Definition: Pin with a head – bust base? 23\S\74439 Description and interpretation: Handmade wellsmoothed pin with the head and shaft carved together. Seen from the front the ‘head’ is rectangular with its lower part narrowing towards the two mouldings beneath it. Two parallel diagonal grooves are engraved on each side of the front. Above them is a projection shaped like a triangular collar. A scar on the top of the head, bordered by lines, indicates that something was attached there. According to parallels (below) this is possibly the chest (the lines symbolize garments) of a human bust (Poplin, pers. comm.) from which the head broke off. The lower part of the cylindrical shaft is missing. This is the only object of its type. L. 69mm, the head l. 17mm, w. 11mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? 64

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Morphological analogies: Samaria-Sebaste, R-B 2nd-5th cent.: Kenyon 1957: 460, Fig. 114: 22. Greece, Corinth, R 1st cent., female bust with broken head: Davidson 1952: 285, Pl. 119: 2347. Switzerland, Augusta Raurica, R 1st3rd cent., female head on top, the lines represent the folds of the garment: Deschler-Erb 2001, Fig. 8: 2034. France, R, in the Copenhagen Museum, bust’s chest: Tardy 1977: 32: k; “Coptic” pin, bust’s chest: Ibid.: 42: 2. England, Colchester, R: Crummy 1983: 25, Fig. 23: 443. England, London, R: Smith 1859 Pl. 34 No. 19. Notes: None.

possible that several perforated fish vertebrae were also used as beads. The so-called “horse beads” (Nos. 261262) form a type in themselves. One was made from a cattle or horse metacarpus diaphysis section. The small, flat perforated “rings” left over by drilling in bone (Nos. 481-482) could also serve in secondary use as beads. Indeed, two of them were found in a grave. The rings are of special interest because wide-scale production of such rings took place at Caesarea for a long period of time (see Chapter VII below). No. 264 belongs to this type. Some of them may have been finger rings (No. 263?) or hair decoration (Petrie 1927: 22), while others (No. 265) were probably part of a composite object, like a hanging chain (Béal 1983a: 269), or used to hold garments together (Verhagen 1993: 396; Bíró 1994: 28), or even just the production waste of various objects (Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 567). Bone rings are usually few compared to the metal ones (Ibid.: 585). Two of those rings were made from the diaphysis of a cattle metatarsus and one from the diaphysis of a cattle metacarpus.

250. Definition: Pin with a flat undefined shape 23\S\34187 Description and interpretation: Pin with a flat undefined shape, handmade with the head and shaft carved in one piece. The left side of the upper section is missing, but it was probably identical (mirror-like) to the right side. There was probably a semi-circular ‘hat’ on top of two short projecting arms and a narrow ‘collar’ beneath them. Three projections stand out on each side of the middle part and there are three perforations in the center of the head. The front is convex while the back is flat and well smoothed. Two parallel grooves were incised on the back of the cylindrical shaft (their ends are seen in the section) along with vertical scraping marks. This is the only object of its type. L. 60mm, the head l. 34mm, w. 14mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

Bracelets. Only a few small pieces were found. As there are almost no long bones with diameters of this size (such as No. 268) it seems that they must have been made from the flat bones of large species. The bracelets shown here have a half round cross-section, perhaps because the flat bone was not thick enough to produce a round one. No. 268 is rather dark and judging by its parallels it might actually be made from imported jet and thus, not belong here.

IV.c.3.2. Miscellaneous jewelry. Apart from the pins, simple pendants, beads, rings, bracelets, etc. were made of bone. A local industry flourished in the Roman Empire, creating these popular jewelry for the lower and middle social classes with several centers concentrating on the manufacture of high-quality expensive objects (Bíró 1994: 26).

251. Definition: Rectangular decorated pendant? 24\S\81635 Description and interpretation: Simple rectangular tablet, carelessly handmade from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis as shown by its concave base. It is cleanly smoothed although its edges are worn, possibly from much use. Two holes were drilled close to one of the narrow sides. The decoration consists of a single circleand-dot design in each corner and nine in the center, arranged in three diagonally oriented lines of three. Judging by the parallels (below) it may also be part of a castanet (see No. 272 below). Those two are the only objects of this type. L. 41mm, w. 36mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Kh. Shatta, B, from grave: Zori 1977: 84, Pl. 21: 6. Castra, B, 6, from graves, amulets: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 10: 10. Egypt, Fustat, A 10th cent., amulet: Scanlon 1982 Fig. 13. Egypt, B, ivory, “Coptic” castanet: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 226 No. 284. Egypt, 6th-7th cent., ivory, castanet: Ägypten Schätze: 194, No. 191a. Egypt, now in Hungary, different decoration, part of a precussion instrument: Török 1993: 65, Pl. 98: Q 2; not identical: Ibid.: 65, Pl. 99: Q 5. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent., 2, furniture mount: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 566, 577, Fig. 17: 50-51. France, Lyon, R, not identical: Sautot

The pendants\amulets (eight) are very simple, asymmetrically handmade and usually decorated with circle-and-dot designs (symbolizing an eye? – Platt 1978) in many variations of arrangement which had probably some meaning. They hung on a string from the neck or the upper part of the body, sometimes holding the garments (Bíró 1994: 29). There is no way to be certain about their definition as pendants; some could also be inlays or other objects. Beads were also found at Caesarea. Eight of them were examined. No. 259 is especially beautiful and well made, while No. 260 is crude and simple. Also included in the assemblage are a round, flat doughnut-shaped bead (S\27568) and 21 small, cylindrical barrel-shaped beads, some with grooved sides (S\10017; 18347; 80650).10 It is 10

These beads will be published by S. Amorai Stark and are not included in this book.

65

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 1978: 62, Pl. 30: 4; the same, R 3rd-4th cent., hair decoration or brooch: Béal 1983a: 383, Pl. 60: 1344. Notes: Wooden parallels, Egypt, “Coptic” castanet: Rutschowscaya 1986: 93-94, Nos. 312-315.

Rediscovering Pompeii: 203, Nos. 88-90. Switzerland, R 1st-3rd cent.: Deschler-Erb 2001 Fig. 6: 3206. France, Autun, R, pendant: Sautot 1978: 33, Pl. 9: 16. France, Langres, R, handle, circles-and-dot design instead of the perforation: Ibid.: 53, Pl. 25: 5. Notes: None.

252. Definition: Unfinished square pendant? 24\P\0042 Description and interpretation: Thin square, slightly bent tablet, probably made from a flat bone. It is smoothed but has fine filing striations on it to the width of the object. Two small holes for tying or hanging were drilled along one of the sides. It could be an unfinished pendant or lid of a simple square box. This is the only object of its type. L. 33mm, w. 32mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 4th-5th cent. Morphological analogies: Nessana, B, ivory, box lid: Colt 1962: 52, Pl. 22: 58. Notes: None.

256. Definition: Small decorated pendant? 24\A\0295 Description and interpretation: Small flat drop-shaped plate. A small perforation was drilled near the pointed end and a larger one in the center. Between them are two small circle-and-dot designs. A wide groove was incised along the sides around the whole object. The use of this object is unclear - it may be a pendant, a piece of inlay or piece of jewelry tied in two different directions (Dray, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 17mm, w. 11mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 9th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

253. Definition: Pendant? 24\S\52163 Description and interpretation: Part of a perforated elongated tablet. The base and edges are very smooth, possibly as a result of rubbing against cloth. The wide end is rounded with a large hole (d. 6mm) drilled in it, perhaps for tying a string. Its lower margins were not entirely drilled and left projecting inwards. A large threecircles-and-dot design was carved near the now broken, narrowing part. This is the only object of its type. L. 25mm, w. 12mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Egypt, now in Hungary, larger and more decorated, unknown use: Török 1993: 65, Pl. 98: Q 3-4. Notes: None.

257. Definition: Antler pendant? 24\S\16032-1 Description and interpretation: Solid cylindrical smoothed item, the only object made from antler at Caesarea. A large (d. 5mm) perforation was drilled near the thick end. The object is worn around it, probably as a result of a strap tied to it. The other end is broken. It may be a simple pendant (Poplin, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 40mm, d. 11mm. Species\skeletal element: Dama mesopotamica antler base. Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Found together with pin No. 224 and object No. 459.

254-255. Definition: Elongated decorated pendant? 24\S\87315; P\002 Description and interpretation: Two rather similar carelessly handmade pendants or amulets. They are elongated, with a round head separated from the body by a narrower neck, in the center of which a hole for hanging was drilled. They are decorated with circle-and-dot designs. The lower end is missing. Similar objects bearing inscriptions are known in Europe as gaming pieces or tags for containers. No parallels were found in the Levant. There is also a possibility that No. 254 is the arm of an Islamic doll (cf. No. 325 below). These are the only objects of this type. No. 254: The object is smoothed, the base flat, the back convex or triangular in cross-section. Six circle-and-dot designs are arranged in two lines on its back. L. 58mm, w. 15mm, t. 9mm. No. 255: A flat object with a smooth base. The decoration consists of rather large (d. 7mm) two-circles-and-dot designs unequally arranged in three lines. L. 50mm, w. 20mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 254: Byzantine; No. 255: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: No. 255: Italy, Pompeii, 1st cent., gaming piece, narrower and thicker, inscribed:

258. Definition: Decorated jewelry? 24\A\0295 Description and interpretation: Flat, rather thick tablet with rounded edges. The thickness is not uniform. A perforation was drilled near each end. The decoration consists of four vertical lines and among them two ‘X’ designs and a two-circles-and-dot design in the center. Each of these is surrounded by four tiny depressions. It could be part of jewelry or inlay, but seems too thick to be part of a composite comb. This is the only object of its type. L. 73mm, w. 15mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 9th-11th cent. Morphological analogies: Yugoslavia, end of 4th-6th cent., part of a composite comb?: Petković 1995: 85, Taf. 4: 1-3, 5: 1, 9: 4, 22: 2-5, 8. Austria, Kremsdorf, 8th-9th cent., from a comb box, less decorated: MacGregor 1985: 98, Fig. 54: b. Notes: None. 259. Definition: Perforated bead 24\A\0032 Description and interpretation: A bead in the shape of a “bow-tie”. The inner cavity is larger on one end than on the other, showing that it is natural and not drilled. The 66

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE narrower end is surrounded by a moulding. The central section, bordered by thin mouldings, is convex while both ends are conical. Six couples of perforations were asymmetrically drilled in the convex section. This is the only object of its type. L. 25mm, d. 10mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, 2, “Coptic”, “Maschrabijjenglieder”: Strzygowski 1904: 216, Taf. 20 No. 8952. Notes: A somewhat similar object with its cavity stoppered is exhibited in the Mayer Museum of Islam, Jerusalem, as a gaming piece.

rectangular cross-section made from a long bone diaphysis. It could be a finger ring, decoration or part of a chain. Altogether eleven rings like Nos. 263-264 were found. D. 24mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus diaphysis fragment? Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: The Red Tower, Phase C, 13th-14th cent.: Pringle 1986: 170, Fig. 61: 4. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 567-568, Fig. 17: 52. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 26, Pl. 6: 2. Notes: None.

260. Definition: Rough polygonal bead 24\S\27890 Description and interpretation: Simple, carelessly made but smoothed bead with a polygonal cross-section. One end is straight and the other oblique, with saw marks remaining on it. The perforation is off-center. This is the only object of its type. L. 12mm, w. 9mm, the perforation d. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 2nd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Holland, Valkenburg, R, from a grave: Verhagen 1993 Fig. 24: 108-109. Notes: None.

264. Definition: Medium-sized ring 25\A\1407-2 Description and interpretation: Part of a thin mediumsized ring with a trapezoidal cross-section (more than can be seen in the drawing) showing that it was lathe-carved with a side point (see Chapter VII). Many such rings were produced at Caesarea. Eleven rings like Nos. 263-264 were found. D. 30mm, w. 5mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman, 2nd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Syria, Tell Neby Mend, H-R: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 1a. France, Lyon, R, end of 1st-2nd cent., lathe-turned baby bracelet: Béal 1983a: 269, Pl. 48: 818. Holland, Valkenburg, R post 2nd cent., perhaps used to attach the belt to the clothing: Verhagen 1993: 396, Fig. 28: 135. Notes: None.

261-262. Definition: “Horse bead”? 24\P\0041; S\39579 Description and interpretation: Short thick, cylindrical hollow objects decorated with parallel grooves around their circumference. They are too short to be handles, their inner cavity is not worked and has no recesses, so they cannot be boxes either. A close look inside No. 262 reveals wear caused by a string, so they are not gaming pieces, especially No. 261, which cannot stand on its bottom. They could be horse beads (Poplin, pers. comm.; beasts’ jewelry are mentioned by Rashi in 11th cent. France [Cattan 1997: 65]) or pendants. No. 261: The ends are not straight. The object is worn out so the grooves are only partly preserved. Two objects of this type were found. L. 36mm, d. 2.4-2.6mm. No. 262: Better worked than the previous one and very cleanly smoothed. Its ends are sawn straight and smoothed (although one of them is a little oblique). Four objects of this type were found. L. 36mm, d. 25mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 262: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jalame, B end of 4th-5thI cent., handle or tube: Berry 1988: 236, Pl. 8-3: 64. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 1st-end of 2nd cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 3: 67. Yugoslavia, 3rd-4th cent., amulet: Petković 1995: 90, Taf. 28: 1-2. France, R, in the Dijon Museum, handle?: Sautot 1978: 39, Pl. 18: 13. France, Nîmes, R, unknown use, less decorated: Béal 1984: 21, Pl. 3: 50. Notes: Ethnographic analogy: New Mexico, bracelet segments made from bird bones: Halstead and Middleton 1972: 70: q.

265. Definition: Thick medium-sized ring 25\S\33451 Description and interpretation: Thick, medium-sized, well made but slightly worn ring. Two thirds of it are a little thicker than the rest showing that it was handmade. It was perhaps part of a composite object such as a chain, decoration, hanger, etc. This is the only object of its type. D. 38mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Acco, R 1st-2nd cent., from a grave: Tzaferis 1986 Fig. 10 Pl. 13 (bottom left). Apollonia: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 56. Halusa, LR-B 4th-6th cent., furniture decoration?: Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 188, Fig. 3. Castra, B, from a grave, ear-ring hang from a string?: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 10: 3. Egypt, LR, today in Hungary, finger ring: Török 1993: 69, Pl. 104: S 3. Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?, lathe-turned, probably part of a cylindrical object: Hogarth 1908: 189, Pl. 35: 2, 3. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 26, Pl. 6: 1. Notes: None. 266. Definition: Ring with a projection 25\S\87228 Description and interpretation: Part of a smoothed medium-sized ring of differing thickness. A projection of unclear purpose exists on the side. The object is reminiscent of the top of a distaff, perhaps for attaching the wool to the rod. This is the only object of its type. D. 27mm, t. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ?

263. Definition: Small ring 25\S\6867 Description and interpretation: Small thin ring with a 67

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Amman, R 2nd-3rd cent., from a grave, ivory, spindle [but it is impossible to attach a whorl to it]: Ibrahim and Gordon 1987 Pl. 28. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, distaff: Gostenčnik 2001 Fig. 5: 5-6. Notes: None.

268. Definition: Carved bracelet 25\P\0118-1 Description and interpretation: Small piece of a carved bracelet. One facet is flat and straight while the other tapers and is worn as if it had been attached to another object. The decoration, consisting of triangular knifecarved notches on both outer facets, runs only on part of the object. It is very dark and could alternatively be made from jet or shale (analogies below). This is the only item of its type. L. 28mm, w. 9mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 4th-5th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Jet and shale parallels, England, Verulamium, RLR: Wangh and Goodburn 1972: 152, Figs. 56: 216, 57: 220.

267. Definition: Bracelet? 25\P\0065 Description and interpretation: Part of a thin, well smoothed and relatively fine bracelet (?) with a half round cross-section. Could possibly be a baby’s bracelet. This is the only object of its type. D. 61mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine, 3rd-5th cent. Morphological analogies: Tunisia, Carthage, 4thIIbeginning of 5th cent., hair clasp or for carrying keys, cosmetic utensils, etc.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 567, 578, Fig. 17: 54-55. Notes: None.

68

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE IV.D. MUSIC, DECORATION

ENTERTAINMENT,

RELIGION,

ART,

of these bone implements. Sixteen such bridges were found at Caesarea, all by the Raban expedition in a limited area within the fortified Early Arab-Crusader city. It is possible that they were not in use before that period. Most of them were found together with ajouré (open work) and frame inlays (see below) and their production waste; it is possible that those musical instruments were produced at Caesarea and decorated with inlays. These objects come in two sizes - with one recess or two.

At a large metropolis like Caesarea, which was also a cultural and religious center, the abundance of objects connected to entertainment, religion and art (1017 in all) is natural. The large number of parts of musical instruments (34), dice and gaming pieces (125), dolls\figurines (38), artistic and religious objects (8), and carved pieces, inlays and furniture mounts (812), testifys to the high standard of life in the city.

Tuning pegs of string instruments such as lyres (Nos. 275-278, eleven of them were found). English scholars debate on their date: some claim they appeared in the 9th cent. when the harp was first introduced into Europe (Fry 1976), while others date them to the 12th cent. at the earliest (Lawson 1978). The English pegs are usually much smaller than those from Caesarea, which probably originate from larger instruments (MacGregor, pers. comm.). The perforation through which the string was tied is usually located near the narrow end but sometimes it was drilled in the thick, stronger section (No. 278). In other cases, a wide groove was cut for the string near the narrow end (Fry 1976: 139). The ‘handles’ were used to push the rods into perforations drilled in the instrument (possibly using some tool-tuning wrench - Fry 1976: 139). Another proposal has been that the unworked (therefore unseen) triangular bases of these pegs (the ‘handles’) were actually vertically installed in a loom or other weaving implement so they could not revolve. The warp strings were tied to their narrow ends (Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 142). The Hungarian find cited below shows, however, that the they were more likely used in string instruments.

IV.d.1. Musical instruments. Musical instruments served a variety of uses: in domestic quarters (i.e. during weddings), during funerals, in theaters and similar institutions, in ritual buildings, etc. The discussed 34 bone objects belong to three groups of musical objects wind, percussion and string instruments. Flutes (Nos. 269-271, four specimens were found) were usually made in all places and periods from the thinwalled but strong leg and wing bones of large birds (eagle, hawk, stork), which were apparently most suitable (Goren 1990; Baldensperger 1913; Ben-Dror 1993: 6770; Halstead and Middleton 1972: 64; Stewart 1973; Putman 1988: 449; Bayer 1990: 142-143; MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1977). Donkey leg bones were also sometimes used to make flutes (Pliny, NH 11, 87) as well as other skeletal elements (MacGregor 1985: 148-151). Parts of flutes could even be made from ivory (Bodley 1946: 224ff). Two flutes from Caesarea were made from a stork or eagle ulna and donkey metatarsus diaphysis respectively. A flute made from sheep tibia is mentioned in the Mishna (Qinim 3, 6). A Galileean Bedouin who still plays a bone flute testified that the finger holes were drilled with a red-hot iron rod (Ayalon 1999: 46) while Dray (pers. comm.) suggests the holes were cut by knife or made by a drill in ancient flutes.

Most of these objects were found by Patrich’s expedition and it is tempting to connect it with the fact that he excavated the Roman-Byzantine administrative center and Governor’s palace (Patrich 1999; 2003a) where musical instruments should perhaps be expected. However, more information is needed to establish this connection. To date, no such object has been published in Israel. For a reconstruction of an 8th cent. harp with such pegs from Cologne, France see Megaw 1968: 132. A wooden inlayed lyre equipped with similar pegs was found in Hungary (Bíró 1994: 59-60, Pls. 71-74 Nos. 606-622, Fig. 34).

Castanet – a percussion instrument made from bone, ivory or wood. Complete specimens are mainly known from Egypt. It consists of an elongated, rectangular handle with two perforations near the top (see No. 546 below) and two small tablets (No. 272), each similarly perforated, tied to each side of the handle. Moving the tool caused the tablets to hit the handle and produced a rhythmic sound. This instrument (crotalum) was used by Christians during funerals (Bíró 1987: 45). It is also possible, however, that the three relevant pieces found at Caesarea were pendants (see No. 251 above).

269. Definition: Flute 26\A\0280 Description and interpretation: The rear part of a flute made from a thin-walled bone. A reed mouth-piece was probably inserted in it (Bodley 1946: 224). A D-shaped (5 X 5mm) lip was cut near the end. Its rounded facet is oblique, either as a result of the cutting technique or intentionally. Two oval finger holes remained in the central section. The first one was drilled obliquely. The object was smoothed but today it is covered with patina. Two objects of this type were found. L. 118mm, d. 1314mm, the holes d. 5.5 X 4.5mm, 5 X 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: Large bird species (eagle or stork) ulna.

String instrument bridge – A rectangular tablet with rounded file-produced recesses and grooves on its top (Nos. 273-274), which was placed near the rear end of a string instrument. The strings passed through the grooves and thus were raised a bit above the face of the instrument (Eichmann 1994 Abb. 30). These are rare objects; similar unpublished bone objects are known from Ashkelon but from no other site in Israel or abroad. Wooden parallels from Egypt enabled the identification 69

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: Gaba\Tell Abu Shuasha, R, from a grave?: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 57. Jerusalem, ER, from a grave: Gershuni and Zissu 1996 Fig. 33. Jerusalem, City of David, ER, from cattle metatarsus: Bayer 1990: 142-143, Fig. 24. Har Sna’im (Mt. Hermon), H-ER: Dar 1993 Fig. 120. Horvat Ramon, B, from leg bone of a large fowl: Ayalon 1999: 46. Egypt, 5th-8th cent., “Coptic”: Badawy 1978 Pl. 6.1 (top). Syria, Hamma, Stratum A1-4, 7th-14th cent., from bird bone: Oldenburg 1969: 135, Fig. 48: 4. Lebanon, Beyrut, B: TurquetyPariset 1982: 9, Fig. 13: 93. Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 194, Pl. 37: 12. Turkey, Tarsus, H: Goldman 1950: 400, Fig. 273: 95. Greece, Corinth, H, 5th cent. BCE.: Davidson 1952: 197, Fig. 30, Pl. 90: 1503. France, Autun, R, tube: Sautot 1978: 33, Pl. 8: 7. France, Lyon, R, not a flute: Béal 1983a: 129-130, Fig. 23: 318. England, various sites, c post-Roman (esp. 8th-9th cent.), a-b from 12th-13th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 148-151, Fig. 78: a-c. England, York, 11th cent. onwards, whistle: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1977-1978, Fig. 935: 7075-7076. Notes: None.

Notes: None. 272. Definition: Castanet’s tablet? 26\P\0045 Description and interpretation: Trapezoidal tablet with uneven and crooked facets, carelessly made from a flat bone. The base is smoothed although remenants of the spongiosa remain. Sawing striations may be seen on both short sides. The decoration consists of large (d. 8mm) circle-and-dot designs – four in the corners and one offcenter. Parallels show that this is probably a castanet tablet (see No. 546 below) although it could also be a pendant (see No. 251 above). Three items of this kind were found. L. 41mm, w. 30mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: See No. 251 above. Notes: None. 273-274. Definition: String instrument bridge 26\A\0182-3; 0801 Description and interpretation: Two variants of those objects which were also made of ivory. Despite their different dimensions they share certain similarities: A rectangular piece whose base is always oblique in sidesection and roughly smoothed, with diagonal striations. One long facet is lower than the other so its lower part is oblique towards the base (see section of No. 274). The edges are only roughly smoothed. The top is carved as two horizontal or slightly oblique shoulders with three grooves in each, and a half round, asymmetrical depression between them with sawing striations in it. The grooves were made with a file (Dray, pers. comm.). No. 274, larger than all the others (which look like No. 273) has two depressions and three shoulders. Egyptian wooden parallels (below) show that this was a bridge of a string instrument (see discussion above). Sixteen objects of this kind were found. No. 273: l. 28mm, w. 7mm, t. 3.5mm. No. 274: l. 53mm, w. 4.5mm, t. 1.1mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 273: Early Arab, 10th-11th cent.. No. 274: Crusader, 11th-12th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Wooden parallels, Egypt, “Coptic”: Eichmann 1994 Abb. 30, Taf. 3: b-d.

270. Definition: Flute fragment? 26\A\95880 Description and interpretation: Fragment of a delicate cylindrical object, possibly a flute, made from a thinwalled long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity is very smooth. The rear end (l. 26mm, d. 11mm) is lathe-turned and a little narrower than the rest. Five parallel circumferential grooves were incised on it, probably to improve the attachment of the mouth-piece on it (Poplin, pers. comm.). A rectangular lip partly survived. This is the only object of its type. L. 65mm, d. 14mm. Species\skeletal element: Donkey metatarsus. Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Szőny, in a Roman fortress: Bíró 1994: 107, Pl. 75: 626. France, Lyon, R, reminds a flute, without holes, thicker wall: Béal 1983a: 128, Fig. 23: 312; unidentifiable, 319 with a hole, thin wall: Ibid.: 130, Pl. 23: 319-320. Notes: None. 271. Definition: Decorated flute fragment? 26\A\0209 Description and interpretation: Fragment – a piece of the wall – made from a cylindrical thin-walled bone. The medullar cavity is clean and smooth. Both ends are missing. The wall is carelessly decorated with handmade diagonal incisions (possibly made with a red-hot needle – Dray, pers. comm.) which create asymmetrical rhombus designs, with a dot or two inside each of them. Two iron rings (w. 4mm, t. 2mm) which were mounted on it left rust stains (compare to Bodley 1946: 224ff). It could be a flute (compare to a recent Bedouin flute with metal parts: Goren 1990; Ayalon 1999 Fig. 58) or a piece of composite jewelry. This is the only object of its type. L. 42mm, d. 15 X 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None.

275-278. Definition: Tuning peg of a string instrument 26\S\54590-2; P\0061; 0121; S\26301 Description and interpretation: Variants of a larger group of these objects, usually identified as tuning pegs (see above). The ‘handle’ is simple, short and with a trianglular cross-section. A cylindrical rod, thicker and sometimes decorated with mouldings in its lower section and narrower in the other is attached to it. A perforation for the string was drilled in the rod, usually near the narrow end (Nos. 275, 277) and sometimes in the thicker section (No. 278). This difference may reflect the use of these pegs in different instruments where the pegs were stuck in opposite directions (MacGregor 1985: 207, n. 45). Lathe indentations remained on some of them (Nos. 276, 277) demonstrating that the cylindrical section was 70

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE lathe-turned. Later, however, this part was deliberately roughed with a file in order to improve its installing within the perforation in the instrument (Dray, pers. comm.). Others have cut-off scars on their narrow end (No. 278). Sometimes wear marks caused by the string can be observed on the rod (No. 278). Others broke because of rotating pressure, probably caused by tightening the string too much (Nos. 276, 278 – Poplin, pers. comm.).

variety of objects connected with games, 125 in all. They can be devided into several main groups: 59 throwing pieces, most of them with numbers (2 astragali, 52 dice and 5 throwing sticks); 66 jetons (pion) in various shapes: 13 convex and flat, 6 domed, 3 varia; 2 “theater tickets”; 36 hollow cylindrical; 4 bottle-shaped; 2 domino tablets. They were probably used in various board games (Salza Prina Ricotti 1995: 95-108; Sebbane 2001) but it is difficult to connect a certain piece to a specific game (MacGregor 1985: 132). The hollow objects – large dice and cylindrical pieces - were mainly made from cattle metatarsus diaphyses and to a lesser extent from those of horse (below). Most gaming pieces, especially the dice, were found at Caesarea in layers from all periods while certain types, like the throwing sticks and the bottleshaped pieces, probably date to the Early Arab and perhaps also the Crusader periods. This last fact is interesting as games of chance were in principal forbidden in the Qur’an (V, 90 [p. 108]). Unless used by non-Moslems only, it might show that games were still popular, just as drinking wine and eating pork never ceased (Roll and Ayalon 1987: 73; 1989: 92, 151, 191, 213, 231; Ziffer 1996: 49-56; Amar 2000: 100-135 esp. 123ff; Cope 1997).

Eleven objects of this kind were found. No. 275: Asymmetrical, probably a handmade peg. The ‘handle’ is small, smoothed and worn although it still has diagonal filing striations on its surface. Vertical plane marks are seen on the rougher rod which broke across the perforation - a known weak point (MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1978-1979). L. 100mm, d. 12mm. No. 276: The ‘handle’ end has two lathe indentations, probably a result of production failure. It is smooth and a little worn-out but diagonal filing striations can be seen on its angles. The lower part of the rod is decorated with lathe-turned mouldings and grooves while the narrow part is missing. L. 70mm, d. 11mm. No. 277: The narrow part of a lathe-turned, cleanly smoothed peg which broke in the moulded section. A groove was incised around the perforation – either to improve how the string was tied or as a sign where to drill the perforation. L. 56mm, d. 10mm. No. 278: Cleanly smoothed rod of the largest peg in this group. It also broke in the decorated part and from a rotating motion. The perforation was drilled in the thicker, stronger section of the rod. Wear signs can be seen on the narrow section, either because of the rubbing inside the hole of the instrument or because the string was tied there (Poplin, pers. comm.). A cut-off scar remained on the narrow end. L. 80mm, d. 14mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 275: Roman-Byzantine. No. 276: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. No. 277: Byzantine, 5th-6th cent. No. 278: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Israel?: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 102. Egypt, R, pin: Petrie 1927: 24, Pl. 19: 52. Hungary, Szőny and Dunapentele (2nd cent.), Nos. 606-622 from a wooden lyre: Bíró 1994: 59-60, 103, 106-107, Pls. 62: 536, 70: 595, 73-74: 606-622. Yugoslavia, 3rd-4th cent.: Petković 1995 Taf. 39: 5. France, Autun, R, the perforation – for hanging: Sautot 1978: 32, Pl. 9: 20-21. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-4th cent., part of a distaff or weaving bobbin: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 142 Fig. 7 right, 192, No. 219. England, Whitby, 12th-15th cent. the earliest: Lawson 1978 contra Fry 1976; MacGregor 1985: 146-148, Fig. 77: d-e. Notes: Ethnographical analogies: Africa, Ubangi-Shari, harp with ivory carved pegs: Tardy 1977: 420. United States, mid-19th cent. violin with pegs: Flayderman 1972: 136-137. The Arab world: Polin 1954 Pls. 23-25. Wooden parallel, Egypt, Quseir Al-Qadim: Whitcomb 1979: 203, Pl. 70: c. Bronze parallel, England: MacGregor 1985: 207 n. 46.

The astragali (or phalanges; No. 279) were popular everywhere throughout history. They were smoothed, sometimes drilled and filled with lead, others were painted or inscribed, and copies were made from various raw materials such as metal and glass. They were used as dice or gaming pieces. Usually several astragali were thrown and their values were determined according to their upper face as they stopped rolling. There was also an aspect of luck, good future and forgiveness to them, as attested by their appearance on Hellenistic-Roman lead anchors, as a patronage request from Venus (Queyrel 1997). The use of astragali of various animals did not change from prehistoric times until today. Ancient figurines, mosaics and paintings show people playing with them. They have been thouroughly discussed so there is no point in adding anything here (cf. Werner 1978; Amandry 1984; Poplin 1984; Reese 1985; Salza Prina Ricotti 1995: 47-49, 76-79; Dandoy 1996; Gilmour 1997; Bartosiewicz 1997-1998). More astragali have no doubt been found at Caesarea but were sent to the zoologists and not defined as “bone objects”. Dice are numerous at Caesarea (52), but based on their uniformity only one example of each type is shown here (Nos. 280-282). They were made according to the “Roman system” (MacGregor 1985: 129) as a squarefaced die (except one, S\34413) with the numbers on each two opposite faces adding up to seven (6+1, 5+2, 4+3) (Ibid.). Similar dice were in use in Israel at least since the Late Bronze Age (Klamer 1981: 33). This arrangement of the numbers was held to in all the Caesarean dice, although in other countries other shapes and systems were known (i.e. Schmid 1980; MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1983). The relative location of the numbers on the different faces was also usually fixed

IV.d.2. Gaming pieces. This group includes a large 71

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS although they were exceptions (Gardner 1979: 31-32; Batey 1992: 57). The connections between the numbers, the size of the dice and designs etc. have also been investigated at other sites (Schmid 1980). The numbers were usually marked by circle-and-dot designs made with a center-bit (see Chapter VI below). In two objects they were marked as small depressions, probably made with a red-hot metal rod (Bíró 1987: 45, 60). The extent of use made of the dice is attested by the degree of their wear: some look brand new while others are so worn out that in extreme cases the numbers have partly disappeared. For their production techniques see Chapters VI-VII below. On the playing methods see Salza Prina Ricotti 1995: 8094. The dice can be divided by size into two groups: solid and hollow.

and prophecies using dice see, among others, Werner 1978; MacGregor 1985: 132; Rediscovering Pompeii 1992: 199-201; Bíró 1994: 61-62. Throwing sticks (Nos. 283-284) are rather rare. All five sticks probably date to the Early Arab or Crusader periods. They resemble dice in their circle-and-dot numbers and in their summing of seven in each two opposite facets (No. 284 and two others), but there exist other sums of numbers (No. 283). As the surfaces available were larger than in the dice, the artisan added many small decorative circle-anddot designs. The two extreme facets were not used because of their small size, and in this sense the sticks resemble astragali (Oldenburg 1969: 134). Elongated throwing sticks arrived in England from Scandinavia only in the Middle Ages. The numbers were incised on them in a growing order according to the chance of the stick to fall on the specific facet, as in the Caesarea sticks (MacGregor 1985: 129). The gaming method used with them is unclear (Goyon 2000: 147-148). It is possible that they were not thrown but lain one beside the other by the numbers, as with domino tablets (they are exhibited in this way in the National Museum in Prague). They may just as well be precussion instruments of the kind used, for instance, during funerals (Bíró 1987: 45).

The solid dice which are more common (36) are relatively small (face length 6-14mm, average 8-9mm) and made from the wall of a thick long bone diaphysis which explains their limited size (No. 280). The number designs therefore often cut across each other or parts of them were left beyond the die’s borders, especially for the numbers 3, 5, 6. Such dice were produced at Caesarea (see Chapter VII). Similar dice were made from almost all existing raw materials (Davidson 1952: 218). The hollow dice (16) are larger. They were made from sections of a long bone diaphysis with cortical bone thick enough to allow it to be planed to give it a square crosssection. This is why their size was also limited (at Caesarea max. 26mm). The medullar cavity was filled with a single long stopper (whose length equals that of the die’s face - No. 282) or with two thin lids (No. 281) which were preferred as it was easier to fit them into the slightly conical cavity. In all dice from Caesarea and in almost all hollow dice from other sites (i.e. Schmid 1980; Béal 1983a: 345; contra Salza Prina Ricotti 1995: Fig. 65) the numbers 4-3 were for a reason that is now unclear incised on the two opposite hollow faces. Sometimes the number designs were incised partly on the stopper and partly on the die itself. In one case, the design on the stopper differs from those incised on the die, showing that it is a secondary stopper. These hollow dice are relatively rare in Europe (they are absent in Hungary [Bíró, pers. comm.] and in France [Béal 1983a: 345]), possibly because solid dice could be made from antler (MacGregor 1985: 129). All hollow dice at Caesarea which were osteologically identified were made from metatarsus diaphysis: seven from cattle, one from horse, three from cattle or horse and one from a similar sized animal. It is possible that this is the only bone which had a wall thick enough for that purpose.

Round convex or flat gaming pieces (Nos. 285-289) are not numerous (13) relative to European sites where many were found in graves, most often incised or inscribed. They are usually defined as gaming pieces or substitutes for money in games of chance (Béal 1984: 75). In one case, two series of jetons were found, 15 white and 15 black, a fact which strengthens their identification as gaming pieces (Rostovtzew 1905; Béal 1983a: 283ff; MacGregor 1985: 132-133; Bíró 1994: 62-63). All were made on a lathe or cut with a center-bit (MacGregor 1985: 133) in various qualities and designs. Without iconography or inscriptions (like the number IIII on No. 293) it is difficult to define them with certainty as gaming pieces. Such a round, flat object could also be a counting or paying jeton or counter (Sautot 1978: 68-70), disk, lid\stopper (Béal 1983a: 283), etc. Conical gaming pieces (No. 290; six were found). Most of them were made from ivory, but a bone example is shown here. Their base is sometimes worn from use. Varia (Nos. 291-293) consist of a cylindrical object with a conical top, an amphora-shaped (?) object and a disk with the number 4 in Greek and Latin on its base. In this it resembles the “theater tickets” (below) although its back is not carved. The meaning of the number is unclear, especially as it is carved on the base which is usually unseen. It could be the value of a gaming piece which – as with domino – the player wanted to conceal, the seat number in a building for entertainmemt or representing a monitary value for commercial purposes.

Some bone boxes found at Caesarea (for instance No. 130) could be used for holding and throwing dice (Kraus 1975 Fig. 222; Bíró 1994 Fig. 37). Many dice have been found in Roman entertainment facilities such as theaters and stadia, both in Israel and abroad, and it seems that the spectators engaged themselves in board games during the intermissions (Davidson 1952: 218). On games, lotteries

“Theater tickets” (Nos. 294-295) of the type found mainly in large cities such as Jerusalem and Ashkelon, 72

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE the 18th cent. – Encyclopædia Britannica 1961: 520; MacGregor 1985: 141) shows that they probably originated in the modern Bosnian village located in the territory of ancient Caesarea (see Vann 1989).

were found by the Patrich expedition in a fill together with Early Roman finds. This spot is not far from the stadium and the governing center, but without full stratigraphical data it is impossible to learn from their findspots about their use. Those disks have on their reverse sides designs showing rulers, gods, buildings, etc., while a number – usually both in Greek and Latin – was engraved on the base. In Egypt they date from the 1st cent. BCE to the 3rd cent. Most researches today agree that they were gaming pieces and not theater tickets (as claimed, for instance, by Bieber 1961: 246-247) as the engraved numbers usually do not exceed 15 (which is unreasonable in a theater; but see one with the number 16 from Antioch: Kondoleon 2000: 161-162, No. 47) and as series of 15 disks were found in graves (Rostovtzew 1905; Alföldi 1975; Alföldi-Rosenbaum 1976; Marangou 1976: 65-66; Rediscovering Pompeii 1992: 203; Kondoleon 2000: 161-162).

279. Definition: Astragalus 27\P\0106 Description and interpretation: A filed and smoothed astragalus which probably served as a die or gaming piece. Only two of its type were registered in this assemblage. L. 34mm, w. 22mm, t. 20mm. Species\skeletal element: Astragalus. Locus date: Roman, 2nd-3rd cent. Morphological analogies: Israel?: Ayalon 1999: 52. Ashdod, H: Dothan 1971 Fig. 30: 1. Shiqmona, H: Elgavish 1974 Pl. 6 and No. 218. Dor, R: Stern 1994 Fig. 225. Syria, Jebel Khalid, H, many modified: Steele 2002: 144. Cyprus, Salamis: Chavane 1975: 185-189, Pls. 5152: 547-556. Spain, Barcelona, R: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 188 No. 209. Notes: Ivory, glass, bronze, pottery and stone parallels: Chavane 1975: 185.

The hollow cylindrical gaming pieces (Nos. 296-303; 36 were found) are sometimes simple (Nos. 298-299) but others – mainly Nos. 301-303 – are more elegant and sometimes very well polished (see Photo 2: 10). Many scholars identified them as furniture mounts (see below) although the base is often worn from use - a typical phenomena of gaming pieces. The fact that many such objects were found in graves shows they are not ornaments (MacGregor 1985: 134). They were produced mainly from cattle or horse metatarsus diaphyses: nine from cattle metatarsus, three from horse and one from cattle or horse. Two were produced from cattle femur diaphyses and one from a cattle or horse metapodial diaphysis.

280. Definition: Small solid die 27\A\0357 Description and interpretation: Small solid die, very worn from use. The numbers are organized as usual: 6+1, 5+2, 4+3. Some of them are asymmetrical or not well positioned on the face, and sometimes the circle-and-dot designs cut across each other or lie too close to the edge. Thirty-six such dice were found. Side length 11mm, numbers designs d. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus diaphysis. Locus date: Early Arab, 8th cent. Morphological analogies: Beth Zur, H: Sellers 1933 Fig. 56: 4. Massada, ER: Yadin 1966: 145. Gamla, ER: Gutman 1994: 110. Jerusalem, ER: Ben-Dov 1982: 164 (left). Dor, R: Stern 1994 Fig. 225. Sepphoris, R: Martin Nagy et al. 1996: 235, Nos. 152-153. Sepphoris, 2, numbers arranged differently: Batey 1992: 57. Tel Jezreel, R 3rd-4th cent., from a grave: Zori 1977 Pl. 7: 4. Jerusalem, R: Bagatti and Milik 1958 Fot. 128: 13. Shiqmona, B: Elgavish 1994 Fig. 140. Castra, B, from graves: Siegelmann in preparation. Sepphoris, B?: Yeivin 1937: 33, Pl. I Fig. 2. Hammat Gader, LB-A: Coen Uzzieli 1997: 448, Pl. 1: 6. Jerusalem, Middle Ages: Tushingham 1985: 151, Fig. 69: 8-9, 11-12. ‘Atlit, 13th cent., 6, small and relatively unused: Johns 1934 Pl. 60 Fig. 2; Sebbane 1999 Fig. 4. Jordan, Jerash, B 5th cent.: Clark and Bowsher 1986: 264-266, Pl. 27.1: g-i. Egypt, “Greek-Roman”, one with a different arrangement of numbers: Petrie 1927: 57, Pl. 49: 234-258. Egypt, LR: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 218, No. 272a-b. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A4, 7th-12thI or earlier: Oldenburg 1969: 132, Fig. 49: 7. Tunisia, Carthage: Henig 1984: 191, Fig. 64: 89-92; 4th II-beginning of 5th cent., 11, 2 asymmetrical, No. 63 possibly blank or waste from die production: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 567568, 579-581, Fig. 19: 61-63; 2nd-3rd cent.: Hurst and Henig 1994: 22-23, 277, Fig. 14.17: 54. Turkey, Antioch, B: Russell 2000: 86, Fig. 9 (bottom). Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., one with a different arrangement of numbers:

The bottle- or tube-shaped gaming pieces (Nos. 304-306, four in all) date to the Early Arab period. Scholars defined them as bottles or containers for cosmetics, ointments, etc., comparing them to similar contemporary glass vessels. However, their medullar cavity is not worked, enlarged or smoothed as in containers and has no recesses for a base and a lid or stopper (see lower section of No. 304). Without a well closed base they cannot be identified as containers. Their decorations are very similar to those on dice and sometimes even give the impression of numeric values, which strengthens their identification as gaming pieces. Nos. 304-305 were found together and their similarity in shape but difference in size suggest that they belonged to the same game, such as a king and a queen in chess. This game was invented in India in the first centuries, distributed through Persia (in the 6th cent. at the latest) and introduced into Europe by the Moslems who conquered Spain around the 10th cent. (Hughes 1961: 426). It is possible that the cylindrical hollow pieces (Nos. 296-303) were used as pawns in the same game (compare to MacGregor 1985 Fig. 71: r). One of the bottle-shaped objects was made from cattle metatarsus diaphysis. Domino (No. 307). Two tablets of this kind were found. The late appearance of this game (between the 16th and 73

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Davidson 1952: 221-222, Pl. 100: 1739-1746, 1748. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 1st-end of 2nd cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 10: 75; end of 2nd-middle of 3rd cent.: Ibid. Fig. 12: 88-89; 4th cent.: Ibid.: 45, Figs. 26: 215, 27: 237; R: Bíró 1994: 108-109, Pls. 77-78: 644-667. Yugoslavia, 2nd cent., Nos. 10-12 with different arrengement of numbers: Petković 1995: 105, Taf. 40: 13. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, one of ivory: Gostenčnik 2001: 384, Fig. 4: 16-18. Switzerland, Vindonissa, R, rectangular and carelessly made: Schmid 1980 Taf. 3: V-10, 4: V-16, 19, 20-22, 5: V-24, 7: V-32, 36. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 29, Pl. 4: 8. France, Malain, R: Ibid.: 68, Pl. 38: 1. France, Lyon, R: Ibid.: 61, Pl. 31: 3; Béal 1983a: 349-354, Pl. 59: 1291, 1297-1298. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-3rd cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 185 Nos. 194-197. Holland, Valkenburg, R: Verhagen 1993: 372-375, Fig. 19: 79-80, 82. England, London, mid-1st cent., 4 dice and 24 glass circular gaming pieces (13 black, 11 white) found together in a wooden box in a grave: Barber and Bowsher 2000: 135, 193, Fig. 97. England, Frocester Court, R, ivory; Gilton Town, esp. 8th-9th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 131-132, Fig. 71: b,c. England, Verulamium, mid-4th cent. (284), beginning of 3rd cent. (285), numbers painted in red: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 73, Fig. 31: 284-285. England, York, post 1080 and stratum 3A: MacGregor 1995: 417, Fig. 157: 7.1-7.3; 10th-14th cent., in bone and ivory: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1982-1985, Fig. 941: 7736, 8078. Notes: Pottery, stone, bronze and wooden dice: Petrie 1927: 57, Pl. 49: 234-258.

France, Lyon, R, with and without stoppers: Béal 1983a: 345-346, Pl. 59: 1230, 1234. France, not later than 1st cent.: Béal 1984: 87, Pl. 19: 357. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st4th cent.: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 185 No. 193. England, Richborough, R, rectangular, with stoppers: MacGregor 1985: 131-132, Fig. 71: e. England, Colchester, mid-1st cent.: Crummy 1992b: 221, Fig. 6.16: 193. Notes: None. 282. Definition: Stopper of a hollow die 27\S\77980 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical stopper for a large hollow die. The 4 side is smooth with sawing marks while a circle-and-dot design is incised on the 3 side. Vertical knife marks and filing and smoothing striations can be seen on the perimeter. Judging by its length it probably extended from one side to the other, so this was also the length of the die face. This is the only object of its kind. L. 18mm, d. 8mm, the circle-and-dot design d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Switzerland, Vindonissa, R: Schmid 1980 Taf. 5: V-26. Notes: None. 283-284. Definition: Rectangular throwing sticks 27\A\0290; 1206 Description and interpretation: Two rectangular gaming pieces. The numbers were rather carelessly marked on the long faces in large two-circles-and-dot designs, with smaller designs sometimes added as decoration. The small ends are unmarked. Five objects of this type were found. No. 283: The numbers 6+1 were incised on the wide faces and 5+2 on the narrow ones, both adding up to 7. Smaller decorative designs were added only on the wide sides. Some of them have a tailshaped addition (compare to No. 304) known from ivory Islamic objects from 12th cent. Sicily (A. Jones, pers. comm.). The corners and angles are worn from use. L. 85mm, w. 9mm, t. 9mm, large circle-and-dot designs d. 5mm, small ones d. 3mm. No. 284: Elongated depressions resulting from breaking the object off the blank rod were left on the small ends. The numbers 4+3 (=7) were marked on the wide faces but on the narrow ones the numbers are 2+1 (=3). Each number was differently designed as concern the arrangement of large and small designs. L. 70mm, w. 12mm, t. 8mm, the large designs d. 4.5mm, small ones - d. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 283: Byzantine-Early Arab. No. 284: Crusader, 12th cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER, with 6 circleand-dot designs: Ben-Dov 1982: 164 (bottom, 2nd from left). Jerusalem, Middle Ages: Tushingham 1985: 151, Fig. 68: 20. Banias, stick, 5+1 designs: Israeli 2001 No. 66. Israel: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 63. Egypt, H-R, numbers 6+1, 5+2: Petrie 1927: 57, Pl. 49: 230-232. Egypt, today in Hungary, unknown use, unclear numbers: Török 1993: 66-67, Pl. C: Q 13. Egypt, unknown use, numbers 3, 6, 2

281. Definition: Large hollow die with stoppers 27\S\91825 Description and interpretation: A large die made from a long bone diaphysis. The cavity is closed with two flat elliptical stoppers, the upper thicker than the lower. Both are precisely adjusted to the asymmetrical shape of the cavity. The numbers on the cavity facets are as usual 3-4. The central design of the 3 was carved on the stopper while the other two and all the 4 designs were incised in the corners. These designs were marked quite symmetrically. The corners and the angles are worn out from use. Sixteen such dice were found. Side length 26mm, circle-and-dot design d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus diaphysis. Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER: Avigad 1983 Fig. 224. Muraba’at Cave, R, with recesses for stoppers, originally filled with lead or wax to control the way it rolled (pipé): Benoit, Milik and de Vaux 1961: 44, Fig. 12: 3, Pl. 14: 6. Samaria, stoppers missing: Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924: 28 No. 2. Israel, with stopper recess: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 66. Syria, Hamma, H: Ploug 1985: 241, Fig. 59: q. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER: Gostenčnik 2001: 384, Fig. 4: 20. Switzerland, Vindonissa, R: Schmid 1980 Abb. 2 top; Taf. 1: V-1, V3, 2: V-5, 5: V-27, 6: V-29-31. Switzerland, Basel, R: Ibid. Taf. 8: AB-2. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 2829, Pl. 4: 7. France, Les Bolards, R, with stoppers: Ibid.: 47-48, Pl. 20: 1. France, Malain, R: Ibid.: 68, Pl. 38: 4. 74

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE plus decorations: Ibid.: 67, Pl. CI: Q 14. Egypt, LR-B, numbers 5-6-2-1, 2-8-5-1, 2-8-3-1, the last one with a “tailed” design: L’art copte Nos. 274-275. Egypt, hippopotamus ivory, “Coptic”?, numbers 5-6-2-1, remains of red paint: Goyon 2000: 147-148. Syria, Hamma, stratum A1-4, 7th-14th cent., numbers 6+1, 5+2: Oldenburg 1969: 134, Figs. 49: 6, 50: 1, 3. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent., possibly gaming stick blank or production waste, 3 circle-and-dot designs: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 568, 579-581, Fig. 19: 63. Turkey, Antioch, B: Russell 2000: 86, Fig. 9 (center bottom). Hungary, Gorsium, c. 2nd-4th cent., one broken with 5 designs on one end, the other with numbers (4?)-13-2: Bíró 1987: 45, Figs. 21: 183, 23. England, Burrian, especially pre-R up to 2nd cent., numbers 5+4, 6+1; Ireland until 9th cent.: MacGregor 1985: 129, Fig. 71: a. “Roman and Coptic Worlds”, one with Greek inscription in circle-and-dot designs: Tardy 1977: 42: 1. Notes: None.

Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Cyprus, Salamis, H: Chavane 1975: 191, Pl. 52: 565. Notes: None. 288. Definition: Circular gaming piece? 28\P\0123 Description and interpretation: Circular lathe-turned disk with an indentation on the top. The base is flat and smooth. The top is surrounded by a projecting mould separated by a circumferential depression from the central convex section. A nipple surrounded by a depression is in the center. The object is partly broken and covered with patina. It could have been a gaming piece, counting or paying jeton, lid or even a piece of inlay. Four objects like Nos. 288-289 were found. D. 30mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Shiqmona, B: Elgavish 1994: 130, two objects on the right. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., counters?: Davidson 1952: 217, 219, Pl. 99: 16791680. France, Lyon, R 1st-2nd cent., thicker, furniture decoration: Béal 1983a: 333, Pl. 57: 1183-1184. France, Nîmes, R end of 1st-beginning of 2nd cent., smaller and thicker, lid: Béal 1984: 19, Pl. 2: 30. Notes: None.

285-286. Definition: Convex circular gaming piece? 28\P\0087; S\17878 Description and interpretation: Round disks with rather flat bases and convex tops. Both are lathe-turned, the typical depression remaining on the top. No. 285: A rather large and thick disk. The base is slightly concave and smoothed with remains of many short and irregular planing marks and a natural groove. The edge is rounded and part of it is broken. The top is smooth and has fine lathe-carving marks on it. This is the only object of its kind. D. 34mm, t. 6mm. No. 286: A small, smooth disk. Six such objects were found. D. 22mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: No. 285: Cattle tibia diaphysis. Locus date: No. 285: Late Byzantine. No. 286: Late Roman-Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 285: Jerusalem: Geva 2003: 345, Pl. 13.1: B8. Tunisia, Carthage, “late”?: Henig 1984: 86, 191, Fig. 64: 83. No. 286: Tunisia, Carthage, counter: Ibid.: 191, Fig. 64: 85; B, counter: Hurst and Henig 1994: 31, 277, Fig. 14.17: 52. Turkey, Tarsus, R, gaming piece: Goldman 1950: 399, Fig. 273: 88. Hungary, Gorsium, 4th cent.: Bíró 1987 Fig. 28: 241. Hungary, R: Bíró 1994: 119, Pl. 83: 838. France, Alésia, R: Sautot 1978: 29, Pl. 4: 3. France, Lyon, R 1st-2nd cent., jeton or gaming piece: Béal 1983a: 286, Pl. 50: 833. England, York, R: MacGregor 1985: 132-133, Fig. 71: I-j. Notes: None.

289. Definition: Thick circular gaming piece? 28\A\1242 Description and interpretation: Rather thick latheturned disk. The flat base is rough with remains of the spongiosa (and manufacture?) striations. The edge is vertical. The top is smooth with a lathe indentation within a nipple surrounded by a circumferential depression, a convex shoulder and a thin circumferential moulding between two grooves. Four objects like Nos. 288-289 were found. D. 23mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine, 6th cent. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Petra, B 6th cent.: Bikai 2001: 411, 422, No. 103. Cyprus, Salamis, B 5th cent., box lid: Chavane 1975: 176-178, Pls. 48: 506, 71: 506. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent.: Davidson 1952: 217, Pl. 99: 1681. France, Malain, R, gaming piece and counter: Sautot 1978: 68-70, Pl. 37: 2. France, Lyon, R, gaming piece: Béal 1983a: 321, Pl. 54: 1163-1166. France, Nîmes, R?, gaming piece: Béal 1984: 75, Type 7. Notes: None. 290. Definition: Conical circular gaming piece? 28\P\0058 Description and interpretation: Conical asymmetrical object with the top point off-center. The base is flat while the top is roughly smoothed. Four objects of this type were found, three of them made from ivory. D. 26mm, t. 15mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Holland, Aalsum, 5th cent., a die and 10 such objects were found in a jar in a grave: van Vilsteren 1987: 47, No. 68. Notes: None.

287. Definition: Flat circular gaming piece? 28\P\0134 Description and interpretation: Small, flat incised disk. It is lathe-turned and two indentations remained on the top and base. The top is better smoothed than the base. A deep circumferential groove exists around most of the top, but parts of it go astray. The artisan probably tried to cut the disk from the raw tablet with a center-bit but failed and cut it again in a slightly different location. The top is decorated with four couples of slightly curving lines. This is the only object of its type. D. 17mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? 75

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS lid: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 176 No. 145. Italy, R: Salza Prina Ricotti 1995: 102-103, Fig. 78 top left. Notes: None.

291. Definition: Cylindrical-conical gaming piece? 28\A\0493 Description and interpretation: Solid cylindrical, slightly worn object. The base is flat and smooth. The upper part is conical with a lathe indentation on its slightly truncated top. Two circumferential grooves separate this cone from the body. This is the only object of its type. D. 13mm, h. 16mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: England, York, 10th cent. and later, with rounded shoulders: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1982, Fig. 940: 7900. Notes: None.

294-295. Definition: “Theater ticket”\carved gaming piece 28\P\0139; 0148 Description and interpretation: Two disks with a carved top and a number on the base. The lathe or centerbit indentation remained on the base. These originally defined “theater tickets” are now thought to be gaming pieces (above). They are the only objects of this kind. No. 294: Well smoothed but today worn out. The base bears the number 4 in Greek and Latin. Two fishes are carved in high relief on the top on a different axis than the numbers (compare to the fishes swimming towards each other: Dothan 1983 Pl. 33: 8). D. 28mm, t. 3.5mm. No. 295: There is a small defect on the edge. The base has the number 9 in Latin on it, with the base of the V covering the lathe indentation. A large part of the base is worn so it is unclear whether the number was carved in Greek too. Three circumferential grooves were nicely carved with a compass on the top. The palm of a hand was skillfully carved on it with its inner part facing to the front. The thumb and the index finger are stretched out while the other fingers are folded.11 A small dot in the center may be the lathe indentation. The palm was carved at a different angle compared to the numbers on the base. D. 30mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 294: Early Roman, 1st cent. BCE-1st cent. No. 295: R, 1st-2nd cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER, gaming piece: Avigad 1983 Fig. 239. Ashkelon, R: Stager 1991: 42; Ayalon 1999 Fig. 62. No. 294: Jordan, Mukawar, ER 1st cent.: Loffreda 2000 T. 30. Egypt, R 1st cent. BCE-1st cent., gaming piece: Rostovtzew 1905; AlföldiRosenbaum 1976, 1980. Notes: These objects were published as probable “theater tickets”: Patrich 2003a: 83; 2003b: 158, Fig. 19.

292. Definition: Gaming piece for a perforated board? 28\P\0080-1 Description and interpretation: A unique object whose ring-like wide end is not flat so that it sits on it in an unstable manner, meaning it was used upside down, as shown here. The globular body is cleanly smoothed but asymmetrical. Beneath it is a narrow neck with two tiny “handles”. The lower part is narrower, conical and grooved, with a cutting mark on the end (not drawn). Its use is unclear: a pin head which was attached to the shaft in the conical end (Dray, pers. comm.), but the cutting mark there is too small to hold such a heavy head; a pendant hung from the two tiny perforations (rejected by Amorai Stark, pers. comm.); a gaming piece used on a perforated board, with the conical end stuck in the hole like a travelling chess board used today; and a stopper for a narrow-necked vessel. This is the only object of its type. H. 24mm, d. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Amman, R 2nd-3rd cent., from a grave, pin head re-used as an amulet: Ibrahim and Gordon 1987 Pl. 48: 5. Notes: None. 293. Definition: Inscribed circular gaming piece? 28\A\1398 Description and interpretation: Broken lathe-turned disk with a flat but relatively rough base. The number 4 was carelessly inscribed on it in Greek and Latin: The delta has a “tail” and the lines of the Latin number are slanted. The edge is vertical and smooth. The top is smoothed with a lathe indentation within a nipple surrounded by a depression, a convex section and two mouldings separated by grooves. Parts of the edge are broken. The number hints that this is a gaming piece, a simple “theater ticket” or a counting jeton. This is the only object of its kind. D. 24mm, t. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Uninscribed: Syria, DuraEuropos, H-R: Matheson 1992 Fig. 16 bottom left. France, Lyon, R mid-2nd-mid-3rd cent.: Béal 1983a: 305, Pl. 52: 1087. France, Nîmes, R?, gaming piece: Béal 1984: 75, Type 7. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-3rd cent., box

296. Definition: Stoppered hollow convex gaming piece 29\S\5859 Description and interpretation: Convex, cleanly smoothed gaming piece made from a long bone diaphysis which needed a stopper. The base is flat and evenly levelled. The upper part is convex. Two concentric circles border the cavity both on the top and bottom. The stopper passes through the whole cavity. Its polygonal base end does not fit the cavity well and the spaces left were filledin with an unidentified material. The top was cleanly smoothed with the end of the stopper filling the cavity better and projects a little from the object. A large (d. 2.5mm) and deep lathe indentation is in its center showing that the stopper was first inserted into the cavity end of a long bone, then the bone was worked and smoothed on a lathe and only then it was sawn into several gaming pieces or similar cylinders. This is why 11

76

Alföldi's suggestion (1975: 15) that the number of fingers correlates with the number on the base does not fit this case.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE there is no lathe indentation on the stopper’s base. Eight objects of this type were found. D. 27mm, h. 20mm. Species\skeletal element: Horse metatarsus diaphysis. Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Castra, B, from a grave, box: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 10: 6 top. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A4 (?) 7th-12thI cent., decorated, gaming piece: Oldenburg 1969: 135, Fig. 49: 5. Greece, Corinth, R, knob (published among furniture parts and hinges): Davidson 1952: 129, Pl. 64: 875. Tunisia, Carthage, 79 from a grave, gaming piece, with stopper like No. 301 and grooves: Henig 1984: 86, 191, Figs. 63: 77, 64: 79. Notes: None.

than the top (which is slightly oblique around the perimeter, showing that it is not the bottom). The object is cleanly smoothed, the base worn from use. Recesses for flat stoppers were carved in the top and bottom of the medullar cavity, leaving an unsmoothed projecting section (t. 8mm) in the center to prevent them from falling in (Poplin, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. D. 27mm, h. 20mm. Species\skeletal element: No. 298: Horse metatarsus diaphysis. Locus date: No. 298: Late Byzantine-Early Arab, 7th cent. No. 299: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 298: Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 214, Taf. 20 No. 8941. No. 299: Cyprus, Salamis, B 5th cent., boxes: Chavane 1975: 176-178, Pls. 48: 506, 49: 507-508, 71: 505-508. Switzerland, R 1st-3rd cent., furniture mounts: Deschler-Erb 2001 Fig. 7: 83. England, Taplow, 7th cent., 30, from a grave, from horse metapodia diaphyses, with a bronze pin holding the stoppers together: MacGregor 1985: 134, Fig. 71: I. Notes: None.

297. Definition: Decorated hollow convex gaming piece 29\S\90326 Description and interpretation: Half the perimeter of a convex object made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity is roughly smoothed and has no recesses so it was perhaps plugged with a single long stopper. The base is flat. The upper part is convex. On both top and base a circle was incised with a center-bit around the cavity. The sides are decorated with a spirally fluted design of parallel diagonal grooves, bordered near the base by a circumferential groove. This is the only object of its type. D. 31mm, h. 27mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab? Morphological analogies: Tunisia, Carthage, 75 from mid-5th cent. onward, gaming piece, 78 stoppered: Henig 1984: 86, 191, Fig. 63: 75, 78. Notes: None.

300. Definition: Grooved cylindrical gaming piece 29\S\25267-2 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical lathe-turned gaming piece made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity is only roughly worked and was probably plugged with a single long stopper. The base is flat with shallow circumferential lathe marks. The top and wall are cleanly smoothed. Two deep circumferential grooves are carved on the wall, one on the shoulder and one near the base (see section) which is a little wider than the wall. Three objects of this type were found. D. 24mm, h. 13mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 5th-6th cent. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Visegrád, R: Bíró 1994: 110, Pl. 78: 678. France, Lyon, R, shorter, furniture mount or hinge?: Béal 1983a: 273-274, Pl. 49: 821, 825826. France, Nîmes, R, unknown use, deeper carving: Béal 1984: 21, Pl. 3: 48. Notes: None.

298-299. Definition: Cylindrical gaming piece with stopper(s) 29\A\0990; P\0017 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical gaming pieces made from long bone diaphyses with the medullar cavity plugged with a stopper or two. No. 298: Very cleanly smoothed but parallel and shallow sawing striations are seen on the base. The stopper is today falling out. The top of the object is slightly inclined from the center towards the perimeter. The cavity is not centered. A lathe indentation on the top of the stopper is not centered (neither in the object nor in the stopper) so it no doubt originated in the production of the stopper only. The top of the stopper fits well in the cavity, but the lower end does not. Both ends are cleanly smoothed while the body is almost polygonal as its wall was planed vertically. The object’s top is decorated with various incisions: A circle around the cavity (marking where it should be widened or as a decoration – Poplin, pers. comm.); Four radial lines running in unequal spans which cross the circle towards the center, three of them continuing a little on the stopper. This fact shows that the lines were incised when the stopper was already in place; A short arched line or two were incised in each section created by two lines. Nine objects of this type were found. D. 24mm, h. 21mm, the stopper d. 10mm. No. 299: Part of a gaming piece made from a long bone diaphysis, by nature a little conical, the bottom narrower

301-303. Definition: Bell-shaped gaming piece 29\S\18176; 10979; P\0041-1 Description and interpretation: Bell-shaped gaming pieces, lathe-turned from large long bone diaphyses. All are unique in the splendid way they are finished. They have a wider base separated from the body by a sharply projecting moulding, a rounded-convex body and a flat top. The base is flat, levelled and usually worn. No. 301: The base which was originally round was cut in Antiquity into a roughly trianglular shape. Afterwards it was resmoothed so the deep circumferential groove on its side partly disappeared. The reason for this may have been to differentiate it from other pieces. A circle was incised around the cavity both on top and bottom. The cavity is partly plugged with a stopper with a globular head (which also served as a handle) and a vertically-planed polygonal 77

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS body with sawing marks on the bottom. A large lathe indentation on its top shows that the stopper was originally the end of a longer lathe-turned rod (Bíró, pers. comm.). It is unclear whether another lid plugged the bottom (it is unnecessary for its use). The stopper is easily drawn out so one player could use stoppered pieces and the other unstoppered ones. Three such objects were found. D. 26mm, h. 30mm. No. 302: Only part of the wall remained. The medullar cavity was roughly worked with vertical cuts with a narrow chisel (w. 4mm; compare to Photo 1: 7). A recess for a thin flat lid may be seen on its top. The bottom is flat and smooth. The outer wall is very cleanly smoothed (compare to Photo 2: 10). It could also be a furniture mount. Four objects of this type were found. D. 47mm, h. 50mm. No. 303: About two thirds of its diameter were preserved. The medullar cavity, which is smoothed but with some protrusions remaining on it, has two recesses – for a lid and a base. A tiny natural hole (the nuticial foramen) runs diagonally through the lower part. It is plugged on the base with a tiny bone pin, probably for reasons of perfect aesthetics, as it is actually unseen. The base is flat and very smooth. The outer wall is very cleanly smoothed until it resembles ivory. Poplin (pers. comm.) suggested that it is a box although some protrusions which were left inside the cavity and its small diameter are not consistent with this idea. The presence of a lower recess shows it is not a furniture mount. On the other hand, such a glued base is not needed for a gaming piece. Seven objects of this type were found. D. 37.5mm, h. 41mm. Species\skeletal element: No. 301: cattle metatarsus diaphysis. No. 303: cattle femur diaphysis. Locus date: No. 301: Late Byzantine. No. 303: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 301: Castra, B, from a grave, box: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 10: 6 bottom. Yugoslavia, end of 4th-5thI cent., no stopper: Petković 1995: 94, Taf. 33: 2. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-4th cent., gaming piece (calculus) for a table board (ludus latrunculorum): Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 146 Fig. 15, 187 No. 201. Nos. 302-303: Ma’on, B 6th cent., 2, from synagogue, furniture mounts: Rahmani 1960b: 82, Fig. 1: 1, Pl. 16: 4, the lid - Pl. 16: 5b. Notes: Wooden analogy for No. 301, Egypt, Karanis, 2nd cent. BCE-1st cent.: Husselman 1979: 11, Pl. 2a.

are probably elegant gaming pieces. The main part of the body has an octagonal (No. 304) or square (No. 305) cross-section, is fully decorated and stands on four legs, while the upper section has a round cross-section and was skillfully turned on a lathe. These are the only objects of their kind. No. 304: The legs (one broken) are square. The body is very cleanly smoothed and dark in color. Its eight facets are of varying width. The decoration is bordered on each end by two parallel lines with two-circles-and-dot designs separated by vertical lines between them. The area between the two bands is filled with different groups of circle-and-dot designs of various dimensions. Some of the small ones have “tails” running along the object’s axis. Another decoration with an unclear meaning consists of three diagonal short lines projecting from a longer horizontal one. The cylindrical neck has a narrow lower section, above there is a convex section followed by a cylindrical top decorated with two horizontal bands filled with vertical and diagonal lines. H. 127mm, w. in base 30 X 28mm, top d. 25mm. No. 305: a smaller object with obliquely cut legs (two of them broken). Their oblique sawing left Vshaped grooves in the points where two of the legs meet. The body is a little conical. The decoration consists of lower and an upper bands of small, dense circle-and-dot designs bordered with parallel horizontal lines. The area between the bands is divided by coupled diagonal lines into triangle and rhombus segments. The central rhombus is filled with a large three-circles-anddot design encircled by many small designs. The triangles are decorated with coupled short lines with a shorter line projecting aside from each one. The cylindrical neck, which is cleanly smoothed, is composed of two narrow parts and a convex larger section between them, with a groove running around its central part. The rim is oblique and projects from the neck. H. 105mm, w. in the base 25mm, top d. 22mm. Species\skeletal element: No. 304: cattle metatarsus diaphysis. Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: Kh. El-Minya, A?, no base: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 98. Jerusalem, Middle Ages, bottle or handle, different decoration: Tushingham 1985: 151, Fig. 68: 11. Egypt, A 8th-9th cent., in the Mayer Museum of Islam, Jerusalem, ivory, No. 46d – perfume bottle: Hasson 1979: 26-27. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A3, from a grave dated to between 969-1260, no feet and base, remains of pink color: Oldenburg 1969: 130, Figs. 47: 8, 48: 5. Southern Arabia, Hugga, A?, handles, Louvre Museum collection, published up-side down, with octagonal body and four legs or with a flat base: Dussaud 1934: 88-89, Figs. 2-3. Notes: These objects were found together, alongside with doll No. 317. No. 304 was published: Rimon 1999: 7* (chess piece?). Glass analogy, Syria, Hamma, A 9th-10th cent., bottle: Lane 1938 Fig. 10e. Glass analogy, Iran? 9th-10th cent., molar-type bottle also made from metal and ivory: Brosh 2001: 355, No. 596. Metal and glass analogies, Khorasan, 10th cent.: Ziffer 1996 Fig. 45.9. Wooden analogy, Egypt, B-A 6th-8th cent., amphora-

304-305. Definition: Bottle-shaped decorated gaming piece 30\A\0062-1-2 Description and interpretation: These bottle-shaped gaming pieces were found together. The fact that one is larger and better decorated than the other points to their use, like a king and a queen in a chess game. Both were made from a long bone diaphysis, large and thick enough to carve straight facets (i.e. a square section). The medullar cavity is unworked and its upper and lower openings were not prepared for inserting a lid and especially not a base. Thus, it is impossible to accept their commonly accepted identification as bottles or containers (see above). Their identification as handles is unreasonable as they are uncomfortable to hold. They 78

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE shaped kohl container on a stand, containing gallena: Rutschowscaya 1986: 37, No. 39.

307. Definition: Domino tablet 30\A\0073 Description and interpretation: Rectangular domino tablet which was well-made although not everything on it is straight and symmetrical. The base is flat and fairly smooth but bears many diagonal sawing striations. The top and the sides are very cleanly smoothed. A narrow groove, slightly diagonal, divides the tablet into two parts. An iron rivet is stuck through the center. The right half has the number 4 on it and the left one a 6 on it, composed from asymmetrically arranged depressions (d. 6mm, de. 1mm) made by a drill equipped with a half globular head. Two small bronze rivets were incorporated in opposite corners but only one remains. They show that the bone tablet was attached to a dark tablet made of wood or jet in order to prevent the other players identifying its numbers. The late date of appearance of the domino (in Europe; see above) means that this tablet must have come from the Bosnian village founded in the area of Caesarea at the end of the 19th cent. Identical domino tablets made from cattle long bone diaphyses with ebony backs were produced during the 19th-20th cent. in the village of Méru north of Paris, a process exhibited today in the museum established in the old factory building.12 Two objects of this type were found. L. 45mm, w. 23mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Ottoman. Morphological analogies: Banias: Israeli 2001: 60, No. 67. Holland, Nijmegen, 18th cent., 2: van Vilsteren 1987: 51 No. 81. England, Playmouth, post-Middle Ages, with a wooden back: MacGregor 1985: 141, Fig. 71: v. England, Colchester, probably 18th-20th cent.: Crummy 1988: 45, Fig. 51: 2017 [mistakingly written 2107]. Notes: None.

306. Definition: Square tube-shaped decorated gaming piece 30\A\0024 Description and interpretation: Gaming piece in the form of a square tube, of which two complete facets and part of a third remained. It was made from a long bone diaphysis whose sides were planed to achieve straight facets. The medullar cavity is roughly worked and has no recesses for a lid or base, so it is not a container. Its identification as a handle is unreasonable as it is uncomfortable to hold. The two legs are very low, decorated with two grooves, and each runs along one complete facet and a third of the adjacent one. The top is incised too. The decoration includes large and small circle-and-dot designs. Short “tails” run from some of the small ones. The large designs probably have a numerical value (see Nos. 283-284) while the small ones are decorative. Thus, one facet gives a value of 5 and the other a value of 6, while the missing facets may have had values of 1 and 2 adding up to the sum of 7. Two objects of this type were found. H. 100mm, w. 20mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Syria, Hamma, Strata A1 14th cent. and earlier and A4 7th-12thI cent. or earlier, no legs or base, the numbers 6+1, 5+2, decorated like throwing sticks but they may also be containers or handles: Oldenburg 1969: 130, Fig. 47: 7, 9. Syria, Tell Nebi Mend, H-R, zigzag decoration: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 1h. Notes: None.

12

79

I am grateful to Prof. Poplin who took me there.

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.D.3. DOLLS\FIGURINES.

finished and, thus, it seems that Ramla may have been one of their production centers.14

Until now, scholars have not distinguished between dolls and figurines (hereafter called ‘dolls’) since even in Antiquity there was apparently some overlap between the two categories (Elderkin 1930: 455-456; Rahmani 1960a: 146-147, 1981b; Oldenburg 1969: 140; St. Clair 19951996 n. 42). The Caesarea assemblage, which includes 38 specimens, adds nothing new to this debate. Similar dolls were also made from ivory, wood, pottery, stone and metal (Elderkin 1930: 456; St. Clair 1995-1996). The dolls can be divided by date into two main groups: Roman and Early Arab.

For the manufacture of these dolls from Caesarea – especially the large, hollow articulated ones – the artisans preferred specific types of bones: two of the dolls were made of cattle or cattle\camel humerus and one of cattle humerus or femur; three others were made from cattle metacarpus. The Islamic dolls have been divided into several subgroups: Heads of cloth dolls (Nos. 312-313). In the past they were identified as complete dolls (Scanlon 1968: 17) but the cloth doll found in Nessana with the bone head still in place demonstrated their real character (see below; Rahmani 1981b). Their lower part tapers downwards to facilitate pushing the head into place and is unworked because it was unseen.

Roman dolls (Nos. 308-311) are few in number and there seem to be no patterning to the differences between them. No complete articulated (or jointed) doll has been found in Caesarea although they have been found at other sites (i.e. Porath, Dar and Applebaum 1985: 143-144 and Fig. 37 [from a nearby site]; Rahmani 1960a: 146-147; St. Clair 1995-1996). Their relative absence is probably related to the small number of Roman graves excavated in the city. Only one arm and one foot attest to their existance here. One perforation for a rivet in the upper part of an arm means that it was moveable, while two holes show that it was fixed. Object No. 308 was included here with reservations since only a small portion of it was preserved while No. 311 may be part of another object such as a distaff.

Special dolls (Nos. 314-316). Each has its own unique characteristics except the common date within the Early Arab period. Articulated dolls (Nos. 317-322). This group appears in many varieties at Caesarea, all preserved without their arms. The larger were made from complete long bone diaphyses while the smaller were produced from wall fragments from such bones. Flat bones were probably not thick enough. These dolls apparently developed from the more realistic Roman articulated dolls (Ibid.). Their head is flat on top, where real hair was glued as a wig although this is seldom preserved (Elderkin 1930: 479, Fig. 31; Badawy 1978: 339). Rahmani (1981b) has suggested that they were also clothed.

Early Arab dolls (Nos. 312-319) include 34 various objects divided into five sub-groups. Except for the special dolls (Nos. 314-316) all are of provincial and personal character and were carelessly made. Most of them are of the type called “Coptic”, probably excluding one special group (on the basis of analogy, No. 315 may have come from Syria). As time passed, these idols became increasingly schematic, featuresless, flat and angular compared to Roman figurines (Elderkin 1930: 478). Török (1990: 60) identified them as “Coptic” although they had previously been considered fertility figurines (one doll from Berlin has the Greek inscription written on it “God is one”) and as Christian derivatives of the earlier pagan fertility figurines. In his opinion, most were produced in Alexandria during the 9th-10th cent. at a time when ceramic fertility figurines had already disappeared. Other scholars, however, reject any fertility connection (although many were found in graves) and identify them as toys (Friedman 1989: 166; Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 216). Some disagree about the “Coptic” identification, a term which in itself is not accurate and has often been attributed to Christian Egypt in general. It appears to be difficult to date these dolls accurately within the Early Arab period and even later13 as the changes occurring in them have not yet been connected to historical events (Scanlon 1968: 16). Many similar dolls were found in Ramla; some were never 13

Dolls’ arms (Nos. 323-325) differ one from the other and their identification (except No. 323) is not conclusive. The Unarticulated dolls (Nos. 326-329) are simple and schematized, even lacking facial features (unless they were painted on and have disappeared). Unlike the articulated dolls, the top of their heads is rounded. These dolls best reflect the provincial character of this group and the Moslem move away from realism in their art. Roman period dolls 308. Definition: Torso of articulated doll 31\P\0181 Description and interpretation: The upper part of an articulated doll. The body is smooth, very schematic and, more or less, square with straight sides. It tapers towards both the hips and the round neck while the rest is broken. The nipples are marked by small circle-and-dot designs but it is unclear whether this doll was meant to represent a man, a woman or a young girl (Amorai Stark, pers. comm.). Two holes were drilled in each shoulder to

Friedman (1989: 166) dated these dolls to the 4th-8th cent. which is no doubt too early.

14

80

Thanks are due to Mrs. Miriam Shamai for this information.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE attach the unmoveable arms. This is the only object of its type. L. 48mm, w. 24mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 5th cent. Morphological analogies: Turkey, R c. 200, ritual figurine, different chest area: St. Clair 1995-1996 Figs. 25. Notes: None.

carved but the depression for the spine and the fat folds of the buttocks are clear. Aphrodite Anadyomene is a very common motif in metal and pottery figurines, on oil lamps, etc. This object is too large to be a pin head (see No. 248) so that it may be a distaff head, a pendant or a doll\figurine. This is the only object of its type. H. 35mm, w. 17mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Caesarea, R: Oleson et al. 1994: 132, Pl. 26: 133. Egypt, 40c - end of 3rd-beginning of 4th cent.: Marangou 1976: 80, Pl. 40b-d. Italy, Pompeii, ivory: Ward-Perkins and Claridge 1978: 138, Fig. 60b. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER, part of a pin: Gostenčnik 2001: 385, Fig. 5: 17. Ivory pin, ER?: British Museum Guide 1929: 125-126, Fig. 134 right. Notes: Another such figurine was found at Caesarea on the surface (private collection). Parallels in sculpture: Stemmer 2001: 29-B2 (2nd cent.), 100-101 – F4 (Crete). Bronze parallel, Tel Tanim (Qiryat Shmona), 4th cent.: Avshalom-Gorni and Getzov 2001 Fig. 3; Friedheim 2002: 18. Bronze parallel, Oboda, from a Nabatean favissa: Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997: 196-197, Pl. 1: 4.

309. Definition: Doll’s left arm 31\M\98-7136 Description and interpretation: Left arm of an articulated doll. It is bent at a 90 degree angle and has two perforations so it was not meant to be moved. The outer side is convex and the inner side flat to facilitate its attachment to the body. The hand is separated from the arm by a groove, perhaps symbolizing a bracelet or a sleeve. The fingers are broken and the hand is worn. This is the only object of its type. L. 40mm, w. 13mm. Parallels: Horvat Hanut\Tsur Yig’al, R, in a grave: BeckNachtingel and Ayalon (in press); Ayalon 1999: 62-63, Fig. 89. Notes: The object is exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam.

Islamic dolls

310. Definition: Doll’s left thigh 31\S\24235-2 Description and interpretation: An almost complete, very realistic left thigh. It was professionally carved and smoothed. The knee, ankle and other features are expertly worked. The top is sawn horizontally (leaving some striations, unseen when the leg was in place) with a projecting, now partly broken loop left for attachment to the hip. The shoe is seen mainly from the outside, with a recess between the front and the rear sides although there is no indication of a sole. Its end is broken. Judging by the size of the thigh the length of the complete doll must have been ca. 200mm. This is the only object of its type. L. 58mm, d. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Turkey, Ephesos. P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 198, Pl. 42: 6. Turkey, Tarsus, R, ivory, general resemblance: Goldman 1950: 396, Fig. 270: 1. Italy, Rome?, R 3rd cent., ivory, similar upper part of a leg: Caravale 1994: 95-98, Pls. 3, 4, 8. Notes: Dolls from other materials, Italy, Rome, 1st-2nd cent.: Salza Prina Ricotti 1995 Figs. 43, 45.

312-313. Definition: Bone head of a cloth doll 31\A\0058; M\98-7117 Description and interpretation: Heads which were originally stuck in cloth dolls. Two horizontal lines separate the head from the base. It is possible that other details were painted on. The top of the head is sawn straight but slightly obliquely and it is possible that real hair was glued there (see Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 217, No. 267 from 11th-12th cent. Egypt). The lower part which was pushed into the cloth doll is unworked and tapers downwards. These are the only objects of this type. No. 312: The back is roughly sawn and bits of the spongiosa remained on it (a rib?). The incised facial features include a mouth, nose, large eyes (or their orbits) with no pupils (one eye crosses the nose lines) and eyebrows. The object displays wear. H. 58mm, w. 19mm, t. 6mm. No. 313: Made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis as shown by its concave back. The facial features include a nose (emphasized by grooves incised on both sides), small round eyes at different levels (by circle-and-dot designs) and eyebrows (as one continuous line), but no mouth. H. 69mm, w. 17mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: No. 313: cattle humerus or femur? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Ramla, A, private collection: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 91, third from right. Kh. Al-Mafjar, A: Rahmani 1981b: 77, Pl. 14D. Nessana, A 7th-8th cent., ivory, with ears: Colt 1962: 51, Pl. 21: 6; stuck in a cloth doll: Ibid.: Pl. 29: 5. Jordan, Amman, A, in the Umayyad palace, with painted facial features: Olávarri-Goicoechea 1985: 11, Fig. 24. Jordan, Hesban, Early Christian [although the Early Arab finds are dominant]: Thompson 1969: 134, Pl. 23: D. Egypt, Alexandria, Strata 3A, 2A,

311. Definition: Aphrodite wringing out her hair 31\S\75050 Description and interpretation: Part of a small figurine of a naked Aphrodite arranging or wringing out her hair (Aphrodite Anadyomene). At least three more such objects were found in this maritime city (see Friedheim 2002: 12-26). Only the central section of the body remained, facing front. The hands are raised and bent towards the missing head. Small and flat breasts, a navel and female genitalia are marked on the front. The central part is thick relative to the shoulders. A projection adjacent to the left knee probably represents the end of a tree trunk on which the idol leaned. The back is roughly 81

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 9th cent., with ears, the flat back hints that it was attached to something: Rodziewicz E. 1978: 332-334, Nos. 11-12, Figs. 12-14. Egypt, Fustst, pre-900: Scanlon 1968: 16, Fig. 4c; A: Gayraud 1986: 25, Pl. 10: D. Egypt, 8th-9th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 203, Taf. 18 No. 8877; A 8th-9th cent., “Coptic”: Kubiak and Scanlon 1973 Fig. 19e. Egypt, today in Hungary: Török 1993: 60, Pl. 90: P 2. Egypt, 9th cent., “Coptic”: Badawy 1978 Pl. 5.42 (2nd from left). Egypt, 11th-12th cent., in the Benaki Museum, Athens, with real hair: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 217, No. 267. Turkey, Tarsus, 10th cent.: Goldman 1935: 548, Fig. 45. Notes: No. 313 is exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam.

with the lower part thicker than the upper part. The head is broken but parallels show that it must have been rectangular and decorated. A latitudinal groove separates the head from the neck (which is narrower than the shoulders). The head broke along this line. The right shoulder slopes obliquely while the left is broken. The figurine has no hands. Three large (d. 7mm) three-circlesand-dot designs on the chest and stomach probably represent the breasts and navel (which is not centralized) although they have also been identified as decorations or tatoos (Rahmani 1981b). Smaller circle-and-dot designs create a decorative chain running from the breasts to the navel and to the belt, and some have seen in this Y-shape design a symbol of the scorpion (L’art copte No. 275). Three small designs were incised around them. Two horizontal lines on the hips which border an uneven row of circle-and-dot designs signify a belt. A triangular space was sawn between the legs but the sexual organ is not marked (unless the groove created by this sawing represents the female gentilia). The feet are separated from the legs by wide latitudinal grooves done in two sawing phases, possibly in an attempt to represent shoes. Part of the right foot is broken. This is the only object of its type. Syrian origin? H. 77mm, w. 32mm, t. 9mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab-Crusader, 10th-12th cent. Morphological analogies: Kh. El-Minya, A\M?, not too similar (dated in the past to the 13th cent. although is probably earlier: Rahmani 1981b: 80, n. 39, Pl. 15: B); Ayalon 1999 Fig. 92. Banias, B, object\handle [shown upside down], non-identical: Israeli 2001: 30, 59, No. 64. Egypt, today in Hungary, different decoration, “Coptic”: Török 1993: 64, Pl. 97: P 24. Syria, Hamma, Stratum E, 720 BCE [sic!], no hands, no chain on the chest: Ingholt 1940: 118, Pl. 32: 5; A 7th-12th cent. (8), 14th cent. (9), the ornamentation probably represents jewelry, tattoo, clothes, etc.: Oldenburg 1969: 138-140, Fig. 49: 8-9. Notes: Analogy to the decoration only: Doll heads, A, tattoos?: Rahmani 1981b: 80, Pl. 15: C, D.

314. Definition: Doll with a decorated chest 31\A\0168 Description and interpretation: Carefully smoothed doll whose head is broken. The back is flat and smooth, slightly convex in the center with remains of the spongiosa (a rib?). The front is convex in cross-section. Six wide and deep asymmetrical horizontal grooves cover the chest and stomach, without any separation. Török (1993: 61) has suggested that these represent fat folds but in this case it seems less reasonable. There is no sign of female breasts although the general appearance – like the pelvis and the genitalia – appears female. The arms end in short projecting pieces which probably represent the hands. The space between the chest and arms was made with a thin saw (w. 1mm). On the right side, this space was almost vertically sawn and therefore it extended up to the armpit. On the left side the space is very oblique and thus, there is a groove in the front but the back was not sawn. The thin hips are oblique and wide and the thighs thick, conforming to “the Oriental ideal of beauty” (Avi-Yonah 1981: 18). Two diagonal grooves which meet in the groin separate it from the hips. The space between the legs was also carried out with very oblique sawing (w. 1.5mm) so there is no space in the back. This was possibly done purposefully, creating a space in the front and strengthening the back. The vertical groove continues upwards beyond the groin, perhaps symbolizing short female genitalia. The feet project to the front, similarly to the hands. This is the only object of its type. H. 60mm, w. 19mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Ramla, A?, private collection: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 91 right. Ramla, A: Y. Arnon, pers. comm. Egypt, today in Hungary, “Coptic”, head with incised features: Török 1993: 61, Pl. 92: P 7. Egypt?, similar central section, different legs, real hair glued to the head: Elderkin 1930: 479, Fig. 31 (see also Egypt, 8th9th cent., in the Cairo Museum: Strzygowski 1904: 201, Taf. 18 No. 8869). Notes: None.

316. Definition: Human head-shaped object 31\A\0023 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical human (woman?) head which was carved and carefully smoothed on a lathe and attached to the top of some object. A hole was drilled in the funnel-shaped bottom, in which a broken bone pin is stuck. The lower part of the object was lathe-carved as a cylindrical pedestal with mouldings bordering a convex section. The head is elongated with a round, smooth hairdo, cut straight across the forehead. Eyes with pupils, nose and mouth are present but there is no chin (see analogies). An indentation from the lathe remained on the top. Bone and wooden parallels from Egypt (below) show that it has possibly been mounted on a kohl stick (stuck in the hole) with the head serving both as a handle and for plugging the cosmetic container. This is the only object of its type. H. 44mm, d. 16mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, Armenian monastery, A (earlier than the Abbasid period), ivory?:

315. Definition: Flat decorated doll 31\A\0717 Description and interpretation: Decorated doll made from a flat bone. It is slightly concave in cross-section 82

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Amit, pers. comm. Egypt, Antinoé, B, bone, with a chin, kohl stick: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 214 No. 262b. Notes: Wooden parallel, Egypt, two kohl sticks with similar male heads, both with strong chins, inserted in the cosmetic containers in a bone inlayed wooden set: Ägypten Schätze: 186-187, No. 178b.

between the legs was sawn diagonally from both sides towards the groin, where the sawing grooves cross each other, forming the female gentilia. The bottom of the legs is sawn straight but the doll cannot stand on them. The lower part of the object, close to the epiphysis displays remains of the spongiosa. This is the only item of its type. H. 100mm, w. 58mm, t. 25mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metacarpus diaphysis. Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Ramla, A, private collection, non-identical: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 91, 3rd from left. Egypt, 7th-8th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 202, Taf. 18 No. 8871. Egypt, post-7th cent., today in Hungary, “Coptic”: Török 1993: 60-61, Pls. 90: P 1, 92: P 6, P 8. Notes: None.

317. Definition: Large articulated painted doll 32\A\0062-3 Description and interpretation: Large articulated female doll made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity was left intact. The top of the head is sawn straight but slightly diagonally. Real hair was probably glued there. A small section on the edge is damaged. The sides of the head are convex with two slightly projecting ears. The nose was emphasized by two grooves running along both sides of it. There are two horizontal incisions of unclear meaning at the tip of the nose. Eyes, eyebrows and make-up (?) on the cheeks (but no mouth) were painted in a brown color. A small projection beneath the nose may represent the chin (see side section). The head is separated from the thick conical neck by a groove. Two arched crossing lines which separate the neck from the shoulders possibly represent a collar or garment. The elliptical breasts (or halter? Amorai Stark, pers. comm.) are large but flat. Several rough, not parallel but horizontal grooves on the stomach either represent a garment or fat folds (Török 1993: 61). A large (d. 6mm) perforation was drilled in each side to attach a moveable arm. The lower part is broken (compare to the following object). Two objects of this type were found. H. 95mm, w. 54mm, t. 25mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metacarpus diaphysis. Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: Ramla, A, private collection: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 91, 4th from right. Egypt, R: Petrie 1927: 62, Pl. 55: 597, 599. Egypt, Fustat, A (Fatimid), 3d pre-1168: Scanlon 1968: 16, Figs. 3d, 4a. Egypt, 11th-12th cent., non-identical: Strzygowski 1904: 201, Taf. 18 No. 8868. Syria, Hamma, 5th-6th cent., “Coptic” Egyptian: Lane 1938: 74-75, Fig. 14d. Notes: The object was found together with gaming pieces Nos. 304-305. Published as a Coptic doll from the 8thbeginning of 9th cent.: Raban et al. 1999: 153-155, Fig. 2.

319. Definition: Medium-sized articulated female doll 32\A\0626-1 Description and interpretation: Medium-sized articulated female doll made from a long bone diaphysis. The back is flat. The head is broken (see next object). The shoulders and chest are carved as a single rectangular unit which projects sidewards and is equipped with a perforation on each side for attaching a moveable arm. The breasts have straight outer sides and triangular inner sides – a common phenomena in these dolls. This shape may represent a halter (see above). The transition from chest to stomach is marked by a horizontal groove. The bare stomach has an emphasized navel in its center with two horizontal grooves beneath it (fat folds? Török 1993: 61). The belly’s left side is carinated while the right side is diagonal. The pelvis is very wide. Two wide grooves (decoration? garment?) run diagonally towards the center of its bottom where they meet at the groin. The sides run downwards straight to the feet. The space between the legs was diagonally sawn from both sides towards the groin. The sawing groove runs slightly upwards, possibly representing female gentilia. The left foot is separated from the leg by two parallel horizontal grooves and projects slightly from it (see section). The right foot is broken. This object is the only one of its kind. H. 80mm, w. 32mm, t. 10mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Kh. El-Burj, A 7th-8th cent., toys and not ritual figurines, not “Coptic”: Rahmani 1981b: 7779, Pl. 15: A. Egypt, Alexandria, 9th-10th cent., 14 with a large head [published upside down, compare to Fig. 17], identified in the past as dolls: Rodziewicz E 1978: 334335, Nos. 13-14 left, Figs. 15-16; 9th cent., “Coptic”: Badawy 1978 Pl. 5.42 (2nd from right). Egypt, 7th-8th cent., in the Cairo Museum: Strzygowski 1904: 203, Taf. 18 Nos. 8871, 8878. Egypt, Alexandria, “Coptic” doll, with joined legs: Jablonowska-Taracha 2001: 58, Pl. 12.4, 5. Egypt, 7th-8th cent., in other sites in Egypt – 9th-10th cent.: Ägypten Schätze: 202, No. 203. Egypt?: Elderkin 1930 Fig. 30. A (Fatimid): Tardy 1977: 92: 3. Notes: Found together with dolls Nos. 326-327. The object was published: Rimon 1999: 5.

318. Definition: Large female doll 32\S\33981 Description and interpretation: Lower part of a large female, probably articulated, doll made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity and the back remained unworked. The front is cleanly smoothed although many diagonal striations remained on the sides. Several rough, not parallel, horizontal grooves and part of a diagonal one on the chest either represent a garment or fat folds (Török 1993: 61). The partly broken pelvis area is wider than the waist. The sides run straight down to the base. A shallow, vertical natural groove runs on the stomach and beneath it are two paired and arched diagonal lines (jewelry? garment?) which cross each other at the bottom. The space 83

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 320. Definition: Medium-sized articulated female doll 32\S\40113 Description and interpretation: Upper part of a medium-sized articulated female doll made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis. Its concave back (= the medullar cavity) is almost unworked. The top of the head is horizontal (probably for attaching real hair) and its lower part is rounded and obliquely carved. The face is smooth and featureless – they were either never marked or painted and faded. The neck is high and thick, with horizontal marks either signifying a necklace or fat folds (Török 1993: 61). The shoulders project to the sides and the breasts (or halter?) were carved as two adjacent triangles. Only a small part remained of the narrower stomach. A perforation for a moveable arm was drilled in the side of each shoulder. This perforation extended into the medullar cavity of the bone. The metal pin (l. 16mm, d. 2.5mm) attaching the left arm to the body has survived. Three specimens of this doll type were found. H. 47mm, w. 24mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Egypt, 7th-8th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 202. Notes: None.

322. Definition: Schematic articulated female doll 33\A\0191 Description and interpretation: Simple and very schematic female doll made from a relatively small and thin long bone diaphysis. It is narrow in the center and wider at the ends, following the natural shape of the bone. The back (except the legs) was roughly scraped for an unclear reason. The head is separated from the shoulders by a horizontal groove. It has no features although it is possible that they were painted on and have faded. The shoulders are separated from the rest of the body by another horizontal groove. A perforation for a moveable arm was drilled in the side of each shoulder. Short diagonal striations remained on the body. A triangular piece sawn away from the bottom creates short legs. A short vertical groove in the front represents female genitalia. The edge of the left leg is broken. This is the only object of this type. H. 93mm, w. 16mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 11th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, today in Hungary, “Coptic”, with painted eyes and eyebrows: Török 1993: 60, Pl. 91: P 3; “Coptic”, with incised and painted (22) features: Ibid.: 63-64, Pls. 95: P 21, 96: 22-23. Notes: None.

321. Definition: Medium-sized schematic articulated doll 33\S\34723 Description and interpretation: Medium-sized, simple and schematic articulated doll. It was made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis, as shown by the remains of the medullar cavity on its back, which was roughly cleaned and smoothed. The head is rectangular and featureless, either on purpose or because the features were painted on but subsequently faded. The neck is marked by two carelessly incised lines. The shoulders and the chest were carved in one unit separated from both head and stomach by small notches on the sides. The sides are straight from top to bottom (excluding the four notches). Two crossing grooves running from a top corner to the opposite bottom corner imitate the triangular breasts of the previous dolls. A perforation for a moveable arm is drilled in each shoulder, extending into the medullar cavity in the back. These conical holes were drilled from the outside. The waist is marked by two rough grooves. Two asymmetrical diagonal lines, one clear and the other thin and shallow, run from the pelvis towards the groin. The bottom is sawn straight and the only sign of legs or the female genitalia is a vertical central groove. The object is very worn. Five artifacts of this type were found. H. 98mm, w. 26mm, t. 15mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Egypt, 7th-8th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, different legs: Strzygowski 1904: 202, Taf. 18 No. 8872. Egypt, today in Hungary, “Coptic”, not identical: Török 1993: 61, Pl. 93: P 10. Notes: None.

323-325. Definition: Doll’s schematic hand? 33\A\1177; 1205; 0074 Description and interpretation: Three hands (?) of articulated dolls. Five objects of this type were found. No. 323: Right arm of a rather large doll. The roughly smoothed flat back retains some of the spongiosa and parallel diagonal sawing striations. The slightly convex front is not entirely smoothed. A rather large (d. 4mm) perforation was drilled near the top for the attaching pin. A notch carved in the fore side probably represents the transition from forearm to upper arm. A groove separates the hand from the forearm. The fingers are separated by rough notches. A diagonal sawing in the inner side of the hand separates the fingers from the opposing (partly broken?) thumb. The object is slightly worn out. L. 73mm, w. 13mm, t. 7mm. No. 324: Schematic (unfinished?) hand (?). The back and sides are rough and slightly worn while the front is better smoothed. The upper end is wide while the lower one is flat with no sign of fingers. A hole (d. 2.5mm, l. 6mm) was drilled half through near the upper end, perhaps for the attaching pin. A worn out area on the back about 30mm from the top was perhaps caused by the arm rubbing against the body. L. 59mm, w. 14mm, t. 6mm. No. 325: Very schematic right hand (?), flat on the smooth back and one side, on which many diagonal striations remained. The top was sawn straight and then its edge broken, leaving a small projection. The front and the other side (with diagonal striations) were carelessly carved as a schematic hand with a moulding (bracelet?) separating them from the forearm. A perforation (d. 4mm) was drilled in the upper part of the arm. L. 45mm, w. 8mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 324: Byzantine, 5th-6th cent. No. 325: Early Arab-Crusader, 10th-12th cent. 84

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Morphological analogies: No. 325: Egypt?, in the Ontario Museum, partly painted doll with similar hands: Elderkin 1930: 478, Fig. 29. Notes: None.

its medullar cavity can be seen on the back which is roughly worked and still retains some of the spongiosa. The head widens towards its rounded top. Its convex front gives the impression of a nose. Two horizontal short lines incised beneath it represent a mouth and maybe also a chin. The bottom of the head is marked by two arched grooves – the jaws or a necklace. The neck is separated from the shoulders by a wide horizontal groove and a narrow one, possibly representing jewelry or fat folds. The narrow shoulders drop down and the sides are straight, with three short horizontal lines on each side probably representing the hands or fingers. Only the upper part of the legs remained, and the left one shows that they were narrower than the body. The upper end of the sawing groove between them represents female genitalia. The front of the doll has horizontal and diagonal grooves on it possibly representing clothes or jewelry. The two diagonal grooves running from the center of the chest down to the sides may mark the hands while the two horizontal grooves incised on each may mark the elbows or sleeves. Three objects of this type have been found. H. 120mm, w. 25mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Parallels: Yoqne‘am, A, different legs [published upside down]: Agadi 1996: 237, Fig. 19.1: 8, Ph. 29.6: 8. Egypt, 8th-9th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 202, Taf. 18 No. 8870. Notes: None.

326. Definition: Schematic unarticulated doll 33\A\0626-2 Description and interpretation: Upper part of a small, flat unfinished (?) doll. The body is slightly thicker than the head. The back is flat and roughly worked, and one side is obliquely sawn. The front is roughly smoothed, with remains of sawing and filing striations on it. The bottom was intentionally partly sawn in both front and back, and the partition between these grooves was broken for an unclear reason leaving a scar. It is possible that the carving of the lower part failed and the unfinished object was discarded by the artisan although the upper part was still kept by someone. This is the only object of this type. H. 34mm, w. 17mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object was found together with dolls Nos. 319 and 327. 327. Definition: Schematic unarticulated doll 33\A\0626-3 Description and interpretation: Complete, schematic unarticulated doll. The back is flat while the front is convex. The head and neck were carved in one unit which widens towards the top. A large nose emphasized by two side grooves dominates the face. Other facial features were possibly painted on but have faded. The neck has three arched grooves on it representing fat folds (Török 1993: 61) or a necklace. The shoulders are wide and the sides straight, without any definition of chest, stomach or waist except two short horizontal grooves incised in the lower part on each side. They may represent the hands or a belt. The legs are carved in a single unit which widens downwards, where a slightly diagonal groove possibly represents the feet. There is no mark representing the female genitalia. Two objects of this type were found. H. 77mm, w. 25mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object was found together with dolls Nos. 319 and 326. It was published: Rimon 1999: 5.

329. Definition: Schematic, unarticulated female doll 34\A\0310 Description and interpretation: Complete, schematic unarticulated female doll made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The back retains some of the spongiosa but the front is carefully smoothed. The head, rounded on top, is featureless – perhaps the features were painted on and have faded. It is separated from the neck by two arched grooves – representing a necklace or fat folds – each one projecting slightly from the other (see section). An incision divides the neck from the body. The shoulders drop and the sides run straight down to the ends of the hands, which extend very low. They are marked by two diagonal unequal lines sawn from bottom upwards. Two horizontal lines at the end of each hand represent the palms or sleeves. The bottom is straight, without legs, but two horizontal grooves possibly mark a belt. An offcenter vertical groove probably represents female genitalia. Five objects of this type were found. H. 101mm, w. 28mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 10th-11th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

328. Definition: Schematic, unarticulated female doll 34\A\1446 Description and interpretation: Female unarticulated doll made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. Part of

85

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.D.4. RELIGIOUS AND ART OBJECTS.

object. Three projecting suspension loops were carved on the top by sawing both sides of each perpendicular to the axis of the artifact. One of those sawings is deeper than the other in each loop. A perforation was drilled in each loop. The wall between the loops is not even or levelled, the perforations do not form a single line and the overlap between them is very small, so Bénédite’s suggestion (below) is unacceptable. A rolled parchment or metal amulet was inserted in the holder, its opening probably stoppered. It was then hung from the neck or belt. Two objects of this type were found. L. 67mm, d. 13mm, h. 20mm, the cavity l. 61mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Israel?, private collection, 3 (from glass, antler and bone): Ayalon 1999 Fig. 95. Egypt, cosmetic container held vertically with the kohl stick inserted in the loops: Bénédite 1907 Pl. 12 No. 44596.15 Hungary, R, in the Budapest University collection: Bíró, pers. comm. Notes: Gold parallel, Hungary, beginning of 3rd cent., from a grave, in the Budapest National Museum. Metal parallel, France, in the Autun Museum, the loops worn out by the hanging string: Poplin, pers. comm. Metal – usually gold – parallels, Lebanon, Tyre, from graves, tubes with two suspension loops incorporated in necklaces: Chéhab 1986: 176-177, Pl. 39.

This group contains eight objects, five of which are described below. They are all carefully carved, shaped and decorated. Some may have had a ritual-religious meaning and others an artistic-decorative one. Most are unique and have no parallels. The exact use and even the correct way of exhibiting some of them remain unclear. 330. Definition: Model of a temple or aedicula with a bust inside 34\M\98-7132 Description and interpretation: Tiny model of a temple or aedicula with a figure inside it. The back is undecorated except the roughly worked architrave which encircles the building beneath the roof. The roof is gabled with acroteria in its corners and denticulated margins on the front and sides. A kind of three-leafed floral design decorates the gable. Two columns border the front. Two horizontal mouldings running along the front and sides represent steps or a podium. Three niches carved on each side one on top of the other, with a horizontal line between the upper two and a vertical line beside them, may indicate an architectural element like windows or niches. A large niche was carved in the front with a bust of a long-haired figure, probably female, inside. It is worn and therefore difficult to identify. The back of the object shows signs of breaking off so it was possibly attached to another artifact. The parallels listed below aim only at the general design or idea, but its use remains unclear. It could represent a gravestone bearing the deceased’s bust which was kept in the family house (O. Tal, pers. comm.; Compare to Toynbee 1971: 47-48, 173, 245-246; Pls. 13, 61-62). Amorai Stark (pers. comm.) suggests a date for it in the 1st-2nd cent. Such objects were often made of precious metals or lead and were probably carried by people or decorated chests etc. (Henig, pers. comm.). Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Hungary, R, similar bone model with Venus inside: Bíró, pers. comm. Notes: The object is exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam. General parallel, clay relief, Beit Nattif, 3rd4th cent., the temple protecting the goddess: Avi-Yonah 1981: 18, Pl. 3: 2. Clay parallel, Syria, Tell Umar, Parthian period, with complete figure: van Ingen 1939 Pl. 14: 102 No. 202. General parallel – stone tombstones, Egypt, Athribis, end of H-R: Mysliwiec 1997: 11, Taf. 4: 3, Fig. 3. Gold analogy, R, ring with similar model, woman with ram’s head: de la Ferté 1974 Pl. 18: 1-2.

332. Definition: Object with one head or two? 34\A\0075 Description and interpretation: Part of an object which is difficult to identify or even orient – either the way it is shown here or upside down. Both ends are broken. The back is straight and smooth as if it had been attached to another artifact. The lower part (in the drawing) is carved in the shape of a column with vertical flutes and round base and capital. Beneath it is a broken part of unclear character. The upper section is carved as a head with two opposing faces, possibly as magic against the evil eye (Henig, pers. comm.). The left face is bearded while the other one is not – male and female or young and old (Amorai Stark, pers. comm.). Short lines perhaps indicate facial features and a hat or crown. The object can also be held upside down. Then it looks like the distorted face of a satyr or Pan or even an animal such as wildcat. The complete object may have been part of a pin, stylus or handle, a decorative object attached to a chest or jewelry, etc. This is the only object of its type. L. 42mm, w. 11mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: France, Langres, R, handle of a bronze dagger or spatula, the face perhaps of a griffon: Sautot 1978: 53, Pl. 25: 3. Notes: Bronze parallel, patera handle, Lajjun, R beginning of 2nd cent., from a grave, decorated with Pan head: Rahmani 1981a: 194, Pl. 29: D.

331. Definition: Amulet holder 34\P\0143 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical carefully smoothed object made from the wall of a large and thick bone diaphysis. Its center is slightly thicker than the ends. One end is closed and straight, retaining a few thin, shallow sawing striations. A long cavity made by a drill with a rounded head runs along most of the length of the

15

86

I am grateful to F. Poplin for this reference.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 334. Definition: Carved flower-shaped object 34\A\1150 Description and interpretation: Hollow object carved in the shape of a half-opened flower (or poppy pod?). The upper edge is polygonal seen from the top and the rim is thickened. Beneath it is a thick circumferential moulding. The lower part widens and then narrows again towards the base, where the continuation is broken. Vertical lines on the wall represent eight flower petals or the lines of the poppy pod. The inner cavity widens on the bottom although several protrusions were retained there. A rough perforation on the bottom was possibly caused when the object was broken off from its base. At least one conical perforation may be found on the bottom (see section). The use of this object is unclear; it probably decorated some other object (i.e. a candelabra similar to the metal Islamic ones – Henig, Allan, Jones, pers. comm.; see Arnon 1996 Fig. 92; Lester, Arnon and Polak 1999) or furniture. This is the only object of its type. H. 53mm, d. 51mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Egypt or Syria, 14th cent., ivory decoration on a (reconstructed) stand foot in the Kuwait Museum: Jenkins 1983: 89. Central Asia, H, ivory, furniture foot mount: Bernard 1970 Figs. 1-2, Pl. 20 bottom. France, R, bed foot mount?: Béal 1986: 113: E. Notes: Not checked by eyesight. Judging by its dimensions and shape it may be made of ivory.

333. Definition: Broken horse head 34\A\0078 Description and interpretation: The end of an object nicely carved in the shape of a horse’s head. The eye is formed from a circle-and-dot design. A depression indicates the nostril and grooves form the nose, mouth and chin. A perforation behind the mouth was perhaps used to suspend the object. Parallel diagonal lines on the back may represent the mane while two paired lines and a small depression on the neck possibly indicate the ears. The harness is carved in detail: one strap surrounding the mouth is decorated in the front with a ‘X’ design. Another strap, decorated with two concentric circles, is attached to the first one with a rivet (shown as a circleand-dot design) and runs backwards along the center of the head. There it is attached to another three-strap band, also decorated with a ‘X’ design, which encircles the back of the head. The continuation of the head is broken. The perforation may indicate that it was a pendant, although its position in the front makes this doubtful. It may be the end of the handle of a whip (therefore the horse – Amorai Stark, pers. comm.) or a knife, as knife handles are often carved with animal figures (i.e. Bíró 1994 Fig. 17). This is the only object of its type. L. 39mm, w. 17mm, t. 9mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

87

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.D.5. MOUNTS.

CARVED

PIECES,

INLAYS

AND

preserved, for example, in Egypt (see below). Therefore it is not always possible to correctly identify a single piece without the other components forming the scene.

FURNITURE

This large group (812 defined objects, more than 100 of which are presented below) was grouped together because of the lack of clear differentiation in the scholarship concerning the various components. Such objects were mainly used to decorate furniture (cf. Richter 1926; Hill 1963; Henig 1983; Béal 1986, 1991b) and other wooden objects such as caskets (Nye 1919) and probably also leather, like book bindings (Colt 1962: 52, Pl. 21: 18; Weitzmann 1980; Hoffman 1999). Theoretically, it is easy to distinguish between an inlay, which is inserted within a depression carved in the wood and a carved piece or furniture mount, which is attached to the wood. Lawlor (2000: 292) defined the inlay as a thin piece with holes in which bone attaching pins sometimes survived while the thick carved piece is imperforated. Others have suggested that the inlay is flat while a carved piece or furniture mount is semicylindrical and perforated (Colt 1962: 51; Rosenthal 1976; Johnson 1985; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 566). Marangou (1976: 32) thinks that semi-cylindrical mounts were attached to the corners of large pieces of furniture while the small tablets decorated chests. Others objected to any attempt to connect the shape of the object to its use (Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 190 n. 15). Some carved pieces have oblique sides, which enabled easy insertion in the depressions carved into the wooden surface and\or easy attachment of several pieces.

Most of the pieces with human, architectural and floral motifs date to the Late Roman and Byzantine periods, 4th6th cent. (Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 200-201), while vine designs also flourished in the Early Arab period. Long after Christianity became the official state religion of the Byzantine Empire, pagan motifs remained popular and were given new meanings, both artistic and religious (Marangou 1976: 38). As few carved pieces were found in dated assemblages, their dating is problematic, relying mainly on iconography and comparison to objects made in other materials (Ibid.: 29-30). Despite the pagan character of the carved pieces, especially those with human figures on them, their character is not purely Roman. The frame and ajouré inlays (which are always found together at Caesarea) mainly date to the Early Arab period, as at Ashkelon (Wapnish 1991). Carved pieces with human figures. This group (13 objects in all) consists of various motifs common in the Roman Empire, especially during the Late Roman and Byzantine periods. They have often been identified as “Coptic”, originating in Alexandria (cf. Giveon 1964; Bíró 1994: 59-60). Today, scholars believe that many of them were manufactured elsewhere, some even in Israel (Rosenthal 1976: 96-97; Johnson 1985; Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 186). The Caesarea repertoire, including pieces published in the past (i.e. Rosenthal 1976: 99-100, Pl. 23B, n. 26), includes scenes common in the Classical pagan and Byzantine artistic repertoire. The use of such pieces was in daily life and was not religious in character. The carving was of medium or even low quality (Ibid. 77102). Such pieces probably decorated wooden caskets which, according to St. Clair and Mclachlan (1989: 4748), were given as presents to the bride. Thus, the scenes are sometimes related to Aphrodite, the protectoress of marriage.

As these objects were influenced by the natural shape and character of the bone, the artisan’s ability, borrowed motifs from objects in other raw materials, common fashions and traditions, and mass production, it is not easy to identify production centers and stylistic sources and to fix chronology (Johnson 1985). Besides, carved pieces usually originate in antiquities markets and not from excavations, and as motifs changed only slightly over time, dating them is difficult (Marangou 1976: 29-30).

Carved pieces with architectural designs (see Robertson 1929), 32 in total, are mainly variations of spirally fluted columns, a common motif in Roman-Byzantine art (i.e. on lead coffins [Avi-Yonah 1981 Pl. 31: a-d, 34: 6\4] or on pottery lamps [Sussman 1999]). Their number and variability, including unfinished tablets, is large at Caesarea. However, very few such objects are known from other sites so it is actually possible that they were produced and mostly used in this city and its region. Haeckl (1999) has suggested that this motif was common in the eastern part of the Roman Empire during the 2nd-3rd cent. and in Byzantine Egypt. Hamilton (1974), discussing representations of buildings with fluted columns on Byzantine and Early Arab metal objects, concluded that they represent Constantine’s Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. This design also appears on Islamic candellabra of the 10th-11th cent (J. Allan, pers. comm.; compare to Arnon 1996 Fig. 92; Lester, Arnon and Polak 1999). Some of the tablets were carelessly

Two of the carved pieces were made from cattle humerus, two from cattle tibia and one from cattle metapodia – all bones from which large pieces could be extracted. This group is sub-divided as follows: human figures (Nos. 335-345), architectural motifs (Nos. 346-359), floral designs (Nos. 360-366), varia (Nos. 367-389), geometric designs including frame inlays (Nos. 390-402), ajouré inlays (Nos. 403-420), and furniture mounts (Nos. 421-438). These objects are numerous because a piece of furniture could be decorated with dozens or even hundreds of bone or ivory pieces and inlays (Nicholls 1979). Many of these artifacts are flat (some were made from flat bones such as scapulae and ribs) while others, made from the wall of long bone diaphyses, are half-rounded. Tablets and inlays of both types were sometimes parts of composite designs, as shown by wooden caskets 88

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE carved while in others the fluted design is very precise and was definitely achieved by marking the spaces among the diagonal lines in advance, connecting the marks with lines and then carving along them (Dray, pers. comm.). Those pieces were usually part of a composite scene of human figures standing between columns, sometimes with an arch on top (Marangou 1976: 65; Lawlor 2000: 296; compare to 4th-5th cent. Egyptian wood carvings: Haeckl 1999: 243, Pls. 12-1, 2). Other architectural motifs found at Caesarea include imitations of column bases or capitals of poorer carving, gabled monuments and an altar.

waste (see below; Photo 3). They are very numerous at the site, especially in the Early Arab period. The variety of shapes is vast: the tablets may be square, triangular, trapezoidal, round, wavy, etc., and the open work designs are reminiscent of butterflies, birds, airplanes, leaves, pointed disks, etc. Rivet perforations exist in some pieces while others were probably glued. Many were parts of composite designs as shown by their oblique sides which were joined to the next piece. Some were carefully made while others were carelessly produced. Several tablets are bent today but originally were certainly flat. It is unclear why so few open work inlays have been published both in Israel (except from Caeserea and Ashkelon) and abroad, even at sites like Fustat, Hama, Alexandria16 and Carthage. This technique was common in Early Arab metalwork (J. Allan, pers. comm.; see below) and it is possible that bone and ivory inlays imitate metal pieces.

Carved pieces with floral designs (14 were found) usually represent variations of vines with or without grapes, as this plant represents fertility and plenty (Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 198). Such tablets were abundant in the Early Arab period when the floral designs replaced some of the human figures (Ibid.). This motif was common in ancient art such as on architectural elements, sarcophagi, etc., with realism deteriorating as time passed (Avi-Yonah 1981: 79-80, Pl. 23). Some of the pieces are unfinished, especially the background areas among the floral designs which remained rough and relatively high. It could be the result of careless production but some of these tablets were probably never finished (it is possible that the master carved the floral design and left the work on the background to an assistant).

Furniture mounts. Scholars have included in this vague definition a large variety of tablets, inlays, decorations, handles, boxes, hinges, etc. Altogether 52 objects were included in this group although No. 421 could be a gaming piece, 423 a box, 424 a “horse bead”, 425 a handle or hinge, and 432-438 inlays. Archaeological excavations, especially in very dry or wet regions, revealed wooden objects decorated with bone and ivory pieces similar to ours (i.e. the inlayed lyre found in Hungary - Bíró 1994: 59-60). Furniture decorated with various mounts also appears in ancient iconography. Cylindrical or semi-cylindrical pieces, sometimes in the shape of columns, were attached to legs, handles, etc. Of special interest are the small, nicely carved rods which are rather numerous at Caesarea and Ashkelon but absent from most excavation reports in Israel and abroad. F. Petrie already identified them at the beginning of the 20th cent. as parts of lattice work (meshrebiyya in Arabic), based on wooden parallels abundant in the Arab world up to the present day (Atil 1981: 197; Pl. 9). These rods were probably stuck into a wooden frame by the flat or rounded tongues projecting from their ends (contra Wapnish [1991: 59] who claimed that they were used to hold the rod on the lathe and discarded after production). Similar artifacts from the 5th-7th cent. were found at Alexandria but have not yet been published (Rodziewicz 1984: 245, n. 236). It is worth noting the difference between these rods and the pins which attached bone hinges to walls and lids of boxes (Fremersdorf 1940 Abb. 22; see above), as sometimes they are rather similar.

Various carved pieces and inlays. This group (32 objects in all) consists of a large variety of decorations, which lack a definite character. Geometrical inlays (all together 426 of which 390 are frame inlays, most of them broken) include almost all shapes: rectangles, parallelograms, triangles, trapezes, hexagons and ellipses. Some were no doubt produced at the site and some never finished. Alternating bone and wooden parallelograms were inserted – as shown by both ancient and recent objects – in frames, which bordered composite designs. The triangles and the trapezes were also probably incorporated with other inlays to create larger designs. The frame inlays which have almost no parallels in Israel are very abundant at Caesarea, especially among Raban’s finds from Early Arab layers, in lesser numbers among Porath’s finds while not even one was found by Patrich. They too were inlayed in bordering frames. Their ends are usually formed in order to fit the next inlay. If the angle was 45 degrees, the two pieces created a 90 degree corner, while if it was different the two inlays were attached in a straight line (Poplin, pers. comm.). Geometric inlays, including frame pieces, were common in the Islamic world until recently and were produced in centers such as Damascus and Bethlehem (Pl. 8; von Graf 1914; Avitsur 1976: 204-205; Schur 1998; Wulff 1966: 92-97).

Carved pieces with human figures 335. Definition: Carved piece: Dionysos and a panther? 35\S\82914 Description and interpretation: Lower right corner of a tablet with the figures of Dionysos and a large felid (usually interpreted as a panther) sitting at his feet in high relief – a scene commonly depicted in the Roman world

The ajouré (open work) inlays (243 definable pieces plus small fragments) were made from flat bones or ivory, some of them at Caesarea, as attested by the production

16

89

Rodziewicz (1984: 245) mentions ajouré inlays from Alexandria but gives no details.

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS (St. Clair and McLachlan 1989: 68). Dionysos’ cult was very popular in Roman Egypt (Marangou 1976: 37), from where it came to Israel, including Caesarea (Gersht 2001, esp. 98-100). The tablet was made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis. Parts of the medullar cavity and some spongiosa may be seen on the back. The bottom is uncarved, creating a basis for the figures. Only Dionysos’ left leg remained, stretching slightly to the left. It is bare and the details of knee, ankle and fingers are clear. Clothing folds may be seen in the background. The panther sits behind Dionysos’ leg, its fore limbs extended slightly to the front and the head is tilted upwards. The head is carefully carved in all its details, including a small mane (compare to the ivory handle No. 522 and to an Early Roman marble lion\panther head found at Horvat Eleq, near Caesarea: Hirschfeld 2003 Fig. 1). The edge of an object that Dionysos possibly holds in his hand is seen above the animal’s head. A circular shape may be seen between the legs – either part of the panther’s body or something else. Amorai Stark and Choyke (pers. comm.) think that the animal may be a lioness. The whole figure seems to have been at least 180mm high and 75mm wide, possibly a combination of two tablets. This is the only object of its kind. H. 80mm, w. 36mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Kafr Som (mirror direction): Tell 1969 Pl. 6 bottom. Egypt, 2nd cent., several variations: Marangou 1976 Pls. 1a-b, 2a, 3b. Egypt, B 4th-5th cent., ivory medicine box: Weitzmann 1979: 142-143, No. 122. Egypt, Shurafa, not pre-5th cent. Engelbach 1915: 42, Pl. 49: 5. Egypt, Alexandria: Jablonowska-Taracha 2001: 279, Taf. 34: 3. Egypt, 3rd4th cent. Early Christian and Byzantine Art: 51, No. 165. Egypt, 4th cent. St. Clair and McLachlan 1989: 68, No. 27. Baltimore expedition, 5th cent., ivory box (mirror direction): Ibid.: 40, Pl. 15 No. 104. Notes: The object was found near furniture mounts Nos. 433-434. Marble parallel, a Roman statue of a satyr and panther from Caesarea: Friedheim 2002: 15.

slightly. The right shoulder is unrealistic, possibly expressing the burden of the full basket although there is no sign of strain in the hand muscles. The belly is large with a fat fold at its bottom. The boy’s penis is bent to the left because the right leg is stretched forwards. The wings look as if they were made from feathers. The left part of the body is covered with a garment tied around the neck, seen also behind the right side and under the wings. The basket was made from thin, straight vertical withes or reeds with a horizontal weft band around its center and a double rim for reinforcement. The globular fruits are piled high above the rim. The whole execution is simple and provincial. H. 85mm, w. 50mm, t. 3mm. No. 337: Rectangular tablet made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. One corner is broken. Eros advances to the left with his left leg stretched forwards and the right one left behind. He looks backwards beyond the left shoulder. The body is fattish like that of a young boy. The male sex organ is less realistic than in the previous scene. The face is round, the hair covers the ear, the mouth small. There is no sign of effort made in carrying the heavy basket. A garment tied around the neck is hang from the shoulders and seen on both sides. The basket is diagonally plaited from thin sprouts or reeds with its base and rim shown as horizontal weft bands. The fruits are piled high above the rim – a symbol of fertility. H. 84mm, w. 32mm, t. 10mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 336: Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: No. 336: Egypt, 3rd-4th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 185, Abb. 240, No. 7092. Egypt, 5th-6th cent., ivory, “Coptic”, on a wooden casket: Badawy 1978 Pl. 5.40a. No. 337: Egypt, 3rd-4th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 182, Taf. 14 No. 7086. Lybia, Leptic Magna, 4th cent.: Aiosa 1997: 140-141, Taf. 60: b. Notes: None. 338. Definition: Carved piece: Hermes holding a caduceus 35\S\59500 Description and interpretation: Rectangular tablet made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis with a depiction of Hermes in high relief holding a caduceus. The left part is missing. Hermes stands to the front and slightly to the left, leaning on his left leg, so that his penis is also bent to the left. The navel is clearly shown. A garment is thrown over his shoulder and hangs around his left hand, which holds the caduceus downwards. An arched design with an unclear meaning may be seen behind the shoulder (compare to Rosenthal 1976 Pl. 22c). This is the only object of its type. H. 107mm, w. 34mm, t. 6.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Not checked by eye-sight. Similar scene in a Roman mosaic from Antioch: Stillwell 1938 Pl. 50 compared by Weitzmann 1981: 246 to his Fig. 103. Similar scene on a Roman sarcophagus from Tarragona: Weitzmann 1951: 123, Pl. 40: 145.

336-337. Definition: Carved piece: Eros carrying a fruit basket 35\S\20557; 10089 Description and interpretation: Two almost complete tablets depicting in high relief a scene typical of Dionysian processions: Eros, with his fattish and disproportionate body is depicted carrying a fruit basket (Marangou 1976: 33; Jablonowska-Taracha 1998: 2728, Pl. 8). The details and performance differ in the two tablets. These are the only objects of this type. No. 336: Rectangular flat piece made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis. Its lower part is missing. The sides are straight and the object may have been part of a larger scene. The back is slightly convex and unworked. Eros is represented as a winged boy walking to the right, his head turned backwards but his eyes looking to the front. The boy’s hair is combed backwards. His facial features are slightly angled, the nose large and low, almost Negroid in character. The mouth is opened 90

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 339. Definition: Carved piece: Aphrodite Pudica 35\P\0045 Description and interpretation: Carved tablet with the high relief figure of Aphrodite Pudica covering her breasts and sex organs (compare to pin head No. 248 and references there). Aphrodite was a very popular goddess in Roman Egypt (Marangou 1976: 39). Her cult reached Israel from there (Friedheim 2002), including Caesarea itself (Iliffe 1933). The back is roughly worked and smoothed. The figure’s right side is sawn straight while the left one follows the lines of the body and garment. Aphrodite stands to the front leaning on her right leg while the left one and pelvis are bent. The head and parts of the legs and the hands are missing. Locks of long hair (atypical for Aphrodite – Amorai Stark, pers. comm.) may be seen behind the neck. The right hand, with a bracelet above the elbow, covers the left breast. The bare right breast has no nipple. The left hand covers the genitalia. The belly, with its navel, is slightly rounded and the pelvis is relatively narrow. The folds of a long garment hang behind her back, an unusual feature as it is often held in the front, covering the sex organ. The tablet has two rivet perforations: on the right shoulder and beside the left knee. The piece was carefully smoothed but today it is worn. This is the only object of its type. H. 112mm, w. 42mm, t. 20mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle humerus. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Sinai, Ostrakina, LR 3rd-4th cent., not identical: Oren 1978: 82. Egypt, Alexandria, 2nd cent.: Jablonowska-Taracha 2001: 279, Taf. 33: 1. Egypt, 2nd cent., in the Alexandria Museum: Carra 1995: 279, Taf. 33: 1. Egypt, end of 3rd-beginning of 4th cent.: Marangou 1976: 40, 80, Pls. 41a, d, 42c, 43b. Hungary, Dunapentele, 2nd cent., from a grave, with more tablets in “Alexandrian style” which ornamented a wooden lyre: Bíró 1994: 59-60, 106, Pl. 71: 600a. France, R, bed leg decoration?: Béal 1986: 113: F. Italy, Pompeii, 1st cent., personification of purity and modesty: Ward-Perkins and Claridge 1978: 138, Fig. 60f. Notes: The object has been published: Porath, Raban and Patrich 1998: 51; Patrich 2003a: 85. Marble, pottery and bronze parallels, 6th-5th cent. BCE onwards: Stemmer 2001: 52-53 - C3-C4, 64 - D1; Marble parallel, Rome, 3rd cent.?: Ibid.: 99 - F2; 2nd cent.: Ibid.: 107 - G1; Marble, Florence, 1st cent.: Ibid.: 109-110 - G3. Clay relief, Beit Nattif, 3rd[-4th] cent.: Baramki 1936 Pl. 2: 3. Clay relief, Tel Gezer, probably manufactured in Beit Nattif: AviYonah 1981: 17-18, Fig. 1.

left. The garment folds which reach to the ankles wave around the legs. These are the only objects of this type (although see No. 564). No. 340: The back is roughly worked and smoothed. The base is sawn straight. The sides are broken. The garment is tied around the waist. The left leg, resting on its toes, can be observed through the garment up to the thigh, while only the foot from the right leg can be seen. This leg also rests on its toes. The tablet is worn. H. 88mm, w. 35mm, t. 7.5mm. No. 341: The back is smoothed and its lower part displays a little of the spongiosa. The bottom is flat and smooth; three horizontal mouldings create a basis on which the figure dances. The sides are sawn straight and smoothed for attachment to a surface or to other tablets. The left leg projects slightly from the garment but is unseen through it. A pronounced line separates the ankle from the foot, which bends to the left and has too large toes. Of the right leg, only the foot, resting on the toes can be seen. The heel is separated from the unrealistic foot by a triangular cut. H. 78mm, w. 40mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 340: Late Byzantine. No. 341: Early Arab-Crusader, 11th-13th cent. (not found in situ?). Morphological analogies: Haifa, LR, from a grave: Dussaud 1912: 89-92. Egypt, 3rd-4th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 180, Taf. 14 Nos. 7074, 7075. Egypt: Marangou 1976 Pls. 27a, 27c. Lybia, Leptic Magna, 4th cent.: Aiosa 1997: 141, T. 60: c. The garment folds – Halussa, LR 4th-5th cent.: Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 189, Fig. 4. Notes: No. 340 has been published: Patrich 2003a: 85. 342. Definition: Carved piece: legs 36\A\30105 Description and interpretation: Left lower corner of a tablet made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis. The back is roughly worked, with projections and remains of the spongiosa. The bottom and side are sawn straight. The lower fringes project and create a basis for the figure, which is carved in high relief. The legs belong to a bare footed figure of unknown sex walking or dancing towards the right. The right leg stretches ahead while the left is pulled back, resting on its toes. The right leg is realistic and muscular while the left is too thick. The background is worked and smoothed except the fringes. A criss-cross design (basket?) can be seen beyond the right leg. There was probably room for another figure on this tablet. This is the only object of its type. H. 44mm, w. 35mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Haifa, LR, from a grave: Dussaud 1912: 89-92; Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 195196, Fig. 7. Sepphoris, B, naked male (mirror direction): Martin Nagy et al. 1996: 237, No. 157. Halusa, LR, 4th5th cent., dancing Dionysian satyr: Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 191, Fig. 5. Jordan, Kafr Som, not the same, dancing Dionysos: Tell 1969 Pl. 8 top. Egypt, 3rd-4th cent., in the Cairo Museum: Strzygowski 1904: 184, Abb. 239 No. 7091. Egypt, end of 3rd-beginning of 4th cent., Dionysos’ companions: Marangou 1976: 80, Pl. 13b.

340-341. Definition: Carved piece: dancing female figure 36\P\0094; A\0292 Description and interpretation: Lower parts of two tablets carved in high relief with figures of dancing Maenads or Nereids (Marangou 1976: 34). This too was a popular motif and it is possible that several pieces created a composite picture. Both were made from the wall of large long bone diaphyses. Both dancers are depicted similarly: half turned to the right, with the right leg pulled back while the left is stretched forward and bent to the 91

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B, male holding a fruit basket: Engelbach 1915: 43, Pl. 50: 1. Notes: None.

(pers. comm.) the tablet dates to the Byzantine period and could be a representation of one of the four seasons. If it holds a basket it could be Eros or one of Dionysos’ companions. Henig (pers. comm.) thinks this may be a depiction of a Maenad holding a wreath and fruits above her head. This is the only object of its type. H. 103mm, w. 29mm, t. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: Nessana, LR-B, 3rd-6th cent., Alexandrian style, dancing Bachante’s hand holding fruits: Colt 1962: 51, Pl. 21: 2. Mampsis, not the same: Rosenthal 1976 Pl. 22E. Egypt, Shurafa, female holding a smaller wreath beside her head: Engelbach 1915: 42, Pl. 49: 4. Egypt, Alexandria, in the Greco-Roman Museum, Dionysos holding grapes over his head: Marangou 1976 Pl. 3d; Rodziewicz E. 1978: 324. Jordan, Kafr Som, not the same, part of a Dionysian scene: Tell 1969 Pl. 7 bottom. Greece, Olynthus, 6th-5th cent. BCE, female holding a musical instrument or wreath over the head: Robinson 1941: 14-15, Fig. 1a, Pl. 2: 8. Notes: None.

343. Definition: Carved piece: figure holding a spear or staff 36\M\98-7140 Description and interpretation: Tablet made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. It has been eroded by water and the bottom is missing. A female figure (Athena? Amorai Stark, pers. comm.) is carved in high relief and shown standing to the front, holding a spear or staff in her right hand. A long groove is seen running along her left side. Garment folds are carved on the chest. This is the only object of its type. H. 63mm, w. 36mm, t. 15mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle humerus. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Mampsis, LR\B: Rosenthal 1976 Pl. 22C; Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 199-200, Fig. 9. Egypt, Alexandria: Jablonowska-Taracha 2001: 57, Pl. 12.2. Ivory dyptich of Valentinian, 380 CE: Maskell 1966 Pl. 6: 2. Notes: The object is exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam. Limestone parallel, Egypt, B 6th cent.?, pilaster top, “Coptic”: Beckwith 1963: 53, Pl. 88.

Carved pieces with architectural designs 346. Definition: Carved piece: spirally fluted column 37\P\0133 Description and interpretation: Complete carved piece shaped as a spirally fluted column with a half circular cross-section, to attach to a flat surface. It was probably made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. Both sides were carefully sawn. The base is made of five round superimposed layers (tolos). The spirally fluted design is handmade and its lines are neither parallel or equal in size. The capital consists of several parts, from bottom to top: a low round tolos, two trapezoidal capitals (in imitation of a Doric capital with echinus and abacus? See Robertson 1929: 42-43) decorated with diagonal lines in the upper parts, and a round part. All were irregularly handmade and incline slightly to the left. The object is worn. It was probably part of a composite design, possibly with another column and a human figure between them, or a series of columns and figures (compare – in another context – to RosenthalHeginbottom 1997: 208). This is the only object of its kind. L. 92mm, w. 16mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic?”: Strzygowski 1904, Taf. 20 (unclear object number). Notes: Wooden parallel (relief), Egypt, Berenike, 4th-5th cent.: Haeckl 1999: 243, Pls. 12-1, 2.

344. Definition: Carved piece: figure holding a spear or staff 36\S\73850-1 Description and interpretation: Upper right corner of a flat, thin tablet. It is bordered by a frame of two flat, wide bands and a narrow band with a rounded profile inside them. Only the edge of the head of an individual of unknown sex remains, carved in high relief. A ritual wreath or a crown adorns the head and one hand is shown holding a cylindrical rod, possibly a spear. The background is flat and smooth. It could be a personification of one of the four seasons (Amorai Stark, pers. comm.). Judging by the hair this is the figure of a young satyr (Henig, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. H. 50mm, w. 27mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 345. Definition: Carved piece: figure holding a wreath or basket 36\S\16195 Description and interpretation: Upper left corner of a tablet made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The back is smoothed. The left side and the left part of the top are sawn straight with diagonal striations remaining on them and it is possible that other tablets were attached there. Only the edge of the figure’s head (with a hairdo or a crown or decoration on the hair) and the right hand holding a wreath or a fruit basket above it, carved in high relief, survived. A horizontal line stretching from the hand to the right could indicate the base of the basket. Inside the outer wreath are fruits or leaves and a globular object, probably a fruit. Unclear grooves beneath the arm may represent garment folds. According to Amorai Stark

347-348. Definition: Carved piece: spirally fluted column 37\P\0262; S\81356 Description and interpretation: Complete rectangular tablets carved as spirally fluted column shafts. Both were made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis so that part of their back is concave. The spiral design was 92

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE asymmetrically carved by hand in the shape of wide and smoothed diagonal bands. No. 347: Many diagonal sawing striations remained on the back. A small projection was left on the lower end because the saw went astray. The last groove on the upper right corner was not carved. Altogether 16 objects of this type were found. L. 70mm, w. 14mm, t. 7.5mm. No. 348: Two scars, resulting from sawing it from both sides are present on its lower end. The upper end is rounded and worn while a projecting tenon left on it was probably inserted in a hole carved in another tablet. Two objects of this type were found. L. 62mm, w. 17mm, t. 1.3mm, the tenon l. 4mm, w. 4mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine (both). Morphological analogies: Caesarea, R, with a tenon: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 83. Haifa, LR, from a grave: Dussaud 1912: 89-92. Oboda, LR, end of 3rd-beginning of 4th cent.: Rosenthal 1976 Pl. 23A; Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997 Pl. 3: 30a. Egypt, Alexandria, end of 6th-beginning of 7th cent., typical to Alexandria: Rodziewicz E. 1969b: 148. Egypt, imitating architectural borders: Marangou 1976: 65, Pl. 67a. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904 Taf. 11 No. 7060. Egypt, Alexandria, 4th cent., Dionysos standing between similar columns: Early Christian and Byzantine Art: 51, Pl. 15 No. 166. Nubia, Ballana, 5th cent., ivory inlays on a casket, similar columns carrying arches: de Villard 1938: 8, Taf. 9-10. France, Marseii, R: Reynaud 1998: 249, Pl. 208 No. 407. Notes: None.

style (Robertson 1929: 39-42, Fig. 17). Several such pieces were probably attached one on top of the other to a wooden object as part of an architectural scene. This is the only object of its type. H. 26mm, reconstructed diameter 55mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Haifa, LR, from a grave: Dussaud 1912: 89-92. Notes: None. 352. Definition: Carved piece: Doric column shaft 37\S\4065 Description and interpretation: Part of a large tablet carved as a column shaft in the Doric style, carelessly made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis. The back is very roughly smoothed with spongiosa remaining on the lower part. The right side is sawn straight so another piece could be attached to it. The left side and the top are broken. The bottom is flat. The base consists of four superimposed layers (tolos) – low, high, and two low ones, separated by grooves and depressions. The central part is decorated with carelessly made vertical flutes (canellures): wide concave bands separated by paired mouldings with a narrow and deep groove between each of them. Vertical filing and abrading striations are seen along them. The top is composed of two horizontal grooves (probably a tolos) along with an unclear continuation upwards, where a shallow diagonal cut may be part of a floral design. This is the only object of its type. L. 153mm, w. 44mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle tibia? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

349-350. Definition: Carved piece: spirally fluted column 37\P\0065; S\81099-2 Description and interpretation: Flat tablets with a spirally fluted decoration, both with the ends broken. No. 349: Thicker than the other. Diagonal sawing striations were left on the flat bottom, making its glueing easier. Each flute is made of two unparallel, carelessly handmade bands. Five objects of this type have been found. L. 40mm, w. 8mm, t. 6mm. No. 350: A wider and thinner piece with narrow asymmetrically handmade flutes. Two objects of this type were found. L. 28mm, w. 11mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 350: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: No. 350: Egypt, Shurafa, LRB: Engelbach 1915: 44, Pl. 51: 7. Notes: No. 350 was found together with piece No. 375.

353. Definition: Carved piece: Corinthian base or capital 38\S\26259 Description and interpretation: Complete, carefully smoothed tablet carved as a Corinthian base or capital made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis. Parts of the spongiosa remained on the back. The sides are sawn straight, probably for attachment to other tablets. The base is narrow and concave in cross-section, while the top is broader and horizontal with sawing marks. The front is decorated with a low, flat base (tolos) and two rows of high relief acanthus leaves in Corinthian style (Robertson 1929: 139-146). The lower leaf stands out while the upper one is shorter, its base hidden behind the first leaf. The ends of the leaves are bent downwards. Some scholars see Egyptian origin behind such objects (Rodziewicz 1969a: 116-118). This is the only object of its kind. L. 60mm, w. 31mm, t. 11mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Nessana, B-A 7th cent., vine leaves: Colt 1962: 51, Pl. 21: 1. Egypt, B 4th-5th cent., ivory, human figures standing between acanthus leaves: Weitzmann 1979: 142-143 No. 122. Egypt, 3rd-4th cent., pilaster capital?: Marangou 1976: 65, Pl. 70e.

351. Definition: Carved piece: Doric column shaft 37\P\0023 Description and interpretation: Part of a carved piece shaped like a column shaft, made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis. Its color is today very bright, reminiscent of gypsum. Both ends are sawn straight and many striations can be seen on them. Both sides are broken but the object was probably half-circular in crosssection, to be attached to a flat surface. The front is decorated by wide vertical flutes (canellures) separated by projecting mouldings which are typical of the Doric 93

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Notes: Comparison to a stone capital, Kh. Keraza, 3rd cent.: Avi-Yonah 1981: 92, Pl. 17: 5. Comparison to stone bases, Egypt, Alexandria, H; Jordan, Jerash, R: Rodziewicz 1969a figs. 2, 6.

Locus date: Late Byzantine-Early Arab, 6th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, 3rd-beginning of 4th cent.: Marangou 1976: 64-65, Pl. 70a. Turkey, Tarsus: Goldman 1950: 400, Fig. 273: 105. France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a: 362, Pl. 19: 1310. Notes: None.

354. Definition: Carved piece: Corinthian capital 38\A\0878 Description and interpretation: Almost complete trapezoid-shaped carved tablet made from a flat bone. Most of the back retains the spongiosa. Two small rivet perforations were drilled near the center and two half holes on each side. The last show that the tablet was part of a larger composite scene. If the neighboring tablets had diagonal sides as well, they would have together created a hexagonal or semi-hexagonal decoration. The top, bottom and sides are not sawn straight. The upper left corner is broken. The decoration consists of a projecting architrave or abacus on top, whose right half is divided by a horizontal groove, and a circular projection in the center. Another projecting horizontal band in the bottom is decorated with diagonal not parallel grooves which probably merged into the spiral flutes of a column shaft (Gersht, pers. comm.; see No. 352; Avi-Yonah 1981: 91, Fig. 3). The wide central band is carved with acanthus leaves and other floral designs. The work is provincial and carelessly made – the central section with a knife and the lower one with a file. L. 100mm, h. 45mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Haifa, LR, from a grave: Dussaud 1912: 89-92. Egypt, R 2nd cent., only part is similar [when held upside down]: Shahin 1998: 373, Fig. 2. Egypt, R-B, narrower and longer: Petrie 1927: 44, Pl. 39: 84. Dumbarton Oaks Collection, 10th cent., ivory, part of an architrave: Cutler 1985: 47, Fig. 7. Notes: The Porath expedition found in another part of the city a very similar but smaller carved piece (S\80306), which is not discussed here.17

356-357. Definition: Carved piece: gabled structure 38\S\62109; 38399 Description and interpretation: Two tablets carved with a gabled structure, made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The back was carefully smoothed although some of the spongiosa remained. The complete side was sawn straight and the top is horizontal and straight. Both were carelessly made by hand. These are the only objects of their type. No. 356: The right and the lower sections are missing. The left margin is unworked. A gable bordered by two bands, the outer more projecting than the inner, is carved on the upper section. A halfcircular unidentified object (see No. 354), whose right part is missing, fills the inner space. It seems that a triangle acroterium was carved to its left (see Robertson 1929: 49). Beneath it is a thick lintel divided into three bands. The main section has a rectangular shape on its left side bordered by a projecting frame and divided into three panels with smaller projecting rectangles. The upper panel is crowned by a series of triangles. The right side is broken so it is unclear whether the whole section was carved in the same design. If so, this may be an imitation of a wooden door (or a stone door shaped like a wooden one – see Mazar 1973 Pls. 3: 3; 34), possibly that of a gabled Holy Ark (Dothan 1983 Pl. 27). It is possible that the rectangular frame represents a pedestal or a column, with a similar shape on the other side and a door in the center. L. 73mm, w. 27mm, t. 7mm. No. 357: Only the right upper section was preserved. The margin is composed of two parallel, smoothed undecorated bands. A gable carved on the upper section is made of two parallel narrow bands bordering a series of triangles, which represent roof tiles or beams. A floral design can be observed on the upper right corner. On the bottom is part of a circle composed of two parallel bands bordering square or circular shapes, the meaning of which is unclear. The central section is filled with floral designs. It is possibly an image of a booth or a pergola covered with vines. L. 67mm, w. 35mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 357: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: No. 357: Egypt, 6th-7th cent., “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 200, Abb. 264 No. 8866 (see also Abb. 263 No. 8865, 265 No. 8867). Egypt, A: Stern 1954 Figs. 6a, b, 7a, b, 8: 634 and especially 7a. Egypt, A, different details: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 198, No. 225. Egypt or Syria, A 7th-8th cent., in the Mayer Museum of Islam, Jerusalem. Syria?, 8th-9th cent., decorated ivory bowl in the Metropolitan Museum: Kühnel [1971] Taf. 3: 7. Notes: None.

355. Definition: Carved piece: Ionic capital 38\S\20254 Description and interpretation: Tablet carved as an Ionic capital, probably made from a flat bone with remains of the spongiosa retained on the back. The left side is broken. It was rather carefully made by hand but is not entirely symmetrical while the right end is thicker than the rest. A half-round recess was sawn in Antiquity (after the carving was finished) in the bottom center, possibly for attachment to another piece. The lower band has short, wide vertical grooves on it, possibly continuing the flutes of the column shaft attached below (see Nos. 352, 354). Only the right spiral volute remained of the usual two (see Robertson 1929: 46-47, Figs. 18-19). The acinus was decorated in the common astragali design with small triangles among their bottoms. The top is bordered by a two-step abacus. This is the only object of its type. L. 76mm, h. 22mm, t. 5.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? 17

It will be published by Amorai Stark.

94

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 358. Definition: Object shaped like a column base 38\P\0060 Description and interpretation: Circular lathe-turned object shaped like a column base. The bottom is flat with remains of the spongiosa and sawing striations. The side is vertical and the upper part is shaped like a truncated trapezoid. The top is carefully smoothed and worn. A large circular depression was lathe-turned centrally as shown by the lathe indentation. The cavity is lighter than the other parts, as if something was originally inserted in it. The object may be a box base (but not a lid, as the bottom is rough) although the depression seems to be too small for that. It is possible that a column shaft was inserted in it as part of a composite scene, architectural in character. This is the only object of its type. D. 37mm, h. 8mm, the central depression d. 20.5mm, de. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

straight. The design comprises a band of vines, including twigs, hand-like leaves and scattered circular fruits, not arranged in clusters as grapes should be (see No. 363). Two objects of this type were found. L. 115mm, w. 30mm, t. 3mm. No. 361: The back is roughly smoothed with some spongiosa retained. A straight line was incised near the perforation on its left end, perhaps to mark the drilling spot. The lines bordering the carved area are quite straight. The design includes shoots and twigs, small leaves and scattered fruits, which do not resemble typical vines but probably were intended to. The work was carelessly done, the details emphasized only by scratching grooves around them while the low background remained unsmoothed. Four objects of this type were found. L. 106mm, w. 30mm, t. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 360: Byzantine. No. 361: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: No. 360: Haifa, LR, from a grave: Dussaud 1912: 89-92. Egypt, 4th-5th cent., “Coptic”, ivory: Cooney 1943: 19, Pl. 30 top. Egypt, 6th-7th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, non-identical: Strzygowski 1904: 199, Abb. 260, No. 8862. Egypt, Fayum, probably 7th-8th cent., “Coptic”, common especially at Fustat: Longhurst 1927: 24-25, Fig. 4. Egypt, A\Umayyad: Stern 1954 Fig. 6c. Egypt, Fustat, A 8th-9th cent., wider: Scanlon 1974 Pl. 30 Fig. 2b. No. 361: Haifa, LR, from a grave: Dussaud 1912: 89-92. Egypt, 5th-6th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, triangular: Strzygowski 1904: 198, Abb. 258, No. 8860; 6th-7th cent.: Ibid.: 198-199, Abb. 259, No. 8861. Egypt, A\Umayyad: Stern 1954 Figs. 6f, 8: 682. Egypt, Fustat, A 8th-9th cent.: Scanlon 1974 Pl. 30: Fig. 2a. Syria, Hama, 5th-6th cent., “Coptic” from Egypt, nonidentical: Lane 1938: 74-75, Fig. 14g. Notes: No. 360 was not checked personally. Similar tablets seen in the Ravenna mosaics, 6th cent., on Maximian’s chair: Maskell 1966 Pl. 18. No. 361: Comparison to lead coffins, Bet Shearim, R: Avigad 1976 Fig. 89: 1-3. Comparison to stone sculpture from Kh. Al-Mafjar: Hamilton 1946: 2-3, Fig. 23, Pl. 2A. Comparison to stone architraves, Yemen, B: Keall 1995 Figs. 6-9.

359. Definition: Carved piece: altar 38\S\81042 Description and interpretation: Tablet made from a flat bone, carved in the shape of an altar. The back is flat with some spongiosa, irregular sawing and filing striations. The corners (except the broken one) were carefully sawn. The sides are straight and smooth with many sawing striations. The upper and lower sections of the altar are stepped, creating an illusion of perspective depth. The two smooth sides add to this impression. The center is a kind of smooth recess decorated with a high relief garland hanging from the upper corners, a motif known, for instance, from sarcophagi (Avi-Yonah 1981 Pls. 19: 9, 26: 3). The garland is composed of two branches with elongated leaves arranged in pairs in differing directions, which meet in the center. It is possible that the tablet was part of a composite scene. This is the only object of its type. H. 52mm, w. 55mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Egypt, 2nd cent., in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection, ivory, not identical, Egyptian altar: Weitzmann 1972: 6, Pl. I; Cutler 1985: 20, Fig. 24. Egypt, R 2nd cent., ivory, not identical: Badawy 1978 Pl. 3/10. Notes: None.

362. Definition: Carved piece: vine design 39\M\55-260 Description and interpretation: Rectangular carved tablet with a flat back and straight sawn sides. The right end is broken. The decoration fills the whole area without margins and perhaps continued to other tablets. It consists of a curving tendril twig with large hand-like leaves common in vines and figs but with no fruits. This is the only object of its type. L. 61mm, w. 15mm, t. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Egypt, Fustat, A: Gayraud 1986: 25, Pl. 11: A; larger: Bahgat Bey and Gabriel 1921 Pl. 28 top. Notes: The object is exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam. This motif is sometimes called the “Palmettewave design”: Kühnel [1971] Taf. 96: 59. Comparison to Early Arab stucco, Kh. Al Mafjar: Hamilton 1947 Fig. 12 Panel 1; Fig. 13 Panel 2.

Carved pieces with floral designs 360-361. Definition: Carved piece: vine design 39\S\39406; 39312 Description and interpretation: Rectangular tablets made from a flat bone, decorated with vine designs carved in high relief. The ends are broken and the margins unworked and only roughly smoothed. Two rivet perforations are present in the first piece and one in the second. One end broke along a perforation, which was a weak point. No. 360: The right end is diagonal for fitting to another piece, either along the same line or at 90 degrees, creating a corner. The lines bordering the decorated area are not 95

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 363. Definition: Carved piece: vine design 39\S\38650 Description and interpretation: Carved tablet or inlay broken on all sides. The decoration consists of curved grooved tendril twigs which encircle the grape clusters. The object is carved in an open work style, the open spaces made by drilling adjacent perforations and breaking the partitions between them. This is the only object of its type. L. 38mm, w. 29mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Egypt, A\Umayyad: Stern 1954 Figs. 7c, 8: 633. Egypt, Middle Ages?, hippopotamus ivory: Petrie 1927: 45, Pl. 39: 91. Notes: None.

Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. Various tablets and inlays 367. Definition: Circular inlay? 40\S\59612 Description and interpretation: Complete circular, lathe-made convex object, probably made from a flat bone. The bottom retains spongiosa and is quite rough. The top is carefully smoothed, with a lathe indentation in its center and fine lathe circles around it. A larger and off-center lathe indentation (i.e. from a previous stage of manufacture) is present on its bottom. This is bordered by a groove around the circumference. The object may be an inlay or a large stopper. This is the only object of its type. D. 37mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Ma’on, B 6th cent., from a synagogue, furniture decoration: Rahmani 1960b: 82, Pl. 16: 5b. Notes: None.

364. Definition: Carved piece: floral design 39\A\0061 Description and interpretation: Corner of a flat smoothed carved tablet with a floral design. How it was displayed is uncertain. The back is rather flat with wavy plane marks. Two sides make a corner which is not 90 degrees. A groove was incised parallel to one side as a frame. The other sides are broken. The incised design consists of leaves (?) with various inner lines, probably part of a larger scene. Two objects of this type were found. L. 64mm, w. 15mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Comparison to wood relief, Egypt, around 1000, leaves arabesque: Kühnel 1949: 24-25, Fig. 16, Pl. 16.

368. Definition: Square moulded tablet 40\S\8200 Description and interpretation: Square tablet made from a flat bone, today slightly bent. The bottom is very smooth with strations from abrasion running in one direction. The top is very carefully polished, resembling ivory. A lathe (or center-bit) indentation in the center is surrounded by two series of concentric mouldings and grooves. The tablet possibly decorated a wooden or leather object (book cover?) and would have been glued in a depression made for it although it also could have been the lid of a square box. Two objects of this type were found. Side l. 50mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 213, Taf. 20 No. 8933. Cyprus, Salamis, triangle tablet with similar decoration: Chavane 1975: 51, Pls. 16: 140, 62: 139 [should be 140]. Turkey, Antioch, B, with perforated corners: Russell 2000: 81, Fig. 1 center right. Turkey, Tarsus [H-R?], ivory lid: Goldman 1950: 397: 5. Notes: Porphir comparison, Egypt, end of 3rd or beginning of 4th cent., similar tablets decorating Diocletian’s (?) chair, “Coptic”: Beckwith 1963: 47, Pl. 5.

365. Definition: Carved piece: floral design 39\S\11595 Description and interpretation: Very thin carved tablet. The lower side is decorated with diagonal pointed depressions which possibly continued to another tablet. A large indented leaf with emphasized veins (acanthus?) is carved in the center. The low background is roughly smoothed. Half a rivet perforation is present on the right side. This is the only object of its type. L. 35mm, w. 38mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Mount Nebo, B-A, not identical: Saller 1941: 304 No. 5, Pl. 134: 1 upper right corner. Notes: None. 366. Definition: Carved piece: floral design 39\A\0046 Description and interpretation: Carved tablet with floral design made from a flat bone. It is unclear how it was displayed. The back is flat and roughly smoothed. The right side is sawn straight while the others are broken. The design – partly incised and partly carved in high relief – consists of round leaves and possibly also tendril twigs. This is the only object of its type. L. 43mm, w. 30mm, t. 3mm.

369. Definition: Carved piece: part of a circular tablet 40\A\0227 Description and interpretation: Carved tablet made from a flat bone, which was part of a large circle. The bottom is flat and smooth but with filing striations across its width. The top is smoothed. The outer and inner (broken) edges retain parts of circles. Two unparallel mouldings, also parts of circles, were carved near it. The central section is slightly convex. It seems that the object was a section of a 96

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE type. Reconstructed d. 68mm, l. 62mm, t. 4mm, the hole d. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

large circular tablet attached to some surface with something (a mirror or image?) in its center. This is the only object of its type. L. 60mm, w. 40mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, H?, 11 tablets shaped like the wall of a cup, furniture decoration?: Vermeule 1989: 282, Pl. 60 middle row. France, R, bed leg decoration?: Béal 1986: 113: K, Figs. 6: 11, 13; 7: 19. France, Lyon, R, part of lid or glued element?: Béal 1983a: 369, Pl. 60: 1320. Notes: None.

373. Definition: Semi-circular decorated tablet 40\S\16193 Description and interpretation: Semi-circular thin tablet, probably made from a flat bone. Today it is bent. The bottom is smooth. The top is incised in an unclear design, probably part of a composite scene, and it is not even sure how it would have been displayed. This is the only object of its type. D. 60mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: Nubia, Karanog, 1st-3rd cent., on a reconstructed wooden chest, from a grave, different decoration: Wooley and Randall-Maciver 1910: 69-70, Pl. 24. Notes: None.

370. Definition: Carved piece: architrave shape 40\S\24741-1 Description and interpretation: Complete carved tablet or inlay made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. One side is cut diagonally to form a corner with another piece. The bottom has many sawing marks on it. The top was carved as an architrave with three rounded parallel mouldings. The top and the long sides were carefully smoothed while the narrow sides, which fitted to neighboring tablets, remained rough with sawing marks. Two objects of this type were found. L. 45mm, w. 10mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Egypt: Marangou 1976: 64, Pl. 67c. France, Lyon, R, not identical: Sautot 1978: 58, Pl. 30: 1; R: Béal 1983a: 361, Pl. 19: 1308. Notes: None.

374. Definition: Carved piece? 40\S\17313 Description and interpretation: Carved tablet made from a large, thick flat bone. It has no parallels and it is even unclear how it would have been displayed. The bottom is flat, roughly smoothed with remains of the spongiosa. The three straight sides are sawn vertically while the curved facet is oblique towards the bottom. The lower, narrow end is broken. The thickness is unequal. Three carelessly made grooves run along the left side. Carved piece or inlay? This is the only object of its type. L. 70mm, w. 52mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

371. Definition: Carved piece: part of a circle 40\P\0288-2 Description and interpretation: Complete small, thin tablet, which was originally part of a circular form. The bottom is roughly smoothed with remains of the spongiosa and filing striations in all directions. The top and the long sides are so carefully smoothed they resemble ivory. The narrow sides are sawn straight but not smoothed as they were attached to neighboring tablets. One groove was incised along the outer long side and two along the inner one; the space between them is lower in the outer strip and higher and rounded in the inner one. This is the only object of this type. L. 33mm, w. 15mm, t. 2mm, reconstructed whole circle d. about 90mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

375. Definition: Inlay: wavy design 40\S\81099-1 Description and interpretation: Very thin and flat inlay carved in a continuous rounded meander design. The bottom is relatively rough while the top is carefully smoothed. Both ends are broken, partly along the weak lines of the carving. The uneven edges of the design, which are barely raised, are not really round. This piece was probably part of a band bordering a scene. This is the only object of its type. L. 55mm, w. 16mm, t. 0.4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B, with remains of green paint: Engelbach 1915: 44, Pl. 51: 6. Notes: The object was found together with inlay No. 350.

372. Definition: Half-circular tablet 40\S\18091 Description and interpretation: About a third of rather thick circular tablet made from a flat bone with remains of the spongiosa on the bottom. The top is carefully smoothed. A groove was incised around the perimeter. Half a rivet perforation is present on the right part of the straight side while a piece is slightly broken off the left part. The piece was probably part of a complete circle, which adorned some object. This is the only item of this

376. Definition: Inlay: pointed leaf? 40\A\0300 Description and interpretation: Flat, thin inlay made from a flat bone and shaped like a pointed leaf. The bottom is roughly smoothed and spongy. The top is also roughly smoothed and covered with patina. One end is pointed and the other rounded with a circle-and-dot 97

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS design (d. 7mm) at its center. It is possible that eight such leaves would have been used to create a complete flower design popular on furniture. Four objects of this type were found. L. 50mm, w. 20mm, t. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Nubia, Karanog, 3rd-4th cent., 6 flowers with similar ivory leaves on a wooden casket: Woolley and Randall-Maciver 1910: 70, Pl. 21; de Villard 1938: 7-8, Taf. 7. Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?, undecorated: Hogarth 1908: 196, Pl. 40: 9,10, 13, 15, 16. France, Alésia: Béal 1984: 91, Pl. 19: 364. Switzerland, R 1st-3rd cent., with two concentric circles: Deschler-Erb 2001 Fig. 7: 1219. Notes: None.

Description and interpretation: Complete rectangular perforated tablet made from a flat bone. The bottom is roughly smoothed with remains of spongiosa. The top is relatively smooth but has many irregular striations on it, which probably derive from its use. All sides are carefully sawn. There are 14 large (d. 5.5mm) perforations drilled in a repeating order of 2-1-2. Altogether 18 small (d. 3mm) perforations were drilled between them in a basic order of 2-1-1-1-2, although only the central row clearly reflects it. The width of the margins is equal except in the upper right corner. The object may be a stanz for the manufacture of circular pieces in various raw materials. The precise nature of the manufacturing work, however, suggests another use like a lid of a box containing fragrant materials, perforated so their perfume could spread in the air (Henig, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 92mm, w. 30mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Syria, Apamea, with inscribed lines: Gautier 1984: 334, Fig. 4: 5. Hungary, Intercisa, larger, game?: Bíró, pers. comm. England, London, Medieval Ages 11th-12th cent.?, part of a composite comb: MacGregor 1985: 94, Fig. 51: 1. Notes: Metal analogy: A rectangular Byzantine lead lid with 8 round perforations of different sizes as well as two triangular ones was found at another spot at Caesarea (unpublished).

377. Definition: Carved piece: circle-and-dot designs 40\S\9910 Description and interpretation: Rectangular flat tablet, bottom and top carefully smoothed. One long side is obliquely sawn for attachment. One short side is broken. Several circle-and-dot designs were incised on the top, creating an ‘X’ shape. The symmetry enables to reconstruct the tablet end near the last circle. If this is an inlay it is unclear why the bottom was smoothed. There could be two perforations in the missing end and than the object was a pendant or part of a castanet (see Nos. 251, 272). This possibility does not explain the oblique end. Two objects of this type were found. L. 31mm, w. 22mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Egypt, decorating a cosmetic container: Ägypten Schätze: 186-187, No. 178b. Tunisia, Carthage, from a grave, square, fitting?: Henig 1984: 86, 188, Fig. 61: 13. Yugoslavia, 4th-5thI cent., general resemblance: Petković 1995: 87-88, Taf. 25: 1, 4, 26: 3. Holland, Valkenburg, R, from a grave, mounting or gaming piece?: Verhagen 1993: 398, Fig. 30: 142. Notes: None.

380. Definition: Carved piece 41\S\91223 Description and interpretation: Part of a thin carved tablet made from a large flat bone. Its use and even the correct way it should be exhibited are unclear. The bottom is flat and a straight line was incised on it near and along the right side, possibly as some sign or guide line. The lower and right sides and the right part of the upper side are sawn straight. The left side is rounded based on the incised line. The central part of the upper side is broken. The design may represent a human figure with a thin right arm separated from the body by a groove (on the left), garment folds in the center and a head (broken off) on top. The tablet was probably part of a larger scene. Today, it appears worn. This is the only object of its type. L. 85mm, w. 25mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

378. Definition: Elongated decorated inlay? 40\A\0009-4 Description and interpretation: Long, narrow, thin and flat tablet which is bent today. The bottom bears many fine, parallel diagonal sawing striations. Both ends are pointed and slightly truncated. The top is decorated with circle-and-dot designs arranged as follows: 3 in a line, 4 in the shape of a cross, 2 in a line, 4 and 3 as above. The extreme left design is cut through. It seems that this end was originally square or longer and only after the decoration was incised was the pointed shape cut. This is the only object of its type. L. 100mm, w. 8.5mm, t. 1mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

381-382. Definition: Perforated tablet with bird design 41\A\1220, 1226 Description and interpretation: Two semi-circular, flat and very thin tablets made from a flat bone, found together and almost identical. The bottoms retain some spongiosa. The tops are not carefully smoothed. The pieces are roughly cut and today are bent. A simple, stylistically provincial bird was incised on each. The bird figure has a pointed beak, an eye, straight lines marking the feathers and bent legs. A wing (?) is incised above the

379. Definition: Perforated tablet 41\A\0709

98

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE back of No. 381. The birds do not stand on a leveled surface and are off-center. About ten small perforations were later irregularly drilled around them, cutting the figures, for sewing onto a garment or a leather object. The bird, symbolizing the soul (especially the dove) was very popular in Classical and Islamic art (see spindles\buttons Nos. 74, 531). Birds often appear on Early Arab pottery lamps (i.e. Gawlikowski 1995: 669, Fig. 1). These are the only objects of this type. No. 381: the lower left corner is broken. L. 56mm, w. 32mm, t. 1mm. No. 382: the lower right corner is missing. L. 55mm, w. 33mm, t. 1mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine-Early Arab, 7th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

width, separated by a wide moulding, were carelessly incised along its center. Filing striations may be seen along them while fine diagonal striations remained on the flat margins. The tablet was probably attached to others on its diagonal ends, forming a square frame. Two objects of this type were found. L. 130mm, w. 27mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Egypt, Alexandria, 4th-5th cent.?, imitation of architectural decoration: Jablonowska-Taracha 2001: 57-58, Fig. 10. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, decorated: Strzygowski 1904 Taf. 12 No. 7061. France, Lyon, R, one groove: Béal 1983a: 361, Pl. 19: 1307. Box, 11th cent.?, on the lid: Cutler 1985: 37, Fig. 34. Notes: None.

383. Definition: Trapezoidal tablet 41\A\1434 Description and interpretation: A trapezoidal inlay or a coating tablet (for a knife handle?) probably made from a flat bone. Two corners are broken. The bottom is flat and rather smooth, with a thicker section left on the wide end, probably to enhance its installation. The sides are straight but rounded in cross-section so it is possible that the tablet was not attached to others. The top is smooth and convex towards a ridge, which runs down the axis. A rivet perforation is present on that axis near each edge, with the metal rivet still stuck in the right one. This is the only object of its type. L. 117mm, w. 23mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Jordan, Hesban, B (before mid-6th cent.): Lawlor 2000: 297, Fig. 7, 3rd from right. England, Straubing, R, knife handle facet: MacGregor 1985, Fig. 88: d. England, York, Middle Ages, knife handle: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1972, Fig. 928: 7061. Notes: None. 384. Definition: Triangular inlay 41\P\0255 Description and interpretation: Triangular end of a flat and thin broken tablet. Parallel grooves were incised on both top and bottom, emphasizing the mouldings left between them. The artisan possibly intended to create a convenient surface for glueing on the bottom (Poplin, pers. comm.) and a decoration on top. Four objects of this type were found. Side l. 25mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 4th-5th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

386. Definition: Decorated perforated tablet 41\M\55261 Description and interpretation: Rectangular decorated perforated tablet with one straight end and one pointed end (now broken). Today it is bent. Ten two-circles-and-dot designs (d. 7mm) were irregularly incised along its axis. The center-bit point produced a perforation (d. 2mm) in each design. The object may be a decoration, inlay, part of a composite comb or part of a game with gaming pieces inserted in the holes (see analogies). This is the only object of its type. L. 88mm, w. 13mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Egypt, B, ivory decorative tablets on a wooden game, with gaming pieces inserted in the holes: Rutschowscaya and Bénazeth 2000: 219, No. 273. Egypt, similar games, “Coptic”: Rutschowscaya 1986: 92, Nos. 310-311. Syria, Apamea, with incised lines: Gautier 1984: 334, Fig. 4: 5. Syria, Hama, Stratum A3, end of 12th-13thI cent., large undecorated holes, furniture mount: Oldenburg 1969: 112, Fig. 43: 7. Greece, Corinth, B, one with 12 circle-and-dot designs and several rivet perforations, one with 6 designs and 2 holes: Davidson 1952: 136, Pl. 69: 953-954. Yugoslavia, end of 4th-6th cent., from composite comb?: Petković 1995: 85, Taf. 4: 1-3, 5: 1, 9: 4, 22: 2-5, 8. Europe, different periods, from composite combs: MacGregor 1985: 86-87, Figs. 49, 51; Holland, Maastricht, 6th-7th cent., of antler: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 29, Fig. 20: 11-12. England, York, 11th-13th cent., antler inlay (with similar bone objects): MacGregor 1995: 419, Fig. 158: 11.12. Notes: The object is exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam.

385. Definition: Grooved trapezoidal inlay 41\A\0180-1 Description and interpretation: Complete trapezoidal inlay made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The bottom is flat and rough with diagonal sawing marks and a groove over its width, made by a plane or a drawing knife. A triangular scar on the short side resulted from unfinished sawing in both directions. The sides are not straight. The top is smooth. Two grooves of different

387. Definition: Carved inlay 41\M\98-7135 Description and interpretation: Inlay or decoration of unknown use. Even the correct orientation is uncertain. The bottom is flat, the top is slightly convex and smooth. Two straight sides form a right angle. The other two are round and thick on the right with a small partly broken perforation in the center and a triangular arm on the left. There may have been a continuation on the right side. 99

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS This is the only object of its type. L. 25mm, w. 14mm, t. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object is exhibited in the Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam.

designed so their perfume could dissipate (Henig, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 44mm, w. 25mm, t. 3mm. If it was symmetrical on both sides of the central cavity then its total dimensions would have been l. 100mm, w. 35mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Antinoé, B-A 6th-8th cent., ivory inlay on a wooden box with 2 cross-shaped perforations: Rutschowscaya 1986: 80-81, No. 273. Southern Yemen, Shabwa, post-4th cent., ivory, square perforations: Béal 1991b: 200, Fig. 5: 68. Germany, Schlezwig, and Denemark, Ribe, early Middle Ages, from a composite comb?: MacGregor 1985: 94, Fig. 51: m. Germany, 10th cent., ivory, religious scene with hollow crosses: Dalton 1909: 52-53, Pl. 29: 55, cf. also Williamson 1982: 12, Fig. 5. Germany, Lahn-Dill-Kreis, 8th cent., bone lid of a reliquary with crosses and other decorations in an open work technique: Roth and Wamerr 1984: 326, No. 218.

388. Definition: Inlay? 41\A\0182-1 Description and interpretation: Long and narrow rectangular piece with one broken end. The bottom is rather smooth with filing striations. The complete narrow end was sawn about half way and the rest broken-off. The top is carefully smoothed although many shallow striations may be seen on it (possibly resulting from the use of the object to which it was attached). A rivet perforation exists near the complete end and half a hole in the other, where the tablet broke as this was a weak point. It is probably a simple inlay or a side-plate from a composite comb. Three objects of this type were found. L. 94mm, w. 9mm, t. 1.5mm. If the perforations were placed symmetrically, the original length was 101mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 10th-11th cent. Morphological analogies: Nubia, Karanog, 1st-3rd cent., from a grave, ivory, part of a scene frame on a wooden chest: Woolley and Randall-Maciver 1910: 69-70, Pl. 24. Notes: The object was found together with a similar piece, a great deal of ajouré and drilling production waste as well as a bridge from a string instrument.

Geometric inlays 390-391. Definition: Rectangular inlay 42\S\84222; A\0105-3 Photos 1: 13; 2: 13; 3: 9 Description and interpretation: Flat, thin rectangular inlays. No. 390: One corner and the opposing end are missing. The bottom is rough with parallel sawing striations, probably to facilitate gluing. The top is very smooth. Two objects of this type were found. L. 53mm, w. 20mm, t. 1mm. No. 391: Complete rectangular tablet. One short side was sawn half way through and then broken off, leaving a projecting strip. Four objects of this type were found. L. 18mm, w. 13mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 390: Late Roman-Byzantine. No. 391: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: No. 391 was found with 150 pieces of inlay, ajouré production waste, etc. (see Nos. 394, 395, 399, 408).

389. Definition: Decorated tablet with cross-shaped perforations 41\A\0216 Description and interpretation: Corner of a decorated tablet of varying thickness, made from a flat bone. The bottom is totally rough with spongiosa although a band (w. 5mm) along the lower side was roughly filed and has many diagonal parallel striations on it, possibly to enable it to be inserted in a narrow slot. The lower side is smoothed but the right side is not. The top is smoothed. The oval circle-and-dot designs are strange since no ancient tool could have incised such shapes. Originally they were no doubt circular but such a shrinking of the tablet in one direction is very unusual. On the left broken side, part of a large, round hole (reconstructed d. 20mm) encircled by a groove can be observed. As components of the decoration cross or cut each other it is possible to reconstruct stages in its manufacture: first three parallel grooves were incised along the lower side; then similar grooves were cut along the right side; then the circle-anddot designs were incised; at this stage, the cross-shaped perforations, the central round cavity and the rivet hole (top right) were sawn. The perforations were carelessly and asymmetrically sawn, probably from previously prepared drilled holes (as in the ajouré inlays), and their dimensions and shapes differ. One of them lacks one arm and two other arms are small, as there was not enough room for them. The rivet hole shows that the item was attached to an object – an inlay, part of a vertical partition or a lid for a box containing special fragrant materials

392-393. Definition: Parallelogram inlay 42\A\0129; 0023 Description and interpretation: Complete parallelogram inlays usually used in frames for composite scenes. No. 392: A thick piece, more or less convex in cross-section (compare to Photo 3: 10). The bottom is flat, the top is usually rather rough with occasional planing and filing marks. They were often found with production waste of ajouré and frame inlays. Nine objects of this type were found. L. 22mm, w. 10mm, t. 6mm. No. 393: A thinner piece, close in form to a rhombus. The bottom is flat with diagonal sawing striations. The top is smoothed and convex. Three objects of this type were found. L. 31mm, w. 17mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 392: Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Nahal David Caves, R 2nd cent.: inlays on a wooden coffin, alternating with similar wooden inlays: Avigad 1962: 182, Pl. 22A. Nessana, B100

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE A, for a book cover?: Colt 1962: 52, Pl. 21: 17. Ashkelon: Wapnish-Hesse, pers. comm. Nubia, Karanog, 3rd-4th cent., ivory, on inlayed chest: de Villard 1938: 7-8, Taf. 6. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 566, 575, Fig. 15: 35-37. Greece, Corinth, not later than 3rd cent., ivory: Davidson 1952: 136, Pl. 69: 959. Notes: None.

Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 398. Definition: Octagonal inlay 42\P\0178 Description and interpretation: Complete octagonal inlay made from a flat bone. The bottom retains traces of the spongiosa. The sides were roughly sawn and their length is not identical. The top is roughly smoothed with many filing striations. Unfinished? This is the only object of its type. L. 17mm, w. 17mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 5th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

394. Definition: Trapezoidal inlay 42\A\0105-5 Photo 3: 5 Description and interpretation: Complete, very thin trapezoidal inlay. The bottom and top are smoothed. Seven inlays of this type were found. L. 11mm, h. 18mm, t. 0.8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object was found with 150 pieces of inlay, ajouré production waste, etc. (see Nos. 391, 399, 408).

399. Definition: Inlay of undefined shape 42\A\0105-10 Photo 3: 8 Description and interpretation: Flat inlay. Its shape is reminiscent of a bird with its wings spread. It’s orientation is unclear. The bottom is smoothed but retains slight traces of the spongiosa. The upper part is shaped like an asymmetrical rhombus. The two asymmetrical wing-like arms are separated by a triangular “tail”. A perforation was drilled in the center. Two objects of this type were found. L. 36mm, h. 18mm, t. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object was found with 150 pieces of inlay, ajouré production waste, etc. (see Nos. 391, 394, 395, 408).

395. Definition: Triangular inlay 42\A\0105-4 Photo 3: 3 Description and interpretation: Complete triangular inlay with spongiosa on the bottom and a smoothed top. One side facet was sawn half way through and then broken off leaving a rough projection. Unfinished? Five objects of this type were found. L. 30mm, h. 15mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Petra, B 6th cent., red painted: Bikai 2001: 411, 422-423, Nos. 95-99, 105-107. Nubia, Karanog, 3rd-4th cent., in a grave, on ivory inlayed chest: Woolley and Randall-Maciver 1910: 69-70, Pl. 24; de Villard 1938: 7-8, Taf. 6. Nubia, Ballana, 5th cent., on ivory inlayed chest: Ibid.: 8, Taf. 9-10; 6th-7th cent., same chest: Tardy 1977: 43. Italy, Palermo, Middle Ages, on ivory inlayed chest: de Villard 1938 Taf. 2. Notes: The object was found with 150 pieces of inlay, ajouré production waste, etc. (see Nos. 391, 394, 399, 408).

400-402. Definition: Frame inlay 42\A\773; S\39639-4; 400215 Photo 3: 7, 11 Description and interpretation: Long narrow inlays which were used to create frames around composite scenes. Their ends are usually diagonal for attachment to another piece. About 390 pieces (plus many small fragments) such as Nos. 400-401 were found. No. 400: A relatively large but thin inlay with a rectangular crosssection. One end is diagonal and the other broken. L. 145mm, w. 6mm, t. 1mm. No. 401: Complete inlay. Both ends are diagonal, perhaps to form a rectangular frame. L. 90mm, w. 3.5mm, t. 2.5mm. No. 402: Part of a carefully smoothed inlay with both ends broken. One of its long sides is rounded in cross-section, an unusual phenomenon which means that it projected from the decorated object. This is the only object of its type. L. 63mm, w. 5mm, t. 2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 400: Late Byzantine-Early Arab, 7th cent. No. 401: Byzantine-Early Arab. No. 402: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon: Wapnish-Hesse, pers. comm.. Egypt, Alexandria, 7th cent., from workshop waste: Rodzciewicz E. 1998: 153, Fig. 23 2nd from bottom. Egypt, 3rd-4th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904 Taf. 11 No. 7060, 12 No.

396. Definition: Carved triangular inlay? 42\A\0652 Description and interpretation: Complete triangular inlay (?) with a flat bottom and a slightly convex top. A large (d. 6mm) perforation was drilled near the long side but off-center. Three small non-identical notches were cut on the side near it. The purpose of this design is unclear. It was probably part of a larger composite scene. This is the only object of its type. L. 46mm, h. 23mm, t. 4.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 397. Definition: Elliptical inlay 42\A\0704 Description and interpretation: Complete, thin, elliptical inlay. The bottom is smoothed but has many diagonal sawing striations on it. The top is smoothed. The sides were roughly sawn. This is the only object of its type. L. 18mm, w. 10mm, t. 1.5mm. 101

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 7064. Egypt, Saqqara, 9th cent., on ivory inlayed chest: de Villard 1938: 7-8, Taf. 6. Nubia, Karanog, 3rd-4th cent., on ivory inlayed chest: Woolley and Randall-Maciver 1910: 70, Pl. 21; de Villard 1938: 7-8, Taf. 6. Origin and date unknown, on ivory inlayed chest: de Villard 1938 Taf. 27. M, 14th-15th cent., on ivory inlayed wooden panels: Atil 1981: 201-209, Pls. 99, 104. Notes: None.

is covered with patina. Two objects of this type were found. L. 38mm, w. 37mm, t. 2mm. No. 409: Rectangular tablet found with four other ajouré pieces. Its thickness varies, the angles are not at 90 degrees and the lower side was sawn only half way through and then broken off without smoothing. The designs represent two leaves or drops and a hole (meant to be enlarged?). Unfinished? Two tablets of this type were found. L. 28mm, w. 21mm, t. 2.5mm. No. 410: Complete triangular piece of varying thickness. One side was sawn half way through and then broken off. Two long grooves were left along the sides. The designs are leaf-shaped. This is the only object of its type. L. 53mm, w. 48mm, t. 3.5mm. No. 411: A very thin tablet shaped like a triangle with a long arched side (for a corner?). The designs are in the form of flying birds and a drop-shape. This is the only object of its type. L. 22, w. 21mm, t. 0.5mm. No. 412: Triangular tablet with a concave long side. A small rivet perforation was drilled in one corner. The designs take various forms. In some cases, the partitions between them broke. Unfinished? Two objects of this type were found. L. 56mm, w. 53mm, t. 3mm. No. 413: Large tablet with broken ends. One long side is straight and the other wavy. The designs take the form of a bird, a flying bird, a triangle, a butterfly, etc. The right end broke across a rivet perforation. Today, the tablet is bent. Unfinished? Six objects of this type were found. L. 128mm, w. 37mm, t. 2mm. No. 414: Complete tablet with part of its long side rounded and the other polygonal, no doubt part of a larger scene. The designs take the form of a bird, a leaf or drop-shape and a butterfly. Two half rivet perforations may have been preserved on its straight side. The object was found with No. 415 and other objects. Two objects of this type were found. L. 55mm, w. 20mm, t. 2.5mm. No. 415: Part of a tablet found together with No. 414 and other objects. A concave recess is present on the long side and possibly several such pieces combined to form a circular shape. The left side is broken. The designs take the form of leaf or drop-shapes, a flying bird and a butterfly. Seven objects of this type were found, including one from ivory. L. 68mm, w. 15mm, t. 2mm. No. 416: Tablet with broken ends shaped like an arch with one end turning outwards. The designs include bird and flying bird or triangle shapes. It may have been part of a circular frame. Seven objects of this type were found. L. 55mm, w. 15mm, t. 1.5mm. No. 417: Tablet found with other pieces of inlay and their production waste. One long side is straight and the other has a large round recess in it. The designs include a butterfly, a flying bird and a leaf or drop-shape. The left edge is broken. This is the only object of its type. L. 63mm, w. 23mm, t. 1mm. No. 418: Corner of a tablet found with other pieces of inlay. The designs include a hole, a triangle and a flying bird. A metal rivet remained in situ near the corner – the only one among the ajouré inlays. There were 102 objects of this type. L. 39mm, w. 16mm, t. 1.5mm. No. 419: Circular broken tablet. The large designs include a triangle or flying bird, a “Y-shaped axe”, etc. Three objects of this type were found. D. (without the projections) 35mm, t. 2mm. No. 420: Broken piece. The designs are rhomboid, possibly birds, a “Y-shaped axe”, etc. Altogether 48

403-420. Definition: Ajouré inlays 43\A\5019; 5024; 0048; P\0048; A\0003; 0105-11; 1594-1; S\32042; A\0754; (?); 44\A\0040; S\39102-1-2; A\0159; 0010-1; 0024-1; S\34534; P\0126. Photos 1: 21; 3: 2 Description and interpretation: Eighteen pieces of ajouré (open work) inlay representing the many variable objects of this type (243, plus many small fragments) at Caesarea (see also Nos. 512-514). They were made from flat bones such as large ribs (Wapnish 1997). The bottom is usually roughly smoothed with filing striations while the top is more carefully smoothed, especially at the margins. The most common types of perforation designs are (the nomenclature is mine - E.A.): the round hole (No. 405); the butterfly (No. 403, right); the flying bird (No. 406); the bird with a distorted tail (No. 416); the snail (No. 405); the triangle (No. 407); the leaf or drop-shape (No. 410). The common shapes for pieces of inlay are: long, narrow band (for frames?), triangular (for corners?), and wavy or arched pieces. Some have designs which may imitate Cuffic letters (Nos. 403-404; Poplin, pers. comm.). Some inlays have rivet perforations in which the metal pin (No. 418) or the rust it left have sometimes survived. It was also possible to use bone and wooden rivets. No. 403: Almost complete, rather bent tablet decorated with a frame of butterfly designs and two sets of other shapes, all carelessly done (unfinished?). Based on unpublished parallels from Alexandria (Poplin, pers. comm.) he suggested that the inner designs imitate Cuffic letters, known for instance from Early Arab pottery lamps (PinderWilson 1960: 201). Holding the piece upside-down, the Arabic letter H can be read (J. Allan, pers. comm.). The central design could also be a palmette (compare to an ivory pyxis of the 10th cent. from southern Italy or Spain: St. Clair and McLachlan 1989: 51-52, No. 16). L. 92mm, w. 57mm, t. 1mm. No. 404: Similar broken thick piece. The lower perforations are larger and rougher than usual (beginner’s work?). Eight tablets like Nos. 403-404 were found. L. 78mm, w. 43mm, t. 2.2mm. No. 405: Elongated band of unequal thickness. One end is diagonally sawn, with half a rivet perforation. The designs include pairs of butterflies separated by round holes. Altogether 48 tablets like Nos. 405-407 were found. L. 59mm, w. 19mm, t. 2mm. No. 406: Part of a band. One end is diagonal (today it is bent), the other broken. The designs are like flying birds. L. 37mm, w. 16mm, t. 2mm. No. 407: Elongated band broken at both ends. The designs are triangular or shaped like schematic birds. It is rather carefully worked although today it is bent. L. 84mm, w. 12mm, t. 1mm. No. 408: Trapezoidal tablet with oblique edges planned to fit within a recess or the neighboring tablets. The designs, in various shapes, are grouped to form a triangle. The object 102

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE objects of this type were found. L. 24mm, w. 18mm, t. 1mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 406: Late Byzantine-Early Arab, 6th-10th cent. No. 407: Early Arab. No. 408: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. No. 410: Early Arab. No. 411: Crusader, 11th-12th cent. Nos. 413-415: Early Arab. No. 416: Early Arab, 9th10th cent. No. 419: Early Arab. No. 420: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, A-C: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 76; Wapnish 1991: 59; Wapnish-Hesse 1999: 3, Fig. 3. Apollonia, C: I. Roll, pers. comm. Egypt, Lake Manzalleh, 12 pieces: Petrie 1927: 45, Pl. 39: 119. Notes: No. 408 was found with 150 pieces of inlay, ajouré production waste, etc. (i.e. Nos. 391, 394, 395, 399). No. 412 was not checked by eye-sight. Bronze ajouré parallels, Syria, Hama, one of the 7th-12th cent. or earlier: Ploug and Oldenburg 1969: 20, Figs. 5: 1-2, 6: 3.

Species\skeletal element: Probably cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Early Arab, 9th-11th cent. Morphological analogies: France, Lyon, R, many found in the theater: Sautot 1978: 60, Pl. 27: 4. Notes: None. 423. Definition: Carved mount: Corinthian base or capital 45\P\0132 Description and interpretation: Object made from a long bone diaphysis, carved as a Corinthian base or capital (cf. Robertson 1929: 139-146). Only half its diameter is preserved. The medullar cavity is smoothed although chisel marks remained on its lower part which was carefully smoothed as if this is a flange of the type used for a base. The bottom is flat. The top is carefully smoothed. The body is decorated with acanthus leaves which project and bend in the upper part. Three (out of four) vertical grooves (undrawn) divide the decoration into panels making it clear that the object originally had a circular shape. The lower flange and the smoothed cavity could point to a box, but it has no lid flange and the cavity is rather small. It is probably a furniture mount, which was held more firmly in place by the flange. This is the only object of its type. D. 32mm, h. 36mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: General: Makowiecka 1969. Egypt, Alexandria, B-A, 5th-9th cent.: Rodziewicz 1998: 146, 153, Figs. 15c, 31-32. Egypt, 3rd-beginning of 4th cent.: Marangou 1976: 64-65, Pl. 70d. Baltimore Expedition, 5th cent., ivory box: Early Christian and Byzantine Art: 40, Pl. 15 No. 104. Notes: Similar stone bases: Jordan, Jerash; Egypt, Alexandria; Lybia, Leptis Magna, R: Rodziewicz 1969a: 121-125, Figs. 5, 6, 10. Similar base and capital on a Coptic cloth, end of 5th cent.: Ibid.: Fig. 13.

Furniture mounts 421. Definition: Carved furniture mount? 45\P\0179 Description and interpretation: Carefully smoothed cylinder with a square base, lathe-turned from a long bone diaphysis. Only about one third of its perimeter remained. It is unclear whether it was used as a whole cylinder or only its half, to be attached to a flat surface. The medullar cavity is smoothed and chisel marks are visible near the bottom, which is flat and smooth. The base is composed of three mouldings separated by deep grooves made with a saw (w. 0.75mm). The body is composed of alternating convex parts and various mouldings. The upper part flares and the top is missing. The object is slightly worn. It may have been a furniture mount or large gaming piece (see Nos. 304-305). It would have been uncomfortable to use as a handle. Four objects of this type were found. L. 105mm, the base w. 34mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle or horse metatarsus. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Oboda, R, without a base, furniture joint: Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997: 208, Pl. 4: 31. Israel?, gaming piece: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 64. Hungary, furniture mount: Bíró, pers. comm. France, R, bed leg decoration?: Béal 1986: 113: H, Fig. 8: 25; 1991a: 291, Fig. 2: 19. Notes: None.

424. Definition: Moulded cylinder 45\S\12314-2 Description and interpretation: Object turned on a lathe and made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity is smoothed but not circular, retaining its natural shape. The top and bottom are sawn straight. The wall is carefully smoothed and decorated with various mouldings. The irregular cavity and lack of base and lid flanges show that it is not a box, and it is too short for a handle. It may have been a furniture decoration (such as a complete cylinder or half a one) or a “horse bead” (see Nos. 261-262). Altogether 16 objects of this type were found. L. 37mm, reconstructed d. 27mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER, handle: Geva 2003: 346, Pl. 13.1: B13. Egypt or Syria, 14th cent., ivory decoration on a (reconstructed) pedestal: Jenkins 1983: 89. Lebanon, Byblos, H-R, ivory: Dunand 1954: 136, Fig. 127. France, R, bed leg decoration?: Béal 1986: 113: H, Fig. 8: 25, 1991a: 289, Fig. 1: 15, 291, Fig. 2: 19. France, Lyon, R: Sautot 1978: 58, Pl. 30: 1; R, 1st-beginning of 3rd cent., furniture mount or box: Béal 1983a: 91, Pl. 17: 100, 102-103. France. Nîmes, R, unknown use: Béal

422. Definition: Semi-cylindrical grooved furniture mount 45\A\0019 Description and interpretation: Semi-cylindrical mount made from a long bone diaphysis. It was first lathe-turned as a complete cylinder and then carefully sawn into two halves so they could be attached to a flat surface. The medullar cavity is carefully smoothed. One end is complete and the other broken. Half a rivet perforation is still present on the right side, about 15mm from each end. In the center of each side there is a carelessly sawn semicircular recess (d. 13mm) whose purpose is unclear. The object is decorated with a series of various grooves. It may have been a furniture mount or part of a handle. This is the only object of its type. L. 102mm, d. 22mm. 103

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 1984: 21, Pl. 3: 48, 50. England, Colchester, R, furniture mount: Crummy 1983: 158, Fig. 191: 4374, 4376. Notes: None.

its type. L. 45mm, d. 11mm. No. 428: The central convex part is decorated with two grooves running around the circumference. Both unworked tenons have lathe indentations on them showing that the object was made separately. This is the only object of its type. L. 37mm, d. 13mm. No. 429: The shorter tenon has a diagonal end with a lathe indentation while the other has two lathe grooves on it. The cross-section through the center of the object is globular. The moulding near the short tenon was cut off in the past, leaving five facets around it. This is the only object of its type. L. 28mm, d. 13mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 429: Early Arab, 8th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, A, furniture and casket decorations: Wapnish 1991: 59; Wapnish-Hesse 1999 Fig. 2 (three on the left). Jordan, Mount Nebo, B-A, for small furniture pieces: Saller 1941: 304: 12, Pl. 134: 1, bottom, 6th. Egypt or Syria, 14th cent., ivory latticework: Jenkins 1983: 89. Egypt, Lake Manzalleh, Arabic, 130, for meshrebiyya work: Petrie 1927: 45, Pl. 39: 120. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, 2, baluster: Strzygowski 1904: 215, Taf. 20 Nos. 8948-8949. Lebanon, Byblos, H, balustre: Dunand 1954: 151, Fig. 125 No. 7849. Syria, Hama, Strata A1-2, 13thII-14th cent. or A4, 7th-12thI cent., furniture meshrebiyya: Oldenburg 1969: 110, Fig. 42: 1-3; Strata A1-2, 13thII-14th cent., no tenon, pin head?: Ibid.: 116, Fig. 44: 7. Turkey, Antioch, B: Russell 2000: 81, Fig. 2 (left). Hungary, R, hinge ends: Bíró 1994 Fig. 32 center. Yugoslavia, 2nd-4th cent.: Petković 1995: 93, Taf. 32: 1. France, Alésia, R, balustre: Sautot 1978: 28, Pl. 6: 5. Spain, Barcelona, R 1st-4th cent., part of a distaff: Beltrán de Heredia Bercero 2001: 142, Fig. 7 center, 192 No. 220. Notes: No. 429 was found with Nos. 430-431 and ajouré production waste. Wooden parallels: Nessana, B-A, baluster: Colt 1962: 58, Pl. 24: 14. Egypt, R or “Coptic”, for meshrebiyya: Rutschowscaya 1986: 95-97, Nos. 318335. Sicily and southern Italy, 11th-12th cent., Islamic work, ivory inlayed chest with similar wooden rods, a broken corner shows how the tenon holds the rod in place: Tardy 1977, inside cover photograph; Kühnel [1971] Taf. 85: 8486: 84. Egypt, 6th-7th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic” furniture with wooden lattice-work: Strzygowski 1904: 134, No. 8796; “Coptic” wooden rods: Ibid.: Taf. 9 No. 7230-7237. Hebron, end of 11th cent., wooden meshrebiyya balustrade in the mosque: Jaussen 1923: 597, Pls. 10: 1, 11; Abu Khalaf 1995: 290-291, 297, Fig. 6. Egypt, Karara, LR-B 3rd-7th cent., distaff decoration?: Ägypten Schätze: 189-190, No. 182b.

425. Definition: Carved furniture mount or hinge 45\S\38401 Description and interpretation: Almost complete object, carefully lathe-turned from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity is unworked. The ends are straight, smooth and worn out from use. The wall is decorated with mouldings separated by convex or flaring sections. The upper and lower sections are symmetrical. Red paint remained in the grooves. The object has no flanges typical of a box and is inconvenient as a handle. Several such objects (furniture mounts or hinges) could be installed one on top of the other, which would explain the worn out ends. Three objects of this type were found. L. 68mm, d. 33mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Lebanon, Beyrut, B, at least 12, gaming pieces: Turquety-Pariset 1982. Notes: None. 426. Definition: Carved rod with flat tenons 46\A\0036 Description and interpretation: Small carved cylindrical rod equipped with flat thin tenons on both ends. It was made from a long bone diaphysis. Traces of the medullar cavity remain as a depression. Wapnish (1991: 59) has suggested that the tenons were lathe rough-out ends which were removed before use. The Caesarea rods demonstrate, however, that the tenons were used to fix the rod in place as part of meshrebiyya type lattice-work (see above). One tenon has a lathe indentation on it and its absence in the other means that several rods were carved on a long blank (cf.: Kloner and Zissu 2003 Fig. 41: 2) and then separated. The tenons were sawn by hand, sometimes leaving a groove at their bottom (Wapnish 1991: 59, lower left). The rod itself was skillfully lathe-carved into mouldings, depressions, grooves and convex sections. This is the only object of its type. L. 51mm, d. 11mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, A, furniture and casket decorations without the tenons: Wapnish 1991: 59. Notes: Wooden comparison: see below. 427-429. Definition: Carved rod with cylindrical tenons 46\A\1115; S\33007; A\1051-1 Description and interpretation: Carved rods similar in shape, dimensions and use to No. 426 except that their cylindrical tenons were also lathed-turned. One tenon is usually shorter and thicker than the other. All have a pear- (Nos. 427-428) or ball-shaped (No. 429) central part bordered by mouldings and grooves. No. 427: The short tenon is smoother than the long one with a large lathe indentation. The narrow mouldings are smoother than the central convex section. This is the only object of

430-431. Definition: Carved rod cut into half 46\A\10512-3 Description and interpretation: Objects similar to the previous ones but cut lengthwise into two halves, the flat bottoms suitable for attachment or gluing (see Nos. 432438). Many diagonal sawing striations remained on them. These are the only objects of this type. No. 430: The upper part is broken while the lower was separated from its continuation by cutting it half way on a lathe, then breaking off the rest leaving a scar. The central thicker 104

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE section is rather cylindrical and decorated with grooves running around the circumference. L. 32mm, d. 12mm. No. 431: Half a lathe indentation remained on the oblique upper end which has sawing striations on it. The almost complete depression shows that first the rod was cut into two. Then the rods were tied together tightly and turned on the lathe, otherwise the saw (which has a certain width) would have eliminated the indentation (Dray, pers. comm.). The other end was halfway cut on the lathe and the rest broken off leaving a scarred depression. Some of the decorative mouldings were later sawn away leaving fine vertical striations. The ends are worn and eroded. L. 27mm, d. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-10th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: These objects were found with a complete rod (No. 426) and ajouré inlay production waste.

Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 432: Early Arab-Crusader, 8th-12th cent. Nos. 433-434: Late Byzantine. No. 435: Late Roman, 3rd4th cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David Stratum 5, R?, ivory, inlay: Ariel 1990: 127, Fig. 12: BI 57. Ashkelon, A: Wapnish 1991: 59; Wapnish-Hesse 1999 Fig. 2 (right). Tiberias, A 8th cent., probably of bone: Oren 1971: 272 top right. Syria, Tell Nebi Mend, H-R: Pézard 1922: 101, Pl. 18 Fig. 1s. Egypt, Shurafa, LR-B, bordering a figure on a reconstructed wooden casket: Engelbach 1915: 42, Pl. 49: 3. Egypt, in the Cairo Museum, 3, “Coptic”: Strzygowski 1904: 215, Taf. 20 No. 8947. Nubia, Karanog, 1st-3rd cent., on a reconstructed wooden casket: Woolley and RandallMaciver 1910: 69-70, Pl. 24. Southern Yemen, Shabwa, post-4th cent., ivory: Béal 1991b: 193-194, Fig. 2: 16. Turkey, Tarsus, Late H: Goldman 1950: 400, Fig. 273: 99. Tunisia, Carthage, end of 5th-beginning of 6th cent., pilaster, box fitting: Henig 1984: 186, Fig. 61: 4. The Baltimore exhibition, 10th-11th cent., on an ivory box: Early Christian and Byzantine Art: 42, Pl. 23 No. 114. France, Lyon, R, complete rods: Béal 1983a: 137, Pl. 24: 327-330. France, halves: Ibid.: 138, Pl. 19: 331. Notes: Egypt, on a “Coptic” wooden casket: Strzygowski 1904: 143 No. 8818, Fig. 213. Furniture legs carved on ivory boxes, Dumbarton Oaks Exhibition: Weitzmann 1972 Pls. 19-21. Wooden parallels, Egypt, 5th-6th cent., on a casket: Early Christian and Byzantine Art: 53, Pl. 18 No. 181.

432-436. Definition: Furniture mount cut in half 46\A\0973; S\82908-1-2; P\0100; 0055 Description and interpretation: Furniture mounts with a flat bottom made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis, sawn into two halves and then lathe-turned (see above). No. 432: The concave bottom, part of the medullar cavity of the bone is roughly smoothed, retaining traces of the spongiosa. It is thinner at the ends than in the center, making its attachment to a flat surface difficult. The left long side is oblique (to fit it to another piece?) while the other is almost vertical. After the rod was cut and tied together again it was incorrectly lathe-turned, which explains why the decoration is diagonal to its axis. The decoration consists of grooves, mouldings and alternating flat and convex sections. This is the only object of its type. L. 85mm, w. 10mm, t. 6mm. Nos. 433-434: Two similar pieces, which were found together. One was skillfully lathe-carved while the other was carelessly handmade, possibly the work of a master and a beginner. Ten objects like Nos. 433-434 were found. One end of the first piece was sawn straight while the other is broken. The bottom has diagonal sawing striations on it. The object is decorated with “beads-and-reels”. The top is carefully smoothed. L. 50mm, w. 9mm, t. 5mm. The second is broken on both ends. It has diagonal sawing striations on its bottom. Its decoration was executed carelessly and its components are asymmetrical and diagonal. The bottom is unsmoothed. L. 62mm, w. 6mm, t. 3mm. No. 435: Similar to No. 433 but much smaller. One end is broken. Four objects of this kind were found. L. 28mm, w. 5.5mm, t. 4mm. No. 436: The flat and smooth bottom has diagonal striations on it. The complete end has half a lathe indentation remaining on it. A rivet perforation was drilled near it. The other end broke along the second rivet perforation which was a weak point. If the holes were symmetrically placed the complete object would have been about 120mm long. The decoration consists of a doubleconed section with a moulding along its width, bordered by two pairs of mouldings. The top is carefully smoothed but worn. This is the only object of its type. L. 104mm, w. 11mm, t. 5.5mm.

437. Definition: Furniture mount, beads decoration, cut in half 46\P\0143 Description and interpretation: Elongated narrow tablet with both ends broken. It was cut into two halves, which were then tied together and lathe-turned in bead (astragali) designs (see above). Four objects of this type were found. L. 36mm, w. 9mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Oboda, B middle 6th cent., from a grave: Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1997: 193, Pl. 4: 38. Egypt, Shurafa, post-5th cent., border on a reconstructed wooden casket: Engelbach 1915: 42, Pl. 49: 4-5. Tunisia, Carthage, 7th cent., pilaster, box fitting: Henig 1984: 186, Fig. 61: 2. Notes: None. 438. Definition: Furniture mount, zigzag decoration, cut in half 46\A\0188 Description and interpretation: Part of a narrow elongated tablet, cut in half. The bottom is flat. The handmade decoration in a zigzag design is composed of six parallel lines. One end is damaged while the other is sawn straight. This is the only object of its type. L. 58mm, w. 5mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 105

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.E. MISCELLANEA

Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

This section exhibits 13 out of 107 objects whose exact use and definition are unknown. 439. Definition: Gaming piece or decoration? 47\A\1667 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical rod skillfully turned on a lathe. The bottom is flat and the object sits flat on it. The lower part is rectangular, decorated with mouldings separated by depressions. A perforation (d. 4mm) crosses through it from side to side and one facet is straight all along the length (for attaching to another object as a decoration?). The cylindrical part, carved with various mouldings and depressions, has a grooved globular section and two grooved conical parts. The broken top is shaped as an upside-down pear with two grooves running around its circumference at its widest part. It may also have been a gaming piece. This is the only object of its type. H. 65mm, d. 12mm, the base l. 16mm, w. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 10th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

442. Definition: Carved object – leg? 47\S\97303 Description and interpretation: Long and thin carved object which was originally part (a leg?) of something. Both ends are broken. The wider (right) end is convex, the next section is thicker and tapers towards the other end, which widens creating a kind of a stretched foot. The wider end broke across a perforation drilled there, another hole in the same direction is present at the bottom of the convex part while a third hole beneath it was drilled perpendicular to it. The object is roughly smoothed with vertical knife scraping marks. It may also have been one of a bunch of small cosmetic tools tied together with a cord (Henig, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 62mm, w. 7mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Switzerland, Augusta Raurica, R, ivory handle, the thin end is shaped like a dog’s head: Deschler-Erb 2000: 126, Pl. 3: 1. Italy, Rome? R 3rd cent.?, ivory articulated doll with similar lower part of leg: Caravale 1994: 95, Pl. 3,4. Notes: None.

440. Definition: Gaming piece or decoration? 47\A\0052 Description and interpretation: Complete cylindrical lathe-turned object. Two perforations of unknown purpose were drilled in the base crossing one another. Both are slightly off-center. The central conical part is decorated with groups of 3-4 grooves. The top is shaped like an onion with a tiny lathe indentation or cutting mark, with an elliptical depression on each side (today filled with patina). The object may have been a gaming piece, decoration or even fan handle of a type known from York, England (Henig, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. H. 55mm, the top d. 11mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

443. Definition: carved piece 47\S\54376 Description and interpretation: Small carefully worked piece, whose purpose or correct orientation cannot be determined. The ‘bottom’ (as drawn) and the walls are very carefully smoothed, suggesting that the ‘bottom’ could be seen. Both ends were rather roughly sawn with diagonal sawing or filing striations, suggesting that they were unseen – perhaps several such pieces were joined together to form a line. The two long facets are convex with double grooves running along them. Both facets are broken on the top but originally they may possibly have enclosed the medullar cavity. This cavity has one square wall and one rounded. This may be a large bead. This is the only object of its type. L. 33mm, w. 13mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman, 1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

441. Definition: Hollow, bent perforated object 47\A\0178 Description and interpretation: Object shaped like a hollow curved horn. The medullar cavity is not worked. The wide end is sawn straight while the narrow end is broken. The upper wall is broken so the object has a U-shaped crosssection although it may have originally been closed. A perforation (d. 6mm) was drilled through both walls near the narrow end. The bone is very soft and friable. Similar objects made from antler tine are known in Europe as “knot openers” (Bíró 1994: 47-48, Pls. 57-58) although such objects could also have been used to protect reapers’ fingers from the sickle blade (Dray, pers. comm.). Such objects, known from traditional societies in Europe and the Middle East, were usually made from reed, wood or metal (Avitsur 1976: 24; Meurers-Balke and Lönnecken 1984). This is the only object of its type. L. 73mm, w. 21mm.

444. Definition: Button\spindle whorl with perpendicular perforations 47\A\5019 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical-conical object similar to spindle whorls\buttons although in addition to the vertical perforation (d. 7mm) another perforation (d. 15mm) exists at a 90 degree angle. As only part of this hole was preserved, it remains unclear whether the vertical perforation ran through the whole object. The bottom is slightly convex and very smooth, as if it had been lathe-turned. The decoration consists of two circumferential grooves near the bottom, pairs of diagonal grooves in opposite directions and circle-anddot designs between them. The object may have been inserted on top of a dagger handle with a rivet in the side 106

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE perforation (compare to a larger object: Béal 1983a: 69, Pl. 10: 72) or be a button\spindle whorl with a perforation drilled in addition to the (stoppered) natural bone cavity which was inconvenient to use (Stancheva 2003). This is the only object of its type. H. 16mm, d. 30mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, B 10th-12th cent., button with stoppered side perforation: Davidson 1952: 298, 302, Pl. 2584-2588. Bulgaria, Middle Ages: Stancheva 2003. Notes: None.

smooth bottom with filing striations on its upper face. Two vertical rectangular ‘pillars’ stand at its ends, separated from it by narrow knife-cut notches. One ‘pillar’ projects slightly out from the base while the other projects inwards. A square depression whose purpose is unclear was carved on one of them. A cylindrical ‘lintel’ is laid on the ‘pillars’. Both its ends are thicker, rounded and decorated with knife-cut notches. The object may have been a separator on a narrow leather belt (Dray, pers. comm.), the end of a buckle (Henig, pers. comm.) or jewelry (Amorai Stark, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 18mm, h. 20mm, w. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman, 2nd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

445. Definition: Hollow convex object with holes in the bottom 47\A\0341 Description and interpretation: Hollow convex object made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity was smoothed and a flange was carved into its top. The bottom and walls are carefully smoothed. The wall is decorated with two circumferential grooves (see section). A wider groove was incised on the bottom. Four holes (d. 3mm, de. 7.5mm) out of six were drilled along this groove with a pointed-head drill. They may have been used to attach it to another object with pins, and thus – with a stopper on its top – it decorated a piece of furniture or some other object. This is the only object of its type. H. 13mm, d. 36mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Shikmona, B, with a stopper, six holes – gaming piece?: Elgavish 1994: 130 (top right). Notes: None.

448. Definition: Decorated perforated tablet 47\S\60526 Description and interpretation: Rectangular tablet made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The bottom is roughly smoothed and has two recesses similar to those used for a box lid and base. Originally it was lathe-turned as a whole cylinder (box?) but now both long sides are straight and smoothed (secondary use after it broke?). The back is decorated with two groups of grooves of different widths and depths. Between them is a slightly convex section with an off-center perforation (d. 7mm) (from the secondary use?). In its present form it may have been used as a decoration or inlay, with the recesses used to attach several pieces to each other. This is the only object of its type. L. 43mm, w. 29mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Parallels: Greece, Corinth, ER, no perforation, furniture joint: Davidson 1952: 128, Pl. 64: 870. Hungary, Gorsium, post-R, knife handle: Bíró 1987: 45, Fig. 21: 172. Notes: None.

446. Definition: Rectangular hollow handle? 47\A\0117 Description and interpretation: Hollow, long and narrow object with a rectangular cross-section. One end is slightly wider than the other. The inner cavity is rectangular at the wide end and slightly elliptical at the narrow. A depression – probably part of the medullar cavity – runs along the bottom. The object’s cavity was drilled – a rather unique work judging by its depth and rectangular cross-section. First a circular perforation was probably drilled and then it was carved with a long and thin chisel. A perforation was drilled near each end. The hole on the narrower end has a small diameter (3mm). The other hole was first drilled with the same diameter and then widened with a thin saw or blade to a rectangular shape (6 X 4mm). The identification of the object as a handle is uncertain since it seems too thin to hold. It is covered with patina. This is the only object of its type. L. 102mm, w. 9mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 9th cent. Morphological analogies: Switzerland, Augusta Raurica, R, perforated whistle: Deschler-Erb 1998 Taf. 28: 1977. Notes: None.

449. Definition: Tiny globular object 47\S\26654 Description and interpretation: Tiny, carefully smoothed globular object. At one point on the surface is a tiny hole (de 1mm) and on the other side a tiny spot, possibly from its separation from a longer rod. Unfinished bead or pin head? It may also have been one of several such objects held in a hollow rattle (Dray, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. D. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman, 1st cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 450. Definition: Perforated tablet 47\S\18414 Description and interpretation: Small smoothed rectangular tablet. A large perforation (d. 10mm), was drilled off-center. The hole may have been used to produce identical decorative circles (die, stanze). This is the only object of its type. L. 26mm, w. 17mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None., Notes: None.

447. Definition: Part of a buckle? 47\P\0174 Description and interpretation: Object shaped like a hollow square. The base is rectangular, with a flat, very 107

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS IV.F. PRODUCTION WASTE

back, with many diagonal filing striations on it, is decorated with two rough grooves near each end, with sawing striations on their bottoms. The unfinished roughout was probably planned as a handle or inlay, etc. Four objects of this type were found. L. 123mm, w. 18mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle tibia. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Nubia, Karanog, 3rd-4th cent., ivory inlayed chest with a frame made from similar pieces: de Villard 1938: 7-8, Taf. 6. Notes: None.

IV.f.1. Rough-outs, blanks and unfinished objects. All the objects described below originated from the bone industry which flourished at Caesarea throughout its history (Ayalon and Dray 2002). They include rough-outs for tablets and rods, pieces which received only preliminary treatment and others where the work was halted for various reasons (damage, breaking, careless work, etc.). Parallels for these artifacts are not numerous as only a few have been published from other sites, or those, which were published, were not identical to ours. Twenty of the 54 objects included in this group are described here. The production technologies are discussed in Chapters VI-VII.

454. Definition: Sawn piece 48\P\0166 Description and interpretation: Piece of the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The bottom and sides (which have diagonal sawing striations on them) are smooth, perhaps from long immersion in water. A sawing groove (the saw w. 1.5mm) remained on the left side. The back is very roughly smoothed. One end was sawn straight across while the other was roughly broken. Ten pieces like Nos. 454-455 were recovered. L. 60mm, w. 32mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman-Byzantine, 1st-5th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

451. Definition: Unfinished handle? 48\P\0115 Description and interpretation: Unfinished object carelessly made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity was not entirely cleaned or worked (see cross-section). Both ends were sawn obliquely to the bone axis. The object is roughly smoothed and with many diagonal filing striations on the outer surface of the cortical bone. Two unparallel and incomplete grooves were carelessly carved near each end. Could this be beginner’s work? It was probably intended to be a simple handle. Three objects of this type were found. L. 153mm, d. 27mm. Species\skeletal element: Horse metatarsus. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object has been published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 1: 2.

455. Definition: Raw material fragment 48\S\26773 Description and interpretation: Rectangular rough-out sawn from the wall of a long bone diaphysis not extending into the medullar cavity. One end was sawn straight across while the other is broken. A flat section was removed from its back with a knife or a drawing knife. This is a typical rough-out for a convex piece (see No. 456). Ten objects like Nos. 454-455 were found. L. 78mm, w. 20mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

452. Definition: Rod rough-out 48\S\18871-1 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical rod made from the wall of a large, thick long bone diaphysis. A depression running along it is what remains of the medullar cavity. Both ends were sawn half way around and the center broken leaving a scar. The object is roughly smoothed and with many filing striations on its surface. It could have been made into a handle, a hinge or a furniture mount, etc. Two objects of this type were found. L. 98mm, d. 14mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Syria, Apamea, thinner: Gautier 1984: 334, Fig. 4: 1. Notes: None.

456-457. Definition: Tablet rough-out 48\P\0061-1,3 Description and interpretation: Two out of the three tablet rough-outs, which were found together. No. 456: Convex tablet made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The bottom is flat with sawing and filing diagonal striations appearing on it. Three grooves were incised near its narrow end down to about two thirds of its width, 8mm from each other – perhaps representing a mark of some kind. The ends are sawn straight. The back is smoothed with a few vertical planing marks. Seven objects of this type were found. L. 83mm, w. 15mm, t. 5.5mm. No. 457: Flat rectangular tablet made from a flat bone (rib?), with remains of the spongiosa on its bottom. Both ends were sawn almost entirely and the rest broken leaving a scar. The tablet is not smoothed and both bottom and back bear diagonal sawing and filing striations. Two tablets of this type were found. L. 63mm, w. 10mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ?

453. Definition: Rough-out of decorated rectangular tablet 48\S\12655 Photo 1: 5 Description and interpretation: Rectangular tablet made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The bottom is cleanly smoothed. The narrower end was sawn straight and smoothed while the wider one was sawn two thirds of the way through the circumference and the rest broken leaving a groove. Both long sides were cleanly sawn and smoothed although a projection remained on the right one after it was sawn from both ends without finishing. The 108

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: No. 456: Haifa, LR, from a grave: Dussaud 1912: 89-92. No. 457: Egypt, Alexandria, B 6th cent.:Rodziewicz 1979a: 87, Fig. 12; Rodziewicz 1998: 146, Fig. 21. Notes: None.

Notes: The object has been published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 2: 3. 461-462. Definition: Blank for a conical rod 49\S\74576-1; 24600-2 Description and interpretation: Blank rods with one thick end and one thin were intended to be made into pins, needles, etc. Fourteen objects like Nos. 461-463 were found. No. 461: The top is thick and polygonal in cross-section with vertical knife cut marks remaining on its surface (compare to Photo 1: 8). The other end is pointed, better worked and smoothed. The point was probably broken. The object looks like a pin blank but could also be a rough tool crudely made “by the user”. L. 110mm, w. 11mm, t. 8mm. No. 462: Blank for a rod with an asymmetrical, rectangular cross-section. The ends and the sides are sawn. L. 123mm, w. 7mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 461: Roman, 2nd-3rd cent. No. 462: Late Byzantine, 6th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 461: Egypt, Alexandria, 2nd and especially 6th II-7th cent.: Dzierzykray-Rogalski, Prominska and Rodziewicz 1972: 178, Fig. 6; B 6th cent.: Rodziewicz M. 1979a: 87, Pl. 12. France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent., from pin production: Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Fig. 4: 2. No. 462: Egypt, Alexandria, B 5th - beginning of 7th cent.: Rodziewicz 1998: 146, Fig. 12; 7th cent.: Ibid.: 153, Figs. 22 top, 23. France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a Pl. 5: 31. France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent., from pin production: Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Fig. 4: 4-7. France, Les Bolards, R, pin\needle blank: Sautot 1978: 48, Pl. 20: 2122. England, Colchester, LR: Crummy 1983: 150-152, Fig. 185: 4333, 4336-4339. Notes: No. 462 was found with No. 465.

458. Definition: Triangular tablet rough-out 49\A\0169 Description and interpretation: Triangular piece made from a flat bone. Today it is deformed. The bottom is rough with a few knife or chisel incisions remaining on it. Both short sides were sawn rather straight (a small piece is missing on one) while the long one was carelessly cut (with a knife?). The back is naturally smooth. This is probably a rough-out for a corner triangular inlay or a triangular weaving tablet (compare: MacGregor 1985 Fig. 101: 20) or waste from the production of a larger piece. This is the only object of its type. L. 76mm, w. 65mm, t. 2-3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab-Crusader. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Alexandria, 7th cent., smaller: Rodziewicz 1998: 153, Fig. 21. Austria, Lorch, 4th-5th cent., side element from a composite comb with rivet holes: MacGregor 1985: 96, Fig. 51: 1. Notes: None. 459. Definition: Trapezoidal tablet rough-out 49\S\16032-2 Description and interpretation: Trapezoidal tablet rough-out with one end broken. Many fine sawing striations can be seen on the bottom. The upper facet was vertically sawn while the lower one is oblique, probably to join with another tablet. The back is flat. Several such tablets would have created a square frame. This is the only object of its type. L. 91mm (original l. 96mm), w. 18mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object was found with Nos. 224, 257.

463. Definition: Pin rough-out? 49\P\0128 Description and interpretation: Upper part of a carelessly handmade rod rough-out with a head shaped like a pyramid on a square base which is thicker on two of its facets. The central part is cylindrical with vertical planing marks and filing striations on its surface. It is less smoothed than the head. The lower part is missing. This is probably a rough-out for a handmade pin with a polygonal head (Nos. 179-181) but as the head was smoothed it is possible that this was a simple, rough pin. Fourteen objects like Nos. 461-463 were found. L. 65mm, the head l. 19mm, w. 7mm, t. 6mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 4th-5th cent. Morphological analogies: Tunisia, Carthage, 4thIIbeginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 569, Fig. 13: 2. Oman, Mleiha, 2ndII-1st cent. BCE, from workshop: Barbier 1999: 213, Fig. 6: 1299, 1369, 1396. Notes: The object has been published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 2: 4.

460. Definition: Pointed rough-out 49\P\0075 Description and interpretation: Pointed rod with a rectangular cross-section made from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The top is missing. All sides are vertically planed. The point is rough and off-center. It was probably a rough-out for a pointed object. Three objects of this type were found. L. 122mm, w. 9mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, R, for pin or needle production: Davidson 1952: 174, Pl. 147a. Hungary, Syrmium, 3rd-4th cent., waste from pins and needles manufacture: Saranovic-Svetek 1980: 132, Fig. 1: 9-36. France, Les Bolards, R, for pin or needle production: Sautot 1978: 48, Pl. 20: 16. England, York, Medieval Ages, rough-out for a pin beater: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1967-1968, Fig. 923: 6670.

464-465. Definition: 49\S\39639-3; 24600-3

109

Frame

inlay

rough-out?

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Description and interpretation: Long, thin complete rods with a rectangular cross-section in a preliminary stage of work. They are covered with diagonal working striations. They could be blanks for frame inlays or production waste (compare to Photos 1: 9, 10; 2: 2, 3; 3: 11). Three objects of this type were found. No. 464: L. 141mm, w. 4mm, t. 3mm. No. 465: L. 123mm, w. 6mm, t. 4mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 465: Late Byzantine, 6th cent. Morphological analogies: No. 465: England, York, Medieval Ages: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999 Fig. 879: 6723. Notes: No. 464 was found with many ajouré and frame inlay production waste and various rods. No. 465 was found with No. 462.

the first hole. This is the only object of its type. L. 34mm, d. 5-6mm. Species\skeletal element: Locus date: Byzantine-Early Arab, 4th\5th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 469. Definition: Die rough-out? 49\S\topsoil Description and interpretation: Rough cube found in the topsoil with five similar cubes, eight sawn pieces and a cylindrical gaming piece. The dimensions of the faces vary. They have sawing striations remaining on them. Some facets were sawn almost completely and the rest broken leaving a projection. This piece is probably a rough-out or waste from die production. Twenty-eight objects of this type were found. L. 12mm, w. 10mm, t. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: Locus date: Morphological analogies: Hungary, Vise grad, 14th-15th cent. Grove and Grog 2001: 282, Fig. 6. France, Les Bollards, 2: Sauté 1978: 48, Pl. 20: 2. Notes: None.

466. Definition: Unfinished whorl\button 49\S\27387-1 Description and interpretation: Partly broken unfinished circular object. The bottom is flat with sawing striations on it. The back is convex and rough with planing or cutting marks around the oblique edge. The central perforation was drilled with a center-bit whose central point was longer than the side ones (see Chapter VI below). The oblique edge shows that it was planned to be a whorl\button. This is the only object of its type. D. 27mm, t. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman, 1st cent. Morphological analogies: Germany, Constance, 13th16th cent., with waste from button/rosary bead workshops: Spitzers 1997 Figs. 2-3. Notes: The object was found with many blanks and production waste.

470. Definition: Pin head rough-out? 49\S\470 Description and interpretation: Solid cylindrical object with unsmoothed, vertically planed wall. Both top and bottom are sawn straight and cleanly smoothed. A hole (d. 4mm) was drilled in its bottom and has a bone pin, now broken, stuck into it. It may be an unfinished pin head with the shaft perhaps used to hold the object during work. This is the only object of its type. D. 15mm, l. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Byzantine, 5th-6th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

467. Definition: Unfinished bead 49\S\88605 Description and interpretation: Complete, carelessly handmade object. Its cross-section is elliptical or pearshaped. One end was sawn straight while the other was badly sawn and the edge broken leaving a projection. It is decorated with two grooves around the circumference near one end and one groove near the other. A small perforation was drilled on each end but the two perforations do not meet. This is the only object of its type. L. 17mm, w. 8mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Oman, Meehan, 2ndII - 1st cent. BCE, unfinished perforation: Barber 1999: 212, Fig. 5 No. 861a. Notes: None.

IV.f.2. Waste from lathe and drilling work; waste from die production. Lathe-carved rough-out end – the ends of the lathe worked rod, which were cut from the finished object and discarded. They are divided into sub-types according to the way they were attached to the lathe. Thirty-nine such pieces were found. Centerbit waste including circular perforated objects resulting from incising circle-and-dot design work, where the drill-bit broke through the bone. 37 objects were found. Die production waste – the end of the rough-out piece from which small solid dice were sawn. They number eleven pieces. These object types are discussed in Chapters VI-VII.

468. Definition: Unfinished bead? 49\A\416 Description and interpretation: Complete, smooth cylindrical object with one end thicker than the other. An off-center perforation was drilled on each end but they do not meet each other. The perforation in the thicker end is large (d. 4mm) and leaves a very thin wall while the other is smaller (d. 1.5mm). Another hole with an unclear purpose was drilled near the thinner end perpendicular to

Lathe-carved rough-out ends 471-475. Definition: Lathe-carved rough-out end with indentation 50\S\25626-1; P\0033; S\17954; P\0139; S\55038 Description and interpretation: Various lathe-carved rough-out rods ends. The indentation left by the lathe tailstock-center may be found on one end while the other 110

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 476. Definition: Lathe rough-out end with an indentation 50\S\25016 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical, thin and smooth rough-out end with a lathe indentation on its thicker end. The other end was gradually thinned on a lathe until it was cut off from the object. It is not impossible that this object was used secondarily. Two objects of this type were found. L. 52mm, d. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine, 3rd-5th cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David, Stratum 5, R, awl or stylus: Ariel 1990: 141, Fig. 21 BI 192. Notes: A similar object from Caesarea was published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 3.

end, adjacent to the object, was cut half way on the lathe. then the center was broken (compare to Photos 1: 22; 2: 7). Afterwards, it was discarded. No. 471: A thick piece made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis. It has a triangular cross-section and one side has adze and knife marks remaining on it. The lathe indentation is larger than usual (d. 3mm, de. 3mm). The cutting marks on the other end show that a cylindrical rod (d. 10mm) was carved there. Fine circumferential lathe marks remained on it. This is the only object of this type and dimensions. L. 48mm, w. 22mm, t. 15mm. No. 472: Short rough-out end carved on a lathe along with the entire rod but was later cut off. Its end was obliquely sawn and part of it broken before drilling the lathe indentation. Part of the object is decorated with circular mouldings bordering a convex section. This is the only object of its type. L. 35mm, d. 10mm. No. 473: Short, thick and cleanly smoothed, cylindrical rough-out end. A large lathe indentation (d. 4mm, de. 2.5mm) may be seen on one end. The other was cut half way on the lathe and the middle broken off. Four objects of this type were found. L. 20mm, d. 10mm. No. 474: Long, thin rough-out end. One end is sawn straight and has fine sawing striations on it as well as a tiny, off-center lathe indentation. The other was partly cut on the lathe and the middle broken off. The rod has vertical planing marks and diagonal filing striations remaining on it. The planing created a polygonal cross-section which minimized the amount of material to be removed on the lathe. The left section was partly carved on a lathe but later it was also discarded. Three objects of this type were found. L. 56mm, d. 5.5mm. No. 475: Long, thin rough-out end vertically planed to create a polygonal cross-section (see above). One end is cleanly sawn and has two lathe indentations remaining on it, showing that the lathe tailstock-center “jumped” or was re-adjusted for better centering. The other end was partly cut on a lathe leaving a very smooth and a slightly conical (resulting from the angle of the cutting point against the rotating object) circumference. Its center was carved during the shaping of the rod (for a pin or needle?) and its diameter is that of the produced shaft. After carving, the rod was broken near the roughout end, leaving a small projecting part (l. 3mm, d. 3mm). Thirteen objects of this type were found. L. 65mm, d. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 472: Late Byzantine. No. 473: Late Roman-Byzantine. No. 474: Roman, 1st-3rd cent. No. 475: Late Roman, 3rd-4th cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, City of David Stratum 5, R: Ariel 1990: 141, BI 187. Egypt, Alexandria, 7th cent.: Rodziewicz 1979a: 87, Fig. 13; 7th cent., “halfproduct”: Rodziewicz 1998: 153, Figs. 27-28. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII - beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 583, Fig. 22: 78. Hungary, R, in the Brigetio Museum, the thin end was rounded and worn from secondary use. France, Lyon, R 1st-2nd cent.: Béal 1983a: 59-60, Pls. 7: 45-46, 49, 8: 47, 50-51. Notes: No. 471 was found together with other waste pieces, including No. 478.

477-479. Definition: Lathe rough-out end without indentation 50\S\23748-1; 25626-2; 26045 Description and interpretation: Rough-out ends separated from the carved object by cutting them half way on a lathe and then breaking them through the middle. The other end, with no indentation, demonstrates that it was attached to the lathe by one of the other methods described in Chapter VI (compare to Photo 1: 23). Fourteen objects of this type were found. No. 477: One end is sawn straight while a short part of the carved shaft remained on the other end. It is somewhat cylindrical in shape but is otherwise rough and unfinished. L. 26mm, w. 11mm, t. 8mm. No. 478: The oblique, smooth end was probably cut with a thin hack saw (see Chapter VI). The rough-out was vertically carved in advance with a knife to minimize the amount of material to be removed on the lathe. L. 20mm, d. 8mm. No. 479: Conical, vertically planed rough-out end. The thin end was sawn straight. L. 34mm, d. 8mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 477: Roman-Byzantine. No. 479: Roman. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Alexandria, B 5th beginning of 7th cent.: Rodziewicz 1998: 146, Fig. 12 center and right, 2nd line from bottom. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII-beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 560, Fig. 11: 4. France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a Pl. 3: 68. Notes: No. 477 was found with four other rough-out ends. No. 478 was found with No. 471. No. 479: Stone parallels, Jerusalem, 1st cent., rough-out ends attached to the lathe with three teeth (see below): Amit, Zeligman and Zilberbod 2001: 109 left top photograph. 480. Definition: Lathe rough-out end without indentation 50\P\0001 Description and interpretation: Rough-out end made from a tuning peg of a string instrument (see Nos. 275278) which broke during production (Dray, pers. comm.). The left end is a thin, conical tenon with no indentation, which was probably attached to the lathe with three teeth or using the socket method (below). The base, with a triangular cross-section, and the cylindrical part (with mouldings, grooves and depressions) are typical of a tuning peg. It shows that tuning pegs were produced at 111

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS Morphological analogies: Hungary, Middle Ages: Bíró, pers. comm. France, Strasbourg, 15th cent., beads and rings: Maire 1998: 275, Fig. 1b,e. England, York, 10th cent., decorative or prayer beads: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1944-1945, Fig. 904: 7700-7701. Notes: Nos. 482-484 were found with another 23 similar disks in an assemblage consisting of about 150 waste pieces, inlays, etc.

Caesarea. This is the only object of it type. L. 36mm, d. 12mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. Drilling waste

Die production waste

481-485. Definition: Drilling waste 50\P\0036; A\01059a-c; S\73079 Photo 3: 12 Description and interpretation: Five out of 37 perforated disks, most of them found by Raban. The typical circular disk is small, its bottom convex, its wall oblique (=the angle of the center-bit outer arms, proving that the drilling was performed from the bottom), the top concave or consists of a moulding around the circumference and a depression surrounding a central protrusion (=the projections in the center-bit central part) and usually a perforation (Nos. 481-484) or a small depression (No. 485) in or off the center, depending on the length and direction of the central point. These discs were the result of creating circle-and-dot designs with a center-bit which penetrated through the bone by mistake (Poplin, pers. comm.; compare to unfinished center-bit drills from York, England, 13th cent.: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999 Fig. 882: 7999). It is also possible, however, that they were deliberately produced using a center-bit to drill perforations in a tablet (Dray, pers. comm.) or to produce beads or small rings (Maire 1998 Fig. 1b,e). Indeed two were found in a grave (it could, however, be a coincidence as they are very small). Nos. 483-485 were drawn to a scale of 1:2 (double actual size) in order to show their details better, while Nos. 481-482 are shown in actual size. No. 481: Small, thin almost circular piece with an off-center elliptical perforation. On both sides the circumference slopes towards the hole. D. 14mm, t. 3mm, the perforation d. 6mm. No. 482: The bottom is convex and the top rather flat. The perforation is off-center so it seems that the drilling was carried out at an oblique angle. D. 9mm, t. 1.5mm, the perforation d. 2mm. No. 483: The bottom is not entirely flat. The top is concave and surrounded by a low moulding. The perforation is in the center. D. 7.5mm, t. 2mm, the hole d. 1.2mm. No. 484: The bottom is convex. The top is sunken, surrounded by a moulding whose height is uneven with a protrusion in its center. The perforation is a little wider at the top, showing that the drill point was triangular in cross-section. D. 9mm, t. 2.5mm, the hole d. 2mm. No. 485: A similar disk but instead of a perforation there is a shallow depression in the center of the protrusion, which means that the central point of the drill was very short. A depression in the center of the bottom may be the result of lathe work or of a previous attempt to drill from that side. D. 10mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 481: Late Byzantine. Nos. 482-484: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. No. 485: Early Roman.

486-488. Definition: Die production rough-out end 50\A\0063; S\52285; 39225-1 Description and interpretation: Ends of rough-outs from which small solid dice were made. The basic rod was sawn from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. The artisan held it by the unworked end while working on it. The rod was planed creating four straight and smooth facets and then the dice were sawn (compare to No. 469). Sometimes (Nos. 486, 488) the die was sawn almost entirely and the remaining part snapped off leaving a projection. Eleven objects of this type were found. No. 486: L. 49mm, the square part w. and t. 8mm. No. 487: L. 68mm, the square part w. 9mm, t. 7mm. No. 488: L. 55mm, the square part w. and t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 487: Byzantine. No. 488: Late Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Visegrád, 14th-15th cent., from a bead and dice workshop: Gróf and Gróh 2001 Fig. 3. Hungary, Syrmium, 3rd-4th cent.: SaranovicSvetek 1980: 132, Fig. 1: 1-4. Notes: No. 488 was found with ivory rough-out end No. 576. No. 486 was published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 1: 5. IV.f.3. Ring production waste. Parts of bone cylinders discarded after rings have been removed from them as seen in Nos. 489-490. Here, two ‘layers’ of rings of different diameters were removed. These are rare finds with no parallels from Israel, first identified by P. Wapnish-Hesse and Y. Dray in the summer of 2000. A preliminary report (Ayalon and Dray 2002: 18-20) already described this technology which is discussed in Chapter VII. Fifty-four of these typical cylinders were found, made from long bone diaphyses. Their length and diameter vary depending on the shape and number of the rings produced. The medullar cavity is usually unworked except for vertical chisel cuts near the ends designed to improve its attachment and centralization on the lathe (Photos 1: 6; 2: 8). Sometimes the inside was smoothed (No. 489) for the same reason. Both ends were sawn straight. The cylinder wall is very smooth as a result of the ring removal on the lathe, leaving parallel grooves on it. The wider and thicker end is usually short and oblique because of it having been carved at an angle to the cylinder’s axis (No. 493). A kind of ‘collar’, separated from the body by a groove (perpendicular to this axis), may often be seen on it (Nos. 490, 493). In the case of short cylinders (Nos. 492, 494) it seems that rings were 112

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 21, 25. Jordan. Petra, short handle: Murray 1940: 15, No. 2. Tunisia, Carthage, 4th II-beginning of 5th cent., 38 pieces, no explanation: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 560, Fig. 11: 1-3. Notes: No. 492 was published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 4: 1.

also removed from the left-over wall itself. These rings are characterized by a trapezoidal cross-section (at least ten were found), a result of its manufacturing technique (see below). These cylinders have thin walls and are very fragile, so only a few have been found intact (No. 494). Sometimes the wall broke in straight lines, a fact which can lead to the incorrect conclusion that they were deliberately sawn.

495-497. Definition: Lathe-carved rings 51\P\0048-2; A\0177; P\0044-1 Description and interpretation: Rings of different sizes removed from the discussed cylinders, characterized by a trapezoidal cross-section (see No. 264). About ten objects of this type were found. No. 495: Cleanly smoothed. D. 40mm, w. 3mm, t. 2mm. No. 496: Smoothed. D. 45mm, w. 5.5mm, t. 3mm. No. 497: Part of a small smoothed ring with lathe carving marks on it. D. 27mm, w. 4mm, t. 2.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 495: Roman-Byzantine, 2nd-5th cent. No. 496: Roman. No. 497: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

489-490. Definition: Ring production waste, two layers 51\S\25043; 18826-2 Photos 1: 14; 2: 8 Description and interpretation: No. 489: Half the circumference of a cylinder from which two sets of rings have been removed. The last large ring (d. 25-30mm) in the outer layer remained adjacent to the base while all the others were removed. Thirteen of the smaller rings (d. 20mm) from the inner layer remained, possibly because the cylinder broke after at least one of those rings had been removed. L. 54mm, upper d. 14mm, base d. 23mm. No. 490: Piece of the wall of a cylinder from which two layers of rings were removed. It is much larger than the previous one and so were the rings removed from it. The medullar cavity is rough with remains of the spongiosa and chisel marks. The last ring of the outer layer was in the middle of being prepared when the work stopped, and the typical ‘collar’ was left between the ring and the body (see cross-section). At least two rings were removed from the inner layer showing that in this case, unlike with the previous object, the artisan removed only a ring or two alternatively from each layer. L. 40mm, d. 55mm. Species\skeletal element: No. 489: cattle metatarsus. Locus date: No. 489: Late Byzantine, 6th cent. No. 490: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: No. 489 was published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 4: 3.

IV.f.4. Production waste. Twenty out of 226 waste pieces from the bone industry are discussed below. Nos. 498-504 are pieces of flat and long bone diaphyses remaining from the preliminary stages of raw material preparation. Nos. 505-511 are remains of more advanced stages in production which include failed, discarded waste parts and pieces which seem to be the result of beginners’ work. Nos. 512-514 represent waste from ajouré inlay production while disks were cut from Nos. 515-517. 498. Definition: Flat triangular piece 52\A\0408 Description and interpretation: Medium-sized triangular piece probably sawn off a scapula. The bottom is roughly smoothed and with some spongiosa remaining in a band. A few long planing marks can be seen along the bottom and top. The piece is worn out and one corner is broken. Three objects of this type were found. L. 136mm, original w. 64mm, t. 6m. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Tunisia, Carthage, 4th and 6th7th cent.: Hurst and Henig 1994: 25, 29, 277, Fig. 14.18: 61, 64. Notes: None.

491-494. Definition: Ring production waste, single layer 51\S\16208; P\0097; A\0013; P\0221 Photos 1: 6; 2: 1 Description and interpretation: Cylinders with the grooves which remain from the removal of the inner layer of rings. There is no proof that an outer layer of rings was ever present. No. 491: Part of a long cylinder. The grooves testify that some of the rings were narrow and others wide (up to 12mm). L. 71mm, w. 28mm, t. 4mm. No. 492: Part of a short cylinder. L. 25mm, d. 55mm. No. 493: Similar piece. The base is oblique because it was carved at an angle to the cylinder’s axis. Part of the last ring remained as a ‘collar’ adjacent to the base. L. 49mm, w. 37mm, t. 9mm. No. 494: Only the thick base remained with the bottom of the narrower part and the vertical ‘collar’ carved to remove the last ring. This is one of the few intact cylinders. It is oblique like many others. L. 8.5mm, d. 42mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: No. 491: Late Roman. No. 492: RomanByzantine, 2nd-5th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Alexandria, 6th-7th cent., photographs presenting 44 pieces defined as box production waste: Rodziewicz 1998: 146, 153, Figs. 16,

499. Definition: Sawn piece of rib 52\S\18864 Description and interpretation: Flat, elongated thin piece, concave along its longitudinal cross-section. The bottom is spongy. One end is stepped as if the saw went astray half way through. The other is broken. Two pieces of this type were found. L. 122mm, w. 33mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle rib. Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: England, York, Medieval Ages: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999 Fig. 879: 6717. Notes: None. 113

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS 500. Definition: Sawn long bone diaphysis 52\S\96098 Description and interpretation: Smooth cylinder made from a long bone diaphysis. The medullar cavity is unworked. Both ends were sawn straight and bear sawing striations. Three objects of this type were found. L. 85mm, d. 26mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: England, Verulamium, 1st cent.: Goodburn and Grew 1984a: 69, Fig. 29: 255. Notes: None.

Description and interpretation: Part of a thin, flat tablet, somewhat convex along both cross-sections. The bottom is spongy. One long side and one short end were sawn straight across. A groove was incised along the other short side to mark the line of sawing. It was sawn half way and the rest broken off leaving a projection. A similar groove was marked along the other long side but it was not sawn. Later it broke in a curved line. The original plan was probably to make a long rectangular tablet, possibly an inlay. This is the only object of its type. L. 173mm, w. 40mm, t. 3.5mm. Species\skeletal element: Cattle rib. Locus date: Byzantine, 4th-5th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

501-504. Definition: Waste – sawn “ring” 52\P\0107; S\23524-1; 59023-2; P\0031-1 Description and interpretation: “Rings” sawn from a long bone diaphysis during the production process (compare to Photo 1: 19). Sometimes one end of the ring is sawn straight while the other is not (Nos. 501-502), showing that the purpose was only to straighten the cylinder end. In other cases, one end was sawn half way and the rest broken off (No. 503), or one end was cut with a chopper or axe (No. 504), probably still from secondary butchering. In those cases too the artisan sawed off the badly shaped end. No. 501: Thin ring with one straight end and the other curved. Part of it is broken off. Nine objects of this type were found. L. 38mm, w. 32mm, t. 8mm. No. 502: Ring sawn near the diaphysis. Sawing striations can be seen on both ends and one end was sawn from two directions. It was found with another similar ring. Four objects of this type were found. L. 55mm, w. 23mm, t. 13mm. No. 503: Ring with one end sawn half way through and the rest broken off (probably by the butcher – Poplin, pers. comm.). The other end was cleanly sawn, probably in order to get rid of the broken part. Fourteen objects like Nos. 503-504 were found. L. 48mm, w. 44mm, t. 29mm. No. 504: Ring with one end cut with a chopper or axe (probably by the butcher) while the other was sawn straight, possibly by the artisan. D. 50mm, t. 40mm. Species\skeletal element: No. 501: Cattle metatarsus. No. 502: Cattle metacarpus. No. 503: Cattle femur. Locus date: No. 501: Late Byzantine. No. 502: Byzantine, 5th cent. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER 1st cent. BCE: Geva 2003: 347-348, Pl. 13.1: B22. Egypt, Alexandria, B esp. 5th, 6thII - 7th cent.: Dzierzykray-Rogalski, Prominska and Rodziewicz 1972: 175-177, Figs. 3-4; B 6th cent.: Rodziewicz M. 1979a: 87, Fig. 12. Turkey, Tarsus: Goldman 1950: 400, Fig. 273: 102. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII - beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988 Figs. 6: 3, 9: 1-5; 4th cent.: Hurst and Henig 1994: 22-23, 105, 275, Fig. 14.16: 44-48. Romania, Apulum, 2nd-3rd cent.: Cigudean 2001: 84, Figs. 4: j, 7. Austria, Magdalensberg, ER: Gostenčnik 2001 Fig. 7: 9. France, Lyon, R 1st-2nd cent.: Béal 1983a: 55, Pls. 1, 3, 5. France, Strasbourg, 15th cent.: Maire 1998 Fig. 1a. Notes: No. 501 was published: Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 1: 1.

506. Definition: “Training” tablet, circle-and-dot designs 53\A\0105-8 Photo 3: 4 Description and interpretation: Rhomboid, slightly convex tablet with remains of spongiosa on its bottom, which was probably never used. Seven circle-and-dot designs were incised on the back, three along each long side and one between them, off-center. The two designs on the right emerge out of the tablet border. In some cases, they were incised too deeply so the long central point of the center-bit penetrated through the bone. The asymmetric shape of the object and the pattern of the designs hint that it was used to train a beginner. This is the only object of its type. L. 38mm, w. 29mm, t. 1.5mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The tablet was found along with 150 waste pieces, inlays, etc., including No. 514. 507. Definition: Sawing waste? 53\S\67054 Photos 1: 4; 2: 11 Description and interpretation: A triangular wedge with one part narrower than the other, looking like a handle. Most of the facets have sawing and filing striations running in different directions on them. It is probably refuse discarded after some object was sawn. This is the only object of its type. L. 44mm, w. 12mm, t. 7mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 508. Definition: Waste from a hollow square object 53\S\40163 Description and interpretation: Waste from a long bone diaphysis which was planed all around until it had a square cross-section. The piece is a little conical like the natural shape of the bone. The medullar cavity was cleaned and smoothed. The facets are smooth and there are sawing marks on the ends. It is probably the discarded end of an object such as a hollow die (see No. 281), as several of them were shaped on a long rod and then

505. Definition: Rib fragment with marks of instruction 53\P\0225 114

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Description and interpretation: Elongated thin, flat tablet which is the broken edge of an ajouré inlay. The bottom is flat and smooth. Both ends are broken. One long side is sawn straight and with diagonal sawing striations on it. The other is composed of broken “teeth” originating in an ajouré design. The piece broke and was discarded. Altogether, 176 pieces of ajouré waste like Nos. 512-514 were found. L. 83mm, w. 13mm, t. 1mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

separated. Four objects of this type were found. L. and w. 24mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: Horse or cattle metatarsus. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 509. Definition: Piece of a “training” tablet? 53\A\0003 Description and interpretation: Broken corner of a flat thin tablet. The bottom is roughly smoothed and has diagonal filing striations on it. Two fine, narrow grooves were incised along one side and three along the other. A perforation (d. 4mm) was drilled at the spot where the lines meet (the corner is broken). Four unfinished holes were produced using a rounded head drill in the inner space. Another perforation, now broken across, was drilled towards the center of the tablet. The tablet was possibly used to train a beginner craftsman to drill, incise and perhaps saw along an incised guide line. This is the only object of its type. L. 32mm, w. 19mm, t. 1mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: France, Lyon, R, purpose unknown: Béal 1983a: 376, Pl. 60: 1336. Notes: None.

513. Definition: Ajouré production waste 53\A\0410 Description and interpretation: Unrestorable fragments of a flat and thin tablet made from a large flat bone. Many perforations (d. 3mm) intended to be sawn into ajouré designs were drilled in it in a rather disordered manner. It probably broke during production or perhaps one artisan drilled the holes and another was supposed to saw the designs but never did. Altogether, 176 ajouré waste pieces like Nos. 512-514 were found. The large parts l. 42mm, w. 37mm; l. 39mm, w. 11mm, t. 1-2mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Crusader, 11th-12th cent. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, A: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 76. Egypt, Lake Manzaleh: Petrie 1927: 45, Pl. 39: 119 bottom. Notes: None.

510. Definition: Hand-carved rough-out end 53\S\L. 40081 Description and interpretation: Unworked end of a hand-carved object. The end which was held by the artisan is rectangular and flat and its sides are broken. The other part is a circular rod (l. 10mm) which was hand-carved with a knife. Its end was sawn half way and the center broken leaving a scar. There is no lathe indentation. This is the only object of its type. L. 32mm, w. 17mm, t. 5mm. Species\skeletal element: Pig bone. Locus date: Early Arab, 10th-11th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object does not have a basket number and was registered by the locus it came from.

514. Definition: Ajouré production waste 53\A\0105-12 Photo 3: 1 Description and interpretation: Part of a flat, thin ajouré tablet sawn on all sides. Another tablet was sawn in a previous stage of work from its right side leaving a long, narrow projection. A rectangular ajouré piece was prepared on the left part. The left side of this piece is oblique, probably to help in joining it to another piece. The designs include a triangle, a bird, a flying bird and a leaf. This tablet was probably discarded because its corner broke. Altogether, 176 ajouré pieces like Nos. 512-514 were found. L. 90mm, w. 26mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, A: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 76. Notes: The object was found with 150 pieces of production waste, ajouré inlays, etc., including No. 506.

511. Definition: Planed piece 53\A\0070 Description and interpretation: Piece of waste sawn from a long bone diaphysis which was planed along its axis, so its cross-section is trapezoid. The bottom has diagonal sawing striations on it and tiny steps, as if the saw “jumped” during work. Both ends are sawn straight. The central band on the back has many fine filing striations on it and a similar sawing step. Both sides are smooth. This is the only object of its type. L. 63mm, w. 9mm, t. 3mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: France, Arras, beginning of 4th cent.: Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Fig. 4: 1. Notes: None.

515. Definition: Scapula for disk production 54\S\72000 Description and interpretation: Large piece of a scapula used to produce small disks. The distal (to the left) and part of the long thin side (now broken) were sawn and the spina scapula was cut off. The other short side is broken. Two perforations (d. 10mm) were cut near the center. Their edges are not worn so they do not seem to have actually been used. The purpose was probably to produce round disks (two from each perforation as the bone has two outer hard layers) – beads or inlays. In all scapulae with such perforations (see parallels) the holes

512. Definition: Ajouré production waste 53\A\1391 115

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE WORKED BONE OBJECTS never display use-wear (i.e. from a thread attaching the bone to the hand during use or to a handle – Northe 2001). The perforations are usually identically located, as the bone is stronger and doubled there (Newcomer 1977: 296-297). As the sawing of the scapula edges was not needed for the perforating it seems that it may have served as a ladle or shovel (mentioned in Talmudic sources; see Chapter IX). Other such scapulae were also sawn in the same way. Two objects of this type were found. L. 175mm, w. 56mm, t. 16mm. Species\skeletal element: ? Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: Shikmona, H, 4-5 scapulae with 2-3 holes in each: Elgavish 1974: 30, Nos. 217, 227, 305, 306; Pls. 6, 11, 12, 34; Ayalon 1999: 21, Fig. 6. Ein Hatseva, H-ER, camel scapula with 2 holes: HakkerOrion 1993 Fig. 3 top. Lebanon, Byblos, H-R?, sheep (?) scapula with 2 holes: Dunand 1958: 627, Fig. 749 No. 13814. England, York, 12th-13th cent., sheep scapula with 7 holes used as a shovel for wet materials where the liquid dripped through them: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1974, Fig. 929: 7065. England, Silchester, R, sheep scapula with 12 holes, counter production: McWhirr 1982 Pl. 31. Notes: None.

Morphological analogies: Syria, Apamea: Gautier 1984: 334, Fig. 4: 4. Romania, Apulum, 2nd-3rd cent.: Ciugudean 2001: 63, Fig. 5: a (right). Hungary, Visegrád, 14th-15th cent., from a beads and dice workshop: Gróf and Gróh 2001 Fig. 6. Germany, Constance, 13th-16th cent., with rings, buttons and rosary bead production waste: Spitzers 1997 Figs. 3, 8-10. France, Vienne, R, 7 objects, 8 holes: Sautot 1978: 78, Pl. 48: 7. France, Strasbourg, 15th cent.: Maire 1998 Fig. 1a. Holland, Deventer, 15th-16th cent., 2: van Vilsteren 1987: 62, No. 111. England, several sites, 14th-15th cent. and earlier, for button and\or bead production: MacGregor 1985: 101, Fig. 58: a-e. England, Saint-Denis, 15th-16th cent., from rosary bead workshop: MacGregor 1989: 115, Fig. 3. England, York, 10th or 13th cent., from bead\button production: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999 Fig. 882: 6779, 6780, 7956, 7999. Notes: Mother-of-pearl parallels, Jerusalem, M 14th cent. onwards: Kogan-Zehavi 2000: *76 Fig. 16. 517. Definition: Disk production waste 54\S\95015 Description and interpretation: Flat tablet from which a large disk (d. 50mm) was sawn or cut off. Less than half the tablet remained and it is possible that the piece broke during production. The disk may have been a lid, inlay or a blank for a circular object. This is the only object of its type. L. 56mm, w. 33mm, t. 4mm. Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, for bead production: Wapnish 1991: 60; Wapnish-Hesse 1999 Fig. 7 (right). Jordan, Petra, B 6th cent., inlay: Bikai 2001: 411, 423, Nos. 101-102. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thIIbeginning of 5th cent., for gaming pieces production?: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 568, 581, Fig. 20: 6; 5th beginning of 6th cent.: Hurst and Henig 1994: 22, 32, 277, Fig. 14.18: 58-60. Notes: None.

516. Definition: Disks production waste 54\A\1228 Description and interpretation: Flat, thin broken tablet from which many small disks (d. 7mm) were cut in a disorganized manner. This is no doubt industrial waste and not a decorative piece. The disks could have been beads or inlays. The edges of the holes have no sawing marks on them and were probably cut with a center-bit (see Chapter VI; Gróf and Gróh 2001 Figs. 2, 4, 5; Spitzers 1997 Fig. 2). Four objects of this type were found. L. 40mm, w. 17mm, t. 2.5mm.

116

CHAPTER V TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE IVORY OBJECTS but only two (1.2%) were made from ivory (Verhagen 1993: 340). These were probably prestige artifacts for elites, some of them with high army rank as many of them are military objects (Deschler-Erb 1997: 74; 2000: 125126). These finds, however, come from the first phase of Roman rule in Europe when ivory began to be scarce (see below) while at Caesarea most ivory objects date to later periods. Caesarea was also a site of ivory manufacture and finds include both blanks and waste pieces, since it was closer geographically to ivory sources in Africa. No comparative data could be found from other sites in the Mediterranean Basin or from periods later than the Roman period.

V.A. INTRODUCTION The distinction between bone and ivory is not always easy on heavily worked objects, even with optical magnifying tools. Well carved and polished bone objects or worn out ones are often described as being made of ivory (Béal 1983b: 612 n. 23; Krzyszkowska 1990: 6; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 320, 327). Ancient artisans and merchants probably made a fortune from such fakes.1 Another problem is the distinction between elephant and hippopotamus ivory. In Antiquity, when hippo actually lived in the region (in Israel at least until the Late Bronze Age; In Egypt until the 17th cent.) it was the main source of ivory (Caubet and Poplin 1995; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 320). From the Hellenistic period if not earlier, elephant tusks dominated the local ivory market. Only one object made of hippo ivory (handle No. 518) was identified with certainty at Caesarea. Most of the Caesarea ivory objects were identified by Prof. Poplin. Doubtful objects were defined “ivory?” as is usual (Krzyszkowska 1990: 1; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 321).

According to Béal (2000: 110) no ivory workshop has been found in Roman Gaul nor are there any written sources about ivory carvers (eborarii) operating there. He concluded that the ivory artifacts were imported from Rome and the eastern Mediterranean (i.e. Alexandria). Cutler (1993: 170-172) reached the same conclusion. Dating ivory implements and defining their origin are difficult as their light weight and high value made them easy to transfer and keep for long periods of time (Reece 1983: 240). Bone and ivory artifacts from the 10th-11th cent. from Aqaba in Jordan, for instance (Whitcomb 1995: 28-30) are quite different from those found at Fustst in Egypt, on the one hand, and at Caesarea on the other hand, showing that various production centers operated in the region, some of which have not yet been identified. On the technology of ivory production see Chapter VI.

The local artisans made ivory objects in addition to ones from bone (see Chapter VII). Concentrations of ajouré and frame inlay production waste which include both bone and ivory pieces2 testify that at least during the Early Arab period both raw materials were sometimes carved in the same workshops. In Medieval England too, artisans carved various raw materials – antler, bone and ivory (MacGregor 1991: 377). In Iran in the mid-20th cent., on the other hand, ivory carvers worked separately (Wulff 1966: 92).

V.B. THE TYPOLOGY ARTIFACTS

A total of 128 ivory objects were found at Caesarea, including raw and waste pieces. Of these, 77 were definitely identified and 51 are probable. Out of a total of ca. 3,900 objects, ivory objects comprise about 3.3% of this assemblage. The comparison to finds in other cities of the Roman Empire is interesting: At Magdalensberg in Austria, 1076 bone and antler artifacts and only three ivory finds (0.3%) were found, and these probably originated in Italy (Gostenčnik 2001). In Lyon (France) and Augusta Raurica (Switzerland) ivory finds comprise less than 1% of the assemblage, in Mainz about 1.5% and so on in other cities (Béal 2000: 101-102, n. 7; Deschler-Erb 2000: 125, Fig. 1). At Valkenburg in Holland, which was on the Roman Limes, 173 bone and antler objects were unearthed 1

2

AND

CHRONOLOGY

OF THE IVORY

The ivory objects are represented in almost all typological groups defined for the bone objects: handles, rods, boxes, cosmetic objects, jewelry, gaming pieces, writing implements, inlays, art objects as well as blanks and waste pieces. Interestingly, carved pieces (especially with human figures) and dolls\figurines were mostly made from bone and not from ivory as might be expected. No prestige objects of the type known from European and Mediterranean centers such as dyptichs, pyxide decorated with human figures or furniture mounts (Bahgat Bey and Gabriel 1921 Pl. 28; Hill 1963; Volbach 1957; Weitzmann 1979, 1980) have been found at Caesarea. A total of 61 out of 128 ivory objects are presented below following the same methods used for bone objects in Chapter IV. The chapter includes a table of all ivory objects (they also appear in the general catalogue of the finds). Many of the ivory artifacts are unique and have no parallels, as might be expected from such a high prestige raw material. Others have analogies among bone implements. It seems that customers' tastes remained within the limits of local and contemporary fashion.

Whitened bone objects, intended to look as if they were made from ivory, were found at Augustica Raurica (Deschler-Erb 2000: 126). Their white color was probably produced by heating the object (MacGregor 1991: 360, n. 10). Porath expedition: B. 39639, L. 10712. Raban: Area CV, B. 0015, L. 008; Area I6, B. 0092, L. 671; Area LL01, B. 0016, L. 005; B. 0170, L. 097; B. 0182, L. 107; Area LL05, B. 0014, L. 005.

117

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE IVORY OBJECTS

V.b.1 Handles. Eight ivory handles are described here. Most of them differ from each other. Some still contain remains of the metal tang. No. 518 was made from hippopotamus ivory. Nos. 518-520 have projections at their butt end whose purpose is unclear. In all of them, the socket has been drilled.

Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object is similar to bone handle No. 27.

519. Definition: Cylindrical handle 55\A\30069 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical handle, nicely worked and smoothed on a lathe. A narrower cylindrical projection was left on the butt end which has a lathe indentation on its end. It is less well worked and its end is oblique, so originally it was perhaps covered by some other material. A cylindrical socket was drilled offcenter into the wider end, which is decorated with two narrow mouldings. This is the only object of its type. L. 61mm, d. 15mm, the socket d. 6.5mm, de. 11mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

522. Definition: Fiale handle with a lion head 55\S\65298 Description and interpretation: The end of a fiale (patera) handle. The cylindrical part is decorated with rounded mouldings near the broken end. This section is worn out, either from use or because an outer ring attached it to the tool (Poplin, pers. comm.). The offcenter socket drilled in it still retains part of the iron tang. The cylinder terminates in a carved lion head. Its rear part is smooth and bordered with a moulding. The locks of hair, eyes and projecting ears are worn now. The nose is round and an opened mouth was drilled from the front in the form of a long, round hole. The object is covered with patina. This is the only object of its type. L. 65mm, the cylindrical part l. 30mm, d. 12mm; the socket d. 6mm; the head l. 35mm, d. 23mm. Locus date: Late Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Kadesh-Barnea, P 5th- 4th cent. BCE, general resemblance, made in bone, the head of a fallow deer?: Cohen 1983: 14. Hungary, Aquincum, R: Bíró, pers. comm. Notes: The patera, used particularly for ritual purposes, was made from metal or pottery, with a handle decorated in the form of an animal head. Marble analogue. ER, Horvat Eleq, lion\panther head: Hirschfeld 2003 Fig. 1. Bronze analogies, The Cave of Letters (Judaean Desert), R 1stII-2ndI cent., fiale handle shaped like a ram's head: Yadin 1963 Fig. 16, Pl. 17. Bronze analogy, England, Verulamium, R 3rdI cent., key handle shaped like a lion: Goodman and Grew 1984b: 49, Fig. 18: 165.

520. Definition: Cylindrical handle 55\S\91434-1 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical handle whose rear end is wide with an elliptical cross-section and an elliptical projection of unclear purpose. The front end is narrower and round in cross-section with a socket of a trapezoid cross-section in which an iron tang remained. This is the only object of its type. L. 100mm, rear end d. 17 X 15mm, front end d. 11mm, the tang 7 X 3mm. Locus date: Roman, 2nd-3rd cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object was found with ivory objects Nos. 526-527.

523. Definition: Cylindrical handle with attachment grooves 55\S\65012 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical handle. The rear end, which is a little damaged, is wider and is reminiscent of an elephant's foot. The front end is broken but the end of the groove in which the blade was inserted still exists as well as part of a perpendicular rivet hole. This is the only object of its type. L. 55mm, rear d. 16mm, front d. 12mm, the groove w. 1mm. Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The ivory identification is not certain.

521. Definition: Handle of rectangular cross-section 55\P\0040 Description and interpretation: Handle of rectangular cross-section. The rear end is rounded and the front straight, with an off-centered socket. As the object is broken the whole socket can be observed. Its outer section is narrow and the wall rough. The inner part widens, turns diagonally and is smooth on one side and rough on the other. A small depression at the end of the socket shows that the drill head was pointed. It is possible that at first a round hole was drilled and then it was widened with a chisel. Two objects of this type were found. L. 52mm, w. 11.5mm, t. 14mm, the socket l. 31mm, d. 3-4.5mm.

524. Definition: Handle shaped like a sword sheath 55\S\25495 Description and interpretation: Handle shaped like a sword sheath (Poplin, pers. comm.). The rear end is rounded and broader than the rest (see No. 124) which has a rectangular cross-section. The front part consists of a narrower section with rounded hip-like ends. Each of these has a small projecting tablet followed by a stepped rim. A small socket shaped like a key hole was drilled in the front which still has sawing striations on it. The handle, probably for a delicate tool, is reminiscent of miniature sword sheaths found in the western part of the Roman Empire, which had votive or funerary functions (Béal and Feugère 1987: 98 and n. 21). However, the

518. Definition: Cylindrical handle from hippo ivory 55\S\85265 Pl. 3 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical handle. The narrow end terminates in a narrower cylindrical projection with a lathe indentation on its end. The wide end, which is broken, has an off-center cylindrical socket with remains of the iron tang. This handle resembles No. 519 but is simpler and rougher although made from a rare raw material. This is the only object of its type. L. 56mm, d. 11mm. Locus date: Byzantine? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

118

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Figs. 22, 24: 113, 118. England, Vindolanda, preHadrianic fortress: Birley 1977 Pl. 60 lower left. Notes: Antler parallel, Portugaal (Holland), 9th-12th cent.: van Vilsteren 1987: 51, No. 79. Metal parallels, France: Béal 1983a: 255, Pl. 64: 797-798. Bronze parallel, England, Verulamium, 3rd cent., painted: Goodburn and Grew 1984b: 47, Fig. 17: 144.

sockets in these sheaths are a lot larger and fit the whole sword blade. This is the only object of its type. L. 61mm, w. 6mm, t. 6mm, the socket de. 9mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine, 6th-7th cent. Morphological analogies: France, Lyon, R 1st-2nd cent., different details: Sautot 1978: 57, Pl. 28: 4; Béal 1983a: 75-76, Pl. 12: 79. Notes: None.

V.b.3. Whorls\buttons. See discussion in Chapter IV.

525. Definition: Cylindrical handle or tool head 55\S\18141 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical object covered now with patina, with a perforation (d. 4.5mm) near its bottom. It was drilled by mistake obliquely causing a break on its bottom, so the object was perhaps never used. The lower section terminates in a groove around the perimeter. Above it the cross-section narrows and there is a step and a cylindrical domed top. The object was probably lathe-carved. It may have been used as a handle or a head of a tool. This is the only object of its type. L. 44mm, d. 17mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

528. Definition: Grooved domed whorl\button 56\P\0033 Description and interpretation: Domed object with a flat bottom which has many parallel sawing or filing striations on it. The top is carefully smoothed and decorated with grooves around its circumference. This is the only object of its type. D. 22mm, H. 10mm, the perforation d. 5mm. Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: France, Autun, R: Sautot 1978: 34, Pl. 9: 2. Notes: Liu Type G1: Liu 1978 Table 1. Corinth Profile IV: Davidson 1952 Fig. 68. 529. Definition: Decorated whorl\button 56\A\0021 Description and interpretation: Originally rather high domed whorl\button which was broken. The bottom is flat and very smooth. A narrow band of fine lathe lines may be seen around part of its perimeter. The decoration consists of lines and groups of small circle-and-dot designs, some of them bordered by parallel lines; pairs of designs joined by two parallel lines; triangles filled with parallel lines and a circle-and-dot design on top of each. This is the only object of its type. D. 32mm, h. 11mm, the perforation d. 7.5mm. Locus date: Hellenistic and Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER, painted purple: Geva 2003: 345, Pl. 13.1: B7. Iraq, Tell Abu Sarifa, 10thII-11th cent., painted white: McC.Adams 1970: 115, Fig. 16: c. Notes: The identification as ivory is not certain. Liu Type G1: Liu 1978 Table 1.

V.b.2 Double buttons. Three ivory objects were found together: a handle (No. 520) and two double buttons. Some scholars claim that these buttons were part of military equipment (Wild 1970: 143-144 and Béal 1984: 69) but such objects were also found in female graves throughout the Roman Limes (Béal 1984: 69; Bíró, pers. comm.). 526-527. Definition: Double button 56\S\91434-2,3 Description and interpretation: These objects consist of two parts: an upper dome with a socket in its base and a lower “leg” inserted in it by pressing and perhaps also by gluing. Both objects have a lathe indentation on the top. The “leg” narrows downwards and terminates in a circular base (No. 526) which was sawn in the past into two sections. This base locked the button on the other side of the cloth. Both buttons are carefully smoothed. Circumferential, fine, shallow lathe marks are present around the circumference of the bottom of No. 527. These are the only objects of this type. No. 526: d. 22mm, h. 16mm. No. 527: d. 22mm, h. 6mm. Locus date: Roman, 2nd-3rd cent. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Amman, R 2nd-3rd cent., 2, from graves, studs: Ibrahim and Gordon 1987 Pl. 48: 4. Syria, Dura Europos, H-R: Matheson 1992 Fig. 16 top right. Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?, decorated: Hogarth 1908: 196, Pl. 42: 7. Hungary, Szőny and Dunapentele, 1st-3rd cent.: Bíró 1994: 72, 125, Pl. 8: 4445. Western Europe and Italy, ER, usually made of metal: Wild 1970: 143-144, Fig. 2 Class X. France, R, in the Besançon Museum: Sautot 1978: 37, Pl. 13: 4. France, Malain, R, rivet: Ibid.: 67, Pl. 43: 1. France, Lyon, R end of 1st - beginning of 2nd cent., possibly military object used in leather belts: Béal 1983a: 255256, Pl. 64: 799. France, Nîmes, end of 1st - beginning of 2nd cent., 2, from a woman's grave: Béal 1984: 69, Pl. 14: 272. Holland, Valkenburg, R: Verhagen 1993: 381,

530. Definition: Decorated whorl\button 56\A\12 Description and interpretation: Broken whorl\button with a very smooth bottom. The perforation is narrower at its center (more than shown in the drawing) since it was drilled from both sides. Two grooves encircle it on the top. The decoration consists of a repeating scene: a triangle filled with criss-crossed lines, bordered on top by two horizontal lines and a circle-and-dot design, and pairs of columns (?) terminating in circle-and-dot designs and linked by a double arch with a dot at its center (created by the center-bit point). In some of the circle-and-dot designs the point penetrated too deeply, creating a hole. This is the only object of its type. D. 27mm, h. 9mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Kh. Abu Suwwana, A 7th-8th cent., ivory bead: Sion 1997 Fig. 11: 9.

119

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE IVORY OBJECTS

Notes: The identification as ivory is not certain. Liu Type G1: Liu 1978 Table 1. Corinth Profile V: Davidson 1952 Fig. 68.

Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

531. Definition: Whorl\button decorated with birds 56\S\39346 Description and interpretation: Rounded whorl\button. The bottom is very smooth with lathe marks in a thin band around the circumference. A shallow depression around the perforation shows that it had been drilled from top. Two mouldings encircle the circumference on the top while a groove was incised around the perimeter at the bottom of the wall. The wall is decorated with images of (originally six) birds walking clock-wise around the object. Each has a head shaped from a circle-and-dot design (d. 2.5mm) and a beak. The body is formed from a similar motif (d. 4mm) and the tail is made from two triangles one within the other. The legs are each marked as two parallel lines. This is the only object of its type. D. 25mm, h. 9mm, the perforation d. 4.5mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: Tel Yoqne'am, A, the bird has no legs or beak: Agadi 1996: 236, Pl. 19.1: 1, Fig. 19.1:1. Egypt, Today in Hungary, whorl, bunches of grapes among the birds?: Török 1993: 67-68, Pl. 102: R 1. Syria, Hamma, Stratum A3 or earlier, end of 12th-13th I cent. or earlier, the bird motif is originally Christian: Oldenburg 1969: 118, 120, 126-128, Fig. 46: 15. Greece, Corinth, 11th cent., non-identical bird: Davidson 1952: 301, Pl. 124: 2572. Afghanistan and Iran, Islamic period: Liu 1978 Fig. 14. Notes: Liu Type G1: Ibid. Table 1. Corinth Profile II: Davidson 1952 Fig. 68.

534. Definition: Rectangular lid 56\S\18746 Description and interpretation: Roughly smoothed rectangular tablet. The top and the bottom are flat. One short side is straight and vertical while the other three are stepped. Two corners are damaged. It may have been a lid for a rectangular box with the lower step moving in the slots of the box (Poplin, pers. comm.). It may also have been a cosmetic palette, but then the steps would have had no use and besides the top is not worn. L. 30mm, w. 25mm, t. 5mm. Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Aquincum, cosmetic palette found with make-up tools: Bíró, pers. comm. Notes: None. 535. Definition: Wall of a rectangular box? 56\A\0180-4 Description and interpretation: Rectangular tablet, thicker along half its length. The thick part is cut through by three half perforations, probably for attaching it to another piece with pins. The side in which these holes are drilled is probably the original outer side although the other facets seem to be broken. L. 45mm, w. 14mm, t. 6mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: See discussion of Nos. 144145 above. Notes: None. 536. Definition: Wall of a rectangular box 56\S\8625 Description and interpretation: Flat tablet, broken on three of four sides. The bottom is roughly smoothed with marks of smoothing. The top is smooth. A rectangular off-centered tenon (with one end broken) projecting from the complete side was probably inserted in a depression cut in the neighboring wall. L. 47mm, w. 42mm, t. 6mm, the tenon l. 18mm, w. 2mm, t. 2mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: The object was found with bone wall No. 145.

V.b.4. Boxes. Two large cylindrical boxes (Nos. 532533) stand out in this group. They probably contained cosmetics, unguent oils, etc. and have no parallels. This group also includes some parts of rectangular boxes. Each one is unique in the assemblage. 532-533. Definition: Cylindrical box 56\A\0010; 1399 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical boxes made from a solid block of ivory, possibly making use of its natural cavity. Their wall is thick relative to the volume of the inner space (especially No. 533). Both are equipped with an inner flange for a lid. No. 532: The bottom is flat and smooth. The inner cavity was cleanly drilled out. The bottom is a little sunken at the center, reflecting the shape of the drill head. The lid flange terminates in a groove around the perimeter, probably incised with a bent point. The rim is flat. A deep and wide groove was incised around the outer wall 18mm above the base. Today the box is covered with patina. H. 80mm, upper d. 47mm, lower d. 49mm, the inner cavity d. 25mm, de. 76mm. No. 533: The box is smaller than that described above and has a smaller cavity. The lower part of the outer wall is decorated with three grooves running around it. The inner cavity is roughly worked with rough walls. The rim is straight and flat. The object is worn out and covered with patina. Part of the wall is missing. H. 72mm, d. 40mm, the inner cavity d. 20mm, de. 56mm.

V.b.5. Hinge heads (?) and stopper. The first two objects were possibly hinge heads or decorations on tool heads while the third was probably a large stopper. 537-538. Definition: Hinge or tool head 57\S\9059; 34084 Description and interpretation: No. 537: A cleanly smoothed object shaped like an onion on a cylindrical shaft (now broken) which widens a little bit downwards. A tiny lathe indentation or cutting point may be seen on its top. The hollow central part is the end of the tusk which broke while the elephant was still alive (Poplin, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. H. 27mm, d. 30mm. No. 538: A cylindrical, cleanly smoothed artifact with a domed top, on which a tiny lathe indentation or cutting point remained. It is decorated with a groove running around both the upper and lower parts. A cylindrical socket was drilled in its bottom with a 120

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE pointed drill, probably to attach it onto another object (hinge? dagger handle? furniture mount?). This is the only object of its type. H. 26mm, d. 19mm, the socket d. 4.5mm, de. 9mm. Locus date: No. 537: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Hungary, Szőny, 1st cent., semi-spherical, perforated: Bíró 1994: 69, 125, Pl. 1: 1. France, Lyon, R, part of a casket lid: Béal 1983a: 264, Pl. 47: 813. Notes: None.

541. Definition: Double-sided concave comb 57\A\0751 Description and interpretation: Broken double-sided comb with a concave side facet. The side margins are wider than usual and the comb is lens-shaped in crosssection for reinforcement. The comb is double-sided with wide short teeth and long thin ones. Guide lines were incised in advance on both sides and both facets, and the artisan indeed sawed up to them. These lines continue across the margins too so that it is possible that more teeth were originally planned. The spaces between the teeth at their bases were sawn obliquely from both sides. This is the only object of its type. L. 64mm, w. 32mm, t. 10mm, thick tooth l. 22mm, thin tooth l. 25mm. Locus date: Early Arab-Crusader, 10th-13th cent. Morphological analogies: Egypt, R-B, “Coptic”, 2, 26 decorated: Petrie 1927: 26, Pl. 20: 22, 26. Germany, Schlezwig, 11th-12th cent., decorated: MacGregor 1985: 81, Fig. 47: c. Notes: None.

539. Definition: Stopper? 57\S\74732 Description and interpretation: Circular object with a flat rim which is wider than the body (see No. 575). The top of the thickened circular part has five parallel chopping marks on it, made at a later stage for unclear reasons. The wider surface is a little convex so this was not the base. Although it was smoothed there are still diagonal, parallel sawing striations on it which are rarely left on the upper parts which can be seen. Thus, its identification as a stopper to close the neck of a vessel with the narrower solid part pointing downwards is not certain. The rim is partly damaged. D. 44mm, h. 10mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Wooden parallel, Nessana, B-A: Colt 1962 Pl. 24: 8.

542. Definition: Double-sided straight comb 57\S\34442 Description and interpretation: Part of a cleanly smoothed, double-sided comb. Four thick, spaced teeth and the margins remained on one side while the bases of seven thin, crowded teeth may be found on the other. The spaces between the teeth were sawn obliquely from both facets. The teeth ends were later cut obliquely from both sides with a knife. This is the only object of its type. L. 65mm, if the comb was symmetrical w. 70mm, t. 3.5mm. The thick teeth l. 32mm. Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Banyas, B, 2, bone: Israeli 2001: 31, 60, Nos. 68-69. Egypt, al-Tur, decorated: Kawatoko 1995 Pl. 38: 1. Tunisia, Carthage, 7th cent., with guide lines: Henig 1984: 86, 188, Fig. 61: 11. Notes: None.

V.b.6. Combs. These three broken combs belong to two types: two are double-sided and one is a special comb without any analogies. 540. Definition: Decorative comb? 57\A\0126 Description and interpretation: Part of a specially carved object, identical in shape on both sides and probably a comb. One end terminates in a curved handle with a circular depression on its end encircled by a moulding and a groove. It is possible, however, that it was originally a double handle which diverged into two parts or that its end had the shape of an animal’s head. A rounded shoulder under the handle terminates in a long tooth similar to the outer teeth of combs. Its end is broken off. Next to the base of this tooth is a space (w. 0.5mm) like that found between comb teeth. The body of this object is decorated with various open work perforations creating a flower design: a small (d. 4mm) round perforation in the center, elliptical leaf-shaped holes around it and elliptical perforations with arrow-shaped projections in their centers, separated by circular holes (d. 3mm), in the outer circle. The reconstruction shown here assumes that the body was symmetrical. This was probably a special comb used to decorate the hair but not to comb it, as the perforations would have weakened it. It could also have been a liturgical comb used in a church (Henig, pers. comm.). The patina covering it makes it difficult to identify the raw material. This is the only object of its type. L. 82mm, w. 47mm, t. 3mm. Locus date: Early Arab, 9th cent. Morphological analogies: Yugoslavia, R, with two handles terminating in animal heads: Petcović 1995 Taf. 8: 6. Notes: The ivory identification is not certain.

V.b.7. Jewelry. See discussion in Chapter IV. 543. Definition: Pin with an onion or pear-shaped head 57\S\53418 Description and interpretation: Pin with a head shaped like an onion or pear. A conical grooved collar separates it from the shaft, which narrows a little at the top. This section, the collar and the head are smoothed cleanly while the rest of the shaft was intentionally left rough. Its lower part is missing. Seven pins with this type of head were found, six of them from bone. L. 70mm, the head l. 12mm, d. 10mm. Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies (in shape, but not in material): Jerusalem, ER: Ben-Dov 1982: 164 (6th from right). Beit Nattif, 3rd(-4th) cent.: Baramki 1936 Pl. 9: 17. Kh. Jalame, LR, acorn-shaped: Berry 1988: 229-230, Pl. 8-1: 15. Gezer, B 4th-5th cent., from a grave: Macalister 1912 Pl. 102: 9. Castra, B, 3 from a grave, cone-shaped: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 1: 13. Meiron, B, Stratum V: Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981 Pl. 9.7: 25. Greece, Corinth, R 1st-2nd cent., conical head: Davidson 1952: 285, Pl. 119: 2342; pear-shaped: Ibid.: 283, Pl. 118: 2300-2301. Hungary, Szőny, 3rd-4th (possibly also 5thI) cent.: Bíró 1994: 88, 127, Pl. 29: 312-313; 3rdII-4th cent.: Ibid.: 87-88,

121

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE IVORY OBJECTS

Pl. 28: 307-309. Italy, Rome, Palatin: St. Clair 1996 Pl. 7 (4 from left). Tunisia, Carthage, oval head, no collar: Henig 1984: 188, Fig. 62: 27; 4thII - beginning of 5th cent., conical head with collar, decorated: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 563, 571, Figs. 12: 21, 14: 21. Notes: The identification as ivory is not certain. Another ivory (?) pin (B. 80315) has a drop-shaped head and a separately made shaft whose upper part is grooved.

V.b.9. Gaming pieces. Ivory parallels to almost all types of bone gaming pieces were found. At least four conical gaming pieces (?), not all identified certainly as ivory, are similar to bone object No. 290. The ivory dice (see table) are also identical to those made from bones (No. 280). It is possible that Nos. 565-566 belong to this group as well. 547. Definition: Gaming piece? 58\A\0035 Description and interpretation: Circular thick disk with a flat bottom. A lathe indentation may be found in a protuberance in the top center, encircled by two mouldings and a projecting rim. No lathe indentation may be seen on the bottom so it seems that a long rod was turned on the lathe and several disks were later sawn from it. The object is covered with patina. It may have been used as a gaming piece, counting token, inlay, etc. This is the only object of its type. D. 24m, h. 9m. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: See No. 289. Notes: None.

544. Definition: Small ring 57\S\73400 Description and interpretation: Small delicate, cleanly smoothed ring which was perhaps made on a lathe. It was probably part of a piece of jewelry or a decoration (Dray, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. D. 15mm, w. 2.5mm, t. 1.5mm. Locus date: Late Roman. Morphological analogies: France, Lyon: Béal 1983a: 269, Pl. 48: 817. England, York, 9th-10th cent., bone and antler, for the finger: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1943, Fig. 903: 6802, 7698. Notes: None.

548. Definition: Cylindrical domed gaming piece 58\P\0061 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical object with a flat bottom and domed top. A lathe indentation may be seen on its top but not on the bottom (see above). This is the only object of its type. H. 24mm, d. 20mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Greece, Corinth, R 1st cent. or earlier, gaming piece: Davidson 1952: 218-219, Pl. 99: 1688. Yugoslavia, 4th cent.: Petković 1995: 105, Taf. 40: 9. France, Lyon, R, with 4 depressions on its bottom, unclear use: Sautot 1978: 62, Pl. 28: 1. Notes: None.

545. Definition: Bracelet section or bead 57\P\0024 Description and interpretation: A piece which appears square from the front and rounded from the top. Both sides are sawn straight. A diagonal perforation was drilled in each opposite corner of the inside facet, crossing through the object so that the exit holes on the back are situated one above the other. It may have been part of a bracelet made from several such pieces threaded on two strings, or a bead. This is the only object of its type. L. 17mm, w. 17mm, t. 3.5mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: Ethnographic parallel: Africa: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 55 (bottom).

549. Definition: Domed gaming piece 58\A\1244 Description and interpretation: Domed object with a flat bottom. It has a lathe indentation on the top, encircled by two concentric circles. The object is covered with patina, split and damaged. Its dimensions suggest that it was a gaming piece and not an inlay or a decoration. This is the only object of its type. H. 23mm, d. 40mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine-Early Arab, 6th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

V.b.8. Musical instrument. 546. Definition: Castanet handle? 57\S\24391 Description and interpretation: Rectangular tablet with the upper part missing. The sides of the lower section are straight while the sides are stepped in the middle. Both facets are similarly decorated with non-parallel latitudinal grooves which sometimes join in the lower section with superimposed circle-and-dot designs above them. The bottom is not straight and the object does not stand on it. Parallels show that it was a castanet handle, with two smaller decorated tablets (see No. 272) tied to it through two perforations in its upper (missing) part. When the handle was shaken, these tablets hit it, making a rhythmic sound. It is not impossible, though, that this was actually a pendant which hung by the perforations. This is the only object of its type. L. 88mm, w. 22mm, t. 5mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Castra, B, at least 3 from a grave, two perforated (the third broken), pendants: Siegelmann in preparation Fig. 10: 4a-c. Syria, Seleucia, published as a figurine possibly used as a handle: van Ingen 1939: 350, Pl. 87: 635 No. 1634. See also parallels cited in No. 272. Notes: The identification as ivory is not certain.

550. Definition: Cylindrical stoppered gaming piece 58\P\0205 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical cleanly smoothed object with a flat bottom and a somewhat rounded top. A narrow cylinder was cut from the center, then its upper and lower parts were sawn off and used as stoppers for the same object. This unexplained procedure can be deduced from their perfect fit, except at one point – probably where the artisan started to drill. Filing striations appear on the bottom but not on that part of the stopper, showing that the object was smoothed between the removal of the inner cylinder and the insertion of the stoppers in its place. There is a lathe indentation on the upper stopper but not on the lower one. It seems that the artisan carved a rod on the lathe and then cut several pieces from it with this object being an extreme example. A guide 122

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Notes: None.

circle was incised on the top before the center of the cylinder was drilled, but the artisan did not keep within the line. The object is cracked today. This is the only object of its type. H. 20mm, d. 25mm, the cavity 9 X 13mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: See Nos. 298-299 above. Notes: The identification as ivory is not certain.

554. Definition: Circular inlay or gaming piece 58\S\40187 Description and interpretation: Thin circular disk. A lathe indentation, two shallow grooves and remains of two circles may be seen on its top. The bottom has dense sawing striations on it. Today, the disk is deformed. It may have been a gaming piece, inlay, stopper, counting token or waste (it was found with industrial refuse). This is the only object of its type. D. 12mm, t. 1mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Nubia, Karanog, 1st-3rd cent., inlays on caskets: Woolley and Randall-Maciver 1910 Pl. 22; ivory inlays on cosmetic boxes: Ibid.: 7172, Pl. 23: 7515, 7530. France, Lyon, R 1st-2nd cent., gaming piece or jeton: Béal 1983a: 286, Pl. 50: 833. Notes: None.

V.b.10. Writing implements. For some unknown reason, all eight writing tablets found at Caesarea were made of ivory even though large flat bones would have done just as well. According to Béal (1984: 109) those tablets, with T-shaped margins in cross-section, are inner ones in the writing set (the projecting margins protected the written material when the tablets were held together), while the outer pieces had margins with L-shaped cross-sections. 551-552. Definition: Writing tablet 58\A\0169; 0443-1 Description and interpretation: No. 551: Well made (90 degrees) corner of a tablet. The width of the margins changes along the facets and between the bottom and top. The rim is smooth on one side (the upper side?) with filing striations on the other (unseen?) surface. Three non-parallel striations may be seen on one side. L. 70mm, w. 27mm, t. 3.5mm. No. 552: Corner (not 90 degrees) of a flat tablet, very smooth on both sides. The width of the rim changes along the facets and between them. It is covered with diagonal striations and its ends on both sides were carelessly sawn leaving small projections. L. 84mm, w. 74mm, the tablet t. 2mm, the margins t. 3mm. Locus date: No. 552: Early Arab, 10th-11th cent. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, similar tablets in bone: Wapnish-Hesse, pers. comm. Egypt, 7th cent., ivory dyptich, two joined tablets covered with wax: British Museum Guide 1921 Fig. 66. Hungary, perforated writing tablet: Bíró 1994: 104, Pl. 65: 556559. Hungary, in the Budapest National Museum: Bíró, pers. comm. France, Nîmes, 2nd cent., ivory, perforated, from a grave: Béal 1984: 108-109, Pl. 22: 385. England, Blythburgh, 7th-8th cent., from maritime mammal bone: MacGregor 1985: 122, 124, Fig. 66. Notes: Wooden parallels, Muraba'at Cave, R: Benoit, Milik and de Vaux 1961 Fig. 12: 7-8, Pl. 12: 6-78. Wooden parallels, Egypt, H-R?: Petrie 1927: 66, Pl. 59. Wooden parallels, England, R, from a fortress, for writing with ink: Birley, Birley and Birley 1993 Pls. 19-24.

555. Definition: Section of a circular inlay? 58\S\38833 Description and interpretation: Part of a round piece, possibly originally shaped like half circle. The bottom is flat. One end (on the right) is sawn straight and the other broken. The top is decorated with two wide (w. almost 10mm) grooves. It may have been part of an inlay surrounding a decoration, portrait, mirror, etc. Two objects of this type were found. L. 35mm, w. 7mm, t. 2mm. Locus date: Roman-Late Roman. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 556. Definition: Carved inlay 58\S\83270 Description and interpretation: Flat, thin, cleanly smoothed tablet. The wide edge is broken and the sides are straight and parallel. The other edge has rounded shoulders and terminates in a small projection, creating an upside-down knight's shield shape. This is the only object of its type. L. 20mm, w. 16mm, t. 2mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 557. Definition: Carved piece: denticulated decoration 58\P\0162 Description and interpretation: Elongated rectangular, rather carelessly handmade tablet, broken on both ends. It is decorated like an architrave: the upper and the lower edges (of different width) comprise two mouldings and are separated by a band of projecting cubits (denticulus). Today, the tablet is deformed. This is the only object of its type. L. 107mm, w. 14mm, t. 4.5mm. Morphological analogies: Southern Yemen, Shabwa, pre-4th cent., ivory, 2-3 bands of denticulations in imitation of stone and wooden architectural elements: Béal 1991b: 195, Fig. 2: 31, 34. Notes: Wooden parallel, Egypt, “Coptic”, double decoration: Rutschowscaya 1986: 145, No. 504.

V.b.11. Inlays, carved pieces and furniture mounts. This group of artifacts includes a great variety of objects. Some have parallels in bone while others are unique. See discussion in Chapter IV. 553. Definition: Triangular inlay 58\S\23994-2 Description and interpretation: Triangular smoothed tablet, probably an inlay. This is the only object of its type. L. 42mm, w. 19mm, t. 3mm. Locus date: Byzantine, 6th cent. Morphological analogies: Turkey, Ephesos, P-H?: Hogarth 1908: 196, Pl. 40: 14. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 566, 575, Fig. 16: 44.

558. Definition: Decorated tablet 58\P\0026

123

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE IVORY OBJECTS

Description and interpretation: Part of a rectangular tablet with two broken sides. Today, it is a little deformed. Parallel lines project from the bottom, probably to insure better gluing. The top is cleanly smoothed with the exception of striations running in various directions on the margins, probably related to the way this object was used. It is decorated with three nonidentical and disorganized triple-circle-and-dot designs. It may have been an unsuccessful attempt to produce a pendant or inlay or even been part of a beginner's training (see No. 506). This is the only object of its type. L. 33mm, w. 31mm, t. 5mm, the largest design d. 7.5mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Holland, Maastricht, 6th-7th cent., a training piece or one broken by mistake: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 25, 63, Fig. 18: 4. England, York, 10th-11th cent.: MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1955-1956, Figs. 915-916. Notes: The object was found with a piece of sawn waste, possibly also ivory.

Description and interpretation: Part (one of two which do not join) of a circular tablet with an empty center. The bottom is smooth. Circular lathe marks may be seen on its top. It may have been a piece of inlay in a design surrounding a mirror, portrait, etc., or part of a lid. This is the only object of its type. D. 70mm, the inner cavity d. 35mm, t. 6mm. Locus date: Roman. Morphological analogies: Jordan, Amman, R 2nd-3rd cent., from a grave: Ibrahim and Gordon 1987 Pl. 48: 2. Egypt or Syria, 14th cent., ivory, decoration: Jenkins 1983: 89. The Baltimore Exhibition, 6th cent., ivory pyxis lid: Early Christian and Byzantine Art: 41, Pl. 19 No. 109. Notes: The object was found with a bone box fragment (No. 129). Analogies to a lead frame from a circular mirror, H. Sugar, B 4th-6th cent.: Aviam and Stern 1997: 99, Fig. 6: 8. Rahmani (1964: 59-60) thinks that small mirrors (like the one possibly put in this piece) were ritual, buried with the dead. Pottery comparison, LR-B, with a circular mirror in its center: Ibid. Pl. 16A.

559. Definition: Floral arched decoration\inlay 59\S\26092 Description and interpretation: Arched decoration which perhaps surrounded (with other sections) a circular or semi-circular area or object. The basis comprises a solid rounded band with a square cross-section. A rounded moulding bordered by two grooves may be seen on the left part of the object. On top there is an open work floral design consisting of units of three leaves with the outer ones touching. There is a small groove at each point where the leaves touch each other. Seen from top, the leaves are narrower than their bases. There are sawing and manufacturing marks on the bottom. The top is carefully smoothed. The hollow sections between the leaves were created by sawing which left marks there. This is the only object of its type. L. 74mm, h. 13mm, the basis w. 5mm, t. 5mm. Locus date: Byzantine, 5th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

562. Definition: Pomegranate-shaped decoration? 59\S\34021 Description and interpretation: Flat tablet carved in the shape of an elongated pomegranate (Poplin, pers. comm.). Six petals (five of which remained) adorn its narrow neck. The body is wide and rounded. The base is broken. The side edges are oblique from both top and bottom and sharp in cross-section. This is the only object of its type. L. 44mm, w. 25mm, t. 3mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Syria, Hamma, handle end, with three holes and two petals: Oldenburg 1969: 114, Fig. 43: 9. Notes: The object was found near inlay No. 563. 563. Definition: Floral inlay 59\S\34020 Description and interpretation: Thin carved piece, broken all around. The design probably comprised large leaves with projecting veins surrounded by circular twigs. The margins on one side, bordered by two straight lines, may have been the edge of the tablet. There are two rivet perforations. There are more pieces, with the edges of other circles and two more rivet holes. This is the only object of its type. L. 50mm, w. 35mm, t. 4mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Egypt, 5th-6th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, ivory: Strzygowski 1904: 185, Taf. 16 No. 7115 left. Notes: The object was found near No. 562. Analogies to Early Arab stone sculpture, Kh. El-Mafjar: Hamilton 1950 Pl. 35 second row on the left top and second row on the left bottom.

560. Definition: Carved piece: lion's paw? 59\S\27237 Description and interpretation: Carved tablet with a flat and very smooth bottom probably attached to some object. The base, the right side and the right end of the top were sawn straight but not smoothed. A finger and nail project from the front and behind them there is probably part of another finger. This may be a section of a decoration or inlay shaped like a lion's paw (Poplin, pers. comm.). This is the only object of its type. L. 86mm, h. 33mm, t. 13mm. Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Saqqara, 6th-7th cent., in the Cairo Museum, “Coptic”, bone handle: Strzygowski 1904: 211 No. 8925. Nubia, Karanog, 1st – 3rd cent., ivory: Woolley and Randall-Maciver 1910: 6970, Pl. 24; de Villard 1938: 7-8, Taf. 6. Notes: None.

564. Definition: Carved pieces: female figures 59\S\81080 Description and interpretation: Judging by their thickness these five broken pieces come from at least two different tablets. Mainly garment folds can be observed. No. 1 should perhaps be looked at with the straight facet at the top. This way a stretched-out hand can be seen

561. Definition: Circular inlay? 59\S\18787

124

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE among the folds. No. 2 is probably a dancing girl (see Nos. 340-341), with a break between her upper and lower garments. Part of a rivet perforation remained in this piece. Nos. 3-5 have one straight facet each. The bottoms have sawing and planing marks on them. These are the only pieces of this type. 1: L. 73mm, w. 29mm, t. 4mm. 2: L. 81mm, w. 29mm, t. 2.5mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Garment folds: Halussa, LR, 4th-5th cent.: Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 189, Fig. 4. Streched-out hand: Egypt(?) 3rd-4th cent.: Elderkin 1926: 150, Figs. 1-2. Egypt, Alexandria, end of 4th - beginning of 5th cent.: Jablonowska-Taracha 2001: 51-52, Fig. 4, Pl. 8.6. Egypt, end of 3rd-4th cent.: Marangou 1976: 80-81, Pls. 48c, g, 50a, 51d, f. Egypt, 5th cent., bone, “Coptic”: Beckwith 1963: 49, Pl. 27. Egypt, Antinoé, 5th-6th cent., bone: Del Francia Barocas 1998: 69, No. 46. Egypt, 4th-5th cent., bone: St. Clair and McLachlan 1989: 47-48, No. 14. Notes: None.

wall is smooth and undecorated, bordered on top by lathe-made mouldings around the periphery. The upper part is decorated with narrow column shafts with circles or beads on their fronts, bordered by vertical lines. Each pair of columns is separated by a depression, oblique from bottom up and from the outside in. The carving was partly done with a chisel which left incisions and small defects on the walls. Despite the nice appearance of the object, close inspection reveals careless work. This artifact may have been a gaming (chess?) piece, dagger pommel or furniture mount. This is the only object of its type. H. 25mm, w. 30mm, original d. 33mm, t. 7mm. Locus date: Early Arab, 7th-8th cent. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: See No. 565. 567. Definition: Foot\gaming piece\decoration? 60\S\14008 Description and interpretation: Part of a lathe-carved object with an indentation on its top. Its profile is reminiscent of a column base, decorated with both rounded and sharp mouldings. Both the top and bottom are flat and smooth. As a complete cylinder it could be a gaming piece or the leg of an object, or – sawn in two halves – a decorative half-column attached to the wall of an object (Dray, pers. comm.). This is the only item of its type. H. 16mm, upper d. 20mm, lower d. 28mm. Locus date: Roman-Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Golan Heights, H-R, unpublished, probably the leg of an object: Hartal, pers. comm. Compare to: France, R: Sautot 1978 Pl. 27: 6. Notes: None.

V.b.12. Heads of objects, furniture mounts, miscellanea. All are unique artifacts of unclear function. 565. Definition: Decorated cylindrical object 60\A\0782 Description and interpretation: Skillfully carved decorated object. A narrow tenon projecting from the bottom was perhaps stuck into a matching depression on another object. The end of this cylinder is oblique with a lathe indentation. The body widens upwards. Its bottom is oblique from the perimeter towards the center. The lower band is smooth and undecorated. The central strip, bordered on top and bottom with encircling grooves, is carved like a series of column shafts separated by deep cavities and surmounted by arches. Each arch is bordered by lines and the indentation made by the drill point remained in each center. The columns are decorated with circles or beads bordered by vertical lines. These imitate a Moslem arcade, a common motif on, inter alia, Early Arab stone vessels (A. Jones, pers. comm.; Humbert 1989: 128, 129 lower photograph). The cavity between each pair of columns was diagonally drilled upwards until the perforation reaches the free space between the central upper cylinder and the leaves on the perimeter. Most of these free standing leaves (or denticulated decoration? J. Allan, pers. comm.) are broken. The central cylinder has a depression on its top (d. 8mm, de. 20mm), probably for attaching another object with a tenon there. This elaborate artifact may have been a furniture mount, decoration or part of a gaming (chess?) piece. This is the only object of its type (but see No. 566). H. 52mm, d. 38mm. Locus date: Early Arab, 10th cent. Morphological analogies: Unknown origin, in the Mayer Museum of Islam, Jerusalem, A, similar object – chess piece. Egypt, R, ivory, chess pieces?: Petrie 1927: 45, Pl. 39: 99-100. Notes: See No. 566.

568. Definition: Hollow object with grooves 60\P\0161 Description and interpretation: Partly damaged conical object. Both top and bottom were sawn straight. An elliptical cavity passes down its entire length. A deep, wide and asymmetrical groove crosses the narrow end and enlarges the inner cavity into a T-shaped funnel. A similar but more organized groove crosses the other side perpendicular to the first and to the vertical cavity. Part of a lock? This is the only object of its type. L. 16mm, d. 17mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 569. Definition: Part of an object 60\A\0331 Description and interpretation: Rectangular piece, part of a larger object. The top (as drawn) and sides are straight and smooth. Two grooves, one longer than the other, may be seen on the top. The other side has a scar which covers more than half its length; on three sides it extends to its perimeter while on the fourth side it is rounded. The object was obviously attached at that point to another object. The other part of the “bottom” turns up in a rounded way. It may be a blank, waste, or part of an unidentified artifact. This is the only object of its type. L. 61mm, w. 27mm, t. 13mm. Locus date: ? Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

566. Definition: Decorated hollow object 60\A\0616-2 Description and interpretation: Part of a hollow cylindrical object. The inner cavity is roughly worked. The bottom is cleanly smoothed and concave towards the center (see side cross-section). The lower section of the 125

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE IVORY OBJECTS

V.b.13. Rods. Three different rods were found.

1995 Pl. 38: 9.

570. Definition: Carved rod 61\P\0061 Description and interpretation: Cylindrical lathe-turned rod. Its thick end is globular and the top narrower and irregularly cut, leaving two short parallel grooves on it. It could have been used as a stamp. Beneath the head are mouldings and grooves. The lower section is less completely smoothed with many vertical planing marks on it. The point is missing. The object may have been a handle, spindle, stylus, etc. This is the only object of its type. L. 111mm, d. 9mm. Locus date: Byzantine. Morphological analogies: Jerusalem, ER, bone: Ben-Dov 1982: 164. Beth-Shan, R?, ivory, not identical: Fitzgerald 1931: 44, Pl. 40: 27. Turkey, Tarsus, Late H, spindle\distaff: Goldman 1950: 398-399, Fig. 272: 51. Hungary, R-LR?, spindle, different decoration: Bíró 1994: 103, Pl. 62: 538-540. Hungary, Gorsium, end of 1st - end of 2nd cent., less decorated, handmade: Bíró 1987: 28, Fig. 7: 15. Yugoslavia, end of 4th – 5thI cent.: Petković 1995: 9394, Taf. 32: 6. Benelux, 4th-7th cent., thick antler, bone and metal stamps for pottery: Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 61, Fig. 37. France, Lyon, R 1st - 3rd cent., working tool: Béal 1983a: 143, Pl. 30: 338-339. France, 1st - 2nd cent., spindles or cosmetic sticks (some with stained points): Ibid.: 204205, Pl. 37. England, London, R: MacGregor 1985: 185187, Fig. 101: 3. England, 5th cent. onwards, antler stamp for pottery: Ibid.: 194, Fig. 104: a. Notes: None.

V.b.14. Blanks, unfinished objects, production waste. Beside the objects described below, unfinished ivory frame inlays were found which testify to their production in the city. 573. Definition: Raw tablet 61\P\0098 Description and interpretation: Rectangular tablet, half of which is thicker than the rest. Part of one side is missing. This is probably a blank showing that ivory was worked at Caesarea. This is the only object of its type. L. 78mm, w. 29mm, t. 8-10mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None. 574. Definition: Unfinished ajouré inlay 61\A\0092 Description and interpretation: Large, flat tablet on which ajouré designs have been carved. The bottom is rough with filing striations running in various directions. The top is more smoothed although similar striations on it can barely be seen. Both long sides were probably obliquely cut with a knife in order to join them to neighboring tablets. The ajouré designs were cut along the left side and this is the line along which the tablet broke. Part of the concave right upper side is likewise broken. Various open work designs and a larger curved perforation are found near the center and probably represent a failure in drilling and cutting. The tablet may be the unfinished work of a beginner. Three pieces of this type were found (the other two of bone). L. 147mm, w. 54mm, t. 2mm. Locus date: Early Arab, 8th-9th cent. Morphological analogies: Ashkelon, A: Ayalon 1999 Fig. 76. Notes: None.

571. Definition: Cylindrical rod or stamp 61\S\70392 Description and interpretation: Thick, short cylindrical rod. The narrower end (slightly damaged) is sawn straight. The other end, a little rounded, has a wide and deep groove across it. It may have been used as a pottery stamp although it is unclear why ivory would have been used in such a mundane task. It is covered with patina. This is the only object of its type. L. 84mm, d. 16 X 18mm. Locus date: Late Byzantine. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

575. Definition: Unfinished lid? 61\S\24146 Description and interpretation: Part of a cleanly smoothed round object whose base is wider than the rest of the object (see No. 539). A round hole was partly drilled in the center. It may have been a lid (with the wider margins on top) of a cosmetic box with a hole for the kohl stick. This is the only object of its type. D. 40mm, h. 9mm, the hole d. 12mm, de. 5mm. Locus date: Early Roman. Morphological analogies: None. Notes: None.

572. Definition: Carved rod 61\A\0680 Description and interpretation: Roughly handmade carved rod with an elliptical cross-section, with some planing marks on it. Unfinished? One end is straight with a groove caused by breaking it from the continuation. This end is worn out and was possibly used for crushing powders (like medical or cosmetic materials). The other end is truncated and could have been used as an applicator. The decoration consists of convex sections bordered by mouldings. This is the only object of its type. L. 77mm, w. 12mm, t. 9mm. Locus date: Early Arab-Crusader, 10th-13th cent. Morphological analogies: Cyprus, Salamis, [H-R?], smaller, nicely carved: Chavane 1975: 50, Pls. 16: 136, 62: 136. Hungary, Szőny, R, from a grave, spindle\distaff: Bíró 1994 No. 529. Yugoslavia, 4th cent.: Petković 1995: 93, Taf. 32: 5. France, Lyon, R, smaller: Béal 1983a: 143-144, Pl. 42: 340. Notes: Wooden parallel, Egypt, Sinai, al-Tur: Kawatoko

576. Definition: Rough-out lathe end 61\S\39225-2 Description and interpretation: Part of a rod carved in planes all around to form a polygonal cross-section before it was mounted on a lathe, to minimize the amount of material to be removed. The right end is sawn straight with no lathe indentation showing that it was attached to it by three teeth (see Chapter VI). The other end, from which the carved object was cut off, is a little thicker. Its smooth margins were cut when the rod rotated on the lathe. The middle was then cut with a saw (leaving parallel striations) and the last part broken off leaving a scar. This is the only object of its type. L. 32mm, d. 12mm. 126

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Locus date: Late Byzantine-Early Arab. Morphological analogies: Egypt, Alexandria, B 5th beginning of 7th cent.: Rodziewicz 1998: 146, Fig. 12 center and right, 2nd line from bottom. Tunisia, Carthage, 4thII - beginning of 5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 560, Fig. 11: 4. France, Lyon, R: Béal 1983a Pl. 3: 68. Notes: The object was found with bone blank No. 488.

Description and interpretation: Part of a rod carved in planes around its circumference before being mounted on the lathe. One end is smooth with an off-center lathe indentation. Parallel marks of a thin saw can be observed over most of the other end, whose last part was broken. This is the only object of its type. L. 40mm, d. 13mm. Locus date: Early Arab. Morphological analogies: France, Lyon, R 1st - 2nd cent.: Béal 1983a: 61-62, Pls. 6: 54-55, 57-58, 7: 45-46, 8: 47. Notes: None.

577. Definition: Lathe carved rough-out end 61\S\34605

Catalogue of the Ivory Objects, Porath Expedition Basket 4259 8625 9059 14008 18034 18141 18176 18746 18787 18855 23994-2 24146 24391

Area B H14 --I+ I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I-E I-E T22-23

Locus D15 C48 048 E93 1582 1591 2015 2122 2110 2110 4331 4228 ---

Year 92 92 92 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

Object Gaming piece Box wall Hinge\object head Box leg? Die Handle\object head Gaming piece? Lid? Circular tablet Piece Inlay Unfinished lid? Castanet handle?

25495 26045 26092 26919 27237 33168 34020 34021 34084 34442 34605 38833 38869 38907 38961 39225-2 39346 39470 39639 39916 40121 40187 51296 51660 53418 54234 65012 65152 65298 66020 70392 73400 74698

I I I I I --II II 3-B II II II II II II II II II II II ------IW IW IW ------I+ A+ A+ ---

Q20 R20-21 4624 4786 U18 G114 10310 10310 --10350 10262 10543 10595 10567 10605 10634 Topsoil 10682 10712 10756 10796 10868 344 205 E22 609 1788 1847 1864 1963 1645 1617 ---

94 94 94 94 94 93 93 93 93 93 93 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 95 95 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 94 95

Handle Rough-out end? Floral decoration\inlay Globular hollow object Carved piece Die Inlay Inlay Hinge\object head? Comb Rough-out end Circular inlay Inlay Gaming piece? 2 Inlays\inlay waste Rough-out end Button\whorl Ring Inlays, blanks, waste Handle Inlay Circular inlay? Cylindrical rod Cylindrical handle Pin 2 Gaming pieces Handle Gaming piece\inlay Carved handle Die Cylindrical rod\stamp Ring Inlay 127

Fig.

Period

56:536 57:537 60:567

B R-B

Remarks Ivory?

Ivory? 55:525 Ivory? 56:534 59:561 58:553 61:575 57:546

B R B LB ER LB

55:524

LB

59:560

B LB A

See Nos. 251, 272 Ivory?

Ivory? 59:563 59:562 57:538 57:542 61:577 58:555

LB LB

Ivory?

A A R-LR Ivory? Ivory?

61:576 56:531

LB-A Bone+ivory Ivory?

58:554

LB-A

57:543

B

55:523

R-B

55:522

LR-B

61:571 57:544

LB LR B

Ivory? Ivory? Ivory? Ivory? Ivory?

TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE IVORY OBJECTS

Basket 74732 76394 76931 77772 80238 80315 80961 81080 81386 82629 83270 85265

Area --------N+ N+ N+ N+ ----N+ ---

Locus B91-92 0000 7746 7602 3316 Topsoil 3348 M2\3 M5\6 3423 3768 8073

Year 95 95 95 95 94 94 94 94 94 95 96 95

Object Stopper? Die Cylindrical rod, blank? Die Die Pin Pin Carved pieces Handle section\head? 4 circular pieces; base? Inlay Handle

91434

---

9212

95

Handle; 2 double buttons

Fig. 57:539

Period

Remarks

Ivory? Ivory? Ivory?

R LB

59:564

Ivory? 58:556 55:518

LB B?

55:520; 56:526-527

R

Hippopotamus ivory

Patrich Expedition Year

Area

Loc.

No.

Basket

Object

------93

CC19 KK25 KK25 KK07

002 095 019 006

001 001 001 002

017 0214 0061 0023

Ring Pin; bottle head Carved rod\stamp 61:570 Human head - gaming piece?

93

KK07

009

002

0028

Human head - gaming piece?

93

KK07

012

001

0041

Tower-shaped gaming piece

93

KK07

012

001

0052

93

KK07

025

001

0087

Cylindrical object , onionshaped head Rod

93 93 93 93 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 95 95 96 96 96 96 00

KK11 KK18 KK19 KK21 CC51 KK22 KK23 KK23 KK23 KK23 KK26 KK26 CC19 KK11 KK27 KK32 KK36 KK36 CC60

118 818 940 115 008 627 003 003 003 008 021 045 002 178 060 000 075 075 629

001 001 001 001 001 003 001 001 002 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0040 0061 0135 0034 0098 0106 0024 0026 0026 0047 0033 0058 0017 0161 0126 0162 0115 0117 0035

Handle Gaming piece Ring Gaming piece Raw tablet Spindle? Bracelet\bead? Inlay? Waste Pin; piece Whorl\button Gaming piece Rod? Worked cylinder Inlay Carved piece Pin Handle Blank\waste

128

Fig.

55:521 58:548

Period

B

Remarks Ivory? Ivory? Ivory? Not checked. Ivory? Not checked. Ivory? Not checked. Ivory? Not checked. Ivory? Not checked. Ivory?

LB Ivory? Ivory?

61:573

LB

57:545 58:561

LB LB

Ivory? Ivory? Ivory? 56:528 58:550

B Ivory?

60:568 Ivory? 58:557 Ivory head?

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Raban Expedition Year --89 90 91 91 92 92 93 93 93

Area CV3 TP3 TP5 CV KK16 I1 I6 G25 I1 I2

No. 22 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 ---

Basket 362 30069 0021 0015 0180-4 1244 0092 0046 1343 ---

Object Sawn piece Handle Whorl\button 11 Inlay waste; 2 inlays Box Gaming piece Inlay blank\waste Rough-out end Gaming piece Whorl\button

I4 I4 I4 I4 I6 I1 I6 I14 I8 K16 TPS TPS Z Z Z Z LL01 LL01 LL01 LL01 LL01 LL01

Loc. 086.39 3013 018 008 253 134 671 019 195? Topsoil 555 600 000 000 058 200 279 940 002 253 064 111 020 144 211 122 075 097 097 107 107 017

93 93 93 93 93 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 96 96 96 96 96 96

001 001 001 001 001 001 002 001 003 001 001 001 001 001 001 002 001 001 001 002 004 005

0680 0759 0751 0782 1466 1407 0010 1399 0013 0180 0126 0327 0035 0443-1 0616-2 0331 0119 0169 0170 0182 0182 0182

LL05 LL05 TP28

005 005 034

001 001 001

0014 0016 0037

Carved object Raw inlay Comb Carved object Inlay Ring production waste Box Box Waste Box Carved comb Writing tablet? Disk\gaming piece Writing tablet Carved piece Object Whorl\button Writing tablet Inlay Inlays Inlay 6 musical bridges; 10 pieces; writing tablet? Inlay waste Inlay waste Waste

98 98 00

129

Fig.

Period

55:519 56:532

B

Remarks Ivory? Bone & ivory

56:535 58:549

LB-A Ivory? Ivory? Ivory?

56:530 61:572

A-Cr

57:541 60:565

A-Cr A

Ivory? Ivory? Ivory? 56:532 56:533 Ivory? 56:535 57:540 58:547 58:552 60:566 60:569

A

Ivory? Ivory?

A A Ivory?

58:551 Ivory? Ivory? Ivory? Bone & ivory

Ivory?

CHAPTER VI THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY VI.a. Sources of Information

The absence of workshops in the archaeological finds forces us to look for other sources of information which are described below, in order to learn about production methods and techniques (Averbouh 2001 Table 1).

The Land of Israel has never been considered a center of bone and ivory industry (Rosenthal 1976; Lowlor 2000: 298). Lowler was even puzzled by the fact that no bone or ivory carving appears in Avi-Yonah’s extensive work on local art in the Roman-Byzantine period (i.e. AviYonah 1981). Indeed, this subject has been largely ignored until now and we lack the knowledge which has accumulated in other places, especially in Europe.

VI.a.1. Historical sources. The written and iconographic sources from the periods under discussion here are even scantier than the archaeological finds. The rare Jewish sources which mention a few bone artifacts (see Chapter IX) do not mention the artisan or his work (Ayali 1987: 103-142, i.e. sv Carver, p. 110). Neither are there Roman sources mentioning the bone artisan although some do refer to 2nd cent. artisans working with the more precious ivory (eborarii) (Deschler-Erb 1998: 93). This latter fact suggests that these workers may already have been organized in a guild (Barnett 1982: 70) or working together with the eborarii-citrarii producing ivory-inlayed furniture from citrus wood (Rodziewicz 1998: 136). The many Roman wall paintings, mosaics and reliefs showing various artisans at work, including carpenters (Rahmani 1988) do not represent bone or ivory carvers.

The investigation of the production techniques of these artifacts is difficult for another reason: Until recently, not even one complete bone or ivory workshop has been found or at least published in detail in Israel in particular and throughout the ancient world in general (Krzyszkowska 1992: 25, 28). Such a find would tell us much about how such workshops were organized, the tools which were used and typical installations. A workshop find would also illuminate the way raw materials were collected and stored as well as tell us something about the production line in more advanced and professional workshops, etc. Actually, it is not even certain that all the production stages were carried out within the same enterprise (Ibid.: 28).

A few illustrations, mostly from periods later than those discussed here, shed some light on the subject. An 11th cent. miniature from Venice (which probably originates from an earlier source) shows an ivory carver sitting beside a low working table, removing pieces from a tusk in an early stage of the work (Cutler 1985: 38, Fig. 37). A miniature from the end of the 13th cent. from Bagdad displays a bow-turned lathe on a table (Sadan 1976: 177, Pl. 3: 6). A 15th cent. German illustration shows a “Paternostermaker” (Spitzers 1997: 160) drilling rosary beads with a bow-operated center-bit (see below; MacGregor 1985: 58, Fig. 35). Another engraving from the 16th cent. depicts an antler comb maker (Christensen 1987 Fig. 9). A 17th cent. illustration describes a workshop producing bone rosary beads: One worker (with a frame saw nearby) cuts away a tablet using a cleaver, another files a piece and the third drills beads with a bow-operated center-bit; perforated waste pieces are scattered on the floor (Pl. 10; Gróf and Gróh 2001 Fig. 5). Another illustration from the same time and place depicts a comb workshop (MacGregor 1989: 121, Fig. 5a). An illustration from the 18th cent. shows a horn workshop, a raw material which was carved like bone and ivory (Ibid., Fig. 4) but which rarely survives in archaeological contexts.

Scanty remains of workshops were unearthed, for instance, in Alésia, France (Poulain and Poulain 1978: 30; Béal 1994: 128-129 – compare to the reconstruction from an earlier period by Evely 1992 Fig. 3a); Compièrre, France (Sautot 1978: 49-51); San Lorenzo di Lucina, Rome (Choyke, pers. comm.); Sagalassos, Turkey (De Cupere 2001:147-159; Syrmium, Hungary (Saranovic-Svetek 1980: 132). Most of the relevant finds from Caesarea, as well as from Alexandria (Rodziewicz 1998), Carthage (Hutchinson and Reese 1988) and other sites (Spitzers 1997; Gróf and Gróh 2001) represent concentrations of blanks, unfinished objects and production waste which were found in secondary position in rubbish dumps, testifying that workshops functioned nearby. This situation can be compared to the Mayan bone production center which flourished in Dos Pilas, Guatemala around 800 CE (Emery 2001). Most of the implements used by the artisans were made of metal and therefore recycled or reused later on for other purposes (Ward-Perkins 2001: 171), perished in the humid conditions at Caesaria, especially since they were made from rather thin metal (Barbier 1994-1995: 13), or taken home by the worker at the end of the day, as traditional artisans do (Hammond 1986: 131). Therefore these tools are rarely found in the excavations.

VI.a.2. Similar crafts. It is widely agreed that bone and ivory carving was very similar in terms of the techniques and tools used to the work of the wood turner (Barnett 1957: 155-159; Poulain and Poulain 1978: 10; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 560; Rutschowscaya 1986:

131

THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY 18-20). The tools used for crafting bone were, however, usually smaller and finer (Barbier 1988: 52). The wood turner who worked beside the traditional carpenter specialized in fine carving and made broad use of a lathe to produce symmetrical cylindrical objects as well as combs similar to ones made from bone and ivory (Avitsur 1976: 162-166; Liversidge 1976: 155-165; Wulff 1966: 90-92, Fig. 135; Ammoun 1991: 92-95). As only a few changes have occurred in the production techniques and tools since the Roman period (Salaman 1997: 13) it is possible – within certain limitations – to reconstruct the ancient bone workshop based on what we know of the workshops of carpenters and wood turners (c.f. McWhirr 1982 Pl. 24; Richter 1926: 148-158; Rahmani 1988; Goodman 1996, especially table p. 15). Such traditional workshops were documented, for instance, during Napoleon’s 1799 expedition in Egypt and by others in the 19th century (Anderson and Fawzy 1987 Pl. 137: 4-5; see Pl. 11 [Wilson 1880: 133]). It is worth noting that Middle Eastern artisans operated the lathe sitting on the floor while since the Roman period Europeans have worked on a table, as shown in the above mentioned illustrations (Sitri, pers. comm.).

used with caution as production techniques, tools, raw material availability, market demands, fashion, etc. sometimes change, even among traditional societies (Krzyszkowska 1992: 26). VI.a.4. Marks left by the implements of manufacture. Many of the ancient implements of manufacture were made, partly or completely, from metal and thus, were recycled when broken or vanished in the wet soil. As many tools such as knives were used for other purposes, it is impossible to connect them with bone carving alone. Therefore, we have to reconstruct the tool kit based on what is known about the equipment used in any given period and by investigating the marks left by those tools on the objects (Barnett 1957: 155-159; Barbier 1988: 52; MacGregor 1985: 55; Evely 1991). The basis for this method was established by researchers of prehistoric finds (such as Semenov 1964; Campana 1989). High quality objects which were well polished and heavily used rarely bear any production marks. In other cases, natural destruction of the objects surface after being thrown away also eliminate the original marks. It is also important to distinguish between production marks and use wear (Campana 1989: 65 Table 1; Griffitts 2001), the erosion of the artifact in the soil (Semenov 1964: 11), butcher’s work signs or marks left on the bone by animals’ teeth (Goren-Rabinovitch and Kolska-Horowitz 1989). It should also be remembered that the carving tools act differently on bone, various kinds of ivory and antler (Krzyskowska 1992: 25) and leave unsimilar marks on each (Evely 1992: 7). Self training in the production techniques is also very important to this aspect of the research (Barbier 1988: 52).

A bone workshop was reconstructed in 1999 for the “Bare Bones” exhibition (see Introduction above), where the artisan Valery Kurov produced various bone objects, some of them decorated or lathe-turned. Watching Kurov at work illustrated how efficient and quick an experienced meister could be in using his tools. Another trade that can be compared to bone production is the mother-of-pearl inlay industry. The roots of this industry can be traced to the Bethlehem region from the Middle Ages at the latest. It flourished in Israel especially during the 19th and early 20th cent., as well as in Iran (Wulff 1966: 92-97), Syria (mainly in Damascus; Ayalon 1999: 56-57) and other Mediterranean countries.

Most of the information about tool marks can be obtained from roughly worked objects, from unobserved parts (like the back or bottom) which are usually less well finished, and mainly from unfinished artifacts. The Use of a magnifying glass and a microscope and accumulating experience enable the researcher to identify the tools used according to the shapes, dimensions, depth and direction of the marks which they left. He can learn about the shape of the tool’s working end, the material from which it was made, the angle of the point relatively to the object, the order of work stages, the amount of power used, etc. (Semenov 1964: 162 and more below). Bone is well suited for this kind of investigation as its face is smooth and keeps the finest striations (Ibid.: 15). It should be kept in mind, however, that tools were used in different ways in various stages of the work so the analysis of the marks they left should be strengthened by other methods of research (Krzyszkowska 1992: 25).

VI.a.3. Ethnographic analogies have already been mentioned, especially those bone, ivory, canine teeth, antler and shell artisans who still use traditional techniques. Such people existed until recently among Eskimoes, Native Americans, Aborigines and in the Far East (McCarthy 1957; Semenov 1964; Stewart 1973; Whiteford 1973) as well as in the Levant (Wulff 1966; Ammoun 1991). However these crafts are rapidly disappearing with the workers already using modern equipment, although small and fine pieces are still carved on a bow-turned lathe as the new tools are too fast and break the bone (Ibid.). Yet Valery Kurov demonstrated very efficiently how fresh bone can be carved with a knife (Pl. 12) and is thus an important source of information on this issue. Ethnographic observations were conducted in the workshops of other traditional craftsmen such as wood turners, who still operate in remote bazaars in the Middle and Far East. An important source for the subject is von Graf’s description of a mother-of-pearl workshop in Bethlehem (von Graf 1914). These ethnographic comparisons should, however, be

VI.a.5. Raw pieces and unfinished objects (Figs. 4849). Raw pieces and rough-outs originate in the first stages of the production – the chopping or sawing of a piece close in shape to the final object. These rough-outs were sometimes prepared in an advanced workshop where each employee performed only one stage of the operation (Ammoun 1991: 92) or in a place where many 132

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE exemplars of a certain stage of the work were produced before moving on to the next stage. Such a technique is known, for instance, among traditional potters. The unfinished objects were sometimes stored in order to finish them according to the customer’s taste (Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 9). They could have also been thrown away because of a failure in the production. These objects are therefore important for the study of the ancient production techniques since tool marks and signs from intermediate stages in the production process can be observed on them. The waste pieces and their relative quantity can tell us much about the skill and proficiency of the artisan and his ability to use the raw material (Spitzers 1997; Averbouh 2001: 112).

implements are employed, it is possible to clarify the mechanical and technological principles as shown when Yehoshua Dray, the technical adviser for this research, produced various types of bone artifacts. VI.b. The Implements Used to Work Bone With very few original tools at our disposal (Barbier 1999: 205; Christensen 1987 Figs. 10-11) the bone artisan’s tool kit has to be reconstructed using the above-mentioned sources. The order the implements are described is based on their hypothesized order of use in the chain of production (Evely 1992 Fig. 3a-b). Obviously this is a general list and there is no certainty that all these tools were in use at Caesarea or elsewhere. Barbier (1999: 205-206) noted that only a few tools – mainly saws – were used by the local workers at Mleiha, Oman, as judged by the marks left on the objects. This is also typical of Palestinian traditional artisans like carpenters and wood turners (Avitsur 1976: 162). It is generally thought that each of the crafts saw a process of development from general multiple-use tools to experts’ implements with specific uses (Goodman 1964: 8).

VI.a.6. Production waste (Figs. 50-54). Production waste is the most common find around workshops, although it is seldom found in situ as it was usually thrown away elsewhere (Béal 1983b: 608 n. 1; Spitzers 1997). This group consists of various pieces starting with tiny unrecognizable chips to “negatives” of drilling or carving different objects which can be identified by their shape, or the ends of their rough-outs. All these aspects reflect closely the production techniques and stages, the implements and the different kinds of artifacts that would have been manufactured there (Béal 1983b: 608). Wapnish-Hesse noted at Ashkelon that raw and waste pieces formed about two thirds of the total assemblage (Wapnish 1991: 61), a quantity which testifies to the large scale of production in that ancient city. At Caesarea these artifacts comprise about one quarter of the finds (958 out of c. 3,900 objects). Sometimes the artisan threw away objects which seem complete at first glance but where an off-center perforation or a bent rod caused them to be rejected (Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 588; Spitzers 1997: 163, Fig. 9: 11). Rejected artifacts and relatively large waste pieces (especially of ivory) were probably retained in the workshop for reuse (Krzyszkowska 1992: 27). The shape of splinters or waste pieces also reflects some of the techniques employed; high relief carving, for instance, produces relatively large and irregular splinters while fine inlays leave tiny chips similar in shape and form (Ibid.).

VI.b.1. Saw. This important tool is easy to operate and control (MacGregor 1985: 55). Several types of iron and steel saws were in use in the periods discussed here (Petrie 1927: 25; Egyptian Collections: 213; Goodman 1964: 121-127; Manning 1985: 19-21, Pl. 9: B21-B23; Salaman 1997: 405-443). Sometimes it is possible to tell by the marks left on the object what saw was used and how, the width of its blade, etc. (Table 6.1). The saw was primarily employed in the first stages of the work – preparing the unworked diaphyses, removing the epiphysal ends and other unwanted parts, and cutting the bone into pieces (Stewart 1973: 113). Often the artisan sawed the bone half way through and broke the rest unevenly (see No. 503; Semenov 1964 Fig. 76: 2; MacGregor 1985: 55; Evely 1992: 8, Pls. 2a-2b). In some cases, a “ring” was later sawn off from that rough end in order to produce a straight edge (No. 501). The saw was also employed in shaping objects and even for decorating them (MacGregor 1985: 55). The spaces between comb teeth or doll fingers, for instance, were cut with saws (Petrie 1927: 25; Barbier 1988: 54: 3). The distance between the teeth or fingers reflect the width of the saw blade (Liversidge 1976: 156; Manning 1976: 151; Barbier 1994-1995: 15). The saw usually left a cut with a square cross-section (MacGregor 1985: 55) and a series of fine striations whose shape, depth and direction testify to the quality of the blade, the depth it penetrated, the angle by which the saw was held, the artisan’s positioning of the bone, etc. (Barbier 1988: 53, 54: 3-4; Evely 1992: 8, Pls. 2a-2b). Sometimes the worker sawed off more than was needed and the end of the groove was left on the object, as like in combs, when the spaces among the teeth were sawn beyond the pre-marked guide line (No. 158; Ibid.: 8, Pls. 2c-2d).

VI.a.7. Experimentation and reconstruction. Few researchers are blessed with both technical qualifications and trained hands. Neither is it possible to exactly duplicate the conditions experienced by and the methods used by ancient craftsmen. However, much insight can be gained from the personal struggle to replicate production difficulties and the search for solutions to the technical problems (Barbier 1988: 48). Barbier’s publications on his experiments have revealed a great deal about Roman manufacturing techniques in bone and the time needed for various stages of the process, etc. (See also SadekKooros 1972; Poplin 1974; Sussman 1988; Campana 1989: 27ff; Krzyszkowska 1992; Spitzers 1997). Obviously, the closer the experiment is to the original conditions (like using hand-operated tools) the more accurate the results are. However, even when modern 133

THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY (Flayderman 1972; Poplin 1974: 85, Figs. 1-2; Campana 1989: 35; Béal 1994: 126). The result is usually a groove with parallel walls or a very straight and smooth wall which is slightly curved at the bottom (Poplin 1974: 85).

The types of saw used at Cesaerea in the discussed periods (Evely 1993: 26-40, Figs. 13-15) are the following: Back saw, equipped with a strengthened back enabling it to be operated by pushing as well (Flayderman 1972; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 591; Evely 1992: 8, Figs. 1a, 2; Stephens Crawford 1990: 32, Figs. 99-100; Wulff 1966: 93, Figs. 136, 138, 149).

Double-blade saw equipped with two parallel, joined blades and used to create a wide groove. It was perhaps invented in a relatively late period (MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1903). When parallel cuts were needed (like with a comb’s teeth) such a saw was used with one blade projecting slightly more than the other. This blade was inserted into the already existing space while the shorter blade cut the new one (MacGregor 1985: 55).

Framed\bow saw with an arched or rectangular frame, an iron blade at its bottom or center and a cord to regulate tension on the upper part (Sperber 1993: 75-85; Liversidge 1976 Figs. 264-265; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 591; Abu Khalaf 1995: 291-293; Salaman 1997: 419). Small saws of this type operated with one hand were used for cutting “skeletal materials”. The iron frame saw was used until recently in Iran to cut blanks for inlays (Wulff 1966: 93, Figs. 136, 138). Such a small saw was used by a traditional mother-of-pearl inlay worker in Bethlehem until the 1970s (Pl. 13).1

There were also short, knife-like saws (Ibid.). Part of an iron saw of the Late Roman-Byzantine period was found in Raqit (Carmel), near Caesarea (Ayalon 2004: 285-290, Fig. 13: 1). Two complete saw blades were found at Jerash, Jordan (Seigne and Morin 1986 Pl. 12: 1-2). Part of an iron saw of the first half of the fifth cent. CE was unearthed at Maastricht, The Netherlands, at a site with a flourishing antler and bone industry (Dijkman and Ervync 1998: 17, Fig. 10).

Fret or hack saw (finer and thinner than the previous tools). It was used, inter alia, to enlarge the inner perforations of ajouré inlays (see below).

MacGregor (1985: 55) measured 0.1-2.6 wide saw grooves on bone implements from England – quite similar to those from Caesarea (Table 6.1).

Cord saw, in which the object was cut with a strong and tightly stretched string moved forward and backward used together with water and sand or vinegar and ash

Table 6.1. Width of saw blades (in mm) Exp.

Year

Area

Loc.

No.

Basket

Object

A

94

I14

047

001

0157

Comb

A A

95 95

TPS TP12

064 Balk

001 001

0126 0009

Comb Comb

S

93

II

10350

34442

Comb

A S A

93 93 94

I5 II I9

10266 930

0053 33895 0168

S

92

G12

Comb Doll's hand Doll's hand and foot Inlay blank?

001 001

12655

Saw width 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 2.5

Remarks Between thin and thick teeth. No. 156 Between teeth. No. 540 Between teeth. No. 158 Modern? Between thin and thick teeth. No. 542 Between thick teeth Between fingers Related Decorative grooves. No. 453

Table 6.2. Width of chisel\gouge blades (in mm) Exp. S S S S S S S 1

Year 92 92 92 93 92 93 92

Area

I+ E13 IW

Loc. 48 9248 1266 1174 1620 108

Basket 8626 8971 10979 11693 2737 16208 12257

Object Box wall? Box Gaming piece Ring production waste Gaming piece Ring production waste Handle

The saw belongs to Joe Shador and I thank him.

134

Blade width 1.5 4 4 4-5 5-6 5-6 6

Remarks No. 145 No. 130 No. 302

No. 491

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

VI.b.2. Cleaver. A large, heavy knife used by the butcher to cut meat and bones (Balsdon 1969 Pl. 9a; Manning 1985: 120-123, Fig. 30, Pl. Q94-Q103). Sometimes it is difficult to distingish between marks left by the butcher and those of the bone artisan. The cleaver was used to split bone or ivory into pieces, as shown in a 17th cent. German miniature (Pl. 10), leaving a smooth facet (for a reconstruction of this operation see Barbier 1999 Fig. 10).

sections such as pins or still unmodified rods prepared for lathe carving (Rodziewicz 1998: 154, Figs. 26-28; Evely 1992: 9, Pl. 1h). Methodical scraping yielded dense, parallel and sometimes wavy lines (Semenov 1964: 158). Carving by removing small chips left similar depressions (MacGregor 1985: 57, Fig. 93). The disadvantage of the knife is the danger that the object would sometimes break under pressure (Barbier 1988: 53). Watching the modern bone artisan Valery Kurov at work showed that within minutes and without any effort he could carve a small tablet from a fresh bone and decorate it with geometrical designs using a sharp knife. MacGregor (1985: 58, Fig. 88n) published a knife which was used in his opinion by bone carvers. Ancient knives were found, for instance, at Jerash in Jordan (Seigne and Morin 1986 Pl. 13: 1-5, and see Evely 1993 Pl. 8).

VI.b.3. Axe (Compare: Egyptian Collections: 213; Evely 1993: 41-61, Fig. 23; Salaman 1997: 46-66, 238-240). Small axes were used to separate bones from the articulated skeleton and during the first stages of carving. The axe was struck against the object at an angle of 50-60 degrees. The chopping marks found on actual bones are in accordance with this. An axe with a broad, thick head was held chisel-like against the object at the appropriate angle. The artisan hit its head with a hammer (MacGregor 1985: 57).

VI.b.7. Chisel, gouge. These tools, equipped with a wide and sharp blade, were operated by hitting their tops with a hammer or mallet (Goodman 1964: 121-127; Evely 1993: 2-19; Abu-Khalaf 1995: 293-294; Salaman 1997: 195, Fig. 200) or by chopping with them by hand although that meant the artisan’s control over the tool was not as good (Evely 1992: 8; Goodman 1996 Fig. 2). The gouge was also used to shape objects on the lathe (Egyptian Collections: 213; Liversidge 1976: 160, Figs. 262, 269; Manning 1985: 21-25, Fig. 4, Pls. 10-11: B25-B50; Barbier 1999 Fig. 14; Salaman 1997: 130-147; Wulff 1966 Fig. 123). These tools have blades of various shapes (the basic ones – straight or rounded) and dimensions, each one leaving a different scar (Evely 1992: 7, Fig. 1a1b, 1993 Fig. 3-5, Pl. 1-5). They were used to split large bones along the axis (Stewart 1973: 112; Spitzers 1997: 160, Fig. 6), to remove thin tablets (Stewart 1973: 114; MacGregor 1985: 57; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 592), to clean the medullar cavity of a bone diaphysis, or in more advanced carving (Barbier 1988: 51; Evely 1992: 8). These tools left both wide (Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 187) and narrow splitting incisions, which are sometimes stepped where the blade stopped between blows (Evely 1992: 8, Pls. 1b, 1e). Sometimes two deep parallel striations were left on the object by the corners of the blade with the distance between them indicating the width of the blade (Table 6.2; Photo 1: 6,7). An ancient gouge was found, for instance, at Jerash in Jordan (Seigne and Morin 1986 Pl. 13: 6).

VI.b.4. Adze. The blade of this tool is attached to the handle perpendicularly to the long axis of the tool and not parallel to it as with the axe. It is considered the basic carpenter’s tool (Wulff 1966 Fig. 119; Egyptian Collections: 213; Liversidge 1976 Figs. 263-264; Manning 1985: 16-17, Pl. 8: B7-B13; Evely 1993: 62-67, Fig. 27; Abu-Khalaf 1995: 293-294; Salaman 1997: 2330). The adze was used for cutting and splitting bone and ivory, perpendicularly to the object (Ciugudean 2001: 63; Stewart 1973: 113; Goodman 1996 Fig. 1). It leaves vertical marks similar to those left by cleavers. An ancient adze was found at Jerash, Jordan (Seigne and Morin 1986 Pl. 12: 3). VI.b.5 Draw knife. This tool is composed of a sharp horizontal blade with a vertically placed handle at each end. This too was a typical carpenter’s tool, equivalent to a modern planing tool. It was pulled longitudinally along the long axis of the bone to plane raw bone, to straighten its facets or to split off thin tablets (Manning 1985: 1819, Pl. 9: B18-B19; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 592; Spitzers 1997 Fig. 6; Salaman 1997: 175-183). It produced a typical waste of thin chips (MacGregor 1985: 58). On the bone’s surface it left a fairly smooth facet with parallel fine striations (Wapnish 1991: 61). VI.b.6. Knife. This tool was used in a wide variety of activities (Pl. 12; Balsdon 1969 Pl. 10b; Evely 1993 Figs. 8-9): sawing (Barbier 1999 Fig. 9), rough or fine planing, carving, grooving, scraping, smoothing, sharpening, carving on a lathe and even drilling (Stewart 1973: 112; Flayderman 1972: 49; Manning 1985: 108-120, Figs. 2829, Pls. 53-56; Wapnish 1991: 61; Salaman 1997: 249255). Decorations on carved pieces were often done free hand using a knife (MacGregor 1985: 57). Sometimes the knife left typical V-shaped striations or grooves on the surface of the object being worked (MacGregor 1985: 55; Barbier 1988: 54:1; Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 187). Scraping and heavy carving left straight, smooth and long facets that are typical for long objects with round cross-

A German monk of the Middle Ages, who relies on Byzantine sources, describes the use of chisels for carving bone: “...First trim a piece... and then spread chalk over it. Draw the figures with lead... and score the outlines with a sharp tracer... Then, with various chisels, cut the grounds... and... carve the figures...” (Theophilus, De Diversis Artibus XCIII, p. 166).2 VI.b.8. Engraver\incising tool. This pointed tool was used by bone carvers to shape objects rotating on the lathe, for hand engraving and to incise guide lines 2

135

I am thankful to Prof. Israel Roll who showed me this source.

THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY (Stewart 1973: 113; Evely 1992: 9, Pls. 1c, 2e-fb). The traditional wood turner owned incising tools with various points – centralized, side ones, ones thicker on one side (to engrave the bowl of a spoon or a box), etc. (compare to the traditional stone engraver’s tools: Magen 2002 Fig. 4.14). Rings were produced using tools with a point bent perpendicularly to the axis of the handle (see below; Pl. 14: D). An engraver with a side projection was probably used to incise a circumferential groove parallel to the wall or rim of the object (MacGregor 1985: 60, Fig. 50).

9). These marks are less clear in ivory than in bone. They differed also if the artisan applied materials like sand to the rotating drill-bit (Evely 1992: 7). Hand-drilling, which is relatively slow, left irregular striations and unparallel walls around only a part of the circumference. Drilling with a bow- or a pump-drill was faster and left striations around the whole perimeter of the hole. It was usually carried out from only one direction leaving parallel walls and concentric striations. Deep drilling sometimes caused the object to break so drilling was often carried out from both directions, leaving a biconical hourglass-shaped perforation (see No. 60; Campana 1989: 35).

VI.b.9. Point or awl. These tools were used to punch and perforate bone using straight, vertical pressure leaving vertical marks, or by moving the tool right and left leaving circumferential marks (Semenov 1964: 18; Flayderman 1972; Evely 1993: 86-96, Figs. 37-38). MacGregor (1985: 58) has stated that no awls have been found in connection with bone industry. Metal points were, however, unearthed at Jerash, Jordan although we do not exactly know how they were used (Seigne and Morin 1986 Pl. 13: 7-8).

Sometimes, as in handle sockets, very deep and narrow holes were drilled, attesting to the skill of the artisan and the quality of his tools. Handle No. 24, for instance, has a socket 65mm long and 6mm in diameter, while the socket in object No. 7 is almost as wide as the handle itself. Unique objects like Nos. 93-96 have holes which are 3.5mm in diameter while a complete item of this kind found at Hammat Gader (Coen Uzzielli 1997 Pl. 1: 2) has a cavity 126mm long and walls which are only 2mm thick. This is an unusual case of drilling even if we assume that the cavity was drilled when the rod blank was much thicker in order to prevent breaking, and only then was the outer perimeter carefully carved on a lathe. To get a large perforation such as that found in buckles (Barbier 1988: 51) and needles (Deschler-Erb 1998: 101, Abb. 160), several small holes were drilled close to each other and then the partitions between them were removed and the perimeter filed.

VI.b.10. Drill-bit. Several kinds of drills have been used from prehistoric times onwards: Small hand-operated drills (Stewart 1973: 112; Burian and Friedmann 1992 Fig. 48; Evely 1993: 77-85, Figs. 33-35; Salaman 1997: 208-210; Barbier 1999 Fig. 15); Vertically-operated hand-drills with a horizontal handle on top (Goodman 1964: 165; Burian and Friedmann 1992 Fig. 49; Dar 1993 Pl. 10: 20; Salaman 1997: 31-44); Vertical drills turned between the palms of the hand (Burian and Friedmann 1992 Fig. 50); Bow-drills, in use at least since the third millenium BCE (Egyptian Collections: 213; Liversidge 1976: 160, Fig. 264; Manning 1985: 25-27, Fig. 5, Pls. 11-12: B51-B73; Barbier 1994-1995: 15; Abu-Khalaf 1995: 292-293; Killen 1997: 10; Salaman 1997: 185186); Pump drills with a weight at the bottom and an operating cord (Goodman 1964: 180, Fig. 183; Burian and Friedmann 1992 Fig. 51a [left]; Salaman 1997: 190191). As the last two are the most efficient and were still being used by traditional wood turners, inlay craftsmen and goldsmiths in the Levant until recently (Wulff 1966 Figs. 124-125; Avitsur 1994) it is reasonable to believe that they also served bone carvers in Antiquity. Both were operated by moving a string tied to a bow which was wrapped around a rotating rod. The drill was an essential tool for perforating parts that were then attached to each other like blades and handles (Goodman 1964: 160, Fig. 160; 1996 Fig. 3; Barbier 1994-1995: 14; Rodziewicz 1998: 155).

The common diameter of needle eyes at Caesarea was 1.5mm with the average diameter ranging between 13mm; the common diameter of the basic holes in ajouré inlays (see below) was 3mm with the average diameter ranging between 2-5mm; The perforation in whorls\buttons was usually 3.5-6mm in diameter. The diameter of the smallest perforations checked was 0.8mm. Ethnographic research revealed that it is not easy to drill a thin bone without breaking or cracking it. A Bedouin from the village of Deir-Hanna in the Galilee who made flutes from thin-walled eagle bones (Ben-Dror 1993: 6970) perforated the holes with a red-hot iron rod (pers. comm.). The same method was used to make holes in wooden or cardboard weaving tablets (see Chapter IV; Collingwood 1982: 26). MacGregor (1985: 58, n. 3) rejected the possibility that rivet perforations in combs were also prepared in this way. Another method to make holes in flutes was with a knife, as judged by the marks it left (Dray, pers. comm.).

The craftsman possessed drill points of various diameters (see Table 3) and shapes such as a solid drill-bit, twisted drill-bit, spoon drill-bit, hollow drill-bit, etc. (Barnett 1957: 155-159; Poulain and Poulain 1978: 12; MacGregor 1985: 58; Evely 1992 Figs. 1b, 2, Pl. 1b-d). This variety is attested, for instance, by the different shapes of sockets drilled in handles, in which each type of drill-bit left its own characteristic marks. The rotating drill incised circumferential lines in the socket (Photo 2:

VI.b.11. Center-bit; toothed drill. This is a bow-drill with a forked head, used, for instance, to incise circleand-dot ornaments (MacGregor 1985: 60; Salaman 1997: 78; Deschler-Erb 1998: 102, Abb. 164). Several scholars (such as Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 566; Wapnish 136

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE 1991: 61) incorrectly suggested that this ornament was produced with a chisel-compass or compass-drawn. However, Petrie (as quoted by Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 593-594) had already noted that this tool, equipped as it is with movable legs, could not be used to incise such small circles as the legs were too close to the central point. The center-bit has a slightly longer central point compared to the side points, producing the central dot. The distance of the side points (two or more) from the central point established the diameter of the circles as well as their length and shape – the depth and shape of the circles’ perimeters (MacGregor 1985: 60, Fig. 38; Evely 1992 Fig. 2 top right; Bíró 1994: 9; Maire 1998 Fig. 1f). A decoration comprising several concentric circles was incised using several drill bits measuring various distances between their side points, while their central point was always positioned at the same spot. An iron drill head (w. 9mm) for incising beads, found in Visegrád, Hungary, was equipped with three points, the outer ones shorter by 4mm than the central one (Gróf and Gróh 2001: 281, Fig. 2). Tablets with irregular circle-anddot designs found at Caesarea are probably the result of beginners’ training (No. 506; Photo 3: 4; Compare to Dijkman and Ervynck 1998: 63, Fig. 18).

The circle-and-dot design appears at Caesarea in a variety of sizes and number of circles. At Gorsium, Hungary, three repeating diameters were measured (Bíró 1987: 53). Below are several examples from Caesarea: Circle-and-dot: 2mm (die S\60160); 2.5mm (whorl\button S\39346); 4mm (dice S\34413, P\0040); 5mm (whorl\button S\18697-1). Double circle-and-dot: 2mm (die S\35994); 4mm (die S\18034); 7mm (pendant S\24391); 8.5mm (die P\0124); 12mm (box lid P\0034). Triple circle-and-dot: 8mm (die S\65939; inlay P\0026). Quadruple circle-and-dot: 8mm (button A\0626). VI.b.12. Bow lathe. A simple bow-operated lathe appeared in Egypt at least by the New Kingdom \ Late Bronze Age (Barnett 1957: 155-159; Liversidge 1976: 162; Killen 1997: 11). Pliny (NH 7, 198; see Richter 1926: 152) ascribed its invention (but perhaps only its improvement?) to Theodorus of Samos in the 6th cent. BCE, and some scholars think it was not known before 700 BCE (Green 1999: 41). A lathe is first depicted on an Egyptian relief from the late 4th cent. BCE (Killen 1997: 10, Fig. 1).3 During the Hellenistic and especially the Roman period the lathe became very common enabling mass production of artifacts from various raw materials (Bíró 1994: 9). Few objects, however, were turned on a lathe in Europe before the 11th cent. (MacGregor 1985: 58; More than 300 pins were found at Colchester, England. All were handmade [Crummy 1983: 19]). In the Land of Israel, however, as well as in Egypt (Rodziewicz 1998: 155), the lathe was widely used from the Roman period. Lathe carving necessitated better craftsmanship and more sophisticated equipment than hand-work. In Roman Gaul, for instance, evidence for lathe work was found only in the large urban centers but not at small settlements (Béal 1983b: 617). Lathe-made objects are characterized by their round cross-section and symmetry and often by the presence of fine concentric striations (Barbier 1988: 54: 2; Deschler-Erb 1998: 98, Abb. 158159).

These drills were also used to cut out disks, lids and other round objects from a flat tablet or from the wall of a long bone diaphysis (MacGregor 1985: 58; Maire 1998; Gróf and Gróh 2001). In this case, the side points were sometimes a bit longer than the central one (although not necessarily; see Spitzers 1997 Fig. 2) and usually slanted a little outwards. The drill was operated until the side points cut the disk out (see typical waste - Nos. 515-517) while the central point only left a small indentation in its center. The perimeter of the disk is usually oblique (MacGregor 1985: 58, Fig. 35). A similar foot-operated implement also existed (Maire 1998 Fig. 1h-i). The center-bit was also used to drill from both sides of the bone. First it was operated half-way through the compacta until the central point penetrated through to the other side, then the bone was turned over and the point placed in the small perforation and thus, drilled in the exact place on the other side (MacGregor 1985: 101, Fig. 58a-e; MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1922, Fig. 916). It seems that sometimes the worker (a beginner?) incorrectly estimated the thickness of the bone and the drill penetrated through it, cutting out a disk. Similar disks were found at Caesarea especially in concentrations of inlay production waste (Nos. 481-485). Nos. 483-484 represent such waste objects, one probably originating from a circle-and-dot design and the other from a double circle-and-dot decoration. No similar waste disks were found in publications except objects identified as “beads” or “rings” at Strasbourg (Maire 1998 Fig. 1b,e). Pieces with unfinished drillings were found in York, England: the central point penetrated to the other side of the bone but the side points only incised the outer circumference (MacGregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1922, Fig. 882).

The basic principle of lathe operation was the rotation of the object attached to it in various ways (see below) with the aid of a bow which the craftsman moved back and forth and whose cord was wound around the object or its catch. At the same time, the artisan carved the rotating object by pressing sharp tools against it (Pl. 15; see reconstructions by Poulain and Poulain 1978: 10; Evely 1993 Fig. 65, and the photograph and its graphic deciphering and a variety of carving tools in MacManus 1983). The lathe was operated on the floor or on a table, as shown in ancient illustrations. Sometimes the artisan operated the bow with one hand and the carving tool with the other, pressing it towards the object with his toes (if he worked on the floor) to improve its final form 3

137

Killen claimed that it was a vertical lathe but he ignored the Egyptian rules of perspective. It was obviously horizontal (see Ibid.: n. 6 where he admits that this possibility was mentioned to him).

THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY (Ammoun 1991: 92) or for better control. It seems, however, that an assistant usually operated the bow while the master concentrated on carving with both hands free (Béal 1994: 128; Barbier 1994-1995: 14). The pointed tool was held perpendicular to the rotating object, held against a supporting rod. The craftsman pressed the point against the object and carved only when the object rotated forwards, away from him. When it rotated backwards he pulled the point away so it would not “be caught” by the blank and cause the surface to be stepped and rough (Wulff 1966 Figs. 133-134; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 593; personal experience).

striations around the circumference and the fine polishing – again testify to the use of the lathe. Sometimes, when small objects like flat disks were produced, several of them were carved on the lathe on the same rod, and only at the end of the work were they separated from each other. On such occasions, the lathe indentations remained only on the two extreme outside disks. A carved object was separated from the unworked end of the rough-out or from the next object as follows: while rotating the object on the lathe the craftsman pressed his pointed tool to the planned cutting spot and cut a deep groove. Sometimes he cut it all the way through but often he penetrated only half or two thirds of the way and then broke the central part (MacGregor 1985: 58, Fig. 29). The margins, cut by rotation, are always very smooth while the broken center is rough and scarred (Fig. 50; compare to Rodziewicz 1998: 153, Figs. 27-28). The remaining unworked end of the rough-out was discarded although it meant wasting some raw material (Deschler-Erb 1998: 98). It is possible to deduce the thickness of the produced object from this piece.

The lathe was used to produce symmetrical objects but also to decorate them with regular grooves and mouldings, to polish and burnish them, etc. (Bíró 1994: 9; Killen 1997 Fig. 15). Barbier’s experiments showed that the length of the bow, the type of cord and other parameters influenced the final results. It was especially important to center the object on the lathe, i.e. that the points of its attachments to the installation need to be in the exact center of the side facets. If this centering is not attended to the object will be asymmetrical and part of the wall will remain less carved compared to the rest (Béal 1983a: 110) or the object will break or “jump” off the lathe during turning (compare to Crummy 1981 Fig. 2: 16. A similar object was found at Caesarea). Where inexperienced artisans held the carving tool unsteady, the surface of the artifact turned out rough. An example of such mistakes can be seen on No.77, a whorl\button whose base is not leveled although marks around its circumference show that it was carved on a lathe.

The two support method was well fitted to prepare rods. The pointed ends of the rough-out were stuck in two wooden supports attached to the lathe arms. It was rotated with a bow whose cord was bound around a side axle attached to one of the supports (Brown 1976 Figs. 33-34; Gibson 1983 Fig. 3). The discarded rough-out end has a tenon on one end and a short point on the other. The block and rod method was also used to carve the inner cavity of concave objects such as the bowl of a spoon. The bottom of the object was attached to a wooden block or to a plane attached to the lathe or stuck in the block. An iron rod held at the center of the other side held it in place (Brown 1976 Figs. 33-34; Gibson 1983 Fig. 3). The concave cavity was carved with an obliquely held pointed tool, leaving only the center (to which the iron rod was pressed) unworked. This part was later smoothed by hand. The rest of the spoon was worked with a file.

Bow lathes were used to carve or decorate metal, wood, bone, ivory, shell and stone artifacts (Yadin 1963 Fig. 51, Pl. 39; Magen 2002; Hadas 1994; Amit, Seligman and Zilberbod 2001: 106-109; Gibson 1983, 2003). Similar lathes remained in use among traditional artisans in Israel and its neighboring countries (Magen 2002; Rodziewicz 1998: 155 n. 52) to the present day – even for carving plastic prayer beads, as in the Cairo bazaar (Ammoun 1991: 92).

The wooden block method was used to attach a long bone diaphysis (that is, an essentially hollow object) to the lathe. A conical wooden block attached to the lathe was forced into one end of the hollow bone, without any support on its other end. The tool used to work the bone was used as in the previous method and the medullar cavity of the bone could also be carved in this way by holding the tool obliquely, for instance in producing a box (Barbier 19941995: 14). In this case one end of the medullar cavity of the bone was worked several centimeters inside in order to improve the hold of the wooden block and to center it. This was usually done by vertical carving with a chisel or a gouge (as in the production of rings – Fig. 51 and Photo 1: 6).

The rough-out was attached to the lathe and carved in various ways (Barbier 1994-1995: 14; Deschler-Erb 1998: 98-100, Abb. 157): The two point method. The rough-out, which had to be solid (not hollow) at both ends, was held between two iron points attached to the side arms of the lathe. One of these arms could be moved right and left in order to adjust the distance between them to the length of the rough-out (Barbier 1988: 50). A small indentation was drilled on each end of the rough-out, and the metal points were inserted into them (Flayderman 1972; MacGregor 1985: 58, Fig. 29; Barbier 1994-1995: 15; Abu-Khalaf 1995: 297, Fig. 12; Killen 1997 Fig. 18). These ends were often not removed or the indentations not eliminated during the finishing stage (for instance on pin heads) and these indentations – together with the symmetrical

The three tooth method was relatively used rarely, leaving almost unseen marks on the object. Three moveable teeth 138

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE were attached to one side of the lathe with a ring around them. Moving the ring back and forth caused the teeth closer to or further away from each other. The bone roughout was inserted between these teeth and held there tightly by pushing the ring forward (Amit, Zeligman and Zilberbod 2001: 108). The teeth left very shallow marks on the end of the artifact (such as in handle [?] No. 23). This method enabled the artisan to carve the medullar cavity of the bone from the far end as in boxes. After being carved, the object was cut away by sawing it half way through and breaking the rest, as seen on one of its ends, although no lathe indentation is present on the other end (No. 479). It is worth noting that very symmetrical objects which look as if they had been made on a lathe were measured with a caliber. It turned out that they had been made very skillfully by hand (Wapnish-Hesse, pers. comm.; compare to Green 1999).

skin, as mentioned by Pliny (NH 9.40; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 592; Deschler-Erb 1998: 102) is one well known and efficient method for scraping and smoothing. Other kinds of rough skin like shark skin (Flayderman 1972: 50) or smooth hide were also good for finishing (possibly in combination with fine sea sand – MacGregor 1985: 58). Greek and Roman craftsmen polished wood (and probably also bone and ivory) with skate fish skin, cedar and juniper oil, wax, etc. (Crummy 1981: 283). Several objects such as cylindrical gaming pieces found at Caesarea were extremely well polished and have a dark shining tint, possibly as a result of coating them with wax, oil or fat during the burnishing or afterwards (Photo 2: 10 [left]; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 592; DeschlerErb 1998: 102). Bone was also polished with wet sand, silt, rough stones like basalt, sandstone or pumice or with silica-rich plants (Stewart 1973: 112; Campana 1989: 2526; Barbier 1999: 206; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 592). A basalt stone for polishing was found in a marble workshop at Petra (Hammond 1986: 135). The initial rough polishing materials left striations and scars on the object (Evely 1992 Pl. 2h). The better the burnishing method the fewer marks remained on the object.

VI.b.13. Vices were needed to hold the rough-out or object still during the production process, especially when the craftsman needed both hands (MacGregor 1985: 60, Fig. 91; Barbier 1994-1995: 13-14). According to Barbier’s reconstruction (Ibid.: 13; 1999 Figs. 12-14) vices were probably made of wood and included a perforated board with two vertical sides which moved along horizontal axis, held in place with pins vertically inserted into the perforations. The object was placed between the sides and held in place with triangular wedges.

VI.b.16. Miscellanea. Other implements were probably used by bone, antler and ivory artisans: a bench or anvil to work on; painting tools like brushes, paint boxes etc. (red was the dominant color and less often – black); a ruler to mark guide lines or to cut along straight lines (Evely 1992: 9); a compass to mark circles or to measure and mark distances; a chisel-compass to incise circles or their parts for working or decorating, as in the small spoon No. 165 (Salaman 1997: 107-113); a roulette to mark repeating decoration (see MacGregor 1985: 60, Fig. 107c); a whetstone to sharpen working tools (Stewart 1973: 112); a mallet made of stone or wood which was used to split bone (Ibid.: 113); as well as other tools.

VI.b.14. Rasps and files have been used since the Roman period. They differ from each other in terms of their shape and the roughness of their teeth and as a result – in the fineness of the work they were used in (Manning 1976: 151, Figs. 257-258; MacGregor 1985: 58, Fig. 29; Salaman 1997: 194-196, 388-390). Rasps operated well on the relatively soft bone and could remove large parts of it precluding use of knives or draw knives (Campana 1989: 31). Such a tool left parallel striations on the object, depending on the spaces between its teeth. This is why the artisan often used it to rough the shafts of pins (and if they were hand-carved, to carve them completely) so they held better in garments or hair (Deschler-Erb 1998: 97, Abb. 154), or the bottom of inlays so they could be better glued to a surface (MacGregor 1985: 58). The more delicate files were used to smooth and polish artifacts. Such tools left clusters of thin, almost invisible striations (Crummy 1981: 283; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 592; Wulff 1966 Fig. 139). A thin file was used, for instance, to enlarge a circular needle eye into an elongated shape, leaving marks on the oblique ends (Béal 1983a: 172). These tools were easy to use but not precise (Dechler-Erb 1998: 97). Their disadvantage was that the spaces between their teeth became rapidly filled with tiny bits of bone (Barbier 1988: 53). File marks are often found on pins, convex carved pieces and other objects from Caesarea. An ancient file was found at Jerash in Jordan (Seigne and Morin 1986 Pl. 13: 9).

VI.c. The Working Methods of the Bone and Ivory Craftsman VI.c.1. Production “by the user” versus the professional artisan. The bone tools found at Caesarea can be divided into two categories: implements made on an ad-hoc basis for immediate use and those made for sale by a professional artisan. The ivory finds are not included in this discussion as this precious raw material was probably processed only in organized workshops. Artifacts made “by the user” who needed them at a certain moment. Thanks to the relative simplicity and ease of carving bone anyone could choose a fragment and prepare the needed object in a few manufacturing stages. Naturally, such objects usually represent simple, undecorated working tools (McGregor 1991: 363). Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between such a simple tool and a naturally pointed bone which was never used. As these objects tended to be used for relatively short periods of time their use wear is not particularly marked and is thus, difficult to identify.

VI.b.15. Polishing and burnishing materials. Artisans used various materials to polish bone and ivory. Fish 139

THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY Some of the simple artifacts from Caesarea (such as Nos. 44 and 48) fall into this category of ad-hoc artifacts and several scholars reject their definition as tools. Implements which were probably made “by the user” are Nos. 49, 53-54.

longer it appears that it was easier to use the metapodia and especially the metatarsus (Crummy 1981: 282), which is indeed the main bone identified in the Caesarea assemblage. The craftsmen at this city preferred the bones of cattle and less than that of horses (and at Ashkelon, unlike Caesarea, also camel) to the bones of pigs, sheep\goats and cervidae, as the dimensions of the bones were the most important parameters (Barbier 1988: 50; Spitzers 1997: 160, 162; Provenzano 2001: 95-96). As over boiling of bones could weaken them by leaching out minerals, the artisan had to procure them before the meat was sold to the customers, thus, his dependence on butchers. This could be the reason why in certain periods and places fewer objects were made from scapulae and ribs (Krzyszkowska 1990: 25) – bones preferred by the customers.

Objects manufactured by a professional craftsman usually differ from those produced casually on the household level in terms of the effort and skill invested in their production, design and finish. Based on the artisan’s experience and the fact that he often specialized in certain types of objects or even in one stage of the “conveyor belt” production system (Schur 1998: 42; Ammoun 1991), those objects were usually of a high quality and rather similar to each other. Indeed, the appearance of many similar, coeval objects at a site might point to the existence of a workshop which specialized in their mass production. In such a case rough-outs, unfinished artifacts and production waste of the same type should also be found (see Chapter VII below). There are hints that popular “design books” served the craftsmen who manufactured precious objects, but as it was impossible to produce really identical objects (as, for instance, with pottery vessels made in a mold), every piece was carved separately according to the shape and character of the rough-out and the skill of the artisan (Marangou 1976: 70).

The bone is four times stronger along its longitudinal axis than along the latitudinal one and therefore it was better to carve it – like ivory and wood – in that direction. Comb teeth, for instance, were sawn along the bone and therefore the dimension of a one-piece comb was restricted (MacGregor 1985: 28, 73-74). Sometimes, the artisan preferred certain bones for the manufacture of a specific object such as donkey metapodia (Pliny, NH 11, 87) or wing bones of large birds for flutes. The carving methods were reconstructed, as discussed above, based on ethnographic parallels, similar crafts, marks left on the objects, production waste, personal experience etc. (see for instance Wapnish-Hesse 1999; Stewart 1973: 112-114).

There were two types of professional craftsmen. The itinerant worker moved from place to place carrying with him a restricted variety of tools. He got his raw materials on an ad-hoc basis from local butchers and operated in each place for a short time depending on the demand (compare to the traditional itinerant Levantine blacksmith: Avitsur 1976: 148; Wulff 1966: 48). Such an artisan could achieve high standards of work although it is reasonable to believe that his occasionally gathered raw material would not be very uniform. This model of work could explain the existence of very similar objects in sites located far away from each other. It is then difficult to decide whether they were made in one place and defused by merchants or produced in the different sites by a wandering craftsman. The other type would have been the sedentary artisan who worked in an organized workshop as explained above (and see Chapter VIII below).

Preparing the bone for carving. The process began with procuring the raw material straight from skinners, tanners and butchers (MacGregor 1991: 360) or through an organized and centralized supply system. As butchers tend to break the bones – one reason is to get to the fatty marrow – the craftsmen probably got ahold of the bones beforehand (Crummy 1981: 283; Reese 1987: 262; Provenzano 2001: 99). As previously mentioned, artisans preferred cattle metapodia which are large, thick-walled, straight and strong and, at the same time, have very little meat on them (Spitzers 1997: 160; Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 327) and therefore are not so valued by butchers and are rare in kitchen waste.4 Among the flat bones, the large scapula was preferred (Ibid.). The craftsmen also paid attention to the dimensions of the animals (influencing the size of their bones) which varied from country to country and from one period to another, on the age of the animal, etc. (Barbier 1988: 49). Experience has shown that even among the preferred bones not each one would have been suitable to the craftsmen’s needs; Barbier notes (Ibid.) that looking for tablets to prepare a comb he checked fifteen scapulae and all proved unsuitable.

VI.c.2. The methods and stages of the work (compare to the reconstruction of the production process in Barbier 1999: 223-225, Figs. 8-16). Many bone objects were made from the diaphysis of the metapodia of large mammals such as cattle and equids. Judging by a Roman relief from France and ethnographic data it seems that these bones were cut away from the body by the skinner or the butcher even before the animal body was cut to pieces, as these bones do not have much meat on them or contain significant amounts of marrow (Béal 1983b: 615616; 1994: 123, 126, Figs. 3-4; MacGregor 1998: 14). Many artifacts were also made from flat bones such as scapulae and ribs. Although the femur and tibia are

First, remains of meat, fat and sinews were cleaned from the bones. This was done in various ways: hand-cleaning 4

140

Reese (1987: 263) notes that he found no metapodia in modern butcheries at Athens.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE the shells in water for one day before processing them (Schur 1998: 42). It is impossible to reconstruct the ancient techniques with certainty. If a complete bone or ivory workshop is ever found, the presence of hearths, plastered vats (compare – Ibid.) or large pottery vessels would be important evidence of the methods actually employed by these ancient craftsmen.

with a knife or a similar tool; long soaking in lime which burned the remains (Wulff 1966: 93); boiling for several hours as was the custom in Germany and Estonia in Early Medieval Ages (Crummy 1981: 283; MacGregor 1991: 360 n. 10; Verhagen 1993: 341; Tamla and Maldre 2001: 371); and by using ash and vinegar (Barbier 1988: 51). If this work was done in the bone workshop within urban boundaries (and not by the butcher or skinner working outside the town walls) it no doubt caused a certain ecological problem, especially during the summer and during the boiling process (Ibid.: 52).

Scholars and ethnographers have disagreed about the question of whether it is actually necessary to boil or heat bones before working them. It has been suggested that long boiling weakens the bone which looses some of its collagen and therefore bones which had gone through cooking processes were not used in carving (MacGregor 1985: 63, 1991: 360; Verhagen 1993: 341; Deschler-Erb 1998: 94). Campana (1989: 24, 36) stated that dry bone was five times harder than wet bone. A moderate heating will harden it a bit (Marshall 1982: 203) but long boiling will hurt the collagen and weaken it. Barbier (1988: 52) concluded that drying the bone too fast or the heat caused by friction when working it with a saw, a lathe, etc. could also cause damage.

Ethnographic data and research experimentation showed that a dry, old bone is unsuitable for working and tends to crack and break while a fresh one is easy to saw and carve (Semenov 1964: 158; Campana 1989: 27ff; Sussman 1988: 91). However, it is difficult to process with a rasp or file as the soft bone flakes fill the spaces between the tool’s teeth (Deschler-Erb 1998: 94). As a result there might be a connection between eating customs and butchers’ work and the availability of certain bones to the artisan (Krzyszkowska and Morkot 2000: 327). It seems, however, that organized workshops could not process fresh bones all the time but had to store a stock of various bones for a period of time and use them according to how they were needed. The problem was that old bones lost some of their organic component and thus could not be carved on a lathe. They had to be softened by soaking in water (Marshall 1982: 203), in steam or smoke and even in urine as was the custom of Inuits and Native Americans, or in ash and vinegar (MacGregor 1985: 63; Barbier 1988: 51). According to the Roman writer Pausanias, an ivory tusk could be straightened by heating in fire (Gill 1992: 234, and compare to similar techniques used to straighten antler – Christensen 1987). Ivory carvers in Medieval India used to wrap the piece in wet cloth for several days to soften it (Van Cammann 1963: 757763). Ivory from ancient mammoths was softened in Siberia by soaking it in very hot water or in vinegar for two or three days (MacGregor 1985: 63). Soaking the bone in water and even heating it enabled the craftsman to split it easily and even bend it, and of course clean meat and fat remains from it (Semenov 1964: 158-160 and n. 2; MacGregor 1985: 63, Fig. 40; Campana 1989: 25). In Iran, bone pieces to be processed into inlays were soaked in large pottery jars full of lime for three months until they became white (Wulff 1966: 93, Fig. 137). The same results could also be achieved in boiling (Crummy 1981: 284; MacGregor 1991: 360, n. 10) for an hour and half or two hours, as experiments showed (Spitzers 1997: 160). Northe (2001) concluded, based on experiments that an old bone could be carved only after softening in water for 10-20 days or boiling for an hour or two. Campana (1989: 28-29) noted that soaking the bone only softened its outer surface so that it was necessary to continue the process through the next stages of work as well. Craftsmen producing mother-ofpearl inlay in Bethlehem of the 19th-20th cent., immersed

The preliminary stage – preparation of the raw material. The first step in working a long bone diaphysis was the removal of the spongy ends which were almost never used except sometimes the globular femur end, made into whorls\buttons (Macgregor, Mainman and Rogers 1999: 1964). This was done with a saw, chopper, axe or knife (Barbier 1988 Fig. 1, 1999 Fig. 9; Spitzers 1997 Figs. 56). Such edges bearing sawing marks on them are typical on workshop sites (Reese 1987; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 549; MacGregor 1989: 110; Wapnish 1991: 60; Béal 1994: 126; Maire 1998 Fig. 1a). Sometimes, as in handles, one epiphysial end was retained to give a better grasp. Barbier (1988: 53) noted that such sawn ends do not prove the existence of industry on the site as sometimes they were removed by the butcher in order to get to the marrow inside the bone. MacGregor, on the other hand, claimed that the saw started to be used by butchers only in the 18th cent. and therefore sawn bones meant industry (MacGregor 1985: 55, 1991: 363; Hurst and Henig 1994: 106). This left the artisan with a hollow shaft (Reese 1987 Pl. 46: h) with a wall ca. 15mm thick. Its length was only about 120-150mm (See No. 500; Barbier 1994-1995: 14; Béal 1994: 124) so the artisan needed several bones originating from several animals to prepare, for instance, a series of hinges for a cupboard door or inlays for a small casket. Béal (1983b: 616, 1994: 124-125) calculated that one cow supplied four metapodia shafts, each approximately 150mm in length, from which about 80 pins or 20 hinges could be made, so one cow provided enough raw material for several hours to several days’ work of a craftsman. Spitzers (1997: 162) showed that in Medieval Constance, Germany, an artisan produced 200 beads a day from metapodia bones of one cow. It seems therefore that professional workshops would have needed an organized system of bone supply from a large zone around the settlement (Wapnish-Hesse

141

THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY 1999: 16).5 This was perhaps one of the reasons why bone artisans concentrated in large cities, where the relatively broad demand for meat and skin made it also possible to procure a supply of bones (Béal 1994: 125). Serial production in the large workshops forced the craftsmen to keep a stock of various bone pieces (Barbier 1988: 49-50).

The square-sectioned rod prepared to be mounted on a lathe was carved into a polygonal cross-section – the nearest to a round one – in order to minimize the amount of work needed on the lathe (Béal 1983a: 26). Hand worked objects like pins or dolls were carved with a knife and\or a file. Sometimes one of the ends was left unprocessed so the craftsman could hold it while working. Finally, this unworked end would have been sawn-off and discarded (see No. 510; Crummy 1981: 284, Fig. 3). Designs and decorations were carved free hand or marked and drawn in advance by an artist. The design could also be marked by putting a piece of paper or cloth with the design on the bone and piercing along the lines with a needle, leaving tiny holes on the bone (Flayderman 1972: 51). Perforations like needle’s eye were made with a bow drill (Barbier 1999 Fig. 15).

The cylindrical diaphysis shaft was sometimes filed or planed in order to achieve an outer round or square crosssection. Often the medullar cavity was cleaned as well. If a box was being prepared, for instance, the medullar cavity was thoroughly cleaned out and smoothed, while a handle needed only a little cleaning. The shafts could be used to produce long hollow or small solid objects (Deschler-Erb 1998: 96, Abb. 15). If it was not used as a whole (Poplin 1977) the diaphysis was cut lengthwise (Spitzers 1997 Fig. 11; Barbier 1999: 206, Fig. 8) into elongated pieces with square or convex cross-sections (See Nos. 456-457 accordingly). This was carried out with a saw (versus Deschler-Erb 1998: 97), adze, knife or chopper (Barbier 1999 Fig. 10), by cutting grooves with a pointed tool and then splitting the pieces or by hitting the bone with a small mallet or a mallet and a chisel (Semenov 1964: 155; Stewart 1973: 113; Barbier 1994-1995: 14, 1999: 206; Spitzers 1997 Fig. 6). Barbier’s experiments (1988: 53) showed that striking a certain point at one end of a long bone with a mallet and chisel would split it into two halves, a technique the craftsmen were probably well aware of even in prehistoric times (Provenzano 2001: 97). The dimensions of these pieces were restricted in width (because of the cylindrical shape of the diaphysis) and thickness, therefore the objects made from them could not be too large. Ivory artifacts, on the other hand, could be larger because of the size of the tusk (Cutler 1985: 22, 26).

A common find at Caesarea are convex carved tablets with a spirally fluted decoration (Nos. 346-350). Sometimes these were carelessly executed by hand but often the diagonal lines were carefully planned and parallel to each other. This decoration was probably done as follows (Dray, pers. comm.): dots equally separated from each other were marked along both sides, constantly deviating between the sides. Then the artisan drew diagonal, parallel lines between each set of dots along which he carved the mouldings. Some details, as in dolls and figurines, were perhaps painted in advance on the artifact, as was common on ancient ivories (Barnett 1957: 155-159). Sometimes the spot intended to be drilled or guide lines were marked in advance with incisions (Elgavish 1968: 29 No. 45; Bíró 1994: 9). Such guide lines along combs, showing the border of sawing the teeth, are very common at Caesarea and other sites, in bone, ivory and wooden combs alike (Ariel 1990: 142, Fig. 23: B1 194). However, the craftsmen sometimes ignored those lines.

Artisans cut the parts suitable for carving from flat bones (especially scapulae – Barbier 1988: 49, Fig. 2, but also ribs and mandibles) mainly from the central sections which are relatively thick and strong. Craftsmen would have used both faces of the bone, without the spongiosa which separates them. Inlays were made from scapulae, ribs or from long pieces of long bone diaphysiss (MacGregor 1991: 363). Artisans could also drill disks of various sizes and for various uses from flat bones (see Fig. 54; Spitzers 1997 Fig. 13). Thin bent pieces like those cut from ribs could be straightened by soaking in hot water and then pressing (see above; Poplin, pers. comm.).

The finish. The rough carving left marks and striations on the object which did not interfere with its practical use and were therefore sometimes left untouched. However, the craftsman usually took care to remove these marks (Deschler-Erb 1998: 102). After carving the artifact with a knife or on the lathe he smoothed it with a file, wet sand or sandstone and polished it with rough or fine skin, sometimes adding wax or oil to make it shine – the same techniques used on wood (Liversidge 1976: 162). Native Americans polished bone points with grass containing silica (Marshall 1982: 203). Pliny (NH 9, 40) mentioned fish skin in this connotation, perhaps especially the skin of skate or shark (Barnett 1957: 155-159). Inuits polished canine or bone with shark skin stretched on a wooden handle before carving it (Flayderman 1972: 50).

The advanced stage – preparation and decoration of the object. Next the artisan spliced the square rough-out or the flat bone into rods or tablets using a mallet and chisel (Barbier 1999 Fig. 14), knife or draw knife (Deschler-Erb 1998 Abb. 153). The tablets were designated, for instance, for the preparation of carved pieces and inlays. 5

Finally, the craftsman decorated the object by hand or on a lathe with various motifs: circle-and-dot, hatching, punching, etc., methods used on pottery and metal as well (Bíró 1994: 9-10). The bone could also be painted, usually in red or black but pink, green, blue and yellow could also be used (Marangou 1976: 26). Human

Horwitz (2000, 2004) found that in some sites near Caesarea the number of cattle bones was far larger than usual. It can be suggested that beyond the need for good meat in a city like Caesarea the reason could be also the demand for raw materials.

142

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE figurines were usually left in the natural color of the bone but were burnished (Rodziewicz E. 1995: 405). Sometimes only design grooves were filled with paint (Béal 1983a: 16; MacGregor 1985: 67; Bíró 1994: 9). The coloring agent was mixed with wax or resin and smeared onto the bone (Rodziewicz E. 1995: 405). Sometimes, this coloring was meant to cover defects in the raw material or execution or to emphasize the background (Marangou 1976: 26; Shahin 1998: 371). The Caesarea assemblage includes pins with gilded heads (Nos. 173, 217) but in Europe it was the shaft which could receive this treatment (MacGregor 1985: 70). Iranian artisans in the mid-20th cent. immersed bone inlays for 4-6 months in a green solution containing vinegar, sal-ammonia and copper until they obtained the green color (Wulff 1966: 93-94, Fig. 137). The green coloring – for instance on Roman pins in Europe – was supposedly in imitation of bronze objects (MacGregor 1985: 67, 70). The popular circle-and-dot decoration was carried out with a center-bit (Deschler-Erb 1998: 102, Abb. 164). Some of the decorations had a practical use like incisions on a handle for better grip (Semenov 1964: 151; Béal 1983a: 17). Points were sometimes hardened in the fire (Marshall 1982: 583), and this could be the reason why many pins have dark points (if these are not the result of contact with some other material).

eye he drilled several perforations close to each other and then removed the partitions between them with a knife or file (Poulain and Poulain 1978: 12; Deschler-Erb 1998: 101, Abb. 160). When he did not bother to remove the projections that remained the eye would have a figure 8shape (like Nos. 102-104). The ajouré inlays decorations were made in a similar way (see also in Chapter VII): many perforations were drilled in the thin tablets and then widened into the planned shapes using very thin saws (see No. 513). Another way to drill an elongated eye for a needle is attested by an oblique depression left in the lower part of one of the sides (No. 106). Sometimes the accurate point of the perforation was marked in advance with incisions, both for guiding the craftsman and to avoid having the drill point slip (Béal 1983a Pl. 21: 157). Whetting. Points of needles, pins, awls, etc. were probably sharpened by rubbing against rough stones like sandstone or pumice, usually wetting the object with water from time to time. It should be noted that many bone objects have identical parallels made in other materials such as wood, metal, glass, etc. (see comparisons in Chapter IV) with the final shape adapted to the characteristics of the raw material. Usually it is difficult to decide which are the prototypes and which the imitations (Béal 1983a: 18-19).

Joining bone parts. As bone pieces and blanks have restricted dimensions (Bíró 1994: 9; Barbier 1994-1995: 13) it was often necessary to carve several pieces very accurately and then join them to a complete object or scene (Shahin 1998: 371). It seems that sometimes the artisan used a design book according to which each piece was separately carved and then put together (Marangou 1976: 27). This is how composite inlays, double buttons, spindles, etc. were made, as well as many pins in which the head and shaft were made separately and then joined with glue (made from bones? Wulff 1966: 86; Crummy 1981: 282, n. 8; Newman and Serpico 2000) or forced together (Deschler-Erb 1998: 103; Bíró 1994: 9). Inlays and carved pieces were attached to the wooden object by gluing – incrustation (Vermeule 1989: 272; Jablonowska-Taracha 1998: 29) as was done until recently in Iran (Wulff 1966: 96) or by inserting them in precisely cut-out depressions – intarsia, as attested sometimes by the bottom of the object which was left rough on purpose (No. 384; Barnett 1957: 155-159; Crummy 1981: 282). In other cases, the joining was carried out with wooden or bone pins or with metal rivets (as in ajouré inlay No. 418) inserted in holes drilled in the object (Cutler 1985 Figs. 28, 34-35; Vermeule 1989: 272; Béal 1991: 309-310).

Close inspection of the artifacts, ethnographical comparisons and technological logic show that the artisan did not always follow the “correct” order of production stages. Sometimes he improvised, trying to save time or avoid errors and problems. In producing dice, for instance, he probably did not saw, smoothed and marked every die separately as can be deduced from the Caesarea finds (see Chapter VII below). Unfinished dice found at Visegrád, Hungary and Les Bolards, France showed that a long rod with a square cross-section was first shaped and smoothed. Then several dice were sawn half way through and while still attached to each other the numbers were marked on the free facets. Only then they were sawn apart and the remaining facets marked (Sautot 1978 Pl. 20; Gróf and Gróh 2001: 282, Fig. 6). This method saved time and produced identical objects. The same is true for drilling. Objects found at Caesarea (like Nos. 93-96) had a drilled socket or cavity and very thin walls. It is obvious that the socket was first drilled while the bone was still thicker, and only then was the outer perimeter carefully filed and smoothed. If this sequence was reversed and the bone drilled when its wall is already thin there was a good chance of it breaking.

Drilling. Close inspection of several perforations revealed that sometimes they were drilled from one direction, giving them a cylindrical or conical shape, depending on the drill head. In other cases, such as when the piece was thick, resulting in much friction, the hole was drilled from both directions and has a bi-conical cross-section (like No. 60; Spitzers 1997: 160, Fig. 2). When the craftsman wanted to prepare an elongated perforation like a needle’s

As for the delicate ajouré inlays it seems, judging by unfinished pieces (Nos. 514, 574) that first the craftsman drilled the perforations and sawed the small designs and only then he separated the piece from the raw tablet. This method made the work easier, for instance in holding the piece while sawing the designs, and decreased the danger of breaking it. 143

THE TECHNOLOGY OF BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY possible to cut ivory pieces around the perimeter of the tusk, to soften them in an acid solution and to flatten them in a press, thus, producing tablets which were even larger than its diameter (MacGregor 1985: 63-66). Pausanias discussed straightening an elephant tusk after heating it in fire (Gill 1992: 234).

The bone artisans also prepared parts which were then attached to objects made from other materials, like bone handles for metal knives, bone hinges and inlays for wooden furniture (McWhirr 1982 Figs. 15-16; Béal 1994: 126), etc. Inlays which were cut along part of the design in order to adjust them to the wooden object show that they were made by the bone artisan and not by the carpenter (like in 11th cent. England – MacGregor 1991: 363). In Medieval times, on the other hand, workshops making metal knives in London used to prepare the bone and ivory handles as well, and bone tuning pegs were found in a workshop for musical instruments. These facts may point to the transition from a single raw material industry to the production of composite objects from different materials, as shown in 17th cent. German illustrations (MacGregor 1989: 114-115, 121, Figs. 2, 5a, 5b, 1991: 366, 369). Such a system was based on smooth connections among different craftsmen, supply of finished parts, help in procuring raw materials, etc. (see Chapter VIII below).

All this is true only for elephant ivory as Hippopotamus ivory is in reality a canine which is more difficult to carve (Ibid.) with smaller dimensions. A modern ivory carver from Paris refused to work on hippo tusk because of its hard enamel coating (Poplin 1974: 85). Cutler (1993: 172) claimed that there was a basic similarity between carving bone and ivory. The above-mentioned scarcity of complete bone workshops and tools in the archaeological finds is also true for ivory (Ibid. 1985: 37-38). An 11th cent. miniature from Venice shows an ivory carver splitting pieces from a tusk using an adze with some kind of an arched object lying at his feet. Sawing ivory is mentioned in a source from the end of the 4th cent. (Ibid.: 38, 41, Fig. 37). Indeed before the tusk was sawn into large pieces the artisan usually removed its damaged outer layer which was unsuitable for use. Sometimes the tusk tip too was discarded because it was damaged by the elephant during its life. Nor was the perimeter of the inner cavity used except in the preparation of a box (Engemann 1987 Abb. 2; Krzyszkowska 1992: 26). By looking closely at ivory objects one can conclude that the craftsman knew how to work individual raw materials according to the “fabric” (like carving wood) in order to avoid too much splitting and to make sawing and carving easier. The larger dimensions of Byzantine ivories showed that their manufacture was based on the “fabric”, i.e. the artisan sawed the tusk along its grain and not across its width (Ibid.). Sometimes incisions can be observed around the carved design, showing that someone marked out guide lines in advance. Most of the carving was carried out free hand although objects like boxes or lids would have been produced on a lathe. Ivory artifacts seem rarely to have been painted (Cutler 1985: 42-47).

Working rate. The final price of an artifact was fixed according to the cost of the raw materials, work, transportation, the quality of the object, supply and demand, etc. Most of these parameters usually remain unknown to us. The working rate, however, can be evaluated based on ethnographic comparisons and experimentation.6 Based on actual experimentation on the production of many objects, Barbier (1988: 50, 55) suggested that without any help the preparation of an undecorated round comb took four hours, a dog-shaped knife handle – 18 hours, a pin with a carved head – 20 hours and a trianglular comb – 30 hours. Most of the work lay in the carving of small details. The latter objects were probably only consumed by wealthy people. VI.c.3. Ivory versus bone carving. The obvious advantages of ivory versus bone, in addition to its being a more expensive and prestigious raw material, lay in the fact that it was softer (Wapnish-Hesse 1999: 17; see Chapter III above) and larger pieces could be produced from the tusk (Weitzmann 1979: 33-34; Cutler 1985: 26, 1993: 172; Engemann 1987 Abb. 2). It was probably also

6

The ancient artisan was much more experienced than the modern researcher, so the original rates were probably shorter (Poplin 1974: 91; Crummy 1981: 284).

144

CHAPTER VII THE BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY AT CAESAREA manufactured in particular quarters of the ancient city of Carthage from the end of the 4th and in the 5th cent. while needles, spoons and combs were made in other quarters – another proof that specialized workshops existed (Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 589). The Polish excavations at Alexandria revealed remains from the production of carved pieces, pins, needles, combs, handles, styli, spindle whorls, disks, dice, gaming pieces, dolls, rings1 etc., throughout the 5th-9th cent. (Rodziewicz 1998: 143; Rodziewicz M. 1979a: 87). At Syrmium in Hungary, the 2nd-4th cent. artisans produced pins, needles, box lids, tablets, dice and rings (Saranovic-Svetek 1980: 132). At Lyon in France, they mainly produced hinges, handles and pins and, in smaller quantities, boxes, square pions, dagger\sword handles, carved pieces, etc. (Béal 1983b: 609).

VII.a. Introduction The remains left at Caesarea by bone and ivory workshop production (“Workshop material” – Krzyszkowska 1992: 25; see Ayalon and Dray 2002) have few parallels in Israel. To date, the only similar assemblage found has been in Ashkelon, and there, too the workshops themselves were not unearthed and the finds only briefly mentioned (Wapnish 1991; see also Ayalon 1999: 56). In other countries similar assemblages are more numerous and even larger (MacGregor 1998: 19), but a varied assemblage like the one discussed here is still rather rare (see for instance Sautot 1978: 30, 49-51; Henig 1984; Hutchinson and Reese 1988 and a list of other sites p. 562; Rodziewicz 1998; Lawlor 2000). Unfortunately, there are hardly any sites anywhere in the territory of the Roman Empire and its successors where the remains of a complete workshop been found (Barbier 1988: 48) and most of the finds attesting to the existence of such workshops originate from fills and dumps (Béal 1983b: 608, 1994: 124; Rodziewicz 1998; De Cupere 2001:147-159).

In attempting to understand the large scale industry which flourished in Caesarea, the following points should be noted (after Barbier 1988: 49): developing urbanisation under Roman rule created a large demand; changes in eating customs which followed this process and the rise in the standard of living resulted in an increased consumption of cattle meat which left an abundance of bones; the advancing technology enabled industrial, serial and professional production.

Large concentrations of workshop material found at various spots at Caesarea (as in Insula W2S3 along Cardo W1 – Porat 2000: 37*) show that a bone and ivory industry flourished in the city during most of its existence, from the Early Roman to the Crusader period. These finds include blanks and unfinished objects (Figs. 48-49), production waste (Figs. 50-54), objects gathered for repair or secondary use (Krzyszkowska 1992: 25), etc. Many of them were found together with ash concentrations, metal-working refuse, melting pots (for instance in Area IV, L. 40081) and other industrial remains showing that the bone carvers operated alongside other craftsmen like blacksmiths (see Chapter VIII below). The finds show that the following objects were produced at the Caesarea workshops (i.e. excluding objects made “by the user”) in varying compositions and quantities and in different periods: handles, pins, needles, dice, rings, beads, whorls\buttons, carved pieces, inlays, disks and perhaps also weapon parts, combs and tuning pegs. Ivory artifacts were manufactured as well although on a much smaller scale (see Chapter V). Decorative items and objects for entertainment are more numerous in this list than utensils, as would probably be expected in a large city with a high standard of living (on the tendency to concentrate production on specific object types see Chapter VIII below and Rodziewicz 1998; Emery 2001). At Mleiha, Omman, on the other hand, workshops from the 2nd-1st cent. BCE produced mainly utensils such as harpoon points, spatulae, spoons and points (Barbier 1999: 207). Pins and inlays were

The manufacture of bone and ivory objects at Caesarea was identified, as mentioned above, by the presence of two kinds of finds: a. ready-made blanks and unfinished artifacts, and b. production waste and unworked roughout ends. About a thousand of these objects (a quarter of the whole assemblage) were found, a selection of which is introduced below according to types.2 The craftsmen preferred, as mentioned above, bones, especially metapodia of large animals like cattle and horses, from which they could carve relatively large and many objects (compare: Deschler-Erb 1997: 74). It should be expected that a large number of these bones will be found at Caesarea where bone workshops operated for hundreds of years. During the 1993-1994 excavations, for instance (Cope 1999 Table 1), cattle bones in Area KK (Byzantine period) comprised 13.5% of the assemblage (compared to 29.5% sheep\goat bones which were seldom exploited for industrial purposes – Ibid. Table 2). Altogether, 21.2% of the cattle was slaughtered before reaching full maturity, showing that they were used for several years as draught animals 1

2

145

The report mentioned pyxides but the Caesarea finds prove that these pieces are the waste of ring manufacturing. Some scholars (like Ciugudean 2001: 64) claimed that a workshop could also be identified by an abundance of identical objects, but that could be the result of a common fashion and other reasons.

THE BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY AT CAESAREA there are no answers for these questions here. Cope (pers. comm.) noted that all types of bones were identified at the city and concluded from it that the slaughtering was done there. In her paper, however (Cope 1999: 413-414, 416) she explained the absence of certain phalanges by the fact that the carcass was processed elsewhere and the body parts were then brought to the city for sale.5

(Ibid.: 407-409). In Area I6 (Early Arab period with Crusader penetrations) cattle bones comprised 20.5% of the faunal assemblage opposed to 43.7% sheep\goat (Ibid.: 409-410). In Area I4 (same periods) cattle bones comprised 19.6% (sheep\goat 34.8%; Ibid.: 410). In Area CC (same periods) cattle bones comprised only 3.9% of the assemblage (for some localized reason) as opposed to 25.4% sheep\goat bones (Ibid.: 410-411). It should be emphasized that in most sites and periods in Israel the number of sheep\goat bones is much larger than cattle's since it is easier to raise them in this relatively dry region.

Where the osteological origin of blanks and waste pieces from Caesarea could be established (see Table 7.1 below), a large variety of animals and bones was identified, including some that no artifacts were made from them like sheep\goat and pig bones. Altogethr 121 bones were identified, revealing an obvious preference for cattle and horse metapodia (91) which is also true for the objects made from them, especially handles, furniture mounts and hollow gaming pieces. The identification of pieces left over by the bone artisans was as follows: ulna – one pig and one cattle; metacarpus – two cattle and one camel; femur – one pig, one horse and one cattle; tibia – one donkey, one cattle and one sheep\goat; metatarsus – 10 cattle, four donkey, three horse, one horse or cattle; metapodial – three cattle, two donkey and two camel; rib – three cattle and one unidentified; scapula – one unidentified.

These species proportions are different at two sites located on Mount Carmel in the Caesarea hinterland. In Horvat ‘Eleq from the Early Roman period, cattle bones comprised 53% of the assemblage and sheep\goat only 31% (Horwitz 2000: 512). Horvat Raqit – a Late Roman-Byzantine farmhouse – revealed 48% cattle bones and only 27.5% sheep\goat (Horwitz 2004:304305). Horwitz explained this phenomenon by special local ecological conditions or the fact that the relatively rich farmers may have preferred cattle meat. It could also be connected, however, with the larger consumption of cattle meat at the nearby big city – Caesarea, as well as one of the by-products – hides and bones for the developing industry described here, which relied on a large scale supply system (Wapnish-Hesse 1999: 16)3. However, more data is needed, both from Caesarea and other sites in its hinterland to strengthen these assumptions.

The tables below present the identification of animal species and bones types used in this assemblage, also showing what kinds of objects were made from them. The results completely confirm the data from the literature (for instance Deschler-Erb 1997: 74-75, with preferance of equid bones), i.e. there is an obvious preference for large metapodia (mainly metatarsus – 68 out of 121), especially those of cattle (76 certain plus some uncertain out of 121 identifiable examples). As opposed to the wide use of camel bones in Ashkelon (originating perhaps from camel caravans which came to the city from the desert – Wapnish 1991: 60), they are very few here (in the best case 5 out of 121 identifiable bones), no doubt because this area was never their Sitz im Leben. When compared to object types, it seems that cattle humerus were preferred in the manufacture of Islamic articulated dolls, probably because of its shape. All large dice and 15 out of 18 hollow gaming pieces which were identified were made of cattle and horse metatarsus, probably for the same reason. Similarly large is the portion of that bone in the identified industrial waste (18 out of 41), reflecting the preferences of artisans. Flat bones were mainly used to manufacture utensils and counters.6

Most of the waste pieces found at the site originated from advanced stages of the production process while large offcuts from the first stages – shafts and epiphyses – are rather few in number, unlike the situation at other sites4 (Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 549; MacGregor 1989: 110; Emery 2001: 76, Fig. 20; to a similar situation see Krzyszkowska 1992: 28; Dijkman and Ervynk 1998: 7; for waste from all working stages see Dzierzykray-Rogalski, Prominska and Rodziewicz 1972). Most of the finds were from long bone diaphyses with no epiphyses in the workshop from the 2nd-1st cent. BCE at Mleiha in Oman (Barbier 1999: 203). The author raised the question of whether the preliminary sawing and preparation of the raw material were done at the slaughtering site (which, for environmental reasons was probably outside the settlement but not too far as the animals were no doubt marched to this spot alive – MacGregor 1998: 11) or the artisans followed rules of hygiene and disposed of the refuse from their workshop properly. As the osteological finds from Caesarea could not be checked within the framework of this research 3

4

The flourishing of bone industry in Méru and its vicinity (north of Paris) was explained as a result of the numerous cattle heads raised there for the consumption of the Capital (explained during a visit to the local factory, now a museum). The actual number was no doubt larger but many of these sawn pieces were sent to the osteologists and so not included here. Cope (pers. comm.) reported on many sawn shafts of cattle ulna and radius included in the material at her disposal.

5

6

146

Cope (Ibid.) explained various phenomena in the assemblage by different methods of butchery and cooking but ignored the possibility that some of them originated from bone separation for industrial purposes. Islamic ajouré inlays at Ashkelon were made from large ribs, mainly those of camels (Wapnish 1997). It was impossible to acertain this in the Caesarea assemblage.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Table 7.1. Identified Bones According to Animal Species and Type of Object Animal names codes: c = cattle; ca = camel; d = donkey; f = fowl (stork or vulture); h = horse; p = pig; s\g = sheep\goat; ui = unidentified. Bone names codes: mc = metacarpus; mp = metapodial; mt = metatarsus; ui = unidentifable. The two bones missing from the total number are those of fallow deer and gazelle. Bone Object Handles

Ulna

cc?ca\c

mt

mp

mc

cciuiu

cc cc

8 2

c\h p 7

ccccccccc c\h cccccccccc c\hhhhddd d 68

cd s\g 5

9 3 2 11

cc

5

ch

ccc c\h c

d ccccccch c\hc\hiu cccccccccc hhhdc\h

Total 10

h

c

f

3

Scapula

c\h

c? ca\c

cp

rib

c

cc

Carved pieces Mounts\ hinges

Total

Tibia

c

Gaming pieces

Industrial waste

Femur

cccccchh c\h c

Utensils Cylindrical boxes Jewelry & art Rings & their production waste Flutes Dice

Humerus

c

18

c

5 10

cccca cadd

ccca

ccc iu

10

10

8

iu

41

3

119

Table 7.2. Number of Identified Bones According to Animal Species and Skeletal Element Animal Bone Humerus Ulna mc Femur Tibia mt mp Rib Scapula Total

Cattle

Horse

Cattle \horse

4 1 7 5 3 46 4 5 1 76

Camel

Donkey

Pig

Sheep \goat

Misc. unid.

1

5 1

2 1 9 1 1 12

7 1

1 1

2

1

1 1 6 2

1 1 3 1

10

5

147

total

9

2

1

6

3 10 8 5 69 10 8 3 121

THE BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY AT CAESAREA up to 17mm from the end, there are clear marks of engraving done on a lathe, terminating in a scar. There is no doubt that the work was never finished and the object was discarded, with no attempt being made to prepare something else from it. L. 140mm, d. 28mm.

This chapter does not deal with objects which were roughly finished but did not receive the last finishing touches (smoothing, polishing, etc.). They constitute a further proof that they were manufactured on-site but could also look this way as the result of unskilled workmanship. An example is a doll's hand (S\33895) which was very roughly worked and covered with sawing and filing striations although its bottom is smoothed from rubbing against the body, showing that it was in use over a long period. This category also does not include simple tools made on an ad-hoc basis “by the user” (see Chapter VI) nor the many objects which were damaged during use and reworked secondarily. None of these can be included within the category of industrially-produced artifacts.

Another carelessly made, unfinished handle is represented by No. 451. Similar objects include shafts No. 500 and No. 452 made from the wall of a long bone diaphyses where the handle socket was not yet been drilled (Béal 1983b: 609) (see their description in Chapter IV above). Other objects of this type (noted with the expedition code and basket number) are: S: 26579; 80729. A: 30.

Scanty remains of bone object production have been found at several sites throughout Israel, in addition to the Caesarea and Ashkelon assemblages: Horvat Castra near Haifa (Ziegelmann, in preparation); Shuni near Caesarea (Y. Tepper, pers. comm.); Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924: 16 No. 16, 28 No. 1); Ramla (M. Shamai, pers. comm.); Jerusalem (Ariel 1990: 141; Horwitz 1990: 145; Geva 2003: 347-348). Tablets and inlays which were probably made on-site were also found at Hesban in Jordan (Lowlor 2000).

Unfinished handle cover? Object No. 453 (Photo 1: 5) described on Chapter IV was probably never finished. Lathe waste from handle production? Many handles were produced on lathes. As, however, only the discarded rough-out end remained we can only deduce from its diameter about the thickness of the object cut off from it. Some of the rough-out ends shown on Fig. 50 (like No. 471) fit the dimensions of handles. Other finds of this type: S: 17954; 25626. P: 0141. VII.b.2. Pins and needles (compare to Davidson 1952: 174, 278-279, Pls. 147a, 148; Barbier 1988: 53; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 5563, Fig. 13: 1-3; for a 4th cent. workshop for simple pins see Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981). Pins and needles are rather similar in their dimensions and pointed shaft and vary only in the form of the head. Therefore a rough rod with a thickened head can be defined as pin blank while that with a uniform thickness is perhaps a needle blank (Ibid.: 113). To simplify the discussion we shall refer below only to blanks and waste from pin production with the data on needles to follow.

The blanks and waste pieces made it possible to define the kinds of objects produced at Caesarea but it is impossible to reconstruct the scope of production during the various periods. Béal (1983b: 617), for instance, noted that in two Roman cities in France situated not far from each other (Lyon and Vienne) similar artifacts were produced, testifying that the distribution of such products was limited. His assumption was strengthened by the fact that similar objects were not found in nearby villages in which bone objects were rather scarce anyway. When the finds from Tel Dor and other sites in Caesarea's hinterland such as Shuni will be published it will perhaps be possible to draw conclusions about the distribution of the bone objects produced in the workshops of Caesarea and other centers.7

Almost 400 of the 3,900 bone and ivory objects discussed here could be clearly identified as decorative pins, almost all from the Roman and Byzantine periods. In addition to these, about 730 broken pieces of pins or needles were found. Some were hand-carved, others were carved on a lathe while many consist of a lathe-carved head forced onto or glued to a hand-carved shaft (Davidson 1952: 278; Poulain and Poulain 1978: 11; compare to an Early Roman lathe-carved wooden pin: Hadas 1994: 38, Fig. 61: 20).

VII.b. Bone Objects Produced at Caesarea VII.b.1. Handles. Unfinished handles and the waste from their production found in the city show that some of them were manufactured there. Unfinished handles. The best example is a handle from the Late Roman period (3rd-4th cent., P, Area KK30, B. 0057, No. 001, L. 026). This is the shaft of a horse metatarsus with its both ends carefully sawn through. Part of the bottom is missing. The medullar cavity was cleaned and smoothed. The surface was smoothed although at one place a flake was removed. On one side, 7

The pin blanks were made from rods sawn or split from the wall of a long bone diaphysis (Béal 1983b: 609). In the list below, the hand-carved blanks (which could also be made into other objects) were separated from the lathe-made unfinished objects which already have the shape of pins, and from lathe waste of pins-like artifacts (Bourgeois and Tuffreau-Libre 1981 Figs. 3-4). The Maya site of Dos Pilas, Guatemala revealed impressive remains of a pin and needle industry (Emery 2001: 73-75, Figs. 4-12).

The bone objects from Dor will be published by Alice Choyke with the author participating in the research of the Roman objects. Among finds from Shuni excavated by Yotam Tepper many were very similar to those from Caesarea.

148

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Pins blanks (see Deschler-Erb 1998 Abb. 153; Emery 2001 Figs. 7-10). No. 460 (see Chapter IV) is a typical pin blank which is thick enough to have a head carved from it as well, not just a shaft. No. 461 also belongs to this group. No. 462 never passed the first stage of preparation (compare to Rodziewicz 1998: 143, Fig. 13 left). An object from the Byzantine period (P, Area KK37, B. 0128, No. 003, L. 080) is a pin in a more advanced stage of production. The pyramidal head was finished and smoothed but the shaft was left unworked with vertical planing marks and parallel file striations still visible ( see Deschler-Erb 1998 Abb. 154). L. 65mm, the head l. 19mm, w. 7mm, t. 6mm. Other finds of this type: S: 39447; 40081; 87114; L. 35532. P: 0017; 0038; 0131; 0176. A: 0082; 1077 (2); 0559; 1527.

was therefore discarded. L. 55mm. Another object (A, Area KK24, B. 0145, No. 001, L. 040) is also a polygonal raw rod. One of its ends was cleanly sawn and has a small lathe indentation on it. The other end was cut off while rotating on the lathe. L. 57mm, d. 6mm. A similar piece dates from the Late Roman period (S, Area IW, B. 55038, L. 731). The cleanly sawn end has two lathe indentations on it (probably the rod moved while rotating or was re-centralized by the artisan). The beginning of a thin (d. 3mm) lathe carved rod projects from the other end, whose continuation was broken off. This is probably part of the pin shaft prepared from this blank. L. 65mm, d. 7mm. Other objects of this type: S: 11476; 23748 (4); 24235; 24741-2; 25600 (2); 25626; 27387; 27420; 27636 (2); 34416; 38984; 40320; 55039; 87448; 89213; 89932. P: 0017; 0082; 0089; 0142; 0174; 0200; 0201; 0202. A: 0009; 145.

Unfinished pins. An unfinished Byzantine pin (S, B. 39535, L. 10660). In the first stage the head, with its rectangular section, was separated from the shaft by grooves cut with a knife on both sides. The shaft bears knife carving marks. The pin is complete and it is unclear why it was discarded. L. 101mm, w. 4mm. Object No. 470 (see Chapter IV) is probably a blank for a pin head. Hand-carved pin, head and shaft made in one piece (P, Area KK32, B. 0158, No. 001, L. 116). The head is polygonal although the intention possibly was to carve it into a globular shape. The shaft has vertical planing marks on it. L. 52mm, the head l. 5mm, d. 4mm.

Another type of rough-out end left from lathe carving of pins and needles is a smooth cylinder which lacks the typical polygonal section. Some of these pieces are similar to the previous rods except for their cross-section while others have a uniform shape such as No. 476 (Chapter IV). Other objects of this type: S: 23748; 26013. A: 0009. A rare object (P, Area KK28, B. 0099-2, No. 001, L. 040) is a tiny cone with a lathe indentation on its wide end. It is probably a rough-out end left from the carving of a thin cylinder. L. 8mm, d. 7mm. Similar objects are S, B. 87517 and an ivory cone (A, Area G25, B. 0046, L. 019).

Lathe production waste (compare to Deschler-Erb 1998 Abb. 157: 1, z, B. 5481). Many discarded rough-out ends were found (see Nos. 471-480). In many of them the cut off end shows that the diameter of the carved object was about 3mm, just like many pins and needles. In most of these the shaft has a polygonal cross-section (the closest to a round one) to be processed later on a lathe, minimizing the amount of material to be removed (compare to 7th cent. objects from Alexandria: Rodziewicz 1998: 153, Figs. 27-28). Some of these pieces are c. 50mm long but were thrown away despite the waste of raw material. No. 474 is probably a rough-out end of a pin (compare: Ibid.: 146, Fig. 12 center top). Part of it was carved on a lathe with the object but was cut off from it for an unknown reason.

Remains of needle production. One needle (S, B. 20767, Square 014) broke in the past – part of its head and the point are missing. The head is flattened. One eye is circular and fairly large (d. 2.5mm) and another eye was half drilled from one side, without finishing it from the other. It is possible that the needle had already broken at this stage and was discarded, although its owner could have used the complete eye. This object may show that needles were produced here. L. 85mm, the head w. 5mm, t. 3mm. An intact Early Roman needle (S, B. 27392, L. 4801) was carefully smoothed, the head is flattened, but the eye was never drilled. It could, however, have been used as a point, cosmetic stick, etc. L. 127mm, w. 6mm, t. 2.5mm.

Another piece from the late Byzantine period (P, Area KK11, B. 0082-2, No. 001, L. 127) was discarded in a more initial stage – while being carved on the lathe. Half of it was already processed into a thin (d. 3mm), smooth cylindrical shaft with a lathe indentation on one end. The other half was left in its thicker (d. 5.5mm) polygonal raw shape which shows that the lathe carving removed a 2.5mm thick layer. The smooth and oblique transition between the two parts shows that the carving tool (a point?) was held at a sharp angle to the rod. The continuation of the thick section is missing and it is possible that it broke during the carving and the object

VII.b.3. Dice. Two types of dice were found at Caesarea (Chapter IV): the large ones were made from a hollow bone and therefore needed plugs, while the small dice were made from the cortical bone of long bone diaphyses which explains their small dimensions. Most of the remains of dice production are from manufacture of the small type (Ayalon and Dray 2002: 20). Small dice were produced as follows: an elongated rod was sawn or planed from the wall of a long bone diaphysis. One of its 149

THE BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY AT CAESAREA where they were mistakenly defined as waste from pyxide production (Rodziewicz 1998: 146, 153, Figs. 16, 25). Two waste pieces from Caesarea showed beyond doubt that various kinds of rings would have been produced from them. The smaller types may have been used as jewelry while the larger ones (like S, B. 39484 – d. 50mm) may possibly have been decorations or mounts attached to various objects, a hanging device (for a curtain or screen), a closing device for bags etc.8, part of a composite artifact (like a dagger handle coated with wood\leather and bone rings alternatively) or inlay, etc. These rings (at least ten have been found) have a typical trapezoid cross-section as a result of the technique for their removal on the lathe (see below).

ends remained unworked and was held by the artisan. The rest was planed, creating four smooth faces and a square cross-section in the dimensions of the needed dice. A deep groove was then sawn between each pair of dice. It is possible that they were not completely sawn off but remained attached to each other like a chocolate bar. Such pieces were not found at Caesarea but are known from Visegrád, Hungary (Gróf and Gróh 2001: 282, Fig. 6) and Les Bolards, France (Sautot 1978: 48, Pl. 20: 2). At this stage the numbers were marked on the free faces using a center-bit. Only then were the dice separated from each other and the numbers marked on the remaining faces. It is also possible, however, that the dice were completely separated from each other from the beginning and the numbers marked on each one, although they would have been less comfortable to hold. The unworked end of the rod, to which a square cross-sectioned smooth segment is still attached, was discarded.

Ring production blank. This rare example (No. 489 – Chapter IV; Photos 1: 14, 2: 8; Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 4:3) was a blank from which rings of two different diameters were removed. After the ends were sawn off, the medular cavity was partly cleaned to insure a good grip on the lathe when the wooden block method was employed (see Chapter VI). In the first stage, parallel grooves were incised on the shaft which rotated on the lathe with a point or knife held perpendicular to the object, penetrating about 1mm deep into the bone. In the second stage the artisan used a pointed tool whose end was bent 90 degrees to its axis (Pl.. 14: D). While the bone was still rotating he pressed the point on the free end of the shaft, along its axis and under the first ring and incised deeply until the point passed the first, perpendicular groove (compare to No. 493 in which the work stopped during this phase and the section of the groove is similar to the shape of the point). Now the artisan incised the first groove again, deepening it until the ring was cut off from the shaft. The point of the second tool with which the bottom of the ring was incised had a triangular cross-section, causing the typical trapezoid cross-section of these rings. The free ring was pushed aside while the craftsman began to incise the second ring. After all the larger rings were cut off the process was repeated with the smaller rings. In this case only the first one was cut off and for some reason (the blank broke?) the work stopped and the piece was discarded.

Blanks of small dice. No. 487 (see Chapter IV) is probably a blank rod from which dice or throwing sticks (like Nos. 283-284) were produced. Smooth blank and unmarked dice were also found (No. 469; Photo 1: 20; compare to 7th cent. blank dice from Alexandria: Rodziewicz 1998: 153, Fig. 24 right). Other objects of this type: S: topsoil (6); 14016; 18970; 26006; 34412; 36037; 37857; 38738; 39165; 40187; 40320; 53918. A: 0048; 0821; 1567. Rough-out ends of small dice production. At least ten pieces such as described above were found. One of them is No. 486 (Ayalon and Dray 2002 Fig. 5: 1) and another is No. 488, from which dice similar to the smallest ones known from Caesarea (face l. 6-7mm: S, B. 35994, L. 12201; A, B. 0112, L. 040) could have been produced. Other objects of this type: S: 18881; 38741; 38982; 39177; 39210; 39682; 40180-1; 40504; 84307. Production waste from a large hollow die. No. 508 (see Chapter IV) is probably such a piece. The two production processes described above were valid in this case too. As the prepared blank shaft probably never matched exactly the combined length of several dice, a small piece from its end was left and discarded, like the one discussed here. Another object (P, Area NN29, B. 0041, No. 001, L. 021) is a similar waste piece made from cattle metatarsus. The medullar cavity was cleaned but the two projecting ridges inside may still be seen. Both ends were sawn and smoothed. The cylindrical shaft was planed into a square cross-section. Face l. 30mm (longer than the largest die known from Caesarea), t. 13mm. Other objects of this type: P: 0221. A: 0026.

Blank No. 490 also has two 'layers' of rings visible on it. Some rings of each type were never removed. In this case, the artisan removed one or two rings at a time alternatively from each layer. Rings production waste. More than 50 broken waste pieces from lathe-manufacturing of rings came to light at Caeserea. The rings were processed in the method described above but only the lower 'layer' remained on the blanks. Only a few waste pieces survived as complete cylinders. In many cases those thin shafts broke in straight and smooth lines along the axis, looking as if they were deliberately sawn.

VII.b.4. Rings. A rare product (based on what has been published) of the local bone industry are rings (Ayalon and Dray 2002: 18-20). Comparisons are known only from Carthage (38 waste pieces from the 4th-5th cent.: Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 560, Fig. 11: 1-3) and Alexandria (at least 44 pieces from the 6th-7th cent.),

8

150

I thank A. Choyke for this remark.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE In most of these shafts (Fig. 51) the medullar cavity was roughly and vertically carved at both ends with a gouge in order to center it on the lathe. The wider end from which no rings were removed remained thicker than the rest, much like a column base. It is usually not parallel to the rings, narrower on one side than on the other as a result of incising the rings with a tool held at an angle to the lathe. Sometimes a kind of a low 'collar' remained above it with a circumferential groove separating it from the shaft (see Nos. 490, 493-494). It was left from a ring which was never cut off completely. The cylinder itself (except the 'base') is very smooth as a result of the lathe carving, and fine shallow parallel grooves remained on it from the removal of the rings. In cases when only a small part of the blank remained on the 'base' (like No. 494) it seems that rings were also removed from the remains of the shaft itself, shortening it more and more. Other objects of this type: S: 11693; 16208; 18547; 18759; 18826; 18855; 20558; 26006; 26370; 32009; 37180; 38734; 39986; 51730; 53219; 69816. P: 0052; 0065; 0076; 0097; 0107; 0115; 0140; 0221. A: D152; L. 503 (2); 0011; 0013; 33; 0048; 0048 (2); 0089; 100; 0146; 0168; 0188; 0191; 0274; 0300; 328; 0375; 0383 (2); 0512; 0549; 598; 0616; 1407; 1517; 1522; 1527; 1554; 1678; 20047.

completely finished. It was probably intended as a furniture mount. L. 63mm, d. 40mm. Other objects of this type: S: 25267; 70087. P: 0033. A: 0024, 26; 38. Unfinished convex tablets. Three unfinished rectangular tablets were found together, two with a convex back and one flat (P, Area KK26, B. 0061, L. 047). One of them is No. 456 (Chapter IV). The other one is similar in shape and dimensions. On a similar piece (S, B. 16173, L. 1618) the edge of the medullar cavity of the long bone diaphysis can be observed on the flat bottom, which has dense sawing striations on it. The back is smooth but unfinished and remains of vertical planing marks can be seen on it. L. 108mm, w. 16mm, h. 6mm. Another tablet (S, Area A+, B. 70087, L. 1639) is similar. One end was carefully sawn while the other was sawn half way through and the rest broken off leaving a rough surface. The convex back is covered with rather deep filing striations. L. 39mm, w. 13mm, h. 6mm. A similar piece (S, Square A-93, B. 74736-1) also has remains of the edge of the medullar cavity on its bottom, which is covered with dense diagonal sawing striations. The back was carefully smoothed but undecorated. One end was carefully sawn while the other was partly sawn and the rest broken leaving a projection. L. 54mm, w. 12mm, h. 5.5mm. Other objects of this type: S: 26157; 26395.

VII.b.5. beads. Two beads which were not completely perforated testify to their production within Caeserea (compare Barbier 1999: 210-213, Fig. 5). One is No. 467 (see Chapter IV) and the other, which may not be a bead, is No. 468. A third and larger object is possibly a “horse bead” (S, Area G+, B. 75358, L. 0000). It is decorated with two groups of circumferential grooves. One end was partly cut on a lathe and the rest broken without smoothing it. L. 42mm, d. 23mm.

Unfinished decorated carved piece. Vine motifs were very popular on carved pieces at Caesarea (Fig. 39). Some of them look as if they were locally produced and never finished: unparallel lines and angles, rough carving, and low areas among the vines (which were first marked with grooves – Goldfus and Bowes 2000: 191) left rough or too projecting (like in A, B. 0242, Early Arab period). However such cases may also be the result of careless work carried out elsewhere on another site. S, B. 38522, L. 10560 – Fragment of a rectangular tablet from the Byzantine or Early Arab period which was made from the wall of a large long bone diaphysis, as shown by its convex cross-section. Both sides were sawn. The spongy layer on the bottom was not cleaned, possibly making it difficult to fix it to a wooden object. The frame around the low decorated area was not smoothed and bears knife carving grooves. The work is rather careless, the angle between two sections of the frame is not 90 degrees, and the vine designs are fairly schematic. L. 82mm, w. 24mm, t. 5mm. S, Area II, B. 33685, L. 10261 – A rectangular tablet from the late Byzantine period with one end broken. It was made from a flat bone and parts of the spongy layer remained on its bottom. The piece was carelessly produced: it is not flat, the lines and angles on it are not straight, the carving is crude and parts of the low areas amongst the vines were not worked. A rivet perforation (d. 4mm) was drilled near one end. L. 82mm, w. 32mm, t. 4mm. This group includes the following objects (possibly also

VII.b.6. Whorls\buttons. At least three unfinished objects remained from their production. One of them is No. 466 which was found together with other waste pieces. A convex button (S, B. 40270, L. 10878) has marks of planing on the back and sawing striations on the bottom. D. 38mm, h. 5mm, the perforation d. 6mm. In another whorl (S, B. 14158, L. 1612, Early Roman period) the central perforation was not completely drilled. VII.b.7. Carved pieces (compare to Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 566). Out of the large variety of carved tablets found at the site the production of rectangular pieces with a convex backs stands out. As all the finished tablets of this kind are decorated with a spirally fluted design (Fig. 37) it seems that this was the intended final product. Convex tablet blank. No. 455 (see Chapter IV) was left over from the first stage of manufacture. A similar object (A, Area TP14, B. 0324, No. 001, L. 000) is a cylindrical piece sawn along its axis with only half of it remaining. The inside was cleaned and smoothed. Both sides are fairly straight but not smooth with each end sawn leaving many striations. On one end the last part was broken off leaving a projection. The back was smoothed but not 151

THE BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY AT CAESAREA originating from the same workshop): S: 33729; 39312.

period) included about 150 objects (Photo 3): more than 60 pieces of frame inlays, 28 geometrical tablets, 26 disks of drilling waste, 33 pieces of ajouré inlays and their production waste, two other inlays, and a piece of waste of some kind. As most of these objects were finished or almost finished it seems that this assemblage originated in a workshop or a shop where the artisan was already inserting them in wooden objects (and leather goods? Possibly on book covers? Pinder-Wilson 1960: 201) and their find spot was not their original place of manufacture. For a description of traditional work with inlays in Iran see Wulff 1966: 93-96.

A different unfinished tablet was found in an Early Arab period assemblage that included many inlays, decorations for wooden objects, tablets as well as their blanks and waste pieces (A, Area I6, B. 1051, No. 001, L. 083). This is a part of a rectangular tablet whose one short side was sawn at an angle of 45 degrees to the long facet so it seems that the artisan intended to create a corner by attaching a similar piece to it. The other short side was only partly sawn and the rest broken leaving a projection. A plant (?) design was roughly carved on the tablet by cutting irregular depressions and grooves around its components, but was never finished. L. 48mm, w. 22mm, t. 3.5mm.

Blanks of ajouré inlays. These inlays were made from thin flat tablets. The elongated rectangular ones were probably made from large ribs (camel ribs: at Ashkelon – Wapnish-Hesse 1999: 15; in mid-twentieth cent. Iran – Wulff 1966: 93). Larger inlays were probably made from other flat bones such as scapulae and pelvises. Several flat, thin blank tablets found at Caesarea were sawn and smoothed and the spongy layer removed from them, but the perforations and decorative designs were not yet drilled and sawn. Tablet No. 499 (see Chapter IV), made from a cattle rib, was never finished. Another one (No. 505), made from a similar bone, was incised with guide lines for sawing but was discarded. No. 458, probably made from a scapula, may have been used as a rough inlay but more likely was a blank for ajouré designs which were never made. Other objects of this type: S: 39639; 84222. P: 0178. A: 34; 38 (2); 44 (2); 0145; 1600.

Rectangular tablets. Several unfinished rectangular tablets or their blanks were found. One of them is No. 457 (see Chapter IV; compare to rough tablets from the 6th-7th cent. from Alexandria: Rodziewicz 1998: 146, Fig. 21; Carra 1995: 281, Taf. 36: 3-4). It was found together with the two convex tablets discussed above. The remains of the spongy layer on the bottom hint that it was made from a flat bone, probably a rib. The long sides were sawn straight while both ends were almost completely sawn through and then broken off. Both back and bottom are covered with many filing striations. L. 63mm, w. 10mm, t. 2.5mm. Another object of this type: A: 0727. Various tablets and inlays. A Byzantine tablet is No. 459 (see Chapter IV; compare to the decorated piece No. 385). Other objects of this type: S: 25626 (2); 37564. A tablet (A, Area TP3, B. 30105, No. 001), of which only the left lower corner remained, consists of part of the outer frame and two human legs advancing to the right. The area left of the feet was not carved and the piece could thus be of local production.

Unfinished ajouré inlays. They were made as follows: first small perforations (d. 2-3mm) were drilled in the flat tablet, then enlarged with a thin hack saw, knife or file to the planned designs – one from each hole or a couple of holes (Wapnish 1991: 59; Davidson 1952: 338, Pl. 138: 2903; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 558). Later the rough perimeters of the designs and the tablet itself were smoothed. The top was better smoothed than the unseen bottom. Several ajouré bands (like A, Area I14, B. 176, No. 001, L. 0207) whose ends were sawn through the middle of the designs show that the artisan created long pieces and the furniture maker cut them according to his needs. Many unfinished ajouré inlays were found at the site.

VII.b.8. Inlays. Assemblages dating to the Early Arab period and fewer from the Crusader period consisted of numerous fragments from bone and ivory inlay production, especially ajouré inlays (compare to finds from Ashkelon: Wapnish-Hesse 1999: 15; Ayalon 1999: 56. For a general background see Pinder-Wilson 1960: 201), frame and parallelogram inlays (see below). They were usually found together along with other objects such as bridges from string instruments, and perhaps those musical implements were adorned with ajouré inlays as is common today in the Levant. A typical concentration of this type (A, Area I6, B. 1051, L. 083) consisted of nine waste pieces from the production of disks (see below), four unfinished tablets, seven frame inlays and waste from their production, five sawn pieces, a carved meshrebiyya rod and two furniture mounts (see Chapter IV), an unfinished carved tablet (see above), a fragment of a blank or unfinished ajouré inlay and a broken inlay. A concentration of pieces at a more advanced stage of manufacture (A, Area I2, B. 0105, L. 269, Early Arab

No. 513 are four pieces of a thin tablet which probably belonged to a single inlay. Many perforations were drilled in them but never enlarged to create the ajouré designs. A large piece (A, Area I16, B. 0188, No. 001, L. 373) was probably originally triangular. It was made from a scapula whose edges and spina scapula were sawn off. Some of the spongiosa remained on the roughly smoothed bottom. The top is worn out. Most of the perforations (d. 2.5mm) were already enlarged into ajouré designs but others remained untouched. The designs are not organized or symmetric and this piece may represent beginner's work. L. 135mm, w. 70mm, t. 1.5mm. A number of other tablets found were discarded 152

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE at this stage in the work. In another piece (A, Area I4, B. 0728, No. 001, L. 564) the artisan finished sawing the designs but did not smooth and polish them. The sawing was not done professionally and many tiny notches were left in their perimeters. L. 30mm, w. 20mm, t. 1mm. Other objects of this type: S: 34444; 37005; 38652. A: 0040; 0167; 0838; 1596.

Alexandria they were found together with ring production waste (Rodziewicz 1998: 146, Fig. 17; compare to Wapnish-Hesse 1999 Fig. 7; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 568, 581, Fig. 20: 68). Disks “negatives”. No. 517 is a flat piece from which a large disk was cut with a saw or a center-bit drill. No. 515 is a scapula from which four small disks were cut leaving two perforations (see Chapter IV). Eight broken pieces of a flat bone from which several disks (d. 3, 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 8, 9mm) were drilled out, were found together (A, Area I6, B. 1051, No. 001, L. 083, Early Arab period, 8th-10th cent.). It is possible, however, that the smaller perforations were actually drilled to be later enlarged as ajouré inlay designs and not for the production of disks. No. 516 was found with another piece of the same type (A, Area I7, B. 0386, No. 001, L. 103; l. 30mm, w. 18mm, the holes d. 6mm). Many small jetons were cut off from both of them.

Ajouré inlays production waste. The manufacture of these inlays left a lot of waste. No. 514 – part of the large industrial assemblage mentioned above (A, B. 0105) – was a blank for several inlays, one of which was already finished and sawn off. The other one was possibly discarded unfinished because its corner broke off. No. 512 is the margin of a broken piece of inlay whose perforations were not enlarged to make the designs. Other objects of this type: S: 39639. A: 05; 0010; 0011; 0014; 0015; 0016; 38; 0138; 0167; 0174; 0182 (2 groups); 0727; 0759; 0787.

Unfinished disks. A disk (S, Area IIS, B. 31652, L. 10103) was cut from the wall of a long bone diaphysis, and its roughly smoothed bottom is slightly concave because of the medullar cavity. The top is smooth but with many filing striations in various directions and obviously never finished. It was possibly planned as a gaming piece or an inlay. D. 22mm, t. 2mm.

Blanks for frame inlays. The number of these inlays (see Chapter IV), their broken pieces and the waste from their production at Caesarea is very large. No. 465 is a typical blank (compare to 7th cent. pieces from Alexandria: Rodziewicz 1998: 153, Figs. 22 top, 23). No. 464 is a similar piece found in a concentration of inlays and their production waste. Other objects of this type: S: 40058; 95092. A: 0208.

VII.b.10. Weapon parts. Caesarea was the center of army units for a long time so it is no wonder that bone parts from weapons were found there (see Chapter IV). One of them, No. 124, probably broke while it was being made and was discarded. It shows that such bone parts were made in the city during the Roman or Byzantine period, but it is unclear whether weapons were actually produced there or only repaired.

Unfinished frame inlays. The lack of finish in these pieces is defined by sides and angles which are not straight, by unsmoothed sawing and filing striations, etc. One group (A, Area I6, B. 0023, No. 001, L. 281) included two objects like this. Other objects of this type: S: 35256. Production waste from frame inlays. Such finds were very numerous but difficult to identify as these narrow fragile inlays broke easily and the fragmented pieces are very similar to production waste. Other objects of this type: S: 38981. A: 0145; 0182. Unfinished parallelogram inlays. These pieces were usually also part of composite frames. About ten such inlays (like No. 392) were found at Caeserea. Some of them, found together with other pieces of inlays waste, were never finished. Unfinished geometrical inlay (No. 398) was sawn but not smoothed. Unfinished furniture mount. One piece (A, Area TP20, B. 0031, No. 001, L. 017) was decorated with knife-carved rough cubes, probably intended to be made into astragali designs but nothing else was done beyond that. L. 43mm, w. 9mm, t. 5mm.

VII.b.11. Combs. A fragment of an Early Arab (8th-9th cent.) comb (A, Area I5, B. 0053, No. 001, L. 490) is unsmoothed and unfinished and probably never completed. VII.b.12. Tuning pegs. These rods served to tighten the strings in musical instruments. No. 480 is probably the handle for such an object which broke as it was being carved on the lathe. The cone with which it was mounted on the lathe is still attached to one end. VII.b.13. Remains from training and practice. Ancient and traditional workshops were characterized by the passing on of know-how and technologies from one generation to the other, often within the family. Beginners' practice left behind unfinished or carelessly made objects. It is possible that some of the unfinished objects described above were of this kind.

VII.b.9. Disks. Circular disks had many uses. The small ones could be inlays or beads while the large ones could be used as gaming pieces, counting jetons, inlays, whorls, buttons, box lids and bases, etc. Their production at the site left flat, smooth bones from which they were cut. In

No. 506, found in a large assemblage of workshop waste, is so carelessly decorated (Photo 3: 4) that it looks more like the result of training than a real object. No. 509, 153

THE BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY AT CAESAREA which is covered with various guide incisions and drilled and half-drilled holes, is another example of a probable practice piece (compare to Béal 1983a: 376, Pl. 60: 1336). A hand-carved pin with a polygonal head (P, Area KK37, B. 0174, No. 001, L. 123) is of even a lower standard of production than other pins of this type. The head is irregular and was never finished although the broken shaft was carefully smoothed, which is rather unusual. This is a particularly carelessly made pin or the work of a beginner. L. 40mm, the head l. 5mm, w. 5mm, t. 3.5mm. Nos. 433 and 434 are interesting examples of two similar objects, one nicely made and finished (by the master?) on a lathe and the other roughly hand-carved (by his student?) and never completed.

manufacture. In addition to numerous splinters, small sawn pieces, etc., other objects characterizing the local industry were found in the city. Drilling waste. If the artisan using a center-bit drill to incise a circle-and-dot design did not stop in time the points penetrated to the other side of the bone. A small perforation was thus drilled in the bone leaving behind a small disk with an oblique and sometimes slightly concave wall and a tiny hole in the center, made by the central point of the tool (Nos. 481-485). In the large concentration of workshop waste mentioned above (A, B. 0105) 26 such disks were found (Photo 3: 12). Other objects of this type: S: 73079. A: 060; 0145; 0167 (3); 0181; 0182 (2); 0450; 0687 (2).

VII.b.14. Industrial waste from the first stage of manufacture. The initial stage of work left behind many sawn pieces – shafts, epiphyses, etc. (Reese 1987: 261262; Henig 1984: 185; Hutchinson and Reese 1988: 549; Ciugudean 2001: 63). A difference existed between butchery remains and industrial waste. The ancient butchers mainly used axes and cleavers to cut bones while bone artisans preferred saws. Butchers began to use saws only in later periods (MacGregor 1985: 55, 1991: 363). The craftsmen looked for long bones, especially cattle and horse metapodia with little meat on them and thus, of less worth to the butchers (on butchery processes and their marks see Cope 1999). Therefore the identification of bone types and animal species may also help to identify industrial waste.

VII.b.16. Other objects produced at Caesarea? Judging by their shapes and appearance in the assemblage, it is possible that other artifacts were also manufactured at the site: pins with hand-carved polygonal head like No. 180; cylindrical gaming pieces with stoppers like No. 298; carved rods and their “halves” used as furniture mounts (Nos. 427, 429); Islamic dolls (Figs. 31-34); etc. VII.c. Statistical/Chronological Analysis of the Bone Industry Typological/chronological analysis of these finds (see Table 7.3) indicates the following: Tablet rough-outs were produced during most periods. All raw rods are of the Roman-Byzantine period, which fits the fact that almost all the hundreds of pins and needles found in the city originated in these periods. Waste pieces of frame inlays, which usually decorated wooden furniture and chests, were found in Byzantine/Early Arab contexts. The appearance of such finished inlays in many places together with the ajouré inlays, however, seems to date both types to the Early Arab period. Most of the dice production took place in the Byzantine period and in smaller quantities – in earlier and later stages. Lathe rough-out ends show that the lathe was in use since the foundation of Caesarea in the Early Roman period throughout most of its history (their absence among Crusader finds could be the result of the relatively small number of objects from that period), but most of them originated in Roman and Byzantine contexts. It should be noted that the number of lathe-carved objects at Caesarea (as well as at Alexandria – Rodziewicz 1998, 155) is rather large, much more than in many contemporary sites in Europe (MacGregor 1985, 58; Béal 1983b, 617).

The assemblage discussed here included a relatively small number of waste pieces from the first stage of production, probably because they remained with the faunal sample. It is also possible that some of the initial work was done outside the city for reasons of hygene. Such waste would have consisted of sawn diaphysis shafts (No. 502), some which were partly sawn and the rest broken (No. 503), or those with one end roughly broken (by the butcher?) and the other nicely sawn (by the artisan? No. 504). Other pieces were sawn during a more advanced phase when the oblique end of the diaphysis was cut off (No. 501). These are typical remains from bone industry (Dzierzykray-Rogalski, Prominska and Rodziewicz 1972: 178) .They also include pieces with sawing or planing marks. Other objects of this type: S: topsoil (8); 15778; 15918; 17035; 17462; 17593; 17757; 23524 (2); 23604; 25232; 25600 (12); 26612; 27387; 27420; 27587 (7); 27588 (10); 27589; 27644 (4); 27645 (2); 27837-1; 28189 (3); 35280; 38398; 38985; 40064 (3); 40199 (5); 40212 (14); 40265; 40270; 40300-1; 59027; 60843; 65119; 80295; 83594; 95013; 95247; 96098; 97047 (4). P: 0031 (3); 0034; 0044; 0048; 0050; 0051; 0055; 0065; 0067; 0116; 0123 (2); 0139; 0143; 0158; 0168; 0171; 0176; 0177; 0213. A: 0011 (3); 0022; 0024; 0051; 060; 073; 074; 0099; 137; 265; 0306; 0309; 0392; 0423; 0424; 541; 0561 (2); 0655; 0720; 0755; 0819; 1537; 1543; 1545; 30028.

Most of the remains of center-bit drilling or carving were found in Early Arab contexts (usually together with ajouré inlays) and a few – in all other periods. Indeed, the circle-and-dot decoration, which was probably the reason for the existence of these perforated disks, was especially common on Islamic objects. The rare waste cylinders left over by the manufacturers of rings on a lathe were most common in Byzantine levels and less than that – in contexts from earlier and later periods. As

VII.b.15. Industrial waste from secondary stages of 154

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE the exact use of these rings is obscure it is unclear why their production flourished mainly in this period. Ajouré (open work) inlays are very common at Caesarea in the Early Arab period and on a smaller scale in the Crusader period. The dating of their production waste is the same. It is worth noting that those inlays and their production waste (from both bone and ivory) were often found together with frame inlays and bridges of string instruments. It is not unreasonable to suggest therefore

that inlayed string instruments like the Arab oudh were produced at Caesarea. Miscellaneous waste pieces of the local production were found in contexts originating from all periods of the city's existence and the relative numbers could be the result of the extent of the excavation, locality within the city, sorting methods (many were sent to the osteologists), etc. It seems, however, that the scale of production of bone objects decreased in the Crusader period.

Table 7.3. Statistical/chronological analysis of the finds Object* Period

ER

Tablet rough-out 454-459 Raw rod 460-463 Frame inlay production waste 464-465 Die production waste 469-470, 488-486 Lathe rough-out end 471-480 Drilling waste 481-485 Ring production waste 489-494 Ajouré production waste 512-514 Miscellanea Total

R

R-B 1 1

7 1

94 102

B

B-A

A

A-C

1 5

1

C

Total

1

3 7

1

18

19

2

7

2

11

5 1

8

3 1

2 1

1

3

9

15

5

27

24

19

54

Chronological/quantitative analysis shows (with the restrictions mentioned above) that bone objects were produced in the city throughout its entire history. It flourished since its foundation in the Early Roman period and during the Byzantine and Early Arab periods and decreased in the last phase of its existence. It seems that ivory industry at Caesarea have its beginning in the Byzantine period and flourished mainly in the Early Arab period (although finished ivory objects of all periods were found in the city).

1 28

3

2

1 3 20 46

14

37 20 88

26 37

38 7 48

1

3

79 188 384

ivory, showing that at least some artisans carved those raw materials at the same time. It is possible that the size of ivory industry was larger than the finds indicate because of the ancient and traditional custom (known in Turkey until mid-20th cent. – Barnett 1982: 77, n. 9) of crushing ivory for medicinal purposes (Pliny, NH 29, 113; Rodziewicz 1998: 156) or other secondary uses. Ivory blanks. No. 573 is a rectangular piece of raw material. No. 571 is a rough rod (?) which could also have been used as a stamp. Unfinished ivory objects. No. 569 is possibly a rough piece or an unfinished object. An ivory cylindrical rod (S, B. 76931, L. 7746) where both ends were sawn and the body roughly smoothed, could have been made into a handle, a pin, a tuning peg, etc. L. 60mm, d. 8mm. No. 575 is probably an unfinished cosmetic box lid.

VII.d. Ivory Objects Manufactured at Caesarea The absence of workshops found in situ at the site makes it difficult to establish the connection between bone and ivory industries there: did the same craftsmen carve both raw materials (as in Medieval England – MacGregor 1991: 377) or was there a professional division based on the differences between their characteristics and value (see Chapter VII). The relative quantity of ivory finds at Caesarea is larger than at some other contemporary sites abroad (see Chapter V above). Blanks, unfinished objects and waste testify to the existence of an ivory industry at the city. It included, inter alia, lathe-made symmetrical objects and ajouré inlays. Some concentrations included production waste from various inlays of both bone and

Ivory industrial waste. No. 574 is probably an ajouré inlay tablet which broke during manufacture. No. 577 is a rough-out end left from lathe carving, and No. 576 is a similar object (compare to Rodziewicz 1998: 146, Fig. 12 center, second row from bottom). A special object (A, Area G25, B. 0046, No. 001, L. 019) is a tiny ivory cone. The wide end has a lathe indentation and circumferential groove on it while the narrow one is 155

THE BONE AND IVORY INDUSTRY AT CAESAREA sawn. The wall is smooth. This is a rough-out end left from the carving of an object on a lathe. L. 14mm, d. 7mm. Similar bone objects were found.

Roman-Byzantine periods was found while a mixed assemblage of the same plus Mameluk finds revealed 19 (19%) fallow and roe deer bones.

This list should also include pieces resembling parts of thick rings which may be blanks or unfinished or waste pieces: S: 95566. P: 0017; 0026; 0035; 0135. A: 0013.

Given the vast numbers of antler objects from Europe which often outnumbered those of bone, the situation at Caesarea is interesting. Only one object (No. 257) there was made from antler. The reason for the lack of interest in antler as a raw material is unclear and further research is needed. Possibly the local antlers were not numerous enough (especially during the Roman-Byzantine period, in which Mount Carmel was relatively heavily populated and cultivated – Kloner and Olami 1980: 40-41 – on the account of the number of wild animals) to insure a reasonable supply of raw material. Also, bone is more easy to work and carve than antler (Ambrosiani 1981: 4546). The antler fragments found in Caesarea probably come from hunted and eaten animals, similarly to Apollonia on the Southern Sharon coast (Roll and Ayalon 1987: 73, 1989: 213). In any event, it seems that antler industry was never important in the Land of Israel.9

VII.e. The Absence of Antler Objects The expedition's archaezoologist, Carol Cope, noted (pers. comm.) that many pieces of fallow deer (Dama mesopotamica) antler were found at the site. The 19931994 seasons revealed in Area I6 (Early Arab period) 0.4% of the same and 0.4% roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) bones. The finds from small sites on Mount Carmel (Caesarea's hinterland and the natural habitat of these animals) is as follows: at Horvat 'Eleq (Early Roman period) 0.75% fallow deer bones (one) (Horwitz 2000: 512). At Horvat Sumaqa (Horwitz, Tchernov and Dar 1990) one fallow deer bone (1%) from the Late

9

156

In the 19th-20th cent. only some knife handles were made of antler in this country (Avitsur 1976 Fig. 394; Ben Dror 1993:25-27).

CHAPTER VIII THE PLACE OF THE ARTISAN IN THE FABRIC OF THE CITY It is not easy to reconstruct the place of the artisan within the fabric of the city in the periods of discussion, both because of a lack of historical and archaeological data and because our point of view is inevitably influenced by modern life. Our awareness of environmental problems, for instance, has increased today so that it is difficult to imagine craftsmen working within the confines of a large city in processes involving bad smells such as cleaning fresh bones.

•

These finds, covering more than a thousand years, show – if they indeed represent the actual working sites – that the artisans operated within the living quarters, probably in the houses and shops (compare to the situation in early European cities: Spitzers 1997: 161-162, Fig. 1; ChrdronPicault and Rodet-Belarbi 2000: 33, Pl. 1). It is possible that, as was common in both ancient and traditional cities in Israel, a workshop existed in the back room and a shop in the front room facing the street (see for instance Neidinger and Matthews 1989; Roll and Ayalon 1987; Safrai 1994: 224-228). Similar buildings were found in Alexandria (Jablonowska-Taracha 2001: 51). The industrial waste was found there mixed with material from residential dumps, showing that the artisans operated in a small scale within the houses (Rodziewicz E. 1969b, 1998; Rodziewicz 1984: 243; Marangou 1976: 27; Ammoun 1991; compare to the recent mother-ofpearl industry at Bethlehem – von Graf 1914; Schur 1998).1 No installation or working tools were found, however, in these houses, similarly to the situation at Caesarea. Several waste concentrations were found in Alexandria near public buildings such as a bath and a theater (again reminiscent of the finds at Caesarea) and the excavators explained it by the natural wish of artisans to operate near the commercial centers. In Autun, France bone craftsmen worked mostly at the edges of town during the Roman period but also near public centers such as the theater. In the residential quarters they operated in the street in front of the houses or inside them, in a working area separated from the living space (Chrdron-Picault and Rodet-Belarbi 2000: 33, 40). At Alésia, France a Roman workshop was unearthed in a dwelling near the forum and the theater, although the building faced a side street (Grapin 2000). At Augusta Raurica bone artisans operated in four quarters in the southern outskirts of the town not far from the amphitheater (Deschler-Erb 2000: 126).

The ancients were no doubt aware of the existence of environmental nuisances and the need to avoid them. This fact is known from both written sources (Kotlar 1976; Felix 1971) and archaeological finds – a subject that has not yet been adequately researched (Ayalon 1997; see also Porath 1995b). Excavation results showed that sources of annoyance such as kilns, garbage dumps and cemeteries were usually located outside the settlement and away from the direction of the prevailing winds (Ayalon 1997). A more detailed look at these activities demonstrated that the picture is much more complicated. As mentioned above no complete bone or ivory workshop has been found at Caesarea. Most of the industrial remains originated from discarded concentrations of waste, often in secondary position, so we cannot even presume that they mark the locations of the workshops. Good examples of this situation are the Byzantine fill in the amphitheater\hippodrome on the beach (Area I) and the Byzantine-Early Arab fill in the large vaults beneath the temple\church podium in the city center (Area II). Many artifacts were also found in fills of wells and cisterns, drains and channels, street foundations, agricultural soil which was taken from city dumps, etc. The chronological value of such objects is, of course, limited. Several loci at the site yielded such concentrations inside houses and shops, possibly in their original dumping sites. At this initial stage, before the final publication of the excavation reports, three such places have been recognized (see city map, Pl. 1): •

•

of these finds were of inlays, carved pieces and drilling waste. In Raban's Area LL01 north of the modern harbor similar waste concentrations were found in houses of the Early Arab period (i.e. B. 0170, 0182).

In Porath's Area I east of the beach hippodrome, Early Roman and Roman remains of bone manufacturing were found in buildings and shops along the cardo (as in L. 4511: Porat 2000: 37*). They included waste from the first stage of production such as sawn pieces and rough-out ends. In Raban's Areas I2 and I6 within the fill of the inner harbor large concentrations of waste were found in Early Arab period (especially from the 8th-10th cent.) houses (such as B. 0105, 1051, see Catalogue). Many

Another similarity among these cities is the mixture of industries. At Alexandria bone production waste was found together with remains of glass manufacture, especially from the 4th-7th cent. (cf. Rodziewicz 1976: 1

157

Bone industrial waste found at Carthage in a room which served a blacksmith and a weaver hints that sometimes bone tools were produced only as a secondary job (Hurst and Henig 1994: 106107).

THE PLACE OF THE ARTISAN IN THE FABRIC OF THE CITY butchers, tanners etc. operated together inside it (Ibid.: 455). Based on the absence of cattle phalanges at Caesarea, Cope (1999: 413-414, 416) concluded that slaughter, butchering, preparation of the bones and skin and other preliminary works which disturbed the local environment were processed outside the city (see Safrai 1994: 216-217) with butchers only cutting up the meat. However, clarification must await the final publication of the archaeological and osteological finds.

205 n. 32, Fig. 29). At Autun bone and antler artisans worked together (as in Alésia) near workshops of blacksmiths, bronze smiths, potters, etc. but it is unclear whether they cooperated in manufacturing composite objects (Chrdron-Picault and Rodet-Belarbi 2000: 33, 41). At Caesarea bone production waste was found near remains of a metal industry (as in Area IV in the south), pottery and glass workshops, ash concentrations etc. A late Byzantine potter's workshop was unearthed in Area C south of the Medieval city (Holum et al. 1988: 191-192). An Early Arab pottery kiln was found east of this greatly reduced town, near the "street of the statues" (Yael Arnon, pers. comm.).

The possible links between bone and ivory artisans has already been discussed above. Concentrations of both bone and ivory production waste show that, at least in certain periods and places within the city, the same craftsmen processed both raw materials. It is reasonable to assume that special experts worked the precious ivory although there is no proof of it. The similarity in the shape of certain bone and ivory objects (such as pins with onion\drop-shaped heads and conical gaming pieces) also hints at connections between both types of artisans. It is also possible that they processed other raw materials as well: mother-of-pearl inlays from the Early Arab period were found by Raban in Area I6 together with the remains of a bone inlay industry. It does not necessarily demonstrate that this artisan produced the shell pieces but that he certainly used them together with the bone inlays.

Such craftsmen probably operated on a rather limited scale during the Roman period, when wide, straight streets and large, fancy public buildings were erected (but see the workshops within the temple in the center of Petra [Hammond 1986]. Craftsmen – some of them Jews – who operated in Aphrodisias, Turkey are mentioned in an inscription found there [Reynolds and Tannenbaum 1987: 116-123], but the location where they worked remains unknown). During the Late Roman and Byzantine periods many cities in Israel reflected a decrease in architectural luxury in favor of a simple daily life, and houses, shops and workshops were built within streets and squares. This phenomenon became more evident in the Early Arab period during which the inhabited area of many cities, including Caesarea, shrank significantly and became more densely populated. A good example of this process was unearthed at Beth-Shan where potter's kilns, installations, shops and workshops came to light in central areas near the theater and the basilica (Tsafrir and Foerster 1977, 1992). At Jerash, dying installations and a lime kiln, both known as environmental polluters, were erected at a late stage in the life of the town in the central market place (Uscatescu and Martín-Bueno 1997; WardPerkins 2001: 172). Similar processes took place in Caesarea (see Chapter I). The flourishing of bone and ivory industry in the city during the late Byzantine and Early Arab periods was probably part of this process, showing that artisans worked within the city.

Only a more detailed research into the bone finds, based on the archaeological final reports, will possibly enable us to determine whether practicing craftsmen, specializing in the production of certain objects were active in the city. At Augusta Raurica, for instance, hair pins were produced in two workshops between the years 50-120 CE and in a third between 150-250 CE. Objects for military use were produced in another building on the same street in the 2nd cent. (Deschler-Erb 2000: 126, Pl. 1). Bíró (2002) has recently described an interesting picture of the distribution of different types of combs at Panonia in settlements and graves on the one hand and in areas inhabited by different ethnic groups on the other hand. While there is some archaeological data about the actual location of the artisans in the city, other aspects of this subject, such as economic and social ones, are almost completely unknown. The economic issue raises some important questions, most of them unanswered because of lack of research on urban economies and its connections in the discussed periods (see, for instance, Johnson and West 1967; Safrai 1994; Kingsley 2004: 11-28; Kingsley and Decker 2001; for Caesarea see Blakely 1996):

It is also reasonable to believe that various artisans cooperated, for example knife makers and bone artisans who prepared their handles, or furniture makers and inlay producers (Rodziewicz 1998: 156). Ajouré bands whose ends were sawn through the middle of the design found at Caesarea, for instance, show that the bone artisan prepared long pieces and the carpenter or the inlay artisan cut them according to need. Recently published finds from the Early Arab settlement at Al-Basra, Morocco show that blacksmiths, potters and bone craftsmen worked together. The latter prepared special bone implements which – the researchers think – were used by the blacksmiths to polish metal objects (Benco, Ettahiri and Loyet 2002). It is also believed that bone artisans preferred to work near the butchers who supplied their raw material. At Fess in Morocco, animals were slaughtered in the 15th cent. outside the city although

•

158

How was the raw material supply organized, especially since artisans preferred certain bones from certain animals? Were they satisfied with the cattle brought to the city for food consumption and horses which were not used anymore, or a supply system had to be organized in the hinterland as assumed by Wapnish-Hesse at Ashkelon (Wapnish 1991)? During the Roman-Byzantine periods, villages and

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE farms in the vicinity raised more cattle than average, possibly in order to supply the large city with their meat (so bones were available too). On Byzantine Caesarea as a commercial and industrial center see Holum et al. 1988: 191-192; on the city as an important road junction see Roll 1996; on its connections with the hinterland see also Safrai 1994: 374-375, 419. •

Did the craftsmen operate only within the framework of the family as suggested by the above-mentioned finds or were there also larger workshops in certain periods which hired more workers? Did each artisan or workshop specialize in manufacturing certain objects or performed a wide variety of tasks? Some of the waste concentrations, especially from the Early Arab period, hint that the same artisans, working both bone and ivory, prepared all kinds of inlays as well as carved pieces, carved baluster rods and bridges for string instruments. Cutler (1993: 176) has suggested that ancient craftsmen prepared various objects and modern specialization was unknown then.

•

How and to whom were the products sold? At Alexandria the excavators concluded, based on the finds and their distribution within the city, that the artisans worked mainly for the local market, despite the accepted claim that this city was a production and cultural center for the whole of the Middle East and beyond. If this was true for Alexandria, it would also have been the case at Caesarea, where production was on a smaller scale. The few bone artifacts found in Shuni, several kilometers from Caesarea are, unsurprisingly, very similar to our finds. Right now it is impossible to answer the question, however, of whether many bone carvings were sold to the villages around the city and what the range of their distribution was (see for instance Safrai 1994: 237-238). Even if many finds from the rural area will eventually be published they can be compared only in terms of their shape, unlike pottery for instance, in which petrographic investigations can point to the clay source (see the interesting diffusion of Kefar Hananya vessels – Adan-Bayewitz 1993: 211-219, Fig. 11). Based on Adan's results it seems likely that bone artifacts produced at Caesarea will be found in large amounts near the city but that this number will decrease with distance from it. As most of the raw material was probably brought to the city from the rural areas around it, an interesting picture emerges of commercial connections between this urban center and its hinterland.

There is no data at all on whether bone carved products were exported from Caesarea but it is reasonable to assume that if any commerce took place only fine, delicate products were involved. The social aspects of the subject are even more obscure. Talmudic sources dealt in detail with craftsmen and crafts but bone and ivory artisans were not mentioned at all (Ayali 1984, 1987: 103-142; Safrai 1994: 214). Classical sources mention an ivory worker or merchant – eborarius – only once, in the 2nd cent. (Deschler-Erb 1998: 93). Also mentioned are the eborarii-citrarii, who made ivory inlayed furniture (Rodziewicz 1998: 136). The bone carver is not mentioned – a surprising fact considering the abundance of bone objects everywhere. Nothing is known about the social status of these craftsmen or how they operated: did they work in large cities as Caesarea within the framework of professional guilds like those of other professions known from Egypt (Ayali 1987: 25-26; Johnson and West 1967: 151-155; Safrai 1994: 197-202, 296-297)? Did they concentrate on a special street or quarter as has been typical of urban craftsmen and merchants since the Roman period until the present (Roll and Ayalon 1987: 73; Hendel 1987: 20-21; For the situation in Jerusalem in the 19th20th cent. see Zacharia 2002)? Did itinerant craftsmen, who usually did not leave much behind them, operate alongside sedentary urban ones? How did traditions, religious and artistic influences and technologies pass from one generation to another and from one artisan to the other? What were the relations between workers who specialized in a certain object and workshops which produced a variety of objects? Was the social status of the artisans relatively low as can be judged by some historical sources (i.e. Hendel 1987: 14) or were they conscious of their professional level as other sources hint (Ibid.: 12-13; Ayali 1987: 79-101, 157-161) and as shown by Roman gravestones mentioning the deceased's profession and showing his tools and products (Balsdon 1969: 135)? What were the working relations, tax payments etc. between the artisans and the urban-commercial authorities (Safrai 1994: 37-39)? There are no definite answers to these questions and others; they are beyond the scope of this book which deals mainly with the typological, chronological and technological aspects of these related classes of raw materials (compare: Christensen 1987).

159

CHAPTER IX BONE TOOLS IN THE JEWISH SOURCES This subject was dealt with in detail by Baruch (1999; Barukh 2001) who also wrote about other aspects related to it. As the bone artifacts are the main subject of this book this chapter will concentrate in the bone objects mentioned in Jewish sources and their identification with archaeological finds.

metal or leather, which were covered by the same laws. A large spoon (Tarvad) mentioned in the Mishna (Shabat 8, 6) can be identified with flat shovels made from scapulae which were found at several oil plants of the Hellenistic, Late Roman and Byzantine periods (Ayalon 1999: 22; Horwitz 2004 Fig. 1; Magen 1993 Fig. 9; Gutman 1994:132; Feig 2002 Fig. 10: 1). Another version of the same law refers to the “tooth of a lock”, possibly the moving part in a bone lock like the one found at Caesarea (No. 146). A flute made from a sheep tibia is also mentioned in the Mishna (Qinim 3, 6). A vessel called a “funnel” and made from metal, glass or bone was used to draw samples of wine (Mishna Kelim 2, 4; Tosephta Kelim 2, 4 [Zuckermandel p. 570]; see Sperber 1993: 123-125). May these tools perhaps be identified with the mysterious hollow tubes (Nos. 93-96) from Caesarea? Delicate and precious bone implements which were not specified (possibly cosmetic tools? Barukh 2001: 30-31) are referred to in the Babylonian Talmud (Hulin 25, 2). Bone handles were referred to in one of the 2nd cent. BCE scrolls from Qumran (Qimron and Strugnell 1994: 113-121).

Bone tools are mainly mentioned in Mishna Kelim and Tosephta Kelim which deal with ritual questions related to various tools and raw materials. The rule was that objects made from mammal bones could become ritually unclean (tame) but could be purified with water or fire, while those made from fish or fowl bones did not become ritually unclean. Although eating certain animals such as pigs was totally forbidden (about the keeping of this law as reflected in archaeological finds see Hesse and Wapnish 1997), the use of their bones was allowed, although not all Jewish sects accepted it (Barukh 2001: 24-30). Despite the large variety of bone objects found in archaeological excavations only a few were mentioned in the sources, often together with those made from wood,

161

CONCLUSIONS on many objects was not available as the final excavation reports have not been published yet; many of the objects were found in secondary locations like fills and dumps so their scientific value was limited; about one third of the objects were not checked by an osteologist; and finally – the lack of publications of bone and ivory artifacts from the discussed periods from Israel and the neighbouring countries made it difficult to find proper comparisons and come to reasonable conclusions.

Conclusions The bone and ivory artifacts found at Caesarea and described above are unique from several points of view: •

•

This is the first time that a complete find assemblage of such objects has been published from a single site in Israel and its neighboring countries. The assemblage spans 1,300 years of use and numbers more than 3,900 objects. The recent excavations revealed large parts of the city with various characteristics and all kinds of buildings from different periods, increasing the significance of the assemblage.

The comparison of the characteristics of the bone as raw material with the ways it was used, as reflected in the Caesarea finds, confirmed the results of the European research. Bone was a common, cheap, available, solid and strong but easy to carve material, therefore its wide use to prepare objects for every aspect of daily life. Many scholars were unfamiliar with these facts, partly because of the lack of proper publications of bone objects from the “late” periods as opposed to pottery, metal and glass objects, coins etc. The size and variety of the Caesarea assemblage are a good proof of the Ancients’ ability to exploit this raw material.

The importance of Caesarea as an urban center and for hundreds of years, even the capital of the province where governors, military headquarters and religious leaders operated. It was also a port with connections to other countries and, as such, was open to outside influences. It was a city with a varied and relatively wealthy population. All these aspects give special significance to the worked bone objects unearthed there so that this important assemblage can be compared with objects found at any other site from these periods in Israel and elsewhere in the territory of the Roman Empire.

•

The fact that during the Roman and early Byzantine periods many of the bone implements were clearly similar to those known from the Empire as a whole made it possible to find good parallels for them, to establish their date and function and to try to identify commercial, cultural and stylistic relations among the different countries.

•

Bone and ivory artisans operated at Caesarea during most of its existence, a long tradition which still must be studied in detail. Hopefully more finds or even a complete workshop will be discovered in the future. However, the existing data described above already enabled us – using for comparison all the published information on Roman bone technology from Europe and North Africa – to define and discuss this outstanding assemblage and to try and reconstruct its components and the working methods and tools used by the local craftsmen.

This know-how was reflected in the adjustment of the type of bone to its use in order to save extra carving. The osteological identification demonstrated this clear choice of bones although it was rather limited as the source of many carefully worked objects could not be identified. Cylindrical objects like handles, gaming pieces, flutes and furniture mounts were made from long bone diaphyses from cattle or horse-size animals whose natural shape was most suitable. Flat objects such as inlays, crushing- and writing tablets were produced from flat scapulae and ribs or from ivory. Small or thin objects like small dice, pins and needles were made from the solid, cortical wall of long bone diaphyses. There was also a clear choice among the types of bones, rooted in the accumulated experience of many generations. The artisan looked for large and solid bones which had little meat on them and which were therefore not in demand by butchers and customers for meat. This is why so much use was made of cattle and horse metatarsus bones. It should be remembered that from each bone of this kind a shaft of about 150mm in length could be extracted so a large number of bones was needed for workshops to maintain constant operations. Even if we assume that a lot of cattle meat was consumed in a large city like Caesarea it is not reasonable that the local bone working industry could rely solely on remains from butcher shops, especially when horse bones were needed too. It seems that the artisans had to establish a special supply system. The bones were probably purchased in the whole of the surrounding region and brought to the city. This assumption opens new directions

The importance of this large concentration of finds exists even when considering its limitations, already mentioned in the introduction: This is only a small and somehow coincidental part of what is still buried at the site; some of the relevant finds (many connected with the local industry and some of the pieces of art) were handed over to other scholars; chronological and stratigraphical data 163

BONE TOOLS IN THE JEWISH SOURCES in the research into the relations between the urban center and its hinterland: the villagers sold bones (and no doubt also skin etc.) to the urban craftsmen and bought finished products in return. This picture could be part of the explanation of why farms in the nearby Carmel mountain range raised more cattle than usual in the Roman and Byzantine periods (in addition to their use of these animals as beasts of burden).

However, a more detailed analysis needs a broader data base, both in finding more well dated parallels from other sites and in the publication of the final stratigraphical reports of the excavations at Caesarea, to get better dating of the bone artifacts. The same situation is valid regarding the dating of the appearance of new technologies, working methods, decorative styles, etc. The exact use of many objects is often difficult to identify. Sometimes it is really unknown as in the case of the “shuttles (?)” (Nos. 93-96). This object is also interesting because at least 14 of its kind were found at Caesarea while in all other sites checked in this research, throughout the whole Empire, only five were located. This enigma will be solved only if more such artifacts will be found with clear connection to other, more common, recognizable objects. Other artifacts are difficult to identify because their shapes are very basic and simple, so they could have been used in various ways. A good example is the tool called ‘spatula’, of which only one or two were found here: at least 15 suggestions are known from the research concerning how such objects were used. Intensive work in the field of material culture teaches us that often many of these possibilities could be valid at the same time as people used such simple tools in multiple ways. In this connection, the problematic whorl\button should be mentioned as well as the suggestion – still hard to except without reservations – that the unworn bone ‘needles’ were actually pins. There seems also to be a problem in distinguishing between handle\box\hinge\furniture mount, etc. In some of these cases the present research has tried to sharpen the common definitions, but in many others the Caesarea assemblage was of little help in improving our knowledge.

It can thus be assumed that a certain number of bones had to be stored in the workshop in order to assure continuous operations. As dry bones are not convenient to carve, craftsmen no doubt established ways to prepare them for their needs, mainly by soaking them in hot water. This aspect of constant supply and stored stock raised the difficult question of the character of the local production. Was production carried out by small scale artisans working within the family and even within their houses (as the excavators concluded at Alexandria), passing on their knowledge from one generation to the other? Certain artifacts like mounts Nos. 433-434 which were found together point towards this assumption. One of them was skillfully carved on a lathe while the other, of the same type, was carelessly hand-carved, possibly by a beginner. This phenomena may partly explain the relative conservatism in the assemblage as well as the fact that no complete workshop was unearthed as it would have been only a small part of the dwelling house which could always be cleaned and cleared. Or perhaps larger, professional workshops did operate in the city during some periods. These may have had many workers, each specialized in particular operations. Several half finished objects hint at this possibility, such as ajouré inlay No. 513 in which one worker drilled the basic perforations while another one was probably supposed to enlarge the designs later on, but never did. As the comparison to traditional potters showed, it is also possible that one craftsman performed the first stage of work – like drilling holes – in a series of similar tablets and only then did he or someone else sit down to do the next stage, such as sawing out the designs.

Some objects found at the city, several of them in rather large numbers, had almost no parallels at other sites throughout Israel and other countries. The best example is the ajouré inlays, which were found only at Ashkelon and a few – at Apollonia, although they must have been found at Alexandria too (unpublished yet?). The comparisons to frame inlays, string instruments bridges, the pin with a ‘drop’ head and incised ‘collar’ etc. are also very restricted. Future research will possibly enable scholars to point to various objects as being produced in Caesarea or more generally in the Land of Israel, thus, explaining their absence abroad. Other objects were unique and have no parallels at all (again – as much as could be checked within the framework of this book) like the special comb No. 540, where even the reconstruction of its shape is uncertain.

Chapter IV contains a detailed description of all types of bone implements. Even if the many question marks and uncertain identifications of many objects are ignored, the large variety of artifacts made from this simple and cheap raw material is impressive: handles; working tools, writing implements and parts of weaponry; boxes; body grooming objects; jewelry (more than 1,100 pins and their parts!); religious and artistic objects; musical instruments and gaming pieces; inlays and decorations; etc. More research is needed to improve the statistical analysis of the assemblage in order to follow changing fashions and preferences for certain objects in each period. It is already obvious, for instance, that most of the pins are from the Roman-Byzantine period while the ajouré inlays are from the Islamic-Crusader phase. It is also easy to distinguish between the Roman dolls\figurines and the more schematic Islamic ones.

This work put much emphasis on the technological aspect of bone and ivory production both because the remains of this industry at the site represented a new subject for study in the region calling for a detailed discussion and because of the author’s fields of interest. With the special help of Y. Dray and the European literature on the subject the marks left on the objects by the working 164

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE tools, blanks, unfinished products and waste were analyzed and in some cases experimentally replicated. The fact that the artisan’s tool kit seems to have been more or less identical throughout the ancient world enabled to use information garnered from foreign sources. This way both the general picture of bone production techniques and working tools (Chapter VI) and specifically the bone and ivory industry at Caesarea itself (Chapter VII) could be introduced here, for the first time in Israel and neighbouring countries. Although similar remains were also found at Ashkelon, Alexandria and Carthage, as much as could be determined they have not yet been published in detail. Thus, research such as appears here, is known only from Europe – a rather sad situation for Mediterranean research.

knives, files and drills. At any rate, the wide use of a bow lathe at Caesarea (much more than at many European sites), shown, inter alia, by the many discarded rough-out ends, points to a rather high standard of craftsmanship. Lack of data and excavated workshops, however, made it impossible to draw a complete picture of the local industry and its scope and level.

The analysis of the finds permitted the scope and composition of bone and ivory production in the city during various periods to be reconstructed. Caesarea produced pins, needles, dice, rings, beads, whorls\buttons, carved pieces, inlays, disks, combs, tuning pegs etc. Ivory objects were also manufactured on a much smaller scale. Simple working tools, most of them made “by the user” should also be added to this list. This is an impressive variety of objects which were produced during all periods of the city existence. The observations could be clarified: pins were produced and used mainly in the Roman-Byzantine period. Carved pieces were dated to the Byzantine and Early Arab periods. Especially significant is the waste of the manufacturing of ajouré and frame inlays during the Early Arab and Crusader periods, finds unearthed mainly in the dwelling houses excavated by Raban in the area of the inner Herodian harbor which was filled in, and north of the modern harbor.

Ivory was a separate issue in the ancient world although it was closely connected with bone both in terms of its biological origin and production techniques. The Caesarea finds showed that at least some of the artisans from the Early Arab period processed both bone and ivory at the same time. Although none of the outstandingly carved ivory objects such as pyxide, dyptichs and furniture mounts known from the Islamic world on the one hand and Europe on the other were found at Caesarea, the local ivory assemblage is still rather impressive, both in numbers (3.4% of the total) and variety. The objects which have come to light represent most of the types of objects made from bone although a preference for ivory is revealed in the production of conical gaming pieces and writing tablets but less for ajouré inlays, combs and boxes.

Other questions raised about those artisans were left unanswered too: in what professional frameworks did they operate and how were they organized, how did their supply and marketing systems operate. What was their monetary background and how were they taxed, etc. The lack of historical data about bone craftsmen creates yet another obstacle.

This study surveyed the assemblage of bone and ivory artifacts found in the Caesarea Maritima metropolis during the extensive excavations carried out in recent years, with the addition of finds which are on display at the Caesarea Musem at Kibbitz Sdot-Yam. The large and varied collection includes about 3,900 bone and ivory artifacts, covering the 1,300 years of the existence of the city. Some of the special and rare finds include blanks, offcuts, unfinished items and waste, evidence of active bone and ivory workshops in the city during the Roman, Byzantine, Early Arab and Crusader periods.

Although no working tools which can be connected with the bone artisan are known from Caesarea, European research, ethnographic comparisons and thorough study of the marks left on the objects and waste enabled the reconstruction of the tool kit used here. It included (though these tools were not always used together) a saw, cleaver, adze, draw knife, knife, chisel, gouge, point\engraver, rasp, file, drill, center-bit, chisel-compass, bow lathe, polishing materials, painting implements, etc. Ethnographic observations show us that many artisans, especially those working on a small scale and the itinerant craftsmen, use only a limited variety of tools like

Future excavations and more advanced researches will hopefully increase our knowledge of this interesting subject.

165

BIBLIOGRAPHY Palestine”. In: K. ‘Amr, F. Zayadine and M. Zaghloul (eds.). Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V: Art and Technology Throughout the Ages. Amman, pp. 289-298. Adan-Bayewitz, D. 1993. Common Pottery in Roman Galilee, A Study of Local Trade. Ramat-Gan. Agadi, S. 1996. “The Bone Objects”. In: A. Ben-Tor, M. Avissar and Y. Portugali, Yoqne’am I, The Late Periods (Qedem Reports 3). Jerusalem, pp. 236-238. Ägypten Schätze aus dem Wüstensand, Kunst und Kultur der Christen am Nil. Wiesbaden 1996. Aharoni, Y. 1962. “Expedition B – The Cave of Horror”. IEJ 12, pp. 186-199. Aiosa, S. 1997. “Ossi lavorati da Leptis Magna: una rilettura”. Libya Antiqua 3, pp. 139-148. Alföldi, E. 1975. “The Muses on Roman Game Counters”. Muse 9, pp. 13-20. Alföldi-Rosenbaum, E. 1976. “Alexandriaca. Studies on Roman Game Counters III”. Chiron 6, pp. 205-239. Alföldi-Rosenbaum, E. 1980. “Ruler Portraits on Roman Game Counters from Alexandria”. Eikoues 12, pp. 29-39. Amandry, P. 1984. “Os et coquilles”. L’Antre corycien II (Bulletin de correspondance hellénique supplément IX). Athènes, pp. 347-380. Amar, Z. 2000. Agricultural Produce in the Land of Israel in the Middle Ages. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Ambrosiani, K. 1981. Viking Age Combs, Comb Making and Comb Makers in the Light of Finds from Birka and Ribe (Stockholm Studies in Archaeology 2). Stockholm. Amit, D., Zeligman, J. and Zilberbod, I. 2001. “A Quarry and Workshop for the Production of Stone Vessels on the Eastern Slope of Mount Scopus”. Qadmoniot 34 (122), pp. 102-110 (Hebrew). Ammoun, D. 1991. Crafts of Egypt. Cairo. Anderson, R. and Fawsy, I. 1987. Egypt Revealed, Scenes from Napoleon’s Description de l’Egypt. Cairo. Ariel, D.T. 1990. “Worked Bone and Ivory”. In: D.T. Ariel et al. Excavations at the City of David 19781985, Vol. II (Qedem 30). Jerusalem, pp. 119-148. Arnon, Y. 1996. “The Caesarea Hoard – Why Was It Hidden?”. In: I. Ziffer, Islamic Metalwork. Tel Aviv, pp. 53*-56*. Arthur, P. 1977. “Eggs and Pomegranates: an Example of Symbolism in Roman Britain”. In: J. Munby and M. Henig (eds.). Roman Life and Art in Britain (BAR BS 41). Oxford, pp. 367-374. Ashton, S.-A. 1997. “Small Finds. Some Initial Results”. In: H. Walda et al. “The 1996 Excavations at Lepcis Magna”. Libyan Studies 28, pp. 63ff. Atil, E. 1981. Renaissance of Islam: Art of the Mamluks. Washington, D.C. Averbouh, A. 2001. “Methodological Specifics of the Techno-Economic Analysis of Worked Bone and

Abbreviations AA - Archäologischer Anzieger AASOR - Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research ABSA - Annual of the British School at Athens ADAJ - Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan AJA - American Journal of Archaeology BA - Biblical Archaeologist BAR - Biblical Archaeology Review BAR BS - British Archaeological Reports, British Series, Oxford BAR IS - British Archaeological Reports, International Series, Oxford BASOR - Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research BMB - Bulletin du musée de Beyrouth DJD - Discoveries in the Judaean Desert DOP - Dumbarton Oak Papers ÉT - Études et Travaux, Travaux du Centre d’archéologie méditterranéenne de Gallia IEJ - Israel Exploration Journal IMSA - Israel Museum Studies in Archaeology JAC - Jahrbuch für antike und Christentum JARCE - Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt JEA - Journal of Egyptian Archaeology JIPS - Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society JRA - Journal of Roman Archaeology JRMES - Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies NG - National Geographic Magazine PEQ - Palestine Exploration Quarterly QDAP - Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine RB - Revue Biblique RDAC - Reports of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus ZDPV - Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins Sources Babylonian Talmud, Trans. and ed. I. Epstein. London 1935-1952. Holy Qur’an, Trans. M.H. Shakir. New York 1985. Mishna, Ed. C. Albeck. Jerusalem 1958-1959. C. Plini, Natural History, Trans. H. Rackham (Loeb). Cambridge, Mass. 1938-1963. Theophilus, De Diversis Artibus (The various Arts), Ed. and trans. C.R. Dodwell. 1989. Tosefta, Ed. M.S. Zuckermandel. Jerusalem 1963. Bibliography Abu Khalaf, M. 1995. “Woodworking in Early Islamic 167

BIBLIOGRAPHY Antler: Mental Refitting and Methods of Application”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 111-121. Avi-Yonah, M. 1981. Art in Ancient Palestine, Selected Studies. Jerusalem. Aviam, M. 1997. “A Rock-Cut Tomb at Sha’ab”. ‘Atiqot XXXIII, pp. 79-80 (Hebrew). Aviam, M. and Stern, E.J. 1997. “Burial Caves Near H. Sugar”. ‘Atiqot XXXIII, pp. 89-102 (Hebrew). Avigad, N. 1962. “Expedition A – Nahal David”. IEJ 12, pp. 169-183. Avigad, N. 1976. Beth She’arim, Report on the Excavations During 1953-1958, Vol. III: Catacombs 12-23. Jerusalem. Avigad, N. 1983. Discovering Jerusalem. Nashville. Avitsur, S. 1976. Man and His Work, Historical Atlas of Tools & Workshops in the Holy Land. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Avitsur, S. 1994. “Religious Articles and Holy Land Souvenir Industry in Bethlehem”. Israel – People and Land, Eretz Israel Museum Yearbook 7-8 (25-26), pp. 217-222 (Hebrew). Avshalom-Gorni, D. and Getzov, N. 2001. “Tell elWawiyat”. Hadashot Arkheologiyot, Excavations and Surveys in Israel 113, pp. 1*-3*. Ayali, M. 1984. A Nomenclature of Workers and Artisans in the Talmudic and Midrashic Literature. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Ayali, M. 1987. Labourers and Craftsmen, Their Work and Status in the Rabbinic Sources. Giv’atayim (Hebrew). Ayalon, E. 1997. “Ecological Aspects of Villages in the Southern Sharon Region During the RomanByzantine Period”. In: S. Dar and Z. Safrai (eds.). The Village in Ancient Israel. Tel Aviv, pp. 209-227 (Hebrew). Ayalon, E. 1999. “Corpus of Bone Artifacts”. In: E. Ayalon and C. Sorek. Bare Bones, Ancient Artifacts from Animal Bones. Tel Aviv, pp. 18-72. Ayalon, E. 2003. The Assemblage of Bone and Ivory Artifacts from Caesarea Maritima, Israel, 1st-13th Centuries CE. Ph.D. Thesis, Bar-Ilan University. Ramat Gan (Hebrew). Ayalon, E. 2004. “The Stone and Metal Implements from Horvat Raqit”. In: S. Dar, Raqit, Marinus’ Estate on the Carmel, Israel (BAR IS 1300). Oxford, pp. 268296. Ayalon, E. and Dray, Y. 2002. “Workshops for Bone Tools in Caesarea”. Michmanim 16, pp. 15-22 (Hebrew). Ayalon, E. and Sorek, C. 1999. Bare Bones, Ancient Artifacts from Animal Bones. Tel Aviv. Badawy, A. 1978. Coptic Art and Archaeology: The Art of the Christian Egyptians from the Late Antique to the Middle Ages. Cambridge, Mass. Bagatti, P.B. and Milik, J.T. 1958. Gli scavi del “Dominus Flevit”, Parte I, La necropoli del periodo romano. Gerusalemme. Bahgat Bey, A. and Gabriel, A. 1921. Fouilles d’al

Foustat. Paris. Bakdensperger, P.J. 1913. The Immovable East, Studies of the People and Customs of Palestine. London. Balsdon, J.P.V.D. 1969. Life and Leisure in Ancient Rome. London. Bar-Yosef, O. and Alon, D. 1988. Nahal Hemar Cave (‘Atiqot XVIII). Jerusalem. Barag, D. 1974. “A Tomb of the Byzantine Period Near Netiv Ha-Lamed He.” ‘Atiqot 7 (Hebrew Series), pp. 81-87 (Hebrew). Baramki, D.C. 1931. “Note on a Cemetery at Karm alShaikh, Jerusalem”. QDAP I, pp. 3-9. Baramki, D.C. 1936. “Two Roman Cisterns at Beit Nattif”. QDAP V, pp. 3-10. Baramki, D.C. and Avi-Yonah, M. 1934. “An Early Christian Church at Khirbat ‘Asida”. QDAP III, pp. 17-19. Barber, B. and Bowsher, D. 2000. The Eastern Cemetery of Roman London, Excavations 1983-1990. London. Barbier, M. 1988. “Le travail de l’os à l’époque galloromaine”. Dossiers histoire et archéologie 126, pp. 48-55. Barbier, M. 1992. “Les objects de tabletterie galloromaine”. In: La collection archéologique de Mme Perrin de la Boullaye. Châlons-sur-Marne, pp. 122127. Barbier, M. 1994-1995. “La tabletterie gallo-romaine, Archéologie expérimentale sur le travail de l’os”. La tabletterie métiers d’art, Déc. 94-Mars 95, pp. 13-16. Barbier, M. 1999. “L’Atelier de tabletterie du site de Mleiha”. In: M. Mouton (ed.). Mleiha I, Environnement, stratégies de subsistance et artisanats (Travaux de la Maison de l’orient Méditerranéen No. 29). Lyon, pp. 203-225. Barkay, G. 1984. “Excavations on the Slope of the Hinnom Valley, Jerusalem”. Qadmoniot 17 (68), pp. 94-108 (Hebrew). Barnett, R.D. 1957. A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories. London. Barnett, R.D. 1982. Ancient Ivories in the Near East and Adjacent Countries (Qedem 14). Jerusalem. Barrett, D.G. 1998. “Other Small Finds”. In: M.S. Joukowsky. Petra Great Temple Vol. I: Brown University Excavations 1993-1997. Providence, pp. 287-315. Bartosiewicz, L. 1997-1998. “A Systematic Review of Astragalus Finds From Archaeological Sites”. Antaeus 24, pp. 37-44. Baruch, E. 1999. “Bone Tools in Talmudic Sources”. In: E. Ayalon and C. Sorek. Bare Bones, Ancient Artifacts from Animal Bones. Tel Aviv, pp. 73-76 (Hebrew). Barukh, E. 2001. “The Halakhic Status of Bone Utensils – A Disagreement Between the Pharisees, Saducees, and the Dead Sea Sect”. ‘Al ‘Atar, Journal of Land of Israel Studies 8-9, pp. 21-35 (Hebrew). Bass, G.F. and Van Doorninck, F.H. Jr. 1982. Yassi Ada Vol. I, A Seventh-Century Byzantine Shipwreck. College Station. 168

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Batey, R.A. 1992. “Sepphoris, An Urban Portrait of Jesus”. BAR 18, pp. 50-62. Bayer, B. 1990. “Flute”. In: D.T. Ariel et al. Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985, Vol. II (Qedem 30). Jerusalem, pp. 142-143. Béal, J.-C. 1978. [“Introduction”]. In: M.-C. Sautot. Le Cycle de la Matière – L’Os. Dijon, pp. 15-16. Béal, J.-C. 1983a. Catalogue des objets de tabletterie du Musée de la Civilisation Gallo-Romaine de Lyon 1-2. Lyon. Béal, J.-C. 1983b. “Les ateliers gallo-romains de tabletterie à Lyon et à Vienne”. Latomus 42\3, pp. 607-618. Béal, J.-C. 1984. Les objets de tabletterie antique du musée archéologique de Nîmes (Cahiers des musées et monuments de Nîmes, 2). Nîmes. Béal, J.-C. 1986. “Eléments en os de lits gallo-romains”. Documents d’archéologie meridionale 9, pp. 111117. Béal, J.-C. 1991a. “Le mausolée de Cucuron (Vaucluse) 2e partie: Le lit funéraire à décor d’os de la tombe no 1”. Gallia 48, pp. 285-317. Béal, J.-C. 1991b. “Le coffret (?) d’ivoire du “Château Royal” de Shabwa”. Syria 68, pp. 187-208. Béal, J.-C. 1994. “Tabletterie & tabletiers d’os en gaule romaine”. In: Aurochs, le retour. Aurochs, Vaches & autres bovins de la préhistoire à nos jours. Lons-leSaunier, pp. 121-129. Béal, J.-C. 2000. “Objets d’ivoire, valeur des objets, lieux de production: L’exemple de la gaule romaine”. In: Béal and Goyon 2000, pp. 101-115. Béal, J.-C. and Feugère, M. 1987. “Épées miniatures à fourreau en os, d’époque romaine”. Germania 65, pp. 89-105. Béal, J.-C. and Fouet, G. 1987. “Une broche à tisser (?) dans la villa gallo-romaine de Valentine”. Revue de Comminges C, pp. 309-317. Béal, J.-C. and Goyon, J.-C. (eds.). 2000. Des Ivoires et des cornes dans les mondes anciens (orient-occident). Collection de l’Institute d’Archeologie et d’Histoire de l’Antiquité, Université Lumière – Lyon 2, 4. Lyon. Beck-Nachtigel, A. and Ayalon, E. In press. “Excavations at Horvat Hanut (Tsur Yig’al)”. ‘Atiqot (Hebrew). Becker, C. 2001. “Bone Points – No Longer a Mystery? Evidence from the Slavic Urban Fortification of Berlin-Spandau”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 129-148. Beckwith, J. 1963. Coptic Sculpture 300-1300. London. Beltrán de Heredia Bercero, J. 2001. “La vida cotidiana. Domus y cultura material”. In: J. Beltrán de Heredia Bercero et al. De Barcino a Barcinona (siglos I-VII), Los restos arqueológicos de la plaza del Rey de Barcelona. Barcelona, pp. 140-197. Ben-Dov, M. 1982. In the Shadows of the Temple. Jerusalem. Ben Dror, M. 1993. Artisans, Healers and Magicians in the Galilee. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Benco, N.L., Ettahiri, A. and Loyet, M. 2002. “Worked

Bone Tools: Linking Metal Artisana and Animal Processors in Medieval Islamic Morocco”. Antiquity 76 (292), pp. 447-457. Bénédite, G. 1907. Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. Cairo. Benoit, P., Milik, J.T. and de Vaux, R. 1961. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 2. Les Grottes de Murabba’ât. Oxford. Bernard, P. 1970. “Sièges et lits en ivoire d’époque hellénistique en Asie centrale”. Syria 47, pp. 327-343. Berry, W. 1988. “The Minor Objects”. In: G. Davidson Weinberg (ed.). Excavations at Jalame. Columbia, pp. 227-255. Bieber, M. 1961. The History of the Greek and Roman Theater. Princeton. Bikai, P.M. 2001. “Cataloge”. In: Z. Fiema et al. The Petra Church. Amman, pp. 409-421. Birley, R. 1977. Vindolanda, A Roman Frontier Post on Hadrian’s Wall. London. Birley, E., Birley, R. and Birley, A. 1993. Vindolanda Vol. II, The Early Wooden Forts, Reports on the Auxiliaries, The Writing Tablets, Inscriptions, Brands and Graffiti. Bardon Mill, Hexham. Bíró, M.T. 1987. “Gorsium Bone Carvings”. Alba Regia 23, pp. 25-63. Bíró, M.T. 1994. The Bone Objects of the Roman Collection (Catalogi Musei Nationalis Hungarici Series Archaeologica II). Budapest. Bíró, M. 1997. “Adalékok Brigetio csontiparához – Contributions to the Bone-Industry of Brigetio”. In: The Publications of the Komárom-Esztergom County Museums 5, 1992. Tata, pp. 175-202 (Hungarian, English Summary). Bíró, M.T. 1999. “Pins with Female Bust Decoration and the Emperor Cult”. Antaeus 24, pp. 79- 92, 604-618. Bíró, M.T. 2002. “Combs and Comb-Making in Roman Pannonia: Ethnical and Historical Aspects”. In: Probleme der Frühen Merowingerzeit im Mitteldonauraum. Brno, pp. 31-71. Bishop, M.C. and Coulston, J.C.N. 1993. Roman Military Equipment from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome. London. Blakely, J.A. 1996. “Towards the Study of Economics at Caesarea Maritima”. In: A. Raban and K. Holum (eds.). Caesarea Maritima. A Retrospective after Two Millenia. Leiden, pp. 327-345. Boardman, J. 1989. “The Finds”. In: M. Ballance et al. Excavations in Chios 1952-1955, Byzantine Emporio. Oxford. Bodley, N.B. 1946. “The Auloi of Meroe. A Study of the Greek-Egyptian Auloi found at Meroe, Egypt”. AJA 50, pp. 217-239. Bourgeois, A. and Tuffreau-Libre, M. 1981. “Un atelier gallo-romain de taille de l’os à Arras”. Latomus 40\1, pp. 112-120. Brandl, B. 1993. “Worked Bone Objects”. In: I. Finkelstein (ed.). Shiloh, The Archaeology of a Biblical Site. Tel Aviv, pp. 235-262. British Museum, A Guide to the Early Christian and 169

BIBLIOGRAPHY Byzantine Antiquities. Oxford 19212. British Museum Guide to the Exhibition Illustrating Greek and Roman Life. London 19293. Brock, J.K. and Mackworth Young, G. 1949. “Excavation in Siphnos”. ABSA 44, pp. 1-92. Brosh, N. 2001. “Glass of the Islamic Period”. In: Y. Israeli. Ancient Glass in the Israel Museum, The Dobkin Collection and Other Gifts. Jerusalem, pp. 343-398 (Hebrew). Brown, D. 1976. “Bronze and Pewter”. In: D. Strong and D. Brown (eds.). Roman Crafts. London, pp. 25-41. Burian, F. and Friedmann, E. 1992. Stone Tools: The Age of Human Discovery. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Campana, D.V. 1989. Natufian and Protoneolithic Bone Tools, The Manufacture and Use of Bone Implements in the Zagros and the Levant (BAR IS 494). Oxford. Caravale, A. 1994. Museo Nazionale Romano. Avori ed Ossi 6, 1. Roma. Carnap-Bornheim, C.V. 1996. “Some Observations on Roman Militaria of Ivory”. In: C. van Driel-Murray (ed.). Military Equipment in Context, Proceedings of the Ninth International Roman Military Equipment Conference, Leiden 1994 (JRMES 5). Oxford, pp. 2732. Carra, R.M.B. 1995. “Gli ossi lavorati del Museo GrecoRomano di Alessandria: aspetti e problemi del repertorio iconografico”. In: N. Bonacasa et al. (eds.). Alessandria e Il Mondo Ellenistico-Romano, I Centenario del Museo Greco-Romano. Atti del Congresso Internazionalle Italo-Egiziano. Roma, pp. 279-282. Cattan, M. 1997. Life in the Time of Rashi. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Caubet, A. and Poplin, F. 1995. “Le travail de l’os, de l’ivoire et de la coquille en Terre Sainte du 7e au 1er millénaires av. J.-C.”. In: K. ‘Amr, F. Zayadine and M. Zaghloul (eds.). Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V: Art and Technology Throughout the Ages. Amman, pp. 489-495. Chavane, M.-J. 1975. Salamine de Chypre 6: Les petits objets. Paris. Chéhab, M. 1986. Fouilles de Tyr, La Nécropole IV, description des fouilles (BMB 36). Paris. Choyke, A.M. and Bartosiewicz, L. (eds.). 2001. Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space, Proceedings of the 2nd meeting of the (ICAZ) Worked Bone Research Group, Budapest, 31 August – 5 September 1999 (BAR IS 937). Oxford. Chrdron-Picault, P. and Rodet-Belarbi, I. 2000. “L’Exploitation de la corne dans l’antiquité, à Autun, d’après les exemples des sites de “L’Institution SaintLazare” et du “Lycée Militaire”“. In: Béal and Goyon 2000, pp. 33-42. Christensen, A.E. 1987. “Reindeer-hunter and Combmaker – a Combination of Trades in the Iron Age”. Tools & Trades IV, pp. 11-32. Ciugudean, D. 2001. “Workshops and Manufacturing Techniques at Apulum (AD 2nd-3rd Century)”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 61-72.

Clark, V.A. and Bowsher, J.M.C. 1986. “Small Finds”. In: F. Zayadine (ed.). Jerash Archaeological Project 1981-1983. Amman, pp. 231-302. Coen Uzzielli, T. 1997. “Marble Decorations, Wall Mosaics and Small Finds”. In: Y. Hirschfeld. The Roman Baths of Hammat Gader. Jerusalem, pp. 442455. Cohen, R. 1983. “Excavations at Kadesh-Barnea, 19761982”. Qadmoniot 16 (61), pp. 2-14 (Hebrew). Collingwood, P. 1982. The Techniques of Tablet Weaving. London. Colt, H.D. 1962. “Miscellaneous Small Objects”. In: H.D. Colt (ed.). Excavations at Nessana 1. London, pp. 51-69. Cooney, J.D. 1943. Late Egyptian and Coptic Art. An Introduction to the Collections in the Brooklyn Museum. New York. Cope, C. 1997. Caesarea Maritima, The 1995-1996 Field Seasons (Unpublished Report). Cope, C. 1999. “Faunal Remains and Butchery Practices from Byzantine and Islamic Contexts (1993-94 Seasons)”. In: Holum, Raban and Patrich 1999, pp. 405-417. Crowfoot, G.M. 1924. “A Tablet Woven Band, from Qau el Kebir”. Ancient Egypt Part IV, pp. 98-100. Crowfoot, G.M. 1931. Methods of Hand Spinning in Egypt and the Sudan (Bankfield Museum Notes, Second Series No. 12). Halifax. Crowfoot, G.M. 1957. “Spindle Whorls and Loom Weights”. In: J.W. Crowfoot, G.M. Crowfoot and K.M. Kenyon. Samaria-Sebaste III: The Objects from Samaria. London, pp. 398-402. Crummy, N. 1979. “A Chronology of Romano-British Bone Pins”. Britannia 10, pp. 157-163. Crummy, N. 1981. “Bone-Working at Colchester”. Britannia 12, pp. 277-285. Crummy, N. 1983. Colchester Archaeological Report 2: The Roman Small Finds from Excavations in Colchester 1971-9. Colchester. Crummy, N. 1988. Colchester Archaeological Report 5: The Post-Roman Small Finds from Excavations in Colchester 1971-85. Colchester. Crummy, N. 1992a. “The Roman Small Finds from the Culver Street Site”. In: P. Crummy. Colchester Archaeological Report 6: Excavations at Culver Street, the Gilberd School, and other Sites in Colchester 1971-85. Colchester, pp. 140-205. Crummy, N. 1992b. “The Small Finds from the Gilberd School Site”. In: P. Crummy. Colchester Archaeological Report 6: Excavations at Culver Street, the Gilberd School, and other Sites in Colchester 1971-85. Colchester, pp. 206-250. Cutler, A. 1985. The Craft of Ivory, Sources, Techniques, and Uses in the Mediterranean World: A.D. 2001400. Washington, D.C. Cutler, A. 1993. “Five Lessons in Late Roman Ivory”. JRA 6, pp. 167-192. Dalton, O.M. 1909. Catalogue of the Ivory Carvings of the Christian Era in the British Museum. London. 170

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Dalton, O.M. 1911. Byzantine Art and Archaeology. Oxford. Dandoy, J. 1996. “Astragali, the Ubiquitous Gaming Pieces”. Expedition 38\1, pp. 51-58. Dar, S. 1993. Settlements and Cult Sites on Mount Hermon, Israel (BAR IS 589). Oxford. Davidson, G.R. 1952. Corinth XII: The Minor Objects. Princeton. Dayagi-Mendels, M. 1989. Perfumes and Cosmetics in Antiquity. Jerusalem (Hebrew). De Cupere, B. 2001. “Animals at Ancient Sagalassos, Evidence of the Faunal Remains”. In: M. Waelkens (ed.). Studies in Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology IV. Turnhout, pp. 147-159. Del Francia Barocas, L. 1998. Antinoe Cent’anni Dopo. Firenze. Delougaz, P. and Haines, R.C. 1960. A Byzantine Church at Khirbet al-Karak. Chicago. Deschler-Erb, S. 1997. “Bone, Antler, Tooth and Ivory: Raw Materials for Roman Artifacts”. Anthropozoologica 25-26, pp. 73-77. Deschler-Erb, S. 1998. Römische Beinartefakte aus Augusta Raurica 1-2 (Forschungen in Augst Band 27). Augst. Deschler-Erb, S. 2000. “Les ivoires d’Augusta Raurica, objets rares et precieux parmi des millièrs d’os”. In: Béal and Goyon 2000, pp. 125-127. Deschler-Erb, S. 2001. “Do-It-Yourself Manufacturing of Bone and Antler in Two Villas in Roman Switzerland”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 31-40. Dijkman, W. and Ervynck, A. 1998. Antler, Bone, Horn, Ivory and Teeth: The Use of Animal Skeletal Materials in Roman and Early Medieval Maastricht (Archaeologica Mosana I). Maastricht. Dimand, M.S. 1958. A Handbook of Muhammadan Art. 3rd ed., New York. Dothan, M. 1971. Ashdod II-III, The Second and Third Seasons of Excavations 1963, 1965 (‘Atiqot IX-X). Jerusalem. Dothan, M. 1983. Hammath Tiberias Early Synagogues and the Hellenistic and Roman Remains. Jerusalem. Dunand, M. 1954. Fouilles de Byblos T. II, I, 1933-1938. Paris. Dunand, M. 1958. Fouilles de Byblos T. II, II, 19331938. Paris. Dussaud, R. 1912. Les Monuments Palestiniens et Judaiques, Musée du Louvre. Paris. Dussaud, R. 1934. “Bibliographie: C. Rathjens et H. von Wissmann – Suedarabien-Reise, t. II: Vorislamische Altertuemer. Hambourg”. Syria 15, pp. 87-90. Dzierzykray-Rogalski, T., Prominska, E. and Rodziewicz, M. 1972. “Refuse of Animal Bones from Kom el-Dikka, Alexandria”. ÉT 6, pp. 173-178. Early Christian and Byzantine Art. An Exhibition held at the Baltimore Museum of Art. Baltimore 1947. Eger, C. 2003. “Dress Accessories of Late Antiquity in Jordan”. Levant 35, pp. 163-178. Egyptian Collections in the British Museum. London

1964. Eichmann, R. 1994. Koptische Lauten, Eine musikarchaeologische Untersuchung von sieben Langhalslauten der 3.-9. Jh. N. Chr. aus Aegypten (Deutsches archaeologisches Institut Abteitung Kairo, Sonderschrift 27). Mainz a. R. Elderkin, K.McK. 1926. “An Alexandrian Carved Casket of the Fourth Century”. AJA 30, pp. 150-157. Elderkin, K. 1928. “Buttons and their Use on Greek Garments”. AJA 32, pp. 333-345. Elderkin, K.McK. 1930. “Jointed Dolls in Antiquity”. AJA 34, pp. 455-479. Elgavish, J. 1968. Archaeological Excavations at Shikmona 1. The Levels of the Persian Period, Seasons 1963-1965. Haifa (Hebrew). Elgavish, J. 1974. Archaeological Excavations at Shikmona 2. The Level of the Hellenistic Period – Stratum H. Haifa (Hebrew). Elgavish, J. 1994. Shiqmona, On the Seacoast of Mount Carmel. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Emery, K.F. 2001. “The Economics of Bone Artifact Production in the Ancient Maya Lowlands”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 73-83. Encyclopædia Britannica Vol. 7, 1961, s.v. “Dominos”, pp. 520-521. Engelbach, R. 1915. “Shurafa”. In: W.M.F. Petrie and E. Mackay. Heliopolis, Kafr Ammar and Shurafa. London, pp. 40-44. Engemann, J. 1987. “Elfenbeinfunde aus Abu Mena \ Aegypten”. JAC 30, pp. 172-186. Evely, D. 1992. “Towards an Elucidation of the IvoryWorker’s Tool-Kit in Neo-Palatial Crete”. In: Fitton 1992, pp. 7-11. Evely, R.D.G. 1993. Minoan Crafts: Tools and Techniques. An Introduction, I-II (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology Vol. 92). Goeteborg. Feig, N. 2002. “Salvage Excavations at Meron”. ‘Atiqot XLIII, pp. 87-114. Felix, J. 1971. “Ecology”. Encyclopædia Judaica Vol. 4B, pp. 1027-1030. Ferdière, A. 1986. Tissu & Vêtement, 5000 ans de savoirfaire. Guiry-en-Vexin. de la Ferté, E.C. 1974. “Un bracelet d’époque romaine à usage obstétrique”. Syria 51, pp. 265-289. Fischer, P.M. and Herrmann, G. 1995. “A Carved Bone Object from Tell Abu al-Kharaz in Jordan: A Palestinian Workshop for Bone and Ivory?”. Levant 27, pp. 145-163. Fitton, J.L. (ed.). 1992. Ivory in Greece and the Eastern Mediterranean from the Bronze Age to the Hellenistic Period (British Museum Occasional Paper 85). London. Fitzgerald, G.M. 1931. Beth-Shan Excavations 19211923, The Arab and Byzantine Levels. Philadelphia. Fitzhugh, W.W. and Kaplan, S.A. 1982. Inna, Spirit World of the Bering Sea Eskimo. Washington D.C. Flayderman, N.E. 1972. Scrimshaw and Scrimshanders, Whales and Whalemen. New Milford, Con. Fremersdorf, F. 1940. “Römische Scharnierbänder aus 171

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bein”. Serta Hoffilleriana, Festschrift V. Zagreb, pp. 321-337. Friedheim, E. 2002. “Rabban Gamaliel and the Bathhouse of Aphrodite in Akko: A Study of EretzIsrael Realia in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries CE”. Cathedra 105, pp. 7-32 (Hebrew). Friedman, F.D. 1989. Beyond the Pharaohs, Egypt and the Copts in the 2nd to 7th Centuries A.D. Rhode Island. Fritsch, C.T. (ed.). 1975. The Joint Expedition to Caesarea Maritima I: Studies in the History of Caesarea Maritima (BASOR Supplementary Studies 19). Missoula, MT. Frova, A. et al. 1966. Scavi di Caesarea Maritima. Roma. Fry, D.K. 1976. “Anglo-Saxon Lyre Tuning Pegs from Whitby, N. Yorkshire”. Medieval Archaeology 20, pp. 137-139. Gardner, M. 19792. The Ambidextrous Universe, Mirror Asymmetry and Time-Reversed Worlds. Reading. Gautier, A. 1984. “La faune de quelques maisons d’Apamée”. In: J. Balty (ed.). Apamée de Syrie, Bilan des recherches archéologiques 1973-1979 (Actes du colloque tenu à Bruxelles les 29, 30 et 31 Mai 1980). Brussel, pp. 305-360. Gawlikowski, M. 1995. “Arab Lamp-Makers in Jarash, Christian and Muslim”. In: K. ‘Amr, F. Zayadine and M. Zaghloul (eds.). Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V: Art and Technology Throughout the Ages, 2. Amman, pp. 669-672. Gayet, A. 1902. L’Art Copte. Paris. Gayraud, R.-P. 1986. “Istabl ‘Antar (Fostat) 1985. Rapport de Fouilles”. Annales Islamologiques 22, pp. 1-26. Gersht, R. 2001. “Life and After-Life, the Dionysiac Realm in Roman Palestine”. In: I. Zinguer (ed.). Dionysos, Origines et Résurgences (De Pétrarque à Descartes 69). Paris, pp. 95-187. Gershuny, L. and Zissu, B. 1996. “Tombs of the Second Temple Period at Giv’at Shapira, Jerusalem”. ‘Atiqot XXX, pp. 45*-59* (Hebrew). Geva, H. 2003. “Bone and Ivory Artifacts”. In: H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969-1982, Vol. II: The Finds from Areas A, W, and X-2, Final Report. Jerusalem, pp. 343-352. Gibson, S. 1983. “The Stone Vessel Industry at Hizma”. IEJ 33, pp. 176-188. Gibson, S. 2003. “Stone Vessels of the Early Roman Period from Jerusalem and Palestine. A Reassessment”. In: G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and L.D. Chrupcata, (eds.). One Land – Many Cultures, Archaeological Studies in Honour of Stanislao Loffreda OFM (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Collectio Maior 41). Jerusalem, pp. 287-308. Gill, D.W.J. 1992. “The Ivory Trade”. In: Fitton 1992, pp. 233-237. Gilmour, G. H. 1997. “The Nature and Function of Astragalus Bones”. Oxford Journal of Archaeology,

pp. 167-175. Giveon, R. 1964. “Alexandrine Decorated Basin-Rims from Israel”. IEJ 14, pp. 232-236. Goldfuss, H. and Arubas, B. 2001. “The Kilnworks of the Tenth Legion at the Jerusalem Convention Center”. Qadmoniot 34 (122), pp. 111-118 (Hebrew). Goldfus, H. and Bowes, K. 2000. “New Late Roman Bone Carvings from Halusa and the Problem of Regional Bone Carving Workshops in Palestine”. IEJ 50, pp. 185-202. Goldman, H. 1935. “Preliminary Expedition to Cilicia, 1934, and Excavations at Gozlu Kule, Tarsus, 1935”. AJA 39, pp. 526-549. Goldman, H. (ed.). 1950. Excavations at Gözlü Kule, Tarsus, I-II: The Hellenistic and Roman Periods. Princeton. Goldman, H. 1963. “Bone”. In: H. Goldman (ed.). Excavations at Gözlü Kule, Tarsus, III: The Iron Age. Princeton, pp. 380-386. Goodburn, R. and Grew, F.O. 1984a. “Objects of Bone”. In: S. Frere. Verulamium Excavations 3 (Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph No. 1). Oxford, pp. 68-75. Goodburn, R. and Grew, F.O. 1984b. “Other Objects of Bronze”. Ibid.: pp. 31-65. Goodman, W.L. 1964. The History of Woodworking Tools. London. Goodman, W.L. 1996. “The Woodworking Tools in The Greek Anthology – and Reflections Thereon”. Tools & Trades IX, pp. 8-19. Goren, O. 1990. “Beduin Flute from an Eagle’s Bone”. Ha’Azania 17, pp. 6-7 (Hebrew). Goren-Rabinovitch, R. and Kolska-Horowitz, L. 1989. “Taphonomy of Bone Assemblages from Archaeological Sites”. Archaeologya 2, pp. 55-64 (Hebrew). Gostenčnik, K. 2001. “Pre- and Early Roman Bone and Antler Manufacturing in Kärnten, Austria”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 383-397. Goyon, J.-C. 2000. “La dent, l’ivoire et l’hippopotame dans l’Egypte du dernières siècles”. In: Béal and Goyon 2000, pp. 147-153. von Graf, P. 1914. “Die Perlmutter-Industrie in Bethlehem”. ZDPV 37, pp. 327-338. Grapin, C. 2000. “Un atelier mixte de Cornetier – tabletier à Alésia”. In: Béal and Goyon 2000, pp. 6365. Green, C. 1999. “Ancient Egyptian Wood Turning – Another View”. Tools & Trades XI, pp. 41-44. Griffitts, J. 2001. “Bone Tools from Los Pozos”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 185-195. Gróf, P. and Gróh, D. 2001. “The Remains of Medieval Bone Carvings from Visegrád”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 281-285. Guéry, R. 1985. La nécropole orientale de Sitifis (Sétif, Algérie). Fouilles de 1966-1967. Paris. Gutman, S. 1994. Gamla – A City in Rebellion. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Hachlili, R. and Killebrew, A. 1999. Jericho, the Jewish 172

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Cemetery of the Second Temple Period (IAA Reports No. 7). Jerusalem. Hadas, G. 1994. Nine Tombs of the Second Temple Period at ‘En Gedi (‘Atiqot XXIV). Jerusalem (Hebrew). Haeckl, A.E. 1999. “The Wooden ‘Aphrodite’ Panel”. In: S.E. Sidebotham and W.Z. Wendrich (eds.). Berenike 1997, Report of the 1997 Excavations at Berenike and the Survey of the Egyptian Eastern Desert, Including Excavations at Shenshef. Leiden, pp. 243-255. Hakker-Orion, D. 1993. “Faunal Remains from Sites Along the Frankincense and Myrrh Route”. In: H. Buitenhuis and A.T. Clason (eds.). Archaeozoology of the Near East Vol. I. Leiden, pp. 77-87. Halstead, B. and Middleton, J. 1972. Bare Bones, An Exploration in Art and Science. Edinburgh. Hamilton, R.W. 1946. “Khirbat Mafjar. Stone Sculpture, II. 2. Decoration of Wall Surfaces”. QDAP XII, pp. 119. Hamilton, R.W. 1947. “Plaster Balustrades from Khirbat Al Mafjar”. QDAP XIII, pp. 1-58. Hamilton, R.W. 1950. “The Sculpture of Living Forms at Khirbat al Mafjar”. QDAP XIV, pp. 100-119. Hamilton, R.W. 1974. “Thuribles: Ancient or Modern?”. IRAQ 36, pp. 53-65. Hamilton, R.W. and Husseini, S.S.S. 1935. “Shaft Tombs on the Nablus Road, Jerusalem”. QDAP IV, pp. 170174. Hammond, P. 1986. “Three Workshops at Petra (Jordan)”. PEQ 118, pp. 129-141. Hands, A.R. 1993. The Romano-British Roadside Settlement at Wilcote, Oxfordshire I. Excavations 1990-92 (BAR BS 232). Oxford. Hasson, R. 1979. Early Islamic Glass. Jerusalem. Hendel, M. 1987. “Crafts and Craftsmen in Israel”. In: N. Krispil (ed.). Craftsmen in the Hebron Mountains. N.p., pp. 3-25 (Hebrew). Henig, M. 1977. “Death and the Maiden: Funerary Symbolism in Daily Life”. In: J. Munby and M. Henig (eds.). Roman Life and Art in Britain (BAR BS 41). Oxford, pp. 347-366. Henig, M. 1983. “The Luxury Arts: Decorative Metalwork, Engraved Gems and Jewellery”. In: M. Henig (ed.). A Handbook of Roman Art, A Survey of the Visual Arts of the Roman World. Oxford, pp. 139165. Henig, M. 1984. “Objects of Metal, Stone and Bone”. In: H.R. Hurst and S.P. Roskams. Excavations at Carthage: The British Mission Vol. I, 1, The Avenue du President Habib Bourguiba, Salammbo: The Site and Finds other than Pottery. Sheffield, pp. 182-193. Henschel-Simon, E. 1938. “The ‘Toggle-Pins’ in the Palestine Archaeological Museum”. QDAP VI, pp. 169-190. Hershkovitz, M. 1996. “Roman Medical Instruments on Masada: Possible Evidence of a Roman Infirmary”. Eretz-Israel 25, pp. 351-355 (Hebrew). Hesse, B. and Wapnish, P. 1997. “Can Pig Remains Be Used for Ethnic Diagnosis in the Ancient Near

East?”. In: N.A. Silberman and D. Small (eds.). The Archaeology of Israel, Constructing the Past, Interpreting the Present (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 237). Sheffield, pp. 238-270. Higuchi, T. and Izumi, T. (eds.). 1994. Tombs A and C Southeast Necropolis Palmyra Syria Surveyed in 1990-92. Nara. Hill, D.K. 1963. “Ivory Ornaments of Hellenistic Couches”. Hesperia 32, pp. 293-300. Hirschfeld, Y. 2003. “A Lion’s Head from the Herodian Palace at Ramat Hanadiv”. IMSA 2, pp. 11-16. Hoffman, E.R. 1999. “A Fatimid Book Cover: Framing and Re-framing Cultural Identity in the Medieval Mediterranean World”. In: L’Egypt Fatimide, son art et son histoire (Actes du colloque organisé à Paris les 28, 29 et 30 mai 1998, sous la direction de M. Barrucand). Paris, pp. 403-419. Hogarth, D.G. 1908. Excavations at Ephesus, The Archaic Artemisia. London, pp. 186-198. Holum, K. 1989. “The End of Classical Urbanism at Caesarea Maritima, Israel”. In: R.I. Curtis (ed.). Studia Pompeiana & Classica in Honor of Wilhelma F. Jashemski, Vol. II: Classica. New York, pp. 87102. Holum, K.G. 1998. “Identity and the Late Antique City: The Case of Caesarea”. In: H. Lapin (ed.). Religious and Ethnic Communities in Later Roman Palestine (Studies and Texts in Jewish History and Culture V). Maryland, pp. 157-177. Holum, K.G. 2004. “The Combined Caesarea Expeditions’ Excavations: The Warehouse Quarter alongside the Harbor and Temple Platform”. Qadmoniot 37 (128), pp. 102-112 (Hebrew). Holum, K.G. et al. 1988. King Herod’s Dream, Caesarea on the Sea. New York and London. Holum, K.G., Raban, A. and Patrich, J. (eds.). 1999. Caesarea Papers 2. Herod’s Temple, The Provincial Governor’s Praetorium and Granaries, The Later Harbor, A Gold Coin Hoard and Other Studies (JRA Supplement Series No. 35). Portsmouth. Horwitz, L.K. 1990. “Archaeological Analysis of Raw Materials Used in the Manufacture of Bone Artifacts”. In: D.T. Ariel et al. Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985 Vol. II (Qedem 30). Jerusalem, pp. 144-145. Horwitz, L.K. 2000. “The Animal Economy of Horvat ‘Eleq”. In: Y. Hirschfeld. Ramat Hanadiv Excavations. Jerusalem, pp. 511-526. Horwitz, L.K. 2004. “Animal Remains From Horvat Raqit”. In: S. Dar. Raqit, Marinus’ Estate on the Carmel, Israel (BAR IS 1300). Oxford, pp. 303-308. Horwitz, L.K., Tchernov, E. and Dar, S. 1990. “Subsistence and Environment on Mount Carmel in the Roman-Byzantine and Mediaeval Periods: The Evidence from Kh. Sumaqa”. IEJ 40, pp. 287-304. Hughes, G.B. 1961. “Chess”. Encyclopædia Britannica Vol. 5, pp. 423-435. Humbert, J.-B. 1989. “el-Fedein\Mafraq”. In: 173

BIBLIOGRAPHY Felousiat”. Beer-Sheva 2, pp. 1*-5*. Johnson, B.L. 2000. “Small Finds”. In: M. Dothan, Hammath Tiberias Vol. 2: Late Synagogues. Jerusalem, pp. 84-92. Kawatoko, M. 1995. al-Tur, A Port City Site on the Sinai Peninsula, The 11th Expedition in 1994 (A Summary Report). Tokyo. Kawatoko, M. 1996. al-Tur, A Port City Site on the Sinai Peninsula, The 12th Expedition in 1995 (A Summary Report). Tokyo. Keall, E.J. 1995. “Forerunners of Umayyad Art: Sculptural Stone from the Hadramaut”. Muqarnas 12, pp. 11-23. Kenyon, K.M. 1957. “Miscellaneous Objects in Metal, Bone, and Stone”. In: J.W. Crowfoot, G.M. Crowfoot and K.M. Kenyon. Samaria-Sebaste III: The Objects from Samaria. London, pp. 439-468. Killebrew, A.E. 2000. “Bone Artifacts”. In: L.H. Schiffman and J.C. Vanderkam (eds.). Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls I, pp. 102-103. Killen, G. 1997. “Wood Turning in Ancient Egypt”. Tools & Trades X, pp. 10-25. Kingsley, S. 2004. Barbarian Seas, Late Roman to Islam. London. Kingsley, S. and Decker, M. 2001. “New Rome, New Theories on Inter-Regional Exchange. An Introduction to the East Mediterranean Economy in Late Antiquity”. In: S. Kingsley and M. Decker (eds.). Economy and Exchange in the East Mediterranean during Late Antiquity. Proceedings of a Conference at Somerville College, Oxford – 29th May, 1999. Oxford, pp. 1-27. Klamer, C. 1981. “A Late Bronze Age Burial Cave Near Shechem”. Qadmoniot 14 (53-54), pp. 30-34 (Hebrew). Kloner, A. and Olami, Y. 1980. “The Persian and Hellenistic Period; The Roman and Byzantine Period”. In: A Sofer and B. Kipnis (eds.). Atlas of Haifa and Carmel. Haifa, pp. 38-43 (Hebrew). Kloner, A. and Zissu, B. 2003. The Necropolis of Jerusalem in the Second Temple Period. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Kogan-Zehavi, E. 2000. “Settlement Remains and Tombs at Khirbet Tabaliya (Giv’at Hamatos)”. ‘Atiqot IL, pp. 52*-79*. Kol-Yaakov, S. 2000. “Various Objects from the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Periods”. In: Y. Hirschfeld. Ramat Hanadiv Excavations, Final Report of the 1984-1998 Seasons. Jerusalem, pp. 473503. Kondoleon, C. 2000. Antioch, The Lost Ancient City. Princeton. Kotlar, D. 1976. Human Ecology in the Ancient World (Eretz-Yisrael, Greece and Rome). Jerusalem (Hebrew). Kraeling, C.H. 1962. Ptolemais, City of the Libyan Pentapolis (The University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications 90). Chicago. Kraus, T. 1975. Pompeii and Herculaneum, The Living

Contribution Française à l’archéologie jordaniènne. Amman, pp. 125-130. Hurst, H.R. and Henig, M. 1994. “Boneworking”. In: H.R. Hurst. Excavations at Carthage. The British Mission, vol. 2.1. The Circular Harbour, North Side: The Site and Finds Other than Pottery. Oxford, pp. 105-107. Husselman, E.M. 1979. Karanis Excavations of the University of Michigan in Egypt 1928-1935. Topography and Architecture (The University of Michigan Kelsey Museum of Archaeology Studies 5). Ann Arbor. Hutchinson, V.J. and Reese, D.S. 1988. “A Worked Bone Industry at Carthage”. In: J.H. Humphrey (ed.). The Circus and a Byzantine Cemetery at Carthage 1. Ann Arbor, pp. 549-594. Ibrahim, M.M. and Gordon, R.L. 1987. A Cemetery at Queen Alia International Airport (Yarmouk University Publications, Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology Series Vol. 1). Irbid. Iliffe, J.H. 1933. “A Copy of the Crouching Aphrodite”. QDAP II, pp. 110-112. Ingholt, H. 1940. Rapport préliminaire sur sept campagnes de fouilles à Hama en Syrie (1932-1938). Copenhague. Israeli, S. 2001. “The Artifacts”. In: J.F. Wilson (ed.). Rediscovering Caesarea Philipi: The Ancient City of Pan. Malibu, pp. 25-34. Jablonowska-Taracha, J. 1998. “Eros Lampadophoros on a Bone Plaque from Tell Atrib”. Archeologia 48, 1997, pp. 25-29. Jablonowska-Taracha, J. 2001. “Bone Objects from Polish Excavations at Kom el-Dikka, Alexandria (1988-1990) Part I”. Archeologia 51, 2000, pp. 51-60. Jackson, R. 1986. “A Set of Roman Medical Instruments from Italy”. Britannia 17, pp. 119-167. Jackson, R. 1990. “Roman Doctors and their Instruments: Recent Research into Ancient Practice”. JRA 3, pp. 527. Jaritz, H. et al. 1996. Pelusium, Prospection archéologique et topographique de la région de Tell el-Kana’is 1993 et 1994. Stuttgart. Jaussen, J.-A. 1923. “Inscriptions coufiques de la chaire du martyr al-Husayn, à Hébron”. RB 32, pp. 575-597. Jenkins, J.G. 1967. Traditional Country Craftsmen. New York. Jenkins, M. (ed.). 1983. Islamic Art in the Kuwait National Museum (The al-Sabah Collection). London. Johns, C. 1996. “Isis, not Cybele: A Bone Hairpin from London”. In: J. Bird, M. Hassall and H. Sheldon (eds.). Interpreting Roman London, Papers in Memory of High Chapman (Oxford Monograph 58). Oxford, pp. 115-118. Johns, C.N. 1934. “Excavations at Pilgrims’ Castle, ‘Atlit, (1932); The Ancient Tell and the Outer Defences of the Castle”. QDAP III, pp. 145-164. Johnson, A.C. and West, L.C. 1967. Byzantine Egypt: Economic Studies. Amsterdam. Johnson, B.L. 1985. “A Bone Carving of Aphrodite from 174

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Cities of the Dead (Trans. R.E. Wolf). New York. Krzyszkowska, O. 1990. Ivory and Related Materials, An Illustrated Guide (Classical Handbook 3, Bulletin Supplement 59). London. Krzyszkowska, O.H. 1992. “Aegean Ivory Carving: Towards an Evaluation of Late Bronze Age Workshop Material”. In: Fitton 1992, pp. 25-32. Krzyszkowska, O. and Morkot, R. 2000. “Ivory and related Materials”. In: P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw (eds.). Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology. Cambridge, pp. 320-331. Kubiak, W. and Scanlon, G.T. 1973. “Fustat Expedition: Preliminary Report, 1966”. JARCE 10, pp. 11-25. Kühnel, E. 1949. The Arabesque, Meaning and Transformation of an Ornament (Trans. R. Ettinghausen). Graz. Kühnel, E. [1971]. Die Islamischen Elfenbeinskulpturen VIII-XIII Jahrhundert. [Berlin]. Künzl, E. 1983. Medizinische Instruments aus Sepulkralfunden der römischen Kaiserzeit. Köln. Künzl, E. 1999. “Aerzte in Ephesos: Gräber und Instrumente”. In: B. Brandt and K.R. Krierer (eds.). 100 Jahre Österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos, Akten des Symposions Wien 1995. Wien, pp. 205-209. Lancel, S. 1982. Mission archéologique Française à Carthage, Byrsa II, Rapport préliminaire des fouilles 1977-1978: niveaux et vestiges puniques. Rome. Lane, A. 1938. “Medieval Finds at al-Mina in North Syria”. Archeologia 87, pp. 19-78. Lane, E.N. 1986. “Sabazius-Artifacts from Cyprus”. RDAC pp. 197-201. L’Art copte en Égypte, 2000 ans de christianisme. Paris 2000. Lawlor, J.I. 2000. “A Corpus of Bone Carvings from the Excavation of the Esbous North Church (Hesban, Jordan)”. In: L.E. Stager, J.A. Greene and M.D. Coogan (eds.). The Archaeology of Jordan and Beyond, Essaays in Honor of James A. Sauer. Winona Lake, pp. 290-301. Lawson, G. 1978. “Mediaeval Tuning Pegs from Whitby, N. Yorkshire”. Medieval Archaeology 22, pp. 139141. Lester, A., Arnon, Y.D. and Polak, R. 1999. “The Fatimid Hoard from Caesarea: A Preliminary Report”. In: L’Egypt Fatimide, son art et son histoire. Actes du colloque organisé à Paris les 28, 29 et 30 mai 1998, sous la direction de M. Barrucand. Paris, pp. 233-248. Levine, L.I. 1975a. Caesarea Under Roman Rule. Leiden. Levine, L.I. 1975b. Roman Caesarea, An Archaeological-Topographical Study (Qedem 2). Jerusalem. Levine, L.I. and Netzer, E. 1986. Excavations at Caesarea Maritima 1975, 1976, 1979 – Final Report (Qedem 21). Jerusalem. Levy, A.H. 1985. “Two Bronze Rouletting Tools”. IEJ 35, pp. 181-182. Liebowitz, H.A. 1977. “Bone and Ivory Inlay from Syria

and Palestine”. IEJ 27, pp. 89-97. Liu, R.K. 1978. “Spindle Whorls: Pt. I: Some Comments and Speculations”. The Bead Journal 3, pp. 87-103. Liversidge, J. 1976. “Woodwork”. In: D. Strong and D. Brown (eds.). Roman Crafts. London, pp. 155-165. Loffreda, S. 2000. Ceramica del tempo di Gesù. Vasi della Terra Santa nel periodo romano antico 63 a.C.70 d.C. Jerusalem. Longhurst, M.H. 1927. Catalogue of Carvings in Ivory I. Victoria and Albert Museum. London. L’Orange, H.P. 1965. Art, Forms and Civil Life in the Late Roman Empire. Princeton. Macalister, R.A.S. 1912. The Excavation of Gezer 19021905 and 1907-1909. Vol. III. London. MacGregor, A. 1985. Bone, Antler, Ivory & Horn. The Technology of Skeletal Materials Since the Roman Period. London. MacGregor, A. 1989. “Bone, Antler and Horn Industries in the Urban Context”. In: D. Serjeantson and T. Waldron (eds.). Diet and Craft in Towns. The Evidence from Animal Remains from the Roman to the Post-Medieval Periods (BAR BS 199). Oxford, pp. 107-128. MacGregor, A. 1991. “Antler, Bone and Horn”. In: J. Blair and N. Ramsay (eds.). English Medieval Industries, Craftsmen, Techniques, Products. London, pp. 355-378. MacGregor, A.G. 1995. “Roman and Early Medieval Bone and Antler Objects”. In: M.O.H. Carver (ed.). Excavations at York Minster I, From Roman Fortress to Norman Cathedral. London, pp. 414-427. MacGregor, A. 1998. “Hides, Horns and Bones: Animals and Interdependent Industries in the Early Urban Context”. In: E. Cameron (ed.). Leather and Fur. Aspects of Early Medieval Trade and Technology. London, pp. 11-26. MacGregor, A., Mainman, A.J. and Rogers, N.S.H. 1999. Craft, Industry and Everyday Life: Bone, Antler, Ivory and Horn from Anglo-Scandinavian York (The Archaeology of York Vol. 17, Fasc. 12: The Small Finds). York. MacManus, M. 1983. “Joseph Hughes: an Armagh Woodturner”. Tools & Trades I, pp. 43-48. Magen, Y. 1993. “Qedumim – A Samaritan Site of the Roman-Byzantine Period”. In: F. Manns and E. Alliata (eds.). Early Christianity in Context, Monuments and Documents. Jerusalem, pp. 167-180. Magen, Y. 2002. The Stone Vessel Industry in the Second Temple Period. Excavations at Hizma and the Jerusalem Temple Mount. Jerusalem. Maire, J. 1998. “Innovation technologique dans le travail de l’os à Strasbourg au XVe siècle”. In: L’Innovation technique au Moyen Age, Actes du VIe congrès international d’archéologie médiévale, Dijon 1996. Paris, pp. 275-276. Maiuri, A. 1953. Roman Painting (trans. S. Gilbert). Geneve. Makowiecka, E. 1969. “Acanthus-base Alexandrian Form of Architectural Decoration at Ptolemaic and 175

BIBLIOGRAPHY De-Loused Themselves”. BAR 15\6, pp. 66-69. Murray, M.A. 1940. A Street in Petra. London. Mysliwiec, K. 1997. “Les ateliers d’Athribis ptolémaique”. Archeologia 47, pp. 7-20. Negev, A. et al. 1993. “Caesarea”. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Vol. I, pp. 270-291. Neidinger, W. and Matthews, E. 1989. The Mercantile Quarter (The Tabernae) of Antipatris. Houston. Newcomer, M. 1977. “Experiments in Upper Palaeolithic Bone Work”. In: H. Camps-Fabrer (ed.). Méthodologie appliquée à l’industrie de l’os préhistorique (Deuxième colloque international sur l’Industrie de l’os dans la Préhistoire). Paris, pp. 293301. Newman, R. and Serpico, M. 2000. “Adhesives and Binders”. In: P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw (eds.). Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technologies. Cambridge, pp. 475-494. Nicholls, R.V. 1979. “A Roman Couch in Cambridge”. Archeologia 106, pp. 1-32. Northe, A. 2001. “Notched Implements Made of Scapulae – Still a Problem”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 179-184. Nye, P.C. 1919. “The Oblong Caskets of the Byzantine Period”. AJA 23, pp. 401-412. Olávarri-Goicoechea, E. 1985. El Palacio Omeya de Amman II. La Arqueología. Jerusalém. Oldenburg, E. 1969. “Les objets en faience, terre-cuite, os et nacre”. In: G. Ploug et al. Hama, fouilles et recherches, 1931-1938, Vol. IV\3: Les petits objets médiévaux sauf les verreries et poteries. Copenhague, pp. 107-141. Oleson, J.P. et al. 1994. The Harbours of Caesarea Maritima, Results of the Caesarea Ancient Harbour Excavation Project 1980-85, Vol. II: The Finds and the Ship (BAR IS 594). Oxford. Oren, E.D. 1971. “Early Islamic Material from GaneiHamat (Tiberias) “. Archaeology 24, pp. 274-277. Oren, E. 1978. “A Christian Settlement at Ostracina in Northern Sinai”. Qadmoniot 11 (42-43), pp. 81-87 (Hebrew). Parker, S.T. 1999. “The Byzantie Period: An Empire’s New Holy Land”. Near Eastern Archaeology 62, pp. 134-180. Patrich, J. 1999. “The Warehouse Complex and Governor’s Palace (areas KK, CC, and NN, May 1993-December 1995)”. In: Holum, Raban and Patrich 1999, pp. 70-107. Patrich, J. 2001. “The carceres of the Herodian Hippodrome/stadium at Caesarea Maritima and Connections with the Circus Maximus”. JRA 14, pp. 269-283. Patrich, J. 2002. “Four Christian Objects from Caesarea Maritima”. ISMA 1, pp. 21-32. Patrich, J. 2003a. “Caesarea: the Palace of the Roman Procurator and the Byzantine Governor, a Storage Complex and the Starting Stalls at the Herodian Stadium”. Qadmoniot 35 (124), pp. 66-86 (Hebrew).

Roman Period”. ÉT 3, pp. 115-131. Maldre, L. 2001. “Bone and Antler Artefacts from Otepaa Hill-Fort”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 19-30. Manning, W.H. 1976. “Blacksmithing”. In: D. Strong and D. Brown (eds.). Roman Crafts. London, pp. 143153. Manning, W.H. 1985. Catalogue of the Romano-British Iron Tools, Fittings and Weapons in the British Museum. London. Marangou, L. 1976. Benaki Museum, Athens. Bone Carvings from Egypt, 1. Graeco-Roman Period. Tübingen. Marshall, D.N. 1982. “Jericho Bone Tools and Objects”. In: K.M. Kenyon and T.A. Holland. Excavations at Jericho IV. London, pp. 570-622. Martin Nagy, R. et al. (eds.). 1996. Sepphoris in Galilee, Crosscurrents of Culture. Vinona Lake. Maskell, A. 1966. Ivories. Rutland and Tokyo. Matheson, S.B. 1992. “The Tenth Season at DuraEuropos 1936-1937”. Syria 69, pp. 121-140. Mazar (Maizler), B. 1973. Beth She‘arim, Report on the Excavations During 1936-1940, Vol. I: Catacombs 14. Jerusalem. McC.Adams, R. 1970. “Tell Abu Sarifa, A SassanianIslamic Ceramic Sequence from South Central Iraq”. Ars Orientalis 8, pp. 87-119. McCarthy, F.D. 1957. Australia’s Aborigines, Their Life and Culture. Melbourne. McNicoll, A., Smith, R.H. and Hennessy, B. 1982. Pella in Jordan 1. Canberra. McWhirr, A. 1982. Roman Crafts and Industries (Shire Archaeology Series 24). Haverfordwest. Megaw, J.V.S. 1968. “The Earliest Musical Instruments in Europe”. Archaeology 21, pp. 124-132. Merlin, M.D. 1984. On the Trail of the Ancient Opium Poppy. London and Toronto. Meshorer, Y. 1982. Ancient Jewish Coinage II: Herod the Great through Bar Cochba. New York. Meurers-Balke, J. and Lönnecken, C. 1984. “Zu Schutzgeräten bei der Getreideernte mit der Sichel”. Tools & Trade V\1, pp. 27-42. Meyers, C.L. and Hoglund, K.G. 1998. “Sepphoris (Sippori), 1997”. IEJ 48, pp. 278-281. Meyers, E.M., Kraabel, A.T. and Strange, T.F. 1976. Ancient Synagogue Excavations at Khirbet Shema’, Upper Galilee, Israel 1970-1972 (AASOR Vol. 42). Durham. Meyers, E.M., Strange, J.F. and Meyers, C.L. 1981. Excavations at Ancient Meiron, Upper Galilee, Israel 1971-72, 1974-75, 1977. Cambridge, Mass. Milne, J.S. 1976. Surgical Instruments in Greek and Roman Times. Chicago. Miró Alaix, C. 2001. “Los íberos en el Pla de Barcelona: el poblado ibérico de Montjuic”. In: J. Beltrán de Heredia Bercero et al. De Barcino a Barcinona (siglos I-VII), Los restos arqueológicos de la plaza del Rey de Barcelona. Barcelona, pp. 112-139. Mumcuoglu, K.Y. and Zias, J. 1989. “How the Ancients 176

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Patrich, J. 2003b. “Herod’s Hippodrome\Stadium at Caesarea in the Context of Greek and Roman Contests and Spectacles”. In: Y. Ben-Arieh and E. Reiner (eds.). Studies in the History of Eretz Israel Presented to Yehuda Ben Porat. Jerusalem, pp. 119167 (Hebrew). Pearson, J.D. 1958. Index Islamicus 1906-1955. Cambridge. Peleg, M. and Reich, R. 1992. “Excavations of a Segment of the Byzantine City Wall of Caesarea Maritima”. ‘Atiqot XXI, pp. 137-170. Petković, S. 1995. The Roman Items of Bone and Antler from the Territory of Upper Moesia (Archaeological Institute, Belgrade Monographies 28). Belgrad. Petrie, W.M.F. 1927. Objects of Daily Use. London. Petrie, F. 1930. Beth-Pelet I (Tell Fara). London. Pézard, M. 1922. “Mission archéologique à Tell Nebi Mend (1921). Rapport préliminaire”. Syria 3, pp. 89115. Piccirillo, M. and Alliata, E. 1994. Umm al-Rasas Mayfa’ah I, Gli scavi del Complesso Di Santo Stefano. Jerusalem. Pinder-Wilson, R. 1960. “‘Adj, Ivory”. The Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition I, pp. 200-203. Platt, E.E. 1978. “Bone Pendants”. BA 41, pp. 23-28. Ploug, G. 1985. Hama, Fouilles et Recherches 19311938, 3: The Graeco-Roman Town. Copenhague. Ploug, G. and Oldenburg, E. 1969. “Les objets en métal sauf les monnaies”. In: G. Ploug et al. Hama, Fouilles et Recherches 1931-1938, IV\3: Les petits objets médiévaux sauf les verries et poteries. Copenhague, pp. 13-88. Polin, C.C.J. 1954. Music of the Ancient Near East. New York. Poplin, F. 1974. “Deux cas particuliers de débitage par usure”. In: H. Camps-Fabrer. Premier colloque international sur l’industrie de l’os dans la préhistoire, Abbaye de Sénanque avril 1974, extraits. Université de Province, pp. 85-92. Poplin, F. 1977. “Utilisation des cavités naturelles osseuses et dentaires”. Méthodologie appliquée à l’industrie de l’os préhistorique (Coll. Int. du C.N.R.S. 568). Abbaye de Sénanque, 1976, pp. 111118. Poplin, F. 1984. “Contribution ostéo-archéologique à la connaissance des astragales de l’Antre corycien”. L’Antre corycien II (Bulletin de Correspondance hellénique supplément IX). Athènes, pp. 381-393. Porat, Y. 2000. “Caesarea – 1994-1999”. Hadashot Arkheologiyot, Excavations and Surveys in Israel 112, pp. 34*-40*. Porath, N. and Ilani, S. 1993. “Pigments Derived from Minerals”. In: C. Sorek and E. Ayalon (eds.). Colors from Nature, Natural Colors in Ancient Times. Tel Aviv, pp. 9*-12*. Porath, Y. 1995a. “Herod’s “Amphitheatre” at Caesarea: A Multipurpose Entertainment Building”. The Roman and Byzantine Near East: Some Recent Archaeological Research (JRA, Supplementary Series

Number 14). Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 15-27. Porath, Y. 1995b. “Recycling of Urban Waste in Ancient Times: An Example from the Excavations at Caesarea”. In: O. Rimon, Caesarea – a Mercantile City by the Sea. Haifa, pp. 18*-21*. Porath, Y. 2003. “Theatre, Racing and Athletic Installations in Caesarea”. Qadmoniot 36 (125), pp. 25-42 (Hebrew). Porath, Y., Dar, S. and Applebaum, S. 1985. The History and Archaeology of Emek-Hefer. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Porath, Y., Raban, A. and Patrich, J. 1998. “The Caesarea Excavation Project – March 1992-June 1994”. Excavations and Surveys in Israel 17, pp. 39-79. Poulain, T. 1976. L’étude des ossements animaux et son apport à l’archéologie, Centre de Recherches sur les Techniques gréco-romaines, no 6. Dijon. Poulain, T. and Poulain, P. 1978. “Introduction”. In: M.Ch. Sautot. Le Cycle de la Matière – L’Os. Dijon, pp. 7-14. Pringle, D. 1986. The Red Tower (al-Burj al-Ahmar). London. Provenzano, N. 2001. “Worked Bone Assemblages from Northern Italian Terramares: A Technological Approach”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 93-109. Putman, J.J. 1988. “The Search for Modern Humans”. NG 174\4, pp. 439-477. Qimron, E. and Strugnell, J. 1994. Qumran Cave 4, V, Miqsat Ma’ase Ha-Torah (DJD 10). Oxford. Queyrel, F. 1997. “Le motif des quatre osselets sur un jas d’ancre du Musée d’Apollonia de Cyrénaique”. Libya Antiqua New Series 3, pp. 113-117. Raban, A. 1989. The Harbours of Caesarea Maritima Vol. I: The Site and the Excavations (BAR IS 491). Oxford. Raban, A. et al. 1999. “The Underwater Excavations”. In: Holum, Raban and Patrich 1999, pp. 152-168. Raban, A. and Holum, K.G. (eds.). 1996. Caesarea Maritima, A Retrospective after Two Millenia (Studies in Near Eastern Archaeology and Civilization [DMOA] Vol. 21). Leiden. Rabinovich, R. and Nadel, D. 1994-5. “Bone Tools from Ohalo II - A Morphological and Functional Study”. JIPS 26, pp. 32-63. Rahmani, L.Y. 1960a. “Roman Tombs in Shmuel haNavi Street, Jerusalem”. IEJ 10, pp. 140-148. Rahmani, L.Y. 1960b. “The Maon Synagogue – The Small Finds”. Eretz Israel 6, pp. 82-85 (Hebrew). Rahmani, L.Y. 1964. “Mirror-Plaques from a FifthCentury A.D. Tomb”. IEJ 14, pp. 50-60. Rahmani, L.Y. 1981a. “A Roman Patera from Lajjun”. IEJ 31, pp. 190-196. Rahmani, L.Y. 1981b. “Finds from a Six to Seventh Centuries Site near Gaza. I. The Toys”. IEJ 31, pp. 72-80. Rahmani, L.Y. 1988. “Chip-Carving in Palestine”. IEJ 38, pp. 59-75. Rediscovering Pompeii. Roma 1992. Reece, R. 1983. “Late Antiquity”. In: M. Henig (ed.). A 177

BIBLIOGRAPHY Handbook of Roman Art, A Survey of the Visual Arts of the Roman World. Oxford, pp. 234-248. Reed, W.L. 1964. The Excavations at Dibon (Dhibân) in Moab Part II: The Second Campaign, 1952 (AASOR 36-37). Cambridge, Mass. Reese, D.S. 1985. “The Kition Astragali”. In: V. Karageorghis. Excavations at Kition V. The PrePhoenician Levels, Part 2. Nicosia, pp. 382-391. Reese, D.S. 1987. “A Bone Assemblage at Corinth of the Second Century after Christ”. Hesperia 56, pp. 255-274. Reisner, G.A., Fisher, C.S. and Lyon, D.G. 1924. Harvard Excavations at Samaria 1908-1910. Cambridge, Mass. Reynaud, P. 1998. “Le petit mobilier”. In: M. Bonifay, M.-B Carre and Y. Rigor. Fouilles à Marseille, Les mobiliers (1er-VIIe siècles ap. J.-C.) (Études Massaliètes 5). Paris, pp. 249-251. Reynolds, J. and Tannenbaum, R. 1987. Jews and Godfearers at Aphrodisias (Cambridge Philological Society Supplementary Volume 12). Cambridge. Richter, G.M.A. 1926. Ancient Furniture, A History of Greek, Etruscan and Roman Furniture. Oxford. Rimon, O. 1995. Caesarea – a Mercantile City by the Sea. Haifa. Rimon, O. 1997. “Medical Instruments from the Roman Period”. In: O. Rimon. Illness and Healing in Ancient Times. Haifa, pp. 62*-71*. Rimon, O. 1999. The Richness of Islamic Caesarea. Haifa. Ringel, J. 1975. Césarée de Palestine: étude historique et archéologique. Paris. Ripoll López, G. 2001. “Objetos de indumentaria personal en Barcino (siglos IV-VII)”. In: J. Beltrán de Heredia Bercero et al. De Barcino a Barcinona (siglos I-VII), Los restos arqueológicos de la plaza del Rey de Barcelona. Barcelona, pp. 214-240. Robertson, D.S. 1929. Greek and Roman Architecture. Cambridge (repr. 1983). Robinson, D.M. 1941. Excavations at Olynthus Part 10, Metal and Minor Miscellaneus Finds. Baltimore. Rodziewicz, E. 1969a. “Acanthus-Base Alexandrian Form of Architectural Decoration at Ptolemaic and Roman Period”. ÉT 3, pp. 115-131. Rodziewicz, E. 1969b. “Bone Carvings Discovered at Kom el-Dikka, Alexandria, in 1967”. ÉT 3, pp. 147152. Rodziewicz, E. 1978. “Reliefs figurés en os des fouilles à Kôm el-Dikka”. ÉT 10, pp. 317-336. Rodziewicz, E. 1995. “On Stylistical and Technical Components of the Roman Colored Bone Appliques from Egypt”. In: N. Bonacasa et al. (eds.). Alessandria e il Mondo Ellenistico-Romano, I Centenario del Museo Greco-Romano. Atti del Congresso internazionalle Italo-Egiziano. Roma, pp. 405-411. Rodziewicz, E. 1998. “Archaeological Evidence of Bone and Ivory Carvings in Alexandria”. In: J.-Y. Empereur (ed.). Commerce et artisanat dans

l’Alexandrie hellénistique et romaine (Actes du Colloque d’Athènes). Paris, pp. 135-158. Rodziewicz, M. 1976. “Un quartier d’habitation grécoromain à Kôm el-Dikka (Sondage R, 1970-1973)”. ÉT 9, pp. 169-210. Rodziewicz, M. 1979a. “Nouvelles donées sur le quartier de Kopron à Alexandrie”. ÉT 11, pp. 79-89. Rodziewicz, M. 1979b. “Thermes romains près de la Gare Centrale d’Alexandrie”. ÉT 11, pp. 107-138. Rodziewicz, M. 1984. Alexandrie 3. Varsovie. Roll, I. 1996. “Roman Roads to Caesarea Maritima”. In: A. Raban and K.G. Holum (eds.). Caesarea Maritima, A Retrospective after Two Millenia. Leiden, pp. 549-558. Roll, I. and Ayalon, E. 1987. “The Market Street at Apollonia-Arsuf”. BASOR 267, pp. 61-76. Roll, I. and Ayalon, E. 1989. Apollonia and Southern Sharon, Model of a Coastal City and its Hinterland. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Rosenberg, S. (ed.). 1999. The Holy Land Knights, The Crusader Jerusalem Kingdom. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Rosenthal, R. 1976. “Late Roman and Byzantine Bone Carvings from Palestine”. IEJ 26, pp. 96-193. Rosenthal-Heginbottom, R. 1997. “Small Finds from the Excavations (1958-61)”. In: A. Negev (ed.). The Architecture of Oboda, Final Report (Qedem 36). Jerusalem, pp. 193-208. Rostovtzew, M. 1905. “Interprétation des tessères en os”. Revue archéologique 5, pp. 110-124. Roth, H. and Wamerr, E. 1984. Essen im Frühmittelalter Archäologie und Kunst. Sigmaringen. Russel, J. 2000. “Household Furnishings”. In: C. Kondoleon. Antioch, The Lost Ancient City. Princeton, pp. 79-89. Rutschowscaya, M.-H. 1986. Catalogue des bois de l’Égypte copte. Paris. Rutschowscaya, M.-H. and Bénazeth, D. 2000. “Aspects de l’art copte”. In: L’Art copte en Égypte, 2000 ans de christianisme. Paris, pp. 146-227. Sadan, J. 1976. Le mobilier au Proche Orient Medieval. Leiden. Sadek-Kooros, H. 1972. “Primitive Bone Fracturing: A Method of Research”. American Antiquity 37, pp. 369-381. Safrai, Z. 1994. The Economy of Roman Palestine. London and New York. Salaman, R.A. 1986. Dictionary of Leather-Working Tools, c. 1700-1950 and the Tools of Allied Trades. London and Sydney. Salaman, R.A. 1997. Dictionary of Woodworking Tools c. 1700-1970 and Tools of Allied Trades. Mendham N.J. (repr.). Saller, S.J. 1941. The Memorial of Moses on Mount Nebo. Jerusalem. Salza Prina Ricotti, E. 1995. Giochi e giocattoli (Vita e costumi dei Romani antichi 18). Roma. Saranovic-Svetec, V. 1980. “A Study of the Ancient Bone-Cutting and Carving Craft on the Territory of South Pannonia with Special Reference to Syrmium”. 178

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Y. Bordowitz and A. Faust (eds.). Technology, Labour and Industry in the Land of Israel, Conference Abstracts, Bar-Ilan University, pp. 6-11 (Hebrew). Smith, C.R. 1859. Illustrations of Roman London. London. Smith, R.H. 1973. Pella of the Decapolis I. The 1967 Season of the College of Wooster Expedition to Pella. London. Smith, R.H. and Day, L.P. 1989. Pella of the Decapolis 2. Final Report on the College of Wooster Excavations in Area IX, The Civic Complex, 19791985. Wooster. Smithline, H. 1997. “Three Burial Caves from the Roman Period in Asherat”. ‘Atiqot XXXIII, pp. 47-59 (Hebrew). Soren, D. 1988. “The Day the World Ended at Kourion”. NG 174\1, pp. 30-53. Sperber, D. 1993. Material Culture in Eretz-Israel during the Talmudic Period. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Spitzers, T.A. 1997. “Late Medieval Bone Production: Socio-Economic Aspects Based on Material from Constance, Germany”. Anthropozoologica 25-26, pp. 157-164. St. Claire, A. 1995-1996. “Women in Context: Eight Statuettes from the Roman Period”. Muse 29-30, pp. 30-49. St. Clair, A. 1996. “Evidence for Late Antique Bone and Ivory Carving on the Northeast Slope of the Palatine: The Palatine East Excavation”. DOP 50, pp. 369-374. St. Clair, A. and McLachlan, E.P. (eds.). 1989. The Carver’s Art: Medieval Sculpture in Ivory, Bone, and Horn. New Brunswick. Stager, L.E. 1991. Ashkelon discovered, From Canaanites and Philistines to Romans and Moslems. Washington D.C. Stancheva, M. 2003. “Some Remarks on Worked Bone Technology in the Middle Ages”. Poster Presented at the 4th International Meeting of the ICAZ Worked Bone Research Group, Tallin, Estonia, 26th-31st of August 2003. Tallin. Steele, D. 2002. “Non-Dietary Animal-Based Industry”. In: G.W. Clarke et al. Jebel Khalid on the Euphrates, Report on Excavations 1986-1996, Vol. 1. Sydney, pp. 143-144. Stemmer, K. 2001. In den Gärten der Aphrodite, herausgegeben von Klaus Stemmer. Berlin. Stephens Crawford, J. 1990. The Byzantine Shops at Sardis (Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, Monograph 90). Cambridge, Mass. and London. Stern, E. 1994. Dor, Ruler of the Seas. Jerusalem. Stern, E.J. 1997. “Burial Caves at Kisra”. ‘Atiqot XXXIII, pp. 103-135 (Hebrew). Stern, H. 1954. “Quelque oeuvres sculptées en bois, os et ivoire de style omeyyade”. Ars Orientalis 1, pp. 119131. Stewart, H. 1973. Artifacts of the Northwest Coast Indians. Ontario. Stillwell, R. (ed.). 1938. Antioch on-the-Orontes II, The

South Pannonia with Special Reference to Syrmium”. Arxeologija 26, pp. 121-132 (Russian, with English summary). Sautot, M.-C. 1978. Le Cycle de la Matière – L’Os. Dijon. Scanlon, G.T. 1968. “Ancillary Dating Materials from Fustat”. Ars Orientalis 7, pp. 1-17. Scanlon, G.T. 1974. “Fustat Expedition: Preliminary Report 1968”. JARCE 11, pp. 81-91. Scanlon, G.T. 1981. “Fustat Expedition: Preliminary Report, 1972, Part I”. JARCE 18, pp. 57-84. Scanlon, G.T. 1982. “Fustat Expedition: Preliminary Report, 1972, Part II”. JARCE 19, pp. 119-129. Schmid, E. 1980. “Beinerne Spielwuerfel von Vindonissa”. Gesellschaft Pro Vindonissa, Jahresbericht 1978. Brugg, pp. 54-81. Schur, N. 1998. “The History of Shell and Souvenirs Industry in Bethlehem”. In: G. Barkay and E. Schiller (eds.). Bethlehem Ephrata (Ariel 128-129). Jerusalem, pp. 41-48 (Hebrew). Sebbane, M. 1999. “Board Games”. In: S. Rosenberg (ed.). The Holy Land Knights, The Crusader Jerusalem Kingdom. Jerusalem, pp. 251-255 (Hebrew). Sebbane, M. 2001. “Board Games from Canaaan in the Early and Intermediate Bronze Age and the Origin of the Egyptian Senet Game”. Tel Aviv 28, pp. 213-230. Seigne, J. and Morin, F. 1986. “Travaux de Restauration”. In: F. Zayadine (ed.). Jerash Archaeological Project 1981-1983. Amman, pp. 83105. Sellers, O.R. 1933. The Citadel of Beth-Zur. Philadelphia. Sellers, O.R. and Baramki, D.C. 1953. A RomanByzantine Burial Cave in Northern Palestine (BASOR Supplementary Studies Nos. 15-16). New Haven. Semenov, S.A. 1964. Prehistoric Technology (trans. M.W. Thompson). London. Shahin, B. 1998. “Bone-Carvings with Floral Decorations from Roman Egypt”. In: N. Bonacasa et al. (eds.). L’Egitto in Italia dall’antichità al mediovo. Atti del III Congresso Internazionale Italo-Egiziano. Roma, pp. 371-376. Shamir, O. and Baginski, A. 1998. “Research of Ancient Textiles Discovered in Israel”. Qadmoniot 31 (115), pp. 53-62 (Hebrew). Sheffer, A. and Druks, A. 2000. “A Bowl from Acre Depicting a Woman Spinning”. Qadmoniot 33 (119), pp. 63-65 (Hebrew). Sidi, N. 2000. “Roman and Byzantine Small Objects”. In: Y. Hirschfeld. Ramat Hanadiv Excavations. Jerusalem, pp. 177-186. Siegelmann, A. In preparation. “The Bone Artifacts from Horvat Castra” (Hebrew). Sion, O. 1997. “Khirbet Abu Suwwana”. ‘Atiqot XXXII, pp. 183-194 (Hebrew). Sitri, Y. 2001. “Wooden Combs of the Roman Period from Sites in the Negev and the Judean Desert”. In: 179

BIBLIOGRAPHY Uscatescu, A. and Martín-Bueno, M. 1997. “The Macellum of Gerasa (Jerash, Jordan): from a Market Place to an Industrial Area”. BASOR 307, pp. 67-88. Uzel, I. 1999. “Les instruments médicaux et chirurgicaux conservé au Musée d’Ephèsus”. In: B. Brandt and K.R. Krierer (eds.). 100 Jahre Oesterreichische Forschungen in Ephesos, Akten des Symposions Wien 1995. Wien, pp. 211-214. van Cammann, S.R. 1963. “Ivory and Bone Carving”. Encyclopedia of World Art Vol. 8, col. 757-763. van Ingen, W. 1939. Figurines from Seleucia on the Tigris (University of Michigan Studies, Humanities Series 45). Ann Arbor and London. Van Vilsteren, V.T. 1987. Het Benen Tijdperk, Gebruiksvoorwerpen van been, gewei, hoorn en ivoor 10.000 jaar geleden tot heden. Haag. Vann, R.L. 1989. “Man-Made Features: 6. Bosnian Caesarea”. In: A. Raban, The Harbours of Caesarea Maritima Vol. I: The Site and the Excavations (BAR IS 491). Oxford, pp. 42-44. Vann, R.L. (ed.). 1992. Caesarea Papers, Straton’s Tower, Herod’s Harbour, and Roman and Byzantine Caesarea (JRA Supplemantary Series No. 5). Ann Arbor. Verhagen, M. 1993. “Bone and Antler Artefacts”. In: R.M. van Dierendonck, D.P. Hallewas, and K.E. Waugh (eds.). The Valkenburg Excavations 19851988. Amersfoort. Vermeule, E. 1989, “Carved Bones from Corinth”. In: A. Leonard, Jr. and B.B. Williams (eds.). Essays in Ancient Civilization Presented to Helene J. Kantor. Chicago, pp. 271-286. de Villard, U.M. 1938. Monumenti dell’arte musulmana in Italia I. Roma. Vitto, F. and Edelstein, G. 1974. “The Mausoleum at Gush-Halav”. Qadmoniot 7 (25-26), pp. 49-55 (Hebrew). Volbach, W.F. 1957. Elfenbeinarbeiten der spätantike und der Frühen mittelalters. Mainz. Walker, S. and Bierbrier, M. 1997. Ancient Faces, Mummy Portraits from Roman Egypt (A Catalogue of Roman Portraits in the British Museum 4). London. Wangh, H. and Goodburn, R. 1972. “The Non-ferrous Objects”. In: S. Frere, Verulamium Excavations 1 (Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No. 28). Oxford, pp. 115-162. Wapnish, P. 1991. “Beauty & Utility in Bone, New Light on Bone Crafting”. In: L.E. Stager, Ashkelon Discovered, From Canaanites and Philistines to Romans and Moslems. Washington, pp. 58-62. Wapnish, P. 1997. “Bone, Ivory and Shell – Typology and Technology”. In: E.M. Meyers (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East I.17, pp. 335-340. Wapnish-Hesse, P. 1999. “Bone Uses, Typology and Technology”. In: E. Ayalon and C. Sorek. Bare Bones, Ancient Artifacts from Animal Bones. Tel Aviv, pp. 14-17 (Hebrew, trans. By E. Ayalon from Wapnish 1997).

Excavations 1933-1936. Princeton. Stordeur, D. 1980. Objets en Os, historiques et actuels. Lyon. Strzygowski, J. 1904. Catalogue général des Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: Koptische Kunst. Vienne. Sussman, C. 1988. A Microscopic Analysis of Use-Wear and Polish Formation on Experimental Quartz Tools (BAR IS 395). Oxford, pp. 78-100. Sussman, V. 1982. “A Tomb at Nahf”. ‘Atiqot 8, pp. 3132 (Hebrew). Sussman, V. 1999. “Architectural Elements in the Design of Oil Lamps (“A House for Light”). ÉT 18, pp. 245264. Sussman, V. 2002a. “An IAA Sarcophagus Adorned with Personal Objects”. IEJ 52, pp. 64-80. Sussman, V. 2002b. “Samaritan Oil Lamps”. In: E. Stern and H. Eshel (eds.). The Samaritans. Jerusalem, pp. 339-371 (Hebrew). Tamla, U. and Maldre, L. 2001. “Artefacts of Bone, Antler and Canine Teeth Among the Archaeological Finds from the Hill-fort of Varbola”. In: Choyke and Bartosiewicz 2001, pp. 371-381. Tardy. 1977. Les Ivoires par Tardy, 12. Paris. Tell, S.K. 1969. “New Discoveries and Researches in Jordan, 1968-69”. ADAJ 14, pp. 32-34 (Arabic). Thompson, H.O. 1969. “Area C”. In: R.S. Boraas and S.H. Horn. Heshbon 1968, The First Campaign at Tell Hesbân, A Preliminary Report (Andrews University Monographs Vol. II). Berrien Springs, Michigan, pp. 127-142. Torgë, H. 2003. “Lod”. Hadashot Arkheologiyot, Excavations and Surveys in Israel 115, p. 44*. Török, L. 1993. Coptic Antiquities I (Monumenta Antiquitatis Extra Fines Hungariae Reperta Vol. II). Roma. Toynbee, J.M.C. 1971. Death and Burial in the Roman World. London and Southhampton. Tsafrir, Y., Di Segni, L. and Green, J. 1994. Tabula Imperii Romani, Iudaea Palaestina, Eretz Israel in the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Periods, Maps and Gazetteer. Jerusalem. Tsafrir, Y. and Foerster, G. 1992. “From Byzantine Scythopolis to Arab Baysan – Changing Urban Concepts”. Cathedra 64, pp. 3-30 (Hebrew). Tsafrir, Y. and Foerster, G. 1997. “Urbanism at Scythopolis – Bet Shean in the Fourth-Seventh Centuries”. DOP 51, pp. 85-146. Turquety-Pariset, F. 1982. “Fouilles de la municipalité de Beyrouth (1977): Les objets”. Syria 59, pp. 27-76. Tushingham, A.D. 1985. Excavations in Jerusalem 19611967, Vol. 1. Toronto. Tzaferis, V. 1982. “A Tomb near Metulla”. ‘Atiqot 8, pp. 26-30 (Hebrew). Tzaferis, V. 1986. “The Ancient Cemetary of AcoPtolemais”. In: M. Yedaya (ed.). The Western Galilee Antiquities. Tel Aviv, pp. 266-280 (Hebrew). Tzaferis, V. et al. 1989. Excavations at Capernaum 1, 1978-1982. Winona Lake. 180

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Ward-Perkins, B. 2001. “Specialisation, Trade, and Prosperity: an Overview of the Economy of the Late Antique Eastern Mediterranean”. In: Kingsley and Decker 2001, pp. 167-178. Ward-Perkins, J. and Claridge, A. 1978. Pompeii AD 79. New York. Weitzmann, K. 1951. Greek Mythology in Byzantine Art. Princeton. Weitzmann, K. 1972. Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Mediaeval Antiquities in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Vol. 3, Ivories and Steatites. Washington D.C. Weitzmann, K. (ed.). 1979. Age of Spirituality, Late Antique and Early Christian Art, Third to Seventh Century. New York. Weitzmann, K. 1980. Byzantine Book Illumination and Ivories. London. Weitzmann, K. 1981. Classical Heritage in Byzantine and Near Eastern Art. London. Werner, P. 1978. Life in Rome in Ancient Times. Geneve. Whitcomb, D.S. 1979. “Small Objects”. In: D.S. Whitcomb and J.H. Johnson. Quseir al-Qadim 1978, Preliminary Report. Cairo, pp. 196-210. Whitcomb, D. 1995. Ayla, Art and Industry in the Islamic Port of Aqaba. Chicago. Whiteford, A.H. 1973. North American Indian Arts. New York. Wild, J.-P. 1970. “Button and Loop Fasteners in the Roman Provinces”. Britannia 1, pp. 137-155. Wild, J.-P. 1976. “Textiles”. In: D. Strong and D. Brown (eds.). Roman Crafts. London, pp. 167-177. Williamson, P. 1982. An Introduction to Medieval Ivory

Carvings. London. Wilson, Ch.W. 1880. Picturesque Palestine, Sinai and Egypt, I-V. London. Winnett, F.V. 1964. The Excavations at Dibon (Dhibân) in Moab Part I: The First Campaign, 1950-1951 (AASOR 36-37). Cambridge, Mass., pp. 1-30. Woolley, C.L. and Randall-Maciver, D. 1910. Karanog, The Romano-Nubian Cemetery. Philadelphia. Wulff, H.E. 1966. The Traditional Crafts of Persia. Cambridge Mass. Yadin, Y. 1963. The Finds from the Bar Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters. Jerusalem. Yadin, Y. 1966. Masada, Herod’s Fortress and the Zealots’ Last Stand. New York. Yeivin, S. 1937. “Historical and Archaeological Notes”. In: L. Waterman. Preliminary Report of the University of Michigan Excavations at Sepphoris, Palestine, in 1931. Ann Arbor, pp. 17-34. Yevin, Z. and Finkielsztejn, G. 1999. Castra at the Foot of Mount Carmel. Haifa. Zacharia, S. 2002. Jewish Merchants and Craftsmen in the Old City of Jerusalem in the Past. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Zarzecki-Peleg, A. 1992. “Decorated Animal Bones of the Third Millennium BCE from Palestine-Syria”. Eretz-Israel 23, pp. 55-64 (Hebrew). Zevulun, U. and Olenik, Y. 1978. Function and Design in the Talmudic Period. Tel Aviv. Ziffer, I. 1996. Islamic Metalwork. Tel Aviv. Zori, N. 1977. The Land of Issachar, Archaeological Survey. Jerusalem (Hebrew).

181

INDEX* * The Index does not include words and names which appear innumerable times in the text, such as Caesarea; raw materials (bone, ivory, antler, horn); sides (top, bottom/base, etc.); tools/implements, smooth/rough, etc. (throughout the whole book); authors, sites and periods (in the morphological analogies in Chapters IV-V and in the references). Abacus 92, 94 Aborigin 132 Abrade, abrasion 93, 96 Acanthus 93-94, 96, 103 Acid 144 Acinus 94 Acron 121 Acroterium 86, 94 Adan 159 Adaptor 13 Administrative 1, 36, 69 Adze 111, 135, 142, 144, 165 Aedicula 86 Aesthetic 78 Africa/n 6, 9, 117, 163 Agent 143 Agriculture 157 Airplane 89 Ajouré 42, 69, 88-89, 100-101, 102-103, 105, 110, 113, 115, 117, 126, 134, 136, 143, 146, 152-153, 154-155, 158, 164-165 Al-Basra 158 Alaska 18, 23 Alésia 131, 157-158 Alexandria 3, 80, 88-89, 92-93, 102, 117, 131, 145, 149150, 152-154, 157, 159, 164-165 Alexandria Museum 91 Alföldi 76 Allan J. 41, 87-89, 102, 125 Almond 49 Altar 89, 95 America 4, 10, 31, 39 Amit 83 Amorai Stark S. 65, 76, 80, 83, 86-87, 90-92, 107 Amphitheater 1, 157 Amphora 51, 63, 72, 78 Amulet 3, 63, 65-66, 67, 76, 86 Anchore, anchorage 1, 7 Animal 5, 20, 58, 71, 72, 86-87, 90, 118, 121, 132, 140141, 145-147, 154, 156, 158, 161, 163-164 Ankle 81, 90-91 Antioch 73, 90 Anvil 139 Aphrodisias 158 Aphrodite (Pudica, Anadyomene) 57, 64, 81, 88, 91 Apollonia 45, 57, 156, 164 Applicator, apply 18, 24, 36, 47, 50-51, 126 Aqaba 117 Aqueduct 1 Arab/ic 4, 5, 9, 11, 69, 71-73, 80-81, 88-89, 95, 99, 102, 117, 125, 146, 151-159, 165 Arabesque 96 Arc, arcade 6, 125

Arch/ed 26, 77, 83, 85, 89-90, 93, 102, 119, 124-125, 134, 144 Archaezoologist 156 Architecture/al 35, 86, 88-89, 92-95, 99, 123, 158 Architrave 86, 94-95, 97, 123 Arm 17, 31-32, 43, 51, 64-66, 80-84, 92, 98-101, 112, 138 Armpit 82 Army 4, 37, 117, 153 Arnon Yael 82, 158 Arrow 121 Art, artist 4, 9, 28, 69, 86-87, 88-89, 99, 117, 131, 147, 159, 163-164 Articulated 80-81, 83-85, 106, 135, 146 Artisan 3-7, 10-11, 13, 15, 28, 41, 46- 49, 51-53, 64, 72, 75, 80, 85, 88, 99, 112-115, 117, 121-123, 131-133, 135146, 149-150, 152-155, 157-159, 163-165 Ash 134, 141, 145 Ashkelon 3, 7, 53, 69, 72, 88-89, 133, 140, 145-146, 148, 152, 158, 164-165 Ashlar 43 Asia 51 Assistant 89, 138 Astragalus 7, 60, 71-73, 94, 105, 153 Athena 92 Athens 82, 140 Attribute 63 Augusta Raurica 117, 157-158 Auriscalpa 50 Austria 24, 117 Autun 86, 157-158 Avi-Yonah 1, 131 Awl 7, 12, 19, 20, 34, 111, 136, 143 Axe 102, 114, 135, 141, 154 Axis 6, 76, 78, 86, 99, 105, 108, 112-113, 115, 135-136, 139-140, 150-151 Axle 31-33, 138 Baby 67-68 Babylonian Talmud 24, 46, 161 Bacchus 61 Bachante 92 Bag 23, 150 Bagdad 131 Ball 13-14, 17, 64, 104 Baluster/re 23, 43, 104, 159 Balustrade 104 Band 13, 20-23, 40- 42, 48, 78, 87, 90, 92-95, 97, 100, 102, 113, 115, 119-120, 123-125, 152, 158 Barbier 4, 133, 138-142, 144 Barcelona 23 Bare 90-91 Barrel 56, 57-58, 65 Baruch 161 183

INDEX Basalt 139 Basilica 158 Basket 19, 90, 91-92, 115 Bath 1, 50, 56, 157 Bazaar 132, 138 Bead 11, 22-23, 28-29, 51, 58, 65-67, 89, 103, 105-107, 110, 112, 116, 119, 122, 125, 128, 131, 137, 141, 145, 151, 153, 165 Bead-and-reels 51, 60, 105 Beak 28, 98, 120 Béal 3, 141, 148 Beam 94 Beard 86 Beast 67, 164 Bed 10, 87, 91, 97, 103 Bedouin 35, 69-70, 136 Beginner 102, 105, 108, 113-115, 124, 126, 137, 152154, 164 Beit Nattif 91 Bell 77 Belly 83, 90-91 Belt 22-24, 30-32, 37, 43, 67, 82, 85-86, 107, 119 Belt divider 22, 23, 30 Ben Yosef S. 39 Benaki Museum 82 Bench 139 Bénédite 86 Berlin Museum 80 Besançon Museum 119 Beth-Shan 158 Bethlehem 39, 89, 132, 134, 141, 157 Bibars 1 Bible/biblical 3, 35 Binding 18, 88 Bird 27-28, 67, 69-70, 89, 98-99, 101-102, 115, 120 Bíró 3, 19-20, 30, 59, 72, 78, 86, 98, 103, 112, 123, 158 Black 16, 26, 72, 74, 139, 142 Blacksmith 140, 145, 157-158 Blade 10-11, 13-16, 20-21, 33, 38, 40, 42, 106-107, 118119, 133-136 Blank 5, 19, 42, 51, 54-56, 73-75, 104, 108-109, 110, 116-117, 125-126, 127-129, 131, 134, 136, 138, 143, 145-146, 148-153, 155-156, 164-165 Blanket 51 Block/ed 41, 120, 138, 150 Blood vessel 5 Blue 142 Boar 14 Board 17, 58, 71-72, 76, 78, 139 Bobbin 14, 22-23, 31, 71 Bodkin 23, 31 Body 5, 13, 18, 23, 27-28, 31, 39, 46, 51, 63-66, 76-78, 80-81, 84-85, 90-91, 98, 103, 112-113, 120-121, 124125, 140, 146, 148, 155, 164 Boil/ing 6, 140-141 Book 18, 43, 65, 88, 96, 101, 140, 143, 152 Bosnian 1, 73, 79 Bottle 51-52, 60, 71, 73, 78, 128 Bow 26-27, 29, 42, 49, 131-132, 134, 136, 137-139, 142, 165

Bow-tie 66 Bowl 46-50, 94, 136, 138 Box 7, 10-11, 17, 25, 27, 39-44, 51, 58, 61, 66-67, 72, 74-78, 89-90, 95-96, 98, 100, 103-105, 107, 113, 117, 120, 124, 127, 129, 134, 136-139, 142, 144-145, 147, 164-165 Boy 90 Bracelet 51, 65, 67-68, 81, 84, 91, 122, 128 Branch 26, 95 Breasts 64, 81-84, 91 Bride 88 Bridge 69-70, 100, 129, 152, 154, 159, 164 Bridle 30 Brigetio Museum 59, 111 Bronze 16-17, 22-23, 30-33, 37, 39-40, 42-43, 47, 50-51, 54, 57, 64, 71, 73-74, 77, 79, 81, 86, 91, 103, 119, 143, 158 Bronze Age 3, 6, 23, 71, 117-118, 137 Brooch 22, 30-31, 34, 66 Brown 83 Brush 139 Buckle 22, 24, 31-32, 37, 107, 136 Budapest National Museum 123 Budapest University 86 Building 46, 69, 72-73, 79, 86, 88, 157-158, 163 Bull 1 Bullet 13 Burnish/ed/er 6, 18, 20-21, 35, 138-139, 143 Bush elephant 6 Bust 64-65, 86 Butcher/y/ing 6-7, 114, 132, 135, 140-141, 146, 154, 158, 163 Butt 118 Butterfly 89, 102 Buttocks 81 Button 7, 9, 22-30, 39, 41, 99, 106-107, 110, 116, 119120, 127-129, 136-138, 141, 145, 151, 153, 164-165 "By the user" 6, 18-19, 109, 139-140, 145, 148, 165 Byzantine 1-3, 9-10, 23, 43, 46, 69, 88, 92, 98, 131, 134135, 144-146, 148-149, 151-159, 161, 163-165 Cabinet 40 Caduceus 90 Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam 1, 18, 25, 30, 32, 41, 43, 47, 63, 81-82, 86, 92, 95, 99-100, 165 Cairo 46, 138 Cairo Museum 25, 28, 41, 48, 55, 57, 59-60, 63-64, 67, 77, 82-85, 90-93, 95-96, 99, 101, 104-105, 124 Cake 17 Calculus 78 Caliber 139 Camel 7, 80, 116, 140, 146-147, 152 Campana 141 Canada, Canadian 20, 51 Canal 5 Candelabra 87-88 Candlestick 11 Canellure 93 Canine 3, 5-6, 132, 142, 144 Capital 1, 17, 59, 61, 86, 89, 92, 93-94, 103, 146, 163 Capo-femuri 25 184

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Capreolus capreolus 156 Caput 7 Caravan 146 Carbon/ized 39 Carcass 146 Card 20 Cardboard 22, 136 Cardo 157 Carmel Mount/ain 134, 146, 156, 163 Carpalia 5 Carpenter 131-133, 135, 144, 158 Carthage 51, 89, 131, 145, 150, 157, 165 Cartilage 5 Carve/d, carving 3, 5-7, 10, 13-14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 25, 2829, 31, 35, 37, 39-40, 43-45, 48-49, 51-68, 70-72, 74-78, 81-97, 101, 103-108, 110-113, 115, 117-119, 121, 123129, 131-133, 135-145, 148-149, 151-156, 159, 163-164 Carved piece 69, 88-98, 106, 117, 123-124, 127-128, 135, 139, 142-143, 145, 147, 151, 157, 159, 165 Carver 131, 135 Casket 43, 88, 90, 93, 98, 104-105, 121, 123, 141 Castanet 65-66, 69-70, 98, 122, 127 Castra, Horvat 148 Catch 137 Cathedral 1 Cattle 7, 10-11, 18-19, 21, 30, 39, 41, 44, 65, 67, 70-75, 78-81, 83, 88, 91-93, 103-104, 108, 113-115, 140, 142, 145-147, 150, 152, 154, 158-159, 163-164 Caucasus 24 Cavity (cf. medullar cavity) 5, 6, 11-12, 16, 37, 39-42, 44, 66-67, 70, 72-74, 76-79, 83-87, 90, 95, 100, 103-108, 112-114, 120, 124-125, 136, 138, 143-144 Cedar 139 Cell 5 Cemetery 157 Center of Marine Studies 2 Center-bit 15, 32, 72, 75-77, 96, 99, 110, 112, 114, 116, 119, 131, 136-137, 143, 150, 153-154, 165 Ceramic 80 Cervidae 7 Chain 24, 51, 65, 67, 82 Chair 64, 95-96 Chalk 135 Channel 157 Cheek 83 Chess 73, 76, 78, 125 Chest 43-44, 46, 64-65, 81-86, 88, 92, 97, 100-102, 104, 108, 154 Chin 82-83, 85, 87 Chip 133, 135 Chisel 39-40, 42-44, 78, 103, 107, 109, 112-113, 118, 125, 134-135, 138, 142, 165 Chisel-compass 49, 137, 139, 165 Chop, chopper 36, 114, 121, 132, 135, 141-142 Choyke Alice 3, 19, 90, 148, 150 Christian/ity 1, 69, 80, 88, 120 Church 1, 88, 121, 157 Circle-and-dot 11, 16, 22, 26-28, 32, 40, 42-43, 46-49, 65-66, 70, 72-75, 78-82, 87, 97-98, 99-100, 107, 110, 112, 114, 119-120, 122, 124, 136-137, 142-143, 154

Cistern 157 Citrus 131 City 1, 4, 6, 37, 46, 69, 72, 80-81, 88, 94, 117, 133, 140, 142, 145-146, 148, 153-155, 157-159, 163-165 Clasp 68 Class 65 Classic/al 88, 99, 159 Clay 18, 20-21, 35, 59, 86, 91, 159 Cleaver 131, 135, 154, 165 Cloth/ing 18, 22-34, 51-52, 56, 66-67, 80-82, 85, 90, 103, 119, 141-142 Cloven (hoof) 14, 48 Cluster 95-96, 139 Clyster 23 Coast 1 Coat/ing 23, 59, 99, 139, 144, 150 Cochlear 46, 47, 49 Coffin 88, 95, 100 Coin 163 Colchester 52, 137 Collagen 5-6, 141 Collar 51-52, 56-65, 83, 112-113, 121-122, 151, 164 Cologne 69 Colony 1 Color 6, 16, 18, 26, 32, 37, 41, 47, 51-52, 56, 60, 63, 78, 83, 93, 139, 143 Column/ar 17, 35, 43, 51, 61, 86, 88-89, 92-93, 94-95, 119, 125, 151 Comb 28, 46-48, 64, 66, 90, 121, 127, 129, 131-134, 136, 140, 142, 144-145, 153, 158, 164-165 Commercial 36, 72, 157, 159, 163 Compacta 5, 7, 137 Compass 76, 137, 139 Compièrre 131 Composite comb 46-47, 66, 98-100, 109 Cone 5, 11, 27, 30, 35, 51, 53, 56, 60-61, 63-64, 76, 121, 149, 153, 155 Conservation 164 Constance 141 Constantine 88 Contain/er 23, 41, 66, 73, 78-79, 82-83, 86, 98 Contents 41 "Conveyor belt" 140 Cooking 47, 141, 146 Cope Carol 146, 156, 158 Copenhagen Museum 65 Copper 37, 47, 50-51, 143 Coptic 17, 25-28, 41, 47-48, 55, 57-60, 63-67, 70, 75, 77, 80, 82-85, 88-96, 99, 101, 103-105, 121, 123-125 Copy 71 Cord 106, 134, 136-138 Corinthian 93-94, 103 Cortical 72, 108, 149, 163 Cosmetic/s 18, 36, 39-40, 46-50, 54, 68, 73, 82-83, 86, 98, 106, 117, 120, 126, 149, 161 Cosmetic box 22, 27-30, 40-41, 47, 123, 126, 155 Couch 39-40, 44 Counter 7, 41, 72, 75, 116, 146 Cover 42-43, 64, 96, 101, 104, 148, 152 Cow 23, 141 185

INDEX Crack/ed 5-6, 13, 123, 141 Craft/man/ship 4-7, 14, 17, 24, 28, 46, 52, 115, 131-133, 136-145, 150, 154-155, 157-159, 163-165 Crimson 39 Criss-cross 119 Crook/ed 13 Cross/ed 29, 32, 43, 49, 58-59, 61, 64, 77, 81, 83-84, 91, 98, 100 Crotalum 69 Crouché 23 Cruciform 59 Crusader 1, 9, 69, 71-72, 145-146, 152, 154-155, 164-165 Crush/ing 13, 18, 126, 155, 163 Crown 86, 92, 94 Crystal 5 Cube 110, 153 Cubit 123 Cuffic 102 Cult 64, 90-91 Culture/al 69, 159, 163 Cup 13, 39, 97 Cupboard 141 Curtain 150 Customer 117, 133, 140, 163 Cut 20, 30, 34, 39, 42, 48, 53, 56, 58, 60-63, 69, 71-73, 75-78, 82, 91, 93, 98-101, 104-106, 109-112, 115-116, 120, 122, 126, 131, 133-135, 137-140, 142-144, 148-154 Cutler 3, 144, 159 Cylinder, cylindrical 5, 10-15, 22, 24-26, 30-31, 35, 3942, 44-45, 51-67, 70-74, 76-78, 82, 86, 88-89, 92, 103104, 106-114, 118-120, 122-123, 125, 127-128, 132, 139, 142-143, 147, 149-151, 154-155, 163 Cyprus 23 Dagger 30, 37-38, 40, 86, 107, 121, 125, 145, 150 Dalton 3 Dama mesopotamica 5, 66, 156 Damascus 46, 89, 132 Dance/ing, dancer 91-92, 125 Davidson 3 Dead 124 Decorate/d, decoration 7, 10-13, 16-19, 20, 22-32, 35, 3947, 49, 51-52, 56-57, 59, 61-63, 65-75, 77-79, 82-83, 8689, 91-108, 110-112, 116, 118-127, 132-135, 137-139, 142-145, 148, 150-154, 164 Defect 76, 125, 143 Deir-Hana 136 Delta 6, 76 Demeter 63 Denticulated/ion 21, 86, 123, 125 Denticulus 123 Dentine 6 Depression 12-16, 18, 24-27, 29-32, 37-39, 43, 46, 50, 63, 66, 70, 72, 74-76, 79, 87-88, 93, 95-96, 104-108, 111112, 118, 120-122, 125, 135, 143, 152 Deschler-Erb 3 Diamond 6, 53, 61 Diana 20 Diaphysis 10-13, 15, 17-21, 39-41, 45, 48, 51, 65, 67, 6981, 83-86, 88, 90-94, 97, 99, 103-105, 107-109, 111-115,

133, 135, 137-138, 140-142, 146, 148-149, 151, 153-154, 163 Didem 51 Die, dice 7, 39-40, 69, 71-74, 75, 108, 110, 112-113, 115116, 122, 127-128, 137, 143, 145-147, 149-150, 154-155, 163, 165 Dijon Museum 54-55, 67 Dimand 3 Diocletian 6, 96 Dionysos 89-90, 91-93 Disk 28-29, 41, 55, 59-60, 72-73, 75-76, 89, 112-113, 115-116, 122-123, 129, 137-138, 142, 145, 152-153, 154, 165 Distaff 18, 22, 35, 64, 67-68, 71, 80-81, 104, 126 Distal 115 Divider 23 Doctor 23, 40, 50 Dog 106, 144 Dolia (dolium) 23 Doll 7, 60, 66, 69, 78, 80-85, 106, 117, 133-134, 142, 145-146, 148, 154, 164 Dome/d 51, 57-58, 71, 119-120, 122 Domestic 69 Domino 71-73, 79 Donkey 69-70, 140, 146-147 Door 43-44, 94, 141 Dor, Tel 1, 148 Doric 92-93 Dorsal 10 Dos Pilas 131, 148 Dot 16, 28, 32, 70, 76, 119, 137, 142 Dotting wheel 17 Double button 37, 119, 128, 143 Double-point 19 Dove 99 Drain 157 Dray Yehoshua 14, 17-18, 21, 23-24, 27, 43-45, 58-59, 63, 66, 69-71, 76, 88, 105-107, 111-112, 122, 125, 133, 136, 142, 164 Drawer 17 Draw/ing knife 99, 108, 133, 139, 142, 165 Dress/ed, dressing 9, 46, 51, 53, 64 Drill/ed 10-13, 15-18, 22-23, 25-26, 29-30, 32, 37, 43-45, 58, 63, 65-67, 69-71, 79-80, 82-84, 86, 94-96, 98-101, 105-108, 110-111, 112, 115, 118-123, 125-126, 131, 133, 135-138, 142-143, 148-149, 151-155, 157, 164-165 Drill-bit 110, 136-137 Drop 49, 51, 52, 59-60, 62, 66, 102, 122, 158, 164 Dumbbell button 23, 30 Dumberton Oak 95, 105 Dump 131, 145, 157, 163 Dwelling 157, 164-165 Dye/ing 158 Dyptich 92, 117, 123, 165 Eagle 69, 136 Ear 47, 50, 81-83, 87, 90, 118 Ear probe/spoon 46-47, 50 Ear-ring 67 Early Arab – see Arab Ebony 79 186

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Eborarius/ii 117, 131, 159 Eborarii-citrarii 131, 159 Echinus 92 Ecology/ical 141, 146 Economy 158 Egg 46, 64 Egypt, Egyptian 6, 22, 41, 63, 69-70, 73, 80-81, 88-91, 93, 95-96, 117, 132, 137, 159 Ein Dor Museum 31, 48 Elastic/ity 5 Elbow 85, 91 Elephant 5-6, 117-118, 120, 144 'Eleq, Horvat 90, 146, 156 Eleusinian Mysteries 63 Employee 132 Enamel 6, 144 England, English 3, 16-19, 23, 36, 52, 69, 72, 106, 112, 117, 134, 144, 155 Engraver, engraving 131, 135-136, 148, 165 Entertainment 69, 72, 145 Envirment/al 6, 146, 157-158 Ephesos Museum 14 Epiphysis/al 5, 10, 83, 133, 141, 146, 154 Equid 19, 140, 146 Erase/r 18-20, 36, 53 Eretz Israel Museum 3, 48 Eros 90, 92 Erosion, eroded 18, 28, 92, 105, 132 Eskimo 18, 23, 132 Estonia 141 Ethnic, ethnography/ic/er 4, 9-10, 22-23, 31, 39, 48, 67, 71, 122, 132, 136, 140-141, 143-144, 158, 165 Europe 3, 9, 24, 44, 46-47, 52-54, 59, 66, 69, 72-73, 79, 106, 117, 131-132, 137, 143, 154, 156-157, 163-165 Evil 86 Excavation, excavator 1, 3, 9, 36, 48, 80, 88-89, 131, 145, 155, 157, 159, 161, 163-165 Expedition 9, 28, 43, 69, 73, 94, 127-129, 132, 148, 156 Expensive 144 Experiment/ation 46, 133, 138, 141-142, 144, 164 Export 159 Eye 24, 32-34, 65, 81-84, 86-87, 90, 98, 118, 136, 139, 142-143, 149 Eyebrow 81, 83-84 Fabric 144 Face, facial 80-81, 84-86, 90 Factory 79, 146 Fake 117 Fallow deer 5, 118, 147, 156 Fan 106 Far East 132 Farm/er, farmhouse 23, 146, 159, 163 Fashion 88, 117, 132, 145, 164 Fasten/er 22, 23, 30, 37, 51 Fat 82-85, 90, 139, 140-141 Fatimid 1 Fauna/l 146, 154 Favissa 81 Feather 35, 51, 62, 90, 98 Felid 89

Female 44, 63-65, 81-86, 91-92, 119, 124 Femur 5, 7, 22, 25, 39, 41, 73, 78, 80-81, 114, 140-141, 146-147 Fertility 63, 80, 89-90 Fess 158 Fiale 118 Fibre 20, 22, 26, 29 Fibula 7 Fig 95 Figure, figurative 43, 51-52, 55, 58, 64, 86-92, 98-99, 105, 117, 124, 135, 143 Figurine 69, 71, 80-85, 117, 122, 142-143, 164 File, filing 16-17, 20, 29, 33-34, 37-38, 48-49, 53, 56-63, 66, 69-71, 73-74, 85, 94-97, 99-102, 106-109, 111, 114115, 119, 122-123, 126, 131, 136, 138-139, 141-143, 148-149, 151-153, 165 Finger 5, 23, 64-65, 67, 69, 76, 81, 84-85, 90, 122, 124, 133 Fire, firing 20-21, 29, 36, 51, 141, 143-144, 161 Fish 65, 76, 139, 142, 161 Fishing net 21 Fistula aenea 23 Fitting 98, 105 Flake 5, 25, 27, 33, 39, 141, 148 Flange 10-11, 39-42, 44, 107, 120 Flock 21 Floor 131-132, 137 Flower, floral 28, 86-87, 88-89, 93-94, 95-96, 98, 121, 124, 127 Flute 7, 9, 69-70, 86, 136, 140, 147, 161, 163 Flute/d 18, 20, 35, 61-63, 77, 88-89, 92-93, 94, 142, 151 Food 17, 20, 158 Foot, feet 14, 28, 58, 64, 78, 80, 82-83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 106, 118, 125, 134, 137, 144, 152 Forehead 82 Fork/ed 14, 17, 136 Fort/ress, fortification/s 1, 4, 36-37, 48, 59, 62, 69-70, 123 Forum 157 Fowl 7, 12, 70, 147, 161 Fragrant 98, 100 Frame 17, 23, 69, 88-89, 92, 94, 96, 100-102, 108-110, 117, 124, 126, 131, 134, 151-153, 154-155, 164-165 France 3-4, 23, 51, 61, 67, 69, 72, 117, 131, 140, 143, 145, 148, 150, 157 Fret (saw) 134 Friction 44, 141, 143 Frova 1 Fruit 20, 90, 92, 95 Funeral, funerary 69, 72, 118 Funnel 18, 23, 25, 29-31, 41, 82, 125, 161 Furniture 23, 42, 45, 67, 75, 88-89, 90, 96-99, 104-105, 107, 131, 144, 152, 154, 158-159 Furniture mount 10-11, 13, 30, 39-40, 44, 65, 67, 69, 73, 77-78, 87-88, 103-105, 108, 117, 121, 123, 125, 146, 151-154, 163-165 Furrow 10 Fustat 89, 95, 117 Gable 86, 89, 94 Galilee 69, 136 187

INDEX Gallena 79 Game 71-73, 78, 98-99 Gaming board 58 Gaming piece/disk 7, 10, 14, 17-18, 22, 29, 39, 41, 44, 58, 66-67, 69, 71-79, 83, 89, 98-99, 103-104, 106-107, 110, 116-117, 122-123, 125, 127-129, 134, 139, 145-147, 153-154, 158, 163-165 Gaming stick 75 Garland 95 Garment 31, 51, 53, 64-65, 83, 90-92, 98-99, 124-125, 139 Gas 23 Gaul 117, 137 Gazelle 35, 147 Gelatin 6 Genitalia 81-85 Geometric/al 51, 56, 88-89, 100-103, 152-153 German/y 131, 135, 141, 144 Gersht 94 Gilded 51-52, 54, 57-59, 143 Girl 80, 125 Glass 50, 54, 71, 73-74, 78, 86, 143, 157, 161, 163 Glossy 21 Glove 64 Glue/d/ing 5, 10, 13, 22, 39, 41, 52, 78, 80-83, 89, 93, 9697, 100, 104, 119, 124, 139, 143, 148 Goat 7, 35, 140, 145-147 God/dess 58, 64, 73, 80, 86, 91 Gold 52, 59, 86 Goldman 3 Goldsmith 136 Gorsium 137 Gouge 134-135, 138, 151, 165 Governor, governing 1, 36-37, 69, 73, 163 Grain 144 Grape 89, 92, 95-96, 120 Grass 142 Grave 3, 11, 23-26, 29-30, 32, 39-42, 46, 48-65, 67-68, 70, 72-78, 80-81, 86, 91, 93-95, 98, 100-101, 105, 109, 112, 119, 121-124, 126, 158 Gravestone 86, 159 Greco-Roman Museum 92 Greek 23-24, 28, 64, 72-73, 75-76, 80, 139 Green 32, 37, 47, 51, 97, 142-143 Griffon 86 Grind 36, 46, 48 Groin 82-84 Grooming 9, 39, 46-50, 164 Groove 11-16, 20, 22-32, 34-35, 37, 39-44, 48-49, 51-53, 56-67, 69-71, 75-79, 81-85, 87, 92-99, 100, 102-108, 110, 112-115, 118-126, 133-136, 138, 142-143, 149-152, 155 Guard 37-38 Guatemala 131, 148 Guide line/incision 46-48, 98, 115, 121, 133, 135, 139, 142, 144, 152, 154 Guild 131, 159 Gypsum 93 Hack (saw) 111, 134, 152 Haifa 2

Hair 21, 24, 36, 46, 51-53, 59, 64-66, 68, 80-84, 86, 9092, 118, 121, 139, 158 Hairdo 82, 92 Hairnet 23, 51 Hairstyle 64 Halter 83-84 Hama 89 Hammat Gader 23, 31, 136 Hammer 135 Hand 10, 13, 18, 20, 22, 27, 35, 37-38, 41, 44, 48, 51, 54, 59-60, 63-64, 76, 78, 81-82, 84-85, 90-95, 104, 106, 115116, 124-125, 133-139, 142, 148, 154 Handle 4, 7, 10-19, 20, 23, 35, 37, 39-42, 44-46, 48-50, 53, 57, 63, 66-67, 69-71, 76-79, 82, 86-87, 89-90, 99, 103-104, 106-108, 113-114, 116-117, 118-119, 121-122, 124, 126-129, 134-136, 139, 141-148, 150, 153, 155-156, 158, 161, 163-164 Handmade 15, 24-25, 29, 34-35, 47, 50-67, 70-71, 92-93, 105, 109-110, 123, 126, 137, 164 Hanger 67 Harbor 1, 157, 165 Harness 21, 87 Harp 69, 71 Harpoon 145 Hartal 125 Hat 64-65, 86 Hawk 69 Head 14, 18, 24, 27-28, 30-33, 37, 43-45, 51-66, 76-77, 79-87, 90-92, 98, 104, 106-107, 109-110, 115, 120-122, 125-128, 135-138, 143-144, 148-149, 154, 158, 164 Hearth 141 Heat 6, 10, 51, 117-119, 141 Heel 91 Hellenistic 1, 3, 6, 9, 51, 71, 117, 137, 161 Henig 35, 44, 64, 86-87, 92, 98, 100, 106-107, 121 Hermes 90 Herod/ian 1, 2, 9, 165 Herringbone 11, 35, 53 Hesban 148 Hide 17, 31, 139, 146 Hilt 38 Hinge 7, 10, 12, 17, 24, 37, 39, 43, 44-45, 77, 89, 103104, 108, 120-121, 127, 141, 144-145, 147, 164 Hinterland 7, 146, 148, 156, 158-159, 163 Hip 80-82, 118 Hippodamian 1 Hippodrome 1, 157 Hippo/potamus 5, 6, 75, 96, 117-118, 128, 144 Holder 86 Hole 10-12, 15-18, 21-34, 37, 39-41, 43-45, 47-48, 52, 58-59, 63-66, 69-71, 76, 78, 80, 82, 84, 88, 93-94, 99100, 102, 105-107, 109-110, 112, 115-116, 118-122, 124, 126, 136, 142-143, 153-154, 164 Holland 117 Hollow 67, 71-74, 76-77, 80, 87, 100, 106-107, 114-115, 124-125, 127, 136, 138, 141-142, 146, 149-150, 161 Holster 40 Holy Ark 94 Holy Sepulchre 88 Home 131 188

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Hoof 14, 48 Hook 22, 25 Horse 7, 10, 17-19, 39, 65, 67, 71-73, 77, 87, 89, 103, 108, 115, 140, 145-148, 151, 154, 158, 163 Horseman 17 Horwitz 142, 146 Hourglass 22, 136 House 86, 157-158, 164-165 Human 43, 51, 58, 64, 82, 88-92, 98, 117, 128, 142, 152 Humerus 5, 80-81, 88, 91-92, 147 Hunch(ing) 142 Hungary 3, 48, 52, 56, 59, 63, 65-67, 69, 72, 74, 82-84, 89, 120, 131, 137, 143, 145, 150 Hunt/ing 12 Hygiene 46, 146, 154 Iconography 9, 22, 51, 64, 72, 88-89, 131 Idol 80-81 Illustration 131-132, 137, 144 Image 94, 97, 120 Imitate/ion 44, 46, 51, 64, 84, 89, 92-94, 99, 102, 123, 125, 143 Immortality 61 Import/ed 6, 40, 117 Incise/d, incision 26-28, 39-40, 49, 52, 56, 58-59, 64-66, 70-72, 74-75, 77, 79, 81-85, 95-100, 107, 109-110, 114115, 120-121, 123, 125, 139, 142-144, 150-152, 154, 164 Incrustation 143 Indentation 12-15, 17-18, 21, 24, 30-31, 41-42, 47-49, 52-53, 56-63, 70-71, 75-78, 82, 95-96, 104-106, 110-111, 115, 118-120, 122-123, 125-127, 135-139, 149-150, 155 Index (finger) 76 Index Islamicus 4 India/n 6, 23, 73, 141 Industry, industrial 4, 6, 65, 108, 115-116, 123, 131-156, 157-159, 163-165 Ink 39, 123 Inlay 7, 9, 16, 22, 28, 30, 42-44, 58, 63, 65, 69, 75, 83, 88-89, 93, 96-103, 104-105, 107-110, 112-117, 122-123, 126-129, 131-134, 136-137, 139, 141-146, 148, 150, 152153, 154-155, 157-159, 163-165 Inscription, inscribed 66, 72, 75-76, 80, 98, Installation 131, 138, 157-158 Insufflator 50 Intarsia 143 Intercisa 52, 59, 98 Inuit 4, 141-142 Invention 46, 137 Ionic 94 Iran 117, 132, 134, 141, 143, 152 Iron 12-13, 15, 46-47, 118, 133-134, 136-138 Iron Age 3, 6, 69-70, 79 Isis 64 Islam/ic 4, 66, 74, 80-81, 87-89, 99, 104, 146, 154, 164165 Israel, Israeli 1-4, 9, 22, 44, 46-47, 49, 53, 64, 69, 71-72, 88-91, 117, 131-132, 137-138, 145-146, 148, 156-158, 163-165 Italy, Italian 1, 102, 117 Itinarate/ant 4, 140, 159, 165 Jablonowska-Taracha 3

Jar 23, 51, 60, 75, 141 Jaw 85 Jerash 134-136, 139, 158 Jerusalem 67, 72, 78, 88, 94, 125, 148, 159 Jet 54, 65, 68, 79 Jeton 71-72, 75-76, 123, 153 Jewelry 3, 7, 39, 51-67, 70, 82-83, 85-86, 107, 117, 121122, 147, 150, 164 Jews, Jewish 1, 3, 35, 131, 158, 161 Joint/ed 43, 80, 83, 89, 103, 107 Jones A. 74, 87, 125 Jordan 5, 39, 117, 134-136, 139, 148 Josephus Flavius 1 Juniper 139 Kefar Hananya 159 Key 68 Kibbutz Shamir 48 Killen 137 Kiln 59, 157-158 King 73, 78 Kitchen 140 Knee 81, 90-91 Knife 4, 7, 11, 13-14, 16-19, 20, 28, 34, 39, 46, 53, 5556, 59, 62, 68-69, 74, 87, 94, 99, 106-109, 111, 115, 121, 126, 132, 134-135, 136, 139, 141-144, 149-153, 156, 158, 165 Knight's shield 123 Knit/ted 23 Knob 77 Knot opener 19, 106 Knuckle 64 Kohl 24-25, 40, 51, 54, 79 Kohl stick 10, 12, 18, 31, 35-36, 39-41, 51, 53, 57-58, 60, 62-63, 82-83, 86, 126 Koren Zvi 26 Krzyszkowska 3 Kurov Valery 132, 135 Kuwait Museum 87 Lace 18, 21, 23, 31, 42 Lacediz 23 Ladle 116 Lamellae 5 Lamp 10, 46-47, 51, 81, 88, 99, 102 Lampstand 57 Land of Israel – see Israel Lanzadera 31 Lathe 10-15, 17-19, 22, 24-25, 27-31, 39-41, 44-49, 5254, 56-63, 67, 70-72, 75-78, 82, 89, 95-96, 103-107, 110112, 113, 115, 118-120, 122-127, 131-132, 135-136, 137139, 141-142, 144, 148-151, 153-156, 164-165 Latin 72-73, 76 Lattice 89, 104 Lead 43, 71, 74, 86, 88, 95, 98, 124, 135 Leaf/ves 26, 49, 59, 62, 86, 89, 92-97, 98, 102-103, 115, 121, 124-125 Leather 5, 17-24, 32, 35, 43, 88, 96, 99, 107, 119, 150, 152, 161 Leg 11, 17, 40, 44, 58, 69-70, 78-79, 81-85, 89-91, 97-98, 103, 105-106, 119-120, 125, 127, 137, 152 Legion/ary 59, 62 189

INDEX Lens 121 Lentil 29 Les Bolards 143, 150 Letter 102 Levant/ine 5, 47, 54, 66, 136, 140, 152 Levine 1 Lice 46 Lid 10, 17-18, 22-23, 25, 27-30, 39-44, 61, 66, 72-73, 7576, 78-79, 89, 95-100, 103, 107, 116, 120-121, 124, 126127, 137, 144-145, 153, 155 Ligula 35, 46, 48, 50, 53 Limb 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 17-21, 39, 90 Limes 54, 117, 119 Limestone 92 Linen 22 Link 1 Lintel 94, 107 Lion/ess 90, 118, 124 Lip 69-70 Liquid 23, 47, 116 Liturgical 121 Lock 39, 43-45, 118-119, 125, 161 London 144 Loom 19, 23, 26, 31, 69 Loop 23, 31, 37, 81, 86 Lottery 72 Louvre Museum 78 Lowlor 131 Ludus latrunculorum 78 Lvovsky Lilia 20, Lyon 39, 117, 145, 148 Lyre 69, 71, 89, 91 Maastricht 134 MacGregor 3, 35, 69, 141 Maenad 91-92 Magdalensberg 24, 117 Magic 38, 52, 86 Magnifying glass/tool 6, 117, 132 Mainz 117 Make-up 83, 120 Male 28, 83, 86, 90-92 Mallet 135, 139, 142 Mameluk 1, 9, 156 Mammal 7, 10, 123, 140, 161 Mammoth 141 Man 80 Mandible 142 Mane 87, 90 Mantle 24 Marangou 3 Marble 40, 90-91, 118, 139 Maritime 123 Marker 13 Market/ing 4, 31, 117, 158-159, 165 Marriage 88 Marrow 5, 140-141 Mass production 88, 137, 140 Master 89, 105, 138, 154 Mat 23, 31 Material culture 164

Maximian 95 Maya(n) 131, 148 Mayer Museum of Islam 67, 78, 94, 125 Meander 97 Meat 6-7, 135, 140-142, 145-146, 154, 158-159, 163 Mechanical, mechanism 40, 133 Medicine, medicinal 11, 14, 18, 20, 23-24, 36, 39, 46-50, 63, 90, 126, 155 Medieval 20, 117, 141, 144, 155, 158 Mediterranean 3, 117, 132, 165 Medullar cavity 5, 10-11, 39-42, 44, 70, 72-73, 77-79, 83-85, 90, 104-108, 112-114, 135, 138-139, 142, 148, 150-151, 153 Megera 46 Melting 145 Merchant 117, 140, 159 Méru 79, 146 Meshrebiyya, Maschrabijjenglieder 67, 89, 104, 152 Metacarpus 5, 10, 39, 65, 80, 83, 114, 146-147 Metal 1, 4, 10-11, 13, 16, 18-19, 21-25, 30-32, 36-37, 4041, 43-44, 46-48, 51, 64-65, 70-72, 78, 80-81, 84, 86-89, 98-99, 102, 106, 118-119, 131-132, 136, 138, 142-145, 158, 161, 163 Metapodia/l 5, 7, 18-19, 73, 77, 88, 140-141, 145-147, 154 Metatarsal, metatarsus 5, 7, 10-11, 18-19, 44, 65, 67, 6974, 77-78, 103-104, 108, 113-115, 140, 146-148, 150, 163 Metropolis 1, 69, 165 Metropolitan Museum 94 Microscope 4, 6, 23, 132 Middle Ages 72, 132, 135 Middle East 3, 106, 132, 159 Military 24, 31, 37, 40, 117, 119, 158, 163 Mineral 5, 140 Miniature 131, 135, 144 Mirror 30, 46, 65, 90-91, 97, 123-124 Mishna 23, 69, 161 Mix 36 Mleiha 133, 145-146 Model 86 Modern 132-135, 140, 144, 157, 159, 165 Modesty 91 Molar 78 Mold 5 Money, monitary 72, 165 Monument 89 Morocco 158 Mosaic 14, 71, 90, 95, 131 Moslem 1, 71, 73, 80, 125 Mosque 1, 104 Mother-of-pearl 46, 116, 132, 134, 141, 157-158 Motif 11, 13, 15-16, 35, 41-42, 88-89, 91, 95, 120, 125, 142, 151 Moulding 10-15, 17-18, 20, 24-31, 35, 40, 44-45, 51-52, 57, 60-64, 67, 71, 75-77, 82, 84, 86-87, 91, 93, 96-97, 99, 103-106, 111-112, 118, 120-126, 138, 142 Mount/ed/ing 3, 7, 14, 22, 24, 52-53, 62, 65, 70, 82, 8889, 90, 98-99, 105, 126-127, 142, 147, 150, 153, 164 Mourning 52 190

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Mouth 17, 41, 81-83, 85, 87, 90, 118 Mouth-piece 23, 69-70 Mural 39 Murex 64 Muscle, muscular 90-91 Mushroom 41, 51, 56 Musical (instrument) 17, 23, 31, 69-71, 92, 122, 129, 144, 152-153, 164 Nabatean 81 Nail 55-56, 124 Naked 64, 81, 91 Napkin 23 Napoleon 132 Narcotic 63 Narthecium 39 Native American 4, 19-21, 51, 132, 141-142 Navel 81-83, 90-91 Neck 14, 18, 28, 31-32, 35, 52, 54, 91, 121, 124 Necklace 23, 84-86 Needle 7, 9, 11, 13, 19, 22-24, 32-34, 39-40, 46, 51, 53, 56, 70, 109, 111, 136, 139, 142-143, 145, 148-149, 154, 163-165 Negev 1 Negroid 90 Nereid 91 Nessana 80 Net, netting 6, 23, 31 Netanya 1 Netherlands 134 Nerve 5 Netzer 1 New Kingdom 137 New Mexico 67 Niche 86 Nicosia Museum 64 Nile 6 Nipple 61, 75-76, 80, 91 Noricum 56 Northe 141 Nose 81-83, 85, 87, 90, 118 Nostril 87 Notch 20, 34-35, 39, 68, 84, 101, 107, 153 Number, numeric 71-76, 79, 143, 150 Nuticial/nutrient foramen 25, 78 Odeon 1 Offcut 146, 165 Ofri Marcia 20 Oil 41, 44, 51, 81, 120, 139, 142 Oil plant 161 Oinment 73 Olive 51, 55, 57 Oman 133, 145-146 Onion 5, 106, 120-121, 128, 158 Ontario Museum 85 Open work 28, 42, 69, 89, 96, 100, 102, 121, 124, 126, 155 Opium 63 Orbit 81 Organic 5, 141 Oricularium specillum 50

Orient/al 82 Ornament/ation 39, 73, 82, 91, 136-137 Osseous 5 Osteology/ist/ical 5-6, 10, 18, 39, 44, 72, 146, 155, 158, 163 Ottoman 9 Oudh 155 Owl 63 Oyster 46 Pagan 80, 88 Paint/ed, painting 11, 13, 16, 22, 26-27, 32, 34, 39, 41, 44, 46, 50-52, 71, 74-75, 80-81, 83-85, 97, 101, 104, 119, 139, 142-144, 165 Palace 1, 69, 81 Palestine, palestinian 6, 133 Palette 48, 120 Palm 64, 76, 85, 136 Palmette 95, 102 Pan 86 Panel 94, 102-103 Panonia 158 Panther 89-90, 118 Paper 20, 142 Papyrus 18 Parchment 86 Paris 79, 144, 146 Partition 32, 37, 85, 96, 100, 102, 136, 143 Partridge 28 Pasty crimper 17 Patera 86, 118 Paternostermaker 131 Patina 6, 13, 15, 18, 20, 31-32, 37, 39, 42, 55-56, 69, 75, 97, 102, 106-107, 118-122, 126 Patrich 9, 28, 36, 69, 73, 89, 128 Pattern book 4, 51 Pattern roll 17 Pausanias 141, 144 Paw 124 Pawn 73 Peacock 28 Pear 47, 49, 51, 59, 61, 104, 106, 110, 121 Pedestal 82, 94, 103 Peg 17-18, 30-31, 39, 42, 44, 69-70, 71 Pelvis 5, 46, 82-84, 91, 152 Pen-case 39, 42 Pendant 17, 51, 60, 65-66, 67, 69-70, 76, 81, 87, 98, 122, 124, 137 Penis 90 Percussion 69, Perforated/ion 10-12, 14, 16-17, 22, 24-31, 37-38, 41, 4344, 58, 63, 65-67, 69-71, 76, 80-81, 83-84, 86-89, 91, 9497, 98-99, 100-103, 105-108, 110, 112, 115-116, 119126, 131, 133-134, 136, 139, 142-143, 151-154, 164 Perforate/or 31, 136 Perfume 41, 47, 50, 78, 98, 100 Pergola 94 Persephone 63 Persia/n 1, 3, 9, 73 Personification 91-92 Petal 11, 28, 87, 124 191

INDEX Petra 139, 158 Petrie F. 89, 137 Petrography 159 Phalanx, phalanges 5, 71, 146, 158 Phini Museum 23 Phoenicians 1 "Pie" 9 Pig 7, 114, 140, 146-147, 161 Pilaster 92-93, 105 Pillar 107 Pinecone 52, 61-62, 64 Pink 78, 142 Pin 7, 9, 12-13, 17-19, 22-24, 31-36, 43-44, 46-48, 50, 51-64, 66, 71, 76-78, 81-82, 84, 86, 88-89, 91, 102, 104, 107, 109-111, 120, 121-122, 127-128, 135, 137-139, 141145, 148-149, 154-155, 158, 163-165 Pin-beater 14, 18-21, 32, 35-36, 109 Pion 71, 145 Pipé 74 Pistil 28 Plait/ing 12, 18, 20-22, 24, 32, 35, 64, 90 Plane, planing 11, 31, 36, 40, 53-54, 56-58, 60-62, 71-72, 75, 77, 79, 96, 99-100, 108-115, 125-127, 135, 138, 142, 149-151, 154 Plano-convex 25 Plant 20, 41-42, 89, 139, 152 Plaster/ed 18, 141 Plastic 138 Plate 47, 66, 100 Play/er 72, 78-79 Pliny 137, 139, 142 Plug/ged 12, 44, 77-78, 82, 149 Pocket-knife 15-16 Pod 87 Podium 86, 157 Point/ed 14-16, 18-20, 23-24, 27-28, 30-37, 44, 46-53, 55-56, 60-62, 66-67, 75, 78, 89, 96-97, 98-99, 107, 109112, 114, 118-121, 125-126, 132, 135-136, 137-139, 142143, 145, 148-149, 154, 165 Polish 3, 145 Polish/ed 13-14, 18, 20-21, 25, 40-41, 73, 96, 117, 132, 138-139, 142, 148, 153, 158, 165 Pomegranate 56, 61, 63-64, 124 Pommel 13, 45, 125 Pompeii/an 39, 44 Poplin 3, 14, 17, 19-21, 23, 25, 29, 37-38, 42-44, 59, 64, 66-67, 70-71, 77-79, 86, 89, 99, 102, 112, 114, 118, 120, 124, 142 Poppy 51, 63-64, 87 Porath 1, 9, 43, 89, 94, 117, 127, 157 Pork 71 Porphir 96 Port 1, 2, 163 Portrait 52, 123-124 Pot 11, 145 Potter/y 17-21, 23-24, 46, 59, 73-74, 80-81, 88, 91, 99, 102, 118, 124, 126, 133, 140-142, 158-159, 163-164 Powder 39, 41, 126 Prague 72 Prayer bead 112, 138

Precussion 65, 72 Prehistoric 3, 71, 132, 136, 142 Prestige, prestigous 117, 144 Price 144 Probe 46 Procession 90 Production line 131 Production waste (cf. waste) 9, 40, 55, 65, 69, 75, 89, 100-105, 109-116, 117, 126, 129, 131, 133-134, 137, 140, 145, 147, 149, 152-153, 155, 158 Protein 5 Protoma 58 Prototype 4, 28, 143 Province 163 Provincial 80, 90, 94, 98 Proximal 48 Pumice 139, 143 Pump (drill) 136 Punch/er 19-20, 23, 31, 136, 142 Pupil 81-82 Purify 161 Purity 91 Purple 119 Pyramide 43, 47, 61-63, 109, 149 Pyxis, pixides 39-40, 102, 117, 124, 145, 150, 165 Quantitative analysis 9 Queen 73, 78 Qur’an 71 Quarter 157, 159 Qumran 161 Raban 1-2, 9, 69, 89, 112, 117, 129, 157-158, 165 Radial 27, 59, 77 Radius 5, 31, 146 Ram 86, 118 Ramat Gan 26 Ramla 80, 148 Raqit, Horvat 134, 146 Rashi 23, 35, 46, 51, 67 Rasp 139, 141, 165 Rate 144 Rattle 107 Ravenna 95 Raw 75, 117, 126, 128-129, 132-133, 135, 143, 149, 154155 Raw material 3-4, 5-7, 22, 28, 42, 46, 71-72, 88, 98, 108, 113, 117-118, 121, 131-133, 137-144, 146, 149, 155-156, 158-159, 161, 163-164 Realism, realistic 80-81, 89-90, 91 Reaper 106 Recess/ed 20-21, 37, 42, 62, 67, 69, 73-74, 77-79, 81, 9495, 102-104, 106-107 Reconstract/ion 132-133, 135, 137, 139-141, 157, 164165 Recycle/d 131-132 Red 11, 13, 16, 26-27, 41, 44, 69-70, 72, 74-75, 101, 104, 136, 139, 142 Reed 69, 90, 106 Reel 11, 23 Reese 3, 140 Relief 13, 76, 86, 89-93, 95-96, 131, 133, 137, 140 192

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Religion, religious 4, 9, 46, 51, 69, 86-87, 88, 100, 159, 163-164 Reliquary 100 Representation 92 Resin 143 Reticular 49, 61 Reuse 131, 133 Rib 5, 18, 20-21, 81-82, 88, 102, 108, 113-114, 140, 142, 146-147, 152, 163 Ridge 12, 20-21, 42, 48, 99, 150 Rim 11-12, 15, 29, 39, 41-42, 45, 48-49, 60, 63, 78, 87, 90, 118, 120-123, 136 Ring 5-6, 10, 16, 40, 43, 51, 65, 67, 70, 76, 86, 112-114, 116, 118, 122, 127-129, 133-134, 136-139, 145, 147, 150-151, 153-156, 165 Ritual 52, 61, 69, 81, 83, 86, 92, 118, 124, 161 Rivet 10-14, 16-17, 37, 43-45, 47, 79-80, 87, 89, 91, 9497, 99-100, 102-103, 105, 107, 109, 118-119, 124-125, 136, 143, 151 Rod 14, 17-18, 22-24, 30, 35-36, 44-46, 53, 55, 58, 67, 69-72, 74, 78, 89, 92, 104-108, 109-113, 115, 117, 122, 126-128, 133, 135-136, 138, 142-143, 148-150, 152-155, 159 Rodziewicz 3 Road 159 Roe deer 156 Roll Israel 45, 103, 135 Roman 1, 3-4, 9, 16, 20, 23-24, 30, 36-37, 40, 44-48, 5152, 54, 57, 59, 61-62, 64-65, 69-73, 75, 80, 88-92, 117119, 131-134, 137, 139-141, 143, 145-146, 148, 151, 153-158, 161, 163-165 Roof 86, 94 Room 31, 157 Rope 21 Rosary bead 110, 116, 131 Rose 41 Rosette 49 Rough-out 53, 104, 108-112, 115, 126-127, 129, 132133, 138-140, 142, 145, 148-150, 154-157, 165 Roulette 17, 40, 139 Ruler 73, 139 Ruminant 14, 37 Rural 159 Rust 11, 15, 23, 31, 46, 70, 102 Sabazius 64 Saddle 21 Sagalassos 131 Sal-ammonia 143 Salamis 23 Samaria 148 Samaritan 1, 46-47 San Lorenzo di Lucina 131 Sand 1-2, 18, 134, 136, 139, 142 Sandstone 139, 142-143 Sarcophagus 89-90, 95 Satyr 86, 90-92 Sautot 3 Saw/n 6, 10-11, 14-15, 17, 19-21, 24, 29-34, 36-38, 4243, 46-48, 63-64, 67, 70, 74, 76-79, 81-86, 91-116, 118-

119, 121-127, 129, 131-132, 133-134, 135, 139-144, 146, 148-158, 164-165 Scabbard chap 37 Scabbard slide 37 Scandinavia 72 Scanlon 3 Scapula 5, 7, 18, 30, 46, 48, 88, 113, 115-116, 140, 142, 146-147, 152-153, 161, 163 Scar/red 14-15, 17, 30, 55, 58, 64, 71, 85, 93, 99, 104105, 108, 115, 125-126, 135, 138-139, 148 Schematic 28-29, 62, 80, 84-85, 102, 151, 164 Scene 28, 88-90, 92-98, 100-101, 119, 143 Scorpion 82 Scraper, scraping 7, 14, 18-21, 50, 65, 84, 106, 135, 139 Scratch 13, 17, 25, 33, 48, 54, 95 Screen 150 Scroll 161 Sculpture 81, 95, 124 Sea, seawater 1, 18-19, 21, 139 Season 92 Seat 72 Sebastos 1 Second/ary use 14, 24, 52, 54, 56, 72, 107, 111, 145, 155 Sedentary 140, 159 Seed 63 Self experiencing/training 22, 132 Separator 107 Settlement 137, 146, 158 Sewing 23-24, 32-33, 99 Sewing machine 23 Sex 91-92 Sexual organ 82, 90 Shaft 7, 10, 24, 31-36, 47, 51-65, 76, 92-93, 94, 110-111, 120-122, 125, 139, 141-143, 146, 148-151, 154, 163 Shale 68 Shamai Miriam 80, 148 Shark 139, 142 Sharon 156 Sheath 37, 118-119 Sheep 7, 69, 110, 140, 145-147, 161 Shell 64, 132, 138, 141, 158 Shenkar College 26 Shine, shiny 6, 13, 27, 33, 35, 139, 142 Shoe 81-82 Shoot 95 Shop 152, 157-158 Shoulder 25-31, 35, 51, 70, 75-77, 80-85, 90-91, 121, 123 Shovel 7, 116, 161 Shuni 148, 159 Shuttle 19, 22-23, 31, 164 Siberia 141 Sicily 74 Sickle 106 Sign 98 Silica 139, 142 Silk 29 Silt 139 Silver 46, 49, 54 Sinew(s) 140 Sitri 132 193

INDEX Sitz im Leben 146 Skate 139, 142 Skeleton/al 3, 5, 9, 69, 134-135, 147 Skewer 36 Skin 18, 23, 139, 142, 158, 163 Skinner 6, 140-141 Skull 5, 7 Slaughter/ing 6, 146, 158 Sledge 43 Sleeve 81, 85 Slide 43 Slot/ted 22, 24, 59, 100, 120 Smith 158 Smoke 141 Snail 64, 102 Snake 64 Sniff 10-11, 23 Soak/ing 141-142, 164 Society, social 4, 65, 106, 132, 158-159 Socket 10, 12-16, 18, 44, 111, 118-120, 136, 143, 148 Soil 132, 157 Soldering 46 Soldier 4, 37, 59 Sole 14, 81 Solution 143-144 Sonda 50 Soot 21, 29, 35, 50 Soul 99 Source 46, 51 Space phobia 28 Spain 23, 73, 102 Spatula 7, 18, 20-21, 46, 50, 86, 145, 164 Spear 92 Species 9, 42-43, 65, 69, 146-147, 154 Spice 11, 39, 47-48 Spider's web 27 Spina scapula 115, 152 Spine/al 5, 81 Spindle, spinning 19, 22-30, 35, 46, 53, 68, 99, 106-107, 126, 128, 143, 145 Spindle whorl 7 Spiral 18, 20, 35, 59, 61-63, 77, 88, 92-93, 94, 142, 151 Spitzer 141 Splinter 133, 154 Split 135, 139, 141-142, 144, 148 Spongy, spongiosa 5, 20, 25-27, 29-30, 37, 41-42, 70, 75, 81-85, 90-91, 93-98, 100-101, 105, 108, 113-114, 141142, 152 Spoon 9, 11, 14, 41, 44, 46-50, 57, 136, 138-139, 145, 151-152, 161 Spot 16, 25, 107, 146, 152 Spout 10-11 Sprout 90 St. Clair 3 Stadium 72-73 Staff 92 Stain/ed 6, 11, 13, 15, 18, 36, 46-48, 51, 54, 59, 70, 126 Stamen 28 Stamp/ed 43, 51, 59, 62, 126-128, 155 Stand 79, 87

Stanz 98, 108 Statistics/cal 9, 154-155, 164 Statue 22, 90, 158 Steam 141 Steel 133 Step/ped 13, 27, 31, 37, 41, 43, 48-49, 86, 113, 115, 118120, 122, 135, 138 Sterile 46 Stick 10, 13, 18, 22, 24-25, 28, 30, 40-41, 44, 46, 51-52, 54, 72, 126, 149 Stiebel G. 3 Stock 141-142, 164 Stomach 82-85 Stone 4, 28, 73-74, 80, 86, 94-95, 103, 111, 123-125, 136, 138-139, 143 Stool 64 Stopper/ed 17-18, 31, 41, 43, 57-58, 67, 72-74, 76-78, 86, 96, 107, 120-121, 122-123, 128, 154 Store 131, 133, 141, 164 Stork 69, 147 Strap 66, 87 Strasbourg 137 Stratigraphy 9, 73, 163-164 Straton's Tower 1 Street 1, 157-159 Stretch 26 Striation 15-17, 27, 37-39, 53, 56-58, 62-63, 66, 70-71, 74-75, 77, 79, 81, 83-86, 92-93, 95-102, 104-111, 114115, 118-119, 121-124, 126, 132-133, 135-139, 142, 148149, 151-153 Strike 43-44 String 17, 22-24, 31, 35, 65-67, 69-70, 71, 86, 122,134, 136, 153, 155, 159, 164 String instrument 69-71, 100, 111, 152 Strip 22, 26-27, 42-43, 97, 100, 125 Structure 94 Stucco 95 Stud 119 Student 154 Style 9, 35, 42, 64, 88, 91-93, 96, 98, 163-164 Stylus, styli 14, 18-19, 36, 53, 60, 62, 86, 111, 126, 145 Substance 41, 51, 54 Sulcus 10 Sumaqa, Horvat 156 Summer 141 Supply 6-7, 140, 144, 146, 156, 158-159, 163-165 Support 138 Survey 1 Switzerland 3, 117 Sword 37, 40, 118-119, 145 Symbolize, symbolic 46, 51, 61-64, 81-82, 90, 99 Synagogue 1, 13, 78, 96 Syria/n 6, 59, 80, 82, 132 Syrmium 131, 145 Table 78, 131, 137 Tablet 17, 20, 22, 30-31, 37-38, 42-44, 46, 48, 65-66, 6973, 75, 79, 88, 89-95, 96-99, 100, 105, 107-108, 112, 114-116, 118, 120, 122, 123-124, 126-128, 131, 135, 137, 140, 142-145, 148, 151-152, 154-155, 164 Tag 66 194

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Tail 28, 32, 74-76, 78-79, 101-102, 120 Tailstock-center 110-111 Tal O. 86 Talmud 24, 116, 159 Tame 161 Tang 10, 12-13, 15-16, 49, 118 Tanner 6, 140, 158 Tarragona 90 Tarsalia 5, 7 Tarvad 161 Tatoo 13, 82 Tax 159, 165 Teat 23 Technique 27, 69, 72, 112, 131-133, 141-142, 150, 165 Technology, technological 3, 26, 108, 112, 117, 131-144, 145, 153, 159, 163-164 Tel Aviv 3 Temple 1, 20, 86, 157-158 Tendril twig 95-96 Tenon 93, 104, 111, 120, 125, 138 Tepper Y. 148 Textile 5, 22-34 Theater 1, 69, 72-73, 103, 157-158 Theater ticket 71, 72-73, 76 Theodorus of Samos 137 Theophanis 23 Thigh 64, 81-82, 91 Thread/ed 11, 22-24, 31, 34, 116, 122 Throwing stick 71-72, 74-75, 79, 150 Thumb 64, 76, 84 Thyrsus 61 Tibia 5, 69, 75, 88, 93, 108, 140, 146-147, 161 Tie, tying 23, 66, 69, 71, 90-91, 105 Tile 94 Tine 106 Tint 139 Tip 11, 14, 16, 18-21, 24, 35-36, 46, 49-62, 83, 144 Tobacco 23 Toe 91, 137 Toggle 30 Token 122-123 Tolos 92-93 Tomb 24, 32, 34, 51, 58 Tombstone 46, 86 Tongue 31-32, 37, 43, 52, 89 Tool kit 132-133, 164-165 Tooth, teeth 5-6, 14, 20, 46-48, 111, 115, 121, 126, 132134, 136, 138-139, 140-141, 161 Torah 13 Torso 80 Tosephta 23, 161 Tower 51, 59, 63, 128 Town 141, 157-158 Toy 17, 80, 83 Tracer 135 Trade 4, 132 Tradition/al 4, 88, 106, 131-134, 136, 138, 140, 152-153, 155, 157, 159, 163-164 Train/ing 114-115, 137, 153 Transportation 144

Tree 81 Trim 51 Trunk 81 Tube 23, 31, 67, 70, 73, 79, 86, 161 Tuning peg 17, 69-71, 111, 144-145, 153, 155, 165 Turban 62 Turkey 39, 131, 155, 158 Tusk 6, 117, 120, 131, 141-142, 144 Twig 124 Ulna 5, 69, 146-147 Umayyad 81 Unclean (ritually) 161 Underwater (research) 1-2 Unguent 120 Ungulate 5 United States 3 Urban, urbanisation 137, 141, 145, 158, 163 Urine 141 Use wear 9, 20, 24, 27, 29, 31, 33, 132, 139 Valentinian 92 Valkenburg 117 Value 117 Vase 60, 63 Vat 141 Vault 157 Veil 51 Vein 96, 124 Venice 131, 144 Venus 71, 86 Vertebra 5, 7, 65 Vessel 17, 19-21, 23-24, 35, 41, 46, 50, 54, 59, 63, 73, 76, 121, 125, 140-141, 159, 161 Vices 139 Vienne 148 Villa 1 Village/r 6, 73, 79, 136, 148, 158-159, 163 Vindolanda 36 Vine 88-89, 93-94, 95-96, 151 Vinegar 134, 141, 143 Violin 71 Visegrád 137, 143, 150 Volute 94 Von Graf 132 Votive 118 Vulture 147 Waist 83-85, 91 Wall (of city) 1, 141 Wall painting 36, 131 Wapnish-Hesse 3, 100-101, 112, 133, 139, 158 Warp 19, 22, 31, 69 Waste (cf. production waste) 73, 101, 109-115, 117, 123125, 127-129, 131, 133, 135, 137-138, 140, 145-153, 154-156, 157, 159, 164-165 Water 5, 20, 46, 92, 109, 134, 141-143, 161, 164 Wave, wavy 28, 95-97, 102, 135 Wax 18, 20, 36, 43-44, 47, 51, 74, 123, 139, 142-143 Wealthy 144 Weapon/ry 37-38, 145, 153, 164 Wear, worn 6, 10-15, 17-23, 25-26, 29-31, 33, 35-37, 40, 42, 44-46, 48-49, 53, 55, 57, 61, 65-68, 71-74, 76-77, 81, 195

INDEX 84, 86, 91-93, 95, 98, 103-105, 111, 113, 115-118, 120, 126, 152 Weaver, weaving 9, 18-19, 20, 22-34, 69, 71, 157 Weaving tablet 22, 30, 109, 136 Wedding 69 Wedge 114, 139 Weft 22-23, 90 Weight 22, 24, 26, 117, 136 Weitzmann 4 Well 157 Wheel 17 Whetstone, whetting 139, 143 Whip 87 Whistle 7, 10, 12, 70, 107 White 41, 72, 74, 117, 119, 141 Whorl 7, 9, 17, 22, 24-25, 29-30, 41, 68, 106-107, 110, 119-120, 127-129, 136-138, 141, 145, 151, 153, 164-165 Wick 10, 51 Wig 80 Wildcat 86 Wind 69 Wind-instrument 18, 23 Wine 23, 71, 161

Wing 28, 31, 69, 90, 98, 101, 140 Withe 90 Wood/en 10, 17, 19, 21-23, 25, 28, 30, 36, 39-40, 42-47, 59, 66, 69-71, 74, 78-80, 82-83, 88-94, 96-100, 102, 104106, 121, 123, 126, 131, 136, 138-140, 142-144, 148, 150-152, 154, 161 Wood turner 131-133, 136 Wool 20-22, 67 Woman 24, 58, 64, 80, 82, 86, 119 Worked Bone Research Group 3 Workshop 3-4, 6, 28, 30, 47, 54-56, 62, 101, 109-110, 112, 116-117, 131-133, 139-142, 144-145, 148, 152-155, 157-159, 163-165 Wreath 92, Wrench 69, Write, writing 7, 18, 20, 36, 53, Writing tablet 7, 18, 36, 123, 129, 163, 165 Yad 13, 35, Yellow 41, York 106, Zigzag 13, 79, 105, Zoologist 71,

196

PART II THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL, 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 17: Body grooming objects (cont.) Figure 18: Body grooming objects (cont.) Figure 19: Pins Figure 20: Pins (cont.) Figure 21: Pins (cont.) Figure 22: Pins (cont.) Figure 23: Pins (cont.) Figure 24: Jewelry Figure 25: Jewelry (cont.) Figure 26: Musical instruments Figure 27: Astragalus, dice, throwing sticks Figure 28: Round gaming pieces, "theater tickets" Figure 29: Cylindrical gaming pieces Figure 30: Decorated gaming pieces, domino Figure 31: Dolls\figurines Figure 32: Dolls\figurines (cont.) Figure 33: Dolls\figurines (cont.) Figure 34: Dolls\figurines (cont.), religious and art objects Figure 35: Carved pieces: human figures Figure 36: Carved pieces: human figures (cont.) Figure 37: Carved pieces: architectural designs Figure 38: Carved pieces: architectural designs (cont.) Figure 39: Carved pieces: floral designs Figure 40: Various carved pieces and inlays Figure 41: Various carved pieces and inlays (cont.) Figure 42: Geometrical inlays Figure 43: Ajouré inlays Figure 44: Ajouré inlays (cont.) Figure 45: Furniture mounts Figure 46: Furniture mounts (cont.) Figure 47: Miscellanea Figure 48: Blanks and unfinished objects Figure 49: Blanks and unfinished objects (cont.) Figure 50: Waste of lathe carving, drilling and dice production Figure 51: Ring production waste Figure 52: Industrial waste Figure 53: Industrial waste (cont.) Figure 54: Industrial waste (cont.) Figure 55: Ivory objects: handles Figure 56: Ivory objects: duble buttons, whorls\buttons, boxes Figure 57: Ivory objects: tool heads, stopper, combs, jewelry Figure 58: Ivory objects: gaming pieces, writing tablets, inlays Figure 59: Ivory objects: inlays, carved pieces Figure 60: Ivory objects: decorated objects, miscellenea Figure 61: Ivory objects: rods, blanks, unfinished objects, waste

Technical information Codes for the origin of the finds: S = Israel Antiquities Authority expedition, Dr. Yosef Porath P = Zienmam Institute of Archaeology expedition, Prof. Joseph Patrich A = Center of Maritime Studies expedition, Prof. Avner Raban M = Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam Scale: All the drawings are drawn on a 1:1 scale unless stated differently. Abbreviations for period names: P = Persian (586-332 BCE); H = Hellenistic (332-37 BCE); R = Roman (37 BCE – 324 CE); ER = Early Roman (37 BCE - 70 CE); LR = Late Roman (3rd-4th cent.); RB = Roman-Byzantine (37 BCE - 638 CE); B = Byzantine (324-638); EB, LB = Early Byzantine (4th-5th cent.), Late Byzantine (6th-7th cent.); A = Early Arab (638-1099); C = Crusader (10991291); M = Mameluk (1291-1516); Ot = Ottoman (15161917). Dates: All dates mentioned are CE unless specified BCE. The dates given to the finds in the following tables are based on the temporary stratigraphical and chronological data supplied by the excavators and not upon the parallels found in the literature. It should be noted that many objects were found in secondary positions like fills and dumps and the given dating is that of accompaning finds like pottery and coins and is not necessarily that of the bone or ivory artifact. Abbreviations for bone names: ms - metatarsus; mp metapodial; mc - metacarpal. List of Figures, Plates and Photographs Figures Figure 1: Handles Figure 2: Handles (cont.) Figure 3: Handles (cont.) Figure 4: Utensils Figure 5: Utensils (cont.) Figure 6: Whorls\buttons Figure 7: Whorls\buttons (cont.) Figure 8: Spinning, weaving & clothing implements Figure 9: Needles Figure 10: Rods, styli Figure 11: Weapon parts Figure 12: Boxes Figure 13: Boxes (cont.) Figure 14: Boxes (cont.) Figure 15: Hinges Figure 16: Body grooming objects

1st. Plates Plate 1: Map of Caesarea and the Excavated Areas (after Holum, Raban and Patrich 1999)

197

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Plate 12: Bone artist V. Kurov carving bone by a knife, 1999 (Photograph: L. Pedrul) Plate 13: Small frame saw of the mother-of-pearl artisan, Bethlehem, 1970'; similar saws were probably used by bone and ivory craftsmen (Courtesy: Y. Shadur; Photograph: L. Pedrul) Plate 14: Reconstructed stages of cutting rings from a long bone diaphysis on a lathe (reconstruction: Y. Dray) Plate 15: Reconstruction of the use of a bow-driven lathe (Drawing: S. Sawadi)

Plate 2: Cattle skeleton: principal bones mentioned in the text (after MacGregor 1985 Fig. 7) Plate 3: Handle No. 518, made from hippopotamus ivory. Photograph: Y. Dray Plate 4: Bone divider in a belt made in India from bone beads threaded on strings. The dividers held the strings in place (Eretz Israel Museum collection. Photograph: L. Pedrul) Plate 5: Lace production as exhibited in the Textile Museum, Barcelona 2002. The wooden handles on left resemble the bone “shuttles” from Caesarea (Photograph: E. Ayalon) Plate 6: Reconstructed use of the bone lock (Drawing: Y. Dray) Plate 7: Gilded bone pin No. 217 (Photograph: L. Pedrul) Plate 8: Wooden chest inlayed with mother of pearl (the design) and bone (the frames) pieces, Damascus, 20th century (Eretz Israel Museum Collection. Photograph: L. Pedrul) Plate 9: Wooden miror frame decorated with meshrebiyya rods, Cairo, 20th century (Photograph: L. Pedrul) Plate 10: Rosary bead workshop, Germany (?), 17th century (after: Gróf and Gróh 2001 Fig. 5) Plate 11: Traditional mother of pearl workshop, Bethlehem, 19th century (after: Wilson 1880: 133)

C. Photographs

Photograph 1: Various objects illustrating production and wear marks (Photograph: Y. Dray) Photograph 2: Enlarged look at various objects illustrating production and wear marks (Photograph: Y. Dray) Photograph 3: A selection of inlays and waste pieces from Raban's basket 0105, Locus 269, Area I2, Early Arab period (Photograph: Y. Dray)

198

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Figure 1. Handles Fig. & No. 1:1

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Animal & Bone

Handle

Period & Cent. LB

P

0098

044

1:2

S

33574

10273

Handle

A

Cattle, mt

1:3

A

0777

000

Handle

1:4

A

0128

000

Handle

A, 9th-11th

Cattle, mt

1:5

A

0159

925

Handle

1:6

A

0158

889

Handle?

1:7

S

39936

10792

Handle?

B

1:8

S

81264

3383

Handle

LB

200

Cattle, mt

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 2. Handles (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

2:9

S

3015

Topsoil

Handle

2:10

S

18411

2090

Handle

B

2:11

S

38396

10561

Handle

RB

2:12

S

81279

3400

Handle

B

2:13

S

31107

10017

Handle

B, OT

2:14

P

0223

333

Handle

2:15

S

71757

7088

Handle

ER

2:16

P

0176

085

Handle

LB

2:17

S

59014

Topsoil

Handle

2:18

A

1532

216

Handle?

2:19

S

400207

40023

Handle

2:20

S

89967-1

8757

Handle

2:21

S

12314-1

108

Handle?

A, 7th-8th

2:22

S

69577

0000

Handle

B

2:23

S

5548

H11

Handle?

B-A

202

Period & Cent.

Animal & Bone

Remarks

Red paint LR, 3rd-4th

With No. 424

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 3. Handles (cont.) Fig. No. 3:24

&

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

S

31557

D109

Handle

3:25

P

0104

036

Handle

RB

3:26

S

2647

11

Handle

B-A

3:27

A

0655-1

416

Handle

A, 8th

3:28

S

37547

3B\B

Handle

3:29

A

0171

216

Handle

B, 7th

3:30

S

34641

10391

Handle

A?

3:31

S

400879

40127

3:32

S

53917

586

3:33

P

0189

130

Folding pocketknife handle Folding pocketknife handle Handle

3:34

P

0044

016

Handle

3:35

S

52240

428

Handle?

3:36

S

73961

7206

3:37

A

5005

---

3:38

A

0496

482

Handle\gaming piece? Handle\gaming piece Handle?

204

ER, 1st BCE -1st CE ER, 1st

RB

B, 7th

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 4. Utensils Fig. & No. 4:39

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

M

---

---

4:40

S

97417

7452

Engraver\kohl stick? Pin\engraver?

4:41

A

0293

757

Engraver\point?

4:42

P

0048

038

Awl

LB

4:43

S

97772

7483

Double point

B

4:44

S

14002

1600

Point?

4:45

S

27837-1

4888

Awl?

LR, 2nd-4th

4:46

S

65444

1801

Knife

B

4:47

S

101251

20441

Knife?

LR

4:48

S

86905

6967

4:49

S

84046

3804

Leather tool? Spatula?

4:50

P

0105

038

Tool

LR-B, 3rd-6th

4:51

S

97494-1

7469

Burnisher\blade?

R

206

Period & Cent.

Animal & Bone

R

Horse, mp

working

Remarks

LR LR-B

Cattle, mt

Natural?

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 5. Utensils (cont.) Fig. & No. 5:52

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

S

84290

3819

Burnisher?

Period & Cent. LR-B

5:53

S

11105

1266

Scraper?

LR

5:54

P

0019

107

Burnisher\scraper?

5:55

S

100031-1

8944

Recessed tool

R

5:56

S

12281

109

Weaving tool?

A, 7th-8th

208

Animal & Bone

Cattle, rib

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 6. Whorls\buttons Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

Animal & Bone

Remarks

6:57

M

---

---

Spindle & whorl

6:58

P

0082

306

Button

6:59

S

5175

R-S15

Whorl\button

6:60

S

88286

1896

Whorl\button

ER

6:61

S

91401

9226

Whorl\button\lid?

ER

6:62

P

0233

238

Whorl\button

R, 2th-3th

6:63

S

33760

10188

Whorl\button

B

6:64

S

20629

4051

Whorl\button

RB

6:65

S

18697-1

2122

Button

B

6:66

A

0626

409

Whorl\button

Red paint

6:67

A

0168

000

Button

Red paint

6:68

A

0256

107

Whorl\button

LB-A, 6th-9th

6:69

S

53241

497

Whorl\button

LB

6:70

A

0807

617

Whorl\button

A, 9th-10th

210

Natural hole

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 7. Whorls\buttons (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

7:71

S

54687

HG19-20

Whorl\button

7:72

A

0323

323

Whorl\button

7:73

A

1308

000

Whorl\button

7:74

A

0331

122

Whorl\button

A, 9th-10th

7:75

A

0161

041

Whorl\button

H?

7:76

A

0414

690

Whorl

7:77

P

0222

101

Whorl\button

LB

7:78

S

89213-4

ZZA67

Whorl\button

RB

7:79

P

0161

178

Whorl

7:80

P

0176

318

Button

LB

7:81

A

0117

056

Button

LB, 7th

7:82

S

72093

7043

Button?

ER

7:83

A

1249

137

Whorl\button

LB, 7th

7:84

P

0163

086

Button

R, 2nd-4th

7:85

P

0108

064

Button

LB, 6th

7:86

P

0141-2

238

Button

LB, 6th-7th

7:87

P

0167-1

106

Button?

212

Animal & Bone

Remarks

B

Side hole

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 8. Spinning, weaving and clothing objects Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

8:88

M

---

---

Weaving tablet?

8:89

P

0107

627

8:90

S

53441

526

Weaving divider? Fastener

8:91

S

82233

3489

Fastener

8:92

A

1382

162

Brooch

8:93

S

28201

152

Shuttle?

8:94

S

1947

---

Shuttle?

8:95

P

0123

055

Shuttle?

LB

8:96

P

0021

104

Shuttle?

LB, 6th

8:97

S

30082

3002

Buckle

8:98

M

---

---

Buckle

8:99

S

27784

4816

Buckle tongue

214

tablet\belt B B

R, 1st-2nd

ER, 1st

Animal & Bone Cattle? scapula

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 9. Needles Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

9:100

P

0210

088

Needle

Period & Cent. LB, 6th

9:101

S

74293

B90

Needle

LR, 3rd-4th

9:102

P

0169

076

Needle

9:103

A

0085

051

Needle

ER, 1st BCE 2 CE RB

9:104

A

401123

40081

Needle

R

9:105

P

0178

122

Needle

R, 1st-2nd

9:106

S

97495

7469

Needle

R

9:107

P

0111

070

Needle

9:108

S

38632

10574

Needle

9:109

S

401030-1

40081

Needle

R

9:110

S

401393-1

40210

Needle

R

9:111

S

25560

S20

Needle

ER

9:112

S

95858

7412

Pin\needle?

ER

216

Animal & Bone

Remarks

Unfinished?

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 10. Rods, styli Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

Animal & Bone

Remarks

10:113

P

0120

030

Rod

10:114

S

33612

10287

Rod

LR

10:115

A

1204

391

Rod

LB, 7th

10:116

A

1029

000

Rod

10:117

S

16115-1

1014?

Rod

10:118

A

0075

039

Rod

10:119

P

0127

145

Stylus

10:120

P

0187

272

Stylus?

R, 1st-3rd

10:121

A

1073

053

Stylus

A, 7th-8th

Stained

10:122

P

0131-2

085

Stylus?

R, 1st-4th

Stained

218

B

Stained

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 11. Weapon parts Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

11:123

S

401471

40228

Scabbard chap

R

11:124

P

0174

082

Scabbard chap

LR, 2nd-4th

11:125

P

0085

052

Suspension loop

11:126

P

0167-2

089

Dagger's guard

220

LB, 6th

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 12. Boxes Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

12:127

P

0040

015

Box

12:128

P

0095

042

Box

12:129

S

18787-4

2110

Box

R

12:130

S

8971

048

Box

LR-B

12:131

A

0066

052

Box

B, 4th-7th

12:132

S

21042

U12-13

Box

B-A

12:133

S

10000

Topsoil

Box base?

12:134

S

12302

110

Box base?

A, 7th-8th

12:135

P

0173

082

Box lid?

RB, 2nd-5th

12:136

P

0179

063

Box lid

222

Animal & Bone

Remarks

With 561

No.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 13. Boxes (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent. A, 7th-8th

13:137

S

12268

108

Box

13:138

S

86518

6969

Box

13:139

P

0034

005

Box lid

13:140

S

27034

4794

Box wall

R, 1st-2nd

13:141

S

26285

732

Box wall

A, 7th-8th

13:142

S

76725

7743

Box wall\cover?

ER

13:143

S

37564

10489

Box wall?

ER

224

Animal & Bone Cattle, femur

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 14. Boxes (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

14:144

S

80158

3313

Box wall?

B

14:145

S

8625

048

Box wall?

LR-B

14:146

M

---

---

Lock

14:147

M

---

---

Lock

14:148

A

0596

393

Lid

14:149

P

0037

015

Lid

14:150

S

38402

10560

Lid locking peg?

A

14:151

S

80301

940

Lid locking peg?

B

A

226

Animal & Bone

Remarks

With 539

No.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 15. Hinges? Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

15:152

S

83281

3709

Hinge?

RB

15:153

S

80368

2175

Hinge?

LR-B

15:154

P

0126

045

Hinge head?

LR, 3rd-4th

228

Animal & Bone Cattle, mt

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 16. Body grooming objects Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

16:155

M

---

---

Comb

16:156

A

0157

047

Comb

A, 8th-9th

16:157

S

6231

1144

Comb

R-LR

16:158

A

0009

Balk

Comb

16:159

P

0117

000

16:160

A

0016-1

281

Bowl for grinding cosmetics Tablet for grinding cosmetics?

230

A

Animal & Bone

Scapula

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 17. Body grooming objects (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

17:161

S

24036

U15

Spoon

LB, 6th

17:162

A

0636

393

Spoon

A

17:163

P

0119

044

Spoon

R, 3rd

17:164

A

0175

078

Spoon

A, 8th-10th

232

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 18. Body grooming objects (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

18:165

S

73044

7125

Small spoon

ER

18:166

P

0164

461

Small spoon

RB

18:167

P

0188-1

076

Ear probe

LR, 3rd-4th

18:168

S

87763

8606

Ear probe

18:169

S

25513

4527

Ear probe

234

B, 4th-5th

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 19. Pins Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

19:170

S

84138-1

3820

Pin

Period & Cent. LR-B

19:171

A

0218

107

Pin

LB-A, 6th-10th

19:172

P

0178

261

Pin

B, 5th

19:173

A

0175-1

125

Pin

19:174

S

83314-1

FG4-5

Pin

RB

19:175

S

88289

8770

Pin

RB

19:176

S

16248-2

1618

Pin

LR

19:177

S

23926

4316

Pin

LR, 3rd-4th

19:178

S

38295

10494

Pin

A

19:179

S

26850-1

4509

Pin

LR, 3rd-4th

19:180

P

0041-2

022

Pin

LR, 3rd-4th

19:181

P

0056

003

Pin

R, 2nd-3rd

236

Animal & Bone

Remarks

Gilded

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 20. Pins (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent. LR, 3rd-4th

20:182

P

0266

145

Pin

20:183

P

0143-1

844

Pin

20:184

P

0133-2

087

Pin

20:185

P

0141

066

Pin

20:186

P

0145

240

Pin

20:187

P

0064

017

Pin

20:188

S

66324

6531

Pin

R

20:189

P

0133-1

153

Pin

R, 2nd-4th

20:190

S

26992

4788

Pin

LR, 3rd-4th

20:191

S

40212-1

10868

Pin

B-A

20:192

S

28222

5008

Pin

ER, 1st

20:193

P

0131

050

Pin

B, 5th

20:194

S

26021

4561

Pin

LR, 3rd-4th

20:195

S

6732

1180

Pin

20:196

A

0012

002

Pin

20:197

S

74294

B90

Pin

20:198

S

87114

0000

Pin

20:199

S

59495

F10

Pin

20:200

P

0082

827

Pin

R, 1st-4th

LR, 3rd-4th

238

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 21. Pins (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

21:201

P

0136

090

Pin

Period & Cent. R, 1st-2nd

21:202

S

14070

1605

Pin

RB

21:203

S

38298

K-D3

Pin

B

21:204

S

73643-2

E95

Pin

LR-B

21:205

S

92502

9331

Pin

21:206

P

0161

060

Pin

LB

21:207

S

39799

10771

Pin

B

21:208

A

169

011.21

Pin

21:209

S

86785

8118

Pin

EB

21:210

P

0136

066

Pin

B, 5th-6th

21:211

S

83152

3678

Pin

21:212

S

80208

LM9

Pin

LB

21:213

S

37456

10480

Pin?

A

21:214

P

0129

146

Pin?

21:215

A

0103

---

Pin

21:216

P

0215

277

Pin

21:217

S

39533

10660

Pin

B

21:218

S

10837

1257

Pin

A

21:219

S

73634-1

7181

Pin

LR

21:220

S

18905-1

2122

Pin

B

240

Animal & Bone

Remarks

Gilded

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 22. Pins (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

22:221

P

0147

100

Pin

RB, 2nd-5th

22:222

P

0214-1

095

Pin

ER, 1st

22:223

P

0183

561

Pin

RB, 2nd-7th

22:224

S

16032-3

1614

Pin

B

22:225

P

0052

003

Pin

LB

22:226

S

25224

L22

Pin

22:227

P

0073

127

Pin

LB

22:228

S

18720-1

2122

Pin

B

22:229

P

0141-1

238

Pin

LB

22:230

A

1536

216

Pin

RB, 2nd-5th

22:231

S

84102-2

3803

Pin

RB

22:232

P

0162-1

072

Pin

R, 1st-4th

22:233

A

0375-1

138

Pin

RB, 3rd-7th

22:234

S

59102

910

Pin

B

22:235

A

1077

051

Pin

H-B

22:236

P

0134-1

238

Pin

22:237

S

86312

1732

Pin

B

22:238

P

0239

299

Pin

RB, 3rd-7th

242

Animal & Bone

Remarks

With Nos. 257, 459

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 23. Pins (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

23:239

M

---

---

Pin?

23:240

S

25528

4557

Pin

B, 4th-5th

23:241

S

86644-1

6988

Pin

B

23:242

S

75330

7540

Pin

LR-B

23:243

P

0104

049

Pin

B, 4th-5th

23:244

S

38719

10589

Pin

23:245

S

20628

4051

Pin

RB

23:246

S

19225-1

G8-10

Pin

B

23:247

P

0129

080

Pin

23:248

S

26496

4592

Pin

23:249

S

74439

A93

Pin

23:250

S

34187

10262

Pin

244

LR, 3rd-4th

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 24. Jewelry Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

24:251

S

81635

3422

Pendant?

24:252

P

0042

055

Pendant?

24:253

S

52163

428

Pendant?

24:254

S

87315

8133

Pendant?

24:255

P

0002

001

Pendant?

24:256

A

0295

767

Pendant?

A, 9th-10th

24:257

S

16032-1

1614

Pendant

B

24:258

A

0295

052

Jewelry?

A, 9th-11th

24:259

A

0032

W1

Bead

A, 8th-9th

24:260

S

27890

4881

Bead

LR, 2nd-4th

24:261

P

0041

008

Bead?

24:262

S

39579

10660

Bead?

246

Animal & Bone

Remarks Cf. No. 272

B, 4th-5th

B

B

Antler; with Nos. 224, 459

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 25. Jewelry (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

25:263

S

6867

1168

Ring

Period & Cent. LR

25:264

A

1407-2

200

Ring

R, 2nd-4th

25:265

S

33451

10225

Ring

25:266

S

87228

8140

Ring?

B

25:267

P

0065

047

Bracelet

25:268

P

0118-1

058

Bracelet

LR-B, 3rd5th B, 4th-5th

248

Animal & Bone Cattle? mt

Remarks

Bone?

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 26. Musical instruments Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

26:269

A

0280

415

Flute

Period & Cent. A, 8th-10th

26:270

S

95880

7342

Flute

ER

26:271

A

0209

000

Flute?

26:272

P

0045

022

Castanet tablet?

LB

26:273

A

0182-3

107

A, 10th-11th

26:274

A

0801

613

26:275

S

54590-2

664

String instrument bridge String instrument bridge Tuning peg

26:276

P

0061

924

Tuning peg

LR, 3rd-4th

26:277

P

0121

140

Tuning peg

B, 5th-6th

26:278

S

26301

732

Tuning peg

A, 7th-8th

250

C, 11th-12th RB

Animal & Bone Eagle or stork, ulna Donkey, mt

Remarks

Cf. Nos. 251, 546

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 27. Gaming pieces (Astragalus, dice, throwing sticks) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

27:279

P

0106

031

Astragalus

Period & Cent. R, 2nd-3rd

27:280

A

0357

863

Solid die

A, 8th

Cattle, mt

27:281

S

91825

9234

Hollow die

R

Cattle, mt

27:282

S

77980

7602

Die stopper

B

27:283

A

0290

766

Throwing stick

B-A

27:284

A

1206

115

Throwing stick

C, 12th

252

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 28. Gaming pieces (cont.), "theater tickets" Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent. LB

28:285

P

0087

219

28:286

S

17878

1831

28:287

P

0134

034

28:288

P

0123

313

28:289

A

1242

117

28:290

P

0058

045

Gaming piece\ jeton Gaming piece\ jeton Gaming piece\ jeton Gaming piece\ jeton Gaming piece\ jeton Gaming piece

28:291

A

0493

223

Gaming piece

B

28:292

P

0080-1

927

R, 1st-4th

28:293

A

1398

687

28:294

P

0139

440

Gaming piec e Gaming piece\ jeton "Theater ticket"

28:295

P

0148

449

"Theater ticket"

254

Animal & Bone Cattle, tibia

Remarks

LR-B LB LB LB, 6th LR, 3rd-4th

Inscribed ER, 1st BCE 1st CE R, 1st-2nd

Inscribed Inscribed

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 29. Gaming pieces (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

29:296

S

5859

14

Gaming piece

Period & Cent. A, 7th-8th

29:297

S

90326

9081

Gaming piece

A?

29:298

A

0990

335

Gaming piece

LB-A, 7th

29:299

P

0017

001

Gaming piece

LB

29:300

S

25267-2

4518

Gaming piece

B, 5th-6th

29:301

S

18176

2015

LB

Cattle, mt

29:302

S

10979

1266

Gaming piece + stopper Gaming piece

29:303

P

0041-1

022

Gaming piece

LR, 3rd-4th

Cattle, femur

256

Animal & Bone Horse, mt

Horse, mt

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 30. Decorated gaming pieces, domino Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

30:304

A

0062-1

864

Gaming piece

Period & Cent. A, 8th-10th

30:305

A

0062-2

864

Gaming piece

A, 8th-10th

30:306

A

0024

281

Gaming piece

30:307

A

0073

021

Domino tablet

258

Ot

Animal & Bone Cattle, mt

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 31. Dolls\figurines Exp.

Fig. & No.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent. B, 5th?

31:308

P

0181

091

Doll

31:309

M

---

---

Doll’s arm

31:310

S

24235-2

4310

Doll’s thigh

A, 7th-8th

31:311

S

75050

7509

Figurine

LB

31:312

A

0058

037

Doll’s head

31:313

M

---

---

Doll’s head

31:314

A

0168

930

Doll

31:315

A

0717

553

Doll

31:316

A

0023

W2

Human head

260

Animal & Bone

Pin's head?

Cattle mp

A-C, 12th A

Remarks

10th-

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 32. Dolls (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

32:317

A

0062-3

864

Doll

Period & Cent. A, 8th-10th

32:318

S

33981

10262

Doll

A

32:319

A

0626-1

409

Doll

A(-C)

32:320

S

40113

10782

Doll

A

262

Animal & Bone Cattle?, mc Cattle, mc

Remarks

With Nos. 326-327

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 33. Dolls (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

33:321

S

34723

19398

Doll

A

33:322

A

0191

090

Doll

A, 11th

33:323

A

1177

000

Doll's arm

33:324

A

1205

112

Doll's arm?

B, 5th-6th

33:325

A

0074

684

Doll's arm?

33:326

A

0626-2

409

Doll

A-C, 12th A(-C)

33:327

A

0626-3

409

Doll

A(-C)

264

Animal & Bone

Remarks

10thWith Nos. 319, 327 With Nos. 319, 326

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 34. Dolls (cont.); objects of art Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

34:328

A

1446

198

Doll

Period & Cent. A

34:329

A

0310

083

Doll

A, 10th-11th

34:330

M

---

---

Model of a temple

34:331

P

0143

240

Amulet holder

34:332

A

0075

047

34:333

A

0078

013

Object with head(s) Horse head

34:334

A

1150

000

Flower-shaped object

266

A, 8th-9th A

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 35. Carved piece: human figures Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

35:335

A

82914

3618

Carved piece

Period & Cent. LB

35:336

S

20557

U13

Carved piece

B-A

Cattle, mp

35:337

S

10089

E12-13

Carved piece

35:338

S

59500

---

Carved piece

35:339

P

0045

013

Carved piece

LB

Cattle, humerus

268

Animal & Bone

Remarks Near Nos. 433-434

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 36. Carved pieces: human figures (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent. LB

36:340

P

0094

190

Carved piece

36:341

A

0292

183

Carved piece

36:342

A

30105

---

Carved piece

36:343

M

---

---

Carved piece

36:344

S

73850-1

1619

Carved piece

LR

36:345

S

16195

1614

Carved piece

LR

270

A-C, 13th

Animal & Bone

11th-

Cattle, humerus

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 37. Carved pieces\inlays (architectural designs) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

37:346

P

0133

637

Carved piece

Period & Cent. LB

37:347

P

0262

123

Carved piece

LB, 6th

37:348

S

81356

3387

Carved piece

LB

37:349

P

0065

005

Carved piece

37:350

S

81099-2

000

Inlay

LB

37:351

P

0023

003

Carved piece

LB

37:352

S

4065

114

Carved piece

RB?

272

Animal & Bone

Remarks

With 375

Cattle?, tibia

No.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 38. Carved pieces\inlays (architectural designs) (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

38:353

S

26259

732

Carved piece

Period & Cent. A, 7th-8th

38:354

A

0878

262

Carved piece

LR-A

38:355

S

20254

4019

Carved piece

LB-A, 6th-8th

38:356

S

62109

6161

Carved piece

38:357

S

38399

10560

Carved piece

A

38:358

P

0060

924

38:359

S

81042

L-M3

Decorative column base? Carved piece

LB

274

Animal & Bone

Remarks

Red paint

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 39. Carved pieces\inlays: floral designs (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

39:360

S

39406

10658

Carved piece

B

39:361

S

39312

10460

Carved piece

A

39:362

M

---

---

Carved piece

39:363

S

38650

10563

Carved piece

39:364

A

0061

678

Carved piece

39:365

S

11595

1174

Carved piece

39:366

A

0046

039

Carved piece

276

LR-B

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 40. Carved pieces and inlays (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

40:367

S

59612

937

Inlay?

B

40:368

S

8200

48

Carved piece

A, 7th-8th

40:369

A

0227

042

Carved piece

40:370

S

24741-1

9331

Tablet

R, 1st-4th

40:371

P

0288-2

128

Inlay?

RB

40:372

S

18091

1591

Inlay?

LB

40:373

S

16193

1620

Carved piece

LR

40:374

S

17313

1765

Inlay?

40:375

S

81099-1

000

Inlay

40:376

A

0300

124

Inlay

40:377

S

9910

K17

Carved piece

40:378

A

0009-4

008

Carved piece

278

LB

B-A

Animal & Bone

Remarks

With 350

No.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 41. Carved pieces and inlays (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

41:379

A

0709

895

Perforated tablet

41:380

S

91223

9192

Carved piece

R

41:381

A

1220

391

Carved piece

LB-A, 7th

41:382

A

1226

392

Carved piece

LB-A, 7th

41:383

A

1434

000

Tablet

41:384

P

0255

113

Inlay

41:385

A

0180-1

213

Tablet

41:386

M

---

---

Perforated tablet

41:387

M

---

---

Inlay?

41:388

A

0182-1

107

Tablet

A, 10th-11th

41:389

A

0216

714

Perforated tablet

A

280

B, 4th-5th

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 42. Inlays Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

42:390

S

84222

3820

Inlay

Period & Cent. LR-B

42:391

A

0105-3

269

Inlay

A, 8th-9th

42:392

A

0129

078

Inlay

B-A

42:393

A

0023

006

Inlay

42:394

A

0105-5

269

Inlay

A, 8th-9th

42:395

A

0105-4

269

Inlay

A, 8th-9th

42:396

A

0652

393

Carved inlay

A, 7th-10th

42:397

A

0704

000

Inlay

42:398

P

0178

261

Inlay

B, 5th

42:399

A

0105-10

269

Carved inlay

A, 8th-9th

42:400

A

773

242

Inlay

LB-A, 7th

42:401

S

39639-4

10712

Inlay

B-A

42:402

S

400215

40023

Inlay

LR, 3rd-4th

282

Animal & Bone

Remarks

With No. 464

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 43. Ajouré inlays Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

43:403

A

5019

503

Ajouré inlay

43:404

A

5024

503

Ajouré inlay

43:405

A

0048

035

Ajouré inlay

43:406

P

0048

206

Ajouré inlay

43:407

A

0003

002

Ajouré inlay

LB-A, 6th10th A

43:408

A

0105-11

269

Ajouré inlay

A, 8th-9th

43:409

A

1594-1

256

Ajouré inlay

43:410

S

32042

10141

Ajouré inlay

A

43:411

A

0754

595

Ajouré inlay

A-C, 11th12th

43:412

A

---

---

Ajouré inlay

284

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 44. Ajouré inlays (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

44:413

A

0040

580

Ajouré inlay

Period & Cent. A

44:414

S

39102-1

10460

Ajouré inlay

A

44:415

S

39102-2

10460

Ajouré inlay

A

44:416

A

0159

287

Ajouré inlay

A, 9th-10th

44:417

A

0010-1

279

Ajouré inlay

44:418

A

0024-1

281

Ajouré inlay

44:419

S

34534

10350

Ajouré inlay

A

44:420

P

0126

060

Ajouré inlay

LB

286

Animal & Bone

Remarks

With No. 415 With No. 414

Metal rivet

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 45. Furniture mounts Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

45:421

P

0179

253

Furniture mount

Period & Cent. LB

45:422

A

0019

001

Furniture mount?

A, 9th-11th

45:423

P

0132

226

Furniture mount

LB

45:424

S

12314-2

108

Furniture mount?

A, 7th-8th

45:425

S

38401

10560

Furniture mount or hinge

A

288

Animal & Bone Cattle or horse mt Cattle?, mt

Remarks Red paint

With No. 21 Cattle, mt

Red paint

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 46. Furniture mounts (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

Animal & Bone

Remarks

46:426

A

0036

076

Carved rod

46:427

A

1115

065

Carved rod

46:428

S

33007

10146

Carved rod

46:429

A

1051-1

083

Carved rod

A, 8th-10th

46:430

A

1051-2

083

Furniture mount

A, 8th-10th

46:431

A

1051-3

083

Furniture mount

A, 8th-10th

46:432

A

0973

315

Mount

A-C, 8th-12th

46:433

S

82908-1

3618

Mount

LB

With 434

46:434

S

82908-2

3618

Mount

LB

With 433

46:435

P

0100

049

Mount

LR, 3rd-4th

46:436

P

0055

000

Mount

46:437

P

0143

057

Mount

46:438

A

0188

000

Mount

290

LB

With Nos. 430-431 With Nos. 429, 431 With Nos. 429, 430

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 47. Miscellanea Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

47:439

A

1667

252

Gaming piece?

Period & Cent. A, 10th

47:440

A

0052

---

Gaming piece?

A, 8th

47:441

A

0178

367

Perforated object

47:442

S

97303

7458

Carved object

ER

47:443

S

54376

607

Carvec piece

ER, 1st BCE - 1st CE

47:444

A

5019

Dump

Button\whorl?

47:445

A

0341

089

Hollow object

LB

47:446

A

0117

049

Handle?

A, 9th

47:447

P

0174

082

Part of a buckle?

LR, 2nd-4th

47:448

S

60526

6057

Perforated tablet

47:449

S

26654

600

Globular object

ER, 1st

47:450

S

18414

2092

Perforated tablet

B

292

Animal & Bone

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 48. Production waste: blanks and unfinished objects Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

48:451

P

0115

628

48:452

S

18871-1

2110

Unfinished handle? Rod rough-out

48:453

S

12655

G12

Tablet rough-out

48:454

P

0166

075

Sawn piece

RB, 1st-5th

48:455

S

26773

4764

A, 7th-8th

48:456

P

0061-1

047

Raw material frg. Tablet rough-out

48:457

P

0061-3

047

Tablet rough-out

294

Animal & Bone Horse, mt

Remarks

B Cattle, tibia

With No. 457 With No. 456

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 49. Production waste: blanks and unfinished objects (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

49:458

A

0169

690

49:459

S

16032-2

1614

49:460

P

0075

014

49:461

S

74576-1

49:462

S

49:463

Object Tablet roughout? Tablet rough-out

Period & Cent. A-C

Remarks

B

A92

Pointed roughout Rod blank

R, 2nd-3rd

24600-2

4331

Rod blank

LB, 6th

P

0128

080

Pin rough-out?

B, 4th-5th

49:464

S

39639-3

10712

Inlay rough-out?

49:465

S

24600-3

4331

Inlay rough-out?

LB, 6th

49:466

S

27387-1

4511

ER, 1st

49:467

S

88605

8743

Unfinished whorl \ button Unfinished bead

49:468

A

416

317

B-A, 4th-9th

49:469

S

---

Topsoil

Unfinished bead? Die rough-out?

49:470

S

23526

4288

Pin head roughout?

B, 5th-6th

296

Animal & Bone

RB

With No. 465

With No. 462

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 50. Waste from lathe carving, drilling and dice production Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

50:471

S

25626-1

Topsoil

Lathe rough-out

50:472

P

0033

033

Lathe rough-out

LB

50:473

S

17954

1805

Lathe rough-out

LR-B

50:474

P

0139

040

Lathe rough-out

R, 1st-3rd

50:475

S

55038

731

Lathe rough-out

LR, 3rd-4th

50:476

S

25016

740

Lathe rough-out

LR-B, 3rd-5th

50:477

S

23748-1

T18-19

Lathe rough-out

RB

50:478

S

25626-2

Topsoil

Lathe rough-out

50:479

S

26045

R20-21

Lathe rough-out

50:480

P

0001

001

Lathe rough-out

50:481

P

0036

016

Drilling waste

LB

50:482

A

0105-9-a

269

Drilling waste

A, 8th-9th

50:483

A

0105-9-b

269

Drilling waste

A, 8th-9th

50:484

A

0105-9-c

269

Drilling waste

A, 8th-9th

50:485

S

73079

1612

Drilling waste

ER

50:486

A

0063

052

50:487

S

52285

451

50:488

S

39225-1

10634

Die production rough-out end Die production rough-out end Die production rough-out end

298

Animal & Bone

Remarks With 478

With No. 471 R

B LB-A

With No. 582

No.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 51. Ring production waste Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent. LB, 6th

51:489

S

25043

743

51:490

S

18826-2

2110

51:491

S

16208

1620

51:492

P

0097

072

51:493

A

0013

002

51:494

P

0221

550

51:495

P

0048-2

020

Ring production waste Ring production waste Ring production waste Ring production waste Ring production waste Ring production waste Ring

51:496

A

0177

275

Ring

R

51:497

P

0044-1

008

Ring

LB

300

RB LR RB, 2nd-5th

RB, 2nd-5th

Animal & Bone Cattle, mt

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 52. Production waste Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

52:498

A

0408

086.36

52:499

S

18864

2122

52:500

S

96098

1612

52:501

P

0107

52:502

S

52:503 52:504

Object Production waste Sawn piece

Period & Cent.

Animal & Bone

B

Cattle, rib

ER

Cattle, mt

865

Sawn diaphysis Sawn ring

LB

Cattle, mt

23524-1

---

Sawn ring

B, 5th

S

59023-2

Topsoil

Sawn ring

Donkey, tibia; cattle, mc Cattle, femur

P

0031-1

628

Sawn ring

302

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 53. Production waste (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

53:505

P

0225

098

Marked bone

Period & Cent. B, 4th-5th

53:506

A

0105-8

269

“Training” tablet?

A, 8th-9th

53:507

S

67054

6531

Sawing waste?

R

53:508

S

40163

10836

Production waste

LB

Horse\ cattle, mt

53:509

A

0003

064

“Training” tablet?

53:510

S

---

40081

Rough-out end

A, 10th-11th

Pig

53:511

A

0070

019

Planed piece

53:512

A

1391

172

53:513

A

0410

190

53:514

A

0105-12

269

Ajouré production waste Ajouré production waste Ajouré production waste

304

C, 11th-12th A, 8th-9th

Animal & Bone Cattle, rib

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 54. Production waste (cont.) Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

54:515

S

72000

G89

Perforated tablet

54:516

A

1228

128

54:517

S

95015

A91-92

Disk production waste Disk production waste

306

Period & Cent. ER

R

Animal & Bone Scapula

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 55. Ivory objects: handles Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent. B?

55:518

S

85265

8073

Handle

55:519

A

30069

3013

Handle

55:520

S

91434-1

9439

Handle

55:521

P

0040

118

Handle

55:522

S

65298

1864

Handle

LR-B

55:523

S

65012

1788

Handle

R-B

55:524

S

25495

Q20

Handle

LB, 6th-7th?

55:525

S

18141

1591

Handle\tool head?

LB

308

R, 2nd-3rd

Remarks Hippopotamus ivory

With Nos. 526527

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 56. Ivory objects: double buttons, whorls\buttons, boxes Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

56:526

S

91434-2

9439

Double button

Period & Cent. R, 2nd-3rd

56:527

S

91434-3

9439

Double button

R, 2nd-3rd

56:528

P

0033

021

Whorl\button

B, 4th-6th

56:529

A

0021

018

Whorl\button

H, 2nd BCE

56:530

A

---

I2 topsoil

Whorl\button

56:531

S

39346

Topsoil

Whorl\button

56:532

A

0010

279

Box

56:533

A

1399

940

Box

56:534

S

18746

2122

Lid?

56:535

A

0180-4

253

Box wall

56:536

S

8625

C48

Box wall

310

Remarks With Nos. 520, 527 With Nos. 520, 526

Ivory? Ivory?

B

With 145

No.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 57. Ivory objects: heads, stopper, combs, jewelry Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

57:537

S

9059

048

Hinge\tool head?

57:538

S

34084

3-B

Hinge\tool head?

57:539

S

74732

B91-92

Stopper?

57:540

A

0126

064

Comb

A, 9th

57:541

A

0751

000

Comb

A-C, 10th-13th

57:542

S

34442

10350

Comb

A

57:543

S

53418

E22

Pin

B

57:544

S

73400

1617

Ring

LR

57:545

P

0024

003

Brecelet or bead

LB

57:546

S

24391

T22-23

Castanet handle?

LB

312

Remarks

B

Ivory?

Ivory?

Ivory?

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 58. Ivory objects: Gaming pieces, writing instruments, inlays, carved pieces Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

58:547

A

0035

020

Gaming piece?

58:548

P

0061

818

Gaming piece

LB

58:549

A

1244

134

Gaming piece

LB-A, 6th-9th

58:550

P

0205

085

Gaming piece

58:551

A

0169

097

Writing tablet?

58:552

A

0443-1

144

Writing tablet?

A, 10th-11th

58:553

S

23994-2

4331

Inlay

LB, 6th

58:554

S

40187

10868

Inlay?

LB-A

58:555

S

38833

10593

Inlay

R-LR

58:556

S

83270

3708

Inlay

LB

58:557

P

0162

000

Carved piece

58:558

P

0026

003

Inlay?

314

Remarks

Ivory?

LB

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 59. Ivory objects: Inlays, carved pieces Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

59:559

S

26092

4624

Inlay

B, 5th

59:560

S

27237

U18

Carved piece

A

59:561

S

18787

2110

Inlay

R

59:562

S

34021

10310

Inlay

LB

59:563

S

34020

10310

Inlay

LB

59:564

S

81080

M2\3

Carved pieces

LB

316

Remarks

With 129 Ivory?

No.

At least 2

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 60. Ivory objects: Decorated objects, Miscellanea Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

60:565

A

0782

000

Decorated object

A, 10th

60:566

A

0616-2

211

Decorated object

A, 7th-8th

60:567

S

14008

1601

RB

60:568

P

0161

178

Foot or gaming piece? Hollow cylinder

60:569

A

0331

122

Part of object

318

Remarks

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure 61. Ivory objects: Rods, production waste Fig. & No.

Exp.

Basket

Locus

Object

Period & Cent.

61:570

P

0061

019

Carved rod

B

61:571

S

70392

1645

Rod

LB

61:572

A

0680

555

Carved rod

A-C, 10th-13th

61:573

P

0098

008

Raw tablet

LB

61:574

A

0092

671

A, 8th-9th

61:575

S

24146

4228

Ajouré production waste Unfinished stopper

61:576

S

39225-2

10634

LB-A

61:577

S

34605

10262

Lathe rough-out end Lathe rough-out end

320

Remarks Ivory?

ER, 1st

A

With 488

No.

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Plate 1: Map of Caesarea and the Excavated Areas (after Holum, Raban and Patrich 1999)

323

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 2: Cattle skeleton: principal bones mentioned in the text (after MacGregor 1985 Fig. 7)

Plate 3: Handle No. 518, made from hippopotamus ivory. Photograph: Y. Dray

324

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Plate 4: Bone divider in a belt made in India from bone beads threaded on strings. The dividers held the strings in place (Eretz Israel Museum collection. Photograph: L. Pedrul)

Plate 5: Lace production as exhibited in the Textile Museum, Barcelona 2002. The wooden handles on left resemble the bone "shuttles" from Caesarea (Photograph: E. Ayalon)

325

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 6: Reconstructed use of the bone lock (Drawing: Y. Dray)

Plate 7: Gilded bone pin No. 217 (Photograph: L. Pedrul)

326

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Plate 8: Wooden chest inlayed with mother-of-pearl (the design) and bone (the frames) pieces, Damascus, 20th century (Eretz Israel Museum Collection. Photograph: L. Pedrul)

327

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 9: Wooden miror frame decorated with meshrebiyya rods, Cairo, 20th century (Photograph: L. Pedrul) 328

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Plate 10: Rosary bead workshop, Germany (?), 17th century (after Gróf and Gróh 2001 Fig. 5)

Plate 11: Traditional mother-of-pearl workshop, Bethlehem, 19th century (after: Wilson 1880: 133) 329

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 12: Bone artist V. Kurov carving bone by a knife, 1999 (Photograph: L. Pedrul)

Plate 13: Small frame saw of the mother-of-pearl artisan, Bethlehem, 1970'; similar saws were probably used by bone and ivory craftsmen (Courtesy: Y. Shadur; Photograph: L. Pedrul)

330

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Plate 14: Reconstructed stages of cutting rings from a long bone diaphysis on a lathe (reconstruction: Y. Dray)

331

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 15: Reconstruction of the use of a bow-driven lathe (Drawing: S. Sawadi)

332

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Photograph 1: Various objects illustrating production and wear marks (Photograph: Y. Dray) 333

ILLUSTRATIONS AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Photograph 2: Enlarged look at various objects illustrating production and wear marks (Photograph: Y. Dray)

334

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE

Photograph 3: A selection of inlays and waste pieces from Raban's basket 0105, Locus 269, Area I2, Early Arab period (Photograph: Y. Dray) 335

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Period abbreviations ER = Early Roman; R = Roman; LR = Late Roman; B = Byzantine; A = Early Arab; C = Crusader; Ot = Ottoman. Porath Expedition Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

188

I+

2122

96

Pin

1688

I12

---

92

Pin fr.

1947

I13

---

92

Shuttle? Pin fr.

2412

D13

1021

92

Pin fr.

2647 2737

--E13

11 ---

92 92

Handle Gaming piece

2827 2834

--F12

1050 1050

92 92

Pin 2 Pin fr.

3015

---

92

Handle

3275

92

Pin fr.

3939

MN1 2 ---

Topsoil --G11

---

Ajouré inlay

4065 4259

I B

I14 D15

92 92

Carved piece Gaming piece

4531 5010

I ---

22 ---

94 92

Pin Pin fr.

5175

I

R-S15

92

Whorl\button

5412

I13

---

92

Lid?

5548 5859

-----

H11 14

92 92

Handle? Gaming piece

5860

---

14

92

Needle fr.

6000

---

92

Pin

6175

NM

Topsoil 1111

92

Pin fr.

6231 6253

D14 F13

1144 1152

92 92

Comb fr. Pin fr.

6418

F13

1152

92

Pin fr.

6611

B+

92

Pin fr.

6669

E14

L-M 11-12 B

92

Needle

6732 6867

I+ ---

1180 1168

92 92

Pin fr. Ring

7860

I+

7901

96

Hand pick?

8200 8414 8571

-------

48 I25 13

92 96 92

Carved piece 4 Pin frs. Furniture mount?

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

8:94 B-A

3:26

Cattle femur LR-B 2:9

Cattle? tibia Ivory?

R-B?

37:352

A 6:59

Horse metatarsus

Cattle metatarsus?

337

Cattle metatarsus

B-A A

2:23 29:295

R-LR

16:157

LR LR

20:195 25:263

A A

40:368

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

8625 8626 8971 9059 9910 10000

H14 H14 H14 H14 IW ---

10089

I+

10144

Locus

Year

Object

92 92 92 92 92 92

Box fr. Box fr. Box Tool\hinge head? Carved piece Box base?

92

Carved piece

---

048 048 048 048 K17 Topsoil E1213 1187

92

Needle

10542

---

D12

92

Pin

10554

---

F`12

92

Pin

10634

---

F11

92

Needle?

10674

---

F11

92

Pin

10678

---

F11

92

Pin

10694

I+

F10

92

Pin

10719

---

F11

92

Pin

10722?

II

39102

94

10756

---

39916

94

2 Inlays; doll hand? 2 waste pieces Handle

10775

I+

E13

92

Pin

10790

---

E12

92

Needle

10837 10979

F11 ---

1257 1266

92 92

Pin Gaming piece

11476

---

1327

93

11105 11595 11677

--I+ ---

1266 1174 ---

92 93 93

Lathe rough-out end Scraper? Carved piece Pin fr.

11693

I+

1174

93

11930

I+

1387

93

Ring production waste Pin

12209 12257

FW IW

L92 108

92 92

Pin Handle

12268

IW

108

92

Box

12281 12302 12314

IW IW IW

109 110 108

92 92 92

12369 12399

IW IW

107 ---

92 92

Weaving tool? Box base? Handle? Furniture mount? Handle\tool head? Box

1243015 12655

---

131

92

Pin fr.

---

G12

92

Decorated tablet

127098

IW

G12

92

Hinge\handle\bead?

Animal & Bone Ivory

Ivory

Period & Date LR-B LR-B LR-B LR-B B-A

Fig. & No. 56:536 14:145 12:130 57:537 40:377 12:133 35:337

Cattle\horse metatarsus Cattle femur Cattle rib

A

21:218 29:302

LR LR-B

5:53 39:365

A A A

13:137

A A A

5:56 12:134 2:21 45:424

A B-A B-A Cattle tibia?

338

48:453

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

12887

IW

12948

IW

13484

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

92

Pin

92

Pin fr.

I+

G-H 17 G-H 17 000

93

Handle?

14002

I+

1600

93

Point?

14008

I+

1601

93

14016

I+

1601

93

14070 14081

I+ I+

1605 1605

93 93

Foot\gaming piece\ decoration? Die production waste; 2 Pin fr.; rod Pin Pin fr.

14158

I+

1612

93

Whorl

15498?

I+

H97

93

Handle

15601

I+

1563

93

Pin

15778

I+

1584

93

Waste

15918

---

1612

93

Waste

16007

---

---

93

Pin fr.

16032

---

1614

93

Pin; pendant? tablet

16072

A+

1614

93

2 Pins

16080

A+

1614

93

Pin fr.

16108

A+

1614

93

Bead?

16115 16130

A+ ---

1616 1614

93 93

Rod; Pin fr. Carved piece

16144

---

1617

93

16157

---

1617

93

16173

---

1618

93

Needle; needle fr.; stylus? 4 pin frs. Pin; stylus? Needle fr.; pin fr. Raw tablet

16179

---

1618

93

Pin

16193 16195 16207

-------

1614 1614 1614

93 93 93

16208

---

1614

93

16223

---

1614

16230

---

16247

Horse metapodial Ivory

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

4:44 R-B

60:567

R-B

21:202

Donkey metapodial Donkey metapodial

ER

Antler (pendant)

B

22:224 24:257 49:459

B

10:117

Decorated tablet Carved piece Pin

LR LR

40:373 36:345

LR

51:491

93

Ring production waste Pin fr.

1618

93

Pin fr.

---

1618

93

Waste

16248 16257

-----

1618 1618

93 93

2 Pin fr.; needle fr. Needle

LR

19:176

16278

---

1618

93

Pin fr.

16302

---

1614

93

Pin fr.

339

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

16306

A+

1616

93

Tuning peg?

16340

---

1619

93

Pin fr.

16365

A+

1619

93

Needle; pin fr.

16386

A+

1620

93

Pin fr.

16396

A+

1620

93

Pin fr.

16728

A+

1621

93

Needle

16746

A+

Top-soil

93

Pin; pin fr.

16782

A+

1627

93

Pin fr.

16982 170123 17035

A+ ---

1633 1718

93 93

Whorl\button Pin fr.

I+

1726

93

Waste

17171

I+

1755

93

Pin fr.

17313

I+

1765

93

Inlay?

17462

I+

1744

93

Waste

17593

I+

0000

93

Waste

17647

I+

1798

93

Whorl\button

17673

I+

0000

93

Whorl\button

17757

I+

1770

93

Waste

17878 17892

-----

1831 1788

93 93

Gaming piece? Pin

17945

---

1841

93

Pin fr.

17954

---

1805

93

17980

---

1831

93

Lathe rough-out end Pin fr.

18005

I+

1598

93

Gaming piece

18034

I+N

1582

93

Die

Cattle metatarsus Ivory?

18038

I+N

2110

93

Waste

Rib

18091 18141 18176

I+N I+N I+N

1591 1591 2015

93 93 93

Tablet Handle\tool head? Gaming piece

18242

I+N

2046

93

18257

I+N

2022

93

Handle\gaming piece\ furniture mount? Shuttle?

18360 18411 18414 18447 18448 18547

I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N

2081 2090 2092 2092 2094 2092

93 93 93 93 93 93

18589

I+N

2092

93

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

R Donkey metatarsus 40:374 Cattle metacarpus Cattle? metatarsus

Pin Handle Tablet Needle fr. Whorl\button Die production waste Pin

Ivory Cattle metatarsus

LR-B

28:286

LR-B

50:473

B

LB LB LB

B B B B B B B 340

40:372 55:525 29:301

2:10 26:450

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone Cattle\horse metatarsus

18609

I+N

2116

93

Gaming piece

18694 18697 18709 18719 18720 18734 18736 18746 18759

I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N

2110 2122 2122 2110 2122 1571 2122 2122 ---

93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

18766 18787

I+N I+N

2110 2110

93 93

18791 18805 18819 18826

I+N I+N I+N I+N

2122 2122 2122 2110

93 93 93 93

18829 18838

I+N I+N

2112 2139

93 93

Pin fr. Button; pin fr. Awl? Pin; 2 pin frs. Pin Pin; pin fr. Pin fr. Pin fr.; 4 pin frs. Lid Ring production waste; pin fr. 2 Pins; 2 pin frs. Box; inlay; 17 pin frs. Pin fr. 3 Pin frs. Tablet; stylus? Ring production waste; decoration? 4 Pin frs. Pin; pin fr.

18844 18855

I+N I+N

2110 2110

93 93

18864 18865

I+N I+N

2122 2122

93 93

18871

I+N

2110

93

18873

I+N

2122

93

18877 18881

I+N I+N

2092 2110

93 93

18882

I+N

2122

93

18905

I+N

2122

93

18918 18920 18931 18941 18949 18951 18960 18970 18979 18988

I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N I+N ---

2110 2122 2122 2122 2147 2122 2122 2122 2122 2143

18998

I+N

19001 19018 19021

I-W I+N I+N

14 Pin frs. Ring production waste; cylinder; 13 pin frs. Waste Pin fr.

Ivory

Ivory (inlay)

Period & Date B B B B B B B B B B R B B B R-B

Fig. & No.

6:65

22:228

56:534

12:129 59:561

51:490

B

Ivory (cylinder) Cattle rib

B B

1 Stained

B

52:499

Rod; rod fr.; 8 pin frs. Pin; needle fr.; 4 pin frs.; thickened item Pin; 2 pin frs. Die production waste 3 Pin frs.

B

48:452

B

93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

2 Pins; 5 pin frs.; inlay; point Pin fr. Pin; whorl\button Pin; pin fr. 3 Pin frs.; stylus Pin fr. 4 Pin frs. Pin fr.; waste 6 Raw\waste pieces 2 Pin frs.; waste Whorl\button

2147

93

Fish vertebra; waste

2122 000 2122

93 93 93

2 Pin frs. Decoration Pin fr.

B B B

B B B B B B B B B

B B B 341

Remarks

21:220

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

19024 19040 19225 20043

I+N I+N -----

2122 2122 G8-10 100260

93 93 93 96

Pin fr. 2 Pin frs. 2 Pins; 3 pin frs. Gaming piece

20149

---

92

Gaming piece

20254 20377

-----

R1415 4019 S13

92 92

Carved piece 4 Pin frs.

20556

---

W3

92

Carved piece

20557

I-E

U13

92

Carved piece

20558

---

IR14

92

20628 20629 20644

-------

92 92 92

20767

---

4051 4051 Q1415 O14?

Ring production waste Pin Whorl\button Stylus

92

Needle fr.

20823 20829

-----

4053 R18

92 92

21042

I-E

92

21589

---

U1213 9570?

Die Hinge\furniture mount? Box

---

5 Raw\waste pieces

22502

I-E

RS13

93

Pin fr.

23150 23192? 23214 23318 23319

I-E ----I-E ---

4231 4272 4239 4263 4263

93 93 93 93 93

Handle\carved rod Pin fr. Box Handle? Gaming piece?

23357? 23359 23387?

F4-5 4264 4264

96 93 96

2 Pins + fr.; Needle Whorl\button Pin frs.

B B R-B

23522 23523 23524

----EF 4-5 I-E -----

4288 4286 ---

93 93 93

Point 2 Pin frs. 2 Waste pieces

B B B

52:502

23526

I-E

4288

93

B

49:470

23582 23584

I-E I-E

4288 R21

93 93

Lathe rough-out end? 2 Pin frs. Pin fr.

23604

---

4041

93

Waste piece

23747 23748

I-E I-E

93 93

23791 23925 23926

I-E I-E I-E

4273 T1819 4265 4316 4316

Needle 5 Lathe rough-out ends Pin Die Pin

93 93 93

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date B B B

Fig. & No.

23:246

B-A

38:355

B-A

35:336

R-B R-B

23:245 6:64

Remarks

Cattle metatarsus

Cattle metapodial

LR Cattle metatarsus B-A

Horse metatarsus

Donkey tibia; cattle metacarpus

A LR A A A

Natural?

B Cattle metatarsus

342

12:132

B-A ER R-B

50:477

B-A LR LR

19:177

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

23994

I-E

4331

93

2 Pin frs.; inlay

24036 24047

--I-E

U15 P14

93 93

24088 24142 24146 24167 24235 24267 24298

I-E I-E I-E I-E I-E I-E ---

4338 4228 4228 4337 4310 4310 U17

24370 24378 24391

I-E I-E ---

24417 24470

I-E I-E

24506 24550 24600

Animal & Bone Ivory (inlay)

Period & Date B

58:553

Spoon Pin fr.

B

17:161

93 93 93 93 93 93 93

Raw\waste piece Pin fr. Lid Pin fr. Raw rod; doll leg Pin fr. Pin fr.; inlay

A ER ER B-A A A

93 93 93

Pin Pin fr. Pendant

93 93

Pin fr. Pin fr.

LR

I-E I-E I-E

4374 4310 T2223 4383 Topsoil 4368 4388 4331

93 93 93

ER B B

24677 24741

I-E I-E

4407 9331

93 93

25016

IW

740

94

25023 25024 25043

I I I

740 740 743

94 94 94

25061 25140 25176 25198 25219 25220 25222 25223 25224

I I IW I I I I I I

396 369 4515 731 4515 4515 022 022 022

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

Pin? Pin Pin fr.; 2 raw\waste pieces Stylus Inlay; lathe roughout end Lathe rough-out end 2 Needles Pin fr. Ring production waste Pin 3 Pin frs. Pin 3 Pin frs. Pin fr.; stylus\pin? Waste piece Needle Needle Pin

25232 25239

I I

4535 4515

94 94

Stylus; inlay; piece Raw\waste piece

R

25263 25264

I I

4541 4531

94 94

Inlay? Pin; 2 points

B R

25267

I

4518

94

B

25290

I

4551

94

Gaming piece; raw rod Needle; 2 points

25330

I

4531

94

Pin

25331

I

4531

94

2 Pin frs.

Ivory

Ivory?

Cattle metatarsus

B? A B

31:310

57:546

49:462, 465 40:370

LR-B

50:476

LR-B LR-B B

51:489

B B B B B B A B-A B

22:226

LR

Remarks

61:575

LR R

R

343

Fig. & No.

Natural points? 29:300 Natural point?

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

25338 25339 25361

I I I

4515 4515 4541

94 94 94

Pin fr. Raw\waste piece Die

25369

I

4146

94

Carved piece\inlay

25390 25446 25495 25513 25528 25551 25560 25600

I I I-E I IW I I I

4541 4527 Q20 4527 4557 4557 S20 4577

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

Pin fr. Pin fr. Handle “Ear probe” Pin Pin fr. Needle 25 Raw\waste pieces

25626

I

Topsoil

94

25817 25862 25924

I I I

4567 4592 4601

94 94 94

Lathe rough-out end; inlay; 7 raw\waste pieces Pin fr. 2 Needles Pin; pin fr.

25932 25969 25970 25971 25973 25977 25993 25997 26006

I I I I I I I I I

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

26013

I

4374 4601 4601 4601 4559 4515 4524 4370 Topsoil 4561

26021 26045

I I

94 94

26092 26157 26183

I I I

4561 R2021 4624 4651 Q22

94 94 94

Pin fr. Pin fr. Needle Waste piece Pin fr. Pin fr. Pin\needle fr. Pin fr. 3 Pin frs.; lathe waste; raw piece Lathe rough-out end Pin Lathe rough-out end Ajouré inlay Tablet Pin fr.

26187

I

94

Pin; pin fr.

26218 26246

I I

RQ2021 4660 R22

94 94

Pin fr. Pin fr.

ER

26259 26271

I I

732 R22

94 94

Carved piece Pin

A

38:353

26285 26301 26370

I I I

732 732 4656

94 94 94

A A B

13:141 26:278

26395 26496 26527 26579

I I I I

4551 4592 4703 4707

94 94 94 94

Box Tuning peg Ring production waste Carved piece Pin Pin Raw piece

Locus

Year

94

Object

Animal & Bone

Cattle metatarsus

Ivory

Horse femur; pelvis

Period & Date B B B

B B B B B B ER ER

55:524 18:169 23:240 9:111

50:471, 478 B ER B LR LR LR B B B B LR

Ivory

LR R

20:194 50:479

B B

58:559

LR LR B ER 344

Fig. & No.

23:248

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date

26594

I

4723

94

Pin fr.

26603 26612 26616 26654 26737

I I I I I

456 4723 4707 600 Top-soil

94 94 94 94 94

Rod Waste piece Handle Globular item 3 Pin frs.

26744

I

4141

94

Gaming piece

26771 26773 26844 26850 26882 26908

I I I I I I

4764 4764 4533 4509 4509 4509

94 94 94 94 94 94

26912 26919 26924 26992 27017 27034 27053

I I I I I I I

4786 4786 4509 4788 4794 4794 4793

94 94 94 94 94 94 94

Handle? Raw piece 3 Waste pieces 2 Pins; 2 pin frs. Pin; 3 pin frs. 7 Pin frs.; waste piece Pin fr. Globular item 2 Pin frs. Pin Fish vertebra Box Disk\lid?

27060 27068 27095 27223 27227 27237 27238 27382 27387

I I I I I I I I I

4802 4794 4002 4707 U18 U18 U18 4458 4511

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

27390 27392 27419 27420

I I I I

4786 4801 4786 4511

94 94 94 94

27424 27465

I I

4830 4834

94 94

Pin fr. Needle Pin fr. 2 Pin frs. Pin fr.; needle Carved piece Stylus? Pin\stylus Pin fr.; 4 lathe rough- out ends; 10 raw\ waste pieces Needle Stylus? Needle Lathe rough-out end; 4 raw\waste pieces Needle Needle

27467

I

4834

94

Stylus\distaff

ER

27568 27587 27588

I I I

4816 4781 4784

94 94 94

Roe deer

ER ER ER

27589

I

4570

94

Bead 7 Raw\waste pieces 2 Inlays; 20 raw\waste pieces Waste pieces

27605

I

4511

94

Pig ulna; cattle Pig femur

ER

27607

I

4046

94

A LR ER ER Cattle metatarsus

13 Raw\waste pieces Disk\lid?

345

Ivory

Donkey tarsus & metatarsus

Remarks

47:449

A A A ER LR LR LR

Ivory

Fig. & No.

B B LR LR ER ER ER ER A B A A A B ER

48:455 19:179

20:190 13:140

59:560

49:466

B ER B ER ER ER

With 27644

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

27636

I

4570

94

27644

I

4784

94

27645 27784 27811 27812 27830 27836 27836 27837

I I -------------

4781 4816 4561 4561 4882 4881 4888 4888

94 94 95 95 95 95 95 95

27838 27862 27886 27889 27890 27896 27966 27968 28076 28084 28086 28119 28189 28201 28222 28283 30082

----------------------I53 ----J54 I III

--4882 4881 4881 4881 4887 4887 4887 4913 4916 4916 4842 4920 I52 5008 25218 3002

95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 96 96 96 96 00 92

2 Raw\waste pieces Buckle tongue Pin Pin; stylus? Needle 2 Pin frs. Needle Awl; raw\waste piece Pin fr. Pin fr. Pin 2 Pin frs. Bead? Pin fr. Pin Pin fr. Pin fr. 2 Pin\needle frs. Waste piece Pin Waste pieces Shuttle? Pin Carved piece Buckle

30096?

---

Sq. 4

92

Die

30322 30789

-----

Sq. 16 3147

92 93

Ajouré inlay Fish vertebra

C

31107

IIS

10017

92

Handle

B, Ot

31557

IIS

D109

92

Handle

31652

IIS

10103

92

Disk

31653

IIS

10103

92

Ajouré inlay

32009

IIS

10117

92

32042 33007

IIS IIS

10117 10146

92 93

Ring production waste Ajouré inlay Carved rod

33168

---

G114

93

Die

33451

II

10225

93

Ring

33574

II

10273

93

Handle

33612

II

10287

93

33685

II

10261

93

Locus

Year

Object 2 Lathe rough-out ends; 2 raw\waste pieces 4 Raw\waste pieces

Animal & Bone Cattle ulna

Period & Date ER

Roe deer

ER

Cattle metatarsus

ER ER LR LR LR LR B LR LR LR LR LR LR R R R B B B B LR R ER B

Fig. & No.

With 27588 8:99

4:54

24:260

8:93 20:192 8:97

2:13 3:24

A?

43:410 46:428

Ivory? 25:265 Cattle, metatarsus

A

1:2

Decorated rod

LR

10:114

Carved piece

B

346

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

33729

II

10262

93

Carved piece

33760 33895

II II

10188 10266

93 93

Whorl\button Doll hand

33981

II

10262

93

Doll

34020 34021 34084

II II II

10310 10310 3-B

93 93 93

Inlay Inlay Hinge\tool head?

34187

II

10262

93

Pin

34412

II

Sq. 302

93

34413

II

Sq. 302

93

Die production waste Die

34414

II

10337

93

Pin

34416

II

Sq. 302

93

34434

II

Sq. 302

93

Lathe rough-out end Waste piece

34442 34444 34534 34605

II II II II

10350 10350 10350 10262

93 93 93 93

34606

II

10262

93

Comb Ajouré inlay Ajouré inlay Lathe rough-out end Pin fr.

34641 34723 34850

II -----

10391 10398 10409

94 93 93

Handle Doll Decoration

35256

---

12084

92

Inlay

35280

---

12058

92

Waste piece

35531

---

12102

92

Broken piece

35532

BII

H10

92

Raw\waste piece

35903

IIN

12190

92

Shuttle?

35994

IIN

12201

92

Die

36037 37005 37180

IIN --II

G13 10422 10533

92 --94

LR? B-A

37354

II

10459

94

Raw piece Inlay Ring production waste 2 Frame inlays

37456 37547

II II

10480 3B\B

94 94

Pin\stamp? Handle

A

21:213 3:28

37564 37839

II II

10489 10522

94 94

Box? Doll

ER

13:143

37840

3D

10522

94

Button

37857

II

10522

94

3 Inlays; raw piece

37913

II

10490

94

38192

II

10545

92

Ring production waste Hinge?

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Cattle metacarpus Ivory Ivory? Ivory

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

B

6:63

A

32:318

B B

59:563 59:562 57:538

Remarks

23:250

Ivory

Ivory

A A A A

57:542

A? A

3:30 33:321

44:419 61:577

Horse metatarsus

Cattle? humerus Painted red

347

Cattle rib

B

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

38197

II

10262

94

Pin

38213

II

10534

94

2 Waste pieces

38295 38298 38309

II --II

10494 K-D3 10551

94 96 94

Pin Pin Needle

38310

II

10551

94

Die

38390

II

10560

94

Frame inlay; disk

38396 38398

II II

10561 10560

94 94

Handle Raw\waste piece

38399 38400

II II

10560 10560

94 94

38401

II

10560

94

38402 38403

II II

10560 10560

94 94

Carved piece Decoration\handle\ hinge Furniture mount\hinge Lid locking peg? Inlay

38409

II

10560

94

Whorl

38413

II

10560

94

Inlay

38462

II

10605

94

Frame inlay

38522 38560

II II

10560 10564

94 94

Carved piece Pin fr.

38562

II

10605

94

Pin fr.

38613

II

10390

94

Frame inlay

38623

II

10556

94

Decoration

38632

II

10574

94

Needle

9:108

38650

II

10563

94

Carved piece

39:363

38652

II

10560

94

Inlay

38681

II

10574

94

2 Needles

38691

---

10563

94

Pin fr.

38719

II

10589

94

Pin

38734

II

10560

94

38738

II

10590

94

38740

---

---

---

Hinge\furniture mount Die production waste? Waste piece

38741?

II

10390

94

Waste piece

38741

II

10590

94

38742

II

10590

94

Die production waste Waste piece

38743

II

10590

94

Pin fr.

38780

II

10590

94

Pin fr.

38818

II

10563

94

Raw\waste piece

38831

II

10593

94

Pin fr.

A B

19:178 21:203

R-B

2:11

A

38:357

Cattle tibia Cattle metatarsus Cattle metatarsus

Painted red A

45:425

A

14:150

B-A

B

23:244

348

Remarks

Painted red

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

38833 38869

II II

10593 10595

94 94

38907

II

10567

38961

II

38962

Object

94

Inlay Frame inlay; waste piece Gaming piece?

Animal & Bone Ivory Ivory (inlay) Ivory?

10605

94

2 inlay waste pieces

Ivory?

II

10605

94

Inlay?

38981

II

10603

94

Waste piece

38982

II

10603

94

38983

II

10603

94

Die production waste Raw\waste piece

38984

II

10603

94

Lathe rough-cut end

38985

II

10603

94

Waste piece

38986

II

10603

94

Pin fr.

38987

II

10603

94

Waste piece

38988

II

10603

94

Waste piece

38989

II

10603

94

Waste piece

38990

II

10603

94

Waste piece

39050

II

10607

94

2 Pin frs.

39052

II

10607

94

2 Pin frs.

39053

II

10607

94

5 waste pieces

39102

II

10460

94

39107

II

10616

94

2 Inlays; pendant? 2 waste pieces Pin fr.

391242 39150

II

10612

94

Waste piece

II

10624

94

Stylus? Waste piece

39165

II

10618

94

39174

II

10625

94

6 Pin frs.; 4 raw\waste pieces Pin fr.

39177

II

10627

94

39210

II

10632

94

39225

II

10634

94

39265 39299

II II

10460 10646

94 94

Pin fr.; die production waste; waste piece Die production waste; fish vertebra Die production waste; lathe roughout end Handle? Fish vertebra

39312 39346

II II

94 94

Carved piece Whorl\button

39406 39447

II II

10460 Topsoil 10658 ---

94 94

Carved piece Raw piece

39470

II

10682

94

Ring

39484

II

10685

94

Stylus? 3 pin frs.; ring; 4 waste pieces

Ivory (rough-out)

Period & Date R-LR

58:555

A

44:414, 415

B-A

50:488; 61:576

B-A A

39:361 56:531

B

39:360

Ivory

Ivory

349

Fig. & No.

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

39533 39535 39579 39639

II II II II

10660 10660 10660 10712

94 --94 94

39643

II

10796

94

Pin Pin Bead? Inlay; 23 inlay raw\ waste pieces 2 Frame inlays

39644

II

10792

95

3 Waste pieces

39681

II

10728

94

Inlay

39682

II

10728

94

39683

II

10792

94

Die production waste Waste piece

39683

II

10728

94

Inlay

39799 39916

II II

10771 10756

94 94

Pin Handle

39936

II

10792

94

39941

II

10756

39972 39976

II II

39984

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Ivory (ajouré)

Period & Date B B B B-A

Fig. & No. 21:217 24:261 42:401 49:464

B

21:207

B

1:7

94

Handle? 3 Waste pieces Handle

10792 10792

95 94

2 Waste pieces Pin

A

II

---

---

Pin

39986

II

10792

94

40021

II

10801

94

Ring production waste “Ear probe”

40023 40046

II II

10802 10801

94 95

Inlay? Waste piece

40058

---

10835

95

5 Inlays

40064

---

10805

95

40081

II

10796

94

40103

---

10796

95

Pin fr.; 3 waste pieces Lathe rough-out end 5 Inlays

40113 40121

-----

10782 10796

95 95

Doll 3 Inlays

40163

---

10836

95

Waste piece

40180

---

10845

95

40187

II

10868

95

40199 40204

-----

10870 10870

95 95

Die production waste Inlay; raw die; 3 raw pieces 5 Raw\waste pieces Pin fr.

40212

II

10868

95

402172 40265

II

10868

95

---

10876

95

40270

---

10878

95

Ivory

A-C

A

Ivory? (some) Horse\cattle metatarsus

Pin; pin fr.; 14 raw\ waste pieces Die production waste Pin fr.; 2 waste pieces Button; raw piece

350

A

32:320

B

53:508

R-B Ivory (inlay)

B-A

58:554

B B-A B

20:191

Remarks Gilded

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

403001

---

10878

95

40320

---

10884

95

40496

---

10896

95

40504

---

10896

95

50637

IW

140

93

Die waste Die

51296

---

344

93

Handle?

51442

IW

344

93

Needle

51660

IW

205

93

Handle?

51730

IW

131

93

51785

IW

385

93

Ring production waste 2 Pin frs.

51834

IW

E13

93

Furniture mount?

52163 52240

IW IW

428 428

93 93

Perforated tablet Handle\toy?

B

24:253 3:35

52285

IW

451

93

B

50:487

52297

---

446

93

Die production waste Pin\needle fr.

52926

IW

490

93

2 Pin frs.

53089

IW

510

93

Pin

53219

---

488

93

53241 53418 53436

IW IW IW

497 E22 543

93 93 93

Ring production waste Whorl\button Pin Pin fr.

B B

6:69 57:543

53441 53490

IW IW

526 550

93 93

Fastener Pin fr.

B

8:90

53753

IW

559

93

Needle

53917

IW

586

93

Knife handle

53918

IW

586

93

54112

IW

604

93

Die production waste? Handle

54222

IW

605

93

Pin

54234

IW

609

93

54241

IW

604

93

Pin fr.; 2 gaming pieces Pin\needle fr.

54376 54489 54490

IW IW IW

607 --555

93 93 93

Carved piece Pin fr. 2 Pin fr.

ER B

54538 54590 54687

IW IW ---

627 664 HG 19-20

93 93 93

Carved piece Tuning peg; disk Whorl\button

LR LR B

Pin fr.; 3 waste pieces; 4 die production waste Pin; rod; inlay; 4 die production waste Waste piece production

R-B Horse metatarsus Ivory? Ivory?

Ivory?

3:32

351

Ivory? (2)

47:442

26:275 7:71

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

54817

IW

679

93

Handle?

54831

IW

391

93

Castanet or pendant

54944 55037

IW IW

735 731

93 93

Decoration 2 Pin fr.

B

55038

IW

731

93

LR

55039

IW

740

93

55050

IW

740

93

Lathe rough-out end Lathe rough-out end Pin

55055

IW

739

93

Pin fr.

55441

IS

929

93

2 Pins

59006

IS

457

93

Carved piece

59014

---

Top- soil

93

Handle

59023

IS

93

Pin fr.; waste piece

59027

IS

93

59077

IS

Topsoil Topsoil G13

Pin fr.; raw\waste piece Pin fr.

59102 59113

IS ---

910 G13

93 93

59115

IS

907

93

Pin Handle\furniture mount? Pin

59175

IS

915

93

3 Pin fr.

59191

IS

F13

93

2 Pin fr.

59217

IS

F13

93

Perforated vertebra

59247

IS

920

93

Pin

59274

IS

909

93

Pin fr.; piece

59289

IS

G11

93

3 Pin fr.

59335

IS

909

93

2 Pin fr.

59384

IS

FG11

93

Pin

59396

---

909

93

Pin

59409

---

909

93

2 Pin fr.

59441 59495

IS IS

929 F10

93 93

2 Pin fr. Pin

59496

IS

F11

93

2 Pin fr.

59500

IS

---

93

Carved piece

59588

IS

F10

93

Carved piece

59612

IS

937

93

Inlay?

60160

---

6010

93

Die

60317

---

D86

93

Pin

60526

T+

6057

93

Carved piece

60843

T+

6066

93

Waste piece

93

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

50:475

LR

2:17 Cattle femur

52:503

B

22:234

Shark

B 20:199 35:338 B

40:367

47:448 Horse metatarsus

352

Remarks

Painted red

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

61012

---

H83

93

62026

I

6104

94

Furniture mount \ handle Whorl\button

62109

T+

6161

94

Carved piece

62291 62295

T+ T+

6173 6166

94 94

3 Pin\needle fr. Gaming piece

62595

T+

6221

94

2 Point fr.

65012

---

1788

93

Handle

65052

I+

1805

93

4 Pin fr.

65053

---

1805

93

Decoration

65080 65085

I+ ---

1790 1831

93 93

Handle; pin fr. Pin fr.

65105

---

1844

93

Disk

65119

---

1805

93

Waste piece

65152

---

1847

93

Inlay\gaming piece

65158

---

1790

93

Disk - inlay?

65162

---

1805

93

Pin fr.

65207

---

1805

93

2 Pin fr.

65259

---

1857

93

Pin fr.

65296

---

1857

93

Pin fr.

65298 65386

I+ ---

1864 1801

93 93

65413

I+

1750

93

Handle Pin\stylus\kohl stick Pin

65416

E81

1756

93

Gaming piece

65444 65585

I+ I+

1801 1895

93 93

Knife Pin

65588

I+

1894

93

2 Ring fr.

65687

I+

1918

93

Carved piece

65879

I+

93

Pin fr.

65939

---

ED 8182 Q75

93

Die

66020

I+

1963

93

Die

66174

I+

1801

93

Pin

66209

---

1782

93

Pin fr.

66212

---

6523

93

2 Pin fr.

66247 66324 66347

I+ I+ I+

6523 6531 6523

93 93 93

Pin fr. Pin Pin fr.

66350

I+

6523

93

Pin\stylus fr.

66415

I+

6542

93

Pin\needle fr.

66464

I+

6542

93

2 Pin fr.

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

38:356 B

Ivory

R-B

55:523

R-B

Ivory?

Ivory

LR-B

55:522

B

4:46

R R

20:188

Cattle\horse metatarsus Ivory

353

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

67054 67069

I+ I+

6531 6531

94 94

Sawn piece Pin

68046

I+

6609

94

3 Needle fr.

69144

I+

1954

94

Carved piece

69341

I+

6846

94

Hinge\tool head

69577 69816

I+ I+

0000 6889

94 94

69835

I+

6889

69947 70084

I+ A+

70087

Animal & Bone

Period & Date R

Fig. & No. 53:507

B

2:22

94

Handle Ring production waste Disk

1948 1639?

94 93

Pin; pin\needle fr. Pin fr.

R

A+

1639

93

Raw tablet

70107 70167

--A+

1639 1645

93 93

Pin fr. Box

70392 71135

A+ A+

1645 7010

93 94

Rod\stamp? Handle?

71223

A+

H191

94

Box base?

71345

A+

7028

94

Carved piece

71757

A+

7088

94

Handle

71711

A+

K93

94

Vertebra

71767

A+

7088

94

Needle fr.

71814

A+

I90

94

2 Rod fr.

71842

A+

7101

94

Needle fr.

71850

A+

7100

94

Handle\box

72000

A+

1612

94

72058

A+

7043

94

Disk production waste Furniture mount

72093 73043

A+ A+

7043 E95

94 94

73044 73079 73148

A+ A+ A+

7125 1612 IK91

94 94 94

73354

A+

F92

73383

A+

73400 73488

LR Ivory

B

61:571

ER

2:15

ER

54:515

Whorl\button Pin; pin fr.

ER

7:82

ER ER

18:165 50:485

94

Small spoon Drilling waste Hinge\furniture moubt Pin

1617

94

Pin fr.

A+ A+

1617 1617

94 94

Ring Pin fr.

LR

57:544

73539

A+

7175

94

Pin fr.

73603

A+

7181

94

Pin fr.

73634 73643 73660

A+ A+ A+

7181 E95 7185

94 94 94

3 Pin fr. 2 Pins Pin

LR LR-B

21:219 21:204

73679

A+

9190

94

Pin

Fish

Scapula Cattle metatarsus

Cattle metatarsus

Ivory

354

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date

73719

A+

1614

94

Carved piece

73732

A+

E95

94

Pin fr.

73842

A+

7201

94

73892 73908 73930

A+ A+ A+

1620 1620 1621

94 94 94

Carved piece; pin fr.; 2 waste pieces Needle fr. Needle fr. Needle fr.

73955

A+

1621

94

Raw piece

73961

A+

7206

94

73992

A+

1621

94

74043

A+

1621

94

Handle\gaming piece? Needle fr.; 2 pin fr.; 2 raw pieces Needle fr.

74058

A+

1621

94

Pin fr.

74160

A+

1629

94

Pin fr.

74209

A+

1617

94

Pin; 2 pin fr.

74217

A+

7214

94

Pin fr.

74229

A+

1617

94

Pin; 2 pin fr.

74244?

---

6846

94

74257

A+

1617

94

Lathe rough-out end Needle fr.

74293 74294

A+ A+

B90 B90

94 94

Needle Pin

74307

A+

7229

94

Tablet

74331

A+

7192

94

Needle fr.

74376

A+

A-2 81

94

Pin

74439

A+

A93

94

Pin

74492

---

95

Needle fr.

B

74537 74548 74576 74600 74652 74665 74680 74698 74707 74730

---------------------

95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95

Needle Pin fr.; point fr. Raw pin; vertebra 2 Pin fr. Pin fr. Pin Pin fr. Inlay fr. Pin fr. Pin

R R R R R LR-B B B LR

74732

A+

95

Stopper?

74735

---

B9192 7285 E95 A92 E95 E94 7292 7291 ----B9192 B9192 C95

95

Pin fr.

74736

---

A93

95

Raw tablet; pin fr.

74739 74748 74813 74891

A+ -------

D93 --2000 7325

95 95 95 95

Pin 2 Pin fr. Pin; pin fr. Pin

LR

Fig. & No.

36:344

LR LR

R-B

3:36

LR

9:101 20:197

23:249

Shark v.

Ivory

Ivory

57:539

R ER B B 355

49:461

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date B

75050 75087

G+ G+

7509 7504

94 94

Figurine Pin fr.; inlay fr.

75106

G+

0000

94

Pin\stylus fr.

75117

G+

7529

94

Tuning peg

75132

G+

7535

94

Pin fr.

75161

G+

7540

94

Pin

75185

G+

7540

94

Pin\stylus fr.

75224 75307

G+ G+

7508 7540

94 94

Decoration Die

75315?

G+

7542

94

Pin fr.

75320

G+

7508

94

2 Pin fr.

75330 75358

G+ G+

7540 0000

94 94

Pin Bead?

75915

G+

7572

94

Pin fr.

76317

A+

0000

94

76359

I+

6660

94

Furniture mount\ handle? Hand pick\scraper?

76364

I+

000

94

Pin fr.

76394

---

0000

95

Die

76725 76903

-----

7743 7744

95 95

Handle fr.? Pin fr.

76931

---

7746

95

Raw rod?

77292

---

7633

95

Bead

77456

---

7643

95

Pin fr.

77666

---

7784

95

Pin\small spoon?

77772

---

7602

95

Die

77825 77980 78004 78018 78031 78041

-------------

7602 7602 7602 7602 7602 4881

95 95 95 95 95 95

Needle fr. Die stopper 2 Pin fr. Pin fr. Pin fr. 7 Pin fr.

B B B B B

78289 78304 78348 78361 78377 78472

----J1 -------

7602 7602 7602 7602 7602 7891

95 95 96 96 96 96

2 Pin fr. Pin fr. Pin; rod Die Pin fr. Pin fr.

B B B B B

78610

I+

7901

96

Tool?

78837

I+

96

Pin fr.; rod fr.

78937 80003

--I+N

Topsoil 7602 F6-9

95 94

Die Pin

Fig. & No.

Remarks

31:311

B

LR-B

23:242

ER

13:142

Ivory Bone?

Ivory

Ivory\ camel canine

B

Horse? scapula

Natural?

B

356

27:282

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

80010

I+N

F7-10

94

2 Pins

80021

N+

94

Decoration

80158 80208 80238

N+ N+ N+

Topsoil 3313 LM9 3316

94 94 94

Box wall? Pin fr.? Die

Ivory?

80295

N+

946

94

80301 80315

N+ N+

94 94

Ivory?

80368

N+

940 Topsoil 2175

2 Pin fr.; waste piece Lid locking peg? Pin

80444

I+N

3237

94

Hinge\furniture mount head? Pin fr.

80476

N+

3265

94

Die

80603

I+N

F6\7

94

Pin; pin fr.

80612

I+N

F9

94

Pin

80662

N+

3289

94

Bead

80667

N+

F6\7

94

6 Pin\needle fr.

80677 80691

N+ N+

F6\7 F6

94 94

Pin Pin\needle fr.

LR-B

80718 80729

N+ N+

3290 3298

94 94

Carved piece Raw rod

B

80902

N+

3330

94

80915

N+

3330

94

Cosmetic pin fr. Pin fr.

80961 80989 81027

N+ N+ N+

3348 3352 LM3

94 94 94

Pin fr. 5 vertebrae Gaming piece?

81031

N+

3361

94

Piece

81080

N+

M2\3

94

Carved pieces

81042 81068 81083 81098

N+ N+ N+ N+

LM3 LM\3 M2\3 M\N4

94 94 94 94

81099

N+

000

81112

N+

81251 81264 81279 81356 81372 81386

94

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

B B

14:144 21:212

B

14:151

LR-B

15:153

B

Remarks

Stained green

spoon;

Ivory? Shark Donkey metatarsus

R B

Ivory

B

59:564

Carved piece Stylus fr.? Carved piece Rod

B B B

38:359

94

2 Inlays; piece

B

37:350 40:375

3371

94

N+

5383

94

Box\handle\ decoration? Shuttle?

N+ N+ N+ N+ ---

3383 3400 3387 3389 M5\6

94 94 94 94 94

B B B B

1:8 2:12 37:348

Handle Handle Carved piece Handle fr.? 2 whorls\buttons; tool head\handle\ gaming piece? 357

Ivory? (head)

At two

least

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

81417

N+

M6\7

94

Whorl

81494 81635

--I+N

M10 3422

94 94

Gaming piece Pendant

81636

I+N

3422

94

Gaming piece

81649

N+

K8

94

Die

81700

---

3470

95

Pin

81876

---

---

95

Gaming piece

81939

---

3487

95

Handle

82114

---

Top- soil

95

82233 82324

I+N ---

3489 3393

95 95

Gaming stopper? Fastener Pin fr.

82629

---

3423

95

4 disks; base fr.?

82727

---

3586

95

Pin fr.

82908 82914 82928

-------

3618 3618 3638

95 95 95

2 Decorations Carved piece Pin fr.

83152

---

3678

95

Pin fr.

83192

---

3660

95

Pin fr.

83232

---

F-G

96

Needle

83255

N+

F62-3

96

Pin; 2 pieces

83270 83281

N+ N8

3768 3709

96 96

Inlay Hinge

83288

---

G-H4

96

4 Pins; 2 pin fr.

83291

---

G-H4

96

Spatula?

83306

N+

---

96

Gaming piece

83310

---

G-H4

96

83314

---

FG4-5

96

Needle; 4 pin fr.; 2 raw pieces Pin fr.; 3 pieces

83320

---

G-H3

96

Pin; pin fr.

83325

---

3716

96

Pin; 3 pin fr.

83369

---

E-F3

96

Pin fr.

83378

---

E-F3

96

Whorl

83387

---

EF4-5

96

83397

---

E-F3

96

Kohl stick; 9 pin fr.; "ear probe" 3 Pin fr.

83411

---

---

96

2 Pins; 8 pieces

83419

---

---

96

2 Needles; 2 pieces

83425

---

E3-4

96

Pin

83428

N+

3745

96

Pin

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

Remarks

B 24:251 Cattle metatarsus Cattle metatarsus

R-B

Cattle metatarsus piece\ B

8:91

B B

46:433- 434 35:335

Ivory (disks)

21:211

Inlay Cattle metatarsus

B R-B

58:556 14:152

Natural?

358

R-B

19:174

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

83431

---

3745

96

Needle fr.

83432

---

3746

96

Pin; 4 pin fr.

83439

---

3508

96

Spindle\stylus fr.?

83594

---

8777

95

Worked piece

84032

P+

---

95

Pin

84046 84093

P+ P+

3804 ---

95 95

Spatula? Pin fr.

LR-B

4:49

841022 84137

P+

3803

95

Pin

R-B

22:231

P+

---

95

2 Pin fr.

84138 84151

P+ P+

3820 ---

95 95

2 Pin fr. 2 Pin fr.

LR-B

19:170

84162

P+

---

95

Pin fr.

84191

---

---

95

Pin

84222 84261 84264

II P+ ---

3820 3819 I32

95 96 96

Inlay 2 Pins Pin fr.

LR-B LR-B

42:390

84270

---

---

96

Pin fr.

84272

---

I9

96

Pin fr.

84284

P+

I26

96

Pin fr.

84290 84300

P+ P+

3819 J11

96 96

Burnisher? 2 Pins; piece

LR-B

5:52

84307

P+

I12

96

84315

---

---

96

Lathe rough-out end Pin fr.

84330 84331

P+ P+

3820 ---

96 96

Pin fr. Kohl stick\stylus fr.

84339

P+

---

96

Pin fr.

84351

P+

---

96

Pin fr.

84371

P+

I16

96

Needle; pin fr.

84381

---

I17

96

2 Pin fr.

84411

P+

---

96

Pin fr.

84544

---

I19

96

2 Pins; point

84626

---

H-I\76

96

Needle

84663

---

---

96

Pin

85265

III

8073

95

Handle

86043 86151

I+ I+

6867 6887

94 94

2 Pin fr. Pin\stamp

B

86186

I+

1710

94

4 Pin\needle fr.

B

86198

I+

1732

94

Pin fr.; needle fr.

Camel or Hippopota m

359

Very thick

R-B

Hippopota m ivory

Remarks

B?

55:518

Natural?

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

Period & Date

86218

I+

1737

94

5 Pin fr.

86295

I+

1732

94

Pin; pin fr.

86312 86436 86518 86554 86644 86666 86685 86785 86890 86905 87057

I+ I+ I+ I+ I+ I+ I+ I+ I+ I+ I+

1732 6958 6969 1710 6988 6984 6984 8118 8124 6967 XW73

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

Pin 3 Pin fr.; raw piece Box Pin; raw piece Pin; piece Pin Pin Pin fr. Pin fr. Scraper? Pin

87714

I+

0000

94

Pin

87207

I+

6948

94

Needle

87228 87297

I+ I+

8140 Top- soil

94 94

Ring\distaff fr.? Pin fr.

B

25:266

87315 87448

I+ I+

8133 8699

94 94

B B

24:254

87484 87517

I+ I+

8702 8702

94 94

87523

I+

8702

94

Pendant? Lathe rough-out end; pin fr. Pin fr. Lathe rough-out end or waste Needle

87614

---

6920

95

Carved piece

87655

---

Top- soil

95

Handle

87660

---

8723

95

Needle fr.

87763

---

8606

95

"Ear probe"

87956

---

1710

95

Pin

88011

I+

8743

95

Pin

88215

---

8756

95

3 Pin fr.

88286

---

1896

95

Whorl\button

ER

6:60

88289 88318

-----

8770 1896

95 95

Pin fr. Needle fr.

R-B

19:175

88324

---

8770

95

Pin fr.; raw piece

88360

---

1896

95

Pin\inlay fr.?

88374

---

1896

95

Pin fr.

88418

---

8749

95

Pin fr.

88527

I+

1722

95

Piece

88605 88750

I+ ---

8743 ---

95 95

Bead? Pin fr.

B-A

49:467

89213

I+

ZZA 67

95

Stylus; whorl\ button; raw rod; pin\ needle fr.

R-B

7:78

B R R-B B B B B B B LR

Fig. & No.

22:237 13:138 23:241

21:209 4:48 20:198

B LR-B

18168

360

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

893402 89374

---

6195

95

Pin fr.

I+

209

95

Pin fr.

89589

---

8909

95

4 Pin fr.

89932

---

8941

95

89967

---

8757

95

Lathe rough-out end Handle

90287

S+

9022

94

90326 90559

S+ ---

9081 9121

94 95

Shuttle fr.?; bead\ gaming piece? Gaming piece Gaming piece

90688

---

9121

95

Handle\hinge\box?

90737

---

9142

95

Pin fr.

90753

---

9144?

95

Handle\decoration?

90780

---

9144

95

Pin

90973

---

9096

95

Pin fr.

91136

---

9179

95

2 Pin fr.

91162

---

9192

95

Pin fr.

91223 91401 91434

----S+

9192 9226 9439

95 95 95

Carved piece Whorl\button\lid? Handle; 2 double buttons

91538

---

9121

95

Pin

91634

---

9192

95

Needle

91708

---

95

Carved piece

91783

---

9121 9125 9165

95

Pin fr.

91825

S+

9234

95

Die

92155

---

9268

95

Pin fr.

92312

---

9300

95

Pin fr.

92458

---

9324

95

Pin

92500

---

9327

95

Bead?

92502

S+

9331

95

Pin

92516

---

9332

95

Handle?

92687

---

9363

95

Awl?

927432 92745

S+

9345

95

Piece

S+

N76

95

Pin fr.

92777

---

9338

95

4 Pin fr.

92856

---

9121

95

Decoration\handle

92924

---

9396

95

Pin fr.

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

Remarks

2:20

A?

29:296

R ER R

41:380 6:61 55:520 56:526527

R

27:281

Cattle metatarsus

Ivory

Cattle metatarsus

Cattle metatarsus

Rib

361

Cattle metatarsus

Natural?

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

92978

---

92989

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

95

Handle?

---

9327 9408 9327

95

Pin

93033

---

9426

95

Pin fr.

95013

---

1602

95

Waste piece

95015

---

A91-92

95

95054

---

7337

95

Disk production waste Needle fr.

95092

---

7339

95

Raw piece

95247

A+

---

95

Waste piece

95566 95698 95725

A+ A+ A+

7390 1612 1612

95 95 95

Ring? Flute; needle fr. Ring

95858 95880

A+ ---

7412 7342

95 95

Pin\needle Flute

96098

A+

1612

95

Sawn piece

97047

---

1612

96

3 Raw\waste pieces

97078

---

1612

96

Pin fr.

97119

---

7421

96

Pin fr.

97215

I33

1389

96

Pin; 2 pieces

97218

A+

C89

96

Pin; 2 pieces

97229

---

7454

96

Pin

97233

---

7454

96

Pin fr.

97248

---

7452

96

Pin fr.

97276

---

7456

96

2 Pin fr.

97297

---

7456

96

2 Pin fr.

97303 97392

A+ ---

7458 7469

96 96

Carved item 2 Pin fr.

97403

---

7469

96

6 pin fr.; needle fr.?

97417

A+

7452

96

Pin\stylus?

97428

---

7469

96

Pin; 2 pieces

97494 97495 97461

A+ A+ ---

7469 7469 7469

96 96 96

Burnisher?; 2 pin fr. Needle Pin fr.

97551

---

7473

96

Pin fr.

97574

---

7469

96

5 Pin fr.

97598

---

7454

96

3 Pin fr.

97603

---

7462 7474

96

Pin fr.

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

Camel? Metacarpal ? R

54:517

Calf metatarsus ER ER

362

Donkey metatarsus Cattle metatarsus Cattle & camel metacarpal

ER ER

9:112 26:270

ER

52:500

ER

47:443

R

4:40

R R

4:51 9:106

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Basket

Area

97694

A+

97706

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone Horse metatarsus

Period & Date

Fig. & No.

96

Waste piece

---

Topsoil 7469

96

Needle

97769

A+

7483

96

Carved piece

97772 97781

A+ ---

7483 7483

96 96

Double point 2 Pin fr.

100031

I+

8944

95

100037

I+

8944-5

95

Notched needle fr. Raw rod

100588

---

20174

96

Pin fr.

100713

I+

QQ59

96

Pin

101017

---

PQ58\9

97

Pin

101052

---

20402

97

Pin fr.

101251 400176

I+ ---

20441 40042

97 95

Knife fr.? Pin

400178

---

40039

95

Pin fr.

400179

---

40039

95

Needle fr.

400205

---

40045

95

Pin fr.

400206

---

40045

95

Needle fr.

400207

---

40023

95

Handle

400215 400221

-----

40023 40045

95 95

Frame inlay Pin fr.

400311

---

12054

---

2 Pin fr.

400879

---

40127

95

Knife handle

400883

---

40127

95

2 Pin fr.

400909

---

40127

95

Needle fr.

400919 400982

-----

40081 40126

95 95

Pin\needle fr. Needle fr.

R

401030 401123 401393

IV IV IV

40081 40081 40210

95 95 95

Needle Needle Needle; pin fr.

R R R

9:109 9:104 9:110

401394

---

40209

95

Needle fr.

401471 401482

-----

40228 210228

96 95

Scabbard chap 2 Dice

R

11:123

401834 811356 830113

--N+ I+N

40267 3387 N8

95 94 95

4 Pins Carved piece Pin; pin fr.

R B

3311225 ---

VII

---

00

Pin

---

95

Rod fr.

*76*

IV

8944 8945 G-H3

96

Pin; pieces

---

---

G-H3

96

Pin; 4 pin fr.

tool;

B

4:43

R

5:55

LR

4:47

Remarks

Natural?

2:19 LR

42:402

3:31

Gilded

Stained point

363

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Basket

Area

Locus

Year

Object

Animal & Bone

I-533

I+

B\73

96

Needle

---

---

96

Die

---

---

Topsoil Topsoil

96

Gaming piece; die production waste

---

I31

96

Stylus fr.?

---

---

Topsoil 1-526

96

Pin fr.

---

---

96

4 Pin fr.

-------

IV N PP QQ 58\9

Topsoil 40081 40081 I+

--95 97

Needle; piece Rough-out end Pin fr.

Period & Date

Horse metatarsus (piece)

Pig

Fig. & No.

Remarks

49:469 (waste)

A A

53:510 Painted red

364

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Patrich Expedition Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

---

CC04

024

001

0133

Pin

---

CC12

008

001

0035

Pin fr.

---

CC12

263

001

0192

Pin fr.

---

CC23

012

001

0013

Pin fr.

---

KK05

039

001

0121

Pin

---

KK11

145

001

0137

Needle

---

KK11

177

001

0165

Pin fr.

---

KK11

182

001

0170

Needle fr.

---

KK12

035

001

0133

Pin fr.

---

KK14

000

001

0134

Pin fr.

---

KK20

268

001

0183

Pin fr.

---

KK25

095

001

0212

Pin fr.

-----

KK25 KK26

095 022

001 001

0214 0044

Pin; piece Pin fr.; bead

Ivory?

ER

22:222

---

KK31

052

001

0133

Pin

---

KK33

178

001

0167

Pin fr.

---

KK33

247

001

0244

Pin fr.

---

KK36

000

001

0068

Pin fr.

---

KK37

095

001

0147

Needle fr.

---

KK37

095

002

0147

Pin fr.

---

KK37

103

001

0155

Needle

---

KK37

123

001

0174

Pin

---

NN19

010

001

0022

Pin fr.

---

SW03

001

001

002

Pendant?

A

24:255

---

KK05

035

---

0119

Die

B

93

KK07

014

001

0043

Perforated disk

93

KK07

009

002

0028

Gaming piece

Ivory?

93

KK07

012

001

0041

Gaming piece

Ivory?

93

KK07

012

002

0052

Gaming disk

93

KK07

023

001

0079

Handle fr.?; sawn piece?

93

KK07

025

001

0083

Tool

93

KK07

025

001

0087

Rod

93

KK07

027

002

0099

?

93

KK08

001

001

0004

Pin fr.

93

KK08

011

001

0048

Die fr.

93

KK10

100

002

0007

Whistle\flute?

Ivory?

365

Remarks

From Raban?

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

93

KK11

118

002

0040

Die

93

KK11

121

001

0044

Needle

93

KK13

327

001

0121

Tuning peg fr.

93

KK15

52W

001

146

Spoon fr.

001

0043

Pin fr.

93

Animal & Bone

KK18

807

93

KK18

000

001

0055

Decoration

93 93

KK18 KK18

818 827

001 001

0061 0082

Gaming piece Pin fr.

93

KK19

924

001

0060

Base?

93 93

KK19 KK19

924 927

001 001

0061 0080

93

KK19

927

002

0080

Tuning peg Gaming piece?; pin Pin

93

KK19

929

001

0081

Pin fr.

93

KK19

940

001

0135

Ring fr.

93

KK19

906

001

0014

93

KK19

923

001

0016

93

KK19

902

001

0006

93

KK20

213

001

0040

Carved cylinder; inlay?; 2 pieces (inlays) Ajouré inlay; sawn piece Gaming piece\tool head\ handle? Hand pick?

93 93

KK20 KK20

219 219

001 001

0087 0089

Gaming piece? Pin

93

KK21

104

001

0021

Shuttle fr?.

93

KK21

115

001

0034

94

CC03

001

001

0017

Gaming piece fr. Raw rod

94 94

CC03 CC03

003 003

001 001

0052 0056

Pin fr. Pin fr.

94

CC03

014

001

0075

Raw rod

94

CC03

014

001

0077

3 Pin fr.

94

CC03

014

0080

2 Pin fr.

94

CC03

014

-002 003 001

0080

Pin

94

CC03

016

001

0085

Pin fr.

94

CC03

018

0089

94

CC03

020

-001 003 001

0096

Needle fr.; 2 pin fr. Pin fr.

94

CC06

005

001

0013

Die

94

CC06

019

001

0062

94

CC07

013

001

0045

Unidentified item Carved piece fr

CC10

134

001

0057

Fig. & No.

Remarks

46:436

Ivory

B

58:548 20:200 38:358

LR R

26:276 28:291

Ivory?

Natural? Cattle tibia

B

28:285 8:96

Ivory?

B

R

22:225 19:181 49:460

. 94

Period

Pin

366

Cattle humerus

B

35:339

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

94

CC07

013

001

0045

Carved piece fr.

94

CC10

134

001

0057

Pin

94

CC10

134

001

0057

Perforated tablet

94

CC13

306

001

0082

Button

94 94 94

CC13 CC13 CC13

313 318 333

001 001 001

0123 0176 0223

Gaming piece? Whorl Handle fr.

94

CC14

406

001

0022

Die

94

CC18

865

001

0107

Waste piece

94

CC41

052

001

0085

Suspension loop

94 94

CC51 CC51

008 063

001 001

0098 0179

Raw tablet Perforated lid?

94

KK08

011

001

0048

Die fr.

94 94

KK11 KK11

127 127

001 001

0073 0076

Pin fr. Waste piece

94

KK11

122

001

0078

Pin; pin fr.

94

KK11

127

001

0080

Pin fr.

94

KK11

127

001

0082

94

KK11

135

001

0105

Lathe rough-out end; pin fr. 4 Pin fr.

94

KK11

135

001

0107

Pin fr.

94

KK11

000

001

0117

94

KK11

145

001

0127

Bowl for crushing cosmetics Rod fr.

94

KK11

127

001

0140

Die fr.

94

KK11

145

001

0127

Rod fr.

94

KK12

005

001

0065

Carved piece

94

KK15

550

001

0221

94 94

KK16 KK16

190 226

001 001

0094 0132

94

KK16

190

008

0094

Ring production waste Carved piece Furniture mount fr. Carved piece

94

KK17

021

001

0044

Die fr.

94

KK17

079

001

0158

Doll fr.

94

KK17

085

001

0205

Gaming piece

94 94

KK17 KK17

084 101

001 001

0211 0221

Gaming piece Waste piece

94

KK17

101

001

0222

Whorl\button

Animal & Bone Cattle humerus

Period

Fig. & No.

B

35:339

Remarks

6:58

Cattle metatarsus Cattle metatarsus

B B

28:288 7:80 2:14

B

52:501 11:125

Ivory

B

61:573 12:136

B

22:227

B

16:159

10:119

Cattle\horse metatarsus

367

51:494

B B

Cattle\horse metatarsus Cattle metacarpus Cattle\horse metapodial

36:340 45:423

58:550

B Cattle metatarsus B

7:77

Stained

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

94

KK17

101

001

0246

94

KK17

101

001

0247

94

KK19

944

001

0164

Unidentified item Unidentified item 2 Pin fr.

94

KK20

045

001

0058

94

KK20

238

001

0134

Unidentified item Pin; pin fr.

94

KK20

238

001

0135

Pin fr.

94

KK20

238

0141

94

KK20

240

-001 002 001

0143

Whorl\button; pin Amulet holder

94

KK20

240

001

0145

Pin

94

KK20

240

001

0146

Pin; pin fr.

94

KK22

627

003

0106

Shuttle fr?.

94

KK22

627

001

0107

Weaving tablet?

94

KK22

628

001

0115

Handle

94 94 94

KK22 KK22 KK22

637 656 000

001 001 001

0133 0173 0026

94

KK22

627

001

0111

Carved piece Box lid or base Unidentified item Amulet holder

94 94

KK23 KK23

003 003

001 001

0023 0024

94 94 94

KK23 KK23 KK23

003 003 008

001 002 001

0026 0026 0041

94

KK23

008

001

0044

94

KK23

008

0045

94

KK23

008

-001 002 001

Ring fr.; waste piece Carved rod

0047

Pin; pin fr.

Ivory?

94

KK24

003

001

0034

Die fr.

Cattle? metatarsus

94

KK24

009

001

0055

Waste piece

94

KK24

030

001

0120

Rod fr.

94

KK24

031

001

0123

Handle fr?.

94

KK24

003

001

0129

Die fr.

94

KK24

031

001

0127

Ring or ring production waste

94

KK26

009

001

0026

2 Pin fr.

94 94

KK26 KK26

021 022

001 001

0033 0041

Whorl\button Pin; Gaming piece fr.; pin fr.; piece

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

22:236

B

7:86 22:229 34:331 20:186

Ivory? 8:89 48:451

Horse metatarsus

Carved piece fr. Bead or bracelet section Inlay? Waste piece Bead

Ivory Ivory Ivory? Cattle\horse metacarpus

B B

37:346

B B

37:351 57:545

B B B

58:558 24:261 51:497

10:113

Metatarsus

368

Ivory Cattle femur (Gaming piece)

B LR

56:528 19:180 29:303

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

94

KK26

031

001

0067

Waste piece

94

KK26

038

001

0075

94 94

KK26 KK26

045 047

0058 0061

94

KK26

047

0065

2 Waste pieces

94 94 94

KK26 KK26 KK26

047 047 052

001 -001 003 -001 002 003 004 001

Perforated disk lid? Gaming piece 3 Raw tablets

0065 0065 0067

Carved piece fr. Bracelet fr. Decoration fr.

94

KK26

031

001

0057

94

KK27

048

001

0115

94

KK27

011

001

0032

Unidentified item Carved piece fr.; ring production waste; 2 needle fr. Inlay fr.

94 94

KK27 KK27

022 048

001 001

0045 0116

Castanet tablet? Pin fr.

94

KK27

000

001

0026

Tuning peg fr.

94

KK28

040

001

0099

94

KK28

058

0118

94

KK28

057

-001 002 001

0119

Shuttle fr.?; raw\waste piece Bracelet fr.; ring\bracelet fr. Pin

94

KK28

058

001

0121

Pin fr.

Sooted

94

KK28

054

001

0125

Waste piece

Sooted

94

KK28

057

001

0185

Rod fr.

94

KK28

076

001

0188

94

KK28

082

001

0194

“Ear probe”; pin fr. Pin fr.

94

KK28

080

001

0200

94

KK28

000

001

0206

Lathe rough-out end Pin fr.

94 94

KK28 KK28

088 081

001 001

0210 0213

Needle Waste piece?

94

KK28

081

001

0214

Pin fr.

94

KK28

081

001

0216

Gaming piece fr.

94 94

KK28 KK29

098 037

001 001

0225 0093

Waste piece Pin fr.

94

KK29

042

001

0095

Box fr.

94

KK29

044

001

0098

Handle

94 94

KK31 KK32

036 005

001 001

0104 0017

Handle Rod fr.

94

KK32

024

001

0047

Distaff fr?.

Animal & Bone Cattle metapodial

Period

Fig. & No.

Ivory

LR

28:290 -48:456 457

Sheep\goat tibia (1)

LR-B LR-B LR-B

25:267

B

26:272

B

25:268

LR

Cattle rib

B

9:100

B

53:505 12:128

Cattle metatarsus

369

Cattle metatarsus

B

1:1

R-B

3:25

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

94

KK33

006

001

0006

Pin

94

KK35

001

001

0005

Handle fr.

94

KK36

005

001

0007

Handle fr?.

94

KK36

008

001

0016

2 Pins

94

NN13

001

001

0001

94 94

NN13 NN13

031 031

001 001

0106 0112

94 94

NN13 NN13

045 046

001 001

0126 0134

Lathe roughout end Astragalus “Ear probe” or cosmetic spoon Hinge head? Pin

94

NN14

005

001

0034

Box lid

13:139

94

NN14

015

001

0037

Perforated lid?

14:149

94

NN14

015

001

0040

Box fr.

12:127

94

NN14

024

001

0089

94

NN14

015

001

0010

95

000

0263

---

---

95 95

CC01 CC01

091 079

001 001

0123 0116

Lathe roughout end Unidentified item Unidentified item Tuning peg Sawn bone

95

CC01

100

001

0132

Pin

95 95

CC03 CC08

044 027

001 001

0119 0149

Spoon fr. Needle fr.

R

17:163

95 95 95

CC12 CC12 CC12

206 253 262

001 001 001

0048 0168 0184

Ajouré inlay Waste piece Pin fr.

B-A LR

43:406

95

CC18

952

001

0291

Pendant?

95 95

CC19 CC19

001 002

001 001

0004 0017

95

CC30

007

001

0019

95

CC51

155

001

0299

Pin Rod fr.?; waste piece Burnisher\scrap er? Ring fr.

95 95

CC52 CC57

145 137

001 001

0266 001

Pin Needle

LR

20:182

95 95

KK09 KK09

064 021

001 001

0108 0043

Whorl\button Hollow cylinder

B

7:85

95

KK11

178

001

0161

95

KK11

178

002

0161

Hollow cylinder Whorl

95

KK12

005

001

0065

Carved piece

95

KK12

042

001

0101

Pin f.

KK12

042

001

0112

Pin fr.

KK12

070

001

0131

Raw rod fr.

95 95

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

B-A

50:480

R

27:279

LR

15:154

Cattle metatarsus

Bone? R Cattle metatarsus

Ivory?

LR R 5:54

Ivory

60:568 7:79

370

Remarks

37:349

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

95

KK12

070

002

0131

Pin fr.

95

KK12

073

001

0142

95

KK12

039

001

0064

95

KK16

253

001

0179

Lathe rough-out end Perforated spatula? Furniture mount

95

KK16

274

001

0201

Rod fr.

95

KK16

236

001

0207

Disk

95

KK16

277

001

0215

Pin fr.

95 95

KK16 KK16

299 213

001 001

0239 0180

Pin Tablet

95

KK16

253

001

0181

95

KK16

253

001

0183

95

KK23

019

001

0069

Unidentified item Unidentified item Pin

95 95

KK24 KK24

034 035

001 001

0134 0136

Gaming piece? Shuttle fr.

95

KK25

019

001

0056

Pin fr.

95 95

KK25 KK25

019 ?019

001 001

0061 0078

Carved rod Waste piece

95

KK25

030

001

0083

Pin fr.

95

KK25

049

0100

Pin fr.; piece

95 95

KK25 KK25

049 049

-001 002 003 001

0100 0104

Decoration Pin fr.

95

KK25

060

001

0138

95

KK25

063

001

0140

Pin fr.; tuning peg fr. Pin fr.

95

KK25

060

001

0143

Pin fr.

95

KK25

060

001

0161

Pin

95

KK25

076

001

0168

Pin fr.

95

KK25

092

001

0219

Hinge head?

95

KK25

019

001

0059

Buckle fr.

95

KK25

019

001

0064

Spatula

95

KK25

019

001

0068

Spatula fr.

95

KK25

019

001

0070

Piece

95

KK25

030

001

0103

95

KK25

060

001

0134

Unidentified item Pin fr.

95

KK25

086

---

0193

95

KK26

070

001

0113

95

KK26

070

001

0134

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

Cattle\horse metatarsus

B

45:421

21:216

R-B

22:238 41:385

B

28:287

R-B

61:570

LR

46:435 23:243

21:206

Drilling waste?; perforated disk Pin fr. Circular item; 2 pins? 371

Cattle metatarsus

ER

R

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

95 95

KK28 KK28

113 113

001 001

0255 0256

Inlay Needle fr.; pin fr

95

KK28

113

001

0244

2 Spatulae?

95

KK28

115

001

0251

2 Spatulae?

95 95

KK29 KK30

057 016

001 001

0143 0036

95

KK30

016

002

0036

Decoration Drilling waste; 2 pin fr. Vertebra fr?.

95 95

KK31 KK31

050 052

001 001

0131 0133

Pin Pin fr.

95

KK33

046

001

0055

Pin

95 95 95 95

KK33 KK33 KK33 KK36

140 146 153 017

001 001 001 001

0121 0129 0133 0064

Tuning peg Pin\stamp fr.? Pin; pin fr. Pin

95

KK37

080

0128

95 95 95

KK37 KK37 KK37

080 080 083

-001 002 003 001 001

0128 0129 0131

Needle fr.; Rod fr. Raw pin; needle Pin Pin fr.

95

KK37

083

001

0132

Pin; 3 pin fr.

95 95

KK37 KK37

089 090

001 001

0167-2 0141

Dagger's guard? 4 Pin fr.

95

KK37

090

001

0142

Pin

95

KK37

090

001

0143

Sawn piece

95

NN11

016

001

0044

Handle section

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

B

41:384

B B

46:437 50:481

B

20:193

B R R

26:277 21:214 20:189 20:187

B B

49:463 23:247

B

11:126

ER

3:34

.

Fish?

? 95

NN17

040

001

0125

95

NN18

014

001

0050

95

NN18

038

001

0105

Lathe rough-out end Spatula\plaiting tool\awl? Triangular tool

95 95

NN19 NN29

011 021

001 001

0035 0041

Tool? Waste piece

95

Z?

122

001

331

Whorl\button

96

CC23

015

001

0020

Pin fr.

96

KK11

188

001

0204

Gaming piece fr.

96

KK11

220

001

0209

Pin fr.

96

KK12

066

001

0125

Pin

96

KK12

070

001

0131

Raw rod fr.

96

KK12

072

001

0135

Pin fr.

96

KK12

072

001

0136

2 Pin fr.

96

KK12

064

001

0127

Unidentified item 372

B-A Cattle rib LR-B B Cattle metatarsus

4:50

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

96

KK15

552

-001 003

0177

96

KK15

552

001

0178

Pin fr.?; Raw\waste piece Pin fr.; tablet

96

KK15

561

001

0183

Pin

96 96

KK15 KK15

561 552

002 001

0183 0194

Pin fr. Pin fr.

96

KK21

132

001

0076

96

KK21

146

001

0097

Ring production waste Pin

96

KK24

042

001

0140

96

KK24

042

001

0148

Ring production waste Kohl stick?

96

KK24

051

001

0158

Waste piece

96

KK24

040

001

0145

96

KK25

060

001

0138

Unidentified item Pin fr.

96

KK26

077

001

0124

Die fr.

96 96 96

KK26 KK27 KK27

090 055 055

001 001 002

0136 0123 0123

96 96

KK27 KK27

060 058

001 001

0126 0127

Pin Shuttle fr?. 2 Raw\waste pieces Ajouré inlay Decoration fr.

96

KK27

065

002

0133

Pin fr.

96

KK27

065

003

0133

Rod fr.

96

KK27

065

004

0133

Pin fr.

96

KK27

065

005

0133

2 Pin fr.

96 96

KK27 KK27

066 065

001 001

0134 0135

Pin 2 Pin fr.

B

96 96

KK27 KK27

066 071

001 001

0136 0139

Pin fr?. Needle fr.

B

21:210

96

KK27

074

001

0140

Pin fr.

96

KK27

068

001

0141

96

KK27

076

001

0144

Lathe roughout end Pin

96

KK27

076

002

0144

Pin

96 96

KK28 KK28

123 123

002 001

0262 0269

Carved piece Circular piece

B

37:347

96

KK30

030

001

0052

Ring production waste

96

KK30

026

001

0057

Handle

Remarks

Tortoise (tablet) 22:223

R-B

Sooted

Cattle metatarsus

Ivory?

Horse metatarsus

373

R B-A

21:201 8:95

B-A

44:420

LR

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

96

KK31

066

002

0141

Pin

96

KK31

070

001

0158

Needle fr?.

96 96 96 96

KK31 KK31 KK31 KK31

082 082 082 082

001 001 002 003

0173 0174 0174 0174

Perforated lid? Scabbard chap Buckle fr?. Vertebra

96

KK31

082

004

0174

96

KK31

086

001

0181

Lathe rough-out end; pin fr. Needle

96

KK32

000

001

0127

Stylus

96

KK32

102

001

0136

Needle fr.

96

KK32

102

001

0138

96

KK32

106

001

0167

Handle\furniture mount fr. Whorl\button?

96

KK32

113

001

0141

Needle

96

KK32

113

001

0142

Pin

96

KK32

115

001

0143

Crushing stick?

96

KK32

000

001

0146

Spoon fr.; pin fr.

96 96

KK32 KK32

100 121

001 001

0147 0150

Pin fr. Pin fr.

96

KK32

080

001

0151

96

KK32

114

001

0154

2 Raw\waste pieces Pin fr.

96

KK32

116

001

0158

Pin; pin fr.

96

KK32

000

001

0162

Carved piece

96

KK32

000

002

0162

2 Pin fr.

96

KK32

000

003

0162

Decoration fr.

96

KK32

103

001

0164

Pin fr.

96

KK32

095

001

0165

2 Needle fr.

96

KK32

093

001

0171

Waste piece

96

KK32

116

001

0156

96

KK33

231

001

0228

Unidentified item Pin fr.

96

KK33

237

001

0230

Point

96 96

KK33 KK33

238 238

001 002

0233 0233

Whorl\button Pin fr.

96

KK33

238

001

0235

Needle

96

KK34

007

001

0021

Pin fr.

96

KK35

032

001

0034

96

KK35

033

001

0036

Gaming piece fr.; waste piece Pin fr.

96

KK35

033

001

0038

Raw rod

96

KK35

038

001

0045

Pin fr.

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No. 20:185

R-B R-B R-B Fish R-B

7:87

R-B

374

12:135 11:124 47:447

22:221

58:557

Ivory

Donkey metatarsus

R

6:62

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

96 96

KK35 KK35

038 040

001 001

0048 0049

Awl Pin fr.

96

KK35

041

001

0053

Pin fr.

96

KK35

041

001

0055

Pin fr.

96

KK35

045

001

0058

Needle fr.

96

KK35

059

001

0080

Pin fr.

96

KK35

058

001

0084

Needle

96

KK35

072

001

0097

96

KK35

061

001

0102

Ring production waste Pin

96

KK35

061

001

0103

96

KK35

068

002

0105

Furniture mount fr?. Needle fr.

96

KK35

068

001

0107

Pin\needle fr.

96

KK36

026

001

0073

Needle

96

KK36

055

001

0093

Pin

96

KK36

056

001

0096

Pin

96

KK36

070

001

0111

Needle

96

KK36

075

001

0115

Pin

Ivory? (head)

96

KK36

075

001

0117

Ivory (handle)

96

KK36

077

002

0118

96

KK36

077

003

0118

96

KK36

086

001

0126

Handle fr.; pin fr. whorl\button\lid ; Point; Decoration 3 Pin fr.; chisel?: waste piece 2 Pin fr.

96

KK36

085

001

0127

Pin fr.

96

KK36

086

001

0129

Pin

96

KK36

085

001

0131

96 96 96 96

KK36 KK36 KK36 KK36

087 087 087 040

001 002 003 001

0133 0133 0133 0139

96

KK36

040

001

0140

Stylus fr.; needle fr.; 2 pin fr. Pin Pin Needle fr.; pin fr Lathe rough-out end Pin

96

KK36

094

001

0142

96

KK36

095

001

0143

96

KK36

040

001

0146

96

KK36

102

001

0158

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

B

4:42

R-B

51:492

Remarks

9:107

R-B R-B

Stained

Handle\inlay\ga ming piece? Pin Needle; pin; 2 pin fr. 2 Pin fr.

375

R R R R R

10:122

Stylus stained Stained

20:184 50:474

Sooted

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

96

KK36

111

001

0163

Needle fr.

96

KK36

121

001

0176

Raw rod

96 96

KK36 KK36

122 129

001 001

0178 0187

96 96

KK36 KK36

130 040

001 001

0189 0147

96

KK36

040

001

0149

96

KK36

039

001

96

KK37

143

96

KK37

96

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

Needle Needle fr.

R

9:105

ER

3:33

0153

Handle fr. Unidentified item Unidentified item Pin fr.

001

0197

Pin fr.

143

001

0201

KK37

151

001

0202

96

KK37

158

001

0211

Lathe rough-out end Lathe rough-out end Sawn piece

96

KK37

154

001

0205

2 Pin fr.; piece

96

KK50

055

001

0143

Raw\waste piece

96

KK50

055

001

0146

Ring fr.

96

NN14

035

001

0132

Tuning peg fr.

96

NN14

039

001

0139

Waste piece

96 97

NN33 CC03

249 079

001 001

0249 0186

Pin Needle

97

CC03

079

001

0187

97

CC55

033

001

0033

97

CC57

051

001

0013

Lid; whorl\button Lathe rough-out end; gaming piece? Die fr.

97 97

CC59 CC59

055 055

002 001

0042 0043

Pendant? Pin

97

CC59

020

001

0033

Sawn piece

97

CC59

048

001

0037

Pin; piece

97

CC59

048

001

0040

Pin fr.

97

CC59

055

001

0042

Pin fr.

97

CC59

020

001

0048

97

CC59

048

001

0035

Ring fr.; waste piece Vertebra

97

CC59

055

002

0042

Pendant?

97

CC59

055

001

0043

Pin

97

CC59

063

001

0051

Waste piece

97

CC59

063

001

0055

Pin

97

KK08

057

001

0146

Whorl\button

Cattle metapodial

LR

376

Cattle metapodial

B

50:472

B

24:252

R-B B

R-B Fish

51:495

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

97

KK08

058

001

0149

Pin

97

KK08

058

001

0150

Pin

97 97

KK14 KK14

440 440

001 001

0139 0140

“Theater ticket” Pin fr.

97

KK14

440

001

0142

Pin fr.

97 97 97

KK14 KK14 KK14

449 461 468

001 001 001

0148 0164 0173

“Theater ticket” Spoon Pin fr.

97

KK14

468

001

0175

Pin fr.

97

KK14

473

001

0176

Raw\waste piece

97

KK14

480

001

0180

Spatula fr.

97

KK14

461

001

0164

Spoon

97

KK17

116

001

0269

Pin

97

KK17

122

001

0271

4 Pin fr.

97 97

KK17 KK17

128 142

001 001

0288 0289

97

KK17

145

001

0294

Inlay; ring fr. Pin fr.; unidentified item Waste piece

97

KK17

155

001

0300

2 Pin fr.

97

KK17

155

001

0301

Pin fr.; 2 pieces

97

KK17

161

001

0305

Pin fr.

97

KK17

163

001

0307

Pin fr.

97

KK18

840

001

0142

Pin fr.

97

KK18

844

001

0143

Pin; 2 pin fr.

97 97

KK20 KK20

255 255

002 001

0176 0177

Pin fr. Pin fr.

97

KK20

255

002

0177

Pin fr.

97

KK20

255

003

0177

Disk fr.

97 97 97 97

KK20 KK20 KK20 KK20

261 261 261 254

001 002 003 001

0178 0178 0178 0179

Pin fr. Ring fr. Inlay Gaming piece

97

KK20

267

001

0181

Gaming piece

97

KK20

268

001

0183

Pin fr.

97

KK20

269

001

0184

Pin fr.

97

KK20

269

002

0184

Cylindrical item

97 97

KK20 KK20

272 272

001 001

0187 0188

Stylus? Needle fr.

97

KK20

274

001

0189

Inlay?

97

KK20

276

001

0190

Pin fr.

97 97

KK25 KK25

085 088

001 001

0176 0177

Handle fr. Rod fr.

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

ER

28:293

R R-B

28:294 18:166

R-B

40:371

20:183

B

377

B B B

19:172

R

10:120

B

2:16

42:398

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

97 97 97 97 97 97 97

KK25 KK25 KK29 KK29 KK29 KK29 KK29

091 091 072 075 075 075 076

001 002 001 001 001 001 001

0181 0181 0162 0165 0166 0167 0168

97 97

KK29 NN30

076 001

001 001

0169 0017

98

CC55

108

001

0072

Pin fr. Doll fr. 2 Pins Pin Waste piece 2 Rod\handle fr. Needle fr.; pin\needle fr. Needle Ring production waste? Raw\waste piece

98

CC55

131

001

0075

Pin fr.

98

CC55

108

001

0072

Raw rod?

98

CC55

118

---

0065

Pin\handle fr.?

98

CC59

063

001

0051

Box

98

CC59

063

001

0055

Pin

98

CC59

077

001

0065

98

CC59

077

001

0059

Ring production waste Pin fr.

98

CC59

077

001

0062

Pin fr.

98

CC59

077

---

0062

Rod\pin fr.

98

CC59

063

001

0051

98

CC59

063

001

0055

Ring production waste? Pin

98

CC59

063

---

0057

Whorl\button

98

CC59

077

001

0059

Pin fr?.

98

CC59

077

---

0065

98

CC59

080

001

0060

98 98

KK08 KK08

086 090

001 001

0163 0163

Ring production waste? Unidentified item Button Pin

98

KK08

088

---

0164

Disk

98

KK08

090

001

0163

Pin

98

KK08

090

001

0165

Pin

98

KK08

090

002

0165

Pin fr.

98 99

NN30 KK33

001 238

001 001

0017 0232

Gaming piece fr. Rod fr.

00

CC60

628

---

0031

3Waste pieces

00

CC60

629

001

0035

00

CC60

641

001

0050

Tablet; 3 raw\waste pieces Waste piece

00

CC60

645

001

0054

Pin fr.

02

KK

Topsoil

001

---

Shuttle fr?.

Animal & Bone

378

Period B B R R-B R-B R

Fig. & No. 31:308 22:232 48:454

ER

9:102

LR

7:84

R-B

29:299 52:504

Ivory (tablet)

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Raban Expedition Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

---------

---------

------000

---------

------0128

Ajouré inlay Rod fr. Doll fr. Handle

---

---

---

---

---

Gaming piece

-------

--03

001 42 04

0697 078 149

2 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Waste piece

---

A03

888 030 .056 27 058

07

137

-----

A03 CV3

--093

10 33+27

143 561

---

CV3

046

001

129

---

CV3

06

130

---

CV3

21

245

Pin fr.

---

CV3

25

394

Pin fr.

-----

CV3 CV3

26 28

523 0408

Raw tablet Waste piece

---

CV3

34

T?

Raw\waste piece

---

CV3

.056 23 .071 24 .086 32 086 .086 36 .030 102 031

Gaming piece\handle fr.? Waste piece? Ring production waste Furniture mount fr.? 2 Inlay fr.

36

075

---

CV3

030

38

073

---

CV3

030

38

073

-----

CV3 CV3

074 030

41 44

417 076

---

CV3

033

BA

MCR

Raw\waste piece; 2 inlay fr. 3 Raw\waste pieces; 11 inlay fr. and waste Raw tablet; 5 inlay fr.; 2 waste pieces Pin fr. 9 Inlay fr.; 2 inlay raw\waste pieces Unidentified item

35 --22

079 076 362

Inlay fr.; piece Sawn piece

34

454

Tuning peg fr.

37 40

072 060

4 Waste pieces Waste piece

13

162

Pin

23

174

Inlay?

A03

-----

CV3 CV3

---

CV3

-----

CV3 CV6

---

CV7

---

CV7

030 .086 39 .178 10 029 029 .011 23 .011 18

Animal & Bone

379

Period

Fig. & No. 43:412

Cattle metatarsus Cattle metatarsus

A

1:4

A

52:498

Ivory?

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

---

CV7

14

169

Pin

---

CV7

16

137

Waste piece

---

CV7

20

220

Pin fr.

---

CV7

43

265

Waste piece

---

CV8

15

165

Pin

---

CV8

17

167

Inlay fr.

---

CV9

29

074

Raw\waste piece

----81 84 --84 84 84 87 87

G14 G25 J3 I4 KK5 TP2 TP3 TP3 J3 Z

.011 21 .011 31 .011 35 .011 22 .014 02 .014 17 .018 23 14100 034

Dump Area 5

001 001 --001 --001 001 ?002 -----

332 0065 5019 0029 119 0078 0002 0002 0229 5005

87

Z

503

---

5019

87 87 88 89 89 89 89

Z Z D2 I1 I1 I1 I1

503 503 --016 1018 1022

------1 001 001 001

5017 5024 1047 0006 0068 0044 10054

89 89

TP2 TP2

2006 ---

001 001

20046 20047

89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 89 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

TP3 TP3 TP3 TP3 TP3 TP3 TP3 TP3 TP3 I6 KK3 TP1 TP1 TP4 TP4 TP4

C89 --------3009 3013 3013 3013 000 002 072 078 --033 035

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 1 001 001

3004 30002 30106 30105 30010 30028 30055 30069 30089 0135 0006 0130 0175 23 0043 0048

Pin Pin fr. “Button” fr. Whorl\button Die Horse head Die Die Whorl\button Handle\gaming piece? Ajouré inlay; 6 inlay fr.; 2 ring production waste pieces 2 Inlay fr. Inlay Waste piece Inlay Spoon fr. 7 Inlays Bridge for string instrument 2 Pin fr. Ring production waste Pin fr. Die Amulet holder fr. Carved piece fr. Pin fr. Waste piece Pin fr. Handle Waste piece Inlay fr. Pin Spoon fr. Spoon fr. Perforated disk Doll fr. Inlay fr.

Dump 430 035 013 001 001

Water

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No. 21:208

380

47:444

A A A A

34:333

3:37 43:403

43:404

A A

36:342

55:519

Ivory

A A A C

17:164

43:405

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

90 90

TP4 TP5

060 007

001 001

0099 0009

90

TP5

008

001

0009

90 90 90 90 90 91

TP5 TP5 TP5 TP5 TP5 CV

018 041 019 014 013 008

001 001 001 001 001 001

0021 0161 0022 0016 0111 0015

91 91 91 91 91 91

CV CV I1 I1 I1 I1

002 008 064 068 076 001

002 001 001 001 001 001

003 0014 0003 0009 0036 0019

Pin fr. Lathe rough-out end Carved piece; astragalus; pin; pin fr. Whorl\button fr. Whorl\button Waste piece Handle fr?. Pin fr. 7 Ajouré inlay waste pieces Inlay fr. Inlay fr. “Training” tablet? Inlay fr. Meshrebiyya rod Furniture mount?

91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91

KK5 KK5 KK5 KK5 KK5 KK5 KK5 KK16

--035 056 056

001 003 001 001 001 001 001 001

0103 0113 0196 0200 0000 0119 0121 0180

91 92 92 92 92 92 92

Z2 CV1 CV1 CV1 CV1 CV1 CV1

001 008 042 043 069

Balk Balk

001 001 001 --001 001 001

0026 0180 060 0071 0185 0165 0174

92 92 92 92 92 92 92

CV1 CV2 CV1 CV2 CV2 CV10 G20

008 022 069 006 006 028 048

001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0101 52 0185 0011 0010 0192 328

92 92

I1 I1

000 000

001 001

0000 1273

92 92 92 92 92 92

I1 I1 I1 I1 I1 I1

050 035 065 000 115 134

001 001 001 001 001 001

1097 1042 1115 0000 1206 1244

Balk 035 039 253

Animal & Bone

Pin Carved piece Rod fr. Pin fr. Tuning peg fr. Die Pin fr. Inlay; box fr.?; 2 gaming pieces Decorated item Die Drilling waste Inlay\decoration Raw inlay? Ajouré inlay fr. Frame inlay fr. or waste piece Whorl\button Ajouré inlay fr. Raw piece Frame inlay fr. Frame inlay fr. Point fr. Ring production waste Die Whorl\button; pin fr. Waste piece? Inlay fr. Meshrebiyya rod Die Gaming piece Gaming piece

381

Period

Fig. & No.

40:378

Ivory

H; B H?

56:529 7:75

Ivory A 53:509

Cattle? metatarsus

A

46:426 45:422

41:385 56:535

Ivory (box)

A

Ivory?

LR?

46:427

C B-A

27:284 58:549

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

92 92

I1 I1

112 117

001 001

1205 1242

92 92

I1 I2

137 269

001 001

1249 0105

Doll hand? Gaming piece\disk Whorl\button 125 Inlays; inlay production waste; 26 drilling waste; raw piece

92 92 92

I2 I4 I6

--617 1679

0128 0807 0155

Doll head 3 Inlay fr. 2 Inlay fr.

92 92 92

I6 I6 I6

1679 690 671

001 001 -001 002 002 001 001

0155 0169 0092

92 92 92 92 92 92 92

I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6

766 733 881 767 323 000 714

001 001 001 001 001 001 002

0290 0252 0026 0295 0323 0168 0216

92 92 92

I7 I7 I8

051 051 052

001 002 001

1077 1077 0063

92 92

I4\I11 I14

000 306

001 001

0024 0278

92 92 92

TP1 TP1 TP4

098 124 076

001 001 001

0347 0300 131

92 92 92

TP4 TP7 TP7

4066 0000 000

001 001 ---

0110 -----

Meshrebiyya rod Raw inlay Inlay raw\waste tablet; 2 inlay fr. Gaming piece Tablet Doll fr. Pendant? Whorl\button Button Perforated tablet\inlay Carved piece 2 Raw rod fr. Die production waste Raw tablet? Perforated tablet fr. Waste piece Inlay Handle\decoration fr. Pin fr. Pin fr. Handle

92 92

TP7 TP8

Balk Balk

001 001

0000

92 92 92 92 92 93 93

TP8 Z2 Z2 Z2 Z2 CV10 CV10

059 287 215 275 217 046 040

001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0114 0159 0125 0177 0181 0278 0353

93

CV10

065

001

0410

D152

Animal & Bone

Pin fr. Ring production waste Frame inlay fr. Ajouré inlay fr. Inlay Ring fr. 2 Drilling waste Perforated disk Small spoon\spatula fr. Pin fr. 382

Period

Fig. & No.

B B

33:324 28:289

B A

7:83

Remarks

42:391, 394-395, 399; 43:408; 50:482484; 53:506, 514

A A

Ivory (tablet(

A A-C A

49:458 61:574

B-A

27:283

A

24:256 7:27 6:67 41:389

A

Painted red

50:486

40:376

Cattle metacarpus

A

Painted red

A

44:416

R C

51:496

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

CV10 CV10 CV10 CV10 CV10 G25 G25 G25 G25 G25 I1 I2

066 042 061 040 052 023 012 021 019 019 195

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 ---

0424 0227 0365 0350 0295 0037 0028 0026 0046 0039 1343 ---

Raw\waste piece Circular item Pin fr. Needle fr. Pendant? Pin fr. Pin fr. Waste piece Rough-out end Spoon fr. Gaming piece Whorl\button fr.

93

I4

555

001

0680

Decorated item

93

I4

564

001

0728

2 Inlay fr.

93

I4

600

001

0759

Ivory (piece)

93

I4

613

001

0801

93 93

I4 I4

000 148

001 001

0793 1567

93 93 93 93 93

I4 I4 I4 I4 I4

553 595 613 595 617

001 001 001 001 001

0717 0754 0818 0772 0838

93

I4

617

001

0852

93 93

I4 I4

000 617

001 001

0780 0807

16 Inlay fr.; 11 waste pieces Bridge for string instrument Inlay fr. Die production waste ? Doll fr. Inlay Inlay fr. Comb teeth 8 Inlay fr.; 3 waste pieces 23 Inlay fr.; 8 waste pieces Inlay Whorl\button

93 93

I4 I4

001 617

001 001

0751 0821

93

I4

000

001

0617

Comb 3 Inlay fr.; Raw die Inlay fr.

93

I4

000

001

0787

93

I4

000

001

0782

93

I5

471

001

0459

Inlay; 5 inlay waste fr.; 4 tablet fr. Handle end\decoration? Inlay fr?.

93

I5

472

001

0478

Spatula fr?.

93

I5

482

001

0496

93

I5

490

001

93 93 93

I5 I6 I6

490 926 148

001 -----

Topsoil

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No. 40:369

A

24:258

Ivory? Ivory? Ivory? Ivory?

56:530

A

61:572

A-C

26:274

31:315 43:411

A

6:70

Ivory?

A-C

57:541

Ivory

A

60:565

Handle?

B

3:38

535

Whorl\button

A

0053 0622 1525

Comb fr. Carved piece fr. Ring fr.

A A

383

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

93

I6

083

001

1051

93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6

000 049 000 000 039 037 009 000

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0463 0959 0658 0445 0945 0920 0393 0727

93 93 93 93 93 93 93

I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6

869 007 039 000 008 837 039

001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0720 0817 0931 0722 0819 0409 0953

93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6

000 172 128 000 128 000 198 262

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

492 1362 1290 1177 1170 1318 1446 1600

93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6

261 142 000 127 128 058 263 209 239 128 000 082 126 000 000 883 898 128 128

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

1599 1263 1221 1175 1235 1472 1606 1478 1557 1165 1183 1040 1149 1434 1242A 541 0567 1264A 1281A

Meshrebiyya rod; 2 decorations; carved piece; 9 production waste pieces; 18 raw\waste pieces and inlays Whorl\button 2 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. 2 Concave item fr. 2 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Concave item fr. 3 Inlay fr.; raw tablet; 4 inlay waste pieces Waste piece 2 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Sawn piece Tool fr?. Raw tablet; perforated piece; 11 inlay fr. Inlay fr. 9 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Doll hand Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Doll 26 Inlay fr.; raw piece 11 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Perforated rod Raw\waste piece 4 Inlay fr. 4 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. 2 Inlay fr. 11 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Inlay fr. 7 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Tablet 2 Inlay fr. Sawn piece Whorl\button Inlay fr. Inlay fr.

384

Period

Fig. & No.

A

-46:429 431

33:323

34:328

41:383

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

93 93 93 93

I6 I6 I6 I6

997 128 000 000

001 001 001 001

1274 1298 1203 1308

93

I6

172

001

1391

93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6

082 256 206 058 263 071 162 256 178 082 159 128

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

1035 1596 1481 1466 1613 1001 1382 1597 1245 1023 1266A 1228

93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6

000 256 000 174 172 256 139 128 128 000 000

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

1058 1594 1029 1370 1369 1593 1194 1220 1143 1150 0463

I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I6 I9

047 127 128 129 690 823 871 925 949 949 149 000 000 000 074 904

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

1007 139 143 1155 0414 0914 565 0619 0688 0676 1260 1150 128 128 013 0048

I9 I9 I12 I14 I14

901 903 001 000 040

001 001 001 001 001

0010 0030 0007 0003 43

Inlay\coating fr.? 2 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Whorl\button fr.; inlay; inlay fr. Inlay production waste 3 Inlay fr. 7 Inlay fr. Whorl\button 12 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Gaming piece Brooch 5 Inlay fr. 3 Inlay fr. Doll head Piece Disk production waste 4 Inlay fr. 8 Inlay fr. Carved rod 2 Inlay fr. 9 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Inlay fr. 3 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Decoration? Bridge for string instrument Disk Disk; whorl Perforated piece Whorl Whorl Spatula? Whorl Needle fr?. Doll fr. Inlays Vertebra Tool head? “Handle” Decoration “Handle” Ring production waste Decorated piece “Handle” Ring fr. Whorl\button Waste piece

93? 93? 93? 93? 93? 93

93? 93? 93? 93? 93? 93? 93? 93

93? 93? 93

93? 93? 93 93 93

Animal & Bone

385

Period

Fig. & No.

Remarks

7:73 53:512

Ivory?

8:92

54:516

43:409 10:116

A

34:334

7:76

Bone?

Fish?

A A A A A

A

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

93 93 93 93 93 93

I14 I14 I14 I14 I14 I14

0207 064 000 187 000 218

001 001 001 001 001 001

176 054 0777 0211 0788 198

93 93 93 93 93 93 93

I14 KK5 KK7 KK7 KK7 KK7 KK7 KK7

000 --009 025 025 006 027

W2

002 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0003 0103 0032 0087 0083 0023 0099 0023

93 93 93

KK7 T6 Z2a

012 000 415

001 001 001

0052 1210 0280

Inlay Inlay fr. Handle fr. Whorl\button Inlay fr. Point - comb tooth? Rod fr. Pin Bead Pin fr. Rod - waste? Inlay Raw\waste piece Head - top of kohl stick? Carved rod 2 Inlay fr. Flute fr.

94? 94? 94 94

CV2 CV11 I1 I1

080 070 195 216

--001 001 001

0320 0217 1349 1517

94 94

I1 I1

199 216

001 001

1386 1527

94 94 94 94

I1 I1 I1 I1

216 216 216 217

002 001 002 001

1527 1532 1532 1522

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

I1 I1 I1 I1 I4 I4 I4 I4

200 195 200 195 000 580 053 281

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

1407 1352 1395 1351 328 0040 1073 0016

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4

684 757 112 687 677 108 744 110 930 000

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0074 0293 1299 1398 0081 1278 0271 1279 0780 1361

93?

Animal & Bone

Disk Pin fr. Pin fr.; point Ring production waste Stylus\kohl stick Ring production waste Raw rod Handle fr?. Carved piece fr. Ring production waste Ring fr.; pin Die fr. Pin Handle? Inlay Inlay Rod fr. Tablet for crushing cosmetics?; 7 inlay fr. Doll hand? Stylus\point? Inlay or waste Gaming piece? Pin fr. Carved rod fr. Doll fr. Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Doll hand?

386

Period

Fig. & No.

Remarks

1:3

Natural?

A

24:259

42:393

Eagle or stork ulna

A

31:316

A

47:440

A

26:269

Bone? B-A

Ivory?

Scapula (tablet)

LR

2:18

R

25:264

A A A

44:413 10:121 16:160

A-C

33:325 4:41 28:293

A A

Stained

Inscribed

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4 I4

856 000 966 893 687 907 000 769 000 895 691

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

1179 1354 1467 1384 1435 0725 1348 0369 0704 0709 0080

94 94

I6 I6

281 281

001 001

0027 0023

94

I6

267

001

0007

94 94

I6 I6

280 279

001 001

0011 0010

94 94 94 94

I6 I6 I6 I6

279 281 281 281

002 001 001 001

0010 0015 0025 0024

94 94 94 94

I6 I6 I6 I6

367 153 357 864

001 001 001 001

0178 0123 0158 0062

Inlay; doll fr. Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Inlay 12 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. Gaming piece Inlay Perforated tablet Handle\gaming piece\bead? 3 Inlay fr. 10 Inlay fr.; waste piece 4 Inlay fr.; 2 waste pieces Waste piece 11 Inlay fr.; 4 waste pieces Box 7 Inlay fr. Inlay fr. 14 Inlay fr.; comb fr.; waste piece Perforated piece Inlay fr. Doll head Gaming piece

94 94

I6 I6

864 864

002 003

0062 0062

Gaming piece Doll

94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

I9 I9 I9 I9 I9 I14 I14 I14

925 930 930 945 889 678 940 863

001 001 001 001 002 001 001 001

0159 0167 0168 0225 0158 0061 1399 0357

Handle Whorl Doll Inlay fr. Handle\tool? Carved piece fr. Box Die

94 94 94

94? 94? 94?

I14 I16 LL02 Z2 Z2 Z2

047 373 047 479 830 846

001 001 001 --001 001

0157 0188 0075 0107 0080 0113

Comb fr. 3 Inlay fr. Carved item Tablet Fastener Needle?

95

03

05

133

95

03

.056 33 056

09

145

95?

CV

002

---

0003

Inlay production waste 4 Inlays\waste pieces Ajouré inlay

387

Period

Fig. & No.

A

42:397 41:379

44:417 56:532

Ivory

44:418 47:441

Cattle metatarsus Cattle? metacarpus

A

30:304

A A

30:305 32:317 1:5 31:314

Ivory Cattle metatarsus

A

1:6 39:364 56:533 27:280

A

16:156 34:332

A B-A A

A

43:407

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

95

CV3

052

03

113

95

CV3

24

445

95 95 95 95

CV3 CV4 CV8 CV8

30 02 08 18

551 000 007 160

Raw rod? Handle\box fr. Inlay fr. Inlay fr.

95

CV8

12

056

Waste piece

95 95 95

CV10 I1 I1

.086 16 099 041 004 .014 14 .005 13 107 219 259

Decoration\handle fr.; inlay fr. Rod

001 001 001

641 1543 1678

95 95 95 95 95 95 95

I1 I1 I1 I1 I1 I1 I1 I1 I1

216 216 216 216 252 219 219 217 219

001 001 001 002 001 001 002 001 001

1538 1536 1537 1538 1667 1545 1545 1539 1554

95

I1 I1

237 270

001 001

1638 1704

95 95 95 95 95 95 95

I2? I6 I7 I7 I7 I7 I7

291 148 000 000 000 103 103

001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0342 1507 0131 0133 0423 0378 0386

95 95 95 95 95 95

I7 I7 I7 I7 I7 I7

129 138 216 218 259 276

001 001 001 001 001 001

0126 0134 0171 0180 0242 0315

95 95 95

I7 I7 I7

291 302 302

001 001 001

0361 0409 0435

95 95 95 95

I7 I7 I7 I7

307 317 345 359

001 001 001 001

0412 416 0616 0537

95

I7

366

001

0521

Pin fr. Raw\waste piece Ring production waste Decoration Pin fr. Raw\waste piece Carved piece fr. Carved rod Raw\waste piece Rod fr. Bead Ring production waste Carved item Perforated disk\lid\whorl 3 Inlay fr. Carved piece Inlay Inlay Waste piece 6 Inlay fr. Inlay fr.; disk production waste; waste piece Inlay fr. 7 Inlay fr. Handle Decorated item Carved piece Gaming piece\jetton Inlay Whorl\button Bridge for string instrument; inlay fr. Inlay; waste piece Bead Waste piece 2 Inlay fr.; waste piece Inlay fr.

95? 95? 95?

Animal & Bone

388

Period

Fig. & No.

R-B

22:230

A

47:439

B-A

A

B

3:29

A

A

B-A

49:468

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

95

I7

366

001

0598

95

I7

383

001

0555

95 95

I7 I7

386 386

001 001

0569 0573

95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95?

I7 I7 I7 I7 I7 I7 I7 I7 I7 I7

391 391 393 393 393 409 409 409 409 411

001 001 001 001 001 001 002 003 004 ---

0588 0779 0596 0652 0670 0626 0626 0626 0626 0032

95 95 95 95

I7 I7 I7 I7

414 416 429 441

001 001 001 001

0639 0655 0695 0715

95 95 95

I7 I7 I7

460 472 472

001 001 001

0755 0771? 0772

95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95

I7 I8 I8 I8 I8 I8 I8 I8 I8 I8 I8 I9 I17 KK09 KK12 KK16 KK16

472 002 002 006 021 002 002 002 021 002 021 943 000 021 039 253 253

001 --003 001 001 001 001 002 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0773 0013 0013 0006 0041 0015 0012 0012 0044 0014 0036 0224 0306 0043 0064 0181 0180

95 95 95 95 95

KK16 KK25 KK25 KK25 KK25

253 019 019 019 019

001 001 001 001 001

0183 0059 0064 0668? 0070

2 Inlay fr.; ring production waste; 2 raw\waste pieces 2 Writing tablet fr.; 3 inlay fr.; waste piece 2 Inlay fr. 3 Inlay fr.; 5 waste pieces Frame inlay Pin fr.; tablet Lid Inlay Inlay Doll fr. Doll Doll fr. Whorl\button fr. Handle coating\decoratio n? Furniture mount Handle Pin fr. Pin fr.; waste piece Waste piece Inlay fr. Inlay fr.; waste piece Inlay fr. Pin Waste piece Needle fr. Pin fr. Raw\waste piece Pin Pin fr. Pin Sawn piece Pin fr. Inlay fr. Waste piece Piece Needle fr. Unidentified item Inlay; 2 box fr.; handle? Point fr. Buckle fr. Pin Pin fr. Waste piece

389

Period

Fig. & No.

A A

14:148 42:396

A (C) A (C) A (C) A (C) A

32:319 33:327 33:326 6:66

A

3:27

Remarks

Ivory (tablet)

Cattle? metatarsus

A Ivory?

LR

20:196

Bird

Ivory

56:535

53:511

Painted red

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95

KK25 KK25 KK26 KK28 KK28 KK37 PP13 S TP3

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0103 0134 0134 0244 0251 0175 0105 0004 0300

95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95

TP3 TP11 TP12 TP12 TP12 TP12 TP12 TP12

030 060 070 113 115 125 034 001 Topsoil 112 000 012 002 Balk 012 025 024

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0325 0326 0078 0056 0009 0082 0127 100

95 95

TP13 TP13

001 004

001 001

0003 0089

95 95

TP13 TP13

021 004

001 001

0073 0048

95 95 95 95

TP14 TP14 TP14 TP15

006 000 052 214

001 001 001 001

0013 0324 0306 0512

95 95 95 95 95 95

TP15 TP16 TP16 TP17 TP17 TP17

202 227 227 039 030 014

001 001 002 001 001 001

0500 0559 0559 0039 0036 0011

95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95

TP17 TPS TPS TPS TPS TPS TPS TPS TPS TPS Z Z

030 082 000 064 056 121 107 000 111 039 000 000

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0028 0392 0386 0126 0117 0442 0256 0188 0327 0075 0309 0209

Point fr. Pin fr. Pin; pin fr.; inlay Needle fr.; pin fr. 3 Point fr. 4 Pin fr. Waste piece Gaming piece Ring production waste? Inlay fr. 2 Inlay fr. Die Decoration Comb fr. Raw rod Spoon fr.? Ring production waste Domino tablet Ring production waste Domino tablet 2 Ring production waste; 3 die production waste Pin Raw\waste piece Inlay Ring production waste Pin fr. Raw\waste piece 2 Waste pieces Rod fr. Pin fr. 3 Raw\waste pieces; die fr. Pin fr. Gaming piece Inlay Comb fr. Button Piece Whorl\button Decoration Writing tablet fr.? Point Sawn piece Pin fr.

95

Z

000

002

0209

Flute fr.?

95

Z

146

001

0405

Raw\waste piece

390

Period

Fig. & No.

Remarks

19:173

Gilded (1)

B-A 16:158

B Ot

Ivory?

Ot B

30:307

A B-A

57:540 7:81

B-A

6:86 46:438

Natural?

Ivory 10:118

26:271

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

95

Z

130

001

0383

95 95

Z Z

077 138

001 001

0222 0375

95 95 95 95 95

Z Z Z Z Z

020 149 028 141 144

001 001 001 001 001

0035 0435 0051 0392 0443

95 95 95 95

Z Z Z Z

051 019 028 211

001 001 001 001

0119 0034 0052 0616

95

Z

190

001

0549

95 95 95

Z Z Z

124 045 197

001 001 001

0328 0136 0561

2 Ring production waste; 3 raw\waste pieces Inlay fr. Pin fr.; ring production waste Disk Sawn piece Sawn piece 2 Sawn pieces Writing tablet; 5 inlays Point Elliptical item Pin Decorated item; ring production waste Ring production waste Pin fr. Sawn piece 2 Sawn pieces

95 95 95 95 95? 95? 95 95 95

Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z2

122 393 122 122 049 123 123 123 611

001 001 001 002 001 001 001 001 001

0325 0636 0331 0331 0117 0335 0315 0338 0274

95 95

Z2 Z2

001 502

001 ---

0004 0168

96 96

KK11 KK24

220 081

001 001

0209 0158

96

KK24

040

001

145

96 96 96 96 96

KK28 KK31 KK31 KK36 KK36

123 082 084 039 040

001 002 001 001 001

0269 0173 0175 0153 0147

96 96 96

KK36 LL01 LL01

040 058 078

001 001 001

0149 0094 0129

Pin fr.; lathe rough-out end Gaming piece 3 Pin fr. Kohl stick? Pin fr. 3 Pins; pin fr.; kohl stick fr.? Pin Inlay fr.; 3 pieces Inlay

96

LL01

059

002

0099

Inlay fr.

Whorl\button Spoon Whorl\button Raw piece? Handle? Whorl Whorl Whorl\button Ring production waste Inlay fr. Ring production waste Pin fr. Sawn piece

391

Ivory (tablet)

Period

Fig. & No.

LR-B

22:233

A

58:547

A

58:552

Remarks

Natural?

Ivory (item)

A

Camel\cattl e humerus; femur

A

Ivory

A A A A A A

60:566

17:162 7:74 60:569 47:446

B Donkey metatarsus

B-A

42:392

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

96

LL01

083

002

0138

96 96

LL01 LL01

075 097

001 001

0119 0170

96

LL01

087

001

0145

96

LL01

087

002

0145

96 96

LL01 LL01

095 107

001 001

0161 0182

96

LL01

107

002

0182

96

LL01

107

003

0182

96

LL01

107

004

0182

12 Inlay fr.; 2 waste pieces; bridge for string instrument Whorl\button Inlay; 28 inlay fr.; 3 raw\waste pieces 11 Inlay fr.; 3 waste pieces 3 Inlay fr.; 6 waste pieces Inlay fr. Perforated tablet; bridge for string instrument; 44 inlay fr.; inlay waste; 17 pieces 43 Inlay fr.; 25 tablets\ waste pieces Inlay; 3 inlay production waste; bridge fir string instrument; 2 drilling waste 7 Inlays

96

LL01

107

005

0182

96 96 96

LL01 LL01 LL01

091 097 083

001 001 001

0157 0169 0167

96 96

LL01 LL01

108 103

001 001

0183 0177

96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96

LL02 LL02 LL02 LL02 LL02 LL02 LL02 LL03

051 052 038 034 015 047 037 007

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0085 0089 0064 0092 0036 0087 0058 0009

6 bridges for string instrument; 10 pieces of the same; 3 writing tablets fr.? Raw die? Writing tablet fr.? Inlay; 24 inlay fr.; bridge for string instrument; 3 drilling waste; 17 inlay production waste Inlay fr. 2 Bridges for string instruments; 2 inlay fr.; 3 drilling waste; 22 inlay production waste Needle Needle fr. Doll fr. Crushed inlays Carved item fr. Rod fr. Doll head Crushed inlay 392

Period

Fig. & No.

A-C

Ivory? Ivory? (inlay)

A-C A A A

Ivory (some)

41:388 26:273

A A

Ivory (some) Ivory (tablets)

A A

Ivory?

58:551 A-C

R-B

9:103

31:312

Remarks

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

96 96 96

TP19 TP19 TP20

028 027 017

001 001 001

0034 0037 0031

96 96 96 96 96 96 96 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 98 98

TP21 TP22 TP22 TP22 TP22 TP22 TP22 I7 I7 I7 LL01 LL04 TP2 TP2 TP19 LL01 LL01

041 031 025 018 025 025 026 089 083 051 185 009 150 160 084 242 230

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 003 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0072 0045 0041 0020 0046 0044 0042 0341 0310 1077 0385 0046 0275 0318 0115 773 503

98 98 98 98 98

LL01 LL01 LL01 LL01 LL04

223 245 202 239 097

001 001 001 001 001

0493 0687 0450 0627 0204

Fastener Pin fr. Decoration; frame inlay fr. 2 Inlay fr. Needle fr. Pin Pointed tool? Piece Pin fr. Pin\needle fr. Perforated ring Doll Pin fr. Point? Unidentified item Pin? Pin Inlays Frame inlay Carved rod\handle fr. Gaming piece Drilling waste Drilling waste Gaming piece Gaming piece fr.; 2 inlay fr.

98 98 98 98 98 98 98

LL04 LL04 LL04 LL04 LL04 LL04 LL05

159 079 107 092 097 057 005

001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0319 0177 0218 0187 0208 0174 0014

98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98

LL05 LL05 LL05 LL05 LL05 LL05 LL05 LL05

042 082 051 044 013 052 083 005

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0048 0117 0084 0054 0013 0066 0121 0016

98? 99? 99

TP2 I1 KE

233 004 002

001 001 002

0816 0001 0011

99

KE

002

002

0013

99

KE

707

002

0011

Inlay fr. Ajouré inlay fr. Pin fr. Point fr. Raw\waste piece Inlay fr. Ajouré inlay production waste Ajouré inlay fr. Point Cylindrical item Ring fr. Whorl\button Box fr. Point fr. Ajouré inlay production waste Carved piece Inlay Ring production waste Ring production waste Lathe waste fr.

393

Period

Fig. & No.

Remarks

LR-B Sooted

Scapula

B A H-B

47:445 34:329 22:235 Bone?

Cattle metatarsus (piece)

B-A

42:400

B

28:291

A A-C

B-A

19:171

Ivory? 43:405

B Ivory?

12:131

A-C B A 51:493

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

Period

Fig. & No.

99

LL01

335

001

0990

Gaming piece

Horse metatarsus

A

29:298

99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99

LL01 LL01 LL01 LL01 LL04 LL04 LL04 LL04

332 315 334 313 183 183 183 227

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0983 0973 0986 0960 0396 0436 0390 0464

R-B A-C

46:432

99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99

LL04 LL04 LL04 LL04 LL05 LL06 LL07 LL07 TP02 TP02 TP23 TP23 TP30 TP33

190 183 251 235 091 030 001 001 262 267 111 101 011 150

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0410 0292 0506 0503 0126 0040 0023 0885 0878 0885 0108 0106 0032 0146

00 00 00 00 00 00

LL01 LL01 LL01 LL01 LL01 LL06

372 355 391 391 392 129

001 001 001 001 001 001

1166 1032 1204 1220 1226 0189

00 00 00

LL06 LL07 LL07

115 090 058

001 001 001

0161 0191 0114

00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

LL07 LL07 LL07 LL07 LL07 LL08 TP07 TP09 TP11 TP11 TP27 TP28 TP28 TP28 TP30 TP30

027 082 050 058 035 039 024 122 131 131 024 034 027 036 040 069

001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001

0065 0145 0146 0089 0093 0046 0421 0076 0160 0142 0131 0037 0025 0045 0112 0191

Shuttle fr.? Decoration Head of tiny item Decorated item fr. Ajouré inlay fr. Inlay Ajouré inlay fr. Doll fr.; ajouré inlay fr. Ajouré inlay fr. Carved piece fr. Pin fr. Pin fr. Inlay Doll 2 Frame inlays Decoration fr. Carved piece Decoration Inlay\waste fr. Frame inlay fr. Die Ring production waste Whorl\button Sawn piece Pointed rod Inlay Inlay Handle\furniture mount fr. Doll fr. Doll Ajouré inlay fr.; 9 frame inlay fr. Perforated bone Drilling waste Doll Whorl\button Rod fr. Carved piece Whorl\button fr. Pin fr.? Pin fr. Pin fr. Fastener Sawn piece Pin fr. Raw die Die Ring production waste 394

Remarks

C C A-C

53:513 36:341

A A-C LR-A B A-C

38:354

B B-A B-A

10:115 41:381 41:382

A

33:322

A Natural? B-A A

39:366

Ivory?

THE ASSEMBLAGE OF BONE AND IVORY ARTIFACTS FROM CAESAREA MARITIMA, ISRAEL 1ST-13TH CENTURIES CE Year

Area

Locus

No.

Basket

Object

Animal & Bone

00

TP30

069

001

0188

00

TP30

060

001

0172

Ring production waste Inlay fr.

Period

Fig. & No.

Remarks

Caesarea Museum, Sdot-Yam The objects are arranged by registration numbers of the Israel Antiquity Authority. All were collected on the surface and therefore have no stratigrafical dating. IAA No.

Object

55-252

Pin Needle Die Pin fr. Cylindrical item fr. Cylindrical item fr. Bead Whorl\button Box

55-260 55-261 55-262 55-429 66-120 71-5348 71-5361 98-71... 98-71... 98-7117 98-7118 98-7119 98-7120 98-7121 98-7122 98-7123 98-7124 98-7125 98-7126 98-7127 98-7128 98-7129 98-7130 98-7132 98-7133 98-7134

Carved piece Perforated tablet Weaving tablet? Buckle Spindle & whorl Gaming piece Small spoon Handle fr. Needle fr. Doll head Tablet Whorl\button\disk Whorl\button fr. Whorl\button Whorl\button Whorl\button Whorl\button Whorl\button Carved rod\handle fr. Carved rod\handle fr. Carved rod\handle fr. Carved rod fr. Stylus\kohl stick? Tiny temple Carved piece Lock; part of lock

98-7135 98-7136 98-7138 98-7139 98-7140

Inlay? Doll hand Buckle tongue; die Carved piece Carved piece

Animal &Bone

Fig. & No.

Cattle\horse metacarpus

Cattle? scapula

39:362 41:386 8:88 8:98 6:57

Cattle femur\humerus

31:313

4:39 34:330 14:146147 41:387 31:309

Cattle humerus

395

36:343

Remarks

CATALOGUE OF BONE AND IVORY OBJECTS IAA No.

Object

98-7142 98-7144 98-7145 98-7146 98-7147 98-7148 98-7151 98-7152 98-7154 98-7608

Pin fr. Pin fr.? Spoon fr.; decoration fr. Comb fr. Comb fr. “Fork”-like item Die Die 2 Carved pieces Whorl\button

Animal &Bone

Fig. & No.

23:239

16:155

396

Remarks