The Tel Bet Yerah Excavations, 1994-95 9654061864, 9789654065665, 9789654061865

Citation preview

IAA Reports, No. 28

THE TEL BET YERAH EXCAVATIONS, 1994–1995

NIMROD GETZOV

With contributions by Rina Y. Bankirer, Haya Ben-Nahum, Israel Carmi, Carole P. Cope, Gerald Finkielsztejn, Dror Segal and Danny Syon

ISRAEL ANTIQUITIES AUTHORITY JERUSALEM 2006

IAA Reports Publications of the Israel Antiquities Authority Editor-in-Chief: Zvi Gal Series Editor: Ann Roshwalb Hurowitz Volume Editor: Hanna Hirschfeld Volume Translator: Danny Syon

Front Cover: The section of Area C (photographer: H. Smithline) Back Cover: Selected sherds (from top: Stratum V, Figs. 2.12:16, 2.15:1; Stratum II, Figs. 3.51:6, 3.50:23; Stratum IV, Fig. 3.44:4; Stratum II, Fig. 3.50:18; Stratum III, not drawn; Stratum IV, Figs. 3.44:19, 3.41:8) (photographer: H. Smithline)

Typesetting, Layout and Production: Ann Abuhav, Margalit Hayosh Cover Design: Ann Abuhav Illustrations: Elizabeth Belashov Printing: Keterpress Enterprises, Jerusalem Copyright © 2006, The Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem POB 586, Jerusalem, 91004 ISBN 965-406-186-4 eISBN 9789654065665 www.antiquities.org.il

CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

v

COLOR PLATES

vi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1

THE EARLY BRONZE AGE CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III CHAPTER 4: OBSERVATIONS ON EARLY BRONZE AGE SETTLEMENT HISTORY IN NORTHERN ISRAEL

7 41 123

HELLENISTIC AND LATER PERIODS CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD Haya Ben-Nahum and Nimrod Getzov The Stamped Amphora Handles Gerald Finkielsztejn A Seleucid Coin Danny Syon CHAPTER 6: THE POST-HELLENISTIC PERIOD

133 151 152 157

ANALYTIC STUDIES CHAPTER 7: THE FLINT ASSEMBLAGE CHAPTER 8: THE FAUNA: PRELIMINARY RESULTS CHAPTER 9: RADIOCARBON DATES

Rina Y. Bankirer Carole R. Cope Dror Segal and Israel Carmi

159 169 175

REFERENCES

177

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF LOCI AND WALLS

183

APPENDIX 2: NOTES ON QUANTITATIVE DATA

191

iv

ABBREVIATIONS

AASOR

Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research

‘Atiqot (ES)

English Series

‘Atiqot (HS)

Hebrew Series

BAR Int. S.

British Archaeological Reports International Series

BASOR

Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

BJPES

Bulletin of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society

EI

Eretz-Israel

ESI

Excavations and Surveys in Israel

HA

Hadashot Arkheologiyot

IAA Reports

Israel Antiquities Authority Reports

IEJ

Israel Exploration Journal

JNES

Journal of the Near Eastern Society

JPOS

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society

JRA

Journal of Roman Archaeology

NEAEHL

E. Stern and A. Lewinson-Gilboa eds. New Encyclopaedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Jerusalem 1993

PEFQSt

Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement

PEQ

Palestine Exploration Quarterly

QDAP

The Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine

RB

Revue Biblique

SAOC

Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The 1994–1995 excavations at Tel Bet Yerah (Permit No. A-2211/1994) were conducted on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority by Nimrod Getzov and funded by the Public Works Department. The assistance of the following people is acknowledged: Haya Ben-Nahum, Dina Shalem and Karen CovelloParan (area supervisors); Yossi Yacobi (administrator); Vadim Essman, Viatcheslav Pirsky and Valentin Shorr (surveyors); and Sandu Mendrea and Howard Smithline (photographers). Lea Porat restored the pottery, Hagit Tahan drew the finds and Elizabeth Belashov prepared the plans and sections for publication. Elisha Dvir prepared the final computerized version of Fig. 1.2. I wish to thank the labor crew provided by the employment plan of the Ministry of Labor for their professional and competent work, especially Salim ‘Ati and Hassan ‘Izadin, who cleaned and straightened many of the archaeological sections. I would like to thank the many experts who contributed to this report: Dr. Carole Cope, who undertook the faunal analysis; Rina Bankirer, formerly of the IAA Prehistory Department, who analyzed the flints; Haya Ben-Nahum, formerly of the IAA, who prepared the Hellenistic pottery; Dr. Gerald Finkielsztejn, of the IAA Department of Excavations and Surveys, who studied the inscription of the Hellenistic stamped amphora handle; Dr. Danny Syon, of the same department, who identified the Hellenistic coin; and the geologist, Anastasia Shapiro of the IAA’s Northern District, who

performed several petrographic analyses of the pottery, which appear throughout the report. I am grateful also to Dr. Zvi Gal, formerly chief archaeologist of the Northern District, who was greatly helpful at the time of the excavations, and to the members of the IAA Northern District, who aided the author throughout the excavation and the research. Special thanks must go to Zalman Winogradov, director of the Bet Gordon Museum, who proved a fount of information in regard to the tell and the previous excavations conducted there; and to Etan Mivtah, secretary of Kibbutz Kinneret, and its many members who aided us during the excavations. I am indebted to Prof. Ram Gophna, Dr. Raphael Frankel and Alon De Groot, who read the original manuscript and provided important comments, as well as to Dr. Syon, who, while translating the original Hebrew manuscript to English, also provided many excellent suggestions. To the members of the IAA Publication Department, among them Aviva Schwartzfeld, who expedited the early stages of the publication process; Hanna Hirschfeld (Hebrew editor) and Dr. Ann Roshwalb Hurowitz (series editor), I extend my thanks. As in the original excavations fifty years ago, our expedition generated great interest amongst the local community. We thank the many visitors who became involved during our fieldwork.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In the winter of 1994–1995 a salvage excavation was conducted at the south edge of Tel Bet Yerah. The excavations were carried out along the Tiberias–Zemah (Samakh) road (Highway 90), which created a deep cut in the edge of the tell, very close to the bridge over the Jordan River. Five settlement strata were defined, as follows: Stratum Va–e—remains of fortifications and a settlement from the end of Early Bronze Age I Stratum IV—remains of a settlement from Early Bronze Age II Stratum III—remains of fortifications and a settlement from the end of Early Bronze Age III Stratum II—remains of fortifications and a settlement from the end of Early Bronze Age III Stratum I—remains of a settlement and tombs from the Hellenistic period The present excavation took place 50 years after the first salvage excavation was carried out on the tell, and after at least eight expeditions put their spade to it. It must be stressed that this report is not intended as an in-depth study of the history of the ancient settlements on the tell. Such a study should be carried out in conjunction with extensive research and publication of the finds of past excavations, most of which have not seen the detailed scientific reporting they deserve.

ORGANIZATION OF THE R EPORT Chapter 1 presents a brief overview of archaeological research at Tel Bet Yerah and the various expeditions that excavated there. It includes bibliographies of the published reports but does not detail their finds. The two widely separate sets of finds are then treated individually, with sections on the Early Bronze Age (Chapters 2–4) and on the Hellenistic and later periods

(Chapters 5, 6), followed by a section on the analytic finds that apply to all the periods found at the site. Chapters 2–3 and 5–6 comprise the main body of the report, each detailing one of the four main periods of settlement that were unearthed: Chapter 2—Stratum V, Early Bronze Age IB; Chapter 3—Strata IV–II, Early Bronze Age II—Early Bronze Age III; Chapter 5— Stratum I, the Hellenistic period; and Chapter 6—the post-Hellenistic periods. Chapter 5, co-written with Haya Ben-Nahum, contains reports on the stamped amphora handles by Gerald Finkielsztejn and on a coin, by Danny Syon. These four chapters are independent. Each includes an overview of the history of research of the relevant period on the tell, including the major discoveries that the earlier expeditions assigned to the period, a discussion on the stratigraphy and architectural remains from our excavation, a description of the ceramic and other finds and a summary of all available data on the period at Bet Yerah.1 Chapter 4, closing the Early Bronze Age section, is devoted to a survey of the contribution of the results of the excavations at Bet Yerah to the dating of the Early Bronze Age strata at sites in northern Israel, followed by a few remarks on the history of Early Bronze Age settlements in this region. The remaining chapters present the specialists’ reports. Chapter 7, by Rina Y. Bankirer, presents the flint assemblage, Chapter 8, by Carole R. Cope, the archaeozoological finds, and Chapter 9, by Israel Carmi and Dror Segal, the radiocarbon analyses of nine samples. They discuss entire assemblages from all the excavated strata. The two appendices list: (1) all loci of the excavations and (2) a summary description of loci with finds that were counted with the described pottery.

2

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE HISTORY OF R ESEARCH, BEFORE THE 1994–1995 EXCAVATIONS Pre-Excavation Research The site, whose traditional name is Khirbet el-Kerak, is identified with Hellenistic Philoteria (see below, Chapter 5, and Sukenik 1922; Avi-Yonah 1976), as well as with Bet Yerah of the Talmudic literature (Press 1946:86–87; see a broad summary in Esse 1991:34– 35, contra Bar-Adon 1956). The site is also identified with Sinnabrey (‫ְרי‬ ֵ‫ ) ִצנַבּ‬of the Talmud and es-Sinnabra, where the Umayyad rulers maintained a winter palace (Mayer 1951; Bar-Adon 1956). The scholars of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were preoccupied mainly with the historical identification of the site (e.g., Wilson 1877; Guérin 1880:275–280; Saarisalo 1927:76–81). Guérin went as far as describing the tell in detail, and even identified traces of a wall surrounding it. The first scholar to have identified Early Bronze Age remains on the tell was W.F. Albright (1926:27–28). He described the band-slipped wares of EB I and was the first to distinguish the red wares with a lustrous burnish, which he termed ‘Khirbet Kerak Ware’. Earlier Excavations The Kinneret Tomb, 1940 The first archaeological excavation that can be linked to Tel Bet Yerah was carried out in a burial cave discovered in 1940 in the grounds of Qevuzat Kinneret, c. 1.25 km west of the tell. The dig was directed by Benjamin Maisler (Mazar), on behalf of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society. A preliminary report on the tomb and associated finds was published (Maisler 1942), followed by a final report (Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973), in which the tomb is presented as having been in use during the EB I and EB II periods. The Excavations of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society, 1944 and 1946 The first excavations on the tell itself were carried out on behalf of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society (JPES), led by Benjamin Maisler (Mazar), Moshe Stekelis and Michael Avi-Yonah. In the two field seasons (1944, 1946), a section was cut perpendicular to the south side of the tell (Fig. 1.1:1), and a large area was excavated on the north side (Fig. 1.1:2). The results of the excavations were published in preliminary

reports only (Maisler and Stekelis 1944–1945; Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1946–1947; Maisler, Stekelis and AviYonah 1952; Greenberg and Paz 2004). The following stratigraphy was observed: Stratum VII—Early Islamic; Stratum VI—Roman–Byzantine; Stratum V—Second Temple period (Hellenistic); Stratum IV—EB III, four construction phases; Stratum III—EB II, one phase with repairs; Stratum II—EB I (EB IB according to Greenberg and Paz 2004); Stratum I—Late Chalcolithic (‘Late Neolithic?’ and ‘EB IA’ according to Greenberg and Paz 2004). The Excavations of the Department of Antiquities, 1949–1955 An expedition on behalf of the Department of Antiquities excavated on the tell from 1949 to 1955 (Fig. 1.1:3). Its first director was Philip L.O. Guy, followed by Pesach Bar-Adon. The results of the excavations were published in preliminary reports and various articles (Guy 1951; Bar-Adon 1953, 1954, 1955a, 1955b, 1956, 1957, 1962, 1973). Bar-Adon prepared a manuscript of the final report (see Amiran 1969a), but it was never published. Bar-Adon granted permission and supplied verbal information to other scholars, who published additional data and various finds from the excavations (a partial list: Yeivin 1953; Yeivin and Yeivin 1964:265–266; Kochavi 1967: 178–179; Ben-Tor 1968; Amiran 1969a). The most complete stratigraphic sequence was found in Square α at the southeast part of the tell. The excavation reached a depth of 8 m, and 16 strata with 24 phases were identified.2 The stratigraphic data published by Kochavi (1967:179) and Ben-Tor (1968:1–2) can be summarized as: Roman stratum; Hellenistic stratum; Persian stratum; Middle Bronze IIB tomb; Stratum VI—Intermediate Bronze Age (EB IV; MB I); Strata VIIA–B, VIII—EB IV; Strata IXA– B, XA–B, XI—EB III; Strata XIIA–D, XIIIA–B—EB II; Strata XIV, XV, XVI—EB I.3 The Excavations of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1952–1964 During the years 1952–1964 the Oriental Institute conducted excavations on the tell, led by Pierre Delougaz and Helene Kantor (Fig. 1.1:4). Trenches were sunk at various points on the tell and the Byzantine and medieval finds were fully published (Delougaz and Haines 1960). The early periods however, were reported only summarily (HA 1963:26;

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

3

Fig. 1.1. Map of the tell and the various excavations.* 1. The JPES excavation in the south. 2. The JPES excavation in the north. 3. The Department of Antiquities excavations, directed by P. Bar-Adon. 4. The Oriental Institute trenches. 5. The Ussishkin and Netzer excavation. 6. The excavations of Yeivin, Amiran and Arnon. 7. The Bahat excavation. 8. The Eisenberg and Yogev excavations. 9. The 1995 excavations (present report). * The map does not include excavation areas with post-Hellenistic material. It is based on maps from earlier publications and not on recent surveys. The location of some of the sites was estimated on the basis of descriptions in the early reports. Sources: Maisler and Stekelis 1944– 1945; Bar-Adon 1956; Winogradov 1979; Esse 1991.

HA 1964a:12; HA 1964b:14–15). Much information on the excavations was published by Esse (1982; 1989; 1990), and in yet another work (Esse 1991: Table 1) he presents a table with all the archaeological periods found in each of the excavation areas. These excavations identified the following settlement periods: medieval, Byzantine, Roman, Hellenistic, EB III, EB II and EB I.

Department of Antiquities in the cut that was created by the water of the lake on the east side of the tell (Fig. 1.1:5). The excavators published a preliminary report (HA 1967b; Ussishkin 1968) which lists the following strata: Hellenistic, EB III (several phases), EB II (one phase), EB I (several phases), “the transition period between the Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age” (one phase).

The Excavation of Ussishkin and Netzer (Menchel), 1967 In 1967 a salvage excavation was conducted by David Ussishkin and Ehud Netzer (Menchel) on behalf of the

The Excavations of Yeivin, Amiran and Arnon (Cohen), 1976 In 1976 a salvage excavation was conducted in the Oholo seminary compound on behalf of the Department

4

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

of Antiquities, led by Zeev Yeivin, Ruth Amiran and Carmela Arnon (Cohen) (Fig. 1.1:6). The results of these excavations were published only as preliminary reports (HA 1977:10–11; Amiran and Arnon 1977) and show the following strata: Stratum I—not dated; Stratum II—probably Hellenistic; Strata III–V—EB, with scattered sherds of Khirbet Kerak Ware; in Stratum IV, EB II finds; Stratum VI—EB I (according to Amiran and Arnon 1977, EB II or III); Strata VII– X—EB I. The Excavation of Bahat, 1976 A further excavation in the Oholo seminary compound (Fig. 1.1:7) was conducted in the same year by Dan Bahat on behalf of the Department of Antiquities, and it too was preliminarily published (HA 1977:11) with the following stratigraphy: Roman–Byzantine (3 phases); Hellenistic; EB III; EB II; EB I. The Excavations of Eisenberg and Yogev, 1981, 1982 and 1985 In 1981 and 1982 Emanuel Eisenberg conducted a salvage excavation in the Bet Yerah high school campus on behalf of the Department of Antiquities (Fig. 1.1:8). In 1985 the excavation was extended by Ora Yogev. The 1981 and 1985 seasons were published in a preliminary report (Eisenberg 1981; Yogev and Eisenberg 1985), while the 1982 season was not published at all. The stratigraphy, as presented in these reports is as follows: Eisenberg 1981: Strata 1–2—second century BCE; Strata 3–6—EB III; Stratum 7—EB II; unexcavated strata. Yogev 1985: Byzantine pit; Strata I–II—Hellenistic; Strata III–IV—EB III; Strata V–VII—EB II; Strata VIIIA–B—EB IB. The Bet Gordon Archives and Museum At Bet Gordon in Kibbutz Deganiya Alef, an archive of publications and other information on researches on the Kinrot Valley, and especially on Tel Bet Yerah, was assembled by Zalman Winogradov. Various finds from the excavations and surveys there are on display at the museum of Bet Gordon (Winogradov 1988).4 An overview of the history of the tell, the excavations on it and its state today was published in a brochure by the Oholo seminary (Winogradov 1982), as well as in a book on the Kinrot Valley (Winogradov 1998). Additional

information can be found in Esse’s introduction to the finds from Bet Yerah (Esse 1991:33–37).

THE 1994–1995 (‘CURRENT’) EXCAVATIONS The 1994–1995 excavations took place on the south side of the tell, along the Tiberias–Zemah road (OIG 20402/23540; NIG 25402/73540). Two areas were opened: Area AB, west of the road (Fig. 1.1:9AB), included a 4 m wide strip approximately 85 m long. Work in Area C consisted of straightening a section east of the road (Fig. 1.1:9C). In Area AB eighteen 5 × 5 m squares were aligned from south to north and numbered 10–27 (Sqs 10–15 were excavated as Area A; Sqs 16–27, as Area B; henceforth, ‘Area AB’; Plan 1.1). The squares were assigned 0.5 m wide balks, so that the balk between every two adjacent squares was 1 m and the net width of the excavation was 4 m.5 In the course of the excavations, most balks were eventually removed. In Sqs 10–21 virgin soil was reached (the Lisan Formation), while in the rest only the upper strata were removed. In order to properly document the ancient city walls and to elucidate the relationship between the phases of their construction and the excavated strata, special care was taken with the west section (Plan 1.1) in order to achieve as straight a section as possible and to draw it accurately. To best study the ceramic assemblages of the various strata, all soil removed from Sqs 11–21 was sifted through an 8 × 8 mm mesh sieve. An initial field reading was carried out, in which body sherds were discarded and all rims, handles and bases were saved. In addition, all pottery was kept from two sample squares (Sqs 12, 20) and from two sealed assemblages: Locus 525 from Stratum IV and L542 from Stratum III. In Area C (Fig. 1.2) the work involved the straightening of the section east of the road. To this end, large quantities of debris that had accumulated since the initial cutting of the road—some 60 years ago—were removed, yielding mixed pottery from all periods of occupation on the tell. Only towards the completion of the straightening of the section was the systematic collection of pottery possible, from certain locations where their chronological origin was clear. In Fig. 1.2 a grid was superimposed over the photograph to enable specific references to the section. The quantitative analysis of the pottery, the results of which will be presented in the chapters of this

Plan 1.1. Schematic west section (Area AB).

Fig. 1.2. East section (Area C).

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

report, was based on a count of rims and handles from Sqs 11–21 in Area AB (sherds that joined during the restoration process were counted as one) and on a count of all sherds from four selected loci (see Chapter 3: Tables 3.9–3.11 on further aspects of the quantitative analysis).

5

As mentioned above, in Area C and in Sqs 22–27 the collection of pottery was not through systematic sifting. Therefore the pottery from these sources was used only for elucidating the typology of the assemblages, not for quantitative analyses.

NOTES 1

The second and third sub-phases of the Early Bronze Age were treated together, because the assignment of various assemblages to either of them is central to this chapter. We intentionally avoided an a priori division of the discussion of these assemblages (Strata IV–II) in order to avoid a series of circular arguments. 2 Bar-Adon (1956:52) states that 24 phases were identified, but the late strata and phases were not published. 3 An important article by Greenberg and Paz (2005) on the fortifications at Tel Bet Yerah, based primarily on the

1945–1949 Bar-Adon excavations, appeared too late to be considered fully in this current volume. Suffice it to say, some of their conclusions agree in part with this current report, and some differ. 4 We are grateful to Z. Winogradov for the plentiful information he supplied us. 5 North of Sq 17 the actual width was narrower, to conform to the area that was to be destroyed for the planned roadbed.

CHAPTER 2

STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

PREVIOUS R ESEARCH Early Bronze Age I pottery was collected on the tell even before any excavations had begun, and especially from the cut made in 1933 during the construction of the Tiberias–Zemah road, the site of the present excavation. Ruth Amiran noted especially the ‘gray-burnished ware’, which at the time was assigned to the end of the Chalcolithic period (Amiran [Kallner] 1943:63). During the JPES excavations a cut perpendicular to the south side of the tell was made, in which four strata of the Bronze Age (according to the terminology applied in the present report) were defined.1 The earliest stratum (I) was assigned to ‘the late Chalcolithic culture’, and three others (II–IV), to the Early Bronze Age (Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1946–1947:54–56; Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:172). The excavators dated Stratum II to the early phases of the Early Bronze Age, and the fortifications with an 8 m thick and 2 m high brick wall were attributed to that stratum. Inside(!) the wall a fosse was identified. The construction of the wall consisted of three elements: a vertical wall in the middle, with a sloping wall flanking both the inside and the outside. Amnon BenTor (1968:39) preferred to assign this wall to EB II and explained its construction with separate elements to the need to let the bricks dry during construction. From the preliminary reports it also appears that during Stratum I the inhabitants lived in dwellings built into pits in the ground, and later, during Stratum II, they constructed rectangular, mudbrick buildings. In the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell a similar stratigraphic sequence was discerned, with a Chalcolithic stratum followed by three Early Bronze Age strata (Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:229; Greenberg and Paz 2004:7–12). During the excavations of the Department of Antiquities led by Pesach Bar-Adon, Strata XVI–XIV were defined as belonging to EB I (Ben-Tor 1968:2); pits and structures were assigned to the ‘transition period

between the late Chalcolithic and the Early Canaanite’ (Bar-Adon 1957:29). Bar-Adon also investigated remains of fortification walls in the south and west parts of the tell, and identified seven phases of construction from the ‘entire’ Early Bronze Age through later periods. According to him, brick walls were erected first, followed by walls with a foundation of stones. The walls surrounded an area of 200–250 dunams (50–60 acres; Bar-Adon 1956:51–52). Efrat and Shemuel Yeivin described gates that were discovered in these excavations, east of the section made by the JPES, but without providing any evidence regarding the dating of the Early Bronze Age phases to which the gates were attributed (Yeivin 1953: Fig. 1; Yeivin and Yeivin 1964:265–266). In the numerous probes conducted by the excavators of the Chicago Oriental Institute, EB I remains were found in almost all parts of the tell, leading to the interpretation that in this period all of it was inhabited (Esse 1991: Table 1). This wide distribution of the EB I settlement was apparent in the first salvage excavations carried out by the Department of Antiquities as well, in which the excavators reached the base of archaeological deposits. Among these are counted the excavations of Ussishkin and Netzer near the shore of the Sea of Galilee (HA 1967b:9), those of Yeivin, Amiran, Arnon and Bahat in the center of the tell (HA 1967b; Amiran and Arnon 1977) and those of Yogev in the southeast, near the JPES excavation site (Yogev and Eisenberg 1985). In some cases, the excavators date the earliest settlement to the phase termed ‘the late Chalcolithic culture’ (Amiran 1943:63; Maisler, Stekelis and AviYonah 1952:229) or to the ‘transition period between the late Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age’ (HA 1967b:9). This dating rested on the evidence of the ‘gray-burnished ware’. In contrast, Yogev and Eisenberg assign the earliest settlement in the area of their excavation to the ‘late phase of the EB I’ which, according to our terminology, is the EB IB period.

8

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Summary. At this stage of research it is evident that the publication of the finds from Bet Yerah is greatly lacking. We do not possess systematic reports on the pottery recovered from the EB I strata of the tell, with the exception of the recent publication of the finds from the section carried out in 1946 at the north side (Greenberg and Paz 2004:7–12), where EB I vessels were found at the base of the strata and which are characterized by gray-burnished vessels and possibly vessels from the Neolithic period as well. Another exception is the unique family, termed ‘crackled ware’, which includes a dark, crackled slip that should be dated to EB IB (Esse 1989:81); they are later than the floruit of the gray-burnished ware. It is possible that the wide distribution of the crackled-ware pottery gave rise to their occasional confusion with the gray-burnished ware that preceded them. In spite of the noted lack of systematic publication of the data, it would seem that the large settlement at Bet Yerah was founded in Phase B of Early Bronze I.

THE CURRENT EXCAVATIONS THE STRATIGRAPHY AND ARCHITECTURE Area AB

Plan 2.1. Area AB. The remains from Stratum V.

The Remains of the Fortifications (Plan 2.1) According to the findings of the excavations, the EB I strata are characterized by deposits, architectural remains and fortifications that can be separated into five phases.

Phase Ve The meager remains include soil accumulations with few potsherds (Fig. 2.1, bottom).

Fig. 2.1. Area AB. Section in Sq 12, looking south. From the bottom up: deposits of Stratum Ve, section through the bricks of W190, the north face of W156.

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

Phase Vd In this phase, a wall was built at the top of the slope at the edge of the tell (W190, Figs. 2.2–2.4). It was constructed of bricks, which were placed on two leveled terraces that were cut into the earlier accumulations and virgin soil. Thirty-six courses of bricks of the front of the wall were preserved (c. 4 m in height). However, within our excavation area its back was completely destroyed; therefore, it was impossible to determine its width beyond asserting that it was greater than 3 m. At the foot of the wall, in front (south), an addition is visible. It appears that this repair was necessitated due to the erosion of the bricks at the point of contact with the ground. The addition included a two-course facing of fieldstones, covered with bricks (Plan 2.1).

Phase Vc In this phase the wall was widened over an additional step cut in the slope in front of the Phase Vd wall (Fig. 2.5). For this purpose the 2.40 m wide brick wall, W191, of which 43 courses survive to a height of c. 4.5 m, was constructed. At the base of the renovated front of the wall a stone facing was affixed; it consists of a row of flat limestone slabs standing on their narrow end. It seems that this facing was done at the time of construction, perhaps as part of the lessons learned from the maintenance of the original wall. The widened wall eventually collapsed, and at the edge of the tell a large eroded mass remained, hiding in it the remains of the wall, covered by a large mass of collapsed bricks, evidence of its great original height.

Fig. 2.2. Area AB. Section through the south face of W190, looking northeast. The terrace cut in the virgin soil is visible (dark soil). Also visible is the seam with W191, showing at front repairs and the fieldstone facing.

Fig. 2.3. Area AB. As Fig. 2.2, looking northwest.

9

Fig. 2.4. Area AB. Horizontal section (looking down) at the south front of W190.

10

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Phase Vb A wall foundation (W156; c. 1.50 m wide) of this phase remained. It was built in a trench cut at the top of the rampart. At its base a bedding of stones was laid, over which bricks were placed. Its inner (north) face was constructed of a revetment of four courses of basalt stones (Figs. 2.1, 2.6). With the demise of this wall, its bricks were swept and carried down the slopes of the mass created from the collapse of the earlier walls. On the inner (north) slope this line of debris can be traced to a distance of 15 m; it seals the remains of the first four phases of Stratum V. On the face of it, this wall was not as wide as its predecessors, but the huge amount of collapsed material suggests otherwise. We suggest that W156 is a narrow foundation built at the top of the slope facing into the tell, and the wall constructed over it was much wider and extended across most of the width of the rampart to the south. A similar technique of cutting level terraces as foundations was already observed in the Phase Vd wall. If this hypothesis is correct, then most of the remains of the Phase Vb wall were swept down the south slope, or were removed by the builders

◄ Fig. 2.5. Area AB. Section through W190, W191, looking north. From bottom up: the Lisan Formation; the facing stones at the front of W191; on right, the brick courses of W191; the facing stones at the front of W190; dark virgin soil; brick courses of W190; the foundation of W156.

Fig. 2.6. Area AB. Section of Sq 12 looking east. From bottom up: the collapse of W190; the collapse of W156 topped by a layer of sediments; the collapse of Stratum Va; on top right, the north face of W110; on top left, the south face of W109.

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

of the Stratum III wall from EB III, leaving only the traces of the foundation constructed on a low terrace, cut into the inner slope. Phase Va The only evidence for this phase is the large accumulation of brick debris found above the ruins of the previous phase. This debris is evidence of yet another wall, which collapsed down the rampart; its foundation would have been removed when the foundations of later walls were built, in EB III. The debris of the Phase Vb wall sealed the preceding phases, and the Phase Va debris sealed that of Phase Vb. All the ceramic material found in these deposits, as well as in all the sealed phases, including both the accumulations preceding the building of the walls and the pottery found in the brick material, should therefore be attributed to EB IB and will be discussed below. Their presence indicates that all the phases of the fortifications of Stratum V are not earlier than EB IB. While theoretically it would be possible to claim that the fortifications are later and that they were built of material taken from the EB IB accumulations, the presence of thousands of EB IB sherds and the lack of material that can be dated positively to later periods indicate clearly that all five phases of Stratum V are to be dated to Early Bronze IB.

Fig. 2.7. Area AB. Square 16, looking north. In center, W502 and L532; on right and in the background, W474 and W481 from Stratum IV.

11

Occupation Levels and Remains of Structures (see Plan 3.2) Layers of soil and ashes, floors, pottery concentrations and single architectural remains were uncovered within a range of c. 30 m north of the walls. In other parts of the excavations no remains from Stratum V were found; they appear to have been removed during leveling works in Stratum IV. Only Sq 16 yielded substantial architectural remains. These include the stone foundation of a wall (W502; see Plan 3.1) and to the north of it a floor made of cobbles (L539; Fig. 2.7). In the west section (Plan 1.1), level with the foundation of W502, the line of silt covering the Phase Vb collapse is visible. Thus, the architectural remains in Sq 16 and the associated deposits (L496) most probably belong to Phase Va, while the deposits beneath (L517) should be assigned to earlier phases of Stratum V, though it is impossible to determine which. In the other squares the situation is similar. Following the silt cover of the Phase Vb collapse, the deposits can be associated with either earlier or later phases, without a possibility for a higher resolution. Of the early deposits, L179 (see Plan 1.1) should be singled out due to the large quantity of pottery and bones it produced, but it yielded no associated architecture (Fig. 2.8).

Fig. 2.8. Area AB. Locus 179, habitation levels, looking south.

12

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Area C—The East Section A 2.7 m wide wall was constructed over a leveled terrace that was prepared on virgin soil (see Fig. 1.2: B–C31–32, W827). Adjacent to it to the south, on a similar terrace, a 2.5 m wide addition was built (see Fig. 1.2: B–C32–33, W826). The wall and its widening correspond to Phases Vd and Vc in Area AB respectively. Unlike in Area AB, however, in Area C no stone facing was applied to the base of the wall in front, and no evidence of Phase Ve was found (Fig. 2.9). Outside the wall and its addition was a large accumulation of bricks that fell from the wall upon its destruction (see Fig. 1.2: B–C34–36). From the extant debris, at least an 8 m high wall can be computed; considering that probably a large portion of the bricks was carried either downhill into the present course of the Jordan River, or fell to the north side, a considerably higher wall can be reconstructed. Traces of another brick construction were identified over the collapse outside the wall (see Fig. 1.2: C34, W832). Considering its width and its situation at the edge of the tell it seems to be yet another fortification that was built after the Phase Vd–Vc wall had been

destroyed, but it cannot be determined whether it should be assigned to Phase Vb or Va, as these were defined in Area AB (Fig. 2.10). As in Area AB, the pottery found among the bricks, in the collapse and in nearby deposits, is all from EB IB. In this section too it could be determined that extensive leveling operations carried out during the EB II and III periods obliterated most remains from Stratum V. Clear traces of this stratum could be observed in only two places: The first is c. 5 m north of the Phase Vd wall, where a brick wall was uncovered, with a cobble floor running up to it (see Figs. 1.2: B28–29; 2.11). Over these were thin deposits of soil and ashes, and these in turn were sealed by the collapse of the Phase Vc–Vd wall. Thus, it can be determined that the deposits are earlier than the destruction of the wall, but not whether they were deposited before it was built or during its existence. The second is 40 m north of the walls, where a natural depression was found full of layers of soil and ashes similar to those over the wall and floor just described (see Fig. 1.2: B–C9–15). The attribution of these layers to this stratum is based on the similarity of the pottery, but cannot otherwise be associated with any phase.

Fig. 2.9. Area C. Section through the fortifications, looking east. From bottom up: The Lisan Formation, topped by dark soil on left and the lowest courses of Stratum Vc on right. In center the seam between Strata Vb on left and Vc on right. The scale rod leans on a collapse of bricks. At top is the Stratum III wall on right, and the Stratum II wall on left.

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

Fig. 2.10. Area C. Looking east, detail near the top right corner of Fig. 2.9. The brick collapse is visible, topped by brick courses of Stratum Vb or Va. On left, the stone foundation of the Stratum III wall.

Figure 2.11. Area C. Habitation levels and brick wall from Strata Vc–d, topped by the collapse of the fortifications of the same strata.

13

14

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

THE FINDS The Pottery Previous reports from Bet Yerah on the EB I strata discussed band-slipped ware (Albright 1926:28), as well as a bowl with a wide base found in the Amiran and Arnon excavations (Amiran and Arnon 1977), and an extensive discussion was presented on the ‘crackled ware’, dated to EB IB (Esse 1989:81). In what follows, the finds from Stratum V will be treated as a homogeneous unit and will not be separated according to assemblages from the various loci. This choice is due to two factors: The first, that the attribution of the deposits to the various phases of Stratum V was possible only at the time the section was studied in detail, close to the end of the excavations in Area AB. At that time it became apparent that most of the deposits are inclined, while the excavation strategy had been to follow horizontal units. Therefore in most cases it was impossible to obtain an unambiguous relation between the excavation units, i.e., the loci, and the various phases of Stratum V. The second factor is that a comparison between those assemblages that could be associated with a phase showed a marked similarity, and it was impossible to find any significant difference between assemblages from different phases—so, for example, in comparing L167, mostly from Phase Va, to L186 and L187 from Phases Ve–Vc (see Plan 1.1). The analysis of the assemblage is based on a list of 32 main vessel types, 5 handle types, 2 spout types and 5 categories of decoration or other surface treatment. The quantitative data are based on a count of rim fragments, handles and spouts; and decoration data, on counts of rims and handles. The counts included all identifiable fragments; fragments that joined were counted as one. Since no calibration of any sort was made, the summary tables should not be used as direct evidence on the relative abundance of any type. Types 1. Straight-Sided Bowls (Fig. 2.12:1–3; Color Pl. 1:3). Bowls with straight or slightly incurved sides. The rim is plain and usually rounded. 2. Bowls with Incurved Rounded Rim (Fig. 2.12:4–7; Color Pl. 1:1). Bowls where the sides and rim are incurved.

3. Bowls with Round Knobs (Fig. 2.12:8–10). Bowls similar to the preceding type, with a row of conical knobs near the rim. A basalt bowl of this shape was found in a previous excavation at Bet Yerah (Braun 1990: Fig. 4:4). 4. Gutter-Rim Bowls (Fig. 2.12:11). Generally similar to the preceding types. The rim is thickened, with a gutter-like depression around it. 5. Bowls with a Triangular Rim (Fig. 2.12:12, 13). Bowls with a thickened rim, with a sharp, inturned triangular cross section. 6. Bowls with Incurved Carinated Rim (Fig. 2.12:14–18; Color Pl. 1:2; back cover). Bowls with the upper part of the sides and the rim incurved. 7. Ledge-Rim Bowls (Fig. 2.12:19). Bowls where the upper part of the rim turns outward, forming a wide ledge. 8. Adze-Rim Bowls (Fig. 2.12:20, 21). Bowls with a ledge-like everted and incurved rim with an adze-like cross section. 9. Carinated Bowls (Fig. 2.12:22–24). Broad, shallow bowls with a sharp carination that creates an incurved rim. 10. Rounded Lamp-Bowls (Fig. 2.12:25–29; Color Pl. 1:10). Small, shallow bowls with a generally rounded contour. The rim often bears scorch marks that resemble marks created by a burning wick. Considering the large number of rim fragments found with such marks, it stands to reason that all bowls with a similar contour were meant to be used as lamps. 11. Lamp-Bowls with an Inner Ledge (Fig. 2.12:30, 31; Color Pl. 1:12). Bowls with a narrow ledge around the inside. Only a single fragment was found from which the profile of the vessel could be determined. The scorch marks on the rim suggest that this bowl served as a lamp and the function of the ledge was to prevent the wick from slipping into the bowl. 12. Broken Vessels that Served as Lamps (Fig. 2.12:32; Color Pl. 1:11). Vessel fragments, mostly bases, with scorch marks along their sides, indicating that they served as lamps.

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

13. Simple-Rim Holemouth Jars (Fig. 2.13:1–12; Color Pl. 1:4, 5). Holemouth jars with a plain rim that can be rounded or sharp, thickened or not. 14. Ridged-Rim Holemouth Jars (Fig. 2.13:13). Holemouth jar with a plain rim with a prominent ridge near it. 15. Square-Rim Holemouth Jars (Fig. 2.13:14–17, 19). This type is distinguished by the square cross section of its rims. 16. Drooping-Rim Holemouth Jars (Fig. 2.13:18, 20; Color Pl. 1:6). Holemouth jars with an inturned and drooping rim. Their outline is like that of the incurved rounded-rim bowls. 17. Miscellaneous Holemouth Jars (Fig. 2.13:21–23). The diverse repertoire of holemouth jars included single specimens that did not fit any of the common types, and they will be summarily described: holemouth jar with a gutter-like depression on the rim (Fig. 2.13:21), holemouth jar with an upturned rim (Fig. 2.13:22), and a holemouth jar with a thickened rim with an incised decoration (Fig. 2.13:23). We also note the jars in Fig. 2.13:10, 11, which have a knob outside and inside the rim, respectively. 18. High-Rim Juglets (Fig. 2.14:1–3). Juglets with an ovoid body and a high loop handle, drawn over the rim to below the center of the body. The rim is plain and upright, sometimes slightly everted. 19. Everted-Rim Juglets (Fig. 2.14:4–7). Similar to the preceding type, but with an everted rim and larger mouth.

15

these latter are characterized by a flattened body and a more pronounced everted rim (‘En Shadud: Braun 1985: Fig. 20:1–5; Tel Qashish: Zuckerman 2003: Fig. 20:6; Tel Esur: Yannai 1996: Fig. 4:4). 22. Miscellaneous Jugs, Juglets and Amphoriskoi. The diverse finds included individual amphoriskoi and juglets that did not fit any category. Of these the following should be noted: An amphoriskos with a pierced handle and a decoration of painted stripes, similar to those common in the Central Highlands (Fig. 2.14:13), a neck of a juglet (or jug) with vertical burnished stripes (Fig. 2.14:14) and a high neck of a jug (Fig. 2.14:15). 23. Jars with a Low, Simple Rim (Fig. 2.15:1–4; Color Pl. 1:7; back cover). The rim is usually everted. 24. Molded-Rim Jars (Fig. 2.15:5–12). Jars with a thickened, everted rim. The rim molding has a triangular cross section. 25. High-Rim Jars (Fig. 2.15:13, 14). The rim is simple, high and straight, or slightly everted. 26. Flat-Rim Jars (Fig. 2.15:15). Jars with a wide, flat rim. 27. Rounded-Rim Jars (Fig. 2.15:16, 17). Jars with a thick rim with a round cross section. 28. Various Kraters. Among the finds from Stratum V, only a few kraters were identified. Of these, we note one with a wide ledge-rim (Fig. 2.15:18) and one with a gutter rim (Fig. 2.15:19).

20. Everted-Rim Amphoriskoi (Fig. 2.14:8). Amphoriskoi with an everted rim and a pair of small handles. As only a handful of sherds was found, the outline of the body could not be determined. It could be that these are fragments of a spouted teapot (e.g., Yannai 1996: Fig. 4:14).

29. Rounded-Rim Pithoi (Fig. 2.16:1–10). Pithoi with a thickened rim and a low neck. The rim is often decorated with a row of incisions or impressions that create a rope pattern. Thickened-rim pithoi were found in the JPES excavations on the north side (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 9) and also in Stratum XIV of the Bar-Adon excavations at Bet Yerah (Eisenberg 1996:11, n. 8).

21. High-Necked Amphoriskoi (Fig. 2.14:9–12). Amphoriskoi with a high neck and a simple, slightly everted rim. These amphoriskoi resemble those common in the Jezreel Valley and Tel Esur, though

30. Triangular-Rim Pithoi (Fig. 2.16:11, 12). Similar to the preceding type, but with a rim with a triangular cross section. These pithoi were not decorated with incisions.

16

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

1

2

4 3

5

6

8

7

9

10

11

12 13

14

16 17

15

19 18

20 0

10

21

Fig. 2.12. Early Bronze IB bowls.

17

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

23

22

0

10

26 24

25

27

28

30

29

31

32

Fig. 2.12. Early Bronze IB bowls. No.

Locus

Basket

Description*

1

517

4524/2

Yellowish-gray clay, red and brown slip, crackled ware

2

517

4553/1

Yellowish-gray clay, red and brown slip, crackled ware

3

182

1355

Grayish-brown clay, minute temper, red slip, crackled ware, incised decoration

4

496

4441

Gray clay, black slip, crackled ware

5

187

1397

Grayish-brown clay, band slip

6

816

8069

Reddish-brown clay, gray core, red slip, crackled ware

7

158

1209

Grayish-brown clay, red slip

8

173

1370

Grayish-brown clay, gray core, dark brown slip, crackled ware

9

170

1277

Brown clay, gray core, red slip

10

179

1452

Brown clay, gray core, red slip, crackled ware

11

187

1414

Reddish-brown clay, gray core, red slip, crackled ware

12

187

1435

Whitish-gray clay, red slip

13

167

1385

Grayish-brown clay, red slip

14

816

8069

Brown-gray clay, black slip

15

517

4553/2

Brown clay, gray core, gray slip, crackled ware

16

517

4573/1

Yellowish-gray clay, dark brown slip, crackled ware

17

811

8048

Grayish-brown clay, brown slip, crackled ware

18

517

4524/3

Yellowish-gray clay, brown and black slip, crackled ware

19

173

1391

Light gray clay, red and black slip, burnish, crackled ware

20

179

1429/1

Light gray clay, black and brown slip, burnish, crackled ware

21

173

1419

Brown-gray clay, red slip, burnish

22

179

1424

Black clay, brown surface, metallic firing

23

167

1409

Grayish-brown clay, red slip, lustrous burnish

24

812

8026

Grayish-brown clay, gray core, red slip

25

517

4637/1

Yellowish-gray clay, red and brown slip

26

179

1419

Grayish clay, red slip

27

187

1412

Grayish-brown clay, reddish-brown slip, burnt rim

28

173

1386/1

Grayish-brown clay, red slip, burn marks

29

181

1324

Grayish-brown clay, red slip, burnish, burn marks on rim

30

179

1375

Grayish-brown clay, red burnish, burn marks

31

517

4524/1

Yellowish-gray clay, red and brown slip, crackled ware, burn marks on rim

32

496

4441

Reddish-brown clay, red and dark brown slip, crackled ware

* Crackled ware is specified only when well defined

18

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

2

3

1

4

5

6 7

9 8

11

10

12

13

14

16

15 0

17

10

18

Fig. 2.13. Early Bronze IB holemouth jars.

19

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

19

20 21 0

10

22

23

Fig. 2.13. Early Bronze IB holemouth jars. No.

Locus

Basket

Description*

1

517

4565/1

Brown clay, gray core, minute temper

2

517

4573/4

Brown clay

3

179

1390

Brown-gray clay, gray core, red slip, incised marking

4

181

1314

Brown-gray clay, much temper, red slip

5

187

1414

Brown clay, band slip

6

175

1344

Brown clay, gray core, incised marks

7

179

1424

Reddish-brown clay, gray core, red slip, band slip

8

194

1146

Light brown clay, red slip, burnish, crackled ware

9

517

4637/2

Gray clay, red wash, burnish

10

517

4524/6

Gray-brown clay, much temper

11

167

1427

Light gray clay, much dark temper, red slip, incised decoration

12

517

4667/1

Gray clay, much temper

13

173

1433

Brown clay, gray core, red slip

14

517

4542/2

Brown clay, gray core, minute temper, red slip, incised decoration

15

517

4509/1

Grayish-brown clay, much temper

16

517

4524/5

Grayish-brown clay

17

812

8030

Brown-gray clay, dark temper, red slip, incised decoration

18

517

4512/1

Yellowish-brown clay, band slip

19

816

8069

Brown clay, gray core, dark temper, band slip

20

134

1153

Brown-gray clay, dark gray outside, incised decoration

21

517

4514/8

Gray clay, calcite temper, incised decoration

22

179

1452

Brown clay, gray core, much temper, incised decoration

23

167

1392

Brown clay, red slip, incised decoration

* Crackled ware is specified only when well defined

20

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

2

1

3

7 5

4

6

8

10

9

11 12 13 0

14

15

0

2

10

Fig. 2.14. Early Bronze IB jugs, juglets and amphoriskoi. Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description*

1

517

4569/1

Juglet

Grayish-brown clay, reddish-brown slip

2

517

4573

Juglet

Grayish-brown clay, reddish-brown and black slip

No.

3

517

4554/2

Juglet

Grayish-brown clay, reddish-brown and black slip

4

496

4441/4

Juglet

Light brown clay, much temper, red paint

5

187

1397

Juglet

Light brown clay, brown and black paint

6

517

4667/2

Juglet

Yellowish-gray clay, much temper, red and black paint

7

175

1349

Juglet

Light brown-gray clay, black slip, crackled ware

8

517

4554/3

Amphoriskos

Grayish-brown clay, reddish-brown slip, crackled ware

9

517

4514/3

Amphoriskos

Yellowish-brown clay, black slip outside, reddish-brown slip inside, crackled ware

10

517

4514/2

Amphoriskos

Brown clay, yellowish-brown core, brown-red slip

11

517

4514

Amphoriskos

Reddish-brown clay, red slip

12

469

4541/3

Amphoriskos

Brown clay, gray core, red slip

13

517

4554/1

Amphoriskos

Yellowish-brown clay, whitish slip, red paint

14

170

1243

Juglet or jug

Grayish-brown clay, red slip, vertical burnish

15

173

1456

Jug

Light brown clay, red slip, crackled ware

* Crackled ware is specified only when well defined

21

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

1

2

4

3

5

7

6

9 8

10

11

12

15 13

14

17

16

19 0

10

18

Fig. 2.15. Early Bronze IB jars and kraters.

22

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

◄ Fig. 2.15 No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

517

4514/1

Jar

Yellowish-gray clay, red paint

2

167

1447

Jar

Grayish-brown clay, much temper, red paint

3

173

1410

Jar

Grayish-brown clay, much large temper, red slip, band slip

4

517

4524/4

Jar

Gray-brown clay, reddish-brown slip

5

158

1205

Jar

Grayish-brown clay, much large temper, red slip, incised decoration

6

182

1355

Jar

Light brown clay, red slip, incised decoration

7

517

4669/1

Jar

Brown clay, yellowish-gray core, reddish-brown slip

8

175

1341

Jar

Light brown clay, gray core, much black temper, red slip

9

517

4573/3

Jar

Yellowish-brown clay, red slip

10

173

1342

Jar

Brown clay, grayish-brown core, red and gray slip, incised decoration

11

173

1386/2

Jar

Grayish-brown clay, much large temper, band slip

12

496

4541

Jar

Brown clay, gray core, red slip, band slip

13

167

1457

Jar

Gray clay, much black temper, black-brown wash

14

179

1429/3

Jar

Brown clay, red slip

15

167

1392

Jar

Brown clay, gray core, brown-red slip

16

179

1442

Jar

Brown-gray clay, red-black wash

17

167

1395

Jar

Grayish-brown clay, red slip

18

179

1429/2

Krater

Gray clay, black temper, brown and black slip, band slip

19

517

4667/1

Krater

Grayish-brown clay, brown-red slip

Fig. 2.16 ► No.

Locus

Basket

1

179

1429/4

Description* Brown-gray clay, much temper, red slip, crackled ware

2

173

1449

Brown-gray clay, much temper, red slip, incised decoration

3

179

1429/5

Brown clay, gray core, brown wash, incised decoration

4

829

8099

Reddish-brown clay, grayish-brown core, red wash, incised decoration

5

187

1435

Brown clay, much temper, red slip, incised decoration

6

179

1416

Brown clay, gray core, red slip, incised decoration

7

187

1451

Brown clay, grayish-brown core, brown and red wash, incised decoration

8

171

1443

Gray clay, brown and gray slip, crackled ware

9

179

1439

Brown clay, much temper, red slip, incised decoration

10

171

1455

Reddish-brown clay, red slip, incised decoration

11

179

1450

Reddish-brown clay, gray core, much black and white temper, red slip

12

173

1444

Brown clay, grayish-brown core, red slip

13

173

1428

Brown-gray clay, much temper, red slip

14

127

1425

Reddish-brown clay, brown core, varied temper, red slip

15

181

1360

Grayish-brown clay, much and varied temper, dark brown and red slip

* Crackled ware is specified only when well defined

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

3

2

1

23

5 4

0

10

7

6

8

9

10

12 11

14 13

15

Fig. 2.16. Early Bronze IB pithoi.

31. Miscellaneous Pithoi. Of these, noteworthy are a holemouth pithos with a thickened rim and a ridge below (Fig. 2.16:13), a pithos with a straight rim (Fig. 2.16:14) and one with a splayed rim (Fig. 2.16:15).

32. Chalices (Fig. 2.17:17). A few fragments were found, indicating the existence of chalices, but without the possibility of reconstructing their form.

24

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Handles Direct connection between rim and handle was found in only a handful of cases. Therefore, the description of handles was separated from that of the vessel forms. All handle fragments recovered during the excavation were kept, sorted and counted (Table 2.8). It should be noted that though Fig. 2.17 shows many decorated sherds, their actual share among the finds is small (see Tables 2.9, 2.10).

4. Juglet Loop Handles (Fig. 2.14:3).

1. Handles with a Round or Oval Cross Section (Figs. 2.12:3, 2.14:8–12, 2.17:1–3, 6). Such handles equally served large (e.g., Fig. 2.17:1) and small (Fig. 2.14:8) vessels.

2. Long, Narrow Spouts (Fig. 2.17:15). These spouts served teapots.

2. Ribbon Handles (Fig. 2.17:4, 5, 7, 8; Color Pl. 1:8). Handles where the width of the cross section is greater than twice the thickness. We have no evidence of such handles serving small vessels, such as juglets and amphoriskoi. 3. Pierced Handles (Fig. 2.17:11–14). Pierced handles served only small vessels.

5. Knob and Ledge Handles (Fig. 2.13:10, 11; Fig. 2.17:9, 10). Spouts 1. Short, Narrow Spouts (Figs. 2.13:12, 2.17:16). These spouts served holemouth jars or cooking pots and were attached near the rim.

Decorations and Surface Treatment 1. Slip (Color Pl. 1:1–3, 12). Application of paint over the entire surface of the vessel. Sometimes uneven application of the paint is evident. When the paint was applied in a thick coat, a network of cracks may have developed, hence the term ‘crackled ware’, known on all types of vessels. Slip is very common in the Bet Yerah assemblages; most vessels were slip-decorated and it appears that only among the holemouth jars is there a large group without slip.

Fig. 2.17 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description*

1

517

4514/5

Jar handle

Brown clay, much temper, reddish-brown slip

2

179

1453

Handle

Reddish-brown clay, gray core, red slip, incised decoration

3

179

1461/1

Handle

Brown clay, gray core, brown and black slip, incised decoration

4

174

1356

Handle

Grayish-brown clay, red slip, incised decoration

5

517

4514/7

Handle

Brown clay, gray core, reddish-brown wash, incision

6

174

1356

Handle

Brown-gray clay, much temper, red slip, incised decoration

7

167

1927

Handle

Brown clay, red slip, incised decoration

8

517

5414/6

Handle

Grayish-brown clay, red paint

9

179

1461

Ledge handle

Grayish-brown clay, red wash

10

517

4573/4

Bowl

Yellowish-brown clay, black slip outside, reddish-brown inside, crackled ware

11

158

1211

Pierced handle

Pinkish-brown clay, red slip

12

179

1434

Pierced handle

Light gray clay

13

173

1365

Pierced handle

Grayish-brown clay, red slip, burnish

14

816

8069

Pierced handle

Reddish-brown clay, gray core, red paint

15

517

4565/1

Teapot

Grayish-brown clay, reddish-brown slip

16

179

1375

Spout

Brown clay, gray core, brown wash

17

179

1453

Chalice

Yellowish-brown clay, red slip, crackled ware

18

496

4541

Body fragment

Pinkish-grayish clay small, varied temper, light slip, red paint

19

528

4581

Body fragment

Grayish-brown clay, band slip, incised before firing

20

813

8065

Handle

Grayish-brown clay, gray core, red slip, incised after firing

* Crackled ware is specified only when well defined

25

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

3

2

4

1

6

7

9

10

5

8

11

12

15

17

13

0

16

18

14

19

10

20

Fig. 2.17. Early Bronze IB handles, spouts, decorated sherds and a chalice.

2. Band-Slip. A slip applied by smearing paint (with a piece of textile?) in a pattern of parallel bands. Sometimes the bands cross, creating a grid of lozenges; sometimes, true bands cannot be identified (Color Pl. 1:5, 6). Usually there is a band of continuous slip around the upper part of the vessel. Band-slip is especially common on holemouth jars (Fig. 2.13:5, 7, 18; Color Pl. 1:5) and storage jars (Figs. 2.15:3, 11, 12); it is also known on bowls (Fig. 2.12:5) and kraters

(Fig. 2.15:18) and probably it was applied to pithoi as well, though we do not have a pithos sherd preserving rim and body with this decoration. 3. Burnish. Burnishing was observed on but a few pieces, notably bowls (Fig. 2.12:19, 29; Color Pl. 1:10) and a holemouth jar (Fig. 2.13:8; Color Pl. 1:4). A single jug (Fig. 2.14:14) exhibits vertical burnished bands.

26

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

4. Painting. A decoration applied with a brush. This decoration sometimes consists of a covering of parallel lines (e.g., Fig. 2.15:2) and sometimes of various geometric patterns (e.g., Fig. 2.15:1). Painting is typical of juglets and amphoriskoi (Fig. 2.14:4–6, 13), and storage jars (Fig. 2.15:1, 2; Color Pl. 1:7–9). 5. Incised and Impressed Decorations. A decoration applied by the incision or impression in the leatherhard clay. The decoration was applied close to the rim of holemouth jars (Fig. 2.13:17, 20–23), storage jars (Fig. 2.15:5, 6), pithoi (Fig. 2.16:2–7, 9, 10) and handles (Fig. 2.17:2–7). Markings Near the rims of some of the holemouth jars (Fig. 2.13:3, 6, 14, 17) and on handles (Fig. 2.17:2–5, 7) incisions were made, mostly of small, short lines. They may be marks of quantity, but may equally be decorative only (see above). On a few other items incisions were found as well, all made before firing (Fig. 2.17:19), except for a single artifact which was incisied after firing (Fig. 2.17:20). It should be noted that this handle was attributed to Stratum V on strength of its fabric and slip, although it was found in a deposit that should be attributed to Stratum II. If so, it might be that the mark was added at a later time. Crackled Ware In the excavations of the Oriental Institute at Bet Yerah the term ‘crackled ware’ was coined to define a group of pottery distinguished by a crackled slip—a slip that after drying or firing developed a dense network of cracks similar to dried-up soil. Esse demonstrated the narrow distribution range of this group and saw in it a local product, the precursor of specialized manufacturing (Esse 1989). He reported that this group has a uniform fabric, and includes shallow and deep bowls, with a slip whose color ranges between reddishbrown and dark gray. In the assemblages from the excavation many items can be identified in terms of Esse’s definitions, and the bowls of Types 1, 3, 6 and 7 form the main part of the group, though it is difficult to separate these vessels into a single, coherent group. On one hand, dark, crackled slip is found on completely different vessels as well, such as amphoriskoi (Fig. 2.14:9), juglets (Fig. 2.14:7) and pithoi (Fig. 2.16:1); on the other hand, vessels of the ‘right’ form, e.g., the carinated bowls of

Type 6, show great variation in fabric and slip color. An inspection with the aid of a magnifying glass carried out by Anastasia Shapiro showed that there is no clear relation between the fabric, typology, color and surface treatment. Grouping by any one of these criteria will divide any and all groupings by any other. Despite the reservation implied, Esse’s observations should not be discarded, because a considerable number of vessels match all the criteria he established. In the quantitative analysis (see below), we applied a division based on criteria of form alone, but it should be noted that the group of crackled wares should include the majority of bowls of Type 1 (Esse 1989: Fig. 13: a) and Type 6 (Esse 1989: Fig. 14: a, b, d), and the single vessels assigned to Type 7 (Esse 1989: Fig. 13: b, d). In addition, some of the vessels of Type 2 (Esse 1989: Fig. 14: c) and Type 3 (Esse 1989: Fig. 15: b) should be related to this group. Stone and Recycled Pottery Artifacts In Stratum V various vessels and tools were found that were manufactured from stone or recycled pottery. Most belong to daily tasks and chores and include fishing weights (Fig. 2.18:1–5), spindle whorls (Fig. 2.18:6, 7), stoppers (Fig. 2.18:8), a mace head (Fig. 2.18:9), bowls and grinding mortars (of which only one was drawn—Fig. 2.18:10), upper and lower grinding stones (not illustrated), and miscellaneous objects (Fig. 2.18:11, 12). The quantity of finds does not warrant a detailed discussion, so we shall only note the following objects: Basalt Bowl with Handles (Fig. 2.18:10). A single fragment of a four-handled basalt bowl. These bowls are characteristic of EB IB (Braun 1990: Type IIIA) and have been found at sites from Tel Dan in the north to Tel Arad in the south (Braun 1990: Fig. 1). They suggest trade patterns. Plaque with Carving (Fig. 2.18:12). A lozenge-shaped plaque made of soft limestone, bearing a carving. At the top of the lozenge there is a small, round depression. Two bands of lines descend from the top along the sides and a third band is perpendicular to these; around the edge there is a border formed by a deeper incision, which was clearly made after the bands of lines that cross the border. We cannot offer an interpretation of the carving.

27

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

1

2

4

3

7

6 0

5

5

9 10

8 0

4

11

0

5

0

12

1

Fig. 2.18. Early Bronze IB stone and recycled pottery artifacts. No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Object

Description

1

167

1392

V

Fishing weight

Limestone pebble

2

173

1265

V

Fishing weight

Limestone pebble

3

542

4715/8

III

Fishing weight

Limestone pebble

4

167

1344

V

Fishing weight

Basalt pebble

5

173

1458

V

Fishing weight

Band-slipped sherd

6

173

1428

V

Spindle whorl

Basalt

7

179

1390

V

Spindle whorl

Basalt

8

173

1396

V

Stopper

Holemouth-jar fragment

9

175

1347

V

Mace head

Quartz

10

179

1389

V

Bowl

Basalt

11

179

1469

V

Weight

Basalt

12

829

8083

V

Carved stone

Limestone

The plaque was found at a point where a rain gully met the brick wall of Stratum V. It could seemingly postdate the wall, but because all pottery baskets collected at the spot contained exclusively Stratum V material, it must also date to this period—EB IB.

Fishing Weights (Table 2.1; Fig. 2.18:1–5). Objects with a circumferential or segmented notch for the tying of a line were defined as fishing weights. Fifteen such weights were recovered, of which ten come from the deposits of Stratum V from the EB I period.

28

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Table 2.1. Fishing Weights No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Description and Dimensions*

Fig.

1

167

1344

V

Pebble, basalt, circumferential groove, 68 × 48 × 36

2.18:4

2

167

1392

V

Beach pebble, chalk, circumferential groove, 48 × 43 × 17

2.18:1

3

173

1265

V

Beach pebble, chalk, grooves on two opposing sides, 59 × 28 × 15

2.18:2

4

173

1419

V

Beach pebble, chalk, circumferential groove, 50 × 35 × 26

5

173

1458

V

Pottery sherd decorated with band-slip; grooves on two opposing sides, 55 × 39 × 12

6

175

1349

V

Beach pebble, chalk, circumferential groove, 50 × 43 × 22

7

175

1349

V

Beach pebble, chalk, circumferential groove, 52 × 50 × 15

8

179

1380

V

Beach pebble, chalk, grooves on two opposing sides, 43 × 36 × 16

9

179

1459

V

Beach pebble, chalk, grooves on three sides, 65 × 50 × 47

10

542

4715/8

V

Beach pebble, chalk, grooves on two opposing sides, 56 × 44 × 16

11

123

1074

II

Beach pebble, chalk, grooves on two opposing sides. Two flaked on opposing sides, 42 × 32 × 13 (the length is after the flaking)

12

469

5011

I

Beach pebble, chalk, circumferential groove, 43 × 42 × 26

13

417

4257

Surface

Beach pebble, chalk, circumferential groove, 61 × 33 × 30

14

810

8022

Surface

Beach pebble, chalk, grooves on two opposing sides, 61 × 49 × 21

15

816

8079

Surface

Beach pebble, chalk, circumferential groove, 43 × 33 × 25

2.18:5

2.18:3

* Length × width × thickness. The units are in millimeters; the width and thickness were measured near the groove

It can be reasonably assumed that the others derive originally from this stratum as well. Two sources for the stones can be discerned: flat pebbles that were most probably collected on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, and pebbles with a round cross section, which arrived at the lake shore with the alluvium of the streams or were collected in the stream beds themselves. Similar weights are common along the lake shore; they are attributable to various periods and were used for both nets and fishing rods.2 In spite of their abundance, the notched pebble weights have been documented in but a handful of excavations, of which the following will be noted: Oholo excavations, which is situated on the Sea of Galilee shore close to Tel Bet Yerah, where remains from the Epipaleolithic period were unearthed (Daniel Nadel, pers. comm.), and Munhata (e.g., Gopher and Orrelle 1995: Fig. 40:3–7)3 and Ha-Gosherim (unpublished; excavation of the present author, Permit A2509/1996), of the Neolithic and early Chalcolithic periods.

While as suggested above, all fishing weights from the excavation originate in the EB IB period, this should not serve as evidence that such weights were not used in other periods as well. It is possible that in other periods the fishermen used to make their equipment on the shore and not within the settlement, and thus no weights were found in later strata. This may also be the reason that they were not reported from other sites. The Flint Assemblage (See Chapter 7) The main constituent of the flint artifact assemblage is a local flake industry that produced various ad-hoc tools. In addition, the assemblage includes retouched blades and sickle blades made on Canaanean blades, which were brought to the site from manufacturing centers some dozens of kilometers to the north of Bet Yerah. The assemblage is fully described in Chapter 7.

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

The Archaeozoological Finds (See Chapter 8) The analysis of the archaeozoological remains from Stratum V shows that most bones were those of caprines (i.e., sheep or goat—58%) while bovids (cattle) came second at 33%. In meat consumption, Bos took the lead at 67% and ovi/caprines second at 18%. The component of Sus was small (5%), and that of gazelle negligible (0.6%). Bos and ovi/caprines appear in about the same percentages as in the other Early Bronze strata, but Sus is much less represented here. Bivalve shells provide evidence that they formed an important part of the local diet.4 In the EB I deposits from Tel Yaqush (Hesse and Wapnish 2001: Table 15.2) the finds are similar, but cattle form a smaller part and wild animals, a larger part. In Stratum III from Bet Ha-‘Emeq, dated to EB IB (Meirhof and Sadeh 1993: Table 4) cattle is dominant and pig bones are noticeably present. In Stratum V at Tel Dalit, dated to EB IB (Kolska Horwitz, Hellwing and Tchernov 1996), the importance of caprines is greater and pigs are even rarer than in Stratum V at Tel Bet Yerah.

DISCUSSION Quantitative Analysis of the Pottery Altogether 1,087 fragments of rims were found in loci that were defined as attributable to Stratum V; the

29

following remarks are offered, based on the quantitative data summarized in Tables 2.2–2.10. Bowls (Table 2.3) form the second largest group, over half of which are straight-sided bowls (Type 1) and bowls with an incurved carinated rim (Type 6), themselves belonging to the group of ‘crackled ware’. Notable among the other bowls are the bowls with a rounded rim and the lamp-bowls. The majority of the holemouth jars (Table 2.4) are of the simple rim type (13). Though the majority of the holemouth jars have a slip, this is the only vessel form with a large group without any slip. Only two exemplars were counted as kraters (see Table 2.7) and it may be that this is due to the way the vessels were classified. For instance, the adze-rim bowls (Type 8) or the pithoi in Fig. 2.16:7, 8 could have been classified as kraters as well. Among the handles, those with an oval cross section (Table 2.8) stand out, together with the juglet loop handles. The latter seem particularly plentiful because of their tendency to break into small pieces that are easily identifiable during sorting. The ledge and knob handles are very scarce. Incised decorations and markings (Table 2.9) are present on but a few exemplars and no more than 4% of the vessels had such markings. The vessels with painted decoration (Table 2.10) are even less, at c. 2%. Incisions are found on many types of vessels, while paint was applied to juglets and jars almost exclusively.

Table 2.2. Total Counted Sherds from Stratum V Vessel

Total

Bowls

391

Holemouth jars

484

Jugs, juglets, amphoriskoi, chalice

93

Jars

85

Kraters Pithoi Total rims Handles

2 32 1087 342

Sherds with painted decoration

25

Sherds with incised decoration and markings

56

14

15

15

16

16

Ridged rim

Square rim; slipped

Square rim; plain

Drooping rim; slipped

Drooping rim; plain

8

5 11

Total plain

Total 16

8

3

1

5

7

6

2

3

158

10

1

4

5

158

Total slipped

17 and unidentified

13

Simple rim; plain

Varia

13

Simple rim; slipped 6

134

1

Type No.

5, 8, 9 and unidentified

Type

27

Lamp-bowls

Varia 10

7

Ledge-rim bowls

3

6

2

134

Total

4 6

Gutter-rim bowls

Bowls with incurved carinated rim

2, 3

Bowls with incurved rounded rim

Type No. 1

Type

Straight-sided bowls

10

1

3

5

1

170

48

2

3

13

18

12

173

18

4

1

11

2

175

60

1

2

5

43

9

179

26

2

5

13

6

181

54

14

40

1

2

1

2

12

36

167

23

6

17

1

6

16

170

69

22

47

2

1

19

47

173

14

4

10

4

10

175

123

34

89

3

2

1

3

2

29

83

179

40

6

34

2

4

34

181

Locus

14

2

12

3

2

9

186

Table 2.4. Holemouth Jars from Stratum V

56

2

5

18

1

17

13

167

Locus

Table 2.3. Bowls from Stratum V

27

14

13

1

14

12

187

6

2

2

2

186

25

10

15

1

2

2

8

12

496

25

1

10

10

4

187

60

47

13

14

16

1

17

12

517

8

5

1

2

496

5

5

1

4

539

104

21

2

56

25

517

3

3

3

545

2

1

1

539

484

172

312

4

18

2

31

12

3

123

291

N

4

1

1

1

1

545

N

484

4

20

43

3

414

N

Total

391

44

3

126

1

132

80

%

1.3

11.2

0.8

32.2

0.2

33.8

20.5

100.0

35.5

64.5

0.8

4.1

8.9

0.6

85.6

%

100.0

Total

30 TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

27

Flat rim

Rounded rim

31

Miscellaneous pithoi

Total

29 30

Rounded-rim pithoi, undecorated

Triangular-rim pithoi

29

Rounded-rim pithoi, decorated

134

Type No. 28

Type

16

1

9

1

Kraters

5

26

Total

1

25 1

3

1

24

High rim

2

Molded rim

167

23

158

4

Type No.

Type

Low, simple rim

134

22

Miscellaneous amphoriskoi and juglets

Total

20 21

Everted-rim amphoriskoi

High-necked amphoriskoi

18 19

High-rim juglets

Type No.

Everted-rim juglets

Type

2

1

1

158

7

3

4

158

13

3

2

3

5

167

6

1

3

1

1

170

10

1

2

4

3

173

4

2

2

175

7

1

2

4

179

4

4

175

10

1

2

1

6

179

8

4

4

181

186

2

1

1

187

3

1

1

1

181

2

1

1

167

170

4

2

2

173

175

14

4

5

5

179

6

1

2

2

1

181

Locus

1

1

6

1

5

196

1

1

186

186

Table 2.7. Kraters and Pithoi from Stratum V

9

1

2

6

173

Locus

Table 2.6. Storage Jars from Stratum V 170

3

3

134

Locus

7

1

5

1

18

12

6

496

1

1

517

187

187

Table 2.5. Juglets and Amphoriskoi from Stratum V

5

8

3

517

3

1

1

1

539

196

539

1

1

545

29

1

2

26

517

1

1

545

85

4

2

7

36

36

N

539

%

4.7

2.3

8.2

42.4

42.4

N

33

2

5

9

15

2

93

2

12

3

22

54

N

6.1

%

100.0

6.1

15.1

27.3

45.4

Total

100.0

Total

534

Total

100.0

2.2

12.9

3.2

23.6

58.1

%

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

31

5

Ledge and knob handles

24 29 1 2 3 4

Rounded-rim pithoi

Oval cross section

Ribbon handles

Pierced handles

Juglet loop handles

18

High-rim juglets

Molded-rim jars

17

Square-rim holemouth jars

Miscellaneous holemouth jars 19

15

Simple-rim holemouth jars

23

13

Rounded lamp-bowls

Everted-rim juglets

10

Straight-sided bowls

Simple-rim jars

1

1

1

158

Type

40

5

20

1

5

3

11

170

34

1

13

1

19

173

14

3

2

1

8

175

89

2

15

2

12

58

179

26

1

5

1

4

15

181

10

1

6

3

186

17

4

5

8

187

18

7

11

496

1

1

2

167

2

1

170

1

1

173

1

1

175

2

3

1

3

2

179

Locus

1

1

1

181

1

1

186

7

1

187

1

496

1

1

1

1

12

1

517

1

545

56

1

25

4

26

517

Table 2.9. Incised Decoration and Marking on Vessels from Stratum V

6

Total

134

1

4

Juglet loop handles

Type No.

18

3

Pierced handles 1

1

1

2

Ribbon handles

15

167

4

158

1

Oval cross section

134

Type No.

Type

Locus

Table 2.8. Handles from Stratum V

1

0

2

10

11

2

1

0

0

5

15

8

0

1

Total

10

4

1

1

4

539

N

342

8

100

7

45

182

% incised

N impressed and incised

Total N in excavation

N

2

2

545

%

4.0

43

1087

Rims

100.0

2.4

29.2

2.0

13.2

53.2

Total

3.8

13

342

Handles

32 TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

33

0

2

1

6

1

1

2

1

1

1

4

6

1

1

517 496 187

1

181

The Sites ‘En Shadud. A site in the central Jezreel Valley, c. 30 km west of Bet Yerah. The limited-scale excavation and the ceramic finds have been fully published by the excavator, Eliot Braun (1985). Braun divided the pottery vessels into 26 different types and presented quantitative data for the content of four loci (Braun 1985:148). Braun also found a chalice similar to the one recovered by Amiran and Arnon at Tel Bet Yerah, though in our excavation no such vessels were discovered (Braun 1985:114).

1

1

1

179 175

1

170

1

167

2

3

4

Ribbon handles

Juglet loop handles

1 Handles with oval cross section

Pierced handles

24

29

Molded-rim jars

Rounded-rim pithoi

23 Simple-rim jars

1 18

19

High-rim juglets

Everted-rim juglets

Locus

0

17 Miscellaneous holemouth jars

10

1

15 Square-rim holemouth jars

3

1.5 2.6 % painted 0

13

0

342

9 16 N painted

1087

Simple-rim holemouth jars

0

Rims N

Total N in excavation

0 1

10

Straight-sided bowls

539 Rounded lamp-bowls

1

Of all the Early Bronze Age ceramic assemblages to have been discovered in northern Israel, only four have been fully published and include quantitative data that can be compared to that of Bet Yerah: ‘En Shadud, Tel Qashish, Qiryat Ata and Abu edh-Dhahab. In what follows, a comparison will be made between the finds from our Stratum V to these assemblages, as well as to the finds from three tells in the central Jordan Valley: Tel Kinrot, Tel Kitan and Tel Shalem. A wider comparison with further assemblages is not offered, nor does the discussion include the regional distribution patterns of the vessels.

158 Type No. Type

Table 2.10. Painted Decoration on Vessels from Stratum V

Total

Handles

Contemporary Ceramic Assemblages (Fig. 2.19)

Fig. 2.19. Map of contemporary sites (EB IB).

34

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Tel Qashish. Situated in the northwest Jezreel Valley, approximately 50 km west of Bet Yerah. A large-scale excavation was conducted at the site (Ben-Tor 1993b; Ben-Tor, Bonfil and Zuckerman 2003), and the ceramic finds were extensively published (Zuckerman 2003). Strata XV–XIII (including post-XIII), which were at the bottom of the deposits, are datable to EB I. The ceramic finds were divided into types and the quantitative data were presented in a table (Zuckerman 2003: Table 2–5).The author showed that the assemblages of these strata, just as those of ‘En Shadud, are datable to EB IB and saw in them regional traits characteristic of sites in the Jezreel Valley (Zuckerman 1996:55–57, 126–127, 133; 2003:57–60). Qiryat Ata. An extensive settlement site where numerous salvage excavations have been conducted. The results of most of these were recently published in an extensive report (Golani 2003). The discussion of the ceramic finds relies on the typological definitions found in the Tel Qashish report. Τable 4.9 (Golani 2003:157) summarizes the quantitative data of the pottery from Strata III–II, dated to EB IB. It is to be expected that the assemblage from this period is almost free of residual finds, because finds earlier than this period are extremely few. The report does not present the methodology of the pottery counting, and so it is not clear whether or not only rims were counted, but in spite of this shortcoming the published quantitative data are very important. Abu edh-Dhahab. A settlement site in the northern coastal plain of the western Galilee. The site was discovered in the course of a survey (Frankel and Getzov 1997: Site 2.159), in which traces of a settlement from EB I and EB II were identified. In a limited excavation at the edge of the settlement, finds from EB IB were found (Getzov 2004). Table 2.11 summarizes the quantitative data from Stratum V of Bet Yerah, ‘En Shadud, Tel Qashish, Qiryat Ata and Abu edh-Dhahab. The data are based on the above-mentioned publications and have been adapted to the Bet Yerah type list used here; it should be noted that this kind of adaptation includes a measure of interpretation that may vary with individual researchers. The assemblage from ‘En Shadud is relatively small, and its statistical reliability limited. The assemblages

from Tel Qashish and Abu ed-Dhahab are influenced by a large number of simple-rim holemouth jars, and the relative number of other vessels appears small.5 In spite of these difficulties it can be stated that there is a great degree of similarity between these assemblages. The few, but important differences are presented below: a. Gutter-rim bowls are common at ‘En Shadud, and even though they are not presented in the quantitative summary, many appear in the plates (Braun 1985: Fig. 16). They are present at Tel Qashish and Qiryat Ata, while at Bet Yerah only a single such sherd was found. These bowls are characteristic of sites in the Jezreel Valley (Zuckerman 2003:35, after Louhivori 1988), and based on their appearance at Tel Qashish, they seem to have had a very short floruit (Zuckerman 1996:32, 45). Following the evidence of the multitude of parallels between the finds from Bet Yerah and those from ‘En Shadud and Tel Qashish, it seems that in spite of their short lifespan, the rarity of the gutter-rim bowls in the Bet Yerah assemblages is due to regional, not chronological variation. At Abu edh-Dhahab two such sherds were found—it seems that their origin lies in the Jezreel Valley.6 b. The bowls with an incurved carinated rim and the ledge-rim bowls are not present at Tel Qashish and ‘En Shadud, but are common at Bet Yerah. As mentioned above, these bowls, as well as the straight-sided bowls, belong to the group of ‘crackled wares’, for which Esse showed a local distribution in the Bet Yerah area. Interestingly, at Abu edh-Dhahab a few exemplars of crackled ware were discovered. While no petrographic analysis was performed, an inspection through a magnifying glass revealed a fabric similar to that found at Bet Yerah—they may have been produced in the Jordan Valley (Getzov 2004). Bowls of a similar outline are present at Qiryat Ata, but the report does not mention the presence or absence of a crackled slip. c. The ‘Type 3’ gray-burnished bowls that were published by Wright (1958) make up nearly a third of the bowl repertoire at both ‘En Shadud and Tel Qashish. At Bet Yerah and Abu edh-Dhahab no evidence of these bowls was uncovered, and apparently the ‘crackled wares’ take their place. d. While high-rim juglets were found at all sites, there is a marked difference in their outline. At Bet Yerah

+

5

+

3.1

82

3

21

14

559

31

0.2

1.4

1.0

38.4

2.1

5.6

1.9

0.1

11

1

328

1

3

6

2

20

32

AM

SJIIIb

17b 17d

Low, simple-rim jars (23)

Molded-rim jars (24)

SJV

SJIIIa

36

36

2

12

GJ

High-necked amphoriskoi (21)

Miscellaneous amphoriskoi and juglets (22)

3

22

54

Everted-rim amphoriskoi (20)

Everted-rim juglets (19)

HLC

3.3

3.3

0.2

1.1

0.3

2.0

5.0

5

12

3.1

7.4

6

41

0.8

5.3

36

19

16

26

25

2.5

1.3

1.1

1.8

1.7

4

33

6

8

HLC, NJ

1.0

1.9

1 27

2.2

1.2

1.2

15.1

Total

High-rim juglets (18)

8

15

0.5

63.2

4.2

3.6

32

18

17

220

% 0.8

2

0.4

1.8

4

492

33

28

0.6

4.7

11

Total

HIII, HVI

4

3

9.2

8.0

4.3

19.6

3.7

5

37

3.1

%

Miscellaneous holemouth jars (17)

1.8

4.0

15

13

7

-

+

28.2

24

Total

0.7

5.7

1.0

1.4

0.3

5.0

5.1

1.9

0.2

56.4

0.2

0.5

1.0

0.3

3.4

5.5

%

Abu edhDhahab

30

20

43

6 32

+

46

% 1.8

Qiryat Ata

29 HIII, HVII

HV

0.3

38.1

0.5

4.0

0.3

11.6

0.1

12.1

3

Total

Tel Qashish

Carinated-rim holemouth jars*

HV

3

414

% 7.4

‘En Shadud

Cooking pots*

15

20, 19e

Drooping-rim holemouth jars (16)

Square-rim holemouth jars (15)

HIV

HI, HII

19c 19d

Ridged-rim holemouth jars (14)

HIV

19a

Simple-rim holemouth jars (13)

HI, HII

BIC, BIIIe–f, BIVc BVI, KIII–IV

Varia (4,5,8 and unidentified)

5

7, 4

Gray-burnished bowls*

BIIIb–c

BIVa

BIII

3 44

BVI BIV

8, 9

126

Ledge-rim bowls (7)

BIa–b, BIIc

1

132

80

Total

Bet Yerah

Small bowls and lamp-bowls (9–11)

Bowls with incurved carinated rim (6)

BIIb

BIIIb, K1–2

BIIb

6

BIIc, K

BIIa

Gutter-rim bowls (4)

1, 2, 3, 10

Bowls with an incurved rounded rim (2, 3)

BI, BIIa

Qiryat Ata Types

BV

5

Straight-sided bowls (1)

Tel Qashish Types

Bowls with incurved sides and triangular rim*

‘En Shadud Types

Bet Yerah Types

Table 2.11. Comparison of Bet Yerah Stratum V to ‘En Shadud, Tel Qashish and Abu edh-Dhahab

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

35

36

100.0 581 100.0 100.0 779 100.0 100.0 Total

Everted-rim pithoi

26 Bow-rim pithoi

* Not found in the Tel Bet Yerah 1994–1995 excavations

SJII

1087

0.2 2 SJII

SJIV, SJVI, SJVII

0.5 5

Miscellaneous pithoi (31)

Triangular-rim pithoi (30)

25 Rounded-rim pithoi (29)

e. At Abu edh-Dhahab there are two types which are not present in the other assemblages: carinated-rim holemouth jars (see also Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959: Fig. 6:20–22) and cooking pots known from Strata IV–III at Bet Yerah (below, Chapter 3: Type 13), but not from Stratum V. These types emphasize the regional individuality of the Abu edh-Dhahab assemblage. A third type, bowls with incurved sides and a triangular rim, occurs at both Abu edh-Dhahab and Qiryat Ata, imbuing it also with a northern character.

163

4.3 7

2.5 4 2.2 24 SJVIII

T, SJIII 13, 14, 24 Kraters (28)

Various jars and jugs (27)

the rim tends to be upright, and at ‘En Shadud (Braun 1985: Fig. 20:1–5), Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: Fig. 4.8:6, 7) and Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003: Fig. 20:6) the rim is more everted, creating an acute angle at the joint of neck and body.

1457

34 2.5 37

1 12.4 180 6.5 51

0.4 6

5.9

0.2

0.9 5

0.2 1.7 2.3 18 3.1 5 0.2

0.3

2

3

0.4

T, JT

0.6

4

SJI SJI

7

Flat-rim jars (26)

High-rim jars (25)

Bet Yerah Types

25

1

4.2 24 3.5 2.2 17

51

Total % Total % Total % Total % Total

Bet Yerah Qiryat Ata Types Tel Qashish Types ‘En Shadud Types

Table 2.11 (cont.)

‘En Shadud

Tel Qashish

Qiryat Ata

Abu edhDhahab

%

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

f. The distribution of the pithos types draws an especially interesting pattern. At Bet Yerah most pithoi have a rounded rim, at ‘En Shadud rounded-rim and bow-rim pithoi are found together, at Tel Qashish there are only bow-rim pithoi, at Qiryat Ata the bow-rim pithoi dominate, with some rounded-rim and some everted-rim pithoi present, and at Abu ed-Dhahab the everted-rim pithoi dominate, with some rounded-rim pithoi present. These data are evidence of a very clear regional divergence: the everted-rim pithoi are common in the western Galilee (Braun 1996b:18–20); the bowrim pithoi in the Jezreel Valley; and those with rounded rims in the Jordan Valley and the eastern Jezreel Valley. A few rounded-rim pithoi arrived by way of trade as far as the western Galilee, as evidenced by the finds at Qiryat Ata, Abu edh-Dhahab and Rosh Ha-Niqra (Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959: Fig. 6:1–4). Tells in the Central Jordan Valley Tel Kinrot. Located near the shore of the Sea of Galilee, c. 20 km north of Bet Yerah. Two Early Bronze Age assemblages were uncovered in the excavations conducted at the top of the tell and on the north slopes. In the early assemblage, many vessels were found that parallel those from Stratum V at Bet Yerah—in particular, bowls with an incurved carinated rim (Fritz 1990: Pl. 51:2), band-slipped sherds (e.g., Winn and Yakar 1984: Fig. 5:10–12) and pithoi with a thickened rim and decorated with incisions (e.g., Winn and Yakar 1984: Fig. 9:5–7; Fritz 1990: Pl. 51:4–6).

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

Tel Kitan. On the west bank of the Jordan River, c. 25 km south of Bet Yerah. In Stratum VII remains of a large unwalled settlement were discovered, chronologically parallel to the beginning of settlement at Bet Yerah (Eisenberg 1993). In this stratum many pottery vessels were found that match those from our Stratum V, notably bowls with an incurved carinated rim, high-rim juglets with loop handles and band-slipped pithoi with a thickened rim, as well as extensive use of band-slip on storage jars and holemouth jars. Tel Shalem. West of the Jordan River, c. 40 km south of Bet Yerah. The pottery assemblage that was recovered from the Early Bronze Age strata was published without quantitative data and is dated to EB IB and the transition to EB II (Eisenberg 1996:20). There are many traits common to the assemblages from Tel Shalem and Bet Yerah Stratum V, in particular a dominant presence of band-slipped sherds (Eisenberg 1996:9), the occurrence of bowls of Types 2–4, 8, 10 (Eisenberg 1996: Figs. 13:5–13, 8, 14:1, 13:15–16, 1–3 respectively), holemouth jars of Types 13, 14, 16 (Eisenberg 1996: Figs. 15:1–3, 14:9–10, 15:4 respectively), juglets of Type 19 (Eisenberg 1996: Fig. 17:10–13) and storage jars of Types 23, 25 (Eisenberg 1996: Fig. 17:1–3, 7–9 respectively); the presence of a large number of pithoi with a rounded rim (Eisenberg 1996: Fig. 16:1–4), which resemble our Type 29, and, as at Bet Yerah, the absence of pithoi with a bow rim, which are common at ‘En Shadud and Tel Qashish (see above). Noteworthy are four aspects in which the assemblages from Tel Shalem and Bet Yerah Stratum V differ: 1. No bowls of Types 1, 6 and 7 were published from Tel Shalem; these types include the majority of ‘crackled ware’ types. 2. Though no quantitative data are available, the Tel Shalem plates suggest that gutter-rim bowls (Bet Yerah Type 4; Eisenberg 1996: Fig. 14:1, 3) and ridged-rim holemouth jars (Bet Yerah Type 14; Eisenberg 1996: Fig. 15:6, 7) are predominant. 3. Among the Tel Shalem rounded-rim pithoi (Bet Yerah Type 29) none have incised decorations. 4. At Tel Shalem there are pithoi with straight rims (Eisenberg 1996: Fig. 16:7, 8), while at Bet Yerah only a single exemplar was found (Fig. 2.16:14).

37

The first two aspects show that there is a greater affinity between the assemblages from Tel Shalem and ‘En Shadud than between those from Tel Shalem and Bet Yerah. There may be a chronological difference between Tel Shalem and Bet Yerah Stratum V. At Tel Shalem, a few sherds of ‘Metallic Ware’ are attributed to the assemblage (Eisenberg 1996:12), while at Bet Yerah only a single bowl fragment can be attributed to this group, and it may well represent an intrusion from a later stratum (at Tel Shalem no such later stratum was found, so the attribution is firmer). According to this observation, the Tel Shalem assemblage is later than Stratum V at Bet Yerah. Summary of the Comparison of Assemblages The majority of observed differences between the assemblage from Stratum V at Bet Yerah and the EB IB assemblages from ‘En Shadud, Tel Qashish, Qiryat Ata and Abu ed-Dhahab are in the different quantities of the various types at each site, though most types appear at all five sites. Thus, it would seem that the sites are contemporary and that the quantitative differences represent regional variation. Among the Jordan Valley tells there is a similarity in many details as well, especially between Tel Kinrot, Bet Yerah and Tel Kitan. It seems, thus, that the region between Tel Kitan and Tel Kinrot was very uniform in its material culture at this time. In the neighboring region, which stretches from ‘En Shadud in the Jezreel Valley, through the Bet She’an Valley to Tel Shalem in the central Jordan Valley, the material culture bears different characteristics.

SUMMARY OF THE FINDS FROM STRATUM V The pottery deposits found in Stratum V clearly belong to EB IB. In our excavation no evidence of earlier deposits was located nor of deposits characteristic of the transition to EB II, although EB IA was uncovered in the JPES excavations on the north of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004:7–10), and a transitional EB I–II phase was discovered at Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996:20) and at Tel Yaqush (Esse 1993:1503). Most of the pottery vessels belong to a characteristic assemblage that is common throughout the EB IB sites in the central Jordan Valley, such as Tel Kinrot and Tel Kitan. As Esse (1989) has shown, the wide distribution of ‘crackled ware’ is an indication of the

38

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

beginning of specialized manufacture. Only a handful of vessels arrived from other regions, and a significant difference can be shown to exist between the Bet Yerah assemblage and those from the Jezreel Valley, such as ‘En Shadud and Tel Qashish. A difference is evident also between Bet Yerah and the sites of the central Jordan Valley which are only a few score kilometers distant to the south, e.g., Tel Shalem and Khirbet etTuwal (Eisenberg 1998). Three samples from Stratum V were subjected to radiocarbon analysis (for details, see Chapter 9; Segal and Carmi 1996, 2004). Two measurements showed a calibrated date of between 2925 and 2699 BCE. This dating conflicts with the data obtained from Strata VI and III, as well as with the accepted dating of the period (Ben-Tor 1992). The third sample presented an earlier date, between 3650 and 3329 BCE. It would thus seem that these measurements are insufficient for drawing conclusions about the date of the Stratum V settlement (for a discussion on the radiocarbon dating of EB I levels see Braun 1996a:158–170; Fischer 2000: Table 12.3). The large percentage of bovid bones indicates that agriculture, which was based on intensive plowing with oxen, took a central part in the economy of the inhabitants of early Bet Yerah. According to Wapnish and Hesse (1991), a 20% rate of bovid bones in the finds indicates an economic base of plow agriculture; at Bet Yerah the rate stands at 33%. The small number of young animals (6.2%) shows that the cattle were raised for work and milking, and that meat production was only of secondary importance. Another piece of evidence for plowing with oxen comes from a relief of a bull on the base of a holemouth jar that was discovered during the excavations of the Oriental Institute (Sussman 1980). The finds from Bet Yerah support earlier evidence to the effect that plowing with oxen was practiced already in EB I (Amiran 1986b; Eisenberg 1992). In addition to grown produce, the inhabitants consumed fish (evidenced by the weights), mollusks, bovids and ovi/caprines. The most prominent find in Stratum V is unquestionably the walls. The excavations revealed but a small fraction of them, yet they were sufficient to identify complex dynamics of construction, maintenance, reinforcement and rebuilding of fortifications. Outstanding among the walls is that of Phase Vd, which was reinforced in Phase Vc.

As mentioned above, the excavations by the IES and Bar Adon revealed that the earliest fortifications included walls built of brick, atop which were stone foundations of later walls, as in our own excavation. It may be suggested then, that all the walls at Tel Bet Yerah that were found to have been constructed of bricks, without a stone foundation, should be attributed to EB IB. The meager remains of the settlement that were exposed in the excavations do not contribute much to our understanding of the settlement in that period. The wall that was exposed in the east section was close to virgin soil and should probably be attributed to the beginning of the settlement in this part of the tell. The beginning of fortifications in Israel should be ascribed to EB IB. In the past, fortifications have been reported from various sites, including Jericho (Holland 1986:22), ‘Ai (Callaway 1972:29), Tel ‘Erani (Yeivin 1960), Tell el-Farah (N) (de Vaux 1962:235), Aphek (Beck and Kochavi 1993; Gal and Kochavi 2000) and Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996).7 In most cases the stratigraphic data are not unequivocal and in some cases the dating of the fortifications and the related ceramic assemblages was questioned (Ben-Tor 1968:38–52; Brandl 1989; Esse 1984); only the data from Tel Shalem appear clearer. The finds from Tel Shalem are the most significant evidence of fortifications from EB IB. Eisenberg showed that at the site there was a fortified town, which was destroyed around the close of the period and was never resettled. Three settlement strata from the period were defined; the upper two had several phases of brick wall construction and reinforcement: The first wall (A) was thickened to a width of 4.5 m and parallel to it a further wall (B), 2.8 m in thickness, was erected. Eisenberg assumed that at the peak of activity at the site all the walls functioned together and that the settlement was surrounded by a 17 m thick line of fortifications. There is nothing in the finds that Eisenberg described to support such a massive fortification, and with a similar degree of probability it can be assumed that the outer wall was constructed only after the inner one went out of use. The distinct identification of EB IB fortifications at Tel Shalem and Tel Bet Yerah clearly demonstrates that this period indeed heralded the culture of the fortified urban centers that was to dominate the local landscape throughout most of the third millennium

CHAPTER 2: STRATUM V—EARLY BRONZE AGE IB

BCE. Close observation (Paz 2000) indicates that possibly dozens of other sites were fortified already in this period, contributing to a genuine urban revolution here (Paz 2000:73). The many phases in the fortifications of Tel Shalem and Tel Bet Yerah also

39

show that the fortification of these settlements was not a sporadic or ephemeral occurrence, but an action that repeated itself because of the destruction of the fortifications, whether due to natural forces or human acts of hostility.8

NOTES 1

The terminology used throughout this report divides Early Bronze Age I into two sub-phases: EB IA, which is distinguished by assemblages of gray-burnished wares; and EB IB, where band-slipped (also known as ‘grain-wash’) ware dominates. 2 I wish to thank Mendel Nun, Sea of Galilee scholar, who examined the weights and supplied information about their distribution and possible use. 3 Gopher and Orrelle attach a symbolic meaning to these objects, but without a solid basis for this. A day-to-day use as a fishing weight seems preferable (Gopher and Orrelle 1995:63). 4 No detailed analysis of the mollusks found in the excavation was conducted. 5 The distribution data of the holemouth jars appear to be due to functional differences and not to stylistic differences

in material culture. The functional differences are not treated in the present report. 6 The finds from Abu edh-Dhahab were examined by eye only. 7 In this study we do not take issue with the remains that were identified as the Pre-Pottery Neolithic fortifications of Jericho, because they are far removed in time and because of the controversy surrounding their identification as fortifications. 8 It seems that in subsequent periods the inhabitants of Tel Bet Yerah learned from experience and founded their walls on a stone foundation, probably to prevent moisture from rising from the ground, thus preserving the integrity of the brick walls.

CHAPTER 3

STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

PREVIOUS R ESEARCH The finds from Tel Bet Yerah served as an important foundation for the establishment of a relative chronology of the EB II–III strata in Israel. The earliest archaeological research on the tell relates to the identification of the family of vessels termed ‘Khirbet Kerak ware’. These were defined by W.F. Albright (1926:27–28), who was the first to note a group of pottery with a lustrous burnish in red and black. These wares serve as an indicator for the EB III strata (Wright 1937; Amiran [Kallner] 1943; Albright 1965). The assemblages from the tomb that was excavated west of the tell, on the grounds of Qevuzat Kinneret (Maisler 1942), provide an important contribution to the study of EB II and to the construction of its chronology. Gold jewelry from the tomb can be compared to finds from EB III tombs in Anatolia (Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973:186). The pottery repertoire should be attributed, based on parallels from tombs in Egypt, to the second half of EB II (Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973:183). In the pottery repertoire, the ‘Metallic Wares’ stand out. The Excavations of the JPES The first season of the JPES excavations exposed a settlement horizon, which included structures built of stones and mortar. It was attributed to EB II because it preceded a stratum in which ‘Khirbet Kerak ware’ was discovered (Maisler and Stekelis 1944–1945:82; Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:170). In the second season it was defined as ‘Bet Yerah’ Stratum III (Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1946–1947:55–56). In the section the excavators made through the walls, no wall was found to be contemporary with Bet Yerah Stratum III, and it was assumed that it was built elsewhere and not yet discovered (Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1946–1947:57). Amnon BenTor (1968:39) and Ruth Hestrin (1993) ascribe to Bet

Yerah Stratum III the wall that the excavators attributed to Bet Yerah Stratum II from EB I. Deposits in which ‘Khirbet Kerak ware’ was abundant were attributed to Bet Yerah Stratum IV from EB III. The excavators noted that the remains indicate that the period was very long; they observed four sub-phases. Most building was carried out solely with stone, and in some cases brick walls were built on stone foundations. A stone wall, which was constructed in a foundation trench, was also assigned to this stratum. It is 4 m wide and on the outside it was protected by a beaten-earth glacis. On the north of the tell, the JPES expedition uncovered paved streets, and between them a large structure with some ten circles. In later research this building was identified as a public granary (Mazar 2001). The Excavations of the Department of Antiquities In the excavations directed by Pesach Bar-Adon, extensive remains from the Early Bronze Age were discovered, including six building phases dated to EB II (Bar-Adon 1957:29): Strata XIIA–D and XIIIA–B (Ben-Tor 1968:2). Bar-Adon attributed fortifications to all the phases of the Early Bronze Age (BarAdon 1956:52), but without treating specifically the fortifications in each individual phase. He attributed Strata IXA–B, XA–B and XI to EB III (Ben-Tor 1968:2). Shemuel Yeivin published a panoramic photograph of the fortifications uncovered by BarAdon (Yeivin 1953: Fig. 2);1 according to Yeivin, this is the basalt foundation of a brick wall. This wall was initially assigned to the Middle Canaanite Period I (Intermediate Bronze Age), and later to the Hellenistic period (Yeivin 1955:9; Hestrin 1993). Underneath the stone foundation a brick wall was uncovered. In it was a gate built of basalt, with a stele in front (Yeivin 1953: Fig. 2). It is possible that this brick wall is the same wall allocated to ‘Bet Yerah II’ by the JPES expedition.

42

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

The Excavations of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago In this expedition strata from EB II were revealed in most of the excavation areas and probed (Esse 1991: Table 1). A probe in the road cut at the south end of the tell (Road 14), at the location where eventually our own excavation was conducted, revealed no clear traces of EB II. However, several cylinder seal impressions with geometric patterns, at least one of which came from a clear EB II stratigraphic context, were found (Esse 1990). Early Bronze Age III remains were discovered at almost all points of investigation, and in Trench H–K a large building was unearthed; it was identified as an olive-oil factory (Esse 1991:23–25). A preliminary report (HA 1964b:15) stated that in EB III the settlement shrank in size, but in the table published by Esse (1991: Table 1) there is no reflection of this decrease. The Salvage Excavations of the Department of Antiquities The salvage excavations, carried out at various spots on the tell, exposed remains from EB II and III. The excavators note the ‘metallic’ wares as indicators of EB II and the ‘Khirbet Kerak ware’ as a diagnostic indicator of EB III. David Ussishkin and Ehud Netzer excavated a partially paved street flanked by structures, one of them a public building. The street and the buildings were dated to EB III—evidence of urban planning in this period, according to the excavators (HA 1967b:9). South of the tell, Ora Yogev uncovered remains of buildings that reflect a considerable continuity between EB II and III; in many cases the same walls served in several strata (Yogev and Eisenberg 1985:14).

THE CURRENT EXCAVATIONS THE STRATIGRAPHY AND ARCHITECTURE (Plan 3.1)

In addition to the architectural and stratigraphic links that will be detailed below, the attribution of the units to Stratum IV was based also on the prominence of pottery from the family of ‘Metallic Ware’, characteristic of EB II assemblages in the north of the country (Greenberg and Porat 1996). Detailed presentation of the finds in the various loci appears in the tables that accompany the quantitative analysis of the pottery. At the south end of the tell, directly on top of the walls of Stratum V, remains of fortifications were exposed. They were attributed to Stratum III only (see W110 below and Plan1.1: Section 1-1); none were assigned to Stratum IV, which was identified only from Sq 12 and north. A dense network of rooms was discovered, their walls constructed of bricks, sometimes founded directly on the ground and sometimes on stone foundations. The floors were made of cobbles, crushed chalk or beaten earth, and in most cases pillar bases were found on them. Because of the limited excavation area, the relation of the rooms to each other or aspects of planning could not be elucidated. In what follows, the remains will be described from south to north. Locus 150. An enclosed space (room?) with a crushed chalk floor (elevation -191.62 m) that runs up to two brick walls: Wall 147 to the west and W142 to the north (Fig. 3.1, see Fig. 3.18). On the floor two basalt slabs were set as bases for pillars. In the south, the floor slopes upward, and judging by the laying of the bricks in W147, which the floor touches (see Plans 1.1, 3.1), this was purposely done at the time the floor was laid. The east segment of the floor (L150) lies outside the excavation boundary; it could not be determined whether or not a bounding wall existed on this side as well. The south wall was also not found; it is possible that it was destroyed by the builders of the fortifications of Stratum III (W110). Floor 150 was laid directly on the brick rubble of Stratum Va. In the south, next to W147, the floor sealed a small pit, L160. Fragments of ‘Metallic Ware’ were retrieved from the pit; therefore, it must represent an early phase of Stratum IV.

Description of the Remains from Stratum IV Area AB Remains from Stratum IV were uncovered in the south part of the excavation (Sqs 12–16) over the remains of Stratum V, while in the central area (Sqs 17–21; Plan 3.1) they were on virgin soil. The excavation did not reach the deposits of Stratum IV in the north part.

Locus 145. A small floor fragment (elevation -191.47 m) that was uncovered in the corner west of W147 and south of W142. It is made of beaten earth and was founded on a deposit of pebbles (L155).

Plan 3.1. The remains from Strata V–IV. ►

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

43

44

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Fig. 3.1. Area AB. Floor 150, looking east. At the bottom, W114 above W147; in the background, W109 above W142.

Wall 177. A brick wall that belongs to the corner of a room west of the excavation area in Sq 13. The wall connects to the northeast corner of the structure at an acute angle. This wall should be considered as an early phase of Stratum IV, because it is sealed by Floor 162 (below).

Locus 162. A room with a crushed chalk floor (elevation -192.03 m) that touches three walls: Wall 142 on the south, W153 on the north, and on the west W185, a brick wall that was built on top of W177 but does not follow its course closely (Fig. 3.2; the wall is seen in the section, Plan 1.1, but not on Plan 3.1, because its top was not uncovered). In the corner where the top

Fig. 3.2. Area AB. Floor 162, looking south. On the right, W177 at floor level; above it the bricks of W183, topped by W117.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

of W177 pushes into the room, it was covered by the room’s chalk floor. Wall 153 is a brick wall, founded on a single course of basalt stones, and abuts the northeast corner of W177. An opening in W153 connects Floor 162 to Floor 169 to the north, its threshold set on a paving of basalt stones that was covered by the chalk floor of the room. In the center of the room a pillar base was constructed of two flat stones, stabilized with smaller stones. In the chalk floor two depressions were made: Locus 172 near the pillar base and another small depression next to the northwest corner, atop W177 (Fig. 3.3). A further pillar base, under the pillar base in Floor 169 (see below), might be connected with the depressions.

Fig. 3.3. Area AB. Floor 162, looking west.

45

Wall 178. A brick wall with a stone foundation course (Fig. 3.4). The wall is situated north of the corner of W177; the two walls are perpendicular. These walls should apparently be connected to an earlier system of walls at the base of Stratum IV, but because of their distance from each other they are probably not part of the same structure. Locus 169. A room with a thin floor of compacted chalk and earth (elevation -191.96 m) north of Floor 162. Three of the walls of the room can be identified: to the south, W153, which was described above; to the east, W164; and to the north, W176. The opening in the north wall opposes the opening in the south wall. The floor touches the south wall, but near the north wall it is too worn—its relation to W176 was determined on the evidence of its elevation and its relation to W153. In the middle of the room (near the west balk of the excavation) a pillar base made of large, flat basalt stones was found, and under it was a flat limestone, which apparently served as a pillar base during the phase in which W177 and W178 functioned (see Plan 3.1: A1). Wall 176 is constructed over W178—evidence for attributing Floor 169 to a later phase than Floor 168 (see below, Table 3.1). Locus 168. This is a room with a floor made of dirt and cobbles (elevation -192.27 m), north of Floor 169

Fig. 3.4. Area AB. Square 14, looking north. Wall 178, above which is W176, topped in turn by W161.

46

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Fig. 3.5. Area AB. Floor 168, looking south.

Fig. 3.6. Area AB. The pillar bases in Floor 168, looking north. At the bottom, the base from the time of W178; above it, the base from the time of W176.

Fig. 3.7. Area AB. Floor 168, looking west. In the foreground, W138, and at center, a bowl on the floor. Above the bowl is Floor 133.

(Fig. 3.5). All four walls of the room can be identified: Wall 178, described above, on the south; W165 on the west; W183 on the north; and W138 on the east. No evidence of a doorway was discovered. In the center of the room a flat stone was set as a base for a pillar (Fig. 3.6). On the floor, near the east wall, were fragments of a basalt bowl (grinding mortar?; Fig. 3.7). The bowl had broken during the time it was in use, but its fragments were reassembled with the aid of additional small stones as props in situ—without strict observance of the original order of the fragments—and it continued to serve as a small, immovable basin (see Fig. 3.58:5).

Elements Later than Floor 169 A few architectural remains were identified that are later than L169, but they are poorly preserved and the relation between them is unclear. Among these are: Wall 161. Built over W176, it must be a third phase (Fig. 3.8). Only a small section of this wall was uncovered; its west end is straight and is apparently a doorjamb. Locus 133 (including L141 and L159). A sloping floor made of small pebbles (elevation -191.90– -192.09 m) west of W161 (Fig. 3.8). This floor is apparently part

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

47

Fig. 3.8. Area AB. Floor 133 and W161, looking west.

of an extensive floor attached to the spaces north and south of W161. South of W161 a juglet, broken into many pieces, not all of which could be restored (see Fig. 3.44:15), lay on the floor. Wall 184. The stone foundation of a long wall that was exposed near the east balk of Sqs 14 and 15. To judge by the elevation, it should be connected with W161, but the assumed connection did not survive. Locus 130. A clay heating unit (kiln; Fig. 3.9), whose outline is unusual, included a postulated opening that did not survive. This opening led to a space (c. 0.4 × 0.5 m), which in turn split into two small and narrow cells (c. 0.2 × 0.7 m). The cells contained fragments of bowls and jars, which were partly restored. Among them were bowls with a ledge rim. The builders of this unit cut W176 and therefore it clearly postdates Floor 162. Because of the close elevations, it is apparently contemporary with Floor 133. The suggestion that it may have been a kiln for firing pottery vessels—though possible—is problematic because of its small size. Elements Associated with Either Strata IV or III (within Sqs 14 and 15) Sloping expanses, which were paved with large- and medium-sized basalt stones, overlay the remains of Stratum IV that were described above. It could not

Fig. 3.9. Area AB. Kiln with a bilobate chamber (L130, 0.6 m wide), looking east. To its right, the top of W176.

reliably be determined whether these belonged to the top of Stratum IV or to the base of Stratum III. This group includes Floor 125 (elevation -190.86 – -191.22 m), which is above Floor 133, and Floor 132, which is above Floor 168 and W165. Floor 125 was damaged by graves from Stratum I that were dug into it (see L118 and L128 below). Locus 478. A space (room?) with a beaten-earth floor with minute embedded pebbles (elevation -193.47 m). The foundations of two of the walls to which the floor

48

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

attaches were uncovered: Wall 474 in the east and W481 in the north (see Fig. 2.7). A large, flat basalt stone was set in the floor as a pillar base. It was placed atop a similar stone and was propped by small stones. The floor level is more than 1 m lower than that of Floor 168 (-192.28 m), which is just to the south (during the excavations, the balk between the two loci—Sqs 15 and 16—was not removed). In both cases the floors were founded directly on the accumulations of Stratum V and it is proposed that the height disparity represents a topographic difference that had already existed at the time the Stratum IV structures were built.

was observed. In the west the floor touches W519. A pillar base made of flat basalt slabs was found on the floor. In the north, the space was bounded by W553, which could be observed only in the east section of the excavation, because it was destroyed by building activity during Strata III–II. However, its course can be reconstructed with fair certainty by following the boundary of Floor 527, just north of the destroyed wall. Both the floor of L520 and W519 were disturbed by the cutting of the trench for the Stratum III tunnel that crossed the space. The floor was founded on debris of Stratum V (L545; see Plan 1.1).

Locus 494. Two levels of cobble floors that touch a brick wall (W519; Fig. 3.10). The floors and wall were cut by the trench that was dug for the construction of the tunnel of Stratum III (see L542 below). These floors were not dismantled in the excavations and no pottery was collected from them. It can at least be asserted that in the section two fragments of Metallic Ware carinated-rim bowls, which are characteristic of Stratum IV, were seen. Their elevations (-193.55 m, -193.30 m), similar to that of the neighboring floor to the south, L478, also point to their association with Stratum IV.

Locus 527. A space paved with gravel (elevation -193.77 m). In the north, the floor touches W504 and in the south it ends in a straight line, indicating the presumed course of W553 (above). On the floor, two pillar bases made of flat limestone slabs were placed directly on virgin soil (Lisan Formation; Fig. 3.11). The north and central part of Floor 527 were covered by an accumulation (L521), in which, although Metallic Wares were predominant, much of the pottery belonged to Stratum III (e.g., bowls of buff clay and pattern burnishing) and to Stratum II (e.g., Khirbet Kerak Ware). The pottery from Strata III and II indicates that the floor had been greatly disturbed, but at only two places were the causes clearly discernible: Installation 516 from Stratum III and Installation W464 from

Locus 520. A space with a beaten-earth floor (elevation -193.74 m) on which a layer of dark ashes, 5 cm thick,

Fig. 3.10. Area AB. Square 17, looking south. At the right corner, Floor 494, and to its left, W519. At left foreground, a pillar base, and in the section to its left, a dark line of ash marks a floor level parallel to Floor 494. The floors and W119 were cut at the time of the construction of Tunnel 542, the top of which can be seen at the bottom.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

49

Fig. 3.11. Area AB. General view at the end of the excavations, looking north.

Stratum I. In L528 (an accumulation that covered the south part of Floor 527) only EB II sherds were found, as well as a jar that stood on Floor 527.

Locus 525. Three pits dug into the virgin soil of the Lisan Formation, north of W504 and sealed by Floor 514 (Fig. 3.12; see below). The pits are 0.2–0.4 m deep

Fig. 3.12. Area AB. Pits 525, looking east.

50

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Fig. 3.13. Area AB. Wall 513, looking east. In the section a krater fragment from Stratum III is visible (see Fig. 3.46:9).

and were full of potsherds, having evidently served as refuse pits. Locus 514. A space paved with cobbles (elevation -193.89 m). In the north the paving abuts W471 and in the south it runs under W504 (there is a c. 0.1 m height difference between the base of the two walls). On the floor of the space, a meager, one-stone-wide wall was erected; one of the stones was a fragment of a basalt bowl (W513; Fig. 3.13). Despite the height difference, it appears that both Floor 514 and W504 belong to the same stratum, because they were both founded on virgin soil. The accumulations of Floor 514 were sealed by those of L505 from Stratum III. Locus 515. A floor made of large cobbles mixed with animal bones and pottery (elevation -194.07 m; Figs. 3.14, 3.15) founded on the Lisan Formation. No walls or installations connected to this floor were uncovered; on the floor were fragments of a jar bottom that was used as a lamp, as evidenced by the soot on the broken edges (Fig. 3.44:18). Locus 490. A large expanse (courtyard?) with a gravel floor (elevation -193.97 m), stretching north of W471. Its other boundaries were outside the excavated area (more than 8 m north of W471). The floor abuts

Fig. 3.14. Area AB. Squares 20 and 21, looking south. The scale is on Floor 515. To its right is W473 (Stratum III); in the background, W471; and behind it, Pits 525.

51

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

Fig. 3.15. Area AB. Close-up of Floor 515. To the right of the scale, a fragment of a jar bottom that served as a lamp (Fig. 3.44:18).

the external corner of a building, W551 and W552 (Fig. 3.16). Adjacent to this corner, on the floor, was a flat stone with a depression. This stone might have been a door hinge socket, except that no architectural context for a possible door was exposed at this place. In the north, the floor is c. 0.1 m above Floor 515. Area C (see Plan 1.1: Fig. 1.2) Among the architectural remains that were observed in the section in Area C, it may be possible to attribute to Stratum IV Floor 808 (C11) and W805, which the floor abuts (C12). The attribution is based on a few Metallic Ware sherds found in the deposit on the floor, but it is admittedly speculative because of the small number of finds. Wall 815 might also be contemporary with Stratum IV because of the elevation of its base, but again, the data are insufficient for a firm conclusion. Summary of the Remains from Stratum IV Nine contiguous spaces attributed to Stratum IV stretch along 48 m of the excavation area. According to the

Fig. 3.16. Area AB. Locus 490, looking north. On the left, W473 and W550; on the right, W551 and W552.

evidence of the pillar bases, seven of the spaces (L150, L162, L168, L169, L478, L520 and L527) were rooms with a roof. The function of the eighth (L514) remains unclear, while the ninth (L490) was apparently an open courtyard. In different sections of the excavation several phases can be discerned, but these cannot be joined into a coherent stratum sequence; they appear to represent local changes and developments. A sequence of three or four building phases stood out in Sq 14. These phases could be related to architectural units in other squares, as illustrated in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1. Stratum IV, Sqs 13–15: Phase Divisions Square 13 and the Balk with Sq 14

Square 14 and the Balk with Sq 15

Square 15

Early phase

W177

W178, pillar base, lower pillar base

L168, W165, W183, W138

Second phase

L162, W153, W185, W142, W172

L169, W176, W164

Continuation of L168 and its surrounding walls?

Third phase

Continuation of L162 and its surrounding walls

W161, L133 (L141 and L159), W148

L133, L130, W148

Fourth phase or early phase of Stratum III

Remains, if any, were destroyed by the Stratum II wall

L125

L132

52

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

In Sqs 19–21, two phases could be discerned, according to Table 3.2. Table 3.2. Stratum IV, Sqs 19–21: Phase Divisions Square 19

Square 20

Square 21

Early phase

L525

L515

L515

Late phase

L514, W504

L490, W471

L490, W551, W552

Description of the Remains from Stratum III Area AB The starting point for describing the remains of Stratum III in Area AB will be W114 in Sq 12 (Plans 1.1, 3.2, 3.3). The foundation of this wall is c. 0.2 m above the extant remains of W147, the west wall of L150, which served as the starting point for the description of Stratum IV. Wall 114. This wall was constructed of bricks made of dark brown clay and affixed with a whitish-gray mortar. This color contrast allowed for a detailed observation of the method of construction of the wall. The bricks are rectangular (0.4 × 0.2 × 0.1 m) and the width of the

wall (0.6 m) necessitated laying them in a ‘header-and stretcher’ manner. The face of the wall was plastered with the same mortar that was used between the bricks (Fig. 3.17). On the south, the wall abuts the stone base of a wide wall (W110, see below), but not at right angles. The triangular space that remained between the last whole brick and the wide wall was filled with three brick fragments held by mortar. This clearly indicates that the builders of the brick wall acknowledged W110 and that it preceded W114, even if only technically. The north end of the latter wall was damaged by the builders of the Stratum II wall (W109, below), leaving only a single course (Fig. 3.18). At a distance of 3.30 m north of W110, W114 ends in a corner that turns west and disappears outside of the excavation area. Wall 110. The stone foundation of a wide wall (Fig. 3.19). It is 4.8 m wide and constructed of rounded basalt stones that were evidently brought from the lake shore or the Jordan River bed. The faces of the wall are carefully constructed of medium-sized stones (average size 0.30 × 0.25 m), with a core of smaller stones (average size 0.25 × 0.15 m) that were piled haphazardly. The north face was built of four courses

Fig. 3.17. Area AB. Wall 114, looking west. On the left, W110; on the right, W109; above, the section in Floor 105.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

53

Fig. 3.18. Area AB. The west section of Sq 12, after the removal of W109. From bottom up: Floor 150, W147, W114, W109.

Fig. 3.19. Area AB. Wall 110, looking east.

of rounded stones and a fifth of flat stones, to carry the brick superstructure, of which three courses survived. Only three courses of the south face were preserved,

but it appears to have been similar to the north face. In the west section (Plan 1.1), three brick courses of the superstructure can be seen.

Plan 3.2. The remains from Strata III–II (South).

Plan 3.3. The remains from Stratum III–II (North).

56

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

North of W114, the remains of Stratum III were damaged by digging and construction works from Strata II and I. Remains clearly attributable to Stratum III were uncovered only in Sq 17 and northward. In spite of the narrow area excavated, the remains show a dense settlement. These remains will be described from south to north (Plans 3.2, 3.3 and see Plan 1.1). Locus 542. A tunnel, carefully constructed of basalt stones in a trench dug into the accumulations of Stratum IV and V and into the Lisan Formation below. As mentioned, the tunnel was discovered in Sq 17 and in the section of Area C. The inner space of the tunnel was also excavated west of Sq 17. Segments of the tunnel were located 30 m apart, but most of the area between was destroyed by the road that cut the tunnel. About seven meters of the tunnel were excavated in the west (Area AB, L542) and two meters in the east (Area C, L828; Plan 3.4). The course of the tunnel is not completely straight, as can be inferred from the different directions of the two excavated segments and also from a bend in its course in Area AB. The inner height is not uniform, reaching 0.75 m in the east and 1.2 m in the west. The width is 0.75 m in the east and 0.9 m in the west. The assumed elevation of the floor (see below) is -195.52 m in the east and -195.60 m in the west. The elevation of the ceiling is -194.67 m in the east and -194.40 m in the west. In the walls five courses can be seen in the east (Fig. 3.20) and seven courses in the west (Fig. 3.21). The three upper courses on either side are stepped inward, and over these, flat stone slabs connect the two sides, creating a vault-like structure. At the bottom of the tunnel a 0.10–0.15 m thick layer of soil was found, containing a large number of sherds, animal bones, a few stone tools and small fieldstones. Although it could be assumed that this soil was deposited as sediment, which either entered through the gaps among the wall stones or with the water, the very small gaps left by the precise construction would not allow the entry of bones or pottery. The breaks on the sherds look ‘fresh’ and do not show signs of wear which would be expected on water-tumbled sherds. We suggest, therefore, that this soil is a deliberate leveling fill made by the builders of the tunnel. The elevation of the top of this fill was used as the benchmark for the above data.

Noteworthy among the finds recovered during the excavation of the floor of the tunnel are four fragments of terracotta animal figurines (see below), of which three were recovered in Area AB and one in Area C. The

Fig. 3.20. Area C. Locus 828, looking east. Section through the accumulations in the tunnel; throughout the height of the section black carbon flakes are visible, and at the bottom, a dense pottery layer.

Fig. 3.21. Area AB. Locus 542, looking east.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

fragment from Area C and one of those from Area AB belong to the same figurine (see Fig. 3.54:10) and were joined during restoration. This accidental discovery demonstrates that the soil in which the figurines lay arrived at a time when the tunnel was open and not as part of the silting-up process. Above the tunnel floor and up to the ceiling, a layered deposit of light-colored soil with flakes of carbonized wood was found; most flakes came from the bottom, though they were present throughout the cross section. Notable was the absolute absence of potsherds, bones or stones in this fill. The layers are neither uniform nor horizontal, and the dynamics of the silting-up process are evident. The geomorphology of the deposits in the tunnel were studied by Eldad Barzilay, through visual observation and through a petrographic sample taken to the laboratory. His observations were that “no evidence of a constant water flow can be traced. The sediments are the result of a low-energy flow. The water flows that permitted the precipitation of the silt were sporadic and local.” It is therefore evident that the deposit was created after the tunnel went out of use and is the result of silt that entered with rainwater through the small gaps between the stones.

57

The trench dug by the builders of the tunnel cut W519 and Floor 494 and L520, all attributed to Stratum IV of EB II (Plan 3.1; Fig. 3.22). The pillar base uncovered in L520 protruded into the trench, but the diggers left it there, probably because it did not obstruct the construction (see Fig. 3.10). Once the construction of the tunnel was finished, its builders backfilled the trench. Above the fill (L529), several levels of stone floors were assigned to Floor 465 of Stratum II. Noteworthy is also L487, which is a pit that cut through Floor 465 and is itself attributed to Stratum II. Inside the pit—which is directly above the tunnel— Khirbet Kerak Ware, including two large kraters that were restored (see Figs. 3.35, 3.51:7, 11), was found. These data clearly show that the tunnel is later than Stratum IV and earlier than Stratum II—i.e., it belongs in Stratum III. It should be noted that most potsherds from L529 (the soil that covered the tunnel) are attributable to EB I and EB II. Only four fragments are later: two from EB III and two from the Hellenistic period. This information confirms the hypothesis that L529 includes the backfill of the trench, which was dug in the accumulations of Strata IV and V, and the late sherds originated in a disturbance that could not be traced during the excavations.

Fig. 3.22. Area AB. The west section of Sq 17. In center, the roof of the tunnel; on the left, Floor 494 and W519 of Stratum IV; at top, remains of the paving of Floor 465 from Stratum II; and on the right, deposits from Stratum V, capped by accumulations from other strata.

58

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Fig. 3.23. Area AB. Wall 504, looking east. At the bottom the stone foundation is visible, and in the section, the mudbrick wall. To right of the wall is another brick wall, which formed the north boundary of Floor 506.

Locus 603 and L606. Fragments of a floor that abut a poorly-built wall (W609) and were cut by an installation from Stratum I (W464, below). The elevation of the floor is -193.19 m and it is c. 0.6 m above Floor 527 of Stratum IV. No other stratigraphic connections were observed, and the attribution to Stratum III rests mainly on the pottery. Floor 603 consists of the accumulations above the floor, and L606, the finds from dismantling the floor. Locus 506. A space, probably a room, paved with small and minute pebbles (elevation -193.50 m; Plan 3.3). The floor level is c. 0.3 m above Floor 527 of Stratum IV. In the north is W504, which is a brick wall with a stone foundation, and the floor abuts the top of the foundation (Floor 527 abuts the base of this foundation). A cylindrical base of a juglet—characteristic of Stratum III assemblages (see Fig. 3.49:13; and see below, the description of the ceramic finds)—was found in the west section, above the stone foundations and below the bricks, indicating that even if the foundation dates to Stratum IV, the brick wall is not earlier than Stratum III. In the east the floor adjoins the base of a brick wall seen in the section (Fig. 3.23). In the south no evidence of a closing wall was uncovered; it may have been destroyed by building activity and pit-digging during Strata II and I. The west boundary of Floor 506 was outside the

excavated area. South of W504 a flat stone pillar base was discovered. It had been placed on an earlier such base, from the time of Floor 527 (Stratum IV). On the floor, close to the west section, a holemouth jar was found in situ (Figs. 3.24, 3.47:10), and in the center of the excavated area, the fragments of a juglet (Fig. 3.49:1). During restoration, the juglet was completed with fragments found in adjacent loci that represent disturbances from Stratum II (L479, L488) and Stratum I (L537). It appears that the upper part of a jar, found in L479 (Fig. 3.48:3), should similarly be attributed to Floor 506.

Fig. 3.24. The west section of Sq 19. On the left a holemouth jar is visible on Floor 506. On the right is Pit 469.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

59

Plan 3.4. Schematic plan of the Strata III and II fortifications and tunnel. For Section 1-1, see Plan 1.1; for Section 2-2, see Fig.1.2.

Locus 516. A circular installation that consisted of a shallow, stone-lined pit cut into Floor 527 of Stratum IV (Fig. 3.25). At the bottom of the pit and between

the stones of the lining, lumps of dark-brown clay were found. A visual inspection in the field showed that this clay did not resemble the virgin soil normally

60

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Locus 505. A space north of W504 contains an accumulation of light-colored soil and a collapse of bricks, a few stones and a large quantity of pottery. No associated floor was found at the base of the accumulation, which was defined by the extant top of W513 of Stratum IV. In the west, the accumulation was disturbed by Pit 469 from Stratum I, and in the section, below the pit, there may be remains of a brick wall that is the west boundary of this space (see Plan 1.1).

Fig. 3.25. Area AB. Installation 516, looking east. Near it is a pillar base, on Floor 527.

encountered at the site and that it was brought from elsewhere. The clay was possibly used to seal the installation or in the manufacture of pottery.2 Floor 506 was not preserved near the installation, and its attribution to Stratum III relies on the few sherds recovered in it. It should be stressed, however, that the attribution is by no means certain, and the installation could also belong to a late phase of Stratum IV.

Locus 470. A small room whose floor consists of earth mixed with pebbles and potsherds (elevation -193.74 m). Only the east part of this room was exposed; most of it lies outside the excavation area (Fig. 3.26). The enclosing walls are W471 in the south, built during Stratum IV; W472 in the north; and W491 in the east, a slipshod partition wall that was attached to the east corner of W472. The doorway, between the partition and W471, has its hinge socket in situ, at the right for those entering. On the floor, next to W491 there was a small stone-paved area (L493) and near W471 a smashed amphoriskos was found in situ (Fig. 3.49:9). Floor 470 seals Floor 490 from Stratum IV, c. 0.25 m below, and is itself sealed by the light-colored accumulation of L427 from Stratum II. Wall 472 and W473. Two walls of a room, of which only the corner was excavated (see Fig. 3.14), at the

Fig. 3.26. Area AB. Floor 470, looking west.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

61

Fig. 3.27. Area AB. Floor 522, looking east.

lowest elevations of L427 from Stratum II. The room had an earthen floor which was not identified with any precision (estimated elevation -193.35 m). Excavation below the foundation of the walls (L485) exposed Floor 490 from Stratum IV (elevation -193.97 m). Wall 550. A stone foundation west of and parallel to W473 (see Fig. 3.16). Its base (-193.96 m) is exactly at the elevation of the top of the foundation of W473, so they evidently did not function at the same time and represent different phases. No floor adjoining this wall was found and no clear assemblages can be attributed to it, yet its proximity to the floor of Stratum III (0.12 m above Floor 470) shows that it is contemporaneous with this stratum. If this observation is correct, then this is the only place in the excavation where two phases from Stratum III are evident. Locus 522. A room with a beaten-earth floor (elevation -193.52 m; Fig. 3.27). In the south the floor abuts the two-course stone foundation of W509 and in the north, the stone foundation of W554. The west boundary of the room was outside the excavation area, while its east boundary was disturbed by construction and digging activities during Strata II and I. On the floor an intact jar (see Fig. 3.48:1) leaned against W554 (see Fig. 3.38) and a holemouth jar (see Fig. 3.47:1) was smashed near W509 (see Fig. 3.37). The excavation did not continue to the deposits below Floor 522. Wall 459 from Stratum II was built over W554 and a pit from Stratum II (L543) damaged

W509 (although the upper course was damaged, the plan shows the bottom course). Area C (Plans 3.2–3.4; Fig. 1.2) Three sets of remains visible in the Area C section can be assigned to Stratum III: Wall 824. A large mass of basalt masonry at the top of the south slope of the tell (C33; Plan 3.2; Fig. 3.28). The method of construction, as well as the rounded stones, highly resembles W110—it appears to be part of the

Fig. 3.28. Area C. Wall 824, looking south, showing a doorpost(?) in the wall of Stratum III. The scale lies on W820, which may have been a threshold. Under W820, a section of the bricks of W826 is visible.

62

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

same wall. The south face of W824 is similar to that of W110, but it was destroyed during modern fortification works (see Chapter 6). The west face of the wall might represent the jamb of a postern or gate in the wall. If this is correct, it may be that a row of flat stones (W820) served as a threshold to the same gate. Locus 828. The east part of the tunnel (see above, L542). Locus 800. A small portion of a room paved with cobbles between two walls (W814 and W831; Plan 3.3). A large ceramic basin was found on the floor (see Fig. 3.49:17). To the south there was apparently another room, W807 and W814 forming two of its walls. Due to potsherds that rolled down the slope and debris piled up by bulldozers, the pottery could not be assigned to any stratum. The attribution to Stratum III rests on a comparison of the basin to those found in the excavations of the Oriental Institute (Esse 1991: Pl. 9: C, D).

Summary of the Remains from Stratum III The Stratum III city yielded many remains that include a wall at the top of the south slope, a tunnel parallel to the wall, and walls that divided the area into small units (rooms?) whose function could not be ascertained because of the narrow excavation area. Most remains can be attributed to a single phase, and the thickness of the deposits is not great. It appears that the Stratum III city was not long-lived. In many cases broken vessels were found on the floor (above, L470, L506, L522, L800, and the group found during excavator works). Vessels in situ were discovered only in this stratum, suggesting that the inhabitants left the site in a hurry.

Description of the Remains from Stratum II (Plans 3.2–3.4) Area AB

Pottery Found during Mechanical Excavator Work A group of pottery vessels that was collected while a mechanical excavator worked at the site after the excavations were over was also attributed to Stratum III (see Figs. 3.47:8, 3.48:2, 8–10, 12). The attribution is based on the similarity of some of the vessels to types common in this stratum, e.g., the jar with triangular rim (below, Type 25; see Fig. 3.48:2).

Wall 109. A stone foundation (Fig. 3.29) of a wall built inside the wall of Stratum III (W110). The foundation was laid in a trench that damaged W114. In fact, the damage to W114, which abuts W110, proves unequivocally that W110 is the earlier (see Figs. 3.18, 3.30). The wall is 4.9 m wide and its foundation was constructed of round and angular stones, mostly basalt, with a little limestone. The two faces of the

Fig. 3.29. Area AB. The stone foundation of the Stratum II wall, looking east. In center, W109; on the left, W117.

Fig. 3.30. Area AB. The west section of Sq 12. On the left, W114 from Stratum III; on the right, W109 from Stratum II. In W114 and in the deposits above it the foundation trench of W109 can be seen.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

63

Fig. 3.31. Area AB. Wall 109 looking south, after the removal of W117.

foundation were laid in six courses (Fig. 3.31), with a core of similarly-sized stones, unlike the walls of the earlier strata. The builders probably brought the limestone and angular stones from the mountains in the west, as the nearer sources of stones had been exhausted during Stratum III. Over the foundation a brick wall was erected (W108), of which approximately six courses survived, each c. 0.1 m high (Fig. 3.32). The arrangement of the bricks (looking from above) could be only partially determined. In the examined section they turned out to be square (c. 0.4 × 0.4 m) and arranged in parallel rows. A row of half-bricks was placed along the centerline of the wall (c. 0.2 × 0.4 m); it seems that by this row the builders achieved the necessary offset so that the joints between the bricks were not one above the other.

The brick material contained potsherds from all the phases of the Bronze Age found in the excavation, including Khirbet Kerak Ware (e.g., Fig. 3.50:18). In the Hellenistic period (Stratum I) a burial (L122) was placed atop the wall and a pit was dug into it (L116).

Fig. 3.32. Area AB. The south face of the Stratum II wall, looking west. Note the brick courses (W108) above the stone foundation (W109).

Fig. 3.33. Area AB. Wall 117, looking south. In front remains of the stone paving of Floor 125 from Stratum IV or III.

Wall 117. Inside (on the north of) W110 a 2.1 m wide stone addition was constructed so that the final width of the wall in Area AB was 7 m. On the north side of the addition eight courses were built (Fig. 3.33), and

64

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Fig. 3.34. Area AB. Floor 105, looking east. On the left, W109; on the right, W110.

the space between them and the original wall was filled haphazardly with stones. The stones and their arrangement are similar to that in the foundation, but the addition is higher and its stones projected above the surface. No evidence of a brick superstructure was found.

were identified as belonging to the large space taken up by these segments. In the largest segment traces of different levels could be seen, indicating a long period of use, in which repairs and elevation changes were carried out. The floor seals the trench in which the Stratum III tunnel was built (see Fig. 3.22).

Locus 105. Outside the wall, south of W109, a pavement of basalt stones was built (see Figs. 3.17, 3.34). The floor runs over the top of the foundation trench of W109. It appears that in the past it abutted the outside face of the city wall, but it was damaged to such an extent that nowhere can the actual join be clearly seen.

Locus 487. Between the surviving segments of Floor 465, an accumulation was traced that contained large fragments of pottery, including the base of a jar (Fig. 3.35) and the side fragment of a Khirbet Kerak Ware krater (see Fig. 3.51:7). This accumulation appears to

North of W117, the remains of Stratum II were damaged by erosion, diggings from Stratum I and by agriculture and earthworks from antiquity to modern times. Only a few deposits of earth remain that can be dated to Stratum II. Only from Sq 17 and to the north were some fragmentary remains clearly identified as belonging to this stratum. Their description follows, from south to north: Locus 465. Sections of a floor made of flat basalt stones (Fig. 3.35). One larger and several smaller segments of floor survived throughout Sqs 17 and 18. No walls

Fig. 3.35. Area AB. Floor 465, looking north. Note the different levels of the paving. Left of the meter scale is the base of a krater at the edge of Pit 487 (Fig. 3.51:11).

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

65

Fig. 3.36. Area AB. Wall 433 and W432, looking east. Wall 433 is cut by Pit 469 from Stratum I.

be the bottom of a pit that cut through the habitation level of Floor 465. A Whitish Soil Layer: Above Floor 465 is a thick (1–1.2 m) deposit of whitish soil. This layer was very prominent in all the sections within Sqs 17–27 (from south to north: L428, L462, L463, L480, L466, L421, L427, L544, L422, L523, L440, L441). According to the many sherds retrieved within, including Khirbet Kerak Ware, it should be attributed to Stratum II. This appears to be an accumulation of eroded debris from the destruction of the Stratum II wall (W108). In addition to the Early Bronze Age sherds, a considerable quantity of Stratum I (Hellenistic) material was collected as well. These appear to be connected with intensive rodent activity observed on top of the whitish deposit and, in fact, in all the sections of the excavations. The accumulations above this layer are datable to Stratum I and the surface. Wall 432 and W433. Two walls forming a corner of a structure (Fig. 3.36) that was cut by Pit 469 from Stratum I. The walls were found in the upper part of the whitish deposit, and while they could be mistaken for an early phase of Stratum I, their orientation matches that of the walls of Stratum II, which is quite different from that of the walls of Stratum I. If, indeed, the whitish deposit accumulated after the destruction of

Fig. 3.37. Area AB. Pit 543 (on the right), cutting W509.

the Stratum II walls, then these walls are evidence of the continuation of building activity after that event. Locus 543. A small pit was dug into the deposits of Stratum III and damaged W509 (Figs. 3.27 on right, 3.37). Locus 523. A soil layer that clearly belongs to the whitish deposit that characterizes the accumulations of Stratum II. At its base there is a habitation level to which the following elements can be connected: Wall 459—a small wall fragment that survived from a mostly damaged wall. North of it was a pillar base made of a flat stone, stabilized by a large stone below it and small stones around it (see Figs. 3.27 on left, 3.38).

66

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

to expand the foundation of the Stratum II wall, even though one is outside the wall, the other inside. It appears that during the strengthening of the Stratum II wall, the builders chose to widen it either on the outside or the inside, as necessary.

Fig. 3.38. Area AB. A pillar base in L523 from Stratum II, over W554 from Stratum III.

Locus 803. A pit, lined with flat stones on the sides and bottom (B17–18; Fig. 3.40). The pit was dug into accumulations that adjoined W805, which was attributed to Stratum IV (see above). A few Khirbet Kerak Ware sherds were found in the pit. Similarly lined pits are identified as grain silos; they are known from the middle Chalcolithic period (Garfinkel 1989: Fig. 32) and are common in the Early Bronze Age (e.g., Greenberg 1996a: Fig. 3.9; Givon 2002: Fig. 17).

Locus 456. A small kiln (Fig. 3.39) that partly survived, with two small chambers that indicate a split fire chamber. A kiln with a similar layout was found in Stratum IV (L130). The kiln is built at the same elevation of the pillar base near W549 and both clearly belong to the same occupation level.

Fig. 3.40. Area C. Silo 803 from Stratum II, looking west. On the right is W805 from Stratum IV.

Summary of the Remains from Stratum II Fig. 3.39. Area AB. Locus 456—a kiln with a bilobate chamber, looking west.

Area C (Plans 3.2–3.4; Fig. 1.2) Among the remains exposed in the section of Area C, three sets of remains can be attributed to Stratum II: Wall 825. A stone foundation of a wall north of W824, which is attributed to Stratum III (C29–31; see Fig. 2.9). The construction of W825 and W109 are clearly identical, making both parts of the same wall. On the outside of the wall there is an additional widening (W833), whose thickness could not be determined due to damage to its outer face (C31–32). A comparison can be made between W833 and W117: both served

The Stratum II city was surrounded by a wall with a wide and strong foundation which, at a certain point in time, was further widened to 7 m and more. No densely built-up area was found in the excavated area, and the architectural elements here attributed to Stratum II are far between. On the other hand, thick deposits and accumulations from this stratum were discovered all over the excavation area. Especially noteworthy is the whitish layer that could be followed for more than 50 m, between Sqs 17 and 27. These deposits show that the Stratum II city was densely built up in the excavated area, yet most of its buildings were not uncovered. This may be due to the decay of organic building materials, the absence of stone foundations for the walls, the proximity to the surface over extended periods, or a combination of these factors.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

The remains of Stratum II indicate a long existence. In some cases several phases were identified: the widening of the wall, the various levels of Floor 465 and the construction of W432 and W433 on top of the whitish layer.

THE FINDS THE POTTERY Introduction In the pottery assemblages of the Early Bronze Age of northern Israel, two unique groups are prominent: Metallic Ware and Khirbet Kerak Ware. Metallic Ware This group is characterized by clay in which red and orange hues stand out, a core that is sometimes gray and poor in temper, and whose grits are brown, red or white. Most of all, it is distinguished by having been fired at a high temperature, producing a hard fabric with a metallic sound. The surfaces of the vessels were sometimes left untreated, and sometimes covered with a red slip, burnished or pattern-combed. In exceptional cases the vessels were decorated with incisions, red paint on a white wash, white paint on a red wash, or strips of cylinder seal impressions. Metallic Ware has often been discussed (e.g., Prausnitz 1954; Ben-Tor 1992:107–109) and lately investigated by Greenberg (1996b:99–105; 2002:44–48) and Greenberg and Porat (1996). Raban (1980:140) was the first to point to the Syrian coast as the source for the combed metallic jars found in Egypt. However, the studies of Greenberg and Porat clearly demonstrated that all metallic vessels have a uniform fabric, proving the use of a clay originating in lower Cretaceous rock formations. Outcrops of such rocks are exposed in the Hermon foothills, the northwestern Hula Valley and large areas of southern Lebanon (Greenberg and Porat 1996: Fig. 5). Khirbet Kerak Ware These vessels represent a phenomenon unique in the dimensions of the spread of a ceramic tradition completely foreign to the traditions of northern Israel, both those preceding and succeeding it. Ruth Amiran (1969a:68–75) lists six traits that characterize this ware: 1. The quality of the fabric, especially of the larger vessels, is poor, and the vessels are brittle.

67

2. The vessels were handmade, not wheelmade. 3. The ware appeared in a new repertoire of shapes and forms. 4. Ribbon handles are common, as are rims with a square cross section. 5. A thick slip usually distinguishes the vessel, as well as a strong, dense burnish. Incised and plastic decorations are common; painted decorations are absent. 6. Use is made of varying firing conditions, in order to obtain red and black hues on the vessels. These traits are common to most Khirbet Kerak vessels, yet they should not be taken as a binding definition. For example, some vessels, such as the horseshoe-shaped stands and most lids, do not have any slip or burnish. Thus, the term ‘Khirbet Kerak Ware’ is not a technological or stylistic definition, but rather a designation of a group of unique vessels that are often found in a common archaeological context. Significant chronological conclusions arose from the analysis of the finds from our excavation: a. Most (perhaps all) of the Metallic Ware family found should be attributed to Stratum IV (EB II). b. In Stratum III (EB IIIA), most common were vessels of a light ware, covered with a thin red wash. In this period Metallic Ware was no longer in use, and Khirbet Kerak Ware had, apparently, not yet appeared. c. In Stratum II (EB IIIB), vessels with a lustrous burnish marking the Khirbet Kerak Ware family were common, as were various other types without burnish, but which are to be included in the same family. Methodology Previous expeditions at Tel Bet Yerah published finds from the EB II–III levels: several vessels were published from the Bar-Adon excavations (Ben-Tor 1968; Amiran 1969a) and several from the Oriental Institute (Esse 1982: Pls.1–15; 1991: Pls. 1–9).3 These publications are crucial for understanding the assemblages found in the present excavation, and especially for the study of the complete vessel forms, because in the present excavation only a handful of vessels were recovered whose full profile could be restored. The analysis of the pottery assemblages and their attribution to each of the strata is based on a list of 40 vessel types. The description of the types and their quantitative data follow an initial division into three groups, according to the strata in which their main distribution lay (i.e., Strata IV, III, II). A concluding

68

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

discussion of the attribution of the vessels to their original strata will be made after their description and the presentation of the quantitative tables. The typological discussion and the figures also include finds from loci that were not included in the quantitative analysis—either because their stratigraphic context was not clear or because no systematic sieving was carried out during their retrieval. The type description that follows includes similar finds that were published from previous excavations at Tel Bet Yerah and references to the table of Metallic Wares of Greenberg and Porat (1996: Fig. 5) and the type list from Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003).

Typology Stratum IV Metallic Ware The above description of Metallic Ware relied on a visual inspection; sherds that were eroded or covered by a

concretion were inspected on a fresh break. The character of Metallic Ware is considerably different from all other Early Bronze Age wares, and thus even very small fragments can be accurately attributed and the number of mistakes in attribution is expected to be small. 1. Shallow Bowls (Fig. 3.41:2). These are shallow bowls with a simple, thin rim. Traces of soot were observed on the rim of some of the specimens; apparently some (perhaps all?) served as lamps. Such bowls were found in the Kinneret tomb (Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973: Fig. 28:6) and in the excavations of the Oriental Institute (Esse 1991: Pl.1: E). They are classified as Type B1a by Greenberg and Porat (1996: Fig. 1:1) and included in Type B1 at Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003: Fig. 62:1, 2), where Metallic Ware bowls dominate, though Zuckerman includes in this group non-metallic ware bowls as well. 2. Carinated-Rim Bowls4 (Figs. 3.41:8, 12–16, 18–24; 3.42:1–6; Color Pl. 1:13, 14; back cover). These bowls

Fig. 3.41 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

168

1227

Bowl

Pinkish-brown clay, red slip, burn marks on rim

2

160

1184

Bowl

Grayish-red clay, metallic firing, red slip

3

159

1183/1

Small bowl

Grayish-brown clay, red slip, burned rim

4

525

4559/1

Bowl

Grayish-brown clay, dark temper, red slip, burned rim

5

528

4581

Bowl

Grayish-brown clay, soot all over the vessel

6

168

1271

Bowl

Red clay, metallic firing

7

497

4455/1

Bowl

Red clay, metallic firing

8

525

4579

Bowl

Red-brown clay, metallic firing, grid-pattern burnish, restored

9

150

1168

Bowl

Grayish-light brown clay, metallic firing

10

124

1082

Bowl

Grayish-brown clay, red slip

11

130

1218/1

Bowl

Pinkish-brown clay, dark temper

12

168

1295

Bowl

Red clay, metallic firing

13

124

1147/1

Bowl

Red clay, metallic firing

14

521

4577/1

Bowl

Gray clay, metallic firing, red slip

15

160

1234/1

Bowl

Red clay, metallic firing

16

159

1183/2

Bowl

Red clay, yellowish-brown core, metallic firing

17

525

4572

Bowl

Yellowish-brown clay, dark temper, red slip, burnish

18

159

1183/3

Bowl

Red clay, gray core, metallic firing, red slip

19

507

4483/2

Bowl

Red clay, metallic firing, red slip, burnish

20

525

4559

Bowl

Red-brown clay, metallic firing, red slip

21

W109

1122/2

Bowl

Pinkish-red clay, metallic firing, red slip

22

507

4484

Small bowl

Pinkish-brown clay, metallic firing

23

548

4737

Bowl

Red-brown clay, gray core, metallic firing, red slip

24

507

4668

Bowl

Orange-red clay, metallic firing, grid-pattern burnish

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

1

3

2

4

5

6

7 8 0

10

9

10

11

12

14 13

15 16

17 18

19 20

22

21

23

24

Fig. 3.41. Early Bronze II bowls.

69

70

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

are among the most outstanding vessels of EB II and the excavation. The rims are modeled in a variety of shapes, including narrow, high rims (e.g., Fig. 3.41:20), a low, triangular rim (e.g., Fig. 3.42:2) or a low, adzelike rim (Fig. 3.41:23). Some bowls were burnished or slipped with a red wash, and a few were decorated on the inside with stripes of burnish in a grid pattern (Fig. 3.41:8, 24). Sometimes traces of paring or a groove made with a sharp tool are found on the outside, under the carination. Such bowls were discovered in the Kinneret tomb (Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973: Fig. 6:25–27), in the EB II strata of the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 11:1–6), in Stratum XIIIB of the Bar-Adon excavations (Amiran 1969a: Pl.15:4) and in the excavations of the Oriental Institute (Esse 1991: Pl.2: A–I). They are classified as Type B2 by Greenberg and Porat (1996: Fig. 1:7– 13) and dominate in Types P1 I–III and BVIII at Tel Qashish, which also include non-metallic ware bowls (Zuckerman 2003: Figs. 63:1, 2, 64). 3. Everted-Rim Jars and Pithoi (Figs. 3.43:13–19; 3.44:7, 8, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19; back cover). The outer face of the jars and pithoi were often decorated with patterncombing. The meager finds from our excavation do not allow for a clear separation between jars and pithoi or for a division into sub-types. Such jars and pithoi were found in the EB II strata of the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 11:1–6), in Bar-Adon’s

excavations (Amiran 1969a: Pl.16:1, Photo 52) and in the Oriental Institute’s excavations (Esse 1991: Pl.1: F, G). They are classified as Types SJ1 and SJ3 by Greenberg and Porat (1996: Figs. 2:3–6; 3:2–5) and Types SJ IIa–b at Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003: Fig. 68:6, 7). 4. Broad Juglets (Fig. 3.44:4; back cover). Juglets with a wide mouth. Besides the illustrated specimen, which was decorated with red stripes painted in a grid pattern, only small fragments of similar, apparently undecorated juglets were found. Greenberg and Porat (1996: Fig. 1:19) attribute to Type SmJ2 a similar juglet (amphoriskos) without a handle. 5. Narrow-Necked Jugs and Juglets (Fig. 3.44:2, 3, 15, 20). Vessels with a narrow, tall neck. Jug and juglet fragments with various decoration techniques were found: burnishing all over the vessel; burnish stripes in a grid pattern; red slip (Fig. 3.44:3); combed and incised patterns (Fig. 3.43:23); plastic rope decoration; red paint on a white background (Fig. 3.44:20);5 and white paint on a red background (Fig. 3.44:19; Color Pl. 2:21). Narrow-necked jugs and juglets were common among the finds from the Kinneret tomb (Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973: Fig. 5:1, 2) and in the excavations of the Oriental Institute (Esse 1991: Pl. 1: J–P). They are included in Type J1–2 of Greenberg and Porat (1996: Fig.1:14–17) and Types J and JT at Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003: Fig. 67:1, 2). In the excavations

Fig. 3.42 ► No. 1

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

133

1236

Bowl

Red clay, pinkish-brown core, metallic firing, red slip

2

525

4734

Bowl

Red clay, yellowish-brown core, metallic firing, red slip, burnish

3

525

4559

Bowl

Red clay, metallic firing, burnish

4

119

1066

Bowl

Red clay, metallic firing

5

507

4483/1

Bowl

Pinkish-brown clay, gray core, metallic firing

6

497

4446/1

Bowl

Red clay, yellowish-brown core, metallic firing, red slip

7

130

1218/2

Bowl

Pinkish-light brown clay, dark temper, traces of red slip, restored

8

130

1218/3

Bowl

Buff clay, dark temper, traces of red slip

9

525

4572/2

Bowl

Light brown and reddish clay, red slip

10

525

4572/1

Bowl

Light brown and grayish clay, much varied temper, red slip

11

143/146

1154/1193

Bowl

Light brown clay, dark temper, traces of red slip on the base

12

525

4567

Bowl

Light brown and grayish clay, brown and gray slip

13

146

1158

Bowl

Light brown and grayish clay, gray core, much varied temper

14

497

4455/2

Small bowl

Light brown clay, thick black core

71

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

7

10

9 11

14 13 0

12

Fig. 3.42. Early Bronze II bowls.

10

72

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

of the Oriental Institute, a fragment of a similar juglet was found, but with a light-colored slip (Esse 1991: Pl. 1: L). Esse relates this fragment to a large group of contemporary vessels discovered in tombs of the first Dynasty in Egypt and at various sites in Palestine (Esse 1991:48, 107–109). 6. Miscellaneous and Unidentified Vessels. Under this heading come vessels of the Metallic Ware family, which either could not be accurately identified, or which were recovered only in very limited numbers, such as the bowls in Fig. 3.41:6, 7, 9. Non-Metallic Ware Included in this group are vessels that were found in Stratum IV assemblages, are not Metallic Ware and are different from Stratum V vessels. It should be noted that the gray holemouth jars (Type 22 below) can be attributed to this stratum as well, but since their major distribution is in Stratum III, they will be described in that stratum.

7. Shallow Bowls with a Simple Rim (Fig. 3.41:1, 3, 4). All the bowls that are not Metallic Ware were covered with a red slip. Most have soot marks on their rim and seem to have been made to serve as lamps. In a single case the rim was deliberately broken to improve the seating of the wick (Fig. 3.41:4). At Tel Qashish just a few Type B1 bowls are nonmetallic ware (Zuckerman 2003:130). 8. Carinated-Rim Bowls (Fig. 3.41:11, 17; Color Pl. 1:15). These are practically identical in form to the Metallic Ware carinated-rim bowls. 9. Ledge-Rim Bowls (Fig. 3.42:7–11). Bowls with a rounded contour and an incurved, horizontal rim with a carination below. All the bowls in this group are made of a light, brittle clay rich in temper. A large concentration of such bowls was found near the kiln (L130). 10. Miscellaneous Bowls (Figs. 3.41:5; 3.42:12–14). This group includes a wide variety of types, but because

Fig. 3.43 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

159

1183/4

Holemouth jar

Dark brown clay

2

119

1063

Holemouth jar

Dark brown clay, black core

3

160

1234/2

Holemouth jar

Dark brown clay, black core

4

507

4486

Holemouth jar

Dark brown clay, black core

5

119

1066

Holemouth jar

Brown clay, gray core

6

525

4584/4

Holemouth jar

Light brown clay, gray core

7

525

4572

Holemouth jar

Dark brown clay, black core

8

525

4735/2

Holemouth jar

Brown clay, gray core

9

497

4446/2

Holemouth jar

Reddish-brown clay, gray core

10

130

1218

Cooking pot

Brown clay, much basalt temper, whitish slip

11

525

4567

Cooking pot

Reddish-gray clay, calcite temper

12

124

1077

Cooking pot

Reddish-brown clay, much basalt temper

13

428

4368

Jar

Red clay, metallic firing

14

801

8001

Jar

Metallic firing

15

520

4515

Jar

Red clay, gray core, metallic firing

16

525

4584

Jar

Gray clay, gray slip, metallic firing

17

W109

1131/5

Jar

Pinkish-brown clay, metallic firing

18

521

4577/2

Jar

Red clay, metallic firing

19

168

1279

Jar

Brown clay, gray core, gray self-slip, metallic firing

20

525

4559

Jar

Reddish-brown clay, black core, brown-red slip

21

130

1218/4

Jar

Grayish-pink clay, dark temper, combed

22

130

1218/5

Jar

Grayish-pink clay, dark temper

23

525

4588

Shoulder

Metallic firing, impressed decoration, incised marking, pattern-combing

73

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

1 2

4

3

6 5

8 7

9

11

12

10

15

13 14

17 16

18 0

10

21

19 20

0

2

22 23

Fig. 3.43. Early Bronze II holemouth jars, cooking pots and jars.

74

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

2

3

1

4 6

5

8

7

9

0

10

11

10

13

12

14

16

18

17

Fig. 3.44. Early Bronze II miscellaneous pottery.

15

75

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

20

21

19

0

22

4

23

Fig. 3.44. Early Bronze II miscellaneous pottery. No.

Locus

Basket

1

478

4389

Juglet

Vessel

Description Brown clay, much dark temper

2

168

1279

Juglet

Red clay, metallic firing

3

169

1226

Jug

Red clay, metallic firing, red slip, vertical burnish

4

140

1235

Juglet

Pink clay, metallic firing, red paint

5

525

4559/2

Juglet

Reddish-brown clay, red slip

6

168

1292

Juglet

Grayish-yellow clay, red slip

7

525

4735/1

Handle

Red clay, metallic firing

8

520

4543

Jar handle

Red clay, gray core, metallic firing

9

497

4455/3

Jar handle

Brown clay, varied temper, brown paint

10

547

4720

Pierced handle

Pinkish-brown clay, brown paint

11

130

1090

Fragment

Brown clay, brown-gray core, red slip, relief decoration

12

130

1218/6

Base

Red-brown clay, light-colored temper

13

150

1168

Base

Red clay, gray core, metallic firing, red slip

14

525

4572/3

Base

Red clay, gray core, metallic firing, incision on base

15

159

1217

Juglet

Red clay, metallic firing

16

497

4445/4

Jar or pithos base

Gray clay, metallic firing, combed

17

528

4613

Jar

Brown clay, varied temper, white slip, red paint

18

547 515

4725 4717

Base used as lamp

Reddish-brown clay, gray core, metallic firing, burn marks on break

19

546

4703/2

Jar

Yellowish-red clay, metallic firing, red slip, white paint

20

429

4327

Jug

Metallic firing, white slip, red paint

21

529

4600

Juglet

White clay, red paint

22

546

4703/1

Juglet

White clay, red-black paint

23

499

4469

Juglet

White clay, red-black paint

76

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

of the small numbers found, they were not typologically separated. While it might be that the bowls with a simple rim (Fig. 3.42:12–14) belong to Stratum V assemblages, the presence of large fragments suggest that they do, in fact, belong to Stratum IV. 11. Brown Holemouth Jars (Fig. 3.43:1–9). These are holemouth jars with a simple, thick rim, mostly with a round or pointed cross section but sometimes with a square cross section. They are characterized by a reddish-dark brown, well-fired clay. On the outside of many sherds soot is visible, indicating their use as cooking vessels. On some vessels, near the rim, marks were incised before firing and in one case body fragments of a holemouth jar were found to carry a cylinder seal impression (Fig. 3.55:5). The contour of these jars is very similar to the gray holemouth jars common to Stratum III, but they can be distinguished by the color of the clay. Such holemouth jars were discovered in EB II strata of the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 11:7–9) and in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pl.2: J, K). Elsewhere, Esse pointed out the difference in the fabric between EB II and EB III holemouth jars (1982:123– 124, 130). These jars are included in Types H I–V at Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003:132), though these types there represent a great variety of fabrics. 12. Miscellaneous Holemouth Jars. Meager fragments of various holemouth jars that could not be otherwise distinguished. It could be that these include also fragments from Stratum V assemblages. 13. Low-Necked Cooking Pots (Fig. 3.43:10–12). Rounded vessels with a very low neck and an everted rim. Their classification as cooking pots was made on the basis of the fabric, which is similar to that of the holemouth jars. Such cooking pots are common in the Tel Dan assemblages (Greenberg 1996a:102) and similar pots seem to be included in Types SJ I–II at Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003: Fig. 68:4). 14. Miscellaneous Jars (Figs. 3.43:20–22; 3.44:9, 10, 12, 17). In Stratum IV only a handful of jars were found that do not belong to the Metallic Ware family. Some vessels of this group were decorated with red paint applied in a grid pattern (Fig. 3.44:9, 10; Color Pl. 1:16, 17). In the Bar-Adon excavations a complete such jar was recovered (Amiran 1969a: Photo 53).

The jar in Fig. 3.44:17 is exceptional, in that it has ledge handles and a decoration of vertical red stripes on a white slip. In addition to this jar only a handful of fragments of similar jars were found in the excavation. Such jars are known from ‘Ai (Marquet-Krause 1949: Pl. LXXIII:933) and other sites in central and southern Israel (e.g., Tel Dalit, Gophna 1996: Fig. 44). The jar from our excavation was discovered standing on Floor 527, whose attribution to Stratum IV is beyond doubt. Noteworthy are jar fragments imported from Egypt. They have a red-brown clay, black core and a white wash. Eleven body fragments were recovered in the excavations, most from Stratum IV deposits; none were found in Strata V or III. One fragment from the accumulations above Floor 168, dated to Stratum IV (see Fig. 3.56:10), carries a sgraffito made after firing, and another fragment, a partially preserved graffito done before firing (see Fig. 3.56:11). A petrographic analysis carried out by A. Shapiro showed that the jars were made in Egypt, from clay that originates in the Nile. 15. Broad Juglets. Juglets similar to Type 4 of the Metallic Ware family, but made of a different clay (Fig. 3.44:5, 6). 16. Narrow-Necked Jugs and Juglets. In this group are included non-metallic ware jugs and juglets, such as the one in Fig. 3.44:1, as well as small juglets characterized by a greenish-white clay with a decoration painted in red-black (Fig. 3.44:21–23; Color Pl. 1:18–20). Only four body fragments of these juglets were found, so that the shape of the vessel could not be reconstructed. As only one of the fragments (Fig. 3.44:22) was retrieved in a clear Stratum IV context, the attribution of these juglets to Stratum IV of EB II rests on evidence from other excavations. Juglets made of greenish-white clay with a painted decoration were recovered in the Kinneret tomb (Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973: Fig. 6:25–27) and fragments were found in the excavations of the Oriental Institute, where they were attributed to the EB II strata (Esse 1991:48, 107–109). 17. Unidentified Vessels. This group includes rims of non-metallic ware vessels; their state of preservation precludes attribution to any other group. Handles A. Metallic Ware Handles Handles with an Oval Cross Section (Fig. 3.44:7, 8). These form the majority of handles, and the

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

ribbon handles and round cross section handles that characterized Stratum V hardly appear. Miscellaneous Handles. This group includes degenerate loop handles, knob handles and ledge handles. The few fragments found were not drawn. So far no vessels with a ledge handle from the Metallic Ware family have been published. In our excavation there may be one such small fragment; its identification as a ledge handle is not certain. B. Non-Metallic Ware Handles Handles with an Oval Cross Section (Fig. 3.44:9). No ribbon handles or round cross-section handles are known from Stratum IV for the non-metallic ware vessels. Ledge Handles. Two fragments were found, in addition to the handles on the jar painted with red on a white slip (Fig. 3.44:17). This type originates in central or southern Israel.

77

Miscellaneous Handles. This group comprises pierced handles, knob handles and indeterminate handles. Only one pierced handle orginated in the loci included in the quantitative analysis. This handle (Fig. 3.44:10) must have served for tying a lid, and four like it can be seen on a jar from the Bar-Adon excavations (Amiran 1969a: Photo 53). Stratum III Most of the vessels to be described below are common to Stratum III: they are made of light clay in hues of buff-brown and gray, usually with a thin slip in shades of orange, red or brown, and are termed here ‘Stratum III Ware’. Sometimes the slip was carelessly applied and some of the surface remained plain.6 Other vessels are described as well, especially the gray holemouth jars, prominent in Stratum III. 18. Bowls with a Simple Rim and Diagonal Burnish Lines (Fig. 3.45:1–7; Color Pl. 2:22, 23). These are similar to

Fig. 3.45 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

W828

8085

Small bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

2

499

4469/1

Small bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

3

542

4694/2

Small bowl

Gray clay, red slip, pattern burnish

4

505

4490

Small bowl

Buff-brown clay, dark temper, red slip, incised decoration

5

499

4461/1

Small bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish, burn marks on rim

6

605

5006/1

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

7

538

4653

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

8

523

5743

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

9

538

4653

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

10

499

4447/2

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

11

499

4469/3

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

12

499

4469/2

Small bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

13

470

4442/2

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

14

113

1028

Bowl

Yellowish-gray clay, dark temper, red slip

15

470

4442/1

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

16

123

1074

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, minute temper, red slip

17

499

4477/1

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

18

499

4461/4

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

19

113

1038

Bowl

Yellowish-gray clay, dark temper, red slip, pattern burnish

20

427

4238/3

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, minute temper, red slip

21

542

4696/1

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

22

499

4461/3

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

23

542

4715/2

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

24

W109

1131/4

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, minute temper, red slip

25

511

4522

Bowl

Gray-brown clay, varied temper, restored

78

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

1

2

3 4

5

6 7

8

9

11 0

10

12

10

13

14

15

16 17

18

19

21 20

22

23

24

25

Fig. 3.45. Early Bronze IIIA bowls.

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

79

1 2

3 4

5

6

7

0

10

8

9

10

12

11 13

Fig. 3.46. Early Bronze IIIA bowls.

the shallow bowls of Stratum IV, and in common with those, sometimes have traces of soot on their rims. They differ from Stratum IV bowls in the following: they are deeper and are made of the light fabric characteristic of Stratum III. Such bowls were found in the EB III strata of the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 15:1) and in the excavations of

the Oriental Institute (Esse 1991: Pl. 3: A–C, E, Pl. 8: A–F); at Tel Qashish they are included in Type BIII (Zuckerman 2003: Fig. 62:4). 19. Thick, Simple Bowls (Fig. 3.45:8–11; Color Pl. 2:25). Bowls that are considerably larger than the previous type. All are made of the light fabric characteristic of Stratum III. Such bowls were found in the excavations

80

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

◄ Fig. 3.46 No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

499

4453

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

2

603

5005

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

3

499

4461/2

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

4

603

5003

Bowl

Grayish-brown clay, red slip, burnish

5

W109

1126

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, dark temper, red slip, pattern burnish

6

542

4715/1

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

7

542

4715/3

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, pattern burnish

8

Surface

Bowl

Yellowish-gray clay, red slip

9

499

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip

4595

10

463

4743

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, dark temper, red slip, restored

11

428

4176

Bowl

Grayish-brown clay, red slip

12

479

4460

Bowl

Buff-brown clay, dark temper, red slip

13

W491

4563

Small bowl

Buff-brown clay, red slip, burn marks on rim

of the Oriental Institute (Esse 1991: Pl.4: C, D, Pl. 8: K). 20. Carinated-Rim Bowls (Fig. 3.45:12–25; Color Pl. 2:24; back cover). These are prominent in Stratum III as well. They differ from Stratum IV bowls in their buffbrown and gray fabric characteristic of Stratum III, almost all have a red slip and a decoration of burnish stripes in various patterns. The shape of these vessels is virtually identical to those of Stratum IV, but among the Stratum III vessels there are no bowls with a thin, incurved rim characteristic of Stratum IV (e.g., Fig. 3.45:16, 17). In Stratum III the deep bowls with a sharply carinated rim (e.g., Fig. 3.46:1–9) and adze rim (e.g., Fig. 3.46:10) are more common than in Stratum IV. Although the different types were not separated, it should be noted that out of 127 items attributed to

Stratum IV, only a single one is of a deep bowl (see Fig. 3.41:23) with a sharply carinated rim, whereas in Stratum III the ratio stands at 25:61. Such bowls were found in Stratum XB of the BarAdon excavations (Amiran 1969a: Pl. 18:4, 5) and in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse1991: Pl. 4: A, B, F, G; Pl. 8: G, J, L, U). They are included in Types PL I, III, IV at Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003: Fig. 64:1, 5, 8, 11). 21. Miscellaneous Bowls (Fig. 3.46:12, 13). These are different from all the above. Their attribution to Stratum III was made solely on the basis of their stratigraphic context. 22. Gray Holemouth Jars (Fig. 3.47:1, 6, 10). Their shape is virtually identical to the holemouth jars of Stratum IV;

Fig. 3.47 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

522

4663

Holemouth jar

Grayish-brown clay outside, reddish-brown inside, varied temper, restored

2

523

5743

Holemouth jar

Brown clay, gray core

3

499

4469/4

Holemouth jar

Brown clay inside, gray outside, much temper

4

470

4442/3

Holemouth jar

Brown clay, gray core

5

542

4729

Holemouth jar

Dark reddish-brown clay, black core

6

W828

8084

Holemouth jar

Brown-gray clay, gray core

7

W828

8097

Holemouth jar

Buff-brown clay

8

Surface

Holemouth bowl

Grayish-brown clay, reddish slip outside, paint splashes inside

9

503

4732

Holemouth jar

Dark brown clay, black core, incised decoration

10

538

4704

Holemouth jar

Grayish-brown clay, much and varied temper, restored

81

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

2

0

1

3 4

5 6

7

8

9

10

Fig. 3.47. Early Bronze IIIA cooking vessels.

10

82

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

they differ mainly in the fabric, which is grayish-brown and appears to be less well fired. Among these jars too, there are some with marks near their rim, incised before firing (see Fig. 3.56:5–7). As a generalization, the

thickening of the rim is less pronounced than in their predecessors, but this rule cannot be used as a guide when examining individual specimens.

1

3 2

5

6

0

4

7 8

Fig. 3.48. Early Bronze IIIA jars.

9

10

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

Holemouth jars typical of EB III strata were found in the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 15:6, 7) and in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1982:130). They

83

are included in Types H I–V at Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003:132). 23. Miscellaneous Holemouth Jars (Fig. 3.47:7–9). These are different from all the above. Their attribution to Stratum III was made solely on the basis of their stratigraphic context. 24. Everted-Rim Jars (Fig. 3.48:1, 8). Jars with a high, everted rim, very similar to the jars of the preceding stratum. Among them are examples with very well-

10

11

0

12

10

13

Fig. 3.48. Early Bronze IIIA jars. No.

Locus

Basket

Description

1

522

4546

Brown clay, gray core, much and varied temper, combed decoration, intact

2

Surface

3

479

4400

Reddish-brown clay, varied temper, red slip, restored

4

605

5006

Grayish-brown clay, varied temper, red slip, restored

5

542

4715/5

Pinkish-brown clay

6

W 109

1131/6

Grayish-brown clay, dark temper, red slip

7

605

5006/2

Buff-brown clay, red slip

8

Surface

Grayish-brown clay, much temper, red slip

9

Surface

Grayish-brown clay, reddish slip

10

Surface

11

505

12

Surface

13

603

Pinkish-brown clay, dark temper, red slip

Grayish-brown clay, red paint 4741

Reddish-brown clay, varied temper, red slip, restored

5005/2

Reddish-brown clay, red paint

Grayish-brown clay, basalt temper, red paint

84

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

fired clay (Fig. 3.48:1) and of brittle clay (Fig. 3.48:8), though none can be attributed to the Metallic Ware family. The jar in Fig. 3.48:1 is the same shape as the Metallic Ware jars (e.g., Greenberg and Porat 1996: Fig. 2:6) and it too is decorated with combed patterns, but is made of a brown clay with white grits, completely different from the fabric of the Metallic Ware family. Though there are jars of a brittle fabric in Stratum IV, they are not decorated; all decorated jars belong to the Metallic Ware family. Such a jar was found in the EB III strata of the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 15:1). 25. Triangular-Rim Jars (Fig. 3.48:2, 7). Jars with a low neck and an everted rim with a triangular cross section. All jars in this group have a light fabric in shades of buff-brown, pinkish or gray and are covered with a red wash that sometimes does not cover the entire area; on the body there is at times a shallow combing. This group also includes jars with a gutter rim (Fig. 3.48:7). Similar jars were found in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pls. 4: J, 8: X, Y). Esse also stresses the gutter as characteristic of these jars (Esse 1991:50).

26. Miscellaneous Jars (Fig. 3.48:9–13). These are different from all the above. Their attribution to Stratum III was made on the basis of their stratigraphic context, as well as the fabric and slip which are characteristic of many vessels of Stratum III, such as the bowls and the triangular-rim jars. 27. Broad Juglets (Fig. 3.49:1–8). Juglets with a wide mouth, similar to those of Stratum IV but taller. Sometimes two juglets were combined into a twin vessel (Fig. 3.49:7, 8). The broad juglets are made of a light fabric in shades of buff-brown and gray, with a coat of red slip or wash similar to that on the triangular-rim jars. A twin juglet of this type was found in the excavations of the Oriental Institute (Esse 1991: Pl. 9: A). 28. Narrow-Necked Amphoriskoi and Juglets (Fig. 3.49:9–16). This group includes a wide variety of amphoriskoi and juglets. All have in common a narrow neck and an everted rim. Noteworthy is an amphoriskos (Fig. 3.49:9), the body of which is modeled similarly to the triangularrim jars: a shallow combing with an incomplete coat of wash. Mention should be made also of juglets with

Fig. 3.49 ► No. 1

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

538/ 479/ 488

4400/4438

Juglet

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash, restored

2

Surface

Juglet

Grayish clay, small, varied temper, red slip or wash

3

499

4461/5

Juglet

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash

4

542

4696/3

Juglet

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash

5

542

4715/4

Juglet

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash

6

505

4493

Juglet

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash

7

542

4673

Twin vessel

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash

8

462

4320

Twin vessel

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash

9

470

4442

Amphoriskos

Grayish-brown clay, white temper, combing marks, red wash, restored

10

603

5003

Juglet

Yellowish-white clay, red slip or wash

11

800

8000

Juglet

Grayish-yellow clay, varied temper, red slip or wash

12

511

4508

Juglet base

Grayish-brown clay, red slip or wash

13

W504

4742

Juglet base

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash

14

427

4444/2

Juglet base

Buff-brown clay, minute temper, traces of red slip or wash

15

800

8003

Juglet base

Pinkish-brown clay, red slip or wash

16

469

4453

Juglet base

Buff-brown clay, red slip or wash

17

800

8060

Basin

Yellowish-gray clay, gray core, red slip or wash

85

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

3 2 0

1

10

4 5 6

7

10 8

9

11

12

13

14

17

Fig. 3.49. Early Bronze IIIA miscellaneous pottery.

15

16

86

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

a ‘truncated base’ (Fig. 3.49:11–14) and biconical juglets (Fig. 3.49:15). Most vessels of this group are characterized by a light fabric in shades of buff-brown and gray, coated with a red wash. Miscellaneous Vessels. No vessels were found in counted assemblages in Stratum III that could be attributed to this group, so it is not included in the list of types. In the section of Area C a large basin with an incurved ledge-rim was noted (Fig. 3.49:17), similar to basins from in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pl. 9: B, D). Sometimes these basins have a spout near the rim; they are commonly identified as having served in the manufacture of olive oil (Esse 1991:123; Epstein 1998:164). Our vessel does not seem to have had a spout.7 Handles Common to Stratum III are handles with an oval cross section. No clear evidence to the use of other types was found in the excavations. Stratum II Very common in this stratum are sherds belonging to the Khirbet Kerak Ware family. At the beginning of this chapter the main characteristics of this family were enumerated, and it was stated that membership in this family was not based on technological or stylistic criteria, but rather on being part of a group of unique vessels that are often found in a common archaeological context. Among the Khirbet Kerak Ware there is one group of small, thin-walled vessels (Types 29–31 below), made of well-levigated clay, and another group that includes larger vessels with a thicker wall (Types 32–40), of a generally brittle fabric with many grits. Khirbet Kerak Ware 29. Thin, Shallow Bowls (Fig. 3.50:1–4; Color Pl. 2:26). These are similar in shape to the shallow bowls of Stratum III, and include also bowls with soot marks on the rims, indicating their use as lamps. They differ considerably from the Stratum III bowls in their gray fabric and, in most cases, a lustrous burnish over red slip. Similar bowls were found in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1982: Pl. 5:18, 6:9, 10).

30. Thin, High-Walled Bowls (Fig. 3.50:5–15; Color Pl. 2:27, 28, 34, 35). Bowls with usually vertical walls, an omphalos base and occasionally soot marks, pointing to their function as lamps (Fig. 3.50:7). Most bowls are covered with a red slip and are burnished, and some have relief decoration. Some of the bowls were not covered with slip and in individual cases were not burnished. Such bowls were found in the EB II strata of the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 15:10, 11) and in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pl. 5: A, C). 31. Thin, S-Shaped Bowls (Fig. 3.50:16–23; back cover). Bowls with a pronounced ‘S’-shaped profile and an omphalos base. They are highly burnished over red slip inside and outside near the rim, and over black paint on the exterior and the base. Some have relief decoration. Such bowls were discovered in the EB III strata of the JPES excavations on the north side of the tell (Greenberg and Paz 2004: Fig. 15:12), in the BarAdon excavations (Ben-Tor 1968: Pl. 14:2) and in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pl. 5: B, D). 32. Thick, Open Bowls (Fig. 3.50:24–33; Color Pl. 2:29). On the rims of these bowls there is a thickening of the triangular cross section, which may be viewed as a vestigial carination following the tradition of the bowls characteristic of the preceding periods. Almost all such bowls have a lustrous burnish over either red slip inside and out, red inside and black outside, or over the plain clay. In only exceptional cases were such bowls found without either slip or burnish. Similar bowls were discovered in the excavations of the Oriental Institute (Esse 1982: Pl. 5:3). It is surprising that they were not assigned by the excavators to the Khirbet Kerak Ware family. 33. Upright Kraters (Fig. 3.51:1–7; Color Pl. 2:31, 32; back cover). Kraters with a high, usually straight side, but sometimes with a rounded, or slightly S-shaped side. They are highly burnished over red slip inside and outside near the rim, and over black slip on the outside and the base. Some have plastic decoration. Noteworthy is the fragment shown in Fig. 3.51:6, which has a prominent geometric decoration, a slip that was applied according to the contours of the geometric

87

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

3

2

1

4 5

6

8

7

9

11

10

12

14

13

15

16

18

17

20

21

19

22 0

10

24

23

26 25

28

27

29

30

Fig. 3.50. Early Bronze IIIB Khirbet Kerak Ware bowls.

88

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

0

10

32

31

33

Fig. 3.50 (cont.)

▲ ◄ Fig. 3.50 No.

Locus

Basket

Description

1

427

4129

Red slip

2

428

4233

Red slip, burnt rim

3

W109

1131/1

Red slip

4

428

4249

Not slipped, burnish

5

422

4298

Red slip

6

544

4689

Red slip

7

813

8013/1

Red slip, burn marks on rim

8

428

4268

Brown slip, relief decoration

9

427

4302/1

Red slip

10

544

4692

Red slip, relief decoration

11

524

4681

Red slip, relief decoration

12

425

4200

Red slip, restored

13

427

4282

Red slip, burn marks on rim

14

447

4372

Red slip

15

422

4324

Neither slip nor burnish

16

441

4223

Red slip interior and black slip exterior, relief decoration

17

813

8027

Red slip interior, red and black slips exterior, relief decoration

18

W108

1012

Red and black slips

19

822

8074

Red and black slips

20

427

4238/1

Red and black slips

21

422

4264

Red and black slips

22

W109

1131/2

Red and black slips

23

813

8036

Red and black slips

24

482

4378

Red slip

25

440

4210

Red slip

26

504

5004

Black and reddish-brown slips

27

450

4254

Red slip

28

427

4217

Red slip

29

484

4433

Red and black slips

30

422

4236

Red slip

31

422

4312

Neither slip nor burnish

32

427

4252

Neither slip nor burnish

33

440

4210

Red slip, restored

89

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

2 1

4 3

6

5

7

9 0

8

10

11

Fig. 3.51. Early Bronze IIIB Khirbet Kerak Ware kraters.

10

90

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

◄ Fig. 3.51 No.

Locus

Basket

Description

1

813

8013

Red and black slips

2

422

4236

Red and black slips

3

422

4236

Neither slip nor burnish

4

427

4112/2

Red and black slips

5

422

4403/6

Red and black slips, relief decoration

6

531

4620

Red and black paint, relief decoration

7

487

4422

Red and black slips, restored

8

422

4281/1

Red slip interior, red and black slips exterior, relief decoration

9

427

4403/1

Red and black slips

10

428

4249

Red and black slips

11

487

4744

Red and black slips, restored

decoration and a black line painted over a part that was left without slip. Similar kraters were uncovered in Stratum XB of the Bar-Adon excavations (Amiran 1969a: Pl. 19:9; BenTor 1968: Pl. 14:16), as well as in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pl. 5: E, F). 34. Curved-Sided Kraters (Fig. 3.51:8–11). Kraters with a distinctive S-curved profile. They are highly burnished over red slip inside and outside near the rim, and over black slip on the outside and the base. Some have relief decoration. The attribution of small fragments as belonging to either this type or to the biconical stands (below) is difficult, and for lack of a better method, was done intuitively. Such kraters were found in the Bar-Adon excavations (Ben-Tor 1968: Pl. 14:16) and in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1982: Pl. 5:9–12). 35. Thin-Walled Holemouth Jars (Fig. 3.52:1–4). Holemouth jars with a thin wall and with a straight end. On the surface of some (e.g., Fig. 3.52:2) there are coarse scratches, possibly caused by a finishing process involving a sheaf of grasses. Similar holemouth jars are known from the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pl. 4: L, M), where a holemouth jar with a Khirbet Kerak Ware-style burnish was also found, but which was not recovered in our excavations. 36. Cooking Pots (Fig. 3.52:5–15; Color Pl. 2:36). A large variety of cooking pots was recovered in Stratum II. Some have a tall, usually straight neck (Fig. 3.52:5,

6); others have a low neck and resemble the cooking pots of Stratum IV (Fig. 3.52:7–10); the rest have a splayed neck, similar to that of the S-shaped bowls and curved-sided kraters (Fig. 3.52:11, 12, 14). The splayed-neck cooking pots have either triangular knob handles (Fig. 3.52:12, 13) or simple ledge handles (Fig. 3.52:15). The fabric is similar to that of the other thickwalled Khirbet Kerak Ware vessels, and they often exhibit coarse scratches, similarly to the holemouth jars. 37. Jars and Jugs (Fig. 3.52:16–22). Jars and jugs were meager in Stratum II, and the small fragments found were too small to determine whether they belonged to jars or jugs. All have an everted rim; most have a red, burnished slip, and a few a white, limey slip (Fig. 3.52:21) or are with no slip. Especially noteworthy is the jug neck with a strain and a ribbon handle (Fig. 3.52:20). This jug has a brittle fabric and a burnished red slip, making it a member of the Khirbet Kerak Ware family. 38. Biconical Stands (Fig. 3.53:1–5; Color Pl. 2:30). These all have a burnished red slip. In a few instances an incised decoration was found on them (Fig. 3.53:2, 3). As mentioned above, the attribution of small fragments as belonging to either this type or to the curved-side kraters is difficult and was done intuitively. 39. Horseshoe-Shaped Vessels (Fig. 3.53:6–9). In our excavations only small fragments were found of these vessels, which are well known from previous excavations at Bet Yerah. All these, both in our and the other excavations were plain, unslipped and usually not

91

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

2

3

1

4

5

6

9

8 7

10

12

13

11

14 15

17

16

19 18

20

21

22 0

10

Fig. 3.52. Early Bronze IIIB cooking vessels and jars.

92

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

burnished. It has been suggested that these vessels were used as stands for cooking pots, but Amiran (1986b; 1989) noted that in the ‘Amuq excavations no soot or burn marks were found on such vessels and therefore rejected their identification as vessels for daily life. According to her, the horseshoe-shaped vessels served as a representation of a deity. All fragments from our excavations are without soot or burn marks. Horseshoe-shaped vessels were recovered in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pl. 7) and in the Bar-Adon excavations (Amiran 1969a: Photos 69–71; Ben-Tor 1968: Pl. 16:9, 10). 40. Lids (Fig. 3.53:10–17). These are conical, with a handle on top. Most are without a slip, and some are burnished while others are not. Two of the fragments found (Fig. 3.53:10, 17) have a burnished red and gray slip.

Lids were recovered in the Oriental Institute excavations (Esse 1991: Pl. 5: H, I) and in the BarAdon excavations (Ben-Tor 1968: Pl. 18:9; Amiran 1969a: Photos 66, 67). Handles In Stratum II only a few handles were uncovered. They include ribbon handles (Fig. 3.52:20), ledge handles (Fig. 3.52:15) and triangular knob handles (Fig. 3.52:12, 13). Most ribbon handles are burnished over a red slip; most knob handles and ledge handles are without burnish or slip. A few fragments of ledge handles with thumb impressions were located (Fig. 3.52:22). To judge by the fabric and slip, they appear to have originated in earlier strata.

◄ Fig. 3.52 No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

422

4324

Holemouth jar

Brown-gray clay, varied temper

2

427

4238/4

Holemouth jar

Grayish-brown clay, varied temper

3

427

4237

Holemouth jar

Grayish-brown clay, gray core, varied temper

4

462

4289

Holemouth jar

Brown-gray clay, varied temper, incised decoration

5

495

4437

Cooking pot

Red clay, wide gray core, calcite temper

6

427

4262

Cooking pot

Gray-brown clay, black core, varied temper

7

484

4421

Cooking pot

Reddish-black clay, straw marks outside, black core, basalt temper

8

440

4161

Cooking pot

Gray-brown clay, varied temper

9

422

4150

Cooking pot

Dark brown clay

10

428

4474

Cooking pot

Gray clay varied temper, some calcite temper

11

441

4176

Cooking pot

Gray-brown clay, black core, varied temper

12

427

4176

Cooking pot

Gray-brown clay, black core, much and varied temper

13

440

4161

Cooking-pot handle

Gray-brown clay, black core, much and varied temper

14

422

4264

Cooking pot

Gray-brown clay, black core, varied temper

15

422

4263

Cooking-pot handle

Dark gray clay, varied temper, scratches outside

16

428

4214

Jar

Khirbet Kerak Ware, red slip

17

107

1020

Jar

Khirbet Kerak Ware, red slip

18

441

4176

Jar

Khirbet Kerak Ware, red slip

19

822

8074

Jar base

Khirbet Kerak Ware, red slip

20

422

4387

Strainer jug

Khirbet Kerak Ware, red slip

21

422

4664

Jar

Yellowish-brown clay, basalt temper, white slip

22

523

5743

Ledge handle

Yellowish-brown clay

93

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

2

3

1

4

5

8 9

6

7

0

10

13 11

14 15

12

16

17

Fig. 3.53. Early Bronze IIIB Khirbet Kerak Ware lids and stands. No.

10

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

422

4281/2

Stand

Red slip

2

427

4112/1

Stand

Brown slip, incised decoration

3

422

4373

Stand

Brown slip, incised decoration

4

488

4435

Stand

Red and gray slips

5

484

4481

Stand

Red slip

6

813

8013

Stand

Neither slip nor burnish

7

511

4496

Stand

No slip, but burnished

8

454

4251

Stand

Neither slip nor burnish Incised

9

422

4324

Stand

10

427

4238/2

Lid

Red and gray slips, burnish

11

800

8076

Lid

Neither slip nor burnish

12

479

4452

Lid

No slip, but burnish

13

511

4518

Lid

No slip, but burnish

14

422

4403

Lid

Neither slip nor burnish

15

429

4148

Lid

No slip, but burnish

16

440

4201

Lid

No slip, but burnish

17

475

4354

Lid

Red and black slips, burnish

94

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

VARIOUS FINDS Clay Figurines Twelve fragments of clay figurines were retrieved (Fig. 3.54). It is possible that one figurine (Fig. 3.54:1) represents a human figure, but this is not certain; the rest are of animals. The representations are schematic and in most cases the gender of the animals cannot be determined. Most have an upright neck, hinting more at donkeys or caprines rather than at cattle, which have a more horizontal neck. A bovine figurine head that was recovered in the tunnel of Stratum III (Fig. 3.54:12) is more detailed. On each side of the head, a forward curved horn was attached, with traces of an ear below it. Delicate grooves on the muzzle represent skin folds. The eyes were modeled from two small clay pellets that were attached to the forehead, with a central groove in each representing the pupils. The pupils both slant in the same direction and are not symmetrical as would be expected. This suggests that in spite of the detailed representation, these were mass-produced items with limited ‘quality control’. Patches of paint represent perhaps the patches on the skin of cattle, and one stripe that is smeared on one of the horns also hints at careless work. Three figurines were discovered in Stratum III, seven in Stratum II, one in an unclear locus that could not be assigned to Stratum II or I, and one in Stratum I. The figurines attributed to Stratum III were uncovered in the tunnel (L542 + L828) and they

cannot have intruded from later strata. Noteworthy is a figurine (Fig. 3.54:10), whose two joining fragments were discovered far from each other and must have entered the tunnel while it was still open. Though most of the figurines originated in Stratum II, it cannot be definitively stated if the items are residual or evidence of continued figurine production. Animal figurines made of clay are a characteristic trait of Early Bronze Age assemblages throughout the country. A figurine unearthed in a previous excavation at Bet Yerah (Yogev and Eisenberg 1985:14) was dated to the beginning of EB II, as were figurines from Tel Na‘ama (Greenberg et al. 1998: Fig. 22:16, 17) and Tel Dan (Greenberg 1996a:139–142, with further bibliography). On the other hand, such figurines were not found at many sites that were inhabited during EB II but not in EB III, such as at Shamir (Bahat 1973), Tel Kinrot (Winn and Yakar 1984), Rosh HaNiqra (Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959) and Bet Ha-‘Emeq (Givon 2002). Thus, in spite of the examples from the Yogev Bet Yerah excavations and Tel Na‘ama, it can be asserted that the use of figurines in EB II was limited, and the majority of them belong to EB III. In the EB III building with circular installations, additional figurines came to light, as well as part of a round vessel with two heads of horned animals (Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:227). Both the excavators and the scholars who studied this object identified the animals as cows or bulls (Amiran 1989; Mazar 2001:452). The high neck of the animals makes their identification as rams more attractive. Five clay

Fig. 3.54 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Vessel

Description

1

544

4685

II

Figurine

Anthropomorphic figurine? brown and dark gray clay

2

W109

1088

II

Figurine

Rear part of pack animal figurine, brown clay, small dark temper, red slip

3

523

4727

II

Figurine

Rear part of animal figurine, brown clay, small dark temper, red slip

4

408

4061

I

Figurine

Miniature caprine figure, grayish-brown clay, few and minute temper

5

447

4352

II

Figurine

Caprine figure, grayish-brown clay, gray slip

6

412

4079

II–I

Figurine

Front of horned animal figurine, brown clay, small dark temper, traces of red paint

7

484

4399

II

Figurine

Animal figurine, brown clay, small dark temper

8

428

4249

II

Figurine

Large animal figurine, gray clay, small dark temper, red slip

9

427

4143

II

?

Object made of gray clay, dark temper

10

828, 542

8084, 4673

III

Caprine figurine

Brown clay, small dark temper

11

542

4698

III

Caprine figurine

Gray clay, little temper

12

542

4747

III

Bovine figurine

Brown clay, small, dark temper, red slip

95

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

1

2

0

3

10

4

5

6

7

9 8

10

11

12

Fig. 3.54. Clay figurines.

96

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

figurines that were attributed to EB III had already been found in the first season at Bet Yerah (Maisler and Stekelis 1944–1945:82; Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:171) and with them a lion-shaped vessel (Mazar 2001: Fig. 23.6).8 Several traits seem to be common to the modeling of this lion and the bull figurine found in our excavation: delicate grooves to mark skin folds, bulging eyes and careless painting. The figurine assemblage from Bet Yerah shows that during Stratum III, the first phase of EB III, use of figurines— known from earlier times—became widespread. Cattle

figurines occupy an important place in the art and cult practices of Early Bronze Age Israel (Beck 1995:21– 26), but it seems that most figurines represent, in fact, caprines9 and donkeys, so that all domestic animals were well represented in contemporary art. Seal Impressions The excavations yielded five impressions of cylinder seals (Fig. 3.55:1–5). Four were impressed on jars of the Metallic Ware family and one on a brown

2 1

3

0

2

4

5 0

10

Fig. 3.55. Seal impressions. No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Impressed on

Remarks

1

463

4283

II

Metallic Ware jar

Gray and reddish-brown clay

2

483

4410

II

Metallic Ware jar

Gray and reddish-brown clay

3

427

4582

II

Metallic Ware jar

Gray and reddish-brown clay

4

542

4673

III

Metallic Ware jar

Gray and reddish-brown clay

5 right

497

4455

IV

Brown holemouth jar

Dark-brown clay, black core

5 left

507

4484

IV

Brown holemouth jar

Another piece of the same vessel

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

holemouth jar. All the impressions are of geometric patterns, similar to many others found in Israel (BenTor 1978; Greenberg 1996a:142–149; 2001a). The identification of the sherd in Fig. 3.55:5 as belonging to a holemouth jar relies on the fabric, which is exclusive to our excavation and which belongs to the brown holemouth jars characteristic of Stratum IV (see above). Seven fragments with parts of impressions that all belong to the same type of holemouth jar were found (four were joined during restoration): five during the dismantling of Floor 490 dating to Stratum IV (L507), one in the accumulations above Floor 497 and one under Floor 508. Floor 490 is from Stratum IV, so there is no doubt concerning the attribution of the impressions to EB II. Esse suggested assigning the earliest use of geometric seals to EB II, based on the evidence of the Oriental Institute excavations at Bet Yerah (Esse 1990, contra Ben-Tor 1978, 1994), and his view is supported by Greenberg (1996a:149), who analyzed the finds from Tel Dan, and by Zuckerman (1996:124– 125), who analyzed the finds from Tel Qashish. The discovery of such an impression on a holemouth jar in our excavation, as well as on a jar neck from the JPES excavations that was recently published (Greenberg and Paz 2004:14–15), also supports Esse’s suggestion. Lately Ben-Tor (2003:173) raised the possibility that some of the impressions can be dated to EB II. The four impressions on Metallic Ware jars (Fig. 3.55:1–4) are consistent with the observation that EB II geometric and cultic impressions were made on Metallic Ware jars and pithoi (Greenberg and Porat 1996:6). While the impression on a holemouth jar is exceptional, the linear lozenge pattern is common and

well known at Bet Yerah (Fig. 3.56:2; Esse 1990: No. 2), at other sites in Israel (Ben-Tor 1994:18, Impression 10) and in Syria (Peltenburg et al. 1997:4). Because the brown holemouth jars are common at Bet Yerah but holemouth jars in general are rare in northern assemblages such as Tel Dan (Greenberg 1996a), it appears that cylinder seals were employed at Bet Yerah and the nearby region, and not only at regions north of the Hula Valley (Greenberg 1996b:217). Sherds with Incisions and Other Marks (Table 3.3) Incisions were made either by the potter before firing or by the user after firing. Incisions appear on vessels from different groups, of which two will be discussed: Holemouth Jars. Twelve fragments of holemouth jar rims bear various marks made by the potters (Fig. 3.56:1–7). Half of them are brown holemouth jars characteristic of Stratum IV of EB II and half belong to gray holemouth jars that appear in Stratum IV but are most common in Stratum III of EB IIIA. On the brown holemouth jars, circles and lines incised with a wide tool are found, while on the gray vessels clusters of short lines incised with a fine point are common, perhaps as indicators of quantity. In one case (Fig. 3.56:7), a mark common on brown holemouth jars was found on a gray one. Holemouth jars with a similar mark are known from all over the country (e.g., at Hazor: Yadin et al. 1961: Pl. 192:3 and Tel Hesi: Fargo 1979: Fig. 5: e–h). Egyptian Wares. Two incised sherds were found among the fragments of Stratum IV Egyptian jars (see above). One was made on the shoulder of the jar before firing—

Fig. 3.56 ► No.

97

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Vessel

Description of incision

1

525

4579

IV

Brown holemouth jar

Round segment—incomplete

2

546

4703

IV

Brown holemouth jar

Single line—complete

3

546

4706

IV

Brown holemouth jar

Circle—complete

4

415

4287

I

Gray holemouth jar

Three lines in a triangular pattern—complete

5

544

4685

II

Gray holemouth jar

Three lines—complete

6

544

4699

II

Gray holemouth jar

Pair of lines—complete

7

-

-

Surface

Gray holemouth jar

Lens shape

8

528

4581

IV

Band-slipped jar

9

496

4541

Va

Juglet

10

124

1097/2

IV

Egyptian sherd

11

124

1097/1

IV

Egyptian sherd

98

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

1

2

4 3

5 6

7

9 8

0

10

11 10

0

2

Fig. 3.56. Marked and incised pottery.

99

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

Table 3.3. Incised Pottery No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Vessel

Description and state of preservation

Fig.

1

525

4579

IV

Brown holemouth jar

Incised before firing: round segment; incomplete

3.56:1

2

546

4703

IV

Brown holemouth jar

Incised before firing: single line; complete

3.56:2

3

546

4706

IV

Brown holemouth jar

Incised before firing: circle; complete

3.56:3

4

415

4287

I

Gray holemouth jar

Incised before firing: three lines in a triangular pattern; complete

3.56:4

5

544

4685

II

Gray holemouth jar

Incised before firing: three lines; complete

3.56:5

6

544

4699

II

Gray holemouth jar

Incised before firing: pair of lines; complete

3.56:6

7

-

-

Surface

Gray holemouth jar

Incised before firing: lens-shaped

3.56:7

8

W473

4718

III

Brown holemouth jar

Incised before firing: pair of lines; incomplete

9

495

4499

III–II

Brown holemouth jar

Incised before firing: round segment; incomplete

10

412

4097

II–I

Brown holemouth jar

Incised before firing: single line; incomplete

11

500

4462

IV

Gray holemouth jar

Incision before firing: three lines; incomplete

12

127

1085

IV–III

Gray holemouth jar body fragment

Delicate incision before firing: two lines surrounded by circle; incomplete

13

802

8002

Unidentified holemouth jar

Incised before firing: pair of diagonal lines; complete

14

496

4541

Va

EB I sherd

Incised after firing

3.56:9

15

528

4581

IV

Band-slipped sherd

Incised after firing

2.17:19

16

528

4581

IV

Metallic Ware jug

Incised after firing

3.56:8

17

131

1215

IV

Metallic Ware jug

Incised before firing: base of a handle

18

520

4525

IV

Metallic Ware jug

Incised before firing: three parallel lines on the base of a handle; incomplete

19

525

4588

IV

Combed Metallic Ware jar shoulder

Incision before firing:

3.43:23

20

525

4572/3

IV

Metallic Ware jug base

Incision before firing:

3.44:14

21

W473

4718

III

Combed Metallic Ware jar shoulder

T- shaped incision before firing

22

146

1158

IV

Combed Metallic Ware jar shoulder

Incised before firing: I-shaped incision under a horizontal row of impressed dots

23

146

1158

IV

Metallic Ware bowl base

Incised before firing: incomplete

24

170

1286

Va

Metallic Ware jug

Incised before firing: combination of incisions and impressed dots; incomplete

25

516

4504

III

Metallic Ware jug

Incised before firing: incomplete

26

505

4490

III

Stratum III ware bowl base

Incised before firing:

27

511

4522

II

Stratum III ware bowl base

Incised before firing: incomplete

28

521

4702

IV–III

Stratum III ware bowl base

Incised before firing: H-shaped

29

813

8065

Surface

EB I handle?

Incised after firing

30

124

1097/2

IV

Egyptian jar

Incised after firing

3.56:10

31

124

1097/1

IV

Egyptian jar

Incised before firing

3.56:11

3.45:4

2.17:20

100

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

only a part of it was discovered (Fig. 3.56:11)—while the other one was made after firing (Fig. 3.56:10). The latter consists of two horizontal lines enclosed in a square. A full list of incised sherds from Strata IV–II is presented in Table 3.3.

SMALL FINDS Model of a Copper Axe The single metal artifact found was a miniature copperalloy model of an axe,10 uncovered on Floor 506 from Stratum III, dated to EB IIIA (Fig. 3.57:1). The model has a trapezoidal outline with a wide, crescent-shaped cutting edge. Axes of a similar shape are characteristic of Early Bronze Age sites from the earliest phases (Shalev and Braun 1997). The lengths of other axes found at Bet Yerah during construction works in the Oholo seminary compound are seven times as long (HA 1967a:23).

Beads Seven bluish faience beads were recovered (Fig. 3.57: 2–5).11 Six of the beads came from the accumulations of Stratum IV and the seventh from Stratum II. It is reasonable to assume that all originated in EB II Stratum IV; they are perhaps evidence of Egyptian imports at the time, as are the Egyptian jars whose fragments were described with the Stratum IV pottery (see Type 14, above). Faience beads were found also in the Kinneret tomb, whose finds were dated mainly to EB II (Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973:183). In tombs dated to EB IB, e.g., ‘En Ha-Naziv and Arad, only stone beads were retrieved (Amiran et al. 1986). Stoppers from Recycled Potsherds Twenty disc-shaped objects were found in the excavations. They are made of potsherds cut to shape and undoubtedly served as stoppers for various vessels. They range in diameter from 27 to 66 mm. Such stoppers are known from the very beginning of pottery production and no development can be indicated for these objects. Table 3.4 presents the data for stoppers from all Early Bronze Age strata, including Stratum V.

3 2

4

1

0

1

5

Fig. 3.57. Axe model and beads. No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Description

1

506

4691

III

Copper-alloy axe model: length 21.3 mm, width of cutting edge 11.0 mm, width of tang 6.0 mm, thickness 2.2 mm

2

169

1226

IV

Barrel-shaped faience bead: diameter 3.5 mm, length 6.5 mm

3

478

4405

IV

Barrel-shaped faience bead: diameter 4.0 mm, length 4.5 mm

4

528

4581

IV

Cylindrical faience bead: diameter 4.0 mm, length 4.0 mm

Not illustrated

528

4581

IV

Cylindrical faience bead: diameter 3.3 mm, length 3.0 mm

Not illustrated

528

4581

IV

Cylindrical faience bead: diameter 4.0 mm, length 4.5 mm

Not illustrated

528

4581

IV

Barrel-shaped faience bead: diameter 4.0 mm, length 4.3 mm

5

428

4370

II

Annular faience bead: diameter 20.0 mm, length 10.0 mm

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

101

Table 3.4. Recycled Pottery Stoppers and a Basalt Stopper No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Diameter (mm)

Original Sherd

1

173

1396

V

44 × 53

Holemouth jar

2

173

1396

V

36 × 51

Jar? Band slip

3

173

1402

V

42 × 39

Jar? Clay includes mica; white slip and red paint

4

175

1344

V

52 × 38

Jar? Well smoothed, possibly burnished

5

179

1453

V

48

Basalt

6

181

1321

Vb–d

29 × 60

Jar? Band slip

7

139

1334

IV

38 × 51

Jar? Band slip

8

150

1219

IV

30 × 31

Metallic Ware bowl?

9

492

4578

IV

35 × 32

Jar?

10

528

4590

IV

26 × 28

Khirbet Kerak Ware

11

528

4590

IV

57 × 65

Khirbet Kerak Ware

12

422

4326

II

33 × 39

Gray holemouth jar?

13

422

4326

II

41 × 44

Gray holemouth jar?

14

422

4326

II

36 × 40

Jar?

15

422

4415

II

57 × 58

Khirbet Kerak Ware (Fig. 3.58:11)

16

427

4172

II

43 × 46

Khirbet Kerak Ware

17

463

4320

II

25 × 29

Khirbet Kerak Ware

18

813

8013

Surface

49 × 47

Khirbet Kerak Ware

19

450

4280

I

46 × 52

Jar?

20

800

8012

Surface

65 × 67

Gray holemouth jar?

GROUNDSTONE TOOLS AND VESSELS Various groundstone tools and vessels, most of them household implements, were found in the excavations. Among them are a spindle whorl (Fig. 3.58:1), bowls and grinding mortars (Fig. 3.58:5–7), small bowls (Fig.

3.58:4, 8, 9), door sockets (Fig. 3.58:12), miscellaneous objects (Fig. 3.58:2, 3, 13), and upper (Fig. 3.59:1–3) and lower (Fig. 3.59:4, 5) grinding stones. The quantity and quality of the finds are insufficient for a detailed analysis, and only a single outstanding object will be described.

Fig. 3.58 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Object

Description Basalt

1

499

4477

III

Spindle whorl

2

429

4261

I

Drilled pebble

Limestone pebble

3

542

4715/6

III

Weight

Soft limestone pebble, biconically drilled

4

542

4715/7

III

Small bowl

Soft limestone pebble

5

140

1290

IV

Grinding mortar

Basalt

6

W513

4638

IV

Bowl

Basalt

7

521

4535

IV–III

Bowl

Limestone

8

525

4584

IV

Bowl

Limestone Chalk

9

428

4248

II

Small bowl

10

513

4510

IV

Rectangular object

Scoria

11

422

4415

II

Stopper

Khirbet Kerak Ware sherd, red slip

12

W110

1108

III

Door socket

Basalt

13

W491

4564

III

Door socket

Limestone

14

808

8082

IV–II

Figurine?

Basalt, on a grinding stone

102

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

4

1

3

2 0

2

5

6

8

12

7

9

11

10

13

14 0

10

Fig. 3.58. Tools of stone and recycled pottery.

103

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

2

0

1

4

3

5

Fig. 3.59. Grinding stones. No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Object

Description

1

404

4006

Surface

Upper

Basalt

2

808

8008

IV–II

Upper

Basalt

3

W110

1123

III

Upper

Basalt

Surface

Lower

Basalt

478

4397

IV

Lower

Basalt

4 5

10

104

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Figurine? (Fig. 3.58:14). A basalt object that was carefully shaped from a slab that was used beforehand as a lower grinding stone. Although not entirely clear, it may be a schematic representation of a human being, somewhat similar to the violin figurines from the Chalcolithic period in Israel (Alon and Levy 1993) or from Early Bronze Age Anatolia (Mellaart 1966:134).

DISCUSSION

THE FLINT ASSEMBLAGE

Quantitative Analysis of the Pottery Data from Strata IV–I (Tables 3.5–3.11)

In Strata IV–II, as well as in Stratum V, the flint assemblage is dominated by a local flake industry that produced various ad-hoc implements (see Chapter 7). In addition, it includes tabular scrapers and tools made on Canaanean blades that were brought to Bet Yerah from other manufacturing centers. There is considerable similarity between the assemblages of the three strata, except that in Stratum IV tabular scrapers are more common and sickle blades less common.

THE ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL FINDS The analysis of the archaeozoological remains from Strata IV–II (see Chapter 8) shows that most bones were those of caprines (i.e., sheep or goat—58%) while bovids (cattle) came second at 24%. In meat consumption, Bos took the lead at 67% and ovi/ caprine second at 18%. The component of Sus in meat consumption was small (10%) and that of gazelle negligible (1%). Bivalve shells are evidence that they formed an important part of the local diet.12 The assemblage of Stratum IV differs from that of the other strata, including Stratum V (see above). It is dominated by caprid bones (87%), hinting at a greater importance of herding in the economy of the settlement. An estimate of the MNI (minimum number of individuals) lowers the number to 62%, but still dominant. Interestingly, in the EB II strata at Tel Yaqush (Hesse and Wapnish 2001: Table 15.2), Bet Ha-‘Emeq (Meirhof and Sadeh 1993: Table 4), ‘Ai (Hesse and Wapnish 2001: Table 15.3) and Tel Dalit (Kolska Horwitz, Hellwing and Tchernov 1996), caprines form a great percentage as well, but not as high as at Bet Yerah. The Bet Yerah finds amplify the tendency to see a rise in the importance of herding during EB II. In Stratum III the tendency reverses and the proportion of cattle peaks at 41%, showing that during

Strata III and II agriculture dependent upon intensive plowing is central in the economy. The finds from Tel Yaqush, paralleling Stratum II at Bet Yerah, show a similar tendency.

The quantitative analysis relies on two sets of data: 1. A count of rim fragments13 found in loci of Sqs 12–21 that were sifted and that could be specifically attributed to any one of Strata IV–II. Appendix 2 presents a brief description of the loci that supplied the data for the quantitative analysis. 2. A count of all pottery14 that was collected in four selected loci. During the count the pottery was divided into the following six groups: 1. EB I pottery. 2. Metallic Ware pottery. 3. Red-slipped pottery, not including EB I sherds. 4. Khirbet Kerak Ware, not including unslipped and unburnished sherds. 5. Hellenistic pottery. 6. Pottery that could not be attributed to any of the preceding five groups with any certainty. In this group holemouth-jar fragments dominate. In the excavation hardly any complete vessels were found, and the quantitative data is based on a count of fragments only. It is likely therefore that many sherds were collected in loci that do not belong to their original stratum and the pottery assemblages in any of the Strata IV–II deposits include the following components: a. Residual sherds. These belong to earlier strata and found their way to where they were collected as a result of construction and digging activities. It is reasonable to assume that the ratio of the types among the residual sherds reflects the ratio in their original stratum. b. Primary sherds. These represent the contemporary assemblages and accumulated as a result of normal wear of household wares and sometimes as a result of war and destruction. c. Intrusive sherds. These originate in later assemblages, and found their way to where they were collected as a result of construction and digging activities during the times of the later strata, animal burrowing, natural

EB I Hellenistic Total

Khirbet Kerak Ware

Thin, shallow bowls Thin, high-walled bowls Thin, S-shaped bowls Thick, open bowls Upright kraters Curved-sided kraters Thin-walled holemouth jars Cooking pots Jars and jugs Biconical stands Horseshoe-shaped vessels Lids

Type No.

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

17

13

3 2 15

2

1

22

2 4

2

2 1 19

1

1

1

9

1

1

2

10

1

1

18

10

`

3

18

10

`

3

13

3

1

6

3

1

13

5

1

3

2

1

4

3

1

146

1

131 1

3 1 10

1

1 1

1

22

15

1

2

1

159 11

1

3

2

5

6

4 2

3

1

1

1

162

1

154 1

3 1 24

1

2

1 1

2

1 1 1 1

8 1

168

1

150 5

27

1

1

2

1

3 1

16 36

4

1

1

1

9

169

2

148 1

478

2

145 1

5

1 1 1

1

1

497

2

145 1

10

3

1 1

1

1

2

1

498

1 1 1

1 1

7

3

1

3

500

3 1

1 1

30

2

2

1 1

9

1 10 4

3

2

1

508

1

140 3

11

1

1

1

2

1

2

2 1

33

2

3

3

1

2

15

1

6

510+546

1

139 3

4

1

1

2

515

1 9

133 1

139 3

141

1

137 4

143

4

160

1 9 1

15

4

1

1 2

1 5 1

91

7

1

7

1

2 1 3

5 10 2 1 21

1

3 22 4

8

3

1

1 1

1

1

528

2

130 4

7

3

1

3

547

1

124 1 4

1

1

548

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

119 1 1

507

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

514

Shallow bowls Carinated-rim bowls Everted-rim jars and pithoi Broad juglets Narrow-necked juglets Miscellaneous and unidentified Shallow bowls with simple rim Non-Metallic Ware Carinated-rim bowls Ledge-rim bowls Miscellaneous bowls Brown holemouth jars Miscellaneous holemouth jars Low-necked cooking pots Miscellaneous jars Broad juglets Narrow-necked jugs and juglets Unidentified vessels Stratum III Ware Bowls with a simple rim and diagonal burnish lines Thick, simple bowls Carinated-rim bowls Miscellaneous bowls Gray holemouth jars Miscellaneous holemouth jars Everted-rim jars Triangular-rim jars Miscellaneous jars Broad juglets Narrow-necked amphoriskoi, jugs and juglets

Type

520

Metallic Ware

Family

Locus

Table 3.5. Quantitative Data for Stratum IV Pottery 525

105

119 5 502

5 3

2

3

20

8

16 127 12 3 10 4 13 21 19 4 76 1 9 9 7 2 1 3

Total

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

490+ 492

166

W161

155

Non-Metallic Ware

1

Type No.

8

11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Brown holemouth jars

Miscellaneous holemouth jars

Low-necked cooking pots

Miscellaneous jars

Broad juglets

Narrow-necked jugs and juglets

Unidentified Vessels

10

Miscellaneous bowls

9

7

Carinated-rim bowls

6

Miscellaneous and unidentified vessels

Shallow bowls with simple rim

4 5

Broad juglets

Narrow-necked juglets

2

Ledge-rim bowls

1

1

169

2

2

478

4

4

492

Locus

2

2

497

2

1

1

498

4

110

1

1

1

113

4

115

2

1

470

2

1

1

1

12

1

2

9

507

2

505

Locus

500

499

Table 3.7. Pottery Counts from Stratum III

1

3

1

1

159

Carinated-rim bowls

Shallow bowls

Metallic Ware

4

143

Everted-rim jars and pithoi

Type

Family

3

1

133

1

3

3

1

131

Total

3

130

1

1

2

124

Ledge and miscellaneous handles

1

1

Metallic Ware handles

Non-metallic ware handles

119

Type

1

1

1

1

506 538 541

1

1

508

Table 3.6. Handle Counts from Stratum IV

1

1

1

1

9

529

3

3

514

1

6

2

1

1

540

1

1

515

2

1

1

542

8

1

3

4

525

3

1

2

13

5

1

4

20

Total

2

2

546

4

1

3

547

6

1

3

2

548

64

5

18

41

N

Total

100.0

7.8

28.1

64.1

%

106 TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Thick, open bowls

Upright kraters

Curved-sided kraters

Thin-walled holemouth jars

Cooking pots

Jars and jugs

Biconical stands

Horseshoe-shaped vessels

Lids

21

15

34

31

14

1 20

2

1

1

3

7

3

470

41

2

3

12

14

1

8

499

53

3

1

2

1

19

13

12

505

41

3

1

1

5

2

4

7

14

506 538 541

6

1

1

529

23

31

Thin, S-shaped bowls

1

1

7

115

Total

30

Thin, high-walled bowls

113

2

29

Thin, shallow bowls

28

Narrow-necked amphoriskoi, jugs and juglets

1

1

110

Locus

Hellenistic

EB I

Khirbet Kerak Ware

26 27

Miscellaneous jars

25

Triangular-rim jars

Broad juglets

23 24

Miscellaneous holemouth jars

Everted-rim jars

21 22

Miscellaneous bowls

Gray holemouth jars

19 20

18

Thick, simple bowls

Bowls with a simple rim and diagonal burnish lines

Stratum III Ware

Type No.

Carinated-rim bowls

Type

Family

Table 3.7 (cont.)

39

1

1

2

1

10

6

7

540

37

1

2

3

2

1

8

13

3

542

323

3

58

1

3

1

20

2

6

7

58

67

1

47

Total

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

107

NonMetallic Ware

16 17

Narrow-necked jugs and juglets

Unidentified vessels

13

Low-necked cooking pots 14

12

Miscellaneous holemouth jars

15

11

Broad juglets

10

Miscellaneous bowls

Brown holemouth jars

Miscellaneous jars

8 9

Carinated-rim bowls

Ledge-rim bowls

7

6

Miscellaneous and unidentified vessels

Shallow bowls with a simple rim

4

Everted-rim jars and pithoi 5

3

Carinated-rim bowls

Broad juglets

2

Shallow bowls

Metallic Ware

Narrow-necked juglets

1

Type

Family

Type No. 105

1

108

117

1

421

2

1

1

2

5

422

1

1

1

2

427

3

3

2

1

1

428

1

1

462

3

2

463+ 480

1

1

2

4

1

465

Locus 466

Table 3.8. Pottery Counts from Stratum II

1

1

1

479

1

1

483

2

1

4

484

487

2

2

1

1

3

488 1

512

2

1

2

2

544

3

10

1

16

2

6

5

18

12

Total

108 TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

1

421

422

2

36

Cooking pots

2 1 4

Total

365

7

2

40

Lids

Hellenistic

2 7

39

Horseshoe-shaped vessels

10

37 38

Jars and jugs

Biconical stands

11

8 20

35

Thin-walled holemouth jars

2

33 21

33 34

Upright kraters

20

Curved-sided kraters

1

19

1 32

129

Thick, open bowls

1

3

8

31

28

Narrow-necked amphoriskoi jugs and juglets

1

Thin, S-shaped bowls

27

Broad juglets

1

30

26

Miscellaneous jars

Thin, high-walled bowls

25

Triangular-rim jars

4

26

29

24

Everted-rim jars

1

27

Thin, shallow bowls

22 23

Gray holemouth jars

21

Miscellaneous bowls

Miscellaneous holemouth jars

19 20

EB I

Khirbet Kerak Ware

1

117

1 6

108 6

1

105

18

Thick, simple bowls

Bowls with a simple rim and diagonal burnish lines

Stratum III Ware

Carinated-rim bowls

Type

Family

Type No.

265

6

5

8

4

3

20

3

19

9

15

12

73

2

1

9

5

19

38

1

8

427

192

14

5

3

1

2

1

5

3

17

7

5

9

43

4

4

2

3

1

11

35

3

4

428

71

2

1

2

1

3

9

2

4

8

1

1

3

7

2

11

10

1

1

462

67

1

1

3

3

4

3

13

7

1

3

1

2

1

14

1

4

463+ 480

29

1

1

1

1

1

2

8

5

465

Locus

Table 3.8 (cont.)

2

1

1

466

64

1

2

1

1

1

7

1

4

13

1

2

3

3

11

2

8

479

9

1

2

2

2

483

35

2

6

1

1

1

6

1

2

2

4

1

1

484

1

1

487

73

2

6

2

2

4

4

3

1

16

1

2

1

3

1

3

8

1

4

488

9

1

4

2

1

512

71

4

2

6

1

3

7

5

2

18

1

1

1

11

2

544

1272

30

27

32

9

25

1

56

15

74

80

54

67

321

12

3

34

3

26

15

0

83

0

177

12

43

Total

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

109

110

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

processes or mistakes during excavation. During the stratigraphic analysis members of this group could usually be separated, but some are expected to be present in most assemblages. Some comments derive from the quantitative data in the tables. The generalized data from Stratum I are presented here to demonstrate the stratigraphic mixing of assemblages whose typological and chronological separation is beyond any doubt. Stratum IV (Tables 3.5, 3.6, 3.9–3.11) 1. Some 24% of the rims found in the stratum are attributed to Stratum V of EB IB. This group reflects well the assemblages of Stratum V as described above in Chapter 2, and includes, among other types, crackled ware and band-slipped vessels. If the band-slipped vessels had continued in use also in EB II (Genz 2000), their ratio in the assemblages attributed to Stratum IV would be higher than in the original assemblages of Stratum V. Because the ratio of the band-slipped vessels of Stratum V found in Stratum IV is not higher than in their original Stratum V assemblages, they are evidently residual sherds and were not used in Stratum IV. 2. About 10% of the vessels belong to the assemblages characteristic of Strata III–I (49 out of 502 sherds). Among the sherds attributed to Stratum III the large quantity of gray holemouth jars stands out (20 out of 36 sherds, see Table 3.5), and in fact their ratio is higher than in the Stratum III assemblages (58 out of 209 sherds, see Table 3.7). It is therefore suggested that 14 gray holemouth-jar sherds belong to the original Stratum IV assemblage. This allows for computing a late intrusive count of no more than 7%. 3. The Metallic Ware family of vessels dominates the assemblage of the stratum; its share is about 49%. 4. Five rims of Hellenistic vessels and eight of Khirbet Kerak Ware were found in Stratum IV. They are evidently intrusive. 5. Over half of the identified vessels in Pits 525 are of the Metallic Ware family. 6. Hellenistic sherds that also appear in Pits 525 evidently point to an intrusion that was not observed during excavation. Stratum III (Tables 3.7, 3.9–3.11) 1. The vessels of Stratum III, characterized by a light fabric and a thin, red wash comprise c. 65% of the total found in the stratum.

2. The Metallic Wares form c. 23% of the residual sherds, less than their share in the Stratum IV assemblage. It can therefore be determined that all Metallic Wares found in Stratum III must be residual. 3. Three Hellenistic-period and four Khirbet Kerak Ware rims were found; the Hellenistic ones are unquestionably intrusive, as probably are the Khirbet Kerak Ware. 4. Of the identified sherds in Tunnel 542, 83% are of the slipped variety, some of which belong to the nonmetallic wares of Stratum IV. In comparison with Pits 525 (a ratio of 2:1 between metallic and slipped wares), it can be computed that the residual sherds form 25% of the total in Tunnel 542 and so the primary percentage of sherds in this locus is very high, at 75%. 5. Two intrusive sherds were counted from Tunnel 542, apparently a result of a technical mistake during excavation. Stratum II (Tables 3.8–3.11) 1. Approximately 59% of the vessels in this stratum are Khirbet Kerak Ware. 2. Of the residual sherds in Stratum II 8.7% (3.4% of all sherds) are of Metallic Ware, similar to the total of Metallic Ware sherds from Stratum III (7.7%), and are all evidently residual here as well. 3. Almost 80% of the sherds found in the deposits of Stratum II, and which are neither Khirbet Kerak Ware nor Hellenistic, belong to vessels common in Stratum III, and the remaining 20% belong to residual vessels of Strata IV and V. As opposed to what happens with the Metallic Wares (above), the proportion of Stratum III sherds, which might be assumed as being residual, is larger than would be expected in a residual assemblage (65%). It is therefore possible that these vessels were still used in Stratum II. 4. Even if some vessels from Stratum III were still in use, they were evidently a minority that did not impact the character of the assemblage; it seems that almost all vessels used in Stratum II were of the Khirbet Kerak Ware family. 5. About half of the identified sherds from L427 are burnished vessels of the Khirbet Kerak Ware family. 6. A significant presence of Hellenistic sherds in the deposits of L427 indicates a late intrusion that was not identified during excavation. 7. The ratio of slipped sherds to Metallic Ware sherds in L427 (Stratum II) is 564:87. This is very similar to the

111

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

Table 3.9. Summary of the Assemblages from Strata IV–I (based on rim counts) Stratum

EB I

Stratum IV, Metallic Ware

Stratum IV, NonMetallic Ware

Stratum III Vessels

Khirbet Kerak Ware

Stratum I, Hellenistic Wares

Total

IV

119

172

162

36

8

5

502

III

58

25

24

209

4

3

323

II

27

43

30

396

746

30

1272

I

20

22

21

202

258

357

880

Stratum IV

Total

%

Total of primary vessels + primary gray holemouth jars

348

69.3

14

4.0

Metallic Ware out of total primary sherds

172

49.4

Residual vessels (EB I sherds)

119

23.7

8

1.6

Intrusive sherds in Stratum IV (including all gray holemouth jars)

49

9.8

Intrusive sherds in Stratum IV (excluding gray holemouth jars)

35

7.0

Total primary vessels

209

64.7

Residual in Stratum III

107

33.1

Intrusive in Stratum III

7

2.2

Metallic Ware out of all residuals in Stratum III

25

23.4

EB I out of all residuals in Stratum III

58

54.2

Total primary vessels

746

58.6

Residual in Stratum II

496

39.0

Primary gray holemouth jars out of total primary vessels (estimate)

Khirbet Kerak Ware out of the total

Stratum III

Stratum II

Intrusive in Stratum II

30

2.4

Metallic Ware in Stratum II

43

4.4

396

79.8

Total primary vessels

357

40.6

Residual in Stratum I

523

59.4

Stratum III vessels in Stratum II Stratum I

Table 3.10. Summary of Pottery from Selected Loci (based on identified and unidentified sherds) Locus 411

Stratum

EB I Sherds

Metallic Ware Sherds

Slipped Sherds

Khirbet Kerak Ware Sherds

Hellenistic Sherds

Unidentified Sherds

Total

I

1

20

19

57

67

298

462

427

II

46

87

564

742

33

2146

3618

542

III

24

65

448

1

1

504

1043

525

IV

48

256

136

1

14

549

1004

112

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Table 3.11. Frequency of Identified Sherds from Selected Loci EB I Sherds

Metallic Ware Sherds

Slipped Sherds

Locus

Stratum

411

I

40.8

34.8

11.6

427

II

2.2

50.5

38.3

542

III

0.2

0.2

83.1

525

IV

3.1

0.2

29.9

ratio in L542 (Stratum III), where it stands at 448:65. It can thus be assumed that all are residual. Stratum I (Tables 3.9–3.11) 1. Only 40% of the sherds found in Stratum I are from the Hellenistic period. The rest are residual sherds from the various phases of the Early Bronze Age. 2. In L411, a similar percentage (41%) of the identified sherds are Hellenistic, the remaining being residual sherds from the various phases of the Early Bronze Age. The Chronology of the Pottery Assemblages from Strata IV–II Stratum IV The pottery assemblage from Stratum IV is parallel to the assemblage from the Kinneret tomb and should be dated to EB II (see above, Types 1, 2, 5, 16; Mazar, Amiran and Haas 1973:183). Noteworthy is the dominance of Metallic Ware in the stratum assemblages, and as Greenberg and Porat have shown (1996), most types of this family are typical of EB II. Two radiocarbon analyses were conducted on carbon found in Stratum IV (below, Chapter 9). The sample from Floor 162 (actually composed of three samples) was collected while exposing a floor that was constructed over the Stratum V deposits. Its attribution to Stratum IV is beyond doubt, in spite of the fact that 65% of the pottery was residual pottery from Stratum V. The sample from Pits 525 was collected from a deposit in a pit that was dug into virgin soil, with only 8% residual pottery. The average date of the two samples is earlier than that accepted for EB II and the samples may have been contaminated by residual material from Stratum V (RT2210, 3493–3113 BCE; RT2536, 3300–2928 BCE). This explanation is plausible for L162 but not for L525. Similar dates were obtained from samples

Burnished Khirbet Kerak Sherds

Hellenistic Sherds

Total

12.2

0.6

100.0%

5.9

3.1

100.0%

12.1

4.5

100.0%

56.3

10.5

100.0%

taken from the EB II strata at Tel Yaqush, Tell Abu alKharaz and Phase L2 at Tell el-Sa‘idiyeh (Philip 1999: Table 1; Fischer 2000: Table 12.3). At all sites the dates have a wide range encompassing the end of the fourth millennium and the first century of the third. At this stage of the research, while a similar chronological horizon can be suggested, the 14C dates do not provide a solid basis for shifting the absolute dates of the various phases of the Early Bronze Age. Stratum III This stratum is dominated by the vessels of light-colored fabric and a thin, red wash. Within the group the bowls stand out; many of them were decorated with burnished bands in a radial or a grid pattern (Types 18–20 above). Such bowls are found at many of the EB III sites, from Tel Dan and Hazor in the north (Greenberg 1996a: Figs. 3.33:2, 3.35:2; 1997: Figs. III.3:1, III.4:3–5) to Tel Halif and Tel ‘Ira in the south (Seger 1989: Fig. 8:1–7; Beit-Arieh 1999: Figs. 6.10:1, 6.11:1, 2). Esse pointed out the wide distribution of these bowls at Bet Yerah and showed their distribution also at EB III sites throughout Israel and beyond, e.g., at Byblus on the Phoenician coast (Esse 1991:48–50). Bowls decorated with grid-pattern burnished bands are known also in Metallic Ware vessels from EB II (e.g., Esse 1991: Pl. 2: H, 8:61), but we do not have examples from that period of bowls decorated with radial burnished bands or with grid-pattern bands on bowls that are not of Metallic Ware. As we have remarked in the discussion of the quantitative data, no Khirbet Kerak Ware can be attributed to Stratum III; hence, this stratum precedes the first appearance of these wares at Bet Yerah. Thus, the assemblages of Stratum III belong in an early phase of EB III, which it is suggested here be termed ‘Early Bronze IIIA’. Assemblages with pattern-burnished bowls, but no Khirbet Kerak Ware, were found also in the excavations

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

of the Oriental Institute. Examples of such assemblages are the one from the olive-oil factory in Trench H–K (Esse 1991: Pl. 8) and that of Phase V in Trench M to its northwest (Esse 1982: Pl. 1). Four carbon samples from Stratum III were analyzed by 14C for age determination (below, Chapter 9). The origin of all the samples is carbonized wood chips, extracted from the accumulations of silt in Tunnel 542 + 828. Sample RT-2541 (2901–2702 BCE) was taken from the top of the accumulations and the others from the base. The accumulation might represent the end of Stratum III, but the tunnel may also have gone out of use earlier and silted up while the buildings of the stratum were still occupied. The results are rather similar, mostly in the twentyninth and twenty-eighth centuries BCE, with an average near 2800 BCE (see Chapter 9: RT2541, RT2539, RT2538 and RT2207). This date for the beginning of EB III is about one hundred years earlier than the one suggested by Stern (NEAEHL: inner cover) and later by about one hundred years than the destruction of the EB II stratum at Tell Abu-Kharaz (Philip 1999:35; Fischer 2000:224). Though these dates are not yet sufficiently focused, they need be taken into consideration when a new timescale of absolute dates for the various phases of the early Bronze Age is evaluated. Stratum II This stratum is dominated by Khirbet Kerak Ware. Various opinions have been voiced in the scholarship on the attribution of this family to specific phases of the Early Bronze Age. Albright divided EB III into three phases, and assigned Khirbet Kerak Ware only to the middle phase (Albright 1965:51–52). In later research it became accepted that Khirbet Kerak Ware, as well as the carriers of the culture they represent (sometimes called ‘the Khirbet Kerak people’), signifies the beginning of EB III (e.g., Hennessey 1967:88; BenTor 1968:152, 1992:111; Amiran 1969b, 1986a:75; Esse 1991:53, 64–67; Greenberg 2002:51; Zuckerman 2003:180–181). The findings from our excavation stand in contrast to this accepted concept and suggest that Khirbet Kerak Ware was widespread at Tel Bet Yerah only in an advanced phase of EB III. A similar situation is obtained in the excavations of the Oriental Institute. In several test trenches the late position of Khirbet Kerak Ware is apparent: In Phase A of Trench D most vessels are Khirbet Kerak Ware (Esse 1982: Pl. 10:1–16), while in Phases B–C below only a

113

small number of them appear (Esse 1982: Pl. 10:22–28). Their majority belongs to the pattern-burnished bowls and to a large assemblage that parallels the finds from Stratum III in our excavation (Esse 1982: Pl. 10:29–45, Pl.11). In Trench E rich assemblages attributed to EB III were excavated. In the uppermost Phase V, Khirbet Kerak Ware dominates (Esse 1982: Pl. 5), while in the lowest Phase III none appears (Esse 1982:111, Pl. 8: 27–34). It is evident that at Bet Yerah a clear stratigraphic sequence of the early EB III exists in which no Khirbet Kerak Ware is attested, topped by a later assemblage in which the vast majority of vessels belonging to the phase are Khirbet Kerak Ware. While the earliest appearance of Khirbet Kerak Ware could be earlier, the fact that the discussion surrounds a central site and not a late development at a marginal site, the results of our 1995 excavations indicate widespread use of Khirbet Kerak Ware in an advanced stage of EB III. We therefore suggest terming this phase as ‘Early Bronze IIIB’. No samples suitable for 14C analysis were found in Stratum II. Post-Stratum II Bet Yerah Most remains from our excavations that are later than Stratum II are attributed to Stratum I of the Hellenistic period, and individual artifacts to even later periods. No remains were found that date to the period between Stratum II (EB III) and Stratum I (Hellenistic). Remains from this lacuna were found only by the Department of Antiquities expedition led by BarAdon. Especially interesting are Strata VIII and VII attributed to EB IV (Ben-Tor 1968:2) or to “a late phase of the EB III” (Ben-Tor 1968:153). These finds show that in a limited area there was a settlement in the Intermediate Bronze Age and in the Persian period, while most of the tell remained deserted. For a lack of a detailed publication of the finds from these strata, it cannot be determined whether they included Khirbet Kerak Ware, evidence of an Early Bronze Age phase later than Khirbet Kerak Ware or early phases of the Intermediate Bronze Age. Contemporary Ceramic Assemblages The quantitative data from Bet Yerah permit a comparison with the EB II finds from Tel Te’o, Tel Qashish and Qiryat Ata and with the EB III finds from Tel Gat-Hefer15 (see Fig. 4.1 and Table 4.1).

114

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

The Sites Tel Te’o. A salvage excavation was conducted at the site by Emanuel Eisenberg. In Stratum III a large refuse pit (L628) containing many EB II sherds was discovered (Greenberg 1987:134–142, 2001b; Eisenberg, Gopher and Greenberg 2001:46). The finds from this pit were studied by Raphael Greenberg, and they seem to be of particular importance as they represent an extremely short time period (Greenberg 1987:135). The remarkably uncontaminated state of the assemblage stems also from the fact that no deposits from periods close in time to the assemblage in question were found: the earlier strata (V–IV) are EB IA, while the later stratum (II) is medieval. It is clear therefore that there are no EB IB or EB III sherds in the EB II assemblages of Tel Te’o. However, because the source of the assemblage is in a single locus which might show a ‘functional’ bias, the quantitative ratio of the types may not be an accurate representation of the totality of vessels in circulation during the period at the site.

recently published in an extensive report (Golani 2003). The report includes a thorough report on the pottery, using the typological terminology employed at Tel Qashish. Table 4.21 (Golani 2003:163) summarizes the quantitative data of the pottery from Stratum I, which is dated to EB II. Though the Qiryat Ata report does not offer full details on either the counting method employed or on the way the residual pottery was separated, the lack of this information does not diminish the importance of the quantitative data. Tel Gat-Hefer. During excavations on the north slope of the tell (Areas C, D), domestic buildings that were erected in EB II and enlarged in EB IIIA were exposed (Covello-Paran 2003). The finds from the early phase are few and are parallel to Stratum IV at Bet Yerah; the majority of finds are datable to the last phase of occupation, which is parallel to Stratum III at Bet Yerah. At Tel Gat-Hefer there are no EB I deposits, and the proportion of EB II deposits is small. Thus, the late assemblages form an important database for quantitative analysis of EB III assemblages. The comparison of the quantitative data from Bet Yerah and Tel Gat-Hefer is reliable also because at Tel Gat-Hefer, as at Bet Yerah, all the earth was sifted through 10 mm mesh sieves.

Tel Qashish. Large-scale excavations conducted at the site (Ben-Tor 1993b; Ben-Tor, Bonfil and Zuckerman 2003) revealed many strata from various phases of the Early Bronze Age (see also Chapter 2, above). The pottery was investigated by Sharon Zuckerman, who also presented summary tables of the pottery counts (Zuckerman 1996: Tables 1–3; Zuckerman 2003: Tables 2–17). The deposits come from a wide range of features, from floors to various fills, so they are expected to reflect accurately the vessels in use in the ancient settlements. The deposits were contaminated to some extent because at Tel Qashish there is a continuity of many strata from the Early Bronze Age, in which assemblages parallel to Strata V–III at Bet Yerah were found, and so residual and possibly intrusive pottery is to be expected. No information is available in the report about the proportion of residual pottery from EB I that was found in the EB II–III assemblages, and it is possible that residual and perhaps even intrusive sherds were included in the numerical data. The comparison only includes data from the strata that were attributed to EB II. The striking similarity between the EB II and EB III assemblages at Tel Qashish suggests that the proportion of residual sherds in the EB III assemblages is very large.

Early Bronze Age II (Table 3.12; Fig. 3.60) Metallic Ware. As observed above, this family is the most characteristic trait of the EB II horizons of northern Israel. It appears in all four assemblages, but in greatly differing proportions: at Tel Te’o some three-quarters of rims16 belong to Metallic Ware vessels, at Bet Yerah and Qiryat Ata about one-half, while at Tel Qashish, only a quarter. The difference between Tel Te’o on the one hand and Bet Yerah and Qiryat Ata on the other shows a decrease from north to south (Greenberg and Porat 1996:11–12). It is possible that the low proportion of the ‘Metallic Ware’ family at Tel Qashish is the result of the inclusion of residual EB I sherds in the count.

Qiryat Ata. The main results of several salvage excavations that were conducted at the site were

Combed Basins and Amphoriskoi. These two types appear at Tel Te’o but are absent from the Stratum IV

Summary of the Comparison of Assemblages Following the comparison of the assemblages from Bet Yerah to those from the four sites, some observations can be stated:

115

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

Table 3.12. Summary of Pottery Finds in the EB II Strata at Bet Yerah, Tel Te’o, Qiryat Ata and Tel Qashish. Tel Te’o Bet Yerah Types Types (Stratum (Stratum IV) III)

Tel Qashish (EB II) and Qiryat Ata Types (Stratum I)

Type

Bet Yerah

Tel Te’o

Tel Qashish

Qiryat Ata

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

16

4.6

9

2.3

5

0.9

13

1.6

127

37.0

214

53.9

67

11.9

193

24.0

12

3.4

32

8.1

36

6.4

90

11.2

4

1.0

1

0.1

Metallic Ware Shallow bowls

1

BI

BI, BIII

Carinated-rim bowls

2

BIV, BV

BIV–BVII, PL

Jars

3

SJI, SJII

SJI–III

AMI

SJIV

Amphoriskoi Broad juglets

4

SSJ

3

0.9

2

0.2

Narrow-necked jugs and juglets

5

JG

JT, J

10

2.9

18

4.5

27

4.8

69

8.6

Miscellaneous and unidentified vessels

6

BIII

BIX–X, K, H

4

1.1

7

1.8

2

0.4

12

1.5

6

1.5

Large, combed bowls

BII

Non-Metallic Ware Shallow bowls with simple rim

7

BI, BIII

13

3.7

12

2.1

3

0.4

Carinated-rim bowls

8

BIV–VIII, PL

21

6.0

81

14.4

37

4.6

Ledge-rim bowls

9

BVc–d

19

5.5

6

0.7

Miscellaneous bowls

10

B

BIX–X

Holemouth jars

11, 12, 22

CPIII

H

4

1.1

4

1.0

10

1.8

8

1.0

91

26.0

78

19.6

133

23.6

110

13.7

Low-necked cooking pots

13

CPII

SJIa/SJIb*

9

2.6

25

6.3

122

21.7

222

27.6

Miscellaneous jars

14

SJIa, SJII–III

9

2.6

54

9.6

18

2.2

Broad juglets

15

SSJ

7

2.0

1

0.1

Narrow-necked jugs and juglets

16

JT, J

2

0.6

Unidentified vessels

17

1

0.3

348

100.0

Total

deposits at Bet Yerah. Such vessels were found in the excavations of the Oriental Institute at Bet Yerah (Esse 1991: Pl. 1: H, Pl. 4: I), so their absence in our Stratum IV is fortuitous and is due to their small proportion in the overall circulating vessels. Cooking Ware. This category includes holemouth jars and cooking pots, and is present in various assemblages. At Tel Qashish Zuckerman (2003:132) includes the cooking pots in her jar Type SJ I, but observes that they were probably used for cooking. On the strength of a single complete cooking pot she assumes that all

397

100.0

14

2.5

20

2.5

563

100.0

805

100.0

had a flat bottom. Cooking pots are common in the Early Bronze Age strata at Tel Dan, where Greenberg (1996a:102) observes that the flat-bottomed pots are few and that the majority have a rounded bottom. The ratio between cooking pots and holemouth jars differs from site to site and from region to region. Already at an early stage of research Amiran observed that in the Early Bronze Age assemblages from Tel Rosh (Khirbet Tell el-Ruweisa) in upper Galilee there are no holemouth jars. Amiran regarded the absence of holemouth jars, ledge handles and rope decorations as evidence of the influence of northern cultures on

116

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Fig. 3.60. Pottery from selected EB II sites.

Galilee, as opposed to other regions of Israel, where these elements are common (Amiran [Kallner] 1953:123). Along the Jordan Valley, the rapid change from the dominance of cooking pots in the northern Hula Valley and that of holemouth jars in the central Jordan Valley can be traced: at Tel Dan cooking pots are dominant (Greenberg 1996a:102); at Tel Te’o the number of holemouth jars is three times that of cooking pots; and at Bet Yerah holemouth jars outnumber cooking pots nine to one. In Israel the change from north to south is more gradual: in the survey of Western Galilee, cooking pots dominate and no holemouth jars were observed in EB II assemblages (Frankel and Getzov 1997:30); at Qiryat Ata there are twice as many cooking pots as holemouth jars; and at Tel Qashish there are slightly less cooking pots than holemouth jars. At the latter it was difficult to differentiate between EB II and EB I holemouth jars, and it is therefore possible that the proportion of holemouth jars is in reality much lower than presented in Table 20 (Zuckerman 2003:132). Only new quantitative data will enable the drawing of a sufficiently accurate map of the change from the dominance of cooking pots to that of holemouth jars. Ledge Handles. As mentioned earlier, Amiran observed that ledge handles were an important characteristic of the Early Bronze Age cultures of Israel and that they are absent at Tel Rosh and in northern cultures. Quantitative data on these handles are available only

from Bet Yerah, where in Stratum IV they form 8% of all handles. At Tel Qashish their proportion is small (Zuckerman 2003:133), and in the summaries of the ceramic assemblages at Tel Te’o they are not mentioned at all. It seems that ledge handles are not characteristic at the EB II sites of northern Israel, and regions where they are common are smaller than those regions where holemouth jars are the norm. The distribution patterns of ledge handles, also, will become clear as quantitative data from additional sites is published. The Non-Metallic Ware. At Bet Yerah about a quarter of the vessels are of neither Metallic Ware nor cooking ware. These vessels exhibit a great variety of types, fabric and firing stages. At Tel Te’o only 14% of the sherds belong to this group (Greenberg 1987:135). There all vessels were well fired and of only one type: a bowl-lamp. It may be that the uniformity at Tel Te’o is influenced by a ‘functionality bias’, but the trend of the dominance of Metallic Ware in the north and the increased importance of ‘non-metallic ware’ in the south fits well with our present knowledge about the distribution of Metallic Ware throughout Israel. Early Bronze Age IIIA (Table 3.13) Metallic Wares form about 10% of the finds from Stratum III at Bet Yerah and 5% at Tel Gat-Hefer. According to the data presented above it can be stated that these wares here are residual, and so it must be at Tel Gat-Hefer. The quantitative data of the other finds

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

Table 3.13. Comparison of Stratum III Finds with Tel Gat-Hefer Bet Yerah

Gat-Hefer

Type

N

%

N

%

Simple, thin bowls

47

22.3

29

4.9

Simple thick bowls

1

0.5

25

4.2

Carinated-rim bowls

67

31.8

190

32.1

Holemouth jars

58

27.5

129

21.8

Cooking pots

2

0.9

89

15.0

Jars

15

7.1

105

17.7

Jugs and juglets

21

10.0

15

2.5

10

1.7

211

100.0

592

100.0

25

10.6

31

5.0

236

100.0

623

100.0

Kraters Total Non-Metallic Ware Metallic Ware Total

suggest a great similarity between the two assemblages, but two distinct differences are noteworthy: (a) At Bet Yerah the proportion of thin-walled bowls with diagonal burnish stripes is especially large. (b) At Tel Gat Hefer the number of cooking pots is large, 41% of all cooking vessels, while at Bet Yerah they comprise only 3% of cooking vessels. It seems that these differences stem from regional differences between the two sites, but for lack of further quantitative data it is difficult to delineate the boundaries of these regions. The difference in the distribution of cooking pots is especially interesting, as it continues regional patterns that were observed in EB II.

SUMMARY OF THE FINDS FROM STRATA IV–II: TEL BET YERAH DURING EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III Stratum IV—Early Bronze Age II According to the analysis of the pottery assemblages and the age measurements obtained through 14C analysis, Stratum IV should be dated to EB II. Finds from this period were found in the different excavations all over the tell: from Sections 5–6 carried out by the Oriental Institute in the north to the Department of Antiquities excavations in the south. In the preliminary reports the excavators attributed to EB II the strata that lay below the strata bearing Khirbet Kerak Ware and above the EB I layers. Thus, in many cases it is impossible to determine whether the preliminary reports relate to

117

strata parallel to our Stratum IV or III. Notwithstanding, structures associated with vessels of the Metallic Ware family or any similarity to the Kinneret tomb find parallels in our Stratum IV. During Stratum IV, the area of the excavation was densely covered with buildings whose roofs were supported by columns and which apparently served as dwellings. A similar picture obtains in other excavations at Bet Yerah where the finds can be related to Stratum IV: In the JPES excavations a building with two rooms was uncovered, one of which served as a storage area (Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:170). Yogev and Eisenberg (1985:14) attributed to Stratum VII two structures with a row of columns, and they believe that the larger one (c. 12 × 5 m) was a public building. In Trenches D and M of the Oriental Institute excavations remains of intensive building activity were recorded, and in Trench D a floor was exposed in which apparently a column base was set (Esse 1982:109–113). Other finds as well had been attributed to EB II, but because of insufficient information on the associated pottery it is impossible to determine whether they belong with Stratum IV or III of our excavations. In the Department of Antiquities excavations six building phases were identified; the fourth yielded a wide, stone-paved street (Bar-Adon 1957:29). In the excavations directed by Dan Bahat in the Oholo seminary compound, round structures with thick walls that may have been granaries were attributed to EB II (HA 1977:11). The data show that during EB II a large and dense settlement existed throughout the area of Tel Bet Yerah, which must have been one of the largest cities in Israel. Such a large city is expected to have been fortified, and evidence of fortifications has indeed been discovered in the south part, though our excavations yielded no fortifications that can be associated with Stratum IV. It might be assumed that this is a local observation at a point where fortifications were destroyed, and that elsewhere along the perimeter of the tell the fortifications of this large city would be found. However, two further observations intensify the doubts surrounding the existence of an EB II wall. An observation similar to our own was made by the JPES expedition, following an analysis of a section made in the south edge of the tell. In this excavation no evidence of an EB II wall was found (Stekelis and AviYonah 1946–1947:57; Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:170) and the finds from our Stratum V indicate

118

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

that the suggestion made by Ben-Tor (1968:39) that the brick wall uncovered by the JPES expedition should be dated to EB II is unacceptable. A second observation is based on the study of the sections (Plan 1.1). As we have shown, Stratum V is characterized by piles of bricks that must have fallen when the city walls collapsed. Likewise, the deposits of Strata III–II are characterized by similar collapses, but such collapsed piles of bricks were not observed in the remains of Stratum IV. In many cases only a very small gap existed between the walls and floors of Stratum IV and those of Stratum III, as for instance W114 from Stratum III, which was found to have been built directly on W151 from Stratum IV, very close to where a city wall would be expected. The lack of accumulations of rubble suggests, too, the absence of walls in this area. It would thus seem that during EB II there was no wall around the south edge of the tell. If there were fortifications during that period, they enclosed a limited area, and the south end was an unprotected suburb. The only structure to have been identified as a public building and whose attribution to EB II is certain is the rectangular building excavated by Yogev and Eisenberg. With some reservations, a street excavated by Bar-Adon might be attributed to this period, as well as the silo structures excavated by Bahat. This fragmentary information about public buildings and fortifications of such a large city is probably due to the relatively small excavation areas where this period was revealed. Stratum III—Early Bronze Age IIIA According to the pottery finds, Stratum III was dated in this study to ‘EB IIIA’ (see above). Age determination employing radiocarbon analysis showed an average date that is some one hundred years later than Stratum IV of EB II, providing another support to the dating of Stratum III to the beginning of EB III. In the pottery assemblages, vessels with a light fabric and a thin, red wash dominate and many of the jars and bowls are decorated with radial or grid-pattern burnish stripes. This assemblage was defined and characterized for the first time in the present excavation as being later than the floruit of Metallic Ware and earlier than that of Khirbet Kerak Ware. This chronological division was not employed in the preliminary reports of the earlier expeditions at Tel Bet

Yerah. Therefore the previous excavators attributed the deposits parallel to our Stratum III to EB II, because they preceded Khirbet Kerak Ware, or to EB III as it was defined by other constituents of the finds (e.g., Esse 1991:123 and perhaps Amiran and Arnon 1977). In light of this difficulty, the elements assigned to EB III in general but whose exact attribution within that period is uncertain are as follows: The Extent of the Settlement. The finds from Stratum III in our excavation included remains of a dense settlement with buildings with thin walls, exclusively of private dwellings. All the trenches of the Oriental Institute yielded phases and architectural remains that clearly parallel our Stratum III (Esse 1982).17 It thus seems that all over the tell there was an intensive settlement during EB IIIA. Streets. The existence of paved streets, which were found in three places, presents important evidence for city planning and organization.The JPES excavations, near the building with the circular installations (see below), found a 2.5 m wide stone-paved street. The Ussishkin–Netzer excavations (HA 1967b) exposed a long, straight, partially-paved street. The Bar-Adon excavations uncovered a 2.7 m wide stone-paved street at the south end. It was attributed to EB II (Bar-Adon 1957:29), but as mentioned earlier, we have no reliable data for its precise dating (see also Esse 1982:135). Public Buildings. The tunnel (L542 + L828) found in our excavation surely represents public building activity that shows exceptional engineering and technical ability. The roofing technique of a corbelled vault is attested in several Middle Bronze Age II structures in Israel, e.g., at ‘Akko (Raban 1991: Fig. 12), Hazor (Yadin 1972: Fig. 28) and Megiddo (Loud 1948: Fig. 29). No comparable structures have come to light in the same region in the Early Bronze Age; the Bet Yerah tunnel is the earliest evidence for the use of this technique. Because of its unique status, it is difficult to speculate on its function. The Roman-period pipeline and siphon that led water from Nahal Yavne’el to Bet Yerah (Amiran [Kallner] 1947; Winogradov 2002) might suggest a similar function for the tunnel. This however should be regarded as no more than a preliminary speculation, because of the severe technical and chronological problems this speculation faces, such

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

as the crossing of the Jordan River that flowed east of the tell and the lack of parallels of water conduction in tunnels at such an early date. The most prominent public building discovered at Bet Yerah is the building with the circular installations, discovered in the JPES excavations. It is commonly identified as a public granary (about its possible use in Stratum II, see below). A. Mazar suggested that the building is the combination of a sanctuary and a central granary and sees in it evidence of a complex economic system that was introduced by a strong administration with a capability for planning (Mazar 2001). Olive-Oil Factory. In Trench H–K the Oriental Institute expedition uncovered an extensive structure that served as an olive-oil factory. Esse saw in this complex and its finds important evidence for the economy of Bet Yerah, which was connected to long-range economic systems in which oil trade held an important place (Esse 1991:123–125). Its large assemblage of pottery, much of which was restored as shown above, helped to determine that it was parallel to Stratum III of our excavations. Fortifications. The Stratum III city was surrounded by a wall, and our excavations revealed a stone foundation 4.8 m wide (W110 and W824; see Plan 3.4). Two previous expeditions found remains of walls that were attributed to EB III, but it is not clear in which phase they were built: the JPES expedition exposed a 4.2 m thick ‘stone wall’ attributed to Stratum IV dated to EB III (Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:172–173). In the Department of Antiquities excavations, many fortification remains were discovered from various phases of the Early Bronze Age (Bar-Adon 1956:52). They included a gate (Yeivin 1953: Fig. 2) and walls that were preserved to a great height (Yeivin 1953: Fig. 2). The Lifespan of the City. The 1995 excavations showed that most remains of Stratum III can be attributed to a single construction phase and that the city did not exist for long. In some cases pottery vessels were found in situ, as were some in the Oriental Institute excavations, in the olive-oil factory and in Phase V in Trench M. Household items left in place seem to be evidence of a sudden evacuation of the city by its inhabitants. The difficulty in a precise attribution of the finds from the previous excavations allows only for a preliminary summary proposal, which would need

119

to be substantiated in the future by an in-depth study of the finds from previous excavations and on further examinations. In this preliminary summary it is proposed that in EB IIIA a densely built city with substantial fortifications existed on most of the tell of Bet Yerah, with unique public constructions and apparently stone-paved streets. The city was led by a strong administration with planning ability, which sustained long-range economic relations. This city did not exist for long and its end seems to have been sudden. Stratum II—Early Bronze Age IIIB In all the deposits of Stratum II there is a clear domination of Khirbet Kerak Ware and it would seem as if almost all the repertoire of vessels in use at the time was of this family. The attribution of the stratum to EB III is assured by the very presence of Khirbet Kerak Ware and because it is later than Stratum III, where this family is absent, it has here been designated ‘EB IIIB’. The Extent of the Settlement. Our excavation yielded meager remains of floor segments, pits and wall fragments that appear to have belonged to private dwellings. The large deposits of Khirbet Kerak Ware indicate that the paucity of architectural remains is not evidence of a small number of inhabitants but rather of poor preservation of the structures. The remains also show that the Stratum II settlement existed for a long period that included several construction phases. All previous excavators reported deposits where Khirbet Kerak Ware dominates, but it seems that especially rich finds were discovered in the southeast part (Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:171; BarAdon 1957; Yogev and Eisenberg 1985), where much architecture survived as well (Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952: Fig. 1; Eisenberg 1981). The Oriental Institute excavations reported architectural remains parallel to our Stratum II only from Trenches D and E (Esse 1982:108–111). It is interesting that in four excavation areas in the center of the tell, no strata equivalent to Stratum II were discovered: in Trenches H–K and M of the Oriental Institute no Khirbet Kerak Ware was found (Esse 1982: Pl. 1; 1991:123). In Bahat’s excavations at Oholo, Khirbet Kerak Ware was retrieved only from a pit (HA 1977:11), and at the nearby excavations of Yeivin,

120

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Amiran and Arnon only a handful of Khirbet Kerak Ware sherds were recovered (HA 1977:10). Amiran and Arnon saw in this a sign of low population density for the Bet Yerah people (Amiran and Arnon 1977). The Circular Installations. According to the excavators of the structure, recovered from it were “many pottery jars and fragments that belong to the third phase of the Early Bronze Age, and among them some sherds and burnished jars of the type called Khirbet Kerak Ware” (Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1946–1947:59). This picture shows the secondary role of Khirbet Kerak Ware in the structure. On the floor were ovens, which obviously prevented its use as grain silos (Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1946–1947:60). Although we do not possess at this time sufficient evidence for dating the building, we would like to propose that the structure was erected during Stratum III, and that in Stratum II it no longer served its original purpose but was converted to dwellings where people lived their daily lives, including the use of ovens for the preparation of food. Fortifications. To Stratum II belongs a brick wall with a massive stone foundation (W109 and W825; see Plan 3.4), which was discovered close to the surface. During the course of its life, this wall was widened by the addition of W117 to a new width of 7 m. The excavations of the Department of Antiquities led by Bar-Adon identified seven wall construction phases, which were attributed to all phases of the Early Bronze Age and to the Hellenistic period (the latest one). Along the perimeter of the tell remains of a “wall with stone foundations” were excavated along 1300 m and could be traced along a further 300 m. Round and square towers were integrated in the wall (see Fig. 1.1; Bar-Adon 1956:51–52) and although this is not explicitly stated, it seems that Bar-Adon attributed it to the Hellenistic period (see also Hestrin 1993). Wall 109 with a stone foundation from our excavation can be identified with Bar-Adon’s wall with a stone foundation and towers due to their situation atop the fortification remains along the perimeter of the tell. Wall 109 cannot be attributed to the Hellenistic period under any circumstance, because graves from this period were excavated on its top (see Chapter 5, below). Therefore, the wall with a stone foundation and towers should be attributed to Stratum II of EB IIIB. The Stratum II settlement stretches across most of the tell, though it was not as dense as previous settlements

and a limited area in the center was not inhabited at all. This settlement was surrounded by a wide and sophisticated wall incorporating round and square towers and evidently had a central civic organization that initiated the erection of the fortification and took care of its maintenance. It seems that in the days of the Stratum II settlement the large public granary on the north was no longer in use, indicating a change in the economic organization. The sharp change in material culture is even more pronounced in the pottery vessels. This change, involving, as mentioned earlier, almost the entire repertoire of vessels, is no doubt evidence of the settling of a new population with a culture originating in a distant region. The possible origins of this culture have been discussed in many studies and nowadays it is accepted that they lie in northern Syria, Anatolia and east of the Caucasus Mountains (Amiran 1989; Philip 1999:35–41). Graham Philip (1999; 2001:208–209) and Greenberg (2000) suggest complex socio-political processes to account for the development of the urban settlements of northern Israel in EB III. Both base their interpretation on the fundamental tenet that at contemporary sites in northern Israel either Khirbet Kerak Ware or assemblages that appear in our Stratum III were employed. This interpretation leads to the portrayal of a reality where a different repertoire of vessels was used at neighboring settlements, indicating a sharp cultural segregation. These scholars also hold that the Khirbet Kerak Ware family does not include a large percentage of basic vessel types and, therefore, this family cannot represent a complete repertoire serving the needs of the population. Philip suggests that the distribution of Khirbet Kerak Ware represents a local development by which stylistic components of a distant origin were adopted by elements of the local population who wanted to segregate themselves from neighboring settlements in which the local repertoire continued to be used. According to Greenberg, northern Israel in EB II was culturally uniform, but after a crisis during EB III, urban centers existed that conducted rival peer-polities that led to cultural differences. Following the analysis of the present excavations, the hypotheses of both Philip and Greenberg should be rejected, on the following grounds: First, a study of the non-burnished Khirbet Kerak Ware shows a repertoire of vessels that indeed covers all types necessary for

CHAPTER 3: STRATA IV–II—EARLY BRONZE AGES II–III

a full household, including cooking pots, holemouth jars, jars and jugs. Second, we have no proof that in northern Israel there was simultaneous usage of both Khirbet Kerak Ware and the traditional repertoire. In contrast to the sharp change that occurred in the north, in central and southern Israel the use of the

121

traditional local pottery repertoire continued and evolved. In these regions but a few exemplars of Khirbet Kerak Ware have been found: ‘Ai (Amiran 1969b), Tel ‘Erani (Brandl 1989: Fig. 6:1), Tel Yarmut (de Miroschedji 1988:37; 2000: Fig. 18.5:5), Nizzanim (Yekutiely and Gophna 1994: Fig. 8:7, 8) and other sites.

NOTES 1

P. Bar-Adon is standing on the wall in the photograph. This suggestion was made by Prof. Emanuel Mazor, who visited the excavations. 3 In what follows, references will be made to Douglas Esse’s 1991 study. His 1982 Ph.D. dissertation will be cited only when necessary for clarifying an issue. It should be noted, however, that the dissertation presents a greater number of artifacts and their stratigraphic context is given. 4 In many cases these bowls, or at least the larger ones, are called platters. 5 These were not drawn because of the small number of such items found and the poor state of preservation of their decoration. 6 Esse (1991:48–51) describes these vessels thus: “Buff standard ware… covered with a brown or red wash” or “light buff fabric with very weak traces of a thin brown or red wash.” 7 Almost all the rim fragments have been found. The only two missing pieces are near the handle, so it is not likely that there was a spout. In similar vessels the spout is located along a diameter perpendicular to the line of handles, e.g., Loud 1948: Pl. 5:15; Epstein 1998: Pl. XII. 8 A. Mazar attributed the lion to the house with the circular structures that was found in the second season, but this seems to be a mistake and it is, in fact, the same vessel discovered in the first season in the south part of the tell. 2

9

See also the figurine of a ‘ram with down-curving horns’ uncovered in the EB III layers at Tel Reqet north of Tiberias (Prausnitz 1957). 10 No metallurgical analysis was conducted. 11 No analysis of the beads was carried out and their definition as faience is intuitive. 12 No detailed analysis was done of the mollusks found in the excavation. 13 Only fragments larger than 2 cm were counted. Rim fragments that were joined during restoration were counted as one unit. 14 See n. 13. 15 To these sites can now be added extensive data published recently about the finds from Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003). 16 The quantitative summaries of the finds from Tel Te’o do not explicitly differentiate between Metallic Ware and nonmetallic ware sherds, so the division was made according to the verbal description of the types and errors are possible. 17 From this publication it appears that finds that parallel our Stratum III came from Phase C, as well as most finds from Phase B in Trench D, Phase III in Trench E, the olive-oil factory in Trench H–K, Phase V in Trench M and the section through Route 5.

CHAPTER 4

OBSERVATIONS ON EARLY BRONZE AGE SETTLEMENT HISTORY IN NORTHERN ISRAEL

The characterization of the pottery assemblages from Bet Yerah Strata V–II allows for a reassessment of the relative dates of various Early Bronze Age assemblages in northern Israel and its vicinity. In what follows, the assemblages from 34 sites (Fig. 4.1; Table 4.1) are examined and related to those of Bet Yerah as reported above, with the latter serving as the basis for comparison as Site No. 1. Included are most Early Bronze Age sites in northern Israel that were excavated, as well as one site that was only surveyed. In addition we shall present summary information from two surveys conducted in Upper Galilee and the Hula Valley. Site 2. Tyre (Bikai 1978). In the early assemblages, which came from the deepest levels, a mixed deposit of Early Bronze Age and Intermediate Bronze Age pottery was found (Strata XXVII–XX). Pithoi with a thickened rim (e.g., Bikai 1978: Pl. LVIIA:2, 32, 34, 42) parallel those from Bet Yerah Stratum V. Platters and jars that apparently belong to the Metallic Ware family1 (e.g., Bikai 1978: Pls. LVI:22, LVIIIA:38–44) correspond to those of Bet Yerah Stratum IV. A wide juglet with a pointed base (Bikai 1978: Pl. LVIIIA:18) and several of the platters (e.g., Bikai 1978: Pl. LVIIIA:15, 45) might parallel those of Bet Yerah Stratum III, but the noteworthy absence at Tyre of platters with radial burnish and other types characterizing Bet Yerah Stratum III make the comparison uncertain. Site 3. Tel Qedesh (Aharoni 1957:10–13). In a survey and a probe, pottery and various artifacts from the Early Bronze Age were collected. A few band-slipped sherds relate to Bet Yerah Stratum V (Aharoni 1957: Pl. VI:1– 3). Sherds with a combed pattern apparently belong to the Metallic Ware family and thus perhaps parallel Bet Yerah Stratum IV (Aharoni 1957: Pl. VI: 21, 23), and the many Khirbet Kerak Ware sherds clearly relate to Bet Yerah Stratum II (Aharoni 1957: Pl. VI:11–19). No pottery corresponding to that of Bet Yerah Stratum III was described. The current excavations led by Sharon

Herbert and Andrea Berlin in the late layers yielded some Early Bronze Age pottery that represents the strata already mentioned. They include EB I sherds, platters and other vessels of Metallic Ware and of Khirbet Kerak Ware. No pottery parallel to that of Bet Yerah Stratum III was recovered.2 Site 4. Tel Dan (Greenberg 1996a). The Early Bronze Age settlement extended over more than 200 dunams (c. 50 acres) and was fortified by a high and thick wall. Early Bronze II is represented by Stratum XV, in which Metallic Ware vessels dominate (Greenberg 1996a:99– 100, 105), and therefore parallels Bet Yerah Stratum IV. Early Bronze III is represented by Stratum XIV, in which the finds show a decrease in Metallic Ware vessels and a wide distribution of vessels fired at lower temperatures. Among these, vessels made of a light fabric, often covered with a red slip, stand out; they parallel the finds from Bet Yerah Stratum III. In spite of their relative decrease in frequency, many Metallic Ware vessels are still present in EB III assemblages at Tel Dan (see the descriptions accompanying the figures in Greenberg 1996a: Figs. 3.31–3.36). Greenberg (2000) sees a phenomenon unique to Tel Dan in comparison to Hazor in the continued use of Metallic Ware vessels. As no detailed quantitative analysis was carried out for the Tel Dan assemblages, an alternative hypothesis, according to which the Metallic Ware sherds are residual deposits from the preceding phase, cannot be assessed. If this were so, then the proportion of EB III deposits at Dan would be far smaller than estimated by Greenberg. At Tel Dan some Khirbet Kerak Ware was also retrieved, mostly from deposits postdating Stratum XIV (Greenberg 1996a:105); we believe this is evidence of a small settlement at Tel Dan from the time of Bet Yerah Stratum II. Especially important is a bowl (Greenberg 1996a: Fig. 3.31:4) recovered in a deposit clearly belonging to Stratum XIV and attributed to the Khirbet Kerak Ware family of vessels. This is a

124

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

small, open, carinated bowl with an everted rim, black on the outside and red inside. In the 1995 Bet Yerah excavations no comparable bowl was found, and all open bowls there are red inside and out. This might be a type that precedes Bet Yerah Stratum II, representing the earliest penetration of Khirbet Kerak Ware into Israel, or it might be a bowl of the early Chalcolithic period (e.g., Garfinkel 1999: Fig. 72). Site 5. Khirbet Khisas (Greenberg 1996b:63–65; 2002:30–31). An extensive settlement, with remains from many periods. The site was surveyed by Idan Shaked; EB II–III pottery was collected over an area of c. 30 dunams. The finds include bowls of the Metallic Ware family (Greenberg 1996b: Fig. 19:11–16) that parallel those of Bet Yerah Stratum IV, and a group from EB III (Greenberg 1996b: Fig. 19:17–24) in which Khirbet Kerak Ware dominates and seems to relate to Bet Yerah Stratum II. An examination of the pottery collected by Shaked at the site (December 1, 1999) showed no pottery corresponding to that of Bet Yerah Stratum III or to the light fabric vessels of Tel Dan Stratum XIV. Site 6. Tel Na‘ama (Greenberg et al. 1998). Many Early Bronze Age sherds were recovered from the Middle Bronze Age deposits excavated on the tell. Some were dated to EB IA, a phase that is earlier than the finds in our excavation, and some to EB II. The latter are dominated by Metallic Ware vessels (Greenberg et al. 1998: Fig. 22) comparable to those of Bet Yerah Stratum IV. No pottery relating to any other strata at Bet Yerah was discovered. Site 7. Shamir (Bahat 1973). A limited-scale probe was carried out at the extensive site of Shamir. The excavation report does not contain a detailed description of the pottery, but it seems that the majority of the vessels illustrated in Fig. 3 belong to the Metallic Ware family and thus parallel Bet Yerah Stratum IV (Greenberg 1987:143–148). No pottery correlating to any other strata at Bet Yerah was uncovered. Site 8. Tel Te’o (Greenberg 1987:134–142; Eisenberg 1989; Eisenberg, Gopher and Greenberg 2001). The excavations revealed three Early Bronze Age strata: Strata V–IV are dated to EB IA and do not concern us. Stratum III was attributed to EB II, and 63% of its diagnostic sherds are of Metallic Ware (Greenberg

Fig. 4.1. Map of sites (see Table 4.1 for legend).

1987:135; 2001b), thus relating to Bet Yerah Stratum IV. Site 9. Giv‘at Yasaf (Rochman-Halperin 1999). Early Bronze Age sherds were located all over the tell, but with no clear stratification. Holemouth jars with a simple rim (Rochman-Halperin 1999: Fig. 13:3, 4) parallel the finds of Bet Yerah Stratum V. An everted-rim pithos that is characteristic of EB IB sites in Western Galilee is noteworthy (Rochman-Halperin 1999: Fig. 13:5). Platters and jars, which probably belong to the Metallic Ware family (Rochman-Halperin 1999: Fig. 13:6–9, 12–14), parallel Bet Yerah Stratum IV.3 A single sherd of a Khirbet Kerak Ware krater indicates that Giv‘at Yasaf was occupied during Bet Yerah Stratum II. No sherds parallel to those of Bet Yerah Stratum III were found. Site 10. Rosh Ha-Niqra (Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959). Two strata were defined in excavations conducted at the south edge of the settlement. The finds from Stratum II parallel those of Bet Yerah Stratum V and include band-slipped pottery (Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959: Pl. XI:23), thickened-rim pithoi, which are decorated with incisions and are similar to pithoi common at Bet Yerah (Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959: Fig. 6:1–4), and evertedrim pithoi characteristic of Western Galilee assemblages (e.g., Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959: Fig. 3:13, 14). The

125

CHAPTER 4: THE EARLY BRONZE AGE IN NORTHERN ISRAEL

Table 4.1. EB II–III Strata at Selected Sites Site No.

Site

Provenance/Comment

1

Bet Yerah 1995

Stratum V—EB IB

Stratum IV—EB II

Stratum III—EB IIIA

Stratum II—EB IIIB

2

Tyre

Pottery in the early strata

Pottery in the early strata

?

-

3

Tel Qedesh

+

+

-

+

4

Tel Dan

-

Stratum XV

Stratum XIV

? Few sherds in the MB strata

5

Kh. Khisas

-

Metallic Ware

-

Khirbet Kerak Ware

6

Tel Na‘ama

-

Many sherds

-

-

7

Shamir

-

All EB pottery

-

-

8

Tel Te’o

-

Stratum III

-

-

9

Giv‘at Yasaf

EB I sherds

EB II sherds

-

A single sherd

10

Rosh Ha-Niqra

Stratum II

Stratum I

-

Single sherds

11

Abu edh-Dhahab

EB I pottery

EB II pottery Metallic Ware

-

-

12

Kabri

Stratum 9

Strata 8–6 Metallic Ware

-

-

13

H. Roshim

Stratum II

Stratum I Metallic Ware

-

-

14

Bet Ha-‘Emeq site

Stratum III

Strata II–I

-

-

15

Hazor

-

Stratum XXI

Strata XX–XIX Mixed pottery from phases of the EB III

16

Qiryat Ata

Stratum III

Strata II–I

-

-

17

Tel Raqqat (Kh. elQuneitira)

Early stratum

Second stratum

?

Upper strata

18

Tel Kinrot

Pre-fortification

Fortified settlement

-

-

19

Gamla

-

Much pottery

-

-

20

Leviah Enclosure

+

+

+

+

21

Tel Megadim

EB IB

?

?

-

22

Tel Gat-Hefer

-

Lower

Upper

-

23

Tel Qashish

Strata XV–XIII

Early phases of Stratum XII

Late phases of Strata XII, XI

-

24

Yoqne‘am

-

Pottery

?

Pottery

25

‘En Shadud

Most of the pottery

-

-

-

26

‘Afula

Pit D

?

Various finds

Pit E

27

Megiddo

Strata J4–5

Limited assemblage

Large assemblage

Limited assemblage Stratum J6

28

Tel Qishyon

Stratum IV

Stratum III

Stratum II ?

Stratum I

29

Tel Yaqush

EB I strata

EB II stratum

?

EB III strata

30

Tell esh-Shuna eshShimaliya

Strata II–IV

?

-

Stratum V

31

Tel Kitan

Stratum VII

-

-

-

Early phase

?

Late phase

32

Ta‘anakh

-

33

Khirbet et-Tuwal

+

34

Bet She’an

Stratum XV

-

R12

R11–R7b

Upper Galilee Survey

18 sites

38 sites

1 site

6 sites

Hula Valley Survey

1 site

21 sites

2 sites

2 sites

+ present, ? possibly present, – absent

126

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

assemblage retrieved in Stratum I is dominated by vessels of the Metallic Ware family and relates therefore to Bet Yerah Stratum IV (e.g., Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959: Fig. 3:1–10, 17–19). The excavators assert that some Khirbet Kerak Ware sherds were found in the center of the settlement, but drawings of these examples were not published (Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959:88). It is thus possible that there was a small settlement at Rosh Ha-Niqra during Bet Yerah Stratum II. Site 11. Abu edh-Dhahab (Frankel and Getzov 1997: Site 2.159; Getzov 2004). Two phases of a settlement were defined in a limited excavation conducted at the edge of the site. The material relates to that of Bet Yerah Stratum V and includes finds similar to Rosh Ha-Niqra Stratum II (Getzov 2004). In the center of the site many Metallic Ware sherds were recovered, paralleling Bet Yerah Stratum IV (e.g., Frankel and Getzov 1997: Fig. 2.159.2:3–13). None of the pottery related to Bet Yerah Strata III or II. Site 12. Kabri (Kempinski 1994, 2002; Scheftelowitz and Peilstöcker 1990; Scheftelowitz 1990, 2002). There are extensive remains of an Early Bronze Age settlement covering c. 130 dunams in the north of the tell, under remains from the Middle Bronze Age. Stratum 9 was dated to EB IB and parallels Bet Yerah Stratum V. The finds in this stratum included bandslipped vessels (Scheftelowitz 1990: Fig. 21:8; 2002: Fig 5.6:6) and everted-rim pithoi that are characteristic of assemblages of Western Galilee (Scheftelowitz 1990: Fig. 21:6; 2002: Fig. 5.6:1, 3, 4). In assemblages from Strata 8–6 Metallic Ware vessels dominated (Scheftelowitz 2002: Fig. 5.8), and these strata parallel Bet Yerah Stratum IV. No vessels were published that relate to Bet Yerah Strata III or II. Site 13. Horbat Roshim (Me‘ona—Braun 1996b). An excavation was conducted at the southwest edge of the site and two strata were defined. Stratum II, parallel to Bet Yerah Stratum V, produced holemouth jars with a simple rim and a red slip (Braun 1996b: Fig. 12:1–3, 7–9) that are common also at Bet Yerah, and everted rim pithoi, characteristic of assemblages of Western Galilee (Braun 1996b: 18–20, Fig. 11:3–8). Stratum I yielded remains of a fortified settlement with a pottery assemblage dominated by Metallic Ware vessels, and thus parallels Bet Yerah Stratum IV.

Site 14. Bet Ha-‘Emeq Site (Givon 2002; Frankel and Getzov, forthcoming). In an excavation carried out on the south slope of the site, six settlement strata were discerned (Givon 2002: Table 1). Throughout the area of the tell a rich collection of pottery, including eleven jar fragments with cylinder seal impressions, was found. Stratum III yielded finds similar to those from Rosh Ha-Niqra Stratum II and parallels Bet Yerah Stratum V. All the sherds with seal impressions, as well as many finds from Strata II and I, belong to the Metallic Ware family and therefore parallel Bet Yerah Stratum IV. No vessels relating to Bet Yerah Strata III or II were discovered. Site 15. Hazor (Greenberg 1996b; 1997). At the base of the tell there is an extensive Early Bronze Age settlement of c. 150 dunams (Greenberg 1996b:71–72). On bedrock in Area L, deposits of Stratum XXI included mainly Metallic Ware vessels attributed to EB II. Above these deposits, as well as in Area A, deposits contained a significant percentage of Khirbet Kerak Ware and lightcolored vessels, poorly fired in comparison with the Metallic Ware family. This assemblage (Stratum XX) was attributed to an early phase of EB III and it is noteworthy that in Area L it directly overlay EB II deposits. At the top of Early Bronze Age deposits in Area A, an assemblage, consisting mainly of vessels of a light-colored fabric with a thin, red, sloppily applied wash, was uncovered in situ (L641). A drastic decrease in the presence of Khirbet Kerak Ware was ascribed to this top stratum (XIX, or 10 according to the local terminology of Area A), which was attributed to a late phase of EB III. The development and progress of the Early Bronze Age assemblages at Hazor, as interpreted by Greenberg (1997:191), differs from our interpretation of Bet Yerah in two aspects: a. At Hazor, Khirbet Kerak Ware appears already in assemblages dominated by Metallic Ware, and an assemblage that is later than the floruit of Metallic Ware but earlier than Khirbet Kerak Ware does not appear at all. b. The ‘late assemblage’ from Hazor, very much resembling that of Bet Yerah Stratum III (especially the jars and amphoriskoi made of a light fabric with a sloppy combing and wash), is found, according to Greenberg, above the stratum with Khirbet Kerak Ware, which should parallel Bet Yerah Stratum II. This sequence, we believe, is impossible. This special

CHAPTER 4: THE EARLY BRONZE AGE IN NORTHERN ISRAEL

sequence was defined in a very limited section of Area A (c. 6 sq m between the foundations of walls from the Middle Bronze Age), and the assemblages were not properly saved (Greenberg 1987:106). Greenberg’s interpretation should, therefore, remain a preliminary suggestion that would need corroboration by further excavations. Site 16. Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003). Three Early Bronze Age strata were discovered in several salvage excavations conducted at the site. The finds from Strata III–II are parallel to those of Bet Yerah Stratum V: they include band-slipped vessels, thickened-rim pithoi decorated with incisions that are common at Bet Yerah (Golani 2003: Fig. 4.13:16–18), pithoi with a bow-rim common in the Jezreel Valley and contemporary with the thickened-rim pithoi at Bet Yerah (Golani 2003: Fig. 4.10; and see the discussion on ‘En Shadud in Chapter 2, above) and everted-rim pithoi common to the Western Galilee assemblages (Golani 2003: Figs. 4.12:13–15; 4.13:10–15). Stratum I showed evidence of a violent destruction, and 47% of its pottery belongs to the Metallic Ware family (Golani 2003:155). This stratum therefore should be compared to Bet Yerah Stratum IV (and see also Amiran 1969a: Photos: 51, 54–56). Site 17. Tel Raqqat (Kh. el-Quneitira; Prausnitz 1957). A probe excavation was carried out at the base of the east slope of the tell. In the short verbal report, remains from four settlement strata were noted: In the early phase of EB I red-slipped and burnished vessels are common, as well as vessels with a ‘striped slip’. This terminology probably refers to the band-slip common in Bet Yerah Stratum V. The second phase included “red slipped and burnished vessels bearing painted triangles filled with white dots and wavy lines” that should be paralleled to Bet Yerah Stratum IV. In the two uppermost strata Khirbet Kerak Ware was dominant; these strata relate therefore to Bet Yerah Stratum II. For lack of further information it cannot be determined whether any vessels corresponding to those of Bet Yerah Stratum III were discovered. Site 18. Tel Kinrot (Winn and Yakar 1984; Fritz 1990: Pls. 50–54). Two Early Bronze Age assemblages were found in excavations carried out on top of the tell and on the north slope. The earlier one belongs to an unwalled settlement and its relation to Bet Yerah Stratum V was

127

discussed in Chapter 2, above. The later one belongs to a fortified urban settlement in which vessels of the Metallic Ware family dominate (e.g., Winn and Yakar 1984: Figs. 6:3–9, 8) and should be paralleled to Bet Yerah Stratum IV. No vessels relating to Bet Yerah Stratum III or II were published. Site 19. Gamla (D. Syon, pers. comm.; Gutmann 1994:44–48; Getzov 2005). In extensive excavations of remains of the Hellenistic and the Roman periods, large quantities of Early Bronze Age sherds, as well as a few deposits in situ, were found. An examination of a considerable percentage of the pottery4 showed that it belongs to EB II, with many Metallic Ware vessels. It is clear, therefore, that the Early Bronze Age finds at Gamla parallel those of Bet Yerah Stratum IV and that no other Early Bronze Age strata known at Bet Yerah are represented at the site. Site 20. The Leviah Enclosure (Kochavi 1999; Yitzhak Paz, pers. comm.). Excavations at the site yielded remains of an urban settlement from the Early Bronze Age. The material parallels all Early Bronze Age strata at Bet Yerah (Paz, pers. comm.) Site 21. Tel Megadim (Wolff 2000). In a preliminary report, several construction phases dated to EB IB are discussed. The finds include pithoi with a bow rim that are common at contemporary sites in the Sharon plain and at ‘En Shadud and form an important component in assemblages that parallel Bet Yerah Stratum V (see discussion on assemblages parallel to Bet Yerah Stratum V in Chapter 2, above). In addition, fragments dated to EB II and III were recovered, but we cannot compare these to the Bet Yerah material due to the lack of detailed information. Site 22. Tel Gat-Hefer (Alexandre, Gal and CovelloParan 2003; Covello-Paran 2003). On top of the tell and on its north slope remains excavated on bedrock yielded two Early Bronze Age assemblages. In the earlier one Metallic Ware vessels, relating to Bet Yerah Stratum IV, dominated. In the later one, a variety of vessels was recovered, most of which were of the light, brittle fabric, often covered by a red wash, characteristic of Bet Yerah Stratum III. In spite of the large area excavated, Tel Gat-Hefer did not yield a single sherd attributable to the Khirbet Kerak Ware family.

128

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

Site 23. Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 1996; 2000). As we have shown above in Chapter 2, Strata XV–XIII parallel Bet Yerah Stratum V. Assemblages in which Metallic Ware vessels dominate are attributed to the early phases of Stratum VII and thus parallel Bet Yerah Stratum IV (Zuckerman 2003:179). In the late phases of Stratum XII and in Stratum XI are assemblages in which there is a greater proportion of light fabric wares with a red wash and they correspond to Bet Yerah Stratum III (Zuckerman 2003:180). The extensive excavations at Tel Qashish yielded not a single Khirbet Kerak Ware sherd, and it can be stated that there is no parallel to Bet Yerah Stratum II. Site 24. Yoqne‘am (Ben-Tor 1993a; Zuckerman 1996:131, Figs. 54–56, 2003:180). Early Bronze Age pottery was discovered in the lowest levels at the site, below a glacis dated to Middle Bronze II. Metallic Ware vessels (e.g., Zuckerman 1996: Figs. 54:4, 5, 55:8, 9) parallel those of Bet Yerah Stratum IV. It is possible that a few platters (e.g., Zuckerman 1996: Figs. 54:6, 56:10) correspond to bowls of Bet Yerah Stratum III, but they are insufficient to claim a significant similarity. Thin-walled holemouth jars (Zuckerman 1996: Fig. 54:14–18) and Khirbet Kerak Ware (Zuckerman 1996:131) compare to finds of Bet Yerah Stratum II. Ben-Tor mentions material from EB I as well (1993a:811). These may be from the early part of the period, as the published pottery drawings do not present any vessels to parallel Bet Yerah Stratum V. Site 25. ‘En Shadud (Braun 1985). Most of the site is a one-period settlement. As elaborated in Chapter 2, above, it is contemporary with Bet Yerah Stratum V. Site 26. ‘Afula (Sukenik 1948). In several places, and especially in Pit D, pottery paralleling that of Bet Yerah Stratum V was retrieved. This pottery includes incurved-rim bowls (Sukenik 1948: Pl. VI:2–3), bowls with rounded knobs (Sukenik 1948: Pl. XI:1, 2), gutterrim bowls (Sukenik 1948: Pl. VI:20, 21), thickened-rim pithoi decorated with a row of incisions (Sukenik 1948: Pl. IV:39, 40) and sherds with band-slip decoration (Sukenik 1948: Pl. XVIII). In other pits on the tell a few graves and single potsherds without an architectural context were found. Among these sherds are combed jar fragments (Sukenik 1948: Pl. XII:26–28), possibly related to vessels from Bet Yerah Stratum IV, as well as jar and bowl fragments of a light fabric

with a red wash (Sukenik 1948: Pls. XI:8, XII:17) that correspond to pottery of Bet Yerah Stratum III. In Pit E, as well as in other deposits, were many Khirbet Kerak Ware sherds (Sukenik 1948: Pls. X, XII:1–6), relating clearly to Bet Yerah Stratum II. Site 27. Megiddo (Esse 1991:67–90; Joffe 2000; Greenberg 2003). In the University of Chicago excavations characteristic EB IB assemblages were found (especially in Stratum XIX), overlaid by various assemblages for which the stratigraphic attribution is not sufficiently clear. These assemblages contain a large proportion of the light fabric vessels with a red wash that parallel those of Bet Yerah Stratum III, as well as a few Khirbet Kerak Ware vessels. Vessels of the Metallic Ware family were also discovered (Engberg and Shipton 1934:11–12). In the renewed excavation by Tel Aviv University, it was determined that Levels J4–5 contain vessels characteristic of Jezreel Valley assemblages in EB IB, such as gutterrim bowls (Joffe 2000: Figs. 8.4:12, 8.5:5) and ridgedrim holemouth jars (Joffe 2000: Figs. 8.4:10, 8.5:8). Level J6 yielded some Metallic Ware vessels (Joffe 2000:174), but mostly pattern-burnished platters (Joffe 2000: Fig. 8.10) with parallels to bowls of Bet Yerah Stratum III. This level yielded also a few Khirbet Kerak Ware vessels (Joffe 2000: Fig. 8.9:1, 4, 7), and it is there suggested that they are intrusive, along with sherds of the Intermediate and Middle Bronze Ages (Joffe 2000:183). These data show that at Megiddo there was an extensive settlement during the time of Bet Yerah Stratum V, a limited settlement during Bet Yerah Stratum IV, again an extensive settlement during Bet Yerah Stratum III and yet again a limited one during Bet Yerah Stratum II. Site 28. Tel Qishyon (Arnon and Amiran 1993). A description of the finds was published, with the only illustration a photograph of a biconical stand of the Khirbet Kerak Ware family. Some vessels are on display at the ‘En Dor archaeological museum. Four Early Bronze Age strata were defined in the excavations: Stratum IV was attributed to EB IA, and included characteristic gray-burnished wares. Sherds with band slip and large loop handles characteristic of EB IB were also found in this stratum; they relate to Bet Yerah Stratum V finds. Stratum III was attributed to EB II, but no information is available as to the

CHAPTER 4: THE EARLY BRONZE AGE IN NORTHERN ISRAEL

pottery associated with it. In Stratum II Metallic Ware vessels, as well as various other vessels and a few Khirbet Kerak Ware vessels, were recovered. Stratum I yielded many Khirbet Kerak Ware items, including the biconical stand, but also examples of Metallic Ware. Despite the lack of data, it can be inferred that some of the Stratum IV finds parallel those of Bet Yerah Stratum V and that Stratum I relates to Bet Yerah Stratum II, with the Metallic Ware vessels in it most probably being residual. The presence of Metallic Ware vessels likely indicates, and the presence of the paint-slipped light fabric vessels on display at the museum suggests, the existence of a stratum parallel to Bet Yerah Stratum III. By way of interpolation it is thus suggested that Tel Qishyon Stratum III parallels Bet Yerah Stratum IV and its Stratum II parallels Bet Yerah Stratum III. The few Khirbet Kerak Ware sherds in it must be late intrusive material from Stratum I. Site 29. Tel Yaqush (Esse 1993). This is a small tell, measuring c. 20 dunams. Esse describes three units: four settlement phases in which juglets with loop handles and band-slipped pithoi were dominant belong to EB I, paralleling Bet Yerah Stratum V. In the last EB I phase a combed Metallic Ware jar was found, which led Esse to interpret this phase as the transition period from EB I to EB II. The stratum attributed to EB II includes many Metallic Ware vessels and is parallel to Bet Yerah Stratum IV (this parallel to the EB II strata at Bet Yerah was already drawn by Esse [1993]). Excavations were renewed in 2000 under the direction of David Schloen and Timothy P. Harrison. Four or five EB III strata were defined, and in all of them Khirbet Kerak Ware dominated (D. Schloen and T.P. Harrison, pers. comm.). Because in the assemblages of these strata the light fabric vessels with a red wash that are characteristic of Bet Yerah Stratum III are rare, it seems that all EB III strata excavated in the 2000 season relate to Bet Yerah Stratum II.5 According to Esse (1993:1504), the EB III assemblages included, apart from Khirbet Kerak Ware, red-slipped vessels such as radial pattern platters and light fabric jars. It seems, therefore, Tel Yaqush contained a small settlement contemporary with Bet Yerah Stratum III. Site 30. Tell esh-Shuna esh-Shimaliya (Leonard 1992). Several excavations were conducted on this tell, which is situated within the town of Shuna esh-Shimaliya (North) (for the latest summary, see Baird and Philip

129

1994). Most excavations yielded remains from the Chalcolithic period and the beginning of the Early Bronze Age. The most substantial evidence on the Early Bronze Age strata came from James Mellaart’s probe excavation at the southwest edge of the tell. Apart from residual sherds from earlier strata, most finds from Strata IV–II parallel those from Bet Yerah Stratum V, e.g., incurved carinated-rim bowls (Leonard 1992: Pl. 10:23, 26–28), high-rim juglets with loop handles (Leonard 1992: Pl. 9:21), thickened-rim pithoi decorated with incisions (Leonard 1992: Pl. 11:25) and, especially, band-slipped vessels (Leonard 1992: Pls. 8:22, 10:21). The finds from Stratum V accurately parallel those of Bet Yerah Stratum II. Here, burnished Khirbet Kerak Ware vessels dominate (Leonard 1992: Pls. 13–18), but also vessels that are not burnished, which also belong to the Khirbet Kerak Ware family. Of the latter, noteworthy is a thin, high-walled bowl (Leonard 1992: Pl. 12:15), thin-walled holemouth jars (Leonard 1992: Pl. 12:22–25) and a triangular knob handle of a cooking pot (Leonard 1992: Pl. 12:32). It is possible that among the Stratum V pottery some Metallic Ware sherds are to be found, which then corresponds to Bet Yerah Stratum IV (Leonard 1992: Pls. 12:16, 13). However, Mellaart’s probe did not yield sufficient evidence for categorically stating that such a relation exists. No finds from the site were published which hint at a significant relation with Bet Yerah Stratum III, and this might imply that during the first phase of EB III there was either no settlement on the tell or that there was a small one in an as yet unexcavated area. Site 31. Tel Kitan (Eisenberg 1993). The similarity of Bet Yerah Stratum V and Tel Kitan Stratum VII was discussed above, in Chapter 2. After the sudden demise of Stratum VII, the settlement at the site was renewed only in MB II. Site 32. Ta‘anakh (Esse 1991:93). Esse’s examination of the assemblages of the site showed that they are dominated by vessels of the Metallic Ware family and thus parallel Bet Yerah Stratum IV. Early Bronze Age III assemblages are distinguished by a great variety of Khirbet Kerak Ware, though their proportion is very small. These assemblages evidently relate to Bet Yerah Stratum II, and because the excavation results have not

130

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

been fully published it cannot be determined whether there is an assemblage parallel to Bet Yerah Stratum III. Site 33. Khirbet et-Tuwal (Eisenberg 1998). The pottery assemblage from the site was dated by Eisenberg to EB IB, and many vessels parallel those from Bet Yerah Stratum V. Noteworthy are incurved roundedrim bowls (Eisenberg 1998: Fig. 3:1–3), simple rim holemouth jars (Eisenberg 1998: Fig. 4:4, 5) and bandslip decoration (Eisenberg 1998:3). Site 34. Bet She’an (Fitzgerald 1935; Mazar, Ziv-Esudri and Cohen-Weinberger 2000). Bet Yerah Stratum V is paralleled by Stratum XV, excavated by the University of Philadelphia Museum expedition. In the renewed excavations of the Hebrew University led by Amihai Mazar, seven strata were attributed to EB II–III. In Stratum R12 many vessels of a light fabric with a red wash, relating to Bet Yerah Stratum III, are known, but vessels of the Metallic Ware family are absent. In Strata R11–R7b, vessels of Khirbet Kerak Ware dominate, thus paralleling Bet Yerah Stratum II. Khirbet Kerak Ware is missing from a small assemblage found in Stratum 7a. Thus, it is later than Bet Yerah Stratum II and should be attributed to a very late Early Bronze Age phase or even to the Intermediate Bronze Age, though precise definition is impossible because of the small sample size. Stratum R12 was dated to EB II, and the lack of vessels of the Metallic Ware family was explained by the position of Bet She’an south of the distribution area of this family (Mazar, Ziv-Esudri and CohenWeinberger 2000:260). This geographical argument is not convincing, as Metallic Ware vessels are common at Tell Abu Kharaz, southeast of Bet She’an (Fischer 2000:212–219). The clear similarity to Bet Yerah Stratum III shows that Stratum R12 should be dated to EB IIIA. The Upper Galilee Survey (Frankel et al. 2001). In a site survey of the Upper Galilee, pottery from the periods discussed in this chapter was found at 43 sites, including our Sites 3–8, 24 and 25 (Table 4.1). At 18 sites pottery parallel to that of Bet Yerah Stratum V (EB IB) was discovered, and at 38 sites Metallic Ware pottery was collected, parallel to that of Bet Yerah Stratum IV (EB II). Material corresponding to Bet Yerah Stratum III (EB IIIA) was recovered only at Hazor, and Khirbet Kerak Ware, at six sites, corresponding to Bet

Yerah Stratum II (EB IIIB). At four of the last six sites (Rosh Ha-Niqra, Giv‘at Yasaf, Iqrit and Tel Rosh) only a handful of Khirbet Kerak Ware was found and only at two (Hazor and Qedesh) was a substantial assemblage discovered, testifying to a large settlement in EB IIIB. The Hula Valley (Greenberg 1987:142–150). In a thorough study of the Hula Valley, Greenberg discerned evidence for settlement in the period under discussion at 22 sites (including our Sites 19–23, 25; Table 4.1). Only at a single site (Hawat Yannai) was there a settlement contemporaneous to Bet Yerah Stratum V, Twenty-one sites yielded EB II evidence, thus relating to Bet Yerah Stratum IV. Only two sites (Tel Dan and Hazor) provided material paralleling that of Bet Yerah Stratum III. At three sites, finds corresponding to those of Bet Yerah Stratum II were identified. One site (Tel Dan) produced only a few Khirbet Kerak Ware sherds. Observations on the Early Bronze Age in Northern Israel The list of sites presented here is based on data from excavated sites only, and thus it clearly does not represent the true distribution pattern of settlements; this pattern can be assessed only from a summary of survey results. Not all areas shown on the map in Fig. 4.1 have been covered by surveys, and the information that is available is not detailed enough for the creation of an accurate distribution map of the settlements in the various phases of the Early Bronze Age. Notwithstanding this inadequacy, several observations are offered on the settlement patterns in these phases. The majority of settlements discussed evince EB IB occupation. Only the Hula Valley is exceptional, with only a single site at its south edge securely dated to this period. Early Bronze Age II flourished in the Hula Valley, where a large number of settlements were established, and in the Upper Galilee, where their number increased considerably. A different pattern emerges along the Carmel coast and in the Jezreel, Bet She’an and Jordan Valleys: three important settlements are abandoned (‘En Shadud, Tel Kitan and Bet She’an) and others experience a drastic decline in size (e.g., Tel Megadim, Megiddo and Tell esh-Shuna esh-Shimaliya). This process of decline in settlements during the transition to EB II has already been pointed out by Yuval Portugali

CHAPTER 4: THE EARLY BRONZE AGE IN NORTHERN ISRAEL

and Ram Gophna (1993); the Upper Galilee appears to differ from the Hula Valley in this respect. Early Bronze Age IIIA saw a dire settlement crisis in most of northern Israel. Sites in the coastal plain and the Upper Galilee are completely deserted and most of the sites in the Hula Valley are abandoned. The picture is, however, different in the Jezreel, Bet She’an and central Jordan Valleys. Here the settlements show stability, and the ones at Megiddo and Bet She’an even grow.6 The settlement pattern of EB IIIB appears similar to that of the preceding period, but some differences should be noted. In the western Jezreel Valley the number of settlements dwindles, while in the central Jordan Valley the sites of Tell esh-Shuna esh-Shimaliya and Tel Yaqush rebound. Especially interesting is the renewed presence of inhabitants in Western and Upper Galilee, but it should be stressed that the evidence for

131

this comes only from scattered sherds and there do not appear to have been real settlements at this time. A study of the distribution patterns presented here reveals a dynamic picture of many turns, in which opposing processes took place in different regions. These drastic changes are reflected in the cycles of existence/ destruction of urban sites throughout Israel, not only in the north (Getzov, Paz and Gophna 2001). In light of this situation, the relative stability of settlement distribution patterns during the transition from EB IIIA to EB IIIB is all the more interesting, especially when the unusually drastic change in material culture is taken into account. It appears that the new settlers, the ‘Khirbet Kerak’ people, preferred to settle in the recently abandoned settlements. At this stage of research we are at a loss to grasp the nature of this change of population: did the ‘Khirbet Kerak’ people displace the original inhabitants, or did they settle at sites abandoned before their arrival?

NOTES 1

Their attribution of the bowls and platters to the Metallic Ware family was made on the basis of their high and narrow rim, but for lack of a systematic description in the publication this attribution is not certain. 2 I wish to thank Andrea Berlin for showing me the early pottery from Tel Qedesh. 3 Arye Rochman-Halperin did not examine the attribution of the vessels to the Metallic Ware family; therefore, their attribution to this family is not certain, especially that of the jar in Rochman-Halperin 1999: Fig. 13:14, which is described as having a buff fabric. 4 I wish to thank Danny Syon for allowing me to examine the pottery from the Gutmann excavations and those from the 1998 excavations.

5

I wish to thank the excavators for showing me the site and the finds. 6 While Greenberg appreciated the variation in urbanization patterns in the various areas in northern Israel, his claim to the uniqueness of the settlement dynamics at Megiddo is unacceptable (Greenberg 2003:68). According to Greenberg, the settlement at Bet She’an was destroyed in EB IB and renewed only by “emigrants carrying the ‘Khirbet Kerak’ culture of the EB III.” This reasoning is also unacceptable, as it does not consider at all the finds from Stratum R12 at Bet She’an. There seems to be a rather great similarity in settlement history between Megiddo and Bet She’an.

CHAPTER 5

STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The traditional name of Tel Bet Yerah is Kh. Karakh (Press 1946:86–87). Sukenik (1922:101) suggested identifying the Hellenistic city on the tell with Philoteria, which is mentioned twice in the ancient sources. It is first mentioned by Polybius (Histories V, 70, 3), according to whom the city capitulated willingly to Antiochus III in 218 BCE. Tscherikower (1931:146) inferred from the name that it was founded by Ptolemy II (283–246 BCE) and was named after the king’s sister Philotera. He also assumed that the Greek city was preceded by an eastern city, Bet Yerah, which existed in the same place. The identification and the circumstances of its founding have been widely accepted (e.g., Press 1946:86; Bar-Adon 1957: n. 5; Avi-Yonah 1976:88; Fuks 1983:22–25). It is further mentioned by Georgius Syncellus (Dindorf 1829:559), according to whom it was conquered by Alexander Jannaeus at the end of his last campaign in Transjordan and the Gaulanitis (83–80 BCE), and never resettled (M. Stern 1995:180, 215).

PREVIOUS R ESEARCH (Fig. 5.1)1 The Excavations of the JPES (Maisler and Stekelis 1944–1945:80–81; Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952:166–167) The excavations on the south side of the tell revealed important remains from the Hellenistic period; they included several construction phases of a Hellenistic– Early Roman city, built over the Early Bronze Age cities. South of the remains of the city, over the remains of an Early Bronze Age fortification, was found a tomb, which was dated to the ‘late Hellenistic period’ (Maisler and Stekelis 1944–1945:83). A colonnaded building, which Tepper (1999) showed to have been an early basilica, stood out among the structures of the city.

In the second season, in the north of the tell, above the Early Bronze Age remains, architectural remains from the Roman and Early Islamic periods were uncovered. The Hellenistic period was represented only by jar fragments; the excavators saw in this evidence of a temporary settlement (Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1946–1947:64; Maisler, Stekelis and AviYonah 1952:229). The Coin Hoard. During the first excavations on the tell, Baramki (1945) published information concerning a coin hoard that was recovered there. It included many coins from the end of the fourth century BCE, the latest of which dated c. 319 BCE. The Excavations of the Department of Antiquities In the excavations directed by Bar-Adon, further buildings from the Hellenistic period were discovered in the southwest part of the tell (Hestrin 1993:258; S. Yeivin 1953: Fig. 4); they superposed remains from the Persian period (Bar-Adon 1970). Bar-Adon also excavated other areas of the tell, followed the course of the walls around its perimeter on the south and east, and identified several phases of fortifications from ‘the Bronze Age and the Hellenistic period’. Round and square towers were incorporated in the most prominent of these (Bar-Adon 1956:51). The excavator remarked that in the Hellenistic period there were walls ‘around the tell’, whose area was 200–250 dunams (Bar-Adon 1956:52); he seems to have referred to the wall with the towers. The Excavations of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago In many probes dug in the excavations led by Pierre Delougaz and Helene Kantor, Hellenistic-period remains were exposed in the north and south of the tell, but incomplete publication precludes assessing

134

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

Fig. 5.1. Map of the tell and the excavation areas.

their nature. Noteworthy, however, is that in most excavation areas in the center of the tell no remains from this period were found (Esse 1991:44–45). The Salvage Excavations of the Department of Antiquities The excavations by David Ussishkin and Ehud Netzer in the center of the tell yielded but meager remains from the Hellenistic period, mostly pits and scattered pottery (HA 1967b:9). The excavations conducted by Zeev Yeivin, Ruth Amiran and Carmela Arnon, as well as those led by Dan Bahat, in the Oholo seminary compound in the north of the tell, uncovered two walls and part of a building from the Hellenistic period (HA 1977:10–11). The Excavations of Eisenberg and Yogev in the Southeast Part of the Tell Near the site of the JPES excavations two strata of extensive buildings from the Hellenistic period were

exposed (Eisenberg 1981; Yogev and Eisenberg 1985). In the lowest stratum a coin of Antiochus I (305–282 BCE) was found, as well as an imported Rhodian amphora that predates 240 BCE (Ariel 1988).

THE CURRENT EXCAVATIONS THE ARCHITECTURAL R EMAINS (Plan 5.1) The architectural remains that are associated with Stratum I include building parts exposed in the north of Area AB, as well as segments of two walls in the south of Area C. Structure 452 The best preserved remains are those of a building (L452; Fig. 5.2) in the north of Area AB. The west part was uncovered during the course of the excavations; its east part had been destroyed by previous road construction. The structure has solid walls, constructed of two faces of medium-sized stones with a core of small stones in between. The floor was made of flat stones. The floor

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

135

◄ Fig. 5.1 No.

Excavation

Hellenistic Remains

Reference

1

Delougaz and Kantor Trench C

-

2

Delougaz and Kantor Trench A

-

3

Delougaz and Kantor Trench B

+

4

Delougaz and Kantor Trench F

-

5

Delougaz and Kantor Trench 4

-

6

Delougaz and Kantor Trenches 5–6

+

7

Delougaz and Kantor Trench 7

+

8

Stekelis and Avi-Yonah

+

Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1946–1947:64

9

Yeivin, Amiran and Arnon; Bahat

+

HA 1977:10–11

10

Delougaz and Kantor Trench D

-

11

Delougaz and Kantor Trench G

-

12

Delougaz and Kantor Trench M

+

13

Delougaz and Kantor Trench E

-

14

Delougaz and Kantor Trench L

+

15

Delougaz and Kantor Trench J

+

16

Delougaz and Kantor Trench H–K

-

17

Ussishkin and Netzer

Pits and pottery

18

Delougaz and Kantor Trench N

+

19

Delougaz and Kantor Trench O

+

20

Bar-Adon

Architecture

Hestrin 1993

21

Eisenberg and Yogev

Architecture

Eisenberg 1981; Yogev and Eisenberg 1985

22

Maisler and Stekelis

Architecture

Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952

23

Present excavation—Area AB, North

Architecture

24

Present excavation—Area AB, South

Graves and pits

Esse 1991:45

Esse 1991:45

HA 1967b:9 Esse 1991:45

+ = Present; - = absent

level is lower than the Early Bronze Age accumulations near the building (L440), indicating that the builders cut down into the ancient deposits. On the floor, two oval upper grinding stones were found (Reg. Nos. 4738, 4739), but because no matching lower stones were discovered it cannot be determined definitively whether they were actually used in this room. Structure 423 In Sq 20 a corner (L423) built of a single row of stones, which seems to have been a revetment for a wall built of organic materials, was exposed.

Miscellaneous Wall Remains Only wall segments of other structures associated with Stratum I were uncovered. It should be noted that while the way W437 cuts W476 would be consistent with the observation that not all walls belong to the same phase, all finds later than the Early Bronze Age are contained in a uniform layer of accumulations only 0.4–0.6 m thick. Similarly, the finds do not suggest cycles of destruction and rebuilding, and thus, all the finds of the Hellenistic period should be associated with a single construction phase.

136

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

Fig. 5.2. Area AB. Structure 452 in the north part of the excavation area, looking west.

Pit 469 South of Structure 423 there is an extensive pit that was dug into the accumulations of the Early Bronze Age and apparently served as a rubbish pit (Fig. 5.3). This suggested function is substantiated by many animal bones, some in articulation, and freshwater clam shells (from Lake Kinneret or the Jordan River), which no doubt served as food, and carbonized wood. The pit is c. 1 m deep and c. 4.5 m in diameter on a north–south axis, but its extent on an east–west axis could not be determined as it was not completely excavated. The pit also included a great amount of discarded pottery; this

Fig. 5.3. Area AB. Accumulations of trash in Pit 469, looking west.

deposit is the basis for the assemblage to be presented in this report.2 Burials3 In the south part of Area AB three burials were discovered: Locus 128 (Fig. 5.4) Only a third of this burial—a single individual placed at the bottom of a pit dug in the ground—was exposed. The upper part of the skeleton was lying on its right side, the head facing east and the skull leaning at an unnatural angle towards the body. The poor state of preservation did not allow the determination of sex, but tooth attrition fixes the age at 30–40 years. A fusiform unguentarium was found near the skull (see Fig. 5.11:14).

Fig. 5.4. Area AB. Burial 128, looking north.

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Plan 5.1. The remains from Stratum I.

137

138

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

The diggers of the grave hit the basalt stone floor, L125, from Stratum IV or II; the natural surface elevation at the time of burial could not be determined. Locus 118 (Figs. 5.5, 5.6). This burial was dug into Floor 125 (bottom at -191.11 m). Over the grave was an elongated heap of stones, oriented east–west (-190.51 m top, -190.80 m bottom), and a flat slab stood at the east end. The corpse was laid on its back, the head to the west and the face and knees to the north. The greater sciatic notch of the pelvis is relatively large; with other indicators it can be determined that the deceased was female. Tooth attrition fixes her age at 25–30 years. No accompanying artifacts were found in the grave.

Fig. 5.5. Area AB. Tombstone of Burial 118, looking north.

Fig. 5.6. Area AB. Skeleton in Burial 118, looking south.

Locus 122. A grave was dug into the bricks of W109 in Stratum II. The tomb was close to the surface and its upper part was destroyed. The deceased was laid on its right side with the head to the west; the meager remains of the skull did not allow the determination of the direction of the face. The poor

state of preservation of the bones also precluded a thorough investigation, and it could only be determined, based on the epiphyseal closure stages of the hand bones, that it was a mature individual. No accompanying artifacts were found. Only Burial 128 could be definitely dated to the Hellenistic period, on the evidence of the fusiform unguentarium (Fig. 5.12:14 and below). We suggest dating all three to this period due to their proximity to each other and to their common grave type—a simple burial in a pit. In the excavations at Tel Shalem similar graves were found, from some of which fusiform unguentaria also were recovered, dating them to the Hellenistic period (Eisenberg 1996:21–22). Installation W464 This is a unique installation which consists of an elongated cell open at both ends (L608) topped by W464. The cell is 1.5 m long and 0.45 m wide and high, constructed of natural stone slabs lining a pit. The wall was built above the cell, its width corresponding to the length of the cell. The base of the wall is short and does not extend much beyond the width of the cell; its top is c. 3.5 m long. It seems that the shape of the wall conforms to the shape of the pit in which the cell was built and is, in fact, a carefully made fill of the pit. Figure 5.7 shows the installation after the Early Bronze Age deposits around it had been removed. The dating of the installation is problematic, as no significant find turned up during the cleaning out of the cell and among the stones. The installation was built into the accumulations of Strata III and II and thus must postdate the Early Bronze Age. The digging of Pit 601, in which some potsherds and glass fragments of the Hellenistic and Roman periods were found, damaged the top of the installation, implying that it is earlier than the Roman period. We suggest attributing it to the Hellenistic period based on the orientation of the installation, which conforms to that of other Hellenisticperiod structures, but admittedly the orientation might be fortuitous and its construction might have taken place before the Hellenistic period, at a time when there was no permanent settlement in this area of the site. Nor do we understand the function of this installation. It might, at first impression, be defined as a tomb, but this explanation is difficult as no bones were recovered and it does not resemble any other Hellenistic tombs, such as those found in Area AB.

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

139

Fig. 5.7. Area AB. Installation W464, looking southeast.

THE FINDS The Pottery Outstanding among the pottery from Stratum I is the large assemblage from Pit 469. The figures and the discussion present all the types that were found in the pit, as well as additional finds that broaden our knowledge about the pottery vessel types that were in use during Stratum I. This additional material originated in various loci of soil accumulations and surface deposits. Despite the fact that the architectural remains show a development and the existence of more than a single phase, the stratigraphic analysis suggests that all finds came from a single stratum, and thus they will be discussed as a unit in this section. For comparative material we rely on the comprehensive reports that were published for Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995; Rosental-Heginbottom 1995) and Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997). At Dor, a continuous settlement was found to have existed from the beginning of the Hellenistic period to its end, and lately a comprehensive report of the excavations of these strata was published (E. Stern 1995). Bracha GuzZilberstein (1995) published a detailed report on the coarse wares from Dor, in which she notes the period

of use of each type at the site. We shall rely on this data as the basis for the dating of the pottery at Bet Yerah that we compare to Tel Dor. At Tel Anafa (Herbert 1997) various settlement strata from the Hellenistic period were uncovered. Comprehensive reports on the pottery were published (Berlin 1997; Rautman 1997; Slane 1997) in which emphasis was placed on the division of vessels according to their fabric. The earliest Hellenistic stratum at Tel Anafa (Stratum Hell 1) was dated 300–250 BCE. Stratum Hell 2a and the strata that follow it are dated 125–80 BCE. It is thus clear that the appearance of a vessel type in Stratum Hell 2a at Tel Anafa does not constitute evidence for its first appearance in general, and it is likely that most types originated earlier, between the end of Stratum Hell 1 (250 BCE) and the beginning of Stratum Hell 2a (125 BCE). Bowls A variety of bowl types was found, most of which are common in the Hellenistic period. Most have a red, black or brown slip. a. Round bowl with a base-ring, red slip (Fig. 5.8:1, 5) or black (Fig. 5.8:2–4). These bowls are classified as BL8a at Dor and are common from the second half

140

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

of the fourth century to the second century BCE (GuzZilberstein 1995:289–290, Fig. 6.1:1–24). At Tel Anafa the appearance of these bowls is placed in Stratum Hell 1a (300–250 BCE; Berlin 1997:74, Pl. 16:133–136).

be a variant of the Hellenistic fish-plates. At Tel Dor they are classified as BL4b and BL5b and are dated between the middle of the third and the early first centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:293, Fig. 6.4:10–19).

b. A bowl similar to the preceding one but slightly larger and made of a coarse, light fabric without slip (Fig. 5.8:6, 7). A similar bowl from Dor also belongs to Type BL8a and was found in a locus dated to the second century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:289, Fig. 6.1:19). One of our bowls (Fig. 5.8:7) can be compared to a bowl from Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957:224, Fig. 38:10).

f. Shallow bowls with a thickened rim, covered with a red (Fig. 5.8:15) or black slip (Fig. 5.8:16). Their outline is similar to that of the fishplates. At Dor they are classified as BL4c and BL5c, differing from fishplates by the absence of the central depression characteristic of the latter; this difference could not usually be discerned on our fragments. The complete bowl from our excavation (Fig. 5.8:16) is similar to Type BL5c at Dor, dated between the end of the fourth and the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:292, Fig. 6.4:1–9).

c. Bowls made of pinkish, well-levigated clay with a glaze-like, lustrous black slip and that are probably imports (Fig. 5.8:8, 10, 11, 18; and see Fig. 5.9). Especially noteworthy is the bowl in Fig. 5.8:8, which is wide, with a simple, rounded rim and is made of pink clay with a lustrous black slip. Two grooves under the rim were created after the slip was applied, and below these there are vestiges of white paint, probably part of a larger design that decorated the bowl. The bowl should be attributed to the vessels made with the ‘West Slope’ technique, well known at Dor (RosenthalHeginbottom 1995:225), although no exact parallel to our bowl was found there. d. ‘Fish plates’ with everted ledge-rims, carinated sides and a central depression that is a hallmark of these bowls (Fig. 5.8:9–11) and appear mostly with a black slip (Fig. 5.8:9,10). One bowl (Fig. 5.8:11) resembles in fabric and slip the ‘West Slope’ bowl (Fig. 5.8:8). These bowls are common in the Hellenistic period. They were first made in Athens as part of the Attic assemblages covered with black, lustrous slip. During the Hellenistic period the slip was changed to a matte black. At Dor these bowls are classified as BL4d, and were discovered in strata dated to the third, but mostly to the second, century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:291, Fig. 6.3:22–27). e. Bowl with an everted ledge-rim in the fish-plate tradition (Fig. 5.8:12–14). Fragments were found with a black (Fig. 5.8:12) or red slip (Fig. 5.8:13,14). Many are of the ‘fish-plate’ type with a central depression, but as remarked by Guz-Zilberstein (1995:292), when the fragments are small they are difficult to classify and are therefore included in the same type. These bowls appear to

g. Bowls with a carinated side and slightly everted rim (Fig. 5.8:17, 18). One of these (Fig. 5.8:17) is labeled at Dor ‘BL7b’, and dated there to the beginning of the third century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:291, Fig. 6.2:14–19). Another (Fig. 5.9:18) is of a higher quality, with black-brown slip on the inside and an impressed palmette decoration on the bottom. A similar palmette decoration is dated at Dor to the second half of the third and the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:291, 293–294, Figs. 6.2:6–13; 6.5:4–11). h. Elegant imported bowl (Fig. 5.9). The bowl is open, with a base-ring and a thickened rim in the form of a band perpendicular to the sides. On the bottom there is a decoration of impressed palmettes surrounding a rosette, all surrounded by four concentric, rouletted circles. The inside and the rim are covered with brownblack slip; there are some paint splashes on the outside. Near the rim, over the slip, there is a white-painted meander. Similar bowls with a decoration combining paint and incisions were found at Tarsus in Asia Minor, where it is dated to the mid-Hellenistic period (third– early second centuries BCE). The excavators of Tarsus assume they are a local imitation of a higher quality bowl (Jones 1950: Fig. 137:127). The decoration of these bowls is of the ‘West Slope’ technique. At Dor a similar bowl, but without its base, was retrieved (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995:227, Fig. 5.10:14). i. Large bowls (Fig. 5.10:1–3). A small number of fragments of large, unslipped bowls indicate a variety of types, including mortaria. We note the bowl in

141

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

3

2

1

4

5 6

7

8 0

3

11

10

9

12

14

13

0

15

10

16

17

18

Fig. 5.8. Hellenistic-period bowls. No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

469

4407/5

Bowl

Yellowish-brown clay, small light colored temper, red slip

2

469

4347/3

Bowl

Yellow-pink clay, small black and light colored temper, black slip

3

469

4370/1

Bowl

Light brown clay, small red and white temper, black slip

4

454

4251

Bowl

Light yellowish-brown clay, black slip

5

602

5001/3

Bowl

Pink clay, small red and white temper, reddish-brown slip

6

469

4408/1

Bowl

Yellow-pink clay, medium-sized black and white temper

7

425

4145

Bowl

Light brown clay, black and white temper

8

439

4227

Bowl

Pinkish clay, black and white slip

9

469

4393

Fish plate

Light brown clay, brown and black slip

10

469

4325/1

Bowl

Gray-brown clay, small light colored temper, black slip

11

469

4347/4

Bowl

Pink clay, small light colored temper, black slip

12

454

4205

Bowl

Pinkish clay, black slip

13

602

5011/4

Bowl

Pink clay, small black and white temper, reddish-brown slip

14

469

4409/1

Bowl

Yellow-pink clay, white, black and red temper, red slip

15

469

4379/2

Bowl

Yellowish-brown clay, red and white temper, red slip

16

469

4396/2

Bowl

Dark brown clay, small red temper, black slip

17

425

4172/1

Bowl

Dark brown clay, black slip

18

531

4630/2

Bowl

Light brown clay, minute temper, brown and black slip

142

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

0

10

Fig. 5.9. Hellenistic-period bowl.

Fig. 5.10 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

469

4416/3

Bowl

Light brown clay, black and white temper

2

531

4620

Bowl

Reddish-yellow clay, small black and white temper

3

469

4416/4

Bowl

Light yellowish-brown clay, small black and white temper

4

469

4407/6

Krater

Light brown clay, small black temper

5

469

5011/2

Frying pan

Brown clay, white temper, mica, net burnish

6

429

4360

Baking dish

Reddish-yellow clay, gray core, mica

7

469

4394

Casserole

Reddish-brown clay, black and white temper

8

469

4407/4

Casserole

Reddish-brown clay

9

469

4745

Lid

Reddish-brown clay

10

469

5011/1

Casserole

Red-brown clay, white temper

11

424

4122/1

Casserole

Orange-brown clay, minute white temper

143

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

2 1

3

4

6 0

10

5

7

8

9

10

11

Fig. 5.10. Hellenistic-period bowls and cooking vessels.

Fig. 5.10:1, which is parallel to one from Dor (GuzZilberstein 1995:295, Fig. 6.9:11). Because of the small numbers from Dor it is difficult to trace their development in the Hellenistic period; however, they come from strata prior to 100 BCE. j. Small, deep, unslipped krater with an everted ledgerim and horizontal handle on the upper part of the body (Fig. 5.10:4). Similar vessels (KRIO) were recovered

at Dor in strata dated from the end of the fourth to the end of the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:296, Fig. 6.12:1–6). Cooking Vessels a. Frying pan with net-pattern burnish made up of radial and concentric lines (Fig. 5.10:5).4 The fabric is rich in mica. Similar pans at Dor are classified as FP1 and dated throughout the Hellenistic period (Guz-

144

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

Fig. 5.11 ► No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

410

4127

Strainer

Reddish-brown clay

2

469

4745/1

Cooking pot

Red-brown clay, small white temper

3

439

4307/1

Cooking pot

Red-brown clay, small white temper

4

469

4745/2

Cooking pot

Reddish-brown clay, small white temper

5

469

4379/1

Cooking pot

Dark brown clay, minute black and white temper

6

469

4396/1

Cooking pot

Brown clay, small white temper

7

469

4417/2

Cooking pot

Dark brown clay, white temper

8

469

4416/1

Cooking pot

Red-brown clay, white temper

9

469

4396/3

Cooking pot

Red-brown clay, small and medium white temper

10

469

4407

Cooking pot

Red-brown clay, minute white temper

11

464

4309

Unguent bottle

Orange-brown clay

12

531

4640/1

Juglet

Yellow-pink clay, small black temper

13

469

4411

Fusiform juglet

Pinkish-yellow clay, small red temper

14

128

1087

Fusiform juglet

Yellowish-pink clay, black temper

15

469

4407/1

Juglet

Yellowish clay, small red, white and black temper

Zilberstein 1995:300, 329, Figs. 6.23:1–4; 6.56:15). Similar pans were also found at Tel Anafa, beginning in Stratum Hell 2a (125 BCE; Berlin 1997:106, Pl. 32:278) and they originate in Italy (Rautman 1997:220, Fig. 13:30). b. Baking dish (Fig. 5.10:6). A wide, open, handmade vessel with thick, short sides and a simple rim. The fabric is coarse with mica particles as temper. Similar dishes at Tel Anafa come from Stratum Hell 2a (beginning 125 BCE; Berlin 1997:111, Pl. 34:299– 301) and their origin is Aegean (Rautman 1997:220, Fig. 13:35). At Dor, this type is classified as BT1 and was mostly found in loci of the second and early first centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:300–301, Fig. 6.23:11–15). c. Casseroles (Fig. 5.10:7, 8, 10, 11). These are open cooking pots with rounded sides and wide, everted and concave rims suited for a lid (Fig. 5.10:9). The vessels have two horizontal (Fig. 5.10:7, 8) or vertical (Fig. 5.10:10, 11) handles that reach from rim to shoulder. Such casseroles at Dor are classified as CP5 and dated from the middle of the fourth to the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:299, Fig. 6.20). While casseroles at Tel Anafa are common, these are mostly more open vessels with straight or everted sides; a few parallels to our casseroles come from Stratum Hell 2a and later (125 BCE and later; Berlin 1997:97–98, Pl. 28:240).

One lid among the few found in Pit 469 was restored and was found to fit a casserole (see Fig. 5.10:8, 9). The lid was broken in the course of its use, and a row of holes shows its repair. At Dor, similar lids are dated to the third and second centuries (275–125 BCE) and the excavators note the chronological overlap between them and the casseroles (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:302, Fig. 6.24). d. Strainer pot (Fig. 5.11:1). This is the bottom of (probably) a casserole, which was pierced while the clay was leather-hard, and apparently served as a strainer. e. Cooking pots with a concave rim to hold a fitted lid (Fig. 5.11:2). The vessel has no neck and the rim is a continuation of the body. At Dor this is Type CP4, dated from the early third to the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:298, Pl. 6.19:13–14). No clear parallel was noted at Tel Anafa. f. Cooking pot with a squat, globular body with fine ribbing, straight, slightly everted neck and a simple, rounded rim with two vertical ribbon handles connecting the rim to the body (Fig. 5.11:3, 4). At Dor these pots were classified as CP1, dated from the second half of the fourth to the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:298, Pl. 6.17). Pots with similar

145

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

2 1

4

5

3 0

10

7 6

10 9 8

15 11

12 0

13

14

2

Fig. 5.11. Hellenistic-period cooking pots and miscellaneous pottery vessels.

rims were found at Tel Anafa in all Hellenistic strata (Berlin 1997:88–89, Pl. 21:187–190). g. Cooking pot, similar in outline to the preceding one, except that the rim is flat (Fig. 5.11:5). At Dor this type

is classified as CP2 and dated from the third century, but is more common in the second century BCE (GuzZilberstein 1995:289, Fig. 6.17:10). At Tel Anafa similar pots appear in Stratum Hell 2a (125 BCE; Berlin 1997:90, Pl. 23).

146

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

h. Cooking pots with a squat globular body with fine ribbing, tall neck, rim with a triangular cross section, handle from rim to body and a slightly rounded bottom (Fig. 5.11:6–10). At Dor this is Type CP3, dated from the second half of the fourth to the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:299, Fig. 6.18). At Tel Anafa, pots with similar rims but defined as neck-less, began appearing in Stratum Hell 1 from the early Hellenistic period (Berlin 1997:87, Pl. 20). It is noteworthy that the pots from Bet Yerah differ in the vertical neck and the relatively sharp angle between neck and body. Ointment Vases (Unguentaria) a. Small, piriform bottle without a handle, with a heavy, tall base and an everted rim (Fig. 5.11:11). One bottle was 3.5 cm tall, with rope-cut marks on its bottom. According to Hershkowitz (1986), these vessels were used for the storage of ointments, and according to her typology our vessel is Type A, dated from the third century BCE to the mid-first century CE. Similar bottles were found at Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:303, Fig. 6.25:7–14) and at Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997:70–71, Pl. 15:123–126). Juglets a. Juglets with a sharp shoulder and very thick sides (Fig. 5.11:12). Our exemplar is missing its neck and base. At Dor similar juglets with red decoration were classified as UG1, dated between the end of the fourth and the third centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:304, Fig. 6.26:1–6). At Tel Anafa these are attributed to Stratum Hell 1 (300–250 BCE; Berlin 1997:62, Pl. 12:77–79). b. Small, fusiform juglet with a thick, open rim and evidence of rope-cutting on the base (Fig. 5.11:13). At Dor this is Type B2UG, which was in use for an extended period, from the end of the Persian period to the second century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:304–305, Fig. 6.26:20, 21). At Tel Anafa they were found in Stratum Hell 1 (300–250 BCE; Berlin 1997:63, Pl. 12:83). c. Fusiform juglet with a wide, flat rim and slightly concave base (Fig. 5.11:14), from Burial 128. The vessel is low-quality and may have been intended for funerary purposes. At Dor this is Type D2UG, dated from the end of the fourth to the middle of the second centuries BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:305, Fig. 6.26:32–35). At Tel Anafa it was found in Stratum Hell 1 (300–250 BCE; Berlin 1997:63, Pl. 12:80–82).

d. Deep juglets with an elongated body, narrow neck and everted rim. A vertical handle connects the neck to the upper part of the body (Fig. 5.11:15). Similar vessels at Dor were classified as JT1 and dated to the Early Hellenistic period and to the second century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:307, Fig. 6.28:5–6). No such vessels were found at Tel Anafa. Guz-Zilberstein (1995:307) notes the rarity of these vessels in Palestinian assemblages but their higher incidence on Cyprus. Jugs a. Small, flattened jugs with a straight neck, squat body and a handle stretching from rim to body (Fig. 5.12:1, 2). No such jugs were recovered at either Dor or Tel Anafa, but similar-shaped cooking pots, attributed to the Hellenistic period, were found at Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996:52, Fig. 10.3:7) and Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970: Fig. 8:11). It should be noted that as our vessels are made of a fabric more like that of jugs and jars, they were included in the jug group and not in that of cooking wares. b. Jug with an out-folded rim, ovoid body with wide ribbing and a base-ring (Fig. 5.12:3, 4). Similar vessels at Dor are classified as JG4, common mostly in the second century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:309, Fig. 6.31:6, 11). At Tel Anafa they first appear in Stratum Hell 2a but may be earlier (Berlin 1997:49, Pl. 8:38, 39). c. Jug with a biconical body, splayed rim, on the inside of which there are two narrow grooves, and a base-ring (Fig. 5.12:5). It too may be compared to Type JG4 at Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:309, Fig. 6.31:9). d. Jugs with a tall neck, thickened rim, wide, tworidged handle joining the rim to the shoulder (Fig. 5.12:6–8). Similar jugs at Dor are classified as JG11. Guz-Zilberstein (1995:308–309, Fig. 6.30:1–6) notes that these vessels were used for storage, similarly to jars, and follows their origin and period of use from the Persian period to the second century BCE. At Tel Anafa jugs of a similar general outline were found, but with a rim different from those in Stratum Hell 2a (Berlin 1997:145, Pl. 50:445). Amphorae a. Table amphora (Fig. 5.12:9). A single fragment of an amphora with a wide ledge rim and black-brown slip on the exterior and on the rim, which also ran on the

147

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

inner side of the rim. At Dor this is Type JG7b, dated from the beginning of the Hellenistic period to the end

1

of the second century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:309, Fig. 6.32:3–7).

2

4

3

7

6 5

9

0

10

8

Fig. 5.12. Hellenistic-period jugs and a table amphora. No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

469

4390/1

Jug

Pink-brown clay, small black and white temper

2

469

4347/1

Jug

Pink clay, white and brown temper

3

469

4417/1

Jug

Pink-orange clay, small red and white temper

4

469

4440/1

Jug

Yellowish-brown clay, black and white temper

5

469

4407/3

Jug

Yellow-pink clay, large black and white temper

6

454

4243

Jug

Yellowish-brown clay, black and white temper

7

469

4416/2

Jug

Yellowish-brown clay, black and white temper

8

439

4194/1

Jug

Yellowish clay, black and white temper

9

425

4164

Table amphora

Pink-brown clay, small white temper, black-brown slip

148

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

b. Imported wine amphorae. Three stamped amphora handles were found (see below), two of them from Rhodes and one from Kos. The Koan handle cannot be precisely dated; the earlier of the Rhodian handles is datable to 229–227 BCE, and the other, to 200–172/171 BCE. Jars Jars form a small percentage of the Hellenistic assemblage, a fact that should be considered fortuitous. Figure 5.13:1, 2 presents the rims of two jars with a low neck and an everted and thickened rim. Similar vessels at Dor were classified as JR1a, and dated from the beginning of the Hellenistic period to the second century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:311, Fig. 6.35). Jars with everted rims appear at Tel Anafa, beginning with Stratum Hell 2a (Berlin 1997:156, Pl. 58). Flasks Two flasks are shown. The one in Fig. 5.13:3 has an incurved rim; a similar flask was found at Tel Michal in Stratum IV, dated to the late Hellenistic period (Fischer 1989:181, Fig. 13.2:19). No similar flasks were published from either Dor or Tel Anafa. Figure 5.13:4 shows a flask with a narrow, tall neck and everted rim. At Dor, flasks appear in strata dated to the third century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:310, Fig. 6.34:2). Berlin

1

(1997:141, Pl. 48:428–430) attributes the appearance of these at Tel Anafa to Stratum Hell 2a (125 BCE). Tubular Vessel Figure 5.13:5 illustrates a fragment of a tubular vessel. In its side there is a circular opening that was cut by the potter while the vessel was ‘leather hard’. Lamps a. Wheelmade lamp with a narrow spout and covered with a glossy slip in hues of black and brown (Fig. 5.14:1). This is most probably an Attic import. At Dor, these lamps are dated from the end of the fifth to the middle of the third centuries BCE (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995:234). b. Local wheelmade lamp with a globular body and a disk base; the filling hole is broken (Fig. 5.14:2). At Dor this is Type 6, dated from the middle of the fourth to the second centuries BCE (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995:235, Figs. 5.13:9, 10; 5.14:1–8). c. Handmade lamp with a rounded body and a concave disk base with a small lug on its side (Fig. 5.14:3). This is clearly a poor imitation of the wheelmade lamps common in the Hellenistic period. At Dor, the imported ‘models’ are classified as Type 7, while their local imitations are Type 8 (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995:235–236, Fig. 5.16:2).

2 3

0

4

10

5

Fig. 5.13. Hellenistic-period jars and flasks. No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

531

4616

Jar

Yellowish-brown clay, red and brown temper

2

540

4648

Jar

Pipnkish-yellow clay, small black and white temper

3

415

4089

Flask

Light brown clay, small light colored temper

4

469

4450/1

Flask

Reddish-brown clay, white temper

5

531

4640/2

Tubular vessel

Reddish-brown clay, small brown temper

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

d. Mold-made lamp, black slipped, with a palmette on the spout and a radial motif around the filling hole (Fig. 5.14:4). In its general shape it resembles the latest moldmade Hellenistic lamp Type 15 of Dor, uncertainly dated to the second, but possibly continuing into the first century BCE (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995:240, Fig. 5.18:4).

Pinecone-Shaped Vessel A small fragment of a mold-made vessel with a pattern of lozenge-shaped elements and covered with a reddishbrown slip (Fig. 5.15:1) was recovered. The elongated base with a hole and an impressed vegetal motif (Fig. 5.15:2) most likely belongs to the same vessel. No

1

2

3

4

0

149

2

Fig. 5.14. Hellenistic-period lamps. No.

Locus

Basket

Description

1

460

4347/2

Gray-brown clay, light colored temper, dark brown-black slip

2

531

4621

Light brown clay

3

469

4404

Gray (originally pink)

4

469

4392

Yellowish clay, black slip

150

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

1

2

0

1

4

3

5

Fig. 5.15. Hellenistic-period miscellaneous pottery vessels and figurines. No.

Locus

Basket

Vessel

Description

1

800

8004/1

Pinecone vessel

Pinkish clay, small red temper, reddish-brown slip

2

800

8004/2

Pinecone vessel

Pinkish clay, small red temper, reddish-brown slip

3

454

4205

Elephant figurine

Pinkish-yellowish clay

4

450

4123

Female figurine

Gray-yellow clay

5

469

5011

Figurine

Light brown clay

151

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

parallels were found, but a rough comparison can be made with a vessel found at H. Zemel on the Golan, also with a hole (Hartal 1989:347, Pl. 17:3). Moshe Hartal, who examined our fragments, noted that the vessel from H. Zemel is of a lower quality and that it was wheelmade and subsequently decorated with incisions. Hartal suggests that the H. Zemel vessel might be an imitation of vessels such as the one discovered at Bet Yerah. Figurines Fragments of mold-made figurines were found: 1. Fragment of the side of an elephant head (Fig. 5.15:3). 2. Fragment of a female face (Fig. 5.15:4) 3. Fragment of a female coiffure or an animal tail (Fig. 5.15:5). These figurines can be related to a large corpus of figurines known from the Hellenistic world; a fuller discussion of them is beyond the scope of this work. As examples (with extensive bibliography) we cite the figurines from Dor (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995:455–456) and ‘Akko (Messika 1996). The Stamped Amphora Handles (Figs. 5.16–5.18) Gerald Finkielsztejn Two Rhodian and one Koan stamped amphora handles were found in the excavation at Bet Yerah. The former can be fairly well dated, but, as a whole, the fragmentary state of preservation of these items does not allow the precise dating of the loci. However, they provide clear evidence of the period of activity on the site in the Hellenistic period. Catalogue Rhodes The dates are according to the ‘lower chronology’ suggested by this author and now widely accepted by scholars, although it may be subject to some relatively minor revisions in the future (Finkielsztejn 2001). Rh 1. Locus 424, Basket 4121—Rectangular Stamp 1Ε[πÍ 1Αρι] στÁως This is the only possible restoration of the name on this stamp borne by a handle with a rounded profile of early date. Types of stamps dated by the eponym 1Αριστεâς, especially those used by the fabricants 2ΙεροτÁλης and

Ζ«νων 1st, allow dating his term c. 229–227 BCE (Finkielsztejn 2001:191 and passim).

0

1

Fig. 5.16. Rh 1.

Rh 2. Locus 429, Basket 4184—Rectangular Stamp Σωκρ
τευς Torch (vertical) On the evidence of the associations with eponyms, Virginia Grace dated the career of this fabricant (the second of two) to c. 212–185 BCE (Grace 1974:200). It may be deduced that he endorsed amphoras dated by several eponyms from Κλε
ρχος or ΠαυσανÌaς 2nd to Νικασαγ×ρας 1st (Grace 1985:9). Therefore, according to the lower chronology, the activity of Σωκρ
της 2nd took place around the years 200–172/ 171 BCE (Finkielsztejn 2001:192 and passim).

0

1

Fig. 5.17. Rh 2.

Kos The chronology of the Koan stamps is much less precisely restored than for the Rhodian series and preliminary results are not yet published (see Grace and Savvatianou-Petropoulakou 1970:363–364; Fraser and Matthews 1987: passim, below entry Kos*; Finkielsztejn 2004). The most common form of amphora produced in Hellenistic Kos comprises double-barreled handles (Dressel 4 class), as is the case here. Ko 1. Locus 813, Basket 8027—Rectangular Stamp Θευδ¶ρου Club Herakles’ club is one of the national symbols of the island of Kos, together with the crab, often found on amphora stamps and coins (Grace 1979: Figs. 58, 59;

152

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

Finkielsztejn 2002:141). The top of the handle is relatively short and this may mean that it belonged to a half-capacity amphora (see Finkielsztejn 2004:158, Fig. 7; note that the stamp from Bet Yerah is mistakenly listed as originating from ‘Akko, p. 159, Table 1). No precise date may be suggested in the second–first centuries BCE.

0

1

Fig. 5.20. Hellenistic-period fragment of a core-wound glass bottle (L469, B4428).

0

1

Fig. 5.18. Ko. 1.

A Seleucid Coin Danny Syon A single bronze coin was found in L412, which is a Stratum I soil accumulation south of Structure 423. It is attributed to Seleucus II, from the mint of Antioch (Fig. 5.19). L412, Reg. No. 4072, IAA 49290 Seleucus II (246–226 BCE), Antioch. Obv.: Head of Athena-Pallas r. wearing an Attic helmet. Hole centered. Rev.: BAΣΙΛ[ΕΩΣ] Σ[ΕΛΕ]ΥΚΟΥ Nike walking l., holding a wreath in her outstretched r.; behind a palm branch. To l.: anchor. Æ, ↑, 8.70 g, 19 mm. Houghton and Lorber 2002:255, No. 692.

0

1

Fig. 5.19. Seleucid coin.

Glass A single glass object from Pit 469 is attributed to the Hellenistic period (Fig. 5.20). It is a fragment of a blue core-wound vessel, decorated with white filaments and fine ribbing.5

Stone Vessels Various stone vessels were found in Stratum I (Fig. 5.21), but it is seldom possible to determine with any certainty whether they belong to the period in question or if they are residual objects from earlier strata. Two loaf-shaped upper grinding stones (not illustrated), found on the floor of Structure 452, might belong to the Hellenistic period, but even this is uncertain, because no matching lower stones were discovered and it cannot be determined if they were used in the building.

THE DATING OF STRATUM I As we have shown, most of the pottery vessels are characteristic of the third–second centuries BCE. Some forms first appeared earlier, and some continued to the first century BCE. All the vessels found, and which first appeared in earlier periods, were still in use in the third century BCE and thus we have no evidence of a Hellenistic settlement before this century. Some of the vessels presented did not continue into the second century (bowls of Group ‘e’ and juglets of Group ‘a’ above, and the Attic lamp). The adduced evidence of the coin of Seleucus I and the earliest of the stamped Rhodian handles implies that the settlement in the excavated area was founded in the third century BCE. The continuation of the settlement into the second century is shown by vessel forms that first appear in this century (baking dishes, jugs of Group ‘b’ above), while its demise can be inferred by the total lack of redslipped ETS ware (Eastern Terra Sigillata) and moldmade bowls with reliefs. These types are common at

153

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

3 1 2 4

0

10

6

5

Fig. 5.21. Stratum I stone vessels. No.

Locus

Basket

Stratum

Vessel

Material

1

438

4181

I

Drilled weight

Limestone

2

444

4530

I

Mortar

Basalt

3

800

8084

Surface

Mortar

Basalt

4

439

4268

I

Mortar

Basalt

5

469

4391

I

Mortar

Basalt

6

469

4745

I

Upper grinding stone

Basalt

Tel Anafa (Slane 1997) beginning in the second half of the second century BCE and at Dor they are known in assemblages dated from the second quarter of the second century BCE (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:314–319; Rosenthal-Heginbottom 1995:209–221). In sum, the excavation revealed the remains of a quarter of the Hellenistic city of Philoteria, settled in the third century and abandoned in the first half of the second century BCE. Especially noteworthy are the jug (Fig. 5.12:3) and the lamp (Fig. 5.14:4) found in Pit 469 and which are dated in the second century BCE.6 By its very nature, a refuse pit would have been used for a limited period, and thus the vessels found within represent a uniform assemblage, dated to the first half of the second century BCE. Because

of its importance, we present a quantitative summary of the pottery from the pit (Table 5.1).

STRATUM I—SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION The results of the excavations show that in the Hellenistic period, in the days of the city of Philoteria, structures were erected only on part of the excavated area, while near the edge of the tell only graves were found, implying that the built-up area did not reach here. Moreover, in the section of Area AB no evidence of fortifications later than Early Bronze Age was discerned, and it is therefore reasonable that the wall with towers discovered by Bar-Adon (1956:52) should be dated to the end of the Early Bronze Age.

154

HAYA BEN-NAHUM AND NIMROD GETZOV

Table 5.1. Rim Fragment Counts from Pit 469 Vessel Type Round bowls

N

%

33

21.0

Relative Quantity* 3.7

% 8.5

Large round bowls

6

3.8

0.7

1.6

Fish plates, ledge-rim plates and shallow bowls

9

5.7

2.0

4.6

Carinated bowls

1

0.6

0.4

0.9

Thick-rim bowls

2

1.3

1.1

2.5

Large bowls and kraters

5

3.2

0.5

1.1

Frying pans

3

1.9

0.4

0.9

Baking dishes

1

0.6

0.1

0.2

Casseroles

3

1.9

0.8

1.8

13

8.3

6.4

14.7

Casseroles and lids Concave-rim cooking pots

3

1.9

1.5

3.4

Straight-rim cooking pots

3

1.9

0.6

1.4

Flat-rim cooking pots

6

3.8

2.0

4.6

15

9.6

4.2

9.7

Unguent bottles

1

0.6

1.0

2.3

Small fusiform juglets

3

1.9

1.0

2.3

Fusiform juglets

1

0.6

0.1

0.2

Elongated juglets

1

0.6

1.0

2.3

Flattened jugs

2

1.3

2.0

4.6

Folded-rim jugs

7

4.5

1.2

2.8

Biconical jugs

7

4.5

2.4

5.5

Tall-necked jugs

8

5.1

1.6

3.7

Table amphoras

2

1.3

4.0

9.2

Triangular-rim cooking pots

Imported wine amphoras

2

1.3

0.3

0.7

Jars

7

4.5

2.3

5.3 2.3

Flasks Lamps and unclassified Total

1

0.6

1.0

12

7.7

1.2

2.8

157

100.0

43.5

100.0

* The calculation of the calibrated relative quantity is based on the addition of the circumferential segments of the rim fragments

An interesting testimony to the planning of Philoteria is the orientation of the buildings of Stratum I, which differs from that of the earlier strata. While the buildings of the Early Bronze Age strata are oriented in the cardinal directions, the Stratum I structures deviate from that by 45º. Such a deviation was observed during the JPES’ first excavation season (Maisler, Stekelis and Avi-Yonah 1952: Fig. 1) and in Eisenberg’s excavations (Eisenberg 1981). The new orientation is parallel to the lake shore (Yeivin 1953: Fig. 4) and does not conform to the direction of the edge of the tell or to the ancient walls. This agreement between the findings of our excavation and the remains in the southeast

part of the tell implies a common planning, as well as the preference for aligning the Hellenistic-period structures with the lake shore and not to a surmised line of fortifications on the slopes. Thus, the orientation of the walls also suggests that the city was not fortified. The present excavation also provides additional information concerning the extent of the city of Philoteria (see Fig. 5.1). Only the excavations in the south part of the tell yielded evidence of intensive building activity in the Hellenistic period. Excavations in the center and north produced mostly poor remains from the period; they include pits and pottery without any architecture. The excavation in the Oholo compound, however, did

CHAPTER 5: STRATUM I—THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

present meager remains of structures north of the center of the tell. The adduced evidence points to Philoteria having existed on the south part of the tell, and its area seems to have been no more than a third that of the Early Bronze Age cities. The inhabitants of Philoteria did, however, conduct various activities in other areas of the tell: in the southwest there was a cemetery and within the present Oholo compound there may have been a farm of limited size. In the remaining area there is evidence of only transient presence, possibly of farmers or passers-by who camped near the city. The finds from our excavations indicate a settlement in the third century and first half of the second century BCE. The dominant presence of imported wares is evidence of a well-to-do settlement, whose inhabitants purchased goods brought from a distance. Though only few imported wine amphorae were recovered in our excavations, these are amply attested in most other excavation reports of the Hellenistic strata at Bet Yerah.

155

A date in the third century BCE agrees with the historical sources, according to which Philoteria was founded by Ptolemy II (285–246 BCE) and captured by Antiochus III c. 200 BCE. The archaeological evidence on the end of the settlement in the mid-second century BCE is, however, contrary to the historical sources, which claim that the place was destroyed by Alexander Jannaeus (104–76 BCE). It may be that at the time the settlement was on a different part of the tell—such a hypothesis is in keeping with the dynamic pattern of the settlements on it after the Early Bronze Age cities. So for example, as the Persian-period settlement in the southeast (Bar-Adon 1970) and that of the RomanByzantine in the north, the settlement taken by Jannaeus may have been in the southeast as well, as evidenced by ETS wares found in the Yogev–Eisenberg excavations (Yogev and Eisenberg 1985).

NOTES 1

The location of the excavations of Maisler and Stekelis is according to their published map (Maisler and Stekelis 1944–1945: Fig. 1). The location of the excavations of Delougaz and Kantor is according to the map published by Esse (1991:44). We wish to thank Z. Winogradov for showing us the locations of all other excavations. 2 The summary of finds from Pit 469 includes all finds from Loci 469, 531 and 537, as well as Hellenistic pottery found in Early Bronze Age deposits cut by the pit—Loci 427 and 540. 3 The anthropological examinations were carried out by Yossi Naggar. This report presents a summary of his findings.

4 The pan shown in the figure does not have a handle, but in the deposit from Pit 469 where the pan was found, there was a hollow handle fragment possibly belonging to this pan. 5 The fragment was identified by Yael Gorin-Rosen and drawn by the late Michael Miles, both of the IAA. 6 The reader must note that single sherds, especially such as did not join others during restoration, might be earlier than the period of use of the pit. This is the case also with many Early Bronze Age sherds found within and which were not described.

CHAPTER 6

THE POST-HELLENISTIC PERIOD

AGRICULTURAL AREAS IN THE ROMAN PERIOD Except for remains of a small pit datable to the Roman period (L601, see description of Installation W464 in Chapter 5 above), small potsherds dated to the second to fourth centuries CE were collected in the surface accumulations. These sherds probably accompanied fertilizers and manure that were spread by farmers who worked the soil in this area. (For pottery as evidence of soil fertilization, see Wilkinson 1982.)

A BURIAL FROM THE EARLY ISLAMIC PERIOD An unlined pit-grave (L555) was located at the edge of Early Bronze Age L523. The finds from the grave included fragmentary remains of a human skull and a glass bottle datable to the beginning of the Early Islamic period (Fig. 6.1).1 Bar-Adon (1956:53) also reported Early Islamic graves in the south and west parts of the tell.

0

2

Fig. 6.1. Early Islamic glass bottle from Burial 551 (L551, B4746).

ACTIVITY IN THE EXCAVATION AREA IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY2 The Tiberias–Zemah Road Initially the road was near the lake shore, where a wooden bridge crossed the Jordan River. In the 1930s,

with the construction of the Naharayim power plant by Pinhas Rothenberg, the road was diverted to its present position and a new bridge and a dam were constructed over the river. Gravel Crusher At the edge of the tell, within the present excavation area, there is a concrete foundation of a gravel crusher that was operated here by Qevuzat Kinneret. The crusher was erected in 1939 for crushing basalt stones, which were collected on the nearby slopes. The first use of the products of the crusher was for building the access road to the company. Afterwards the crusher supplied choice gravel to builders in the vicinity and in farther settlements, all the way to Haifa. In the Second World War the British army acquired all the production of the crusher. In 1942 the crusher broke and work there ceased. After the construction of the crusher, the company was fined for damaging antiquities and was required to pay 50 Palestine pounds to the Department of Antiquities of Palestine. Fortifications During the Second World War a ‘pillbox’ type guard post was erected at the site by the British army. The post was destroyed by the enlargement of the road and during the excavation no traces of it were found. Just before the War of Independence (1948) a position was built at the site to control the road and hinder Arab transportation, in retaliation for Arab shooting at Jewish transportation. In 1967, in anticipation of the Six-Day War, trenches were dug and lined with corrugated plates. Their remains were seen during the excavations. Agriculture The area is cultivated by Qevuzat Kinneret and at various times corn and vineyards were planted in it.

158

TEL BET YERAH, 1994–1995

NOTES 1

The glass bottle was identified by Yael Gorin-Rosen and drawn by the late Michael Miles, both of the IAA.

2

I would like to thank Noga Israeli from Qevuzat Kinneret for providing the relevant information.

CHAPTER 7

THE FLINT ASSEMBLAGE RINA Y. BANKIRER

The flint assemblage of Tel Bet Yerah includes 1,313 artifacts retrieved from five different strata, as well as surface collection. Flint artifacts unearthed in Stratum I (dated to the Hellenistic period) and those collected on the surface, as well as some material of mixed context (which could not be assigned to a specific stratum) are not included in the analysis (Table 7.1). The flint assemblage from each stratum was examined separately; differences between these assemblages will be discussed in this report. The largest assemblage derives from Stratum V, the oldest settlement unearthed at the excavation, dated to EB IB (Table 7.1). The excavation methods included sieving of all excavated material through 8 × 8 mm mesh. The ad-hoc raw materials exploited in all strata at Bet Yerah are of good quality, usually fine-grained, Eocene flint. This raw material type appears on site as small pebbles (c. 5 × 7 × 5 cm in size) in light brown– beige or dark gray colors. The source of this flint can be found in outcrops in some proximity, c. 5–10 km east of Bet Yerah.

Table 7.1. Frequency of Flint Artifacts by Strata Stratum

N

%

Surface

34

–

I

63

–

Mixed context

177

–

Subtotal

274

–

V

464

44.6

IV

188

18.1

III

145

14.0

242

23.3

Subtotal

II

1039

100.0

Total

1313

Stratum V The assemblage of Stratum V includes 464 items, of which almost 12% are tools (Table 7.2). Flakes dominate within the debitage, with c. 7% blades and bladelets. Eighteen of the blades are Canaanean. The cores comprise 5.4% of the assemblage, a relatively large group, compared with the other strata (Table 7.2). Most are made on pebbles, with 50–80% cortex coverage, and are small in size (on average: length, 5 cm; width, 4 cm; thickness, 3 cm). Two cores produced bladelets, while the others are flake cores. All cores but one are single striking platform cores (Table 7.3). The average number of scars on all cores is five. Within the tool assemblage, the Canaanean component is 36.4%. The Canaanean sickle blades are made of fine-grained flint in light colors of gray-brown, and are broken, not truncated, at both ends. Bitumen remains are visible on five implements. Six sickles have a single working edge; the remainder have two glossed edges. The working edges are either denticulated (Fig. 7.1:1) or nibbled (Fig. 7.1:2), whereas the opposite edge (not glossed) is usually not worked. The Canaanean retouched blades show retouch (sometimes irregular) on one or both edges. Only one fragment of a tabular scraper was retrieved. More than 60% of all tools in the stratum are ad hoc, in which the most frequent tool type is notches/ denticulates (Table 7.4). Stratum IV This is a small assemblage, with a flake dominated industry as well (Tables 7.1, 7.2). Half of the blades are Canaanean. There are two cores, both for flakes; one with a single striking platform and c. 75% cortex coverage, the other amorphous (Table 7.3). Tools include a large group of ten tabular scrapers, which represents c. 30% of all tools in this stratum. All of these are fragments, made on light–dark brown

160

RINA Y. BANKIRER

fine-grained flint, with smoothed cortical backs. Two fragments retain facetted striking platforms. The Canaanean sickle blades are similar to those described above, with fine denticulation on the working edge (Fig. 7.1:4). Another sickle blade differs markedly from the others, both in shape and material. It is a typical Chalcolithic sickle blade, long and thin, and bitruncated (Fig. 7.1:3; Gilead 1988: Fig.10:5–7; Noy 1998: Pls. LX, LXI). Less than 50% of the tools are ad hoc, most of which are notches/denticulates (Table 7.4).

One sickle displays remains of bitumen on its edge. Other tools are two Canaanean retouched blades and three tabular scrapers fragments. One of the latter has incisions on the cortical back. The remainder are adhoc tools (more than 66% of all tools), in which the most frequent are awls (Table 7.4). Stratum II The flint assemblage derived from Stratum II includes 242 flint artifacts (Table 7.1). It is a flake dominated assemblage, in which blades and bladelets compose less than 6% of the total debitage. Eight of the nine blades are Canaanean blades. Cores appear in a very low frequency within this assemblage (Table 7.2); all three cores are small-sized flake cores with one striking platform. Two cores are made on pebbles and one on a flint nodule (Table 7.3). Most tools (c. 59%; Table 7.4) are ad-hoc tools. The remainder are Canaanean sickle blades and retouched blades, and tabular scrapers. All Canaanean sickle blades are made of finegrained flint in light colors of gray-brown. Only one is complete; the others are either broken or snapped at

Stratum III This assemblage is the smallest one (Table 7.1). The debitage displays similar pattern as in all strata, where flakes dominate (Table 7.2). All four blades are Canaanean blades. Only two cores were retrieved, both cores for flakes with a single striking platform; one of them is made on a primary element flake; the other, on a pebble half covered by cortex (Table 7.3). Within the tools, three are Canaanean sickle blades. All are broken at both ends and exhibit gloss on both edges, which have fine denticulation (Fig. 7.2:1, 2).

Table 7.2. Waste Frequencies Stratum V (EB IB) Type Primary elements

N

%

IV (EB II) N

%

III (EB III) N

%

II (EB III) N

%

Total N

%

92

28.9

29

22.0

22

21.6

36

21.8

179

25.0

Flakes

192

60.4

98

74.2

73

71.5

119

72.1

482

67.2

Blades

21

6.6

4

3.0

4

3.9

9

5.5

38

5.3

1

0.3

–

–

1

1.0

–

–

2

0.3

12

3.8

1

0.8

2

2.0

1

0.6

16

2.2

318

100.0

132

100.0

102

100.0

165

100.0

717

100.0

61

92.4

15

75.0

16

94.1

29

82.9

121

87.7

Bladelets CTE Total Debitage Chunks Chips Total Debris Debitage

5

7.6

5

25.0

1

5.9

6

17.1

17

12.3

66

100.0

20

100.0

17

100.0

35

100.0

138

100.0

318

68.5

132

70.2

102

70.3

165

68.2

717

69.0

Debris

66

14.2

20

10.6

17

11.7

35

14.5

138

13.3

Cores

25

5.4

2

1.1

2

1.4

3

1.2

32

3.1

Tools

55

11.9

34

18.1

24

16.6

39

16.1

152

14.6

Total

464

100.0

188

100.0

145

100.0

242

100.0

1039

100.0

161

CHAPTER 7: THE FLINT ASSEMBLAGE

one or both ends. In two cases where the proximal end was not broken, the striking platform is punctiform. All sickles present a unidirectional scar pattern on their back, and a trapezoidal or a triangular cross section. Five sickle blades show gloss on a single edge, and the rest on both edges. The working edge(s) are usually finely denticulated or display use signs (Fig. 7.2:3). The opposite edge is either nibbled or not worked at all (Fig. 7.2:4). Three tools are retouched Canaanean blades: one has two parallel notches; one, a truncation, and another, fine retouch on both edges. Tabular scrapers are represented by four fragments, made of fine-grained brown flint, with cortex on the dorsal surface. Another group of tools, which was retrieved in mixed loci, should be mentioned. It comprises nine tabular scrapers, one of which is the only complete tabular scraper found at the excavation (Fig. 7.3:2). Another scraper is broken, with incisions on its cortical surface (Fig. 7.3:1).

Table 7.3. Core Types and Frequencies, According to Strata Stratum

Core Type

On Pebble N

On Nodule N

On Flake N

Total

16

7

1

24

V

One striking platform Amorphous

–

1

–

1

One striking platform

1

–

–

1

Amorphous

–

1

–

1

One striking platform

1

–

1

2

Amorphous

–

–

–

–

One striking platform

2

1

–

3

Amorphous

–

–

–

–

IV

III

II

N

Table 7.4. Tool Frequencies Stratum V (EB IB)

IV (EB II)

III (EB III)

II (EB III)

Total

Type

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

Canaanean sickles

11

20.0

3

8.9

3

12.5

9

23.1

26

17.1

–

–

1

2.9

–

–

–

–

1

0.7

Canaanean retouched blades

9

16.4

4

11.8

2

8.3

3

7.7

18

11.8

Tabular scrapers

1

1.8

10

29.4

3

12.5

4

10.2

18

11.8

13

23.6

7

20.6

2

8.3

9

23.1

31

20.4

Endscrapers

4

7.3

2

5.9

–

–

2

5.1

8

5.3

Sidescrapers

1

1.8

–

–

–

–

1

2.6

2

1.3

Borers

–

–

–

–

1

4.2

–

–

1

0.7

Burins

1

1.8

1

2.9

–

–

1

2.6

3

2.0

Truncations

1

1.8

2

5.9

–

–

1

2.6

4

2.6

Awls

5

9.1

1

2.9

5

20.8

3

7.7

14

9.2

Retouched flakes

5

9.1

2

5.9

4

16.7

2

5.1

13

8.6

Retouched blades and bladelets

–

–

–

–

–

–

2

5.1

2

1.3

Multiple tools

4

7.3

1

2.9

4

16.7

2

5.1

11

7.2

55

100.0

34

100.0

24

100.0

39

100.0

152

100.0

Sickles—others

Ad-Hoc Tools Notches and denticulates

Total

162

RINA Y. BANKIRER

1 0

1

2

3

4

Fig. 7.1. (1, 2) Canaanean sickle blades (Stratum V); (3) Chalcolithic sickle blade (Stratum IV); (4) Canaanean sickle blade (Stratum IV).

CHAPTER 7: THE FLINT ASSEMBLAGE

1

2

0

3

1

4

Fig. 7.2. Canaanean sickle blades: (1, 2) Stratum III; (3, 4) Stratum II.

163

164

RINA Y. BANKIRER

1

0

1

2

Fig. 7.3. Tabular scrapers: (1) mixed context; (2) EB III mixed context.

CHAPTER 7: THE FLINT ASSEMBLAGE

Discussion While the flint assemblages of each strata do not present large samples, they display very similar patterns. In general, the flint industry can be divided in two: one, a local ad-hoc flake industry; the second, imported industries of Canaanean products and tabular scrapers that were produced off-site. This division is common to Early Bronze Age flint assemblages (Rosen 1997). Cores of all strata are ad hoc and show uniformity in technology. The great majority are cores for flakes; they are small and have a single striking platform showing few scars. Most are fashioned on pebbles (Table 7.3). The ad-hoc industry is flake dominated, as demonstrated by the debitage frequencies (Table 7.2), and by a very high flake:blade ratio (Table 7.5). Non-Canaanean blades and bladelets comprise a very small component (0–3.9%) of the total debitage. These blades were probably not produced intentionally, but are by-products of the flake industry. Also, none of the ad-hoc tool types, except two retouched blades and one borer, were made on blades (Table 7.4). The ad-hoc technology on site presents a relatively high ratio of tool:core and a very low ratio of tool: debitage in all strata (Table 7.5). More cores were unearthed in Stratum V than in any other strata (Table 7.2), but it seems that flint knapping was not a frequent activity in the areas excavated. When trying to group all tools into different tool classes, according to their purpose activities (Rosen 1997:117), the dominant adhoc tool class in all strata is notches, denticulates and retouched flakes (see Fig. 7.6). These tool types served for woodwork and various functions. In addition, Stratum III shows also a high awl/borer tool class (perforating tools). In addition, the debitage frequency displayed in all strata is very similar (Table 7.2). Therefore, the local ad-hoc industry in all Early Bronze Age settlements at Bet Yerah seems to have played a similar role within

Table 7.5. Ad-Hoc Technological Ratios, According to Strata Stratum Ratio Flake:blade

V

IV

III

II

71:1

63.5:1

95:1

155:1

Tool:core

1.4:1

8:1

8:1

7.7:1

Tool:debitage

0.1:1

0.1:1

0.2:1

0.1:1

165

the economic system. Ad-hoc tools were manufactured, when needed, of local pebbles found nearby, using a simple knapping technology, for immediate domestic use and then discarded. The slight differences within the ad-hoc assemblages might indicate chronological variations, but may also be a result of the different contexts from which they were retrieved. No Canaanean cores for blade production were discovered at Bet Yerah. The phenomenon in which Canaanean products are found on site, while cores to produce them are not, is well known in most sites of the Early Bronze Age (Rosen 1997). The blade products (probably blanks) were imported to the site and were then retouched and used (Bankirer and Marder, in press). Very few sites with these cores are known in Israel; of these, the two Early Bronze Age sites closest to Bet Yerah (both were not excavated) are Har Haruvim (c. 45 km from Bet Yerah; Rosen 1997) and Nahal Gush Halav (c. 35 km distant; N. Getzov, pers. comm.). The present state of research into Canaanean technology and typology has not yet established chronological variance. The widths of Canaanean sickles have been measured, yielding variations between sites, which were hypothesized as suggesting different sources within a trade system (Rosen 1997). An attempt was made, using the Bet Yerah Canaanean sickle blades and retouched blades, to determine differences between the strata. Since most tools are broken or intentionally snapped at both ends, the width of each tool was measured. It appears that in all strata, the most usual width of the sickle blades is between 1.5 and 2 cm (Fig. 7.4). Since minor differences are displayed in this figure, another one was produced, merging the strata according to periods (Fig. 7.5). Here, the most frequent width is still 1.5–2 cm. However, the EB I sample shows a similar pattern at both extremes of the graph (i.e., 1–1.5 and 2–2.5 cm width), while the EB II and the EB III samples exhibit reverse patterns, the former towards narrower blades and the latter towards wider blades. Even though this observation is based on small samples, it might indicate a trend to wider blades towards the end of the Early Bronze Age. This situation can be interpreted variously as due to different external contacts for each settlement, different distribution centers, different preferences of the inhabitants, etc. The unmodified Canaanean blades were imported to the site and were there later snapped to several segments,

166

RINA Y. BANKIRER

Fig. 7.4. Width of Canaanean sickle blades, according to strata.

Fig. 7.5. Width of Canaanean sickle blades, according to period.

retouched and hafted by the local users (Rosen 1997; Bankirer and Marder, in press). The use of bitumen for hafting is known in the Southern Levant, mostly in EB I (Marder, Braun and Milevski 1995). Compatibly, the evidence from Bet Yerah is chiefly from Stratum V (five implements). If the ad-hoc tools are disregarded, the Canaanean sickles and blade tools are the most frequent tool types

in all four strata (Fig. 7.6). These tools were used in harvesting as part of the agricultural subsistence strategy, and their frequency indicates that agricultural activities played an important role within the socioeconomic systems of all strata. In Stratum IV (EB II), tabular scrapers are also quite abundant (Table 7.4; Fig. 7.6). All of these are fragments; at least three of them probably represent the same tool (on the basis of raw material, thickness, etc.). The incisions on the cortex displayed on some of these tools (Fig. 7.3:1) are characteristics indicative of EB I (Marder, Braun and Milevski 1995). The rasping of the cortical back to create a smoother surface is a known aspect of these tools (Rosen 1997). Tabular scrapers were most probably used for hideworking, but may also have had some ritual significance, and are considered as trade objects (Rosen 1983; 1997). The single Chalcolithic sickle blade retrieved might imply a Chalcolithic occupation in the area of the excavation (tabular scrapers are also known in the Chalcolithic, but it is quite sure the ones retrieved here are in situ). In conclusion, all four occupations at Bet Yerah shared a similar subsistence economy, where flint artifacts are concerned. On one hand, when flint tools were needed for domestic activities, flint pebbles were brought in and knapped on site. On the other hand, as part of a wider trade system, Canaanean flint blades, as well as tabular scrapers, were obtained, and the former were slightly modified on site for use in agriculture.

Fig. 7.6. Tool classes, according to strata.

CHAPTER 7: THE FLINT ASSEMBLAGE

Acknowledgments I would like to offer my gratitude to Nimrod Getzov for his assistance throughout the preparation of this report.

167

Thanks also to Prof. Vladimir Zbenovitch, Hamudi Khalaily and Ofer Marder for their useful advice and remarks in the writing of this report. Thanks are also due to Leonid Zeiger, for drawing the flint artifacts.

R EFERENCES Bankirer R. and Marder O. In press. The Flint Collection of Tel Beth Shean–Area M. Gilead I. 1988. The Chalcolithic Period in the Levant. Journal of World Prehistory 2:397–443. Marder O., Braun E. and Milevski I. 1995. The Flint Assemblage of Lower Horvat ‘Illin: Some Technical and Economic Considerations. ‘Atiqot 27:63–93.

Noy T. 1998. Flint Artifacts. In C. Epstein. The Chalcolithic Culture of the Golan (IAA Reports 4). Jerusalem. Pp. 269–332. Rosen S.A. 1983. Tabular Scraper Trade: A Model of Material Culture Dispersion. BASOR 249:79–86. Rosen S.A. 1997. Lithics after the Stone Age. A Handbook of Stone Tools from the Levant. Walnut Creek.

CHAPTER 8

THE FAUNA: PRELIMINARY RESULTS CAROLE R. COPE*

INTRODUCTION The Early Bronze Age site of Tel Bet Yerah produced a collection of 2,086 bones for study, of which 734 were identifiable to species after removal of mixed samples. In terms of relative frequencies ovi/caprines made up the bulk of the collection with 57.2%. Bos taurus was next with 23.4%, then Equus asinus with 7.6% and Sus scrofa with 6.3% (Table 8.1). In meat-weight terms, however, the picture looks very different. Bos taurus was most important; the individuals judged to have been present would have provided 15,680 kg of meat, while the ovi/caprine category would only have produced 1,512 kg. Sus scrofa was relatively unimportant and the individuals present would only have provided 3,050 kg for the meat economy. Hunted

animals were rare and together represented less than 1% of the collection. All species, including beasts of burden, but excluding the rat and the weasel, bore cut marks. Based on relative frequencies, the ovi/caprine category appears to be the mainstay of the economy at Bet Yerah. However, in terms of meat weight Bos taurus provided over three times as much meat, as at least seven ovi/caprines equal the weight of a single Bos taurus. It should be noted, however, that there are inherent dangers in equating meat weights with economic importance. It is possible large, less frequent species like Bos may have represented a higher degree of human interaction and energy expenditure. Energy expenditure varies considerably depending on the species selected to husband. Ovi/caprines are chiefly

Table 8.1. Species List and Relative Frequencies Species/Species Groups

N (Bones)

% NIBS (Number of Identifiable Bones per Species)

MNI

Ovi/caprines (sheep/goat)

420

57.2

94

Bos taurus (domestic cow)

172

23.4

49

Equus asinus (donkey)

56

7.6

14

Sus scrofa (domestic pig)

46

6.3

19

Gazella gazelle (mountain gazelle)

18

2.5

10

Equus caballos (domestic horse)

10

1.4

2

Canis familiaris (domestic dog)

4

0.5

3

Aplochena sp. (Egyptian goose)

2

0.3

2

Capreolus sp.

1

0.1

2

Camelus (camel)

1

0.1

1

Rattus rattus* (rat)

1

0.1

1

Lepus capensis (hare)

1

0.1

1

Dama dama (fallow deer)

1

0.1

1

Martes foina (weasel)

1

0.1

1

Total

734

* Intrusive ** Total does not add up to 100% due to rounding

* Cope Archaeological Services, 430 Fifth Avenue, Redwood City, CA 94063

100.0**

170

CAROLE R. COPE

browsers that do well on a variety of coarse vegetation. Bos is a grazer that requires grassland, and Sus scrofa is an omnivore with a semi-aquatic adaptation that does not fare well in hot open environments (Eisenberg 1981; Nowak and Paradiso 1983). In Europe this latter was often herded in mixed forests, but in the Middle East, when it has been kept at all, it has largely been an urban animal; therefore its presence at Bet Yerah is of particular interest and will be dealt with in detail in the following sections.

Therefore, in a site like Bet Yerah where pig bones were present, the relative frequencies of this species could become artificially inflated as an artifact of their anatomy. This danger does not exist for MNI as this method takes these factors into account and creates a ‘standard skeleton’; e.g., four metacarpals of Sus, two right and two left, of the same size and age within the same locus, are considered to be the same individual. For an ovi/caprine, however, the same information would result in two individuals being counted.

METHODOLOGY

Sex Ratios

Investigations were conducted with the aid of several methodologies ranging from archeological ones that estimate minimum numbers of individuals and relative frequencies to classic zoological tools.1

Sex ratios were interpreted for each species in a number of ways dependent on the pattern of sexual dimorphism for that particular animal. It should be remembered that sexual dimorphism is not just a question of larger size in males, but is a pattern produced by sexual selection (Darwin 1871; Cope 1991). For most ungulates, the skull bones, atlas and axis, carpals and tarsals are not only larger in the male, they are differently proportioned with more pronounced muscle attachments. Therefore although all bones in a collection cannot be sexed, counts and percentages can be produced from those that can.

Minimum Numbers of Individuals Minimum numbers of individuals (MNI’s) were estimated a number of ways dependent on the size and condition of the collection. For larger, well-preserved collections that produced statistically sized samples of measurable distal ends, MNI’s were estimated by counting the number of the elements and dividing by the number that would be found on the animal. This was done for all major elements and the results compared for possible differential preservation. The element with the largest adjusted count for a complete distal end was considered to be the MNI for that species at that locus. For the smaller collections, e.g., Bos from EB III, Stratum II, MNI’s were estimated by matching sex/ age/size categories per unit level. All specimens of the same approximate age, judged by epiphyseal unions, and from the same stratum were considered to be the same individual unless repetitions were in evidence. The same principal was applied to the dimorphic patterns of cows and bulls or individuals of unusually large size. Minimum Number of Individuals is the basis of most discussions that attempted to produce meat weights for Bet Yerah instead of Number of Identified Bones per Species (NIBPS) because of the danger of overrepresentation of some species, especially Sus scrofa. Different animals contain different numbers of bones, e.g., most ungulate species have four metapodia; Sus has eight with a corresponding number of phalanges.

R ESULTS The discussion of results from Bet Yerah, beginning with the earliest, will be placed within a stratigraphic context conducive to the study of the various cultural elements that occupied the site over time. This method may illuminate specific patterns and practices that might be unique or conversely demonstrate cultural continuity in situ. Stratum V—Early Bronze IB One hundred and forty-seven bones belonging to six species were considered suitable for analysis from Stratum V. The highest frequency NIBPS was produced by the ovi/caprines with 57.8%. Bos taurus was next with 32.7%, and finally Equus asinus with 5.4% of the collection. Sus and Gazella were present but were probably not of economic importance (Table 8.2a). Only 7% of the ovi/caprine category were immature at the time of slaughter and none would have been maternally dependent. Of Bos taurus, 6.2% were

CHAPTER 8: THE FAUNA: PRELIMINARY RESULTS

immature at death; all Equus asinus were completely mature. Although the bones of Sus were rare in Stratum V, 66.6% would have been maternally dependent. Stratum IV—Early Bronze II Stratum IV produced the largest sample of identifiable bones for study. Two hundred and twenty-seven bones belonging to ten species were analyzed and quantified. Of the NIBPS, 86.3% were ovi/caprine, 6.6% were Bos and 4% belonged to Gazella. All other species, both hunted and domestic, together made up 3% of the collections. Sus had an MNI of one individual and composed only 0.9% of the collection (Table 8.2b). Only 5.1% of ovi/caprines were immature at slaughter and none would have been maternally dependent. All other specimens with the exception of one gazelle fawn were mature. Although relative frequencies indicate the importance of ovi/caprines, meat weights suggest that in meat weight terms Bos taurus was most important (Table 8.2b). Stratum III—Early Bronze IIIA Stratum III produced a relatively large sample size of 206 bones. Of the eight species present, Bos had the highest relative frequency with 41.3%. The ovi/caprine category followed with a relative frequency of 31.1%. Sus scrofa was next in importance with 13.1%, the highest figure for the entire site. Equus asinus was 11.6%, while the remaining three species together made up only 2.9%. Only 7% of Bos taurus were immature at death, 6.4% of ovi/caprine and 13.3% of Sus scrofa (Table 8.2c). The sample from Stratum III seems to reflect a culture where secondary products are more important to the economy than meat. Stratum II—Early Bronze IIIB Stratum II contained only 45 identifiable bones. Again in terms of relative frequencies, the ovi/caprine category led with 42.2 % of the collection, Bos taurus was next with 31.1%, then Equus asinus at 17.8%, Sus scrofa at 6.7% and gazelle, with 2.2% (Table 8.2d). All species including Equus asinus bore butcher marks. Only 5.2% of ovi/caprines were found to be immature at death. In contrast, 28.5% of Bos were immature at slaughter. However the latter figure is deceptive, as this

171

relative frequency is largely based on the bones of a single individual. However now we are presented with a puzzle. The relative frequencies for Strata III and II are very different, i.e., the figures for the ovi/caprine category and those of Bos taurus appear to have reversed themselves (Table 8.2c, d), while Sus makes up 13.1% of the Stratum III collection. In meat-weight terms this places pig as the second most important meat source. Interestingly, 71.4% of pigs found in Stratum III are found in only two loci, L113 and Tunnel 542. Although relative frequencies for economically important species are different for EB II and EB III, it should be noted that relative frequencies often reflect localized patterns of local industry or usage. Such patterns are interesting in and of themselves, but what is important here is that in meat-weight terms the relative proportions of ovi/caprine and Bos taurus are, for both strata, the highest ratio between Bos and the ovi/caprines for the site. Or in other words, the amount of food produced for consumption by Bos taurus was five to six times that produced by the ovi/caprine category for both strata. Analyses of Stratum II seem to indicate a culture of faunal exploitation in which secondary products such as milk and wool are more important than meat. It must be remembered, however, that the sample size for this stratum was extremely small, so conclusions must be tentative until compared with the larger sample from Stratum III (EB IIIA). Stratum I—Hellenistic Stratum I produced a collection of 108 identifiable bones. In terms of relative frequencies the ovi/caprine category made up 51.8% of the collection. Equus asinus was next with 13.9%; Sus scrofa, 10.2%; and Equus caballos and Bos taurus, each 9.3%. The last five species listed in Table 8.2e make insignificant contributions to the faunal economy. All beasts of burden—Camel dromedarius, Equus asinus and Equus caballos bore butcher marks, so it is assumed that they were eaten when they had outlived their usefulness. Only 5.3% of ovi/caprines were immature at slaughter with 1.7% maternally dependent. Conversely 72.7% of Sus were immature at death, with 63% maternally dependent. Forty percent of Bos taurus were maternally dependent at the time of slaughter. All beasts of burden and hunted animals appeared to have been fully mature at death (Table 8.2e).

172

CAROLE R. COPE

Table 8.2. Frequency of Species by Strata Species

NIBPS

Relative Frequency*

% Immature

MNI

MW (kg)

a. Stratum V—Early Bronze IB (based on 6 species and 147 identifiable bones) Ovis aries/ Capra hircus

85

57.8

7.0

47

1776

Bos taurus

6.2

48

32.7

21

6720

Equus asinus

8

5.4

0

5

1000

Sus scrofa**

3

2.0

66.6

3

480

Gazella gazella**

3

2.0

0

3

60

147

99.9

Total

b. Stratum IV—Early Bronze II (based on 10 species and 227 identifiable bones) Ovis aries/ Capra hircus

196

86.3

5.1

40

1920

15

6.6

13.3

15

4800

Gazella gazella

9

4.0

0

4

80

Sus scrofa**

2

0.9

0

1

160

Equus asinus**

1

0.4

0

1

320

Capreolus sp.**

1

0.4

0

1

20

Dama dama **

1

0.4

0

1

80

Canis familiaris**

1

0.4

0

1

***

Martes foina

1

0.4

0

1

***

227

99.8

Bos taurus

Total

c. Stratum III—Early Bronze IIIA (based on 8 species and 206 identifiable bones) Bos taurus

85

41.3

7.0

14

4480

Ovis aries/ Capra hircus

64

31.1

6.4

20

960

Sus scrofa

27

13.1

13.3

10

1600

Equus asinus

24

11.6

0

2

400

Gazella gazella**

4

1.9

0

2

40

Lepus**

1

0.5

0

1

2

Canis**

1

0.5

0

1

***

206

100.0

Total

d. Stratum II—Early Bronze IIIB (based on 6 species and 45 identifiable bones) Ovis aries/ Capra hircus

19

Bos taurus

42.2

5.2

13

624

14

31.1

28.5

12

3840

Equus asinus

8

17.8

0

2

400

Sus scrofa

3

6.7

0

2

320

Gazella gazella

1

2.2

0

1

20

45

100.0

Total

173

CHAPTER 8: THE FAUNA: PRELIMINARY RESULTS

Table 8.2 (cont.) Species

NIBPS

Relative Frequency*

% Immature

MNI

MW (kg)

e. Stratum I—Hellenistic (based on 12 species and 108 identifiable bones) Ovis aries/ Capra hircus

56

51.8

Equus asinus

15

13.9

Sus scrofa

11

10.2

Equus caballos

10

9.3

0

2

1800

Bos taurus

10

9.3

40.0

8

2560

Canis

2

1.8

50.0

2

***

Gazella gazella

1

0.9

0

1

20

Camel dromedarius

1

0.9

0

1

360

Alpochena sp.

1

0.9

0

0

3

Dama dama

1

0.9

0

0

80

108

99.9

Total

5.3

15

720

0

9

1800

72.7

5

806

* Totals may not add up to 100% or vary ±