Jerusalem: Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley (GivʿAti Parking Lot) 9789654063784, 9789654065900, 9654063786

Citation preview

IAA Reports, No. 52

Jerusalem Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley (Giv‘ati Parking Lot) Volume I

Doron Ben-Ami

With contributions by

Donald T. Ariel, Marva Balouka, Guy Bar-Oz, Stella Behar, Katia Cytryn-Silverman, Dorit Gutreich, Masha Krakovsky, Yossi Nagar, Noga Nissim Ben Efraim, Orit Peleg-Barkat, Noa Raban-Gerstel, Débora Sandhaus, Ariel Shatil, Guy D. Stiebel, Yana Tchekhanovets and Ayala Zilberstein

ISRAEL ANTIQUITIES AUTHORITY JERUSALEM 2013

IAA Reports Publications of the Israel Antiquities Authority Editor-in-Chief: Judith Ben-Michael Series and Production Editor: Ann Roshwalb Hurowitz Volume Editor: Shelley Sadeh Production Coordinator: Lori Lender Front Cover: Giv‘ati Parking Lot in the City of David, looking northeast (photograph, Skyview Photography Ltd.). Back Cover: The Giv‘ati Parking Lot excavations with Area M1 in foreground; Temple Mount in the north, looking northeast (photograph, Skyview Photography Ltd.). Cover Design and Production: Ann Buchnick Abuhav Layout and Typesetting: Ann Buchnick Abuhav, Hagar Maimon Illustrations: Natalya Zak, Elizabet Belashov Printing: Art Plus Ltd., Jerusalem Copyright © 2013, The Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem POB 586, Jerusalem, 91004 ISBN 978-965-406-378-4 eISBN 9789654065900 www.antiquities.org.il

Contents

Abbreviations

v

Foreword

vii

Chapter 1: Introduction

Doron Ben-Ami

1

Chapter 2: sTRATIGRAPHY and ARCHITECTURE

Doron Ben-Ami

7

Chapter 3: THE IRON AGE POTTERY

Doron Ben-Ami

63

Chapter 4: the hellenistic pottery

Débora Sandhaus

83

Chapter 5: the early roman pottery

Yana Tchekhanovets

109

Chapter 6: The late Roman and byzantine pottery

Marva Balouka

151

Chapter 7: the islamic-period pottery

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

167

Chapter 8: THE architectural fragments

Orit Peleg-Barkat

205

Chapter 9: THE Stone vessels and furniture of the early roman period

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

213

Chapter 10: THE early roman stone scale weights

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

229

Chapter 11: THE coins

Donald T. Ariel

237

Chapter 12: the glass finds

Dorit Gutreich

265

Chapter 13: the metal objects

Masha Krakovsky

291

Chapter 14: the military equipment

Guy D. Stiebel

297

Chapter 15: the stamped impressions of the legio X fretensis

Stella Behar

305

Chapter 16: THE stone objects

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

309

Chapter 17: the bone objects

Ariel Shatil and Stella Behar

321

Chapter 18: the stamped amphora handles

Donald T. Ariel

327

Chapter 19: the Provincial stamp impressions

Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

339

Chapter 20: a greek abecedary inscription

Yana Tchekhanovets

343

CHAPTER 21: A ROMAN VESSEL FRAGMENT WITH A FIGURATIVE SCENE

Yana Tchekhanovets

345

CHAPTER 22: THE HUMAN REMAINS

Yossi Nagar

347

CHAPTER 23: THE FAUNAL REMAINS

Guy Bar-Oz and Noa RabanGerstel

349

APPENDIX 1: LOCUS LIST

381

APPENDIX 2: WALL LIST

387

v

Abbreviations

AASOR ADAJ AJA AJPA ‘Atiqot (ES) BAR Bar Int. S. BASOR BIES IAA Reports IEJ INJ INR JAOS JARCE JFA JGS JRA JRGZM JRMES JSP LA MUSE NEAEHL NEAEHL 5 PEQ PEFQSt PEFA RB SBF QDAP ZDPV

Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan American Journal of Archaeology American Journal of Physical Anthropology ‘Atiqot English Series Biblical Archaeology Review British Archaeological Reports International Series Bulletin of the American schools of Oriental Research Bulletin of the Israel Exploration Society (Hebrew) Israel Antiquities Authority Reports Israel Exploration Journal Israel Numismatic Journal Israel Numismatic Research Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt Journal of Field Archaeology Journal of Glass Studies Journal of Roman Archaeology Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentral Museums Journal of Roman Military Equipment Judea and Samaria Publications Liber Annuus Annual of the Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Missouri, Columbia E. Stern and A. Lewinson-Gilboa eds. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 1–4. Jerusalem 1993 E. Stern ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 5: Supplementary Volume. Jerusalem 2008 Palestine Exploration Quarterly Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement Palestine Exploration Fund Annual Revue Biblique Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins

vii

Foreword

This volume is the first in a series of projected volumes describing the results of the excavations conducted in the Giv‘ati Parking Lot, in the northwestern corner of the City of David, on the eastern slope of the Tyropoeon (Central) Valley. Due to the intensive stratigraphy expected to be encountered here, based on the results of previous excavations (see Chapter 1), we divided the site into four areas (M1–M4). This was done in order to enable us to cope with the large amounts of finds and the complex stratigraphy. The present volume describes the results of the 2007 season in Area M1, located in the southwestern quarter of the site (see Fig. 1.1). During this season, Area M1 was excavated down to bedrock and the stratigraphic sequence of the site was determined. This first volume is designed to serve as a stratigraphic key for the entire site. The following volumes in this series will be devoted to specific periods, in chronological order, as they were exposed over all of Area M (M1– M4), and will incorporate in-depth conclusions. The stratigraphic analysis in this volume is presented in Chapter 2, in chronological order from the earliest to the latest strata. The pottery assemblages are also described from the earliest (Iron Age) to the latest (Islamic) periods in Chapters 3–7. The various categories of small finds are discussed in Chapters 8–19. Two unique artifacts––a Greek abecedary inscription and a fragment of a Roman vessel with a figurative scene––are presented in Chapters 20 and 21 respectively. These are followed by analyses of the human and faunal remains in Chapters 22 and 23. Lists of loci and walls appear in Appendices 1 and 2. Certain categories of small finds uncovered in insignificant numbers in Area M1 (e.g., figurines, spindle whorls, beads) will be discussed together with those from other areas in future volumes. The excavations (Permit No. A-5071) were carried out on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) and financed by the ELAD Association, and form a crucial part of a much larger project planned to combine

the various archaeological sites located in the northern part of the City of David into one archaeological park. The excavations in Area M1, described in this volume, were directed by the author, with the assistance and participation of a large and devoted staff: the field director was Yana Tchekhanovets; the area supervisors, Stella Behar, Dorit Gutreich, Noga Nissim Ben Efraim and Ayala Zilberstein. The innumerable finds retrieved in the course of excavations were catalogued and packed by Masha Krakovsky. These staff members were also important participants in the final publication team. The project was skillfully computerized by Manuel Cimadevilla and Yulia Gecht. Aerial photographs were provided by SkyView Photography Ltd. We are also thankful to our many colleagues at the IAA for their valuable support. The field plans and sections were drawn by Vadim Essman, Marc Kunin and Marc Kipnis, and Marc Kunin and Tanya Kornfeld also drew the architectural elements. The plans and sections were drawn in their final form by Natalia Zak and Elizabet Belashov. The excavation results presented in this report were made possible first and foremost through the assistance and considerable support of the Artifact Treatment Department headed by Pnina Shor. Special thanks are also due to Nuha Aga and Rivka Cohen-Amin of this department. Area photographs were taken by Tsila Sagiv and by members of the expedition; studio photographs were prepared by Clara Amit and Marina Salzberger. Thanks are also due to Yael Barschak of the IAA photograph archives for her assistance and helpful remarks. Pottery was restored by Yosef Buckengoltz. Coins and other metal artifacts were cleaned and conserved by Lena Kupershmidt. Glass vessels were restored by Olga Shorr. The finds were drawn by Carmen Hersch and Dalit Weinblatt, and Carmen Hersch also prepared the figure plates. Special acknowledgement must be paid to Sa‘id ‘Amle, whose metal detector recovered hundreds of

viii Special thanks are due to the IAA publication department and its editor-in chief, Judith Ben-Michael, the IAA Reports series editor Ann Roshwalb Hurowitz, and the volume editor Shelley Sadeh. Further thanks are extended to Hillel Geva, Malka Hershkovitz and Débora Sandhaus for hours of pottery discussions at the site. Last but not least, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to all those who participated in the excavations and carried out the actual work at the site.1 They include groups and non-affiliated excavators, archaeology students and other volunteers, who all share the excitement of archaeological work in general, and that in Jerusalem in particular. Many of them joined the project at its very beginning and stayed with us for many months afterward. We are deeply indebted to them all.

coins in the area, most of which would surely have been otherwise missed. Once the unique architectural complex of the Second Temple period (Stratum VII) was exposed in 2007 (see Chapter 2), a team from the IAA Conservation Department initiated a long-term conservation project at the site. Headed by Yoram Saad, under the supervision of Evgeny Ivanosky, and with the devoted work of Shiran Sabag and Yossi Vaknin, the conservation project first focused in 2007 on the stabilization of the structures. Further conservation and reconstruction work is planned. Publication of this volume could not have been accomplished without the meticulous work of the many researchers who devoted their time and knowledge, each in his own field of expertise. We would also like to express our appreciation to Dorit Gutreich for her devoted assistance in preparing an early manuscript.

Note Specifically, Itai Abecasis, Mamduh Abu Hadwan, Muhammad Abu Hadwan, Usama Abu Hadwan, Wissam Abu Kweida, Nader Abu Sbeikh, Hila Achiel, Matan Afik, Yonatan Aldoubi, Efrat Alpert, Meir Aviner, Elad Azri’el, Dvir Bach, Asaf Bar-Hadas, Ahmad Barakat, Matan Bartov, Aviram Bdil, Moriah Be’er, Mersedes Ben-Hamo, Amram Ben-Nathan, Noa Bernstein, Robert Berson, Nadav Berton, Ortal Chalaf, Neta-Li Chamiel, Hilla Chipman, Amital Cohen, Asaf Cohen, Ayelet Cohen, Bat-Zion Cohen, Gadi Dahan, Daniel Dansker, Elad Dante, Micha Danziger, Inon Dimri, Yonatan Dorfberger, Gil Dvir, Yoash Dvir, Yoni Eitan, Shimrit Elya, Shmulik Freireich, Tchiya Fuchs, Yuli Gekht, Natalia German, Maichai Gertwagen, Zion Getahun, Hadas Gilad, Ruth Gleen, Dora Goldshmidt, Yifat Goloz, Viki Greenboim, Daniel Gruer, Galia Gutreich, Shuki Haidu, Shahar Hanan, Matan Har-Zahav, Rachel Herman, Amiad Hibsh, Hanani Horowitz, Yoash Kabir, Eisam Kafishi, Hoo1

Goo Kang, Asaf Karavani, Gilad Karish, Margo Karlin, Hagar Kishoni, Shua Kisilevitz, Tamar Klopper, Izkhak Knaan, Knaan Knaan, Ghazi Knaan, Federico-Bernardo Kobrin Campos, Gennady Kolomeichuk, Orit Koslansky, Boris Kripak, Ben Lantzman, Uri Leibovich, Sneh Levy, Dror Luzon, Kafa Mansoura, Zacharia Mashkovsky, BatEl Melamed, Sagit Melamed, Ateret Meshulami, Morel Mintz, Olga Mostinsky, Ronit Muchtarian, Yael Navin, Amir Nissim, Doron Pe’er, Reut Pinchasi, Gennady Polonetsky, Noam Puchacho, Tali Rabin, Marc Razgon, Muhsein Rishek, Haim Rosenbaum, Ohad Rozenfeld, Raid (Abu Nidal) Shalabi, Anat Schwartz, Michael Shenkar, Gabriel Shmulevich, Samer Shweiki, Yosef Silverberg, Alon Simon, David Tanami, Tali Tolkachev, Racheli Tzari, Nadav Tzichi, Ido Vechtel, Filip Vukosavovic, David Weston, Yitzhak Yaffe, Azri’el Yechezkel and Amit Zilberstein.

Chapter 1

I ntroduction Doron Ben-Ami

The Site The site called ‘Giv‘ati Parking Lot’ is located in the northwestern corner of the City of David, on the eastern slope of the Tyropoeon Valley, c. 30 m south of the Ottoman city wall that encircles the Old City of Jerusalem (Figs. 1.1–1.3; map ref. OIG 17230/13120, NIG 22230/63120). It is confined, for the most part, by modern roads and houses: on the north it is bordered by the road along the southern wall of the old city that leads to the Dung Gate, on the east by the road that leads southward from the Ophel to the Siloam Pool, and on the south and west by modern houses (Figs. 1.2, 1.3). The site is situated in what was originally the visitors’ parking lot for the City of David and the Old City. It was partially excavated in 2003 (see below), and our renewed excavation includes the area of the parking lot as well as a higher terrace on its north, covering a roughly rectangular area of over 0.5 ha. Considering the many excavations conducted in Jerusalem throughout the years, and the many area numbers assigned to them, it was for the sake of convenience that we decided to follow Kenyon’s numbering and term the site Area M (see below).

Previous Excavations Archaeological work at the site began fifty years ago (in 1963) with the excavations carried out by Kathleen Kenyon. Motivated by the intensive building activity and the new main road planned to replace the track through the Tyropoeon Valley, Kenyon laid out a series of excavation sites along this valley, Area M being the northernmost (Plan 1.1). It was located several tens of meters to the north of an area excavated by John W. Crowfoot in 1927 (Kenyon 1964:13, Fig. 1). In a series of successive excavation seasons, Kenyon established the stratigraphic setting and main periods represented at her dig. Bedrock was reached in some

spots, mainly on the eastern side of the area, where bedrock was higher. The results of each season were published as preliminary papers (Kenyon 1964; 1965; 1966; 1967). The material from Kenyon’s excavations in Jerusalem in general, and that of Area M in particular, is currently being processed by Kay Prag (Prag 2008). Work was renewed at the site in 2003 by the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), southwest of Kenyon’s Area M, headed by Eli Shukron and Ronny Reich (Plan 1.1; Reich 2008). The major finds in this season were undoubtedly the rich Byzantine remains uncovered throughout the area. In general, Shukron and Reich did not reach lower than the Late Roman–Byzantine strata, although in some limited areas, Early Roman remains began to appear. Bedrock was not reached anywhere in their excavations.

The Current Excavations In 2007, the area excavated by Shukron and Reich was expanded as part of a large-scale excavation project. This ongoing project, initiated and financed by the ELAD Association on behalf of the IAA, aims to excavate the entire 0.5 ha site in year-round seasons. The site was divided into four areas (M1–M4), each to be excavated separately, one after the other (see Fig. 1.1). The first year of excavation focused in Area M1 (Plan 1.1; Fig. 1.4), which was chosen as a pilot area for the entire project, to define the periods and archaeological sequence represented at the site. In the subsequent volumes, the archaeological remains will be presented according to period, as they were exposed throughout the entire site. Prior to excavation, test drillings (using a 20 cm diameter drill) were carried out at various locations at the site, to determine bedrock depth. These drillings, together with the excavation results, have provided, for the first time, data on the original course of the Tyropoeon Valley (see Chapter 2).

2

Doron Ben-Ami

unt

730

o Temple M

740

Old City of Jerusalem Ophel

Dung Gate

M2

M3

Giv‘ati Parking Lot M4

lle dr

on

Ty

Va

ro

po

690

y

eo

70

0

n V all ey

72

0

M1

680

Ki

City of David

670

66

0

65

Pool of Siloam

64

0

0

0

63

0

Fig. 1.1. Location map.

100 m

Chapter 1: introduction

3

Fig. 1.2. Location of Area M in the Giv‘ati Parking Lot (photograph, SkyView Photography Ltd.).

Our renewed excavations began with the clearing of the debris that had accumulated over the Byzantine remains in the four years since the excavations by Shukron and Reich, and completed the exposure of the Stratum VI remains throughout Area M1. The area was slightly enlarged to the east, where the Early Islamic strata were exposed. Altogether, twelve occupation strata were defined in Area M1 (Table 1.1), some of which consist of several phases. The earliest, Stratum XII, dates to Iron Age IIA, and the latest, Stratum I, to the Early Islamic period, which was covered by heavy fills of the medieval, Ottoman and modern periods. The Iron Age is represented by a sequence of four well-defined strata (Strata XII–IX), from Iron IIA to the very end of the Iron Age (sixth century BCE), with

a possible gap in Iron IIB. The architectural remains dated to the Hellenistic period (Stratum VIII; second century BCE) are of importance due to the relative rarity of such remains in the archaeological record of Jerusalem. The Early Roman (Stratum VII) and Late Roman–Byzantine periods (Strata VI–V) represent the most substantial remains at the site. These strata were sealed by well-stratified remains of the Early Islamic period, consisting of four different occupation strata (Strata IV–I). Above these strata were fills containing medieval and Ottoman pottery dating to the eleventh– fifteenth centuries. These two periods may be separated and assigned stratum numbers in following reports. Modern remains dated to the twentieth century seal the dense stratigraphic sequence uncovered in Area M1.

4

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 1.3. City of David and the location of the excavation area (photograph, SkyView Photography Ltd.).

Table 1.1. Strata in Area M1 Stratum

Period

Date*

Main Features

Modern

1960s

Architectural remains

Ottoman

Seventeenth–nineteenth centuries

Pottery sherds

Medieval

Thirteenth–fifteenth centuries

Pottery sherds

I

Early Islamic

Tenth century

Pits

II

Early Islamic

Ninth–tenth centuries

Architectural remains

III

Early Islamic

Ninth–tenth centuries

Architectural remains

IV

Early Islamic

Ninth century

Architectural remains

V

Byzantine

Fifth–early seventh centuries

Large structures, drainage channel

VI

Late Roman–Early Byzantine

Fourth–fifth centuries

Large structure, drainage channel(?)

VII

Early Roman

First century BCE–first century CE

Large building, water installations

VIII

Hellenistic

Second century BCE

Retaining wall

Persian

Fifth–fourth centuries BCE

Pottery sherds, stamped handles

IX

Iron Age III

Late seventh–early sixth BCE

Dwellings

X

Iron Age III

Seventh century BCE

Dwellings

XI

Iron Age III

Eighth–seventh centuries BCE

Dwellings

XII

Iron Age IIA

Ninth century BCE

Dwellings on bedrock

*Dates may be slightly modified in subsequent volumes

5

Chapter 1: introduction

Fig. 1.4. Area M1 at end of 2007 season (photograph, SkyView Photography Ltd.). 98

97

99

0

1

2

4

3

5

6

7

9

8

10

N

N

M

M

L

L

M-3

K

K J

J

M-2

I

I

M-4

H

H

G

G

F

F

Ken

E

E

yon

D

D

M-1

C

C

2003

B 0

A 97

B

10 m

98

99

0

A 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Plan 1.1. Area M1 (2007) in relation to the 2003 excavation area.

9

10

6

Doron Ben-Ami

Field Methodology As the excavation in Area M1 was, in fact, the continuation of work carried out at the site by Shukron and Reich, our excavation was mostly restricted to the boundaries set by them. Thus, as we were obligated to work among architectural remains, sometimes 3 m high, already exposed in the course of the former excavations, regular 5 × 5 m squares were not the case here. We established a series of balks that abutted the architectural remains visible at the time, to serve as control sections. Once the architectural remains were totally exposed, the balks were removed. As excavation progressed, new balks were adapted to the earlier remains.

Previous work at the site by Shukron and Reich left us with a relatively deep probe, deeper mainly on the southern and western sides of Area M1. We began our excavation on the higher northern and eastern sides (in the east we started from topsoil), in order to reach an approximately equal level throughout the whole area (i.e., down to the Byzantine remains). When this was achieved, the entire area was excavated simultaneously. A 5 × 5 m grid network (Sqs A–G/1–5) was then set (Plan 1.1). Due to the depth we reached during excavation, it was necessary to establish safety strips every 2–3 m along the perimeters of the area (marked as dotted lines on Plans 2.1–2.17); hence, the exposure area of the early strata was gradually reduced.

References Kenyon K.M. 1964. Excavations in Jerusalem, 1963. PEQ 96:7–18. Kenyon K.M. 1965. Excavations in Jerusalem, 1964. PEQ 97:9–20. Kenyon K.M. 1966. Excavations in Jerusalem, 1965. PEQ 98:73–88.

Kenyon K.M. 1967. Excavations in Jerusalem, 1966. PEQ 99:65–70. Prag K. 2008. Excavations by K.M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967 V: Discoveries in Hellenistic to Ottoman Jerusalem (Levant Supplementary Series 7). Oxford. Reich R. 2008. Jerusalem, the Giv‘ati Parking Lot. NEAEHL 5:1807–1808.

Chapter 2

Stratigraphy and Architecture Doron Ben-Ami

The stratigraphic discussion of the excavations in Area M1 is presented here according to stratum, from the earliest remains to the latest. Strata were defined as such only in cases where architectural remains were involved, i.e., walls, floors and installations. Fills of mixed material were not labeled as strata, no matter how substantial they were. In the case of the fills of the Persian period, which contained no architectural remains, the period is noted in the stratigraphic table (see Table 1.1), but not marked as an occupation stratum. Twelve occupation strata were identified in Area M1. They range from Iron Age IIA (Stratum XII) to the Early Islamic period (Stratum I). Some of the strata consist of several phases, such as Stratum XI of Iron III and Strata VI–V of the Late Roman and Byzantine periods. Medieval and modern remains were also encountered, sealed below the asphalt surface of the parking lot, which were dated, according to the finds, from the eleventh to the mid-twentieth centuries CE. Bedrock was reached in several places along the eastern part of Area M1. Due to the large and important architectural complex of the Early Roman period uncovered in Stratum VII in the western part of Area M1 (Ben-Ami and Tchekhanovets 2011), as well as the conservation work that immediately followed its exposure, bedrock was not reached in this part of the excavation area. Nevertheless, its actual depth is known as a result of the test drillings conducted prior to the excavations. A top plan with the key to the stratigraphical sections is provided in Plan 2.18.

Bedrock and the Topographic Setting of the Tyropoeon Valley (Figs. 2.1, 2.2; Plans 2.1, 2.18: Sections 2-2, 3-3) Prior to the 2007 excavations, the spur upon which the City of David is situated was perceived as relatively long and narrow, mainly due to the absence of clear

data regarding its western boundary. While the Kidron Valley is a distinct topographic feature that defines the eastern bounds of the spur, the Tyropoeon Valley, which in Josephus’ description (War 5:4:1) bounded the spur on the west, had filled up over the course of time until it had almost totally disappeared from the city’s landscape. Kenyon’s excavations the length of the Tyropoeon Valley in the 1960s and the schematic plans she consequently published (Kenyon 1964; 1965; 1966; 1967), together with the earlier discoveries by Crowfoot and Fitzgerald (1929) on the western slopes of the hill, were the main sources for reconstructions of its outline and extent. Kenyon’s schematic plans firmly established the impression that the hill’s western boundary was congruous with the modern road that passes through the valley (see Fig. 1.1). Our excavations have provided important information for the actual topography along the western side of the City of David spur in ancient times. Test drillings conducted at various locations at the site prior to the start of the 2007 excavations clearly revealed that the bedrock drops steeply toward the west. On the southeastern side of the site, bedrock was reached at a depth of c. 9 m below the modern-day surface, whereas further west it was c. 15 m below the modern surface. In the course of the excavations, bedrock was exposed over a relatively large surface in the eastern and central parts of Area M1. In the southeastern corner of the area, there is a relatively high natural step in the rock at 688.92 m asl, against which the Stratum XII walls were built (Fig. 2.1). Other natural steps in bedrock were noticed further to the west in L823 (688.10, 687.65, 687.46, 687.35, 687.19; Fig. 2.2; Plan 2.1), much lower than the one in the east. These steps appeared artificial at first glance, but closer examination proved them to be part of the natural descent of the rock westward. In one spot in the southern part of the area (Sqs B–C\3), the rock revealed a depression, somewhat rectangular in shape; this was the only place where quarrying activity may be indicated.

8

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.1. Accumulation above bedrock; higher step of bedrock exposed in the southeastern corner of Area M1, looking southeast.

Fig. 2.2. Close-up of natural steps in bedrock, looking northeast.

roughly equivalent with the modern road that runs the length of the valley, can no longer be maintained. It became evident that building activities took place on the western slope of the hill, as on the eastern one, during the early periods, and this activity considerably contributed to its elevation over time (below). This conclusion regarding the extent of the City of David has far-reaching consequences regarding the nature and import of settlement on the northwestern part of the hill during all periods, especially the early ones, when settlement was limited to the spur only. This was the earliest settlement nucleus in Jerusalem due to its proximity to the Gihon spring. Many questions have been raised concerning the nature of this earliest settlement, deriving mainly from the assumption that the limited area precluded the existence of any significant settlement. Our excavation results would seem to indicate the need for a reassessment of these initial assumptions.

Stratigraphy and Architecture The test drillings and the excavation results have provided the first significant evidence of the original topography of the Tyropoeon Valley. Thus, the bottom of the Tyropoeon Valley, which bounded the City of David on its western side, was located further to the west, beyond the boundaries of Area M. In light of these results, the widely accepted conception that places the lower part of the valley further to the east,

Iron Age IIA–III: Strata XII–IX Stratum XII: Iron Age IIA (Figs. 2.3–2.8; Plans 2.1, 2.18: Section 2-2) The Stratum XII remains were exposed over a relatively small area in the southeastern corner of Area M1, revealing only parts of architectural units consisting of segments of walls and floors built against the rock scarp.

9

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

3

4 Bedrock

C

C L823

687.65

687.35

2

Bedrock

689.06 688.34 L837 688.17

2

L835 688.18

688.82

W984

688.10

689.32 688.12

W987

687.46

3

687.19

689.16 688.66 689.51 688.49

0

3

W9

85

B

688.92

3

2 m

W98

6

B

4

Plan 2.1. Plan of bedrock and Stratum XII.

The walls were poorly constructed, some built of only one row of medium-sized fieldstones (W984, W987), while others were built of two rows of small fieldstones (W985, W986). The walls in the west were preserved to over 1 m in height. Wall 984 still retained the original plaster on its eastern face, which reached the lowest course of the wall, close to bedrock (Fig. 2.3). Unfortunately, later Iron Age building activity cut through these early remains. Nevertheless, the architectural remains ascribed to Stratum XII testify to the simple nature of settlement in this part of the city. The first inhabitants on the western slope of the City of David utilized the bedrock to accommodate their buildings. For example, the steep scarp and rock step were incorporated into Room 835. The step was smoothed to serve as floor level, and was enclosed by W984, W985 and W986, which were founded on bedrock (Figs. 2.4, 2.5). Its southeastern corner (W985, W986) is only 0.20 m from the scarp face. A rich ceramic assemblage of broken vessels, only one of which was restorable, was found in situ on this floor (see Figs. 3.1–3.3). The room continues to the north; some pottery fragments remain beyond the

northern boundary of the excavated area. Interestingly, chalices were clearly predominant, present in a variety of shapes and sizes (Figs. 2.6, 2.7; see also Fig. 3.2). Many of these chalices still bear dark soot stains in the bottom of their bowls, testifying to the nature of their use. Fragments of a ceramic cult stand (or altar?) were also found in this same context (not illustrated), but no figurines were encountered. Apparently, Room 835 should be assigned a cultic character, most probably to store disused cult objects. West of Room 835, W987 runs parallel to W984 (Fig. 2.8). As with all the Stratum XII walls, W987 was also constructed directly on bedrock. The narrow strip of fill between W984 and W987 (L837) yielded only a handful of pottery sherds. Wall 987 was probably part of another room, adjacent to Room 835 on the west. However, construction of the massive retaining wall, W969, along the eastern slope of the Tyropoeon Valley in the Hellenistic period (Stratum VIII), cut through the Iron Age remains all the way down to bedrock, and resulted in the total removal of all remains connected with this room.

Fig. 2.3. Stratum XII: plastered eastern face of W984; note the smoothed bedrock that served as floor level of Room 835, looking west.

Fig. 2.6. Stratum XII: one of the chalices found in Room 835, looking south.

Fig. 2.7. Stratum XII: chalice from Room 835 (see Fig. 3.2:9).

Fig. 2.4. Stratum XII: Room 835: rock scarp surrounded by W984, W985 and W986, looking northeast.

Fig. 2.8. Stratum XII: Wall 984 and adjacent western W987, looking north.

◄ Fig. 2.5. Stratum XII: Wall 985 and W986 oriented to fit the natural layout of the rock scarp, looking east.

11

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

Stratum XI: Iron Age III

restricted inner area exposed, and it seems that here, as in other Iron Age structures, bedrock served as the floor. A narrow wall consisting of one row of stones (W981) was built against the corner of Building 831, its eastern edge abutting the rock scarp. A thick, whitish plaster floor (L826 + L827), to the north of and abutting W981 and W978, extends westward and is cut by the Hellenistic retaining wall (W969). This floor was laid over the remains of Stratum XIII. A new wall (W982) was constructed in Phase XIC over the Stratum XII wall (W985). It is c. 0.5 m in width and identical in orientation to the earlier wall (Fig. 2.11). In the narrow space defined by W981 in the north and W982 in the south (Fig. 2.12), another thick plaster floor (L806) was uncovered, which abuts these two walls as well as W975 in the west. Its eastern end abuts the rock scarp. The floor continues southward through the opening between W982 and W975, and extends south of W982 (L813; Fig. 2.11).

Stratum XI represents a new phase of building activity at the site, consisting of structural remains built over the earlier remains of Stratum XII. Three phases of occupation were discerned in Stratum XI (XIC–XIA), characterized mainly by the raising of floor levels and the addition of walls. Phase XIC (Figs. 2.9–2.12; Plans 2.2, 2.18: Sections 1-1, 3-3) The most prominent remains assigned to this phase are two well-built walls, W978 and W975, which form the northeastern corner of a structure that extends southward beyond the excavation boundaries. Most of the building was damaged by the construction of the Hellenistic retaining wall (W969; Figs. 2.9, 2.10). The walls of the Phase XIC structure (L831) were founded on bedrock. No floor level was discerned in the

3

4

C

C

3 L826+L827 690.02-689.90

1 W9

689.92 687.54 L831

B

L806 690.07 W982

690.21 687.54

0

L813 690.13

3

2 m

690.40 689.77

W981

W9 75

78

1

3 Plan 2.2. Plan of Stratum XI, Phase XIC.

4

B

690.29 689.51

12

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.9. Phase XIC: corner of Building 831 and W982 in the east; Hellenistic W969 cuts the building in the west, looking southwest.

Fig. 2.10. Phase XIC: corner of Building 831 and W982 in the east. Stratum XII walls in the north, looking west.

13

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

Fig. 2.11. Phase XIC: Wall 982 atop W985 of Stratum XII; note remains of plaster floors on both sides of W982; bedrock visible in north and east, looking east.

Fig. 2.12. Phase XIC walls: Wall 975 in foreground, W981 and W982 in background, looking east.

Phase XIB (Fig. 2.13; Plans 2.3, 2.18: Sections 1-1, 3-3) This phase is distinguished from Phase XIC by the raising of floor levels and walls. In the north, a new

plaster floor (L820 + L821) was laid over the earlier one, with c. 0.25 m of fill separating the two floors. A new plaster floor (L825 and L798) was founded in

3

4

C

C

1 W9

78

0

3

L825

690.21

B

W97

1

L798

690.21 687.54

690.27

3

2 m

W981

5

L831

690.40 689.77

W97

699.92 687.54

B

1

3

L820+L821

690.24-690.14

4

Plan 2.3. Plan of Stratum XI, Phase XIB.

691.69 689.51

14

Doron Ben-Ami

a considerable height of c. 1.20 m. Worth noting are two fragments of zoomorphic figurines found on Floor 820+821, and two additional fragments on Floor 798 (not illustrated). Over the entire exposed area, the white plaster floors of Phase XIB were covered by an ash layer (Fig. 2.13), apparently testifying to the violent destruction that brought Phase XIB to its abrupt end. Phase XIA (Figs. 2.14–2.16; Plans 2.4, 2.18: Section 3-3) This phase witnesses the latest use of Building 831 and the architectural elements to the east, i.e., W981 and W971 (Fig. 2.14). The changes observed here include the construction of additional walls and a large installation, and the raising of floor levels 0.3–0.4 m. In this phase, the floors are all thickly plastered. Locus 793 in the south abuts W971 and W975, continues further north (L794) through the opening located between these two walls, and abuts W981. The narrow space defined between W981 in the north and W971 in the south is now occupied by a plastered, oval installation with soot marks (L801), sunk into Plaster Floor 794. Floor 794

Fig. 2.13. Phase XIB: Floor 820+821 sealed by thin ash layer in section; below, Floor 826+827 of Phase XIC; above, W979 of Phase XIA.

the southern rooms also, abutting both the northern and southern faces of W971. The latter was built directly over W982 of Phase XIC. Unlike the earlier wall, W971 is narrow, only one stone wide, and was preserved to 3

4

C

C

W980

3

W97

699.92 687.54

B

L831

0

2 m

W97 5

8

L821

690.60 690.16

W979

690.40 689.77

W981

L794 690.63

690.21 687.54

B

L801

W97 1 L793 690.52

3

3 Plan 2.4. Plan of Stratum XI, Phase XIA.

4

691.69 689.51

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

15

Fig. 2.14. General view of Phase XIA remains, looking west.

extends to the east and slants up the rock scarp. A rich assemblage of ceramic vessels was found crushed, in situ, upon the floor of this narrow space. The assemblage (see Fig. 3.9) consists of one complete (Fig. 2.15) and three nearly complete storage jars, a complete bowl and a complete stand (additional vessel fragments are still visible in the northeastern balk). To the north of W981, a new room was built over the earlier plaster floor of Phase XIB. Only the southwestern corner of this room was exposed, its continuation lying beyond the excavated area. The corner consists of a

one-row-wide wall (W979) built of relatively large fieldstones, and a somewhat wider, two-row-wide wall (W980), built of small and medium-sized stones (Fig. 2.16). No floor level was preserved here. Wall 979, the southern wall, is parallel to W981 with only a narrow passage or alley running between them.

Fig. 2.15. Phase XIA: complete storage jar found on floor of installation 801 (see Fig. 3.7:13).

Fig. 2.16. Phase XIA: Wall 979, W980 and W981, looking east; note later Iron Age remains above.

16

Doron Ben-Ami

Judging from the rich finds, the well-preserved walls, and the lack of any sign of destruction, it appears that Phase XIA was simply abandoned. It was then covered by the natural fill that washed down from the upper eastern slope of the Tyropoeon Valley, upon which the Stratum X structures were built soon after.

western face of W978. The eastern end of W976 lies beyond the excavation limit and in the west, the wall is cut by the Hellenistic retaining wall (W969), which also damaged the remains of Room 803. Room 803 is bounded in the east by W977, a narrower wall constructed of small and mediumsized fieldstones directly over W980 of the previous stratum. Wall 977 abuts W976 to form a corner of a larger structure of unknown dimensions. The wider

Stratum X: Iron Age III (Fig. 2.17; Plans 2.5, 2.18: Sections 1-1, 3-3) In Stratum X, a new settlement was built that sealed the earlier elements of Phase XIA. The scanty structures of this stratum consist of two partially preserved rooms and a tabun, incorporated into a beaten-earth floor. These are the simple remains of a residential quarter located on the western slope of the hill, similar in nature to those of the previous Iron Age occupations. Wall 976 is a wide wall built of two rows of large fieldstones and preserved to a height of c. 0.5 m. It was constructed over W981 and W978 of the previous stratum, in the same orientation as the underlying walls, with only its western face deviating slightly from the

Fig. 2.17. Stratum X: Tabun 807 alongside W976, looking west.

3

4

C

C 3

1

691.11 690.67

W977

L803

L799 690.89

W976

B

L807

691.46 689.85 3

0

2 m

3

4 Plan 2.5. Plan of Stratum X.

1

B

17

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

wall (W976) is obviously the southern external wall of the building. To the east of W977, Room 799 has a plastered floor covered with a thin, gray ash layer. This ash layer is the result of household activities and the presence of a tabun in the room (Fig. 2.17). This tabun (L807), c. 0.5 m in diameter, was incorporated in the room’s plaster floor, its bottom sunk c. 0.1 m below the floor, and encircled by small pebbles to reinforce its walls. Stratum IX: Iron Age III (Figs. 2.18–2.20; Plans 2.6, 2.18: Sections 1-1, 3-3) Stratum IX represents the latest Iron Age remains in Area M1 and dates to the end of the seventh century– early sixth century BCE, based on both the ceramic finds and the stratigraphic sequence. The architectural remains assigned to this stratum consist of a single unit, Room 778 (Figs. 2.18, 2.19). Three of its walls and its entrance were uncovered; the location of the fourth wall is beyond the northern boundary of the excavation. Although W967 and W968 of the newly erected room

were established directly over the earlier walls of Room 799 (Stratum X), a thick layer of fill, c. 1 m in depth, separates the plastered floor (778) of Stratum IX and the beaten-earth floor (L799) of Stratum X. The entrance to the room, c. 1.5 m wide, is located in the east, between a doorpost in W974 (Fig. 2.20) and W968. Two installations were incorporated into Floor 778: Tabun 786 and Installation 788. Tabun 786, built close to W968, is c. 0.6 m in diameter and its rim was encircled by small stones. Interestingly, this tabun was erected almost precisely over the location of Tabun 807 of Stratum X. Nevertheless, a 0.9 m thick fill separates the two. To the north of Tabun 786 is the rounded stone installation, c. 1 m in diameter (L788). Remains of white plaster were preserved on its walls and bottom surface, suggesting the installation was entirely plastered. Two large stone slabs placed on the floor close to its rim were probably working surfaces connected with the installation. The remains of animal bones (see Chapter 23) and charcoal found inside could be part of its original deposit.

3

4

C

C

W967

W974

3

1

L788 L778 691.78

691.74 691.11

1

692.41 690.87

L786

W968

692.57

3

B

0

2 m

3

4 Plan 2.6. Plan of Stratum IX.

B

18

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.18. Stratum IX: Room 778, looking north.

Fig. 2.19. Stratum IX: Room 778 above Stratum XI remains, looking north.

Fig. 2.20. Stratum IX: Room 778 in center; in lower left, Hellenistic W969, looking east.

19

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

The Hellenistic Period: Stratum VIII (Figs.

limits of the excavated area. The wall, c. 1 m wide at the top and 1.5–2.0 m wide in its lower part, toward the base, was founded directly on bedrock, cutting through the Iron Age remains underneath (Fig. 2.21). Prior to its construction, the Hellenistic builders leveled the bedrock and covered it with a hard, thick layer of plaster. Then, a wide stone base (W983) was constructed on the plaster to further level the uneven rock surface (see

2.21–2.25; Plans 2.7, 2.18: Sections 1-1, 2-2)

A massive wall preserved over 3 m high (W969) was revealed to the west of the Iron Age remains, running in a north–south direction. Over 8 m of the wall were exposed, although its entire length is unknown, for both its southern and northern ends extend beyond the

2

3

4 G

D

D W940

G

L795+L812

1

689.86-689.79

L795+L812 689.86-689.79

C

C W9

69

L808+L814+L815 689.70-689.46

1 688.82

691.55 2

2

B

B 688.92 0

2 m

2

3 Plan 2.7. Plan of Stratum VIII.

4

20

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.21. Stratum VIII: Hellenistic retaining W969 cutting through Iron Age remains; note crude eastern face of wall, looking north.

Plan 2.18: Sections 1-1, 2-2). Wall 983 is one stone high in the north and two stones high in the south. The difference in height is due to the gradual inclination of the rock toward the south. It projects from beneath the lowermost course of W969 (Fig. 2.22). Wall 969 was built of large, worked, rectangular limestone placed as headers in the upper courses, their narrow sides aligned with the wall’s western face, together with small and medium-sized fieldstones in the lower courses (Fig. 2.23). While the western face of W969 is well-built of nicely dressed stones, the eastern face is crudely constructed of fieldstones, and it widens significantly near the base. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the cruder eastern face of the wall was not meant to be seen, supporting the interpretation of a retaining function for this long, wide wall. Two superimposed plaster floors (L814, L812) abut the western side of W969 and slope gently west toward a mass of stone collapse located directly beneath the massive eastern wall of the monumental Early Roman building of Stratum VII (W940; Fig. 2.24). No further excavations were conducted here due to safety considerations, as well as the decision reached during the 2007 season to preserve the Early Roman building

Fig. 2.22. Stratum VIII: Hellenistic W969 with stone platform W983 below it, constructed on rock surface, looking northeast.

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

21

Fig. 2.23. Stratum VIII: western face of Hellenistic W969 with Floor 814, looking east.

Fig. 2.24. Stratum VIII: Hellenistic W969 in foreground, stone collapse below the Early Roman wall in background, looking west.

(see Foreword). Thus, the nature of the architectural remains to which the stone collapse belongs could not be clarified. Stratigraphically, the collapse is sealed by the Early Roman building, the pottery sherds collected within the collapse are identical to the pottery uncovered on the two superimposed floors abutting W969, and large ‘chisel-dressed’, rectangular stones were found among the stone collapse (Fig. 2.25). All

these features clearly testify to the presence of a large Hellenistic structure (second century BCE) west of the retaining wall (W969), and the floors sloping westward probably adjoined it. Rich ceramic assemblages were found on both the earlier (L814) and later (L812) floors west of W969, including large quantities of shallow plates and bowls (see Figs. 4.4–4.10). Worth noting are the relatively

22

Doron Ben-Ami

0

20

Fig. 2.25. Stratum VIII: a large, rectangular, ‘chisel-dressed’ stone, typical of the Hellenistic period, found among the stone collapse.

large numbers of imported wares found here, such as some thirty Rhodian amphorae with stamped handles, providing a date within the second century BCE (see Chapter 18), and Black Glazed and Eastern Sigillata A wares (see Chapter 4).

The Early Roman Period: Stratum VII (Figs. 2.26–2.44; Plans 2.8, 2.18: Sections 1-1, 4-4–8-8) A complex of walls and installations dating to the Early Roman period was discovered immediately above the Hellenistic remains of Stratum VIII and below the remains of the Late Roman period (Stratum VI). The 2003 excavation by Shukron and Reich reached the top of this stratum in the southern part of their excavation (see inset, Plan 2.8). The more the remains of this stratum were revealed, the more we realized that they constitute part of an extraordinary architectural complex that extends across a large part of Area M1 (Ben-Ami and Tchekhanovets 2011). This complex, which is dated to the Early Roman period (first century BCE–first century CE) based on ceramic and numismatic finds, consists of two main architectural units. The Southern Unit Building 760 is a large, impressive edifice (Fig. 2.26), of which only the northeastern corner was revealed in the 2007 season. This monumental building continues further west, as well as to the south, beyond the limits of the excavated area. The eastern wall of the building (W940), over 14 m of which have been exposed, rises to a height of more than 5 m and is approximately 2 m thick. It is built of large, roughly dressed fieldstones (Fig. 2.27), some of which are hundreds of kilograms in weight. The structure’s northern wall (W922) is about 1 m wide and also preserved to a height of c. 5 m.

These two outer walls were so formidable that the massive foundations of the Late Roman walls utilized them as a solid foundation (Fig. 2.28). The interior of the building exposed in the excavated area is divided into elongated halls oriented northwest– southeast (Figs. 2.29, 2.30). The eastern parts of three, and the beginning of a fourth, of these halls have been uncovered, and it is possible that additional hall(s) are situated to the south. The northern hall (L740) is the narrowest excavated so far, c. 2.5 m wide, defined by W922 in the north and W952 in the south. These two long walls, the northern of which is over 8 m long, extend further west beyond the excavation area. Wall 953 subdivides this hall into rectangular rooms, of which only the eastern room was completely excavated (Room 740), though the beginning of a second room is clearly evident. The two adjacent halls to the south (L760 and L783), separated by W958, are both 3.8 m. wide. Wall 958, c. 1.5 m wide, is the widest of the internal walls excavated in the building. Partition Wall 966 in the southern hall (L783) created a quadrangular room in the eastern part of the hall. The proximity of W966 to the western limit of the excavation prevented determination of its nature, i.e., whether it was originally built as part of the complex, or added sometime later. The beginning of a fourth hall (L770) was revealed in the southwestern corner of the excavation area, south of W965. The upper part of W965 had already been uncovered in the 2003 season. At this stage, it cannot be ascertained if the building continued further south beyond Hall 770. These halls were preserved to a height of at least two stories. The lower level (henceforth ‘the basement’) was roofed with vaults made of neatly worked, rectangular white limestone blocks. The bottom courses of the vaults have survived in situ (Figs. 2.31, 2.32), while the rest of the vault stones were found among the heaps of collapse that resulted from the building’s destruction (Figs. 2.33, 2.34). The walls in the basement were plastered with thick, gray, hydraulic plaster (Fig. 2.35), apparently to prevent moisture in the basement, implying a storage function. The walls of the second story, above the vaults, are preserved to a substantial height of several meters and in some spots still bear the original plaster (Fig. 2.36). Scanty remains of painted plaster in shades of red, yellow and green, with thin black lines, were discovered in the building collapse, demonstrating that

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

the plastered upper-story walls were decorated with colored frescoes. In Hall 760, a large niche (L742), 1 m wide and the entire height of the wall, was incorporated in the second story of W940. The plaster in the niche, consisting of several layers, was perfectly preserved. Apparently, the niche had been furnished with wooden

23

shelves, and soot marks on the plaster testify to the fire that raged in this part of the building. A square hole, c. 0.15 × 0.15 m and c. 0.3 m deep, was hewn in one of the massive stones in the southern side of the niche. As it was empty, and no parallel hole was found on the opposite side, its purpose is unknown.

Fig. 2.26. Stratum VII: aerial view of Building 760.

Fig. 2.27. Stratum VII: eastern wall of Building 760 during excavation, looking east.

24

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.28. Stratum VII: Late Roman W909 to left, above W922, looking north.

Fig. 2.29. Stratum VII: Building 760, looking east.

A

B

C

D

E

0

691.56

4

5

1

693.21

693.12 692.42

692.80

W926

F

8

W923

7

1

L770

692.04

2 m

691.53

L783 690.15

691.48

691.91

693.75

5

2

692.00 693.77

691.24

693.28

2

6

695.16

Plan 2.8. Plan of Stratum VII.

2

692.20

4

W950

694.97

695.37 693.69

695.08

8

693.79

693.77 693.06

691.65

L702 691.41

693.18

L714

691.59

L742

694.90 692.23

2

W95

L740 690.11 690.97

W92

693.24

693.39

691.81

W96

8

W92

L719 691.17

L760 689.89

W958

692.01 692.08

L704

W95 1

692.02

693.02

L728

691.30

691.57

L779

693.62

3

G

6

W940

1

W96

W95

7

W949

6 W956

3

1

3

W948

5

696.20 693.27

L729

695.95

4

Shukron and Reich excavations (2003) M1 (2007)

4

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

Fig. 2.30. Stratum VII: northeastern corner of Building 760, looking east.

Fig. 2.31. Stratum VII: Building 760; note vault stones, looking southeast.

25

26

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.32. Stratum VII: Room 740 in Building 760; note vault stones, looking east.

Fig. 2.33. Stratum VII: destruction in Room 740; note vault stones in debris, looking east.

Fig. 2.34. Stratum VII: destruction layer in Building 760, looking east.

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

27

Fig. 2.35. Stratum VII: hydraulic plaster on walls in Room 740, looking north.

The Northern Unit To the north of Building 760 were a number of plastered water installations: Locus 702, L704, L714 and L719 (further examples were excavated in later seasons; see Ben-Ami and Tchekhanovets 2011: Fig. 2), comprising a northern annex of the building (Fig. 2.37). Two of these, L704 and L719, were ritual baths (miqva’ot). Due to the fact that bedrock was still hidden several meters below, the miqva’ot and other

Fig. 2.36. Stratum VII: white plaster on walls of upper floor and gray plaster in basement, looking northeast.

water installations were dug into the ground rather than quarried in the bedrock, as is the case with most ritual baths discovered in Jerusalem (Reich 1990:47– 48, 230–242). Their walls and floors were treated with the typical Early Roman, gray hydraulic plaster. These installations were found in a perfect state of preservation except for their roofing, which had been

Fig. 2.37. Stratum VII: aerial view of northern annex of Building 760.

28

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.38. Stratum VII: Cistern 702 in foreground; note breach in background, looking south.

Fig. 2.39. Stratum VII: breach in W958, looking south.

completely removed by Late Roman–early Byzantine leveling operations. Locus 702 is a large, quadrangular (2.60 × 2.80 m) water cistern built against the northern wall of Building 760 (W922), using it as its southern face (Fig. 2.38). It was excavated down to its plaster floor, at a depth of c. 2.5 m. In the following stratum, a massive wall (W909) was built into the water cistern, adjacent to its southern inner face; the wall stood directly upon the cistern’s plaster floor without causing any damage to its floor or walls. This wall was constructed by the Late Roman–early Byzantine builders during the course of their leveling operations to overcome the gap in height caused by the earlier cistern. An irregular opening was found in the southern wall (W922) of the cistern, c. 1 m above the floor, leading into Building 760 (Fig. 2.38). This breach was much wider on its northern side, facing the cistern, than on its southern side. It was most probably dug from within Cistern 702, at a time when the cistern no longer functioned in its original purpose, i.e., there was no water in it. In light of the discovery of another such opening in W958 (Figs. 2.39, 2.40), it appears that these breaches were hastily dug prior to the destruction of this monumental complex (see below). West of Cistern 702, Miqveh 704 was also built against W922, adjacent to the western limit of the

Fig. 2.40. Stratum VII: close-up of breach in W958, looking south.

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

excavation area. The threshold and the door-socket stone were preserved in situ in the western wall (Fig. 2.41). The northern stone jamb in the doorway is clearly seen below Late Roman W914 above it. Inside the miqveh, stone stairs, plastered with the same gray plaster that covers the miqveh’s walls, descended into the immersion basin. These stairs were later removed by the Late Roman–early Byzantine builders, but traces of them are clearly visible in the southern wall of the miqveh. The immersion basin at the bottom of Miqveh 704 was not excavated, as it is still sealed below Late Roman–early Byzantine W919 (which we intentionally preserved). A second miqveh (L719) was found north of W951. The western wall and entrance to this miqveh also lie below W919. Miqveh 719 is defined by W951 in the south and W928 in the north. One of its steps is preserved immediately under the lower course of W919, and two more steps are clearly indicated in the miqveh’s northern wall. The interior is well-plastered with several layers of gray plaster, as is the immersion basin, 0.7 × 2.0 m and c. 0.4 m deep, which was entirely preserved. Above the eastern side of Miqveh 719, a large bath (L714) was built parallel to the miqveh’s immersion basin, but at a higher level. It measures 0.8 × 2.8 m and is preserved to a height of 0.6 m. In the northwestern corner of the excavation area, adjacent to the northern wall of Miqveh 704, a deep narrow shaft (L728) was unearthed. It is built of small

29

and medium-sized stones and was excavated to a depth of c. 2 m. Due to safety considerations, its bottom could not be reached. It appears, however, that this shaft was part of the water-installation complex in the northern annex of Building 760. A narrow wall (W923), built of finely dressed, rectangular limestone, bounded the shaft on the north. This wall must have been a part of another architectural element located beyond the limits of Area M1. These water installations were part of an annex to Building 760, which served for purification purposes in this spacious architectural complex. The existence of such a separate purification annex further emphasizes the importance of the structure under discussion. The actual size of this annex is unknown, as the northern, eastern and western walls that bounded it were beyond the excavation’s limits. Remains of Stratum VII were also exposed to the east of the Building 760 complex. Here, higher up the eastern slope of the Tyropoeon Valley, a stone platform (L729), built of large, flat stones set on a foundation (W950), was partially uncovered. This platform continues to the north and to the east, beyond the excavation area. Approximately 2 m east, and parallel to Building 760’s eastern wall (W940), another wall (W948) was carelessly built of small and medium-sized stones and preserved to a height of 3 m, its lower part much wider than its top (c. 1 m and 0.5 m respectively).

Fig. 2.41. Stratum VII: Miqveh 704 with door socket in situ; Late Roman W919 on left, looking south.

30

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.42. Stratum VII: Wall 949 and W950, looking north.

The northern end of W948 abuts the foundation wall (W950) underlying Platform 729, with the southern flagstones of the platform placed directly upon it. The narrow space between W940 in the west and W948 in the east was further divided by W949 (Figs. 2.42, 2.43). Wall 949, 0.3 m wide and 1.5 m long, was built of dressed, rectangular limestone and small fieldstones placed alternately in one narrow row. Four meters to the south, another wall (W956), identical to W949 in construction and orientation, obviously formed part of the same architectural element. It is unclear whether the gap separating the two was deliberate, or the result of a later disturbance. The northern end of W949 abuts foundation W950, which in turn is connected with Building 760’s eastern wall (W940). Thus, Building 760 is stratigraphically connected with the architectural components in the east. Although W949 and W956 were preserved to a height of c. 1.7 m, no floor connecting them with W940 on the west was detected. The entire space was filled with a homogenous fill of soft earth and an abundance of pottery sherds––the latest of which date to the Early Roman period. The accumulation of fill to a height of over 1.5 m attests that this set of walls east of Building 760 was constructional, part of a retaining-wall system to support the contemporary buildings on this higher terrace east of Building 760. The superstructures on these walls were not preserved, except for platform W729, due to building operations in subsequent periods. Discussion

Fig. 2.43. Stratum VII: Wall 948 on right, W940 on left, W949 in center; note platform W729 above, looking north.

Building 760 was intentionally demolished. The enormous fieldstones were toppled from the tops of the walls into the structure, causing the collapse of the floors and the basement’s vaults, and the stones of the walls and the vaults were jumbled together in the destruction layer that came to rest on the basement floor (see Figs. 2.33, 2.34). Fragments of shattered pottery vessels were discovered amongst the heaps of collapsed stones, and pieces of stone vessels were spread over the entire area of the building. Many coins were also found in the destruction layer and on the floors of the building, the latest coins dating to the time of the First Jewish Revolt (Fig. 2.44; see Chapter 11). The pottery, stone vessels and coins indicate that the building was demolished in 70 CE, at the time of the

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

0

31

4

Fig. 2.44. Stratum VII: coins dating to the First Jewish Revolt, found in Building 760.

destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans at the end of the Second Temple period. The remains of two human skeletons were uncovered in Room 760, caught under the massive debris accumulated on its floor: one is a mature male around 40 years of age who was killed by a strong blow to the head; the second is that of a younger individual of undetermined sex (see Chapter 22). The evidence from the excavation of Building 760 and its northern annex illustrates the dramatic measures taken by its inhabitants prior to its destruction, who, sensing the impending danger, apparently tried to escape via the basement of Building 760, breaching narrow openings in the walls of the building, which could be easily camouflaged if necessary (see Figs. 2.38–2.40; Ben-Ami and Tchekhanovets 2011).

The Late Roman–Early Byzantine Period: Stratum VI After a gap in occupation during which the city was abandoned following the destruction by the Romans in 70 CE, the western slope of the hill witnessed a new phase of building activity in the Late Roman– early Byzantine period, sometime during the late third–fourth centuries CE. The architectural remains of the Late Roman–early Byzantine period include a large, remarkably well-planned building with impressive foundations, 1.0–1.5 m wide, which penetrated to a great depth, sometimes over 3 m,

along the westernmost part of the area, reaching the first-century CE structures. Apparently, some of the destroyed Early Roman buildings were still visible to the Stratum VI builders. This was clearly evident in the area of the northern annex of the Early Roman complex, where the Stratum VI builders founded their walls directly upon the floors and walls of the Stratum VII water installations, without causing any damage to the plaster. Prior to the construction of these massive foundations, the whole area was cleared of the collapsed Early Roman (Stratum VII) structures. The Stratum VI foundation walls were built of small and mediumsized fieldstones, although some larger stones were also incorporated. Noteworthy is the incorporation of building elements of earlier structures, most of them from the Early Roman structures that were readily available to the builders of Stratum VI. Among these are fragments of column bases, column drums and shafts, and capitals. The area was then leveled with construction fills, which yielded large quantities of Early Roman sherds as well as other artifacts that date to the Late Roman–early Byzantine period. Among the latter are many Roman roof tiles manufactured in the workshop of the Tenth Legion, which was garrisoned in Jerusalem after the revolt was suppressed in the year 70 CE. Two of the Roman tiles bear Tenth Legion Fretensis stamp impressions (see Chapter 15). Two distinct phases were discerned in this stratum: Phases VIB and VIA.

32

Doron Ben-Ami

Phase VIB (Figs. 2.45–2.57; Plans 2.9, 2.18: Sections 7-7–9-9) The remains of a large structure, Building 628, were excavated in the northern part of Area M1 (Fig. 2.45). Four of its rooms were exposed, although it seems that the building had additional rooms beyond the northern and eastern limits of the excavation. Little of the superstructure has survived, consisting of walls built of fieldstones, c. 0.8 m wide, narrower than the underlying foundation walls, which are c. 1.2 m wide and constructed primarily of rectangular, dressed stones (Figs. 2.46–2.48). Building 628 extends over the northern annex of the Early Roman complex (Stratum VII), its foundations rooted in the latter’s water installations (Fig. 2.49). The southern wall of the building (W881) was founded directly upon W922 of Stratum VII, though with a different orientation. Unit 648, located in the northeastern corner of the excavation area, had two entrances, one located in the southern wall and the other in the west. The northern and eastern sides of this space extend beyond the limits of the excavation. It seems that L648 was part of a central courtyard in the building, around which the rooms were arranged. Originally, this space had a hard, beaten-earth floor (L648). Sometime during Phase VIB, the floor level was raised c. 0.1 m and a new beaten-earth floor (L633) was laid (Fig. 2.50). Both floors abut a 2.5 m wide entrance in W870, flanked by rectangular stone slabs. It led into a large room (L634; 4.5 × 5.0 m) to the south, which was entirely exposed. Traces of white plaster testify that the room’s floor was originally plastered. Room 628 had a hard-packed earth floor and its entrance was not preserved, Room 636, in the northwestern corner, had a thin plaster floor (Fig. 2.51), and was entered through its eastern wall, connecting it with Courtyard 648. These four rooms were almost completely cleared prior to the construction of new floors in the following Phase VIA. The remains of this large structure and its deep, massive foundations reflect the remarkable effort

invested in its construction (Fig. 2.52), suggesting it may have been of a public nature. Two meters south of Building 628, Building 671 was uncovered (Fig. 2.53; Plan 2.9). It is uncertain whether the early phase of this structure, excavated in 2003 by Shukron and Reich (Reich 2008), was contemporaneous with Building 628. It is attributed here to Stratum VIB based on the common orientation and absolute heights it shares with Building 628. This building consists of two long walls––W864 in the north and W924 in the south. Wall 864 was preserved c. 3 m high; its western side was severely robbed in a later period (below). This wall was built entirely of large, rectangular, dressed stones clearly in secondary use, originating in earlier structure(s) that once stood here. The building’s early phase was poorly preserved, and little of its inner plan has survived. It seems that the long space between the two external walls was originally divided into two rooms by W885, of which only single stones remain. Its existence and location were deduced according to the robbed foundation trench discerned close to the western end of W864, which had also been robbed in a later period. A whitish-plaster floor was uncovered inside the building, constructed directly over Drainage Channel 601 (a cloaca maxima), which orginated in this phase and continued in use until Stratum III of the Early Islamic period. It directed water westward to the Tyropoeon Valley below (or may have led it toward a central drainage channel under a street in the Tyropoeon Valley). Its two walls, 0.8 m apart, were built of small and medium-sized fieldstones to a height of c. 1.5 m. Large, flat stone slabs covered the channel and its floor was coated with brownish clay material (Figs. 2.54–2.56). The 2 m wide corridor between Building 628 in the north and Building 671 in the south may have served as a street, although no surface level survived here (Fig. 2.57). Perhaps it joined a main south–north street along the Tyropoeon Valley, to the west of Area M1, leading to the Upper City.

33

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

4

3

2

1

G

VIB 7

G

6

696.87 696.17

697.18 696.28

W915

8

Upper floor

L648 696.33 W911

W870

L636 696.28

W904

E

696.86 696.12

696.87 696.17

L634 696.23

W919

696.12

F Shukron and Reich excavations (2003) M1 (2007)

696.72 694.90

W883

W912

W914

697.49 696.74

697.47 696.76 W910

8

697.49 695.02

E

L628 696.43

W881

W909

697.67 695.91

698.51 695.52

(street)

W921

W864

D

D W885

L601

W924

697.25

7

C

1

L671 697.50

696.75 695.09

2 Plan 2.9. Plan of Stratum VI, Phase VIB.

C

6

F

L633 696.41

W912

W882

0

2 m

3

4

34

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.45. Phase VIB: aerial view of Building 628, looking northwest.

Fig. 2.46. Phase VIB: foundation walls and superstructure of Building 628, looking west.

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

Fig. 2.47. Phase VIB: walls of superstructure on massive foundations, Threshold W912 in background, looking east.

Fig. 2.48. Phase VIB: architectural element in secondary use in W914, looking north.

35

36

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.49. Phase VIB: foundations of Phase VIB superimposed on Stratum VII remains; note W909 in Cistern 702, looking west.

Fig. 2.50. Phase VIB: Floors 648 and 633 of Phase VIB, looking south.

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

Fig. 2.51. Phase VIB: plaster Floor 636 and Phase VIA beaten-earth Floor 624 in section, looking northwest.

Fig. 2.52. Phase VIB: the massive foundations in Room 636, looking northeast.

37

38

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.53. Phase VIB: Building 628 in foreground; W864 of Building 671 in background, looking south.

Fig. 2.55. Phase VIB: inside Channel 601, looking east.

Fig. 2.54. Phase VIB: part of Channel 601 with cover stones, looking east.

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

Fig. 2.56. Phase VIB: Channel 601 after removal of cover stones, looking southeast.

Fig. 2.57. Phase VIB: the street between Buildings 671 and 628, looking southeast.

39

40

Doron Ben-Ami

Phase VIA (Figs. 2.58–2.62; Plans 2.10, 2.18: Sections 7-7, 9-9) Building 628 presents only minor changes compared with its original plan (Fig. 2.58). Floors were raised in almost every room and installations were added. On the northern side of the wide entrance in W870, a new floor was constructed (L607; Figs. 2.59, 2.60). Unlike the two beaten-earth floors underlying it, this new floor is plastered and abuts W870 on the south and the new threshold (W908) in W912 in the west. The floor (L618) in the large room to the south of W870 was raised c. 0.3 m and plastered (Fig. 2.61). Floor 618 abuts the wide threshold in W870, and a large, rectangular, dressed stone attached to the southern face of this wall is the sole remnant of the buttresses that supported a vaulted roof. Room 628 retains its original plan with its hard-packed earth floor still in use. In the northwestern

room (Room 624), a new beaten-earth floor was laid c. 0.2 m above the plaster floor of Phase VIB. The floor covered the earlier threshold in W912 and abutted a new threshold (W908) built in this phase to adjust to the new floor level. A rectangular installation (L841), of unknown purpose, consisting of two large stones set vertically into the ground and covered with a flat stone slab, was built in the southeastern corner of the room, against W912 (Fig. 2.62). Undoubtedly, the settlement founded in Stratum VI is part of a significant and intensive occupation in the Lower City. The large-scale building operations and the massive foundations, the large buildings, the street and the well-built drainage channel excavated in Area M1 testify to a well-planned settlement established here sometime during the late third–fourth centuries CE.

Fig. 2.58. Phase VIA: general view of late phase of Building 628, looking east.

41

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

4

3

2

1

G

VIA 7

G

6

696.87 696.17

L607 606.68

W882

8

L624 696.48

697.49 696.00

W908

697.18 696.28

W912

F

W910

W870

W911

F Shukron and Reich excavations (2003)

696.72 694.90

W883

W912

W904

M1 (2007)

697.47 696.76

L841

696.87 696.17

696.86 696.12

8

L618 696.58 697.49 695.02

E

E

L628 696.43 W881

697.67 695.94

W885

L601

698.51 695.52

W864

W921

D

(street)

W924

C

C 0

7

696.75 695.09

6

697.25

1

D

L671 697.50

2 Plan 2.10. Plan of Stratum VI, Phase VIA.

3

2 m

4

42

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 2.59. Phase VIA: Rooms 607 and 618 of Building 628 in foreground, W864 of Building 671 in background, looking south.

Fig. 2.60 Phase VIA: Room 607, looking south.

Fig. 2.61. Phase VIA: Room 618, looking west.

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

43

Fig. 2.62. Phase VIA: foundations and upper walls of Building 628; note Installation 841 on right and later threshold, looking east.

The Byzantine Period: Stratum V The remains of the Byzantine period (fifth–early seventh centuries CE) were widely exposed in the past in areas adjacent to Area M: in the south by Crowfoot (1929), in the northeast by Kenyon (1964; 1965; 1966; 1967), and in the excavation in the Giv‘ati Parking Lot in 2003 (Reich 2008). The latter uncovered long walls with deep foundations, a cistern and a stone-paved alley. Thus, our excavations in Stratum V of Area M1 are complementary to this broad picture of Byzantine settlement on the eastern slope of the Tyropoeon Valley provided by the former excavations. The architectural remains in Stratum V reveal a descent westward into the valley, and therefore demonstrate that the Tyropoeon Valley at that time, although filled up with the remains of earlier settlements, was still a clear topographical feature in the landscape of Byzantine Jerusalem. Excavations on the eastern slopes of the Tyropoeon Valley have consistently shown that the Byzantine period is represented by two main phases (Reich

2008:1808). This stratigraphic picture is further supported by the results of our excavations, although the stratigraphy here is somewhat more complex. The two distinct phases discerned in Area M1 are labeled VB and VA. Phase VB (Fig. 2.63; Plans 2.11, 2.18: Section 9-9) With the end of Stratum VI, Building 628 ceased to exist and none of its components was reused in the construction operations that took place in this area in the subsequent strata. It appears that during Stratum V this area was left devoid of buildings. Building 671 of Stratum VI (now Building 606) witnessed some modifications, such as the construction of new walls and the raising of floor levels. Wall 887 divided the building into two rooms. The eastern room (L606) had a mosaic floor laid on a plaster and cobblestone foundation (Fig. 2.63). The floor abutted a large, monolithic threshold that was incorporated into W887. The mosaic floor itself had been destroyed in ancient times, and only segments

B

0

1

697.25

W885

C

D

1

2 m

W924

L601

L612

2

2

W864

W887 697.35

L685

L606 697.72

3

3

W920

697.78

Plan 2.11. Plan of Stratum V, Phase VB.

698.51 695.52 6

6

W921

697.77 696.86

L676

4

4

697.80 696.49

5

697.55 696.79

5

W959 697.46

W962

L741 697.01

697.59

B

C

D

W963

697.98 696.39

L756 697.12

W961

M1 (2007)

Shukron and Reich excavations (2003)

W941

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

45

Fig. 2.63. Phase VB: cobblestone foundation of mosaic Floor 606, Stratum III Channel 600, looking east.

of it were preserved in situ along the northern wall (W864) of the room. A dark ash layer covered the cobblestone foundation and preserved segments of mosaic. The floor in the western room (L612) was not preserved. A new wall (W920) was built in the south directly upon W924 of the previous stratum. A segment of a mosaic floor (L685) was uncovered south of W920. Channel 601 remained in use during this time, running under Building 606. In the east it met Channel 676, which ran perpendicular to it. The original connection between the two was not preserved due to later modifications carried out here in Stratum IV (see below). Additional remains of Phase VB were excavated to the east of Building 606, where part of a large structure dated to the Byzantine period was exposed along the eastern boundary of Area M1. Two wide walls (W941, W959 [widths 1.1 m]), formed the southwestern corner of the building. Due to the limited area of exposure, it is not certain whether a third wall (W961), uncovered along the northern limit of the excavation, may be the building’s northern wall, although considering its width (0.9 m), it is more likely that W961 is a partition wall within the building. A buttress built of rectangular,

dressed stones (W962) abuts the inner face of W941, probably to support a stone arch for the roofing. A perfectly preserved, white plaster floor (L756) abutted all three walls. Further south, the remains of a plastered pavement (L741) were unearthed. It is part of another room that extended beyond the limits of the excavation area. Phase VA (Fig. 2.64; Plans 2.12, 2.18: Section 9-9) Toward the end of Stratum V, the settlement underwent a clear process of degeneration, reflected in the poorly constructed, one-row-wide walls erected in Building 606 to subdivide the western room into smaller spaces (Fig. 2.64). Wall 888, built over the monolithic threshold in W887, W878 parallel to it on the west, and W907 in the north, formed a small cell (L617). The purpose of the cell remains unclear, as it was empty of finds. To the west of Cell 617, the building was badly damaged. Changes were also detected in the building on the eastern side of Area M1. The floor level was raised c. 0.5 m, and a new plaster floor (L731) now covered the western buttress (W962) indicating a change in the roofing arrangement of Room 731.

B

0

W885

1

2 m

697.25

L612

698.41 697.84

L601

W889

698.41 697.84

W878

C

D

1

W907

2

697.47

L617

W864

W8

88

697.35

L685

L606 697.72

3

3

W920

697.78

697.77 696.86

Plan 2.12. Plan of Stratum V, Phase VA.

698.51 695.52

6

6

2

W887 L676

4

4

697.80 696.49

697.98 696.39

L741 697.01

5

W959 697.59 697.46

L731 697.57

W961

M1 (2007)

Shukron and Reich excavations (2003)

5

B

C

D

W963

W963

W921

W941

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

47

Fig. 2.64. Phase VA: Building 606 with walls added in Phase VA, looking northwest.

The Early Islamic Period: Strata IV–I Sometime in the late eighth, or perhaps, the early ninth century CE, a new occupation was established on the western slope of the hill. Although scanty and poorly preserved, three distinct architectural phases (Strata IV–II) clearly testify to the intense activity in this period. In Stratum I, pits dug throughout the area represent a time of abandonment during the tenth century CE.1 Stratum IV (Figs. 2.65, 2.66; Plans 2.13, 2.18: Section 9-9) The earliest occupation remains from the Early Islamic period were uncovered near the eastern side of the excavation. These include segments of walls, floors and installations of a settlement that was almost entirely demolished by later building activity. Two walls were unearthed running east–west, W918 in the north and W917 to its south, both of which differ in construction method, suggesting they belong to separate structures. Wall 918 is c. 0.8 m wide and built of medium-sized fieldstones. Plaster Floor 666 abuts its northern face,

and remains of another plaster floor (L664) were detected to its south, reaching W917. Wall 917 is 1 m in width, and therefore seems to be part of a large structure that stood here in Stratum IV. This wall, built of large dressed limestone, was constructed directly over Channel 601. Originally constructed in Stratum VI, this drainage channel continued in use throughout the Early Islamic period (Strata IV–II). The Stratum IV settlers were aware of the presence of this impressively built channel and incorporated it, along with Channel 676 which joined it from the south, within their drainage system. Channel 676, originally built in Stratum V, was excavated by Shukron and Reich in 2003 (Reich 2008); its northern end was uncovered during the current excavations (Fig. 2.65; see above). In the north, it connected with Channel 601, to which other, smaller channels were connected; the junction of these two channels was now enlarged into an ovalshaped installation, probably to enable access to the two channels for maintenance purposes. Channel 676 was covered with Floor 667, made of packed earth with many embedded small stones. A round stone installation (L646), c. 1 m in diameter and c. 1.5 m deep, was uncovered on the western side of

C

D

E

0

1

697.25

2 m

M1 (2007)

L601

Shukron and Reich excavations (2003)

1 2

2

6

Plan 2.13. Plan of Stratum IV.

698.11 697.36

3

698.40 696.93

W917

3

L646

L676

L664 697.66

6

698.37 697.12

W918

L666 697.92

4

4

L667 697.70

C

D

E

48 Doron Ben-Ami

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

this floor (Fig. 2.66). It was built of small and mediumsized fieldstones and yielded many small artifacts such as glass, marble and metal fragments, along with several coins (Chapter 11) and animal bones. Most of the pottery sherds inside it date to the Abbasid period (see Figs. 7.2, 7.3). It may have been connected with industrial activity, although its exact purpose is unclear. It can be assumed that the finds and debris inside Installation 646 accumulated after the installation went out of use, i.e., during the construction phase of Stratum III.

Fig. 2.65. Stratum IV: Channel 676, looking south.

Fig. 2.66. Stratum IV: Installation 646, looking south.

49

Stratum III (Figs. 2.67–2.70; Plans 2.14, 2.18: Section 9-9) A new array of structures was erected in Stratum III, representing a renewed architectural phase in the Abbasid settlement. Both the walls and the floors of the new buildings were constructed much higher than the preceding ones, clearly distinguishing them from those assigned to Stratum IV. The western side of a large structure (L621) was uncovered near the eastern boundary of Area M1 (Fig. 2.67). Comprising two rooms, the northern room (L621) was better preserved. Inside Room 621, a beaten-earth floor abuts W901 in the north, W902 in the west and W905 in the south. These walls were similarly constructed of large, dressed limestone coated on top with a layer of small fieldstones, above which the superstructure was built. A similar construction method characterizes the other walls in Stratum III. Wall 942 defines the southern boundary of the building. It was largely excavated in 2003, together with the remains of the southwestern room of Building 621 (Reich 2008). Wall 902 on the western side of Building 621 was built over the eastern face of Channel 676, and the maintenance installation at the junction of Channels 601 and 676 went out of use. It was now replaced with a stone-walled shaft (L653), c. 0.7 m deep, which was constructed over Channel 676, c. 1 m south of the meeting point between the two channels. Shaft 653 was covered with a flat stone slab, which was found in situ (Fig. 2.68). To the west of Building 621, segments of walls and newly built drainage channels were assigned to Stratum III. Two long drainage channels, L602 and L603, run east–west across Area M1 (Fig. 2.69), parallel to Channel 601, which continued in use into Stratum III. These channels were uncovered in the 2003 excavation season, and the renewed excavations have exposed more of their continuation to the east. It became evident that Channel 602 was connected to Channel 601 by Channel 654, running perpendicular to the two long channels; only the eastern wall of this channel has survived. A gutter exposed in the 2003 season, c. 4 m west of channel 654, was connected with Channel 602 and apparently led to Channel 601.

C

D

0

1

697.25

2 m

L601

2

2

L602

L603

6

W906

699.45 698.74

W903

698.40

3

L654

Plan 2.14. Plan of Stratum III.

699.30 698.64

L600

3

698.45

6

E

1

L676

698.35 697.71

L653

L613 698.53

W902

4

699.45 698.74

W905

L621 699.02

699.07 698.57

W901

699.01 699.19

4

698.92 698.03

W942

5

M1 (2007)

Shukron and Reich excavations (2003)

5

C

D

E

51

Fig. 2.67. Stratum III: Room 621; Pit 625 of stratum I on left, looking southeast.

Fig. 2.68. Stratum III: Room 621, Shaft 653 in background, looking west.

Fig. 2.70. Stratum III: Channel 600, looking east. Fig. 2.69. Stratum III: Channels 602 and 603, looking east.

52

Doron Ben-Ami

Near the junction between Channels 654 and 601, a segment of a wall (W903) was built in the same technique characterizing the other walls of Stratum III, i.e., large dressed stones topped with a layer of small fieldstones. No floor or other walls were connected with W903; thus, its architectural function is unknown. Similarly, W906, c. 2 m southwest of W903, was not connected with any other remains. Underneath W906, a winding drainage channel (L600) was unearthed with its cover slabs still in situ (Fig. 2.70). It was founded directly upon the cobblestone foundation of the destroyed Floor 606 of Stratum V. The western end of Channel 600 led toward Channel 601, although the actual connection between the two was not preserved. The drainage system revealed below the surface of the Abbasid settlement, and the construction technique common to the Stratum III walls, testify to the wellplanned nature of the settlement established on the western side of the City of David in the ninth–tenth centuries CE.

4

3

W900

699.19 689.77

D

D

L610 699.11 0

2

3

m

4

Plan 2.15. Plan of Stratum II.

Stratum II (Fig. 2.71; Plan 2.15) This stratum was barely preserved; it is represented by a single wall and some patches of a floor connected with it. Stratigraphically, these remains are superposed above the Stratum III remains, thus representing a subsequent phase, still within the Abbasid period. Wall 900, uncovered close to the eastern boundary of the excavation, was built directly above W901 of the previous stratum (Fig. 2.71). thus, Building 621 had obviously gone out of use by the time W900 was built. The latter is a poorly constructed wall, running east– west, of carelessly laid fieldstones, one stone wide in its eastern end and two stones wide in its western end. A beaten-earth floor (L610) abutting its southern face is preserved mainly close to the wall, as it was disturbed by a pit dug from Stratum I (see below). Despite the scanty remains assigned to Stratum II, it is clear that the Abbasid settlement in this part of the city witnessed a decline prior to its end in the early tenth century CE.

Fig. 2.71. Stratum II: Wall 900 above northwestern corner of Room 621, looking north.

53

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

Stratum I (Figs. 2.72, 2.73; Plans 2.16, 2.18: Section 11-11) No further building activities can be assigned to the Abbasid period following the end of Stratum II, but nevertheless, it is Stratum I that represents the end of this period in Area M1. A number of pits were dug randomly over the now-deserted, open area outside the settlement, clearly demonstrating that the Abbasid presence continued well into Stratum I. The pits are rounded in shape and vary in size and depth, and cut into the earlier Abbasid strata. The largest of these pits (L625; Figs. 2.72, 2.73) was only partially uncovered, as it continues beyond the eastern boundary of the excavation. It was filled with many small and mediumsized fieldstones, and bones and other refuse were mixed in the fill, including many potsherds, the latest of which date to the Abbasid period. Two other pits of the same character (L627, L631), filled with earth and many small and medium-sized fieldstones, were discovered west of Pit 625. The northern of these, Pit 631, disturbed the eastern end of Channel 602, while the southern pit, L627, was placed directly above the round, stone-built Installation 646 of Stratum IV. Another large pit (L652) on the western side of the excavation area was mostly hidden beyond the excavation’s western boundary.

2

1

Fig. 2.72. Stratum I: Pit 625, cutting through W901, looking east.

Fig. 2.73. Stratum I: Pit 625, looking southeast.

3

4

E 11

699.41 697.87 L631

Shukron and Reich excavations (2003) M1 (2007)

D

E

699.56 699.46 698.98

L652

L627

D

L625 11

C

0

1

4

C m

2

3

Plan 2.16. Plan of Stratum I.

4

54

Doron Ben-Ami

Fills Above Stratum I and Modern R emains (Figs. 2.74: Plan 2.17)

immediately below the surface, remains dated to the twentieth century were encountered. The latter consisted of a flight of stairs (L651), of which eight steps were exposed, descending southeast to northwest (Fig. 2.74). A base of a glass bottle bearing the date 1966 provided a terminus post quem for the construction of the stairs.

The fills above Stratum I, deposited above the Abbasid pits, were rich in pottery fragments dated mainly to the medieval and Ottoman periods. In the few centimeters 3

4

5

E

E L651

D

D

0

3

4

2

m

5

Plan 2.17. Plan of medieval and modern remains.

Fig. 2.74. Modern Stairway 651; Pit 625 of Stratum I on left, W900 of Stratum II above W901 of Stratum III, looking southeast.

55

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

2

1

3

4

5 G

7

9

G

6

F

8

F 8 Shukron and Reich excavations (2003) M1 (2007)

E 11

E

5

D

D 5

1

9

C

11

C 3

7

4

1

2

10

2

4

B

B

10 6 3

A

0

4

1

A

m

2

3

Plan 2.18. Schematic plan and sections.

4

5

56

Doron Ben-Ami

W940

694.00

694.00

693.00

693.00

692.00

W974

W952 W967

W969

L799

W977

691.00

W983

688.00

688.00

1-1

1-1 W969 691.00

691.00

690.00

690.00

W987

W984 689.00

W983 L835

L837

688.00

688.00

2-2

2-2

693.00

692.00

L778

691.00

690.00

693.00

W968

W974

L820+L821 L826+L827

L799 W979

692.00

W971 W976

L794

L793

L806 L825

W981

689.00

L826+L827 689.00

L815, L814, L808

689.00

691.00

690.00

W980 689.00

692.00

L820+L821

L795+L812

690.00

L778

W985

3-3

3-3

Plan 2.18 (cont.). Sections.

691.00

L798 L813

W982

690.00

689.00

57

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

694.00

694.00

693.00

693.00

692.00

692.00

W958 691.00

691.00

690.00

690.00

L783

689.00

689.00

4-4 4-4

W922

695.00

694.00

L729

W949

696.00

W881

W909

W940

W950

W948

696.00

695.00

694.00

693.00

693.00

692.00

692.00

691.00

691.00

W953

690.00

L740

690.00

5-5

5-5

Plan 2.18 (cont.). Sections.

688.00

689.00

690.00

691.00

692.00

693.00

694.00

W928

W910

L719

W951

L702

W922

6-6

6-6

Plan 2.18 (cont.). Sections.

L740

W952

W940

L760

L742

W958 L779

L783

W965

688.00

689.00

690.00

691.00

692.00

693.00

694.00

58

59

ChAPTER 2: STRATIgRAPhy AND ARChITECTuRE

L652 698.00

L628

W881

698.00

W904

L624 L636

697.00

696.00

W882 W915

W914

696.00

L601

695.00

697.00

695.00

W909

W923

694.00

694.00

W922

W926

693.00

693.00

L704

L728

692.00

692.00

7-7

7-7

W912 695.00

W882 W915

694.00

693.00

695.00

694.00

W923

W928

692.00

691.00

L714

L719 L728

693.00

692.00

691.00

8-8

8-8

Plan 2.18 (cont.). Sections.

694.00

695.00

696.00

697.00

698.00

L607 L633 L648

W870

W910

9-9 Plan 2.18 (cont.). Sections.

W883 L618 L634

W881

9-9

L603 L602

W864

L601

L671

L606

694.00

695.00

696.00

697.00

698.00

60 Doron Ben-Ami

61

Chapter 2: Stratigraphy and Architecture

697.00

697.00

696.00

696.00

695.00

695.00

694.00

694.00

693.00

693.00

692.00

692.00

W969

691.00

691.00

10-10

10-10

701.00

701.00

700.00

700.00

698.00

697.00

L625

699.00

L667

L656 W924

699.00

698.00

697.00

696.00

696.00

695.00

695.00

694.00

694.00

693.00

693.00

692.00

692.00

691.00

691.00 11-11

11-11

Plan 2.18 (cont.). Sections.

62

Doron Ben-Ami

Note It should be noted that due to the limited exposure of the Early Islamic remains in Area M1, the dates assigned

1

here to Strata IV–I may be slightly modified in future reports.

R eferences Ben-Ami D. and Tchekhanovets Y. 2011. The Lower City of Jerusalem on the Eve of Its Destruction, 70 C.E.: A View from Hanyon Givati. BASOR 364:61–85. Crowfoot J.W and Fitzgerald G.M. 1929. Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley, Jerusalem, 1927 (PEFA 5). London. Josephus War. Josephus. The Jewish War. H.St.J. thackeray transl. (Loeb Classical Library). Cambridge, Mass.– London 1927. Kenyon K.M. 1964. Excavations in Jerusalem, 1963. PEQ 96:7–18. Kenyon K.M. 1965. Excavations in Jerusalem, 1964. PEQ 97:9–20.

Kenyon K.M. 1966. Excavations in Jerusalem, 1965. PEQ 98:73–88. Kenyon K.M. 1967. Excavations in Jerusalem, 1966. PEQ 99:65–70. Reich R. 1990. Miqwa’ot (Jewish Ritual Immersion Baths) in Eretz-Israel in the Second Temple and the Mishnah and Talmud Periods. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Reich R. 2008. Jerusalem, the Giv‘ati Parking Lot. NEAEHL 5:1807–1808.

Chapter 3

The Iron Age Pottery Doron Ben-Ami

Introduction This chapter discusses the pottery assemblages of Strata XII–IX in Area M1. It must be stressed that due to the limited exposure of the Iron Age strata, the present study deals with relatively small amounts of material and its primary objective is to provide a representative picture of the Iron Age pottery unearthed in Area M1. Thus, no quantitative analyses were conducted; these must await further excavations and a more comprehensive study of the Iron Age pottery. Nevertheless, the wellstratified material that originated in each Iron Age stratum presents an important opportunity to closely examine ceramic changes in the City of David during the Iron Age. For this purpose, only secure loci were chosen for presentation; these include floors that were stratigraphically sealed by floors of the succeeding Iron Age stratum. No material from fills is discussed, even when these were sealed by the remains of the stratum above. These assemblages have produced valuable data regarding general trends in the overall assemblage (dominant types, the appearance and disappearance of certain types, surface treatment, etc.), as well as more specific aspects. The comparative material for the Area M1 assemblages is drawn primarily from other stratified excavations in Jerusalem such as the City of David (De Groot and Ariel 2000), Caves I and II on the southeastern hill of Jerusalem (Eshel 1995), and the Jewish Quarter (De Groot, Geva and Yezerski 2003; Yezerski 2006). While finds from the renewed excavations at the stratified site of Bet Shemesh would have been a natural choice for comparative material, by the time of publication only a few pottery assemblages had been published. Limited use has been made here of material originating from the older excavations at Bet Shemesh (Grant and Wright 1938). To enlarge the pool of comparative data, selected parallels are cited from two ‘key’ sites in Iron Age Judah, Lachish (Zimhoni 2004a; 2004b) and ‘Arad (Singer-Avitz 2002). As they

enjoy a wide consensus regarding the dating of their rich and well-stratified Iron Age strata, these two sites have become the basis for comparative studies for all other Iron Age sites in Judah. And finally, the rich Iron Age assemblages from Batash (Mazar and PanitzCohen 2001) were also utilized in the comparative typological discussion. Hopefully, this analysis will provide a preliminary chronological framework for the Iron Age occupation on the western slope of the City of David. The Iron Age assemblages excavated in Area M1 Strata XII–IX are varied in nature and the number of vessels, of which the earliest, Stratum XII, and the latest phase of Stratum XI, Phase XIA, are clearly the largest. Mainly diagnostic forms were chosen for illustration, in amounts representative of their presence in the assemblage. The figures are organized according to loci, while the discussion is typological and proceeds from earliest (Stratum XII) to latest (Stratum IX), and from open to closed forms, focusing on three main vessel groups that have chronological significance: bowls and kraters, cooking pots, and storage jars. Other forms are illustrated, but not discussed. For the most part, the fabric is the typical Judean reddish brown ware.

The Pottery Assemblages Stratum XII (Figs. 3.1–3.3) Although restricted in exposure, Stratum XII yielded a relatively rich pottery assemblage in comparison with the other Iron Age strata. This assemblage, deriving from Room 835, included a variety of types dominated by the large number of chalices. Bowls (Fig. 3.1) Most of the bowls are shallow and rounded with a slight carination on the upper third of the vessel; above

64

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 3.1 ► No.

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

9477/10

688.27–16

Slip, horizontal and irregular hand burnish on interior and exterior

2

9467/5

688.65–27

Slip, uneven horizontal and irregular hand burnish on interior and exterior; fire marks on interior and exterior

3

9435/13

689.24–688.82

Fire marks on interior and exterior

4

9443/8

689.24–688.65

5

9443/2

689.24–688.65

6

9443/3

689.24–688.65

Fire marks on interior

7

9435/6

689.24–688.82

Dense hand burnish on interior and exterior

8

9494/13

688.16–09

Fire marks on interior and exterior

9

9477/1

688.27–16

Traces of burnish on interior

10

9467/11

688.65–27

Irregular burnish on interior and rim; fire marks on interior

11

9434/4

689.24–688.82

Traces of hand burnish on interior and exterior

12

9477/5

688.27–16

Red stripes on top of rim; slip and horizontal hand burnish on interior and rim

13

9494/12

688.16–09

Traces of hand burnish on interior and rim

14

9477/2

688.27–16

15

9435/22

689.24–688.82

Horizontal hand burnish on interior and rim; clay knob

16

9467/4

688.65–27

Clay knobs

the carination the walls are everted and relatively thin (Fig. 3.1:1–13). In most cases, the rim has the same thickness as the walls. Rims are usually plain and rounded (Fig. 3.1:1, 4, 6, 7, 10) or pointed (Fig. 3.1:2, 9, 15), with a few thicker than the wall, flattened and slightly inverted (Fig. 3.1:11, 12). The bowl in Fig. 3.1:14, with a thickened rim that projects outward, may be the forerunner of the folded rim that became the typical bowl rim in the later part of the Iron Age throughout Judah (see below). Surface treatments, when applied, include slip, burnish, painted decoration and the addition of clay lumps. Slip appears in a few cases on both the interior and exterior of the vessel (Fig. 3.1:1, 2); in other examples, only the interior is slipped (Fig. 3.1:12). In general, Stratum XII bowls were hand burnished using diverse burnishing techniques such as irregular, horizontal or a combination of both. Wheel burnish is completely absent. Painted decoration is rare, appearing on a single bowl (Fig. 3.1:12) and consisting of red stripes on the top of the bowl rim. Similar decoration on bowls is seen in the City of David Stratum 15 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 13:1) and in ‘Arad Stratum XI (SingerAvitz 2002: Fig. 8:2). Some bowls exhibit small clay lumps applied below the rim (Fig. 3.1:15, 16). The lack of any complete vessels prevents any conclusion

regarding their number or function, and they may have been decorative knobs or perhaps functioned as knob handles (cf. bowl from Lachish Level IVC, Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.23:4). The Stratum XII bowl assemblage demonstrates many characteristics that place it within Iron IIA. This dating relies primarily on the clear dominance of the carinated bowls, with the carination located, as a rule, in the upper wall, close to the rim. Such bowls were reported from the City of David Strata 15 and 14 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Figs. 13:6; 14:1) and Lachish Levels V–IV (Zimhoni 2004b: Figs. 25.2:13–18; 25.3:1, Groups B11–B18). In her analysis of the Level V–IV pottery at Lachish, Zimhoni noted a trend toward a decline in the production of these bowls. In Level III, they gave way to a new type of carinated bowl in which the carination is placed at the midpoint or in the lower third of the walls (Zimhoni 2004b:1667). The earlier carinated bowls are well represented in Stratum XI at ‘Arad (Singer-Avitz 2002: Figs. 6:5, 6, 8:1–3). The total absence of folded-rim bowls in Stratum XII, so typical of the later part of the Iron Age, both in Area M1 (Strata XI–IX) and elsewhere, is noteworthy. The sole use of hand burnishing of different techniques also supports this early dating. The variety of decoration techniques noted in this assemblage is replaced by the wheel-burnish technique in the following stratum,

65

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

1

2

4

3

6

5

8

7

9

10

12

11

14

13

15

16 0

10

Fig. 3.1. Pottery from Stratum XII, Room 835—bowls.

which became the standard burnishing technique in the later Iron Age. Chalices (Fig. 3.2) In light of their scarcity in Strata XI–IX, the many chalices found in Room 835 deserve special attention. Several chalices bear dark fire marks inside only. Except for a single example (Fig. 3.2:14, below), all the chalices have a shallow bowl with an everted rim. The form of the everted rim varies widely and this range

of rim design, with no two identical, characterizes the chalice assemblage. The dominant rim type is the long everted form. The bowls are either rounded (Fig. 3.2:2, 3, 5–10) or slightly carinated (Fig. 3.2:1, 4). Two are decorated: that in Fig. 3.2:4 has red-painted horizontal stripes on the exterior; and that in Fig. 3.2:5 is red slipped both on the interior and exterior. The chalice in Figure 3.2:14 has a deep bowl that joins a foot with an everted base. Figure 3.2:15 resembles the petal decoration found on chalices at Tel Miqne-‘Eqron (Gitin 1993:253, Fig. 5:b).

66

Doron Ben-Ami

2 1

3

5 4

6

7

8

10

9

11

13

12

15

14

0

10

Fig. 3.2. Pottery from Stratum XII, Room 835—chalices.

Since Amiran’s ceramic study (1969:213), other scholars have noted the scarcity of chalices in the later part of the Iron Age, and the rarity of decoration on them (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001:56–57). The early date of the Stratum XII chalices within the Iron Age gains further support from the S-shaped profile of certain examples (e.g., Fig. 3.2:6), which becomes less frequent in Iron IIB, with only isolated examples

continuing past the eighth century BCE (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001:56, and references therein), and the ridged lower foot (Fig. 3.2:11–13), which differs from the simple flaring foot of the later Iron Age chalices. Parallels for the chalices from Stratum XII are found mainly in early Iron II contexts, e.g., Lachish Level IVB (Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.31:23).

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

67

◄ Fig. 3.2 No.

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

9457/3

688.65–27

2

9467/10

688.65–27

3

9435/19

688.65–27

4

9443/10+6

689.24–688.65

horizontal red stripes on exterior; dark fire marks on interior

5

9494/8

688.16–09

Red slip on interior and exterior

6

9443/2

689.24–688.65

Fire marks on interior

7

9458/1

688.65–27

Fire marks on interior

8

9443/18

689.24–688.65

Fire marks on interior

9

9456/2

688.65–27

10

9453/2

690.29–689.02

11

9457/4

688.65–27

12

9435/5

688.65–27

13

9494/15

688.16–09

14

9457/4

688.65–27

15

9455/2

688.65–27

Kraters (Fig. 3.3:1–8) Although no complete kraters were uncovered in Room 835, the diagnostic sherds could be classified into two principal groups based on the stance of their upper walls: one is characterized by an upright or slightly everted upper wall (Fig. 3.3:1–3, 7, 8), the other by a slightly inverted upper wall (Fig. 3.3:4–6). The rims appear in a number of variations: rounded and slightly thickened (Fig. 3.3:1, 2), thickened and folded (Fig. 3.3:3–6), and thickened and flattened on top (Fig. 3.3:7). Some of the Stratum XII kraters were hand burnished, but none were slipped. Nor do any bear signs of a handle, although this could be due to the fragmentary nature of the finds. Close parallels for the various rim types include: for Fig. 3.3:6, the City of David Stratum 15 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 11:12); for Fig. 3.3:3 and Figs. 3.3:8, 3.3:6 and 3.3:4, Lachish Levels V–IV (respectively, e.g., Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.18:3 and Zimhoni 2004b: Figs. 25.18:2, 25.18:8, 25.21:19) and for Fig. 3.3:8, ‘Arad Stratum XII (Singer-Avitz 2002: Fig. 1:9). Cooking Vessels (Fig. 3.3:9–11) Of the few rim fragments of cooking vessels recovered from Room 835, three are presented here, including two cooking pots (Fig. 3.3:9, 10) and one cooking

Description Fire marks on interior

Fire marks on interior

Fire marks on interior

jug (Fig. 3.3:11). The pots have a short, vertical (Fig. 3.3:9) or slightly inverted (Fig. 3.3:10) rim, which is thicker than the vessel wall and has a fine ridge in its lower part. A relatively close parallel to Fig. 3.3:9 is seen in the City of David Stratum 15 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 13:14), and a close parallel to Fig. 3.3:10, in Lachish Level IVB (Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.27:4). A parallel to the cooking jug (Fig. 3.3:11) is found in Lachish Level IVC (Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.23:14). Storage Jars (Fig. 3.3:12–18) Of the various storage-jar rim fragments found in Room 835, the ridged-neck storage jar is dominant (Fig. 3.3:12–14). This type is characterized by a ridge immediately below the rim. The rim is either slightly inverted (Fig. 3.3:12), everted (Fig. 3.3:13) or upright (Fig. 3.3:14), with a triangular (Fig. 3.3:13, 14), or sometimes rounded section (Fig. 3.3:12). Figure 3.3:15 probably belongs to this type of ridged-neck jar, although only the rim is preserved. This type becomes rare in Stratum XI, and is totally absent in Strata X– IX. Close parallels to Fig. 3.3:12 are found in the City of David Stratum 14 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 15:27) and in Lachish Level IV (Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.19:9), while Fig. 3.3:13 has a close parallel in Lachish Level IV (Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.35:16).

68

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 3.3 ► No.

Vessel

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

Krater

9494/2

688.16–09

2

Krater

9443/1

689.24–688.65

3

Krater

9494/10

688.16–09

4

Krater

9477/8

688.27–16

5

Krater

9448/19

689.24–688.65

Horizontal hand burnish and fire marks on interior

6

Krater

9494/6

688.16–09

Horizontal and irregular hand burnish on interior

7

Krater

9467/12

688.65–27

8

Krater

9443/21

689.24–688.65

Irregular horizontal hand burnish on exterior

9

Cooking pot

9443/14

689.24–688.65

10

Cooking pot

9435/18

689.24–688.82

11

Cooking jug

9435/4

689.24–688.82

12

Storage jar

9467/7

688.65–27

13

Storage jar

9467/3

688.65–27

14

Storage jar

9467/8

688.65–27

15

Storage jar

9494/1

688.16–09

16

Storage jar

9494/5

688.16–09

17

Storage jar

9434/6

689.24–688.82

18

Storage jar?

9494/2

688.16–09

19

Jug

9443/5

689.24–688.65

20

Jug

9434/7

689.24–688.82

21

Jug

9443/3

689.24–688.65

22

Juglet

9435/9

689.24–688.82

Irregular burnish

23

Juglet

9549

688.16

Vertical burnish

The large storage jar in Fig. 3.3:16 has a wide mouth and a relatively thick rim. Such storage jars are found in Lachish Level IV (Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.21:7). The rim in Fig. 3.3:17 is inverted with a triangular section. This is the only decorated example, with red stripes painted on the neck and rim. A close parallel (but undecorated) is seen in Lachish Level IV (Zimhoni 2004b: Fig. 25.19:4). No parallels have been found for the jar in Fig. 3.3:18. Not a single holemouth jar was found in Stratum XII. These make their first appearance only in the following stratum. Miscellaneous Vessels (Fig. 3.3:19–23) Several rims of simple jugs were recovered from Room 835 (Fig. 3.3:19–21). The upper part of a juglet is characterized by its simple rim and long neck, and the handle drawn from neck to shoulder (Fig. 3.3:22). A complete juglet with a thickened rim and a handle

Fire marks on interior

Red stripes on exterior

drawn from rim to shoulder has vertical hand burnish all over the body (Fig. 3.3:23; see also Fig. 3.9, second from left). Summary The Stratum XII assemblage is characterized by pottery types that appear to antedate the late eighth century BCE, both in Area M1 and throughout Judah. Not only the present types suggest this dating, but also those that are absent, e.g., the total absence of folded-rim bowls, wheel-burnish and holemouth jars. However, the regional nature of ceramic assemblages that predate the mass production of pottery in Judah in the eighth century BCE (which resulted in the uniformity of forms over wide regions) must be taken into consideration when utilizing parallels from other regions. The lack of definitive ceramic anchors does not enable a more accurate date than pre-eighth century BCE for Stratum XII.

69

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

1

2

4 3

6

5

8 7

11

9 10

12

14

13

16

15

17

18

19

20

21 22 0

10

Fig. 3.3. Pottery from Stratum XII, Room 835.

23

70

Doron Ben-Ami

Stratum XI (Figs. 3.4–3.9) The pottery assemblage originating in the three phases of Stratum XI (XIC–XIA) marks a clear change from the previous one: some of the characteristic types of the Stratum XII assemblage are now absent and new types, which become the dominant and characteristic types of the following Strata X–IX, make their first appearance. As the three phases closely resemble each other, they are discussed here as a single assemblage. Bowls (Figs. 3.4:1; 3.5:1–5; 3.6:1–14) The clear dominance of the folded-rim bowls in Stratum XI is striking (Figs. 3.4:1; 3.5:3–5; 3.6:7–14; 3.9), and is further emphasized in light of their total absence from the previous assemblage. These bowls are reported from sites throughout Judah dating to contexts of the late eighth–early sixth centuries BCE. Among the large number of variations in forms, the short folded rim with a pronounced triangular section is dominant (Figs. 3.5:4; 3.6:10–13). These bowls are also the most common bowls in Stratum 12 of the

eighth century BCE in Area D of the City of David (De Groot and Ariel 2000:95, e.g., Figs. 16:4; 17:16, 17; 18:1, 2, 29; 19:14–16, 22, 23), and were found in ‘Arad Strata X–VII, with a clear dominance in Strata X–VIII (Singer-Avitz 2002: Type B 24, eighth century BCE). They are totally absent in ‘Arad Stratum VI (SingerAvitz 2002:132). Worth noting among these bowls is the presence of the elongated folded-rim in Phase XIA (Fig. 3.6:14). This rim is the dominant foldedrim variant throughout the seventh and early sixth centuries BCE, with parallels in ‘Arad Strata VII–VI (Singer-Avitz 2002:132, Type B 25). These, together with certain other vessels in Phase XIA that are considered to be common seventh-century BCE types (see below), suggest that the latest phase of Stratum XI (XIA) postdates the eighth century BCE. The thin-walled bowl also makes its earliest appearance in Stratum XI (Fig 3.5:1, 2; 3.6:3). Such bowls are found in Stratum 12 in the City of David (De Groot and Ariel 2000:95, e.g., Figs. 16:1, 8, 9; 17:4, 5; 18:11, 21; 19:9, 10; 20:2, 3, 12). The bowls with a thickened band applied below the rim (Fig. 3.6:8) have a close parallel in seventh–sixth-century contexts

1

2

3

4

5

0

10

Fig. 3.4. Pottery from Phase XIC, L827. No.

Vessel

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Bowl?

9284/4

690.14–00

2

Holemouth jar

9284/2

690.14–00

3

Holemouth jar

9284/1

690.14–00

4

Storage jar

9284/3

690.14–00

5

Storage jar

9308/1

690.00–689.91

71

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

1

2

4

3

5

6

8

7

9

11

10

12

14

15

13

0

10

Fig. 3.5. Pottery from Phase XIB, L798, L820, L821 and L825. No.

Vessel

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

Bowl

798

9063/6

690.18–11

Dense horizontal burnish on interior and exterior

2

Bowl

825

9334/6

690.21–689.81

3

Bowl

825

9334/5

690.21–689.81

Irregular burnish on interior

4

Bowl

825

9334/4

690.21–689.81

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

5

Bowl

825

8934/1

690.21–689.89

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

6

Krater

821

9226/1

690.60–32

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

7

Holemouth jar

820

9224/3

690.60–26

8

Holemouth jar

820

9224/2

690.60–26

9

Storage jar

820

9248/4

690.26–14

10

Storage jar

825

9224/1

690.60–26

11

Storage jar

825

9381/8

690.21–689.89

12

Jug

821

9258/1

689.53–52

13

Jug

825

9334/2

690.21–689.89

14

Jug

821

9252/4

690.31–17

15

Jug

820

9248/3

690.26–14

Vertical burnish on exterior

72

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 3.6 ► No.

Vessel

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Bowl

793

8852/4

690.52–18

2

Bowl

794

9373/4+5

690.73–23

3

Bowl

793

8852/1

690.52–18

4

Bowl

793

8844/8

690.52–18

5

Bowl

801

8942/2

690.00–689.74

6

Bowl

793

8852/3

690.52–18

7

Bowl

794

8984/3

690.63–39

8

Bowl

794

8863/3

690.63–56

9

Bowl

793

8852/2

690.52–18

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

10

Bowl

793

8828/2

690.73–52

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

11

Bowl

801

9261/3

690.52–21

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

12

Bowl

801

8902/1

690.63–57

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

13

Bowl

801

9261/8

690.52–21

Horizontal and irregular burnish on interior; horizontal burnish on rim

14

Bowl

801

8921/1

690.52–46

15

Chalice

793

8844/1

690.52–18

16

Krater

793

8828/1

690.73–52

Wheel burnish on interior

17

Krater

794

8889/2

690.63–39

Irregular burnish on rim

18

Krater

793

8844/5

690.52–18

Wheel burnish on interior

19

Krater

793

8844/6

690.52–18

in the Jewish Quarter (De Groot, Geva and Yezerski 2003: Pl. 1.7:12). Stratum XI marks the earliest appearance of wheel burnishing, especially on bowls. Except for one bowl (Fig. 3.6:13), in which irregular hand burnish still appears (alongside horizontal burnish), all bowls in this stratum were wheel burnished inside and on the rim. This phenomenon has long been recognized as the outcome of the mass production of pottery vessels, so characteristic of the late eighth century BCE onward (Zimhoni 2004b:1704–1706, and see references therein). Chalice (Fig. 3.6:15) A single base of a chalice was recovered in Phase XIA, on Floor 793. Kraters (Figs. 3.5:6; 3.6:16–19) The kraters of Stratum XI, like the bowls of this stratum, are dominated by the folded-rim type (Figs. 3.5:6; 3.6:16–18). Almost all are wheel burnished inside and on the rim. Folded-rim kraters are also the dominant kraters in Stratum 12 in the City of David (De

Description

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

Groot and Ariel 2000: Figs. 7:8; 8:8–11; 16:17; 18:6, 7; 21:14, 15; 24:6, 7). At ‘Arad, these kraters appear in Strata X–VII (Singer-Avitz 2002:135, Type B 42). The krater in Fig. 3.6:19 has an everted neck terminating in a thickened rim. Although much less common than the folded-rim kraters, this type was found in late Iron Age contexts at several Judahite sites such as ‘Arad Strata VII–VI (Singer-Avitz 2002:138, Type B 47) and Lachish Level II (Zimhoni 1990:42, Fig. 31:1). Possible parallels from the City of David include two kraters from Stratum 12 in Area D1 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 25:1, 2), and another from Stratum 10B in Area G (Shiloh 1984: Pl. 34:2). Cooking Pots (Fig. 3.7:1, 2) Cooking pots are conspicuously rare in Stratum XI. Only two cooking-pot rim fragments were recovered in Stratum XI, both in Phase XIA. Since the pottery assemblage of this phase is stratigraphically distinguished from those of Phases XIC and XIB, these two pots cannot be considered representatives of the earlier phases. Figure 3.7:1 is characterized by its thick and slightly everted rim with a gutter in the rim interior, probably to hold a lid. Two loop handles extend from rim to shoulder.

73

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

1

3

2

4

5

7

6

9

8

12

11

10

13

15

14

16

17

18

19

0

10

Fig. 3.6. Pottery from Phase XIA, L793, L794 and Installation 801.

Although we could not find identical parallels for this cooking pot, it resembles others in assemblages dated to the end of the Iron Age, such as ‘Arad Strata VII–

VI (Singer-Avitz 2002: Figs. 46:2; 47:12) and Batash Stratum II (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001: Fig. 60:14). No exact parallel was found for Fig. 3.7:2.

74

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 3.7 ► No.

Vessel

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

Cooking pot

794

8966/2

690.23–19

Mending hole

2

Cooking pot

801

8921/1

690.52–46

3

Holemouth jar

794

9049/10

690.23–05

4

Storage jar

794

9049/8

690.23–05

5

Storage jar

794

8889/6

690.63–39

6

Storage jar

801

9261/8

690.52–21

7

Storage jar

794

9373/3

690.73–23

8

Storage jar

794

9049/3

690.23–05

9

Storage jar

794

8889/4

690.63–39

10

Storage jar

794

9373/2

690.73–23

11

Storage jar

801

8931/3

690.52–45

12

Storage jar

794

8884/1

690.63–39

13

Storage jar

801

8931/6

690.52–45

14

Storage jar

801

8933/7

690.52–45

Storage Jars (Figs. 3.4:2–5; 3.5:7–11; 3.7:3–14) The holemouth jar makes its first appearance as early as Stratum XI, and is a very frequent type in Phases XIC–XIB (Figs. 3.4:2, 3; 3.5:7, 8). It continues to appear in the following Phase XIA (Fig. 3.7:3) and onward (Figs. 3.10:16, 17; 3.11:10), though it becomes much less popular. As no complete example of a holemouth jar was found in Area M1, it is difficult to ascertain whether the rims found belonged to the cylindrical holemouth-jar type, or to the bag-shaped jar with a holemouth rim. Of the two popular rim variations of the latter storage jar at sites throughout Judah (see Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001:105–107, Type SJ 10a–b, and references therein), only the plain shelf rim is present in the Iron Age strata in Area M1, whereas the ridged rim is totally absent. In their earliest appearance in Area M1 (Stratum XI), the holemouthjar rims are rather thick and the rim top varies in shape from flat (Figs. 3.5:8; 3.7:3) to concave (Fig. 3.4:2) or convex (Figs. 3.4:3; 3.5:8). In the following strata (X–IX), the holemouth rims become more rounded and standardized in shape. Parallels are found in later Iron Age contexts in Jerusalem and sites throughout Judah: a parallel to Fig. 3.4:2 is seen in Stratum II of the Jewish Quarter (Yezerski 2006: Pl. 3.2:20) and in Stratum II at Batash (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001: Pl. 98:1); rims similar to Fig. 3.4:3 are found in Stratum 12 in the City of David (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Figs. 16:23; 20:30; 26:2–6, 8) and at Bet Shemesh (Grant

Hole in body

and Wright 1938: Pl. LXV:23). The main occurrence of the holemouth storage jar at ‘Arad is in Strata X–VIII, with a parallel to Fig. 3.5:7 in Stratum IX (Singer-Avitz 2002:146, Type SJ 16, Fig. 33:8). Significantly, the so-called ‘rosette storage jar’ (Fig. 3.7:9–14) makes its appearance in the latest phase of Stratum XI. One complete and another nearly complete example (Fig. 3.7:13, 14; 3.9) were uncovered in Phase XIA, alongside large fragments of additional such jars. These storage jars have an elongated oval body, relatively thin walls, and a sloping shoulder below which four two-ridged loop handles were placed. The neck is either straight (Fig. 3.7:10–13) or slightly everted (Fig. 3.7:14), and the rim is plain. They are all made of light gray metallic clay with gray and white grits. These jars, which are considered by some scholars to be the continuation of the LMLK jars (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001:96, Type SJ 9; SingerAvitz 2002:144, Type SJ 3), were found in Area M1 in clear domestic contexts. However, jar handles bearing rosette seal impressions (see Cahill 1995:241–244) were not discovered in Area M1. Storage jars of this type appear in seventh-century BCE contexts in Judah. In Area G in the City of David, many such jars were found in a late Iron Age context (Stratum 10B, L818, ‘House of Ahiel’; Shiloh 1984:18, Pl. 30:2). In contrast to its relative popularity in Jerusalem and immediate vicinity (e.g., Ramat Rahel; Barkay 1985:406), this type is far less represented at Lachish, where it appears in Level II (Zimhoni

75

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

2

1

3

4

8

7

6

5

9

12 11 10 0

10

14

13

0

20

Fig. 3.7. Pottery from Phase XIA, L793, L794 and Installation 801.

1990:32). At ‘Arad, these storage jars were found exclusively in Stratum VII (Singer-Avitz 2002:144, Fig. 46:7, 8).

Other than the holemouth jars and the rosette storage jars, the storage-jar rims originating in Stratum XI find close parallels in contexts of the late eighth–seventh

76

Doron Ben-Ami

centuries BCE at sites throughout Judah (due to the fragmentary preservation of these rims, the possibility that some were actually large-mouthed jugs could not be ruled out).

century BCE assemblages such as those in the City of David Stratum 10 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 10:4, 5), Lachish Level II (Zimhoni 1990:46, Fig. 33:4) and ‘Arad Stratum VII (Singer-Avitz 2002:155, Type J 14).

Decanters (Fig. 3.8:1–3)

Lamps (Fig. 3.8:5, 6)

Decanters were first introduced in Area M1 during Phase XIA. An upper half and two rim fragments of decanters were encountered in L794. They are characterized by a narrow, ridged neck from which a handle is drawn to the shoulder, and the sloping shoulder joins the body at a sharp angle. The rim is simple and flaring (Fig. 3.8:2), or thickened and rounded (Fig. 3.8:1, 3). This type of decanter was found in seventh-

The small lamp with a thick, high disc base (Fig. 3.8:5) is a well-known type in late Iron Age contexts (late eighth–seventh centuries BCE) such as Lachish Level III (Zimhoni 1990:15, Fig. 6:15, 16), ‘Arad Strata VII–VI (Singer-Avitz 2002:158, Type L 2) and Batash Stratum II (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001:133, Type LP 3). Judging by the thickened lower part of Fig. 3.8:6, it may also be a fragment of another such lamp.

1

3 2

5

4

6

7 0

10

Fig. 3.8. Pottery from Phase XIA, L793, L794 and Installation 801. No.

Vessel

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Decanter

794

8842/8

690.73–56

2

Decanter

794

8842/4

690.73–56

3

Decanter

794

9373/1

690.73–23

4

Juglet

801

9261/4

690.52–21

5

Lamp

794

8999/1

690.23–05

6

Lamp

801

9261/16

690.52–21

7

Stand

801

8733

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

Stand (Fig. 3.8:7)

77

The ceramic evidence suggests a short gap in time between this stratum and the preceding Stratum XII of the ninth century BCE. Unfortunately, the meager number of diagnostic pottery sherds recovered in the earliest phase of Stratum XI (XIC) prevents, for the moment, any decisive conclusions.

One complete stand and numerous fragments of others were recovered in Phase XIA. Although they vary in diameter, all belong to large biconical stands. Similar stands were found in Jerusalem in Area G of the City of David in late Iron Age contexts (Stratum 10B, L818, ‘House of Ahiel’, and L967, ‘House of the Bullae’; Shiloh 1984: Pls. 30:2, 34:2) and in the Jewish Quarter (Yezerski 2006: Pl. 3.2:23). It is well-known throughout the Iron Age at sites in Judah and elsewhere (Grant and Wright 1938: Pls. LXVI:42–44; LXVII:22; Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001:137, “hourglass” stand; Singer-Avitz 2002:139, Type ST 1).

The two assemblages presented in Figs. 3.10 and 3.11 originated in the two uppermost strata of the Iron Age sequence. As they closely resemble each other, displaying similar vessel types, they are discussed here as a single assemblage.

Summary

Bowls (Figs. 3.10:1–7; 3.11:1–5)

The Stratum XI assemblage is characterized by a number of new pottery types that demonstrate a clear departure from the Stratum XII tradition. Among these, the folded-rim bowls, the holemouth jars and the ‘rosette storage jars’ (Fig. 3.9), all typical eighthcentury BCE types, are the most significant. Stratum XI also marks the earliest appearance of wheel burnishing, a phenomenon that has long been recognized as the outcome of the mass production of pottery vessels, so characteristic of the late eighth century BCE onward.

Folded-rim bowls continue to dominate the bowl assemblage (Figs. 3.10:4, 5; 3.11:2, 4, 5). All the bowls of this type are rounded, none are carinated, and all are wheel burnished; only one example is red slipped. Parallels are found at numerous sites in Judah from the eighth–sixth centuries BCE (see above, Stratum XI). A new type of bowl appears in Strata X–IX, the carinated bowl with out-turned rim (Figs. 3.10:1; 3.11:1). The carination is in the upper wall, immediately below the rim. The rim itself is either slightly flaring (Fig. 3.11:1) or angled sharply outward (Fig. 3.10:1),

Strata X–IX (Figs. 3.10, 3.11)

Fig. 3.9. Pottery vessels recovered on Phase XIA Floor 794.

78

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 3.10 ► No.

Vessel

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

Bowl

9069/8

693.65–63

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

2

Bowl

8981/1

691.25–03

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

3

Bowl

8891/6

691.61–58

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

4

Bowl

9206/2

690.78–61

Red slip and wheel burnish on interior and exterior

5

Bowl

8891/4

691.61–58

Wheel burnish on interior and exterior

6

Bowl

8981/2

691.25–03

7

Bowl

8069/3

693.65–63

Red slip; dense horizontal burnish; wavy burnish pattern below rim

8

Krater

8995/1

691.04–03

Wheel burnish on interior

9

Cooking pot

9206/3

690.78–61

10

Cooking pot

9206/5

690.78–61

11

Cooking pot

8995/3

691.04–03

12

Holemouth jar

9034/2

691.04–690.89

13

Holemouth jar

9069/11

690.89–81

14

Storage jar

9053/3

691.04–690.89

15

Storage jar

9053/6

691.04–690.89

16

Storage jar

9034/2

691.04–690.89

17

Storage jar

9069/12

690.89–81

18

Juglet

9053/1

691.04–690.89

19

Lamp

9069/15

693.65–63

and protrudes inward. In both examples, the angledout rim creates an S-shaped profile. This type of bowl is found in late Iron Age strata at many Judahite sites, is commonly assigned to the Assyrian-inspired carinated bowls and is considered a typical bowl of the seventh–sixth centuries BCE (Mazar and PanitzCohen 2001:43–44). Close parallels from Jerusalem include a bowl from Stratum 7 in the Jewish Quarter (De Groot, Geva and Yezerski 2003: Pl. 110:4) and from the City of David (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 28:1, 2). The latter examples, which are identical to our Fig. 3.10:1, originated in the limestone-chip layer assigned to Stratum 9 of the Persian period. The chip layer could well include mixed material from the end of the Iron Age. Thus, these bowls may represent the final occurrence in the Iron Age of this typical bowl type. The examples from Strata X–IX (Figs. 3.10:1; 3.11:1) appear to be comparable to Type B 13 at ‘Arad (Singer-Avitz 2002:130) and Type BL 22 at Batash (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001:43–44), dated to the late seventh century BCE.

It cannot be determined if the two ledge-rim bowls (Fig. 3.10:6, 7) belong to the carinated or the rounded bowl types. That in Fig. 3.10:7 is red slipped with dense horizontal burnish and has a wavy burnish pattern below the rim. Parallels for such rim types are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (De Groot, Geva and Yezerski 2003: Pls. 1.2:6; 1.7:31; 1.11:3), the City of David Stratum 12 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 8:4) and Cave I (Eshel 1995: Fig. 13:3, 8). Other close analogies are seen at Bet Shemesh (Grant and Wright 1938: Pl. LXVI:7) and in Batash Stratum III (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001: Pl. 93:14, identified as a chalice). Worth noting is the total absence of the mortariumbowl type in these strata. This bowl appears in late Iron Age contexts (seventh–early sixth centuries BCE), as in ‘Arad Stratum VI (Singer-Avitz 2002:138, Type B 48, Fig. 48:4), and becomes the typical bowl type in post-exilic contexts (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001:51, Type BL 20); they are also common in the Persian period (Stern 1982:96–98).

79

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

2

1

3

5

4

6

7

8

10

9

12

11

13 14

15

16

17

18

19 0

10

Fig. 3.10. Pottery from Stratum X, Room 799.

Kraters (Figs. 3.10:8; 3.11:6, 7) The folded-rim krater dominant in the previous stratum (Fig. 3.6:16–18) becomes the only krater type in the Strata X–IX assemblages. These rims are identical to those of the previous stratum in both shape and surface treatment––wheel burnished inside and on the rim. Parallels are found in assemblages dated from the eighth–sixth centuries BCE at sites throughout Judah (see above). Parallels to the krater in Fig. 3.10:8 are seen, for example, in the City of David Stratum 12 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 17:9), in the Jewish Quarter (De Groot, Geva and Yezerski 2003: Pl. 1.9:9), in

Cave I in Jerusalem (Eshel 1995: Fig. 16:10), in Lachish Level III (Zimhoni 2004a: Fig. 26.31:3) and ‘Arad Stratum VII (Singer-Avitz 2002: Fig. 44:1). Cooking Pots (Figs. 3.10:9–11; 3.11:8, 9) The dominant cooking-pot type in Strata X–IX is the closed, globular cooking pot. Only rims have been preserved of these cooking pots, among which the popularity of the everted rim is clearly noticeable (Figs. 3.10:11; 3.11:8, 9). This rim type finds many close parallels in assemblages from the later part of the Iron Age at sites throughout Judah. According to these

80

Doron Ben-Ami

Fig. 3.11 ► No.

Vessel

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Bowl

778

8868/4

691.71–61

2

Bowl

778

8868/8

691.71–61

3

Bowl

778

8794/1

691.78–72

Description Wheel burnish on interior

4

Bowl

788

8865/3

690.69

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

5

Bowl

778

8750/4

691.87–77

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

6

Krater

778

8865/2

690.69

7

Krater

778

8865/4

690.69

8

Cooking pot

778

8868/5

691.71–61

Cooking pot

786

8882/2

691.59–56

10

9

Holemouth jar

788

8865/6

690.69

11

Storage jar

778

8750/7

691.87–77

12

Storage jar

778

8868/3

691.71–61

13

Jug

778

8750/3

691.87–77

14

Jug

778

8750/9

691.87–77

15

Jug

778

8750/8

691.87–77

parallels, the everted rims may be associated with small and medium-sized, deep closed cooking pots. Parallels are seen, for example, in the City of David Stratum 9 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 28:8), Lachish Level II (Zimhoni 2004a: Figs. 26.52:12; 26.54:6, 14; 26.55:11, 12), ‘Arad Strata VII–VI (Singer-Avitz 2002: Figs. 44:3; 47:6) and Batash Stratum II (Mazar and PanitzCohen 2001: Pl. 34:9). The concave rim in Fig. 3.10:11 is a relatively rare variant with few parallels. A similar cooking pot with a short, concave neck was found in Batash Stratum II (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001: Pl. 32:8). The rim in Fig. 3.10:9 seems to be the only representative of the open cooking-pot type in Strata X–IX. It has a close parallel in the Jewish Quarter (De Groot, Geva and Yezerski 2003: Pl. 1.1:7). The cooking-pot rim in Fig. 3.10:10 is an eighthcentury BCE heirloom, although this type was not found in Area M1. Similar examples from eighthcentury BCE contexts are found, for example, in the City of David Stratum 12 (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Figs. 17:12; 25:15), Cave I in Jerusalem (Eshel 1995: Fig. 18:3) and Lachish Level III (Zimhoni 2004a: Fig. 26.38:3). Storage Jars (Figs. 3.10:12–17; 3.11:10–12) The holemouth storage jar continues to appear in both Stratum X (Fig. 3.10:12, 13) and Stratum IX (Fig.

Wheel burnish on interior and rim

3.11:10). It first appeared in Stratum XI, where it was a common storage-jar type (see above). Its relatively low frequency in Strata X–IX represents its decline in popularity toward the end of the Iron Age. The rims are now more rounded and the walls are thinner compared with the earlier variants. Similar jars with such characteristics are found in contexts of the late seventh– early sixth centuries BCE in the Jewish Quarter (De Groot, Geva and Yezerski 2003: Pl. 1.10:20, 21) and Batash Stratum II (Mazar and Panitz-Cohen 2001: Pls. 47:10, 11; 57:22, 97:1, 2). Another close parallel is a holemouth jar from Lachish Level II (Zimhoni 2004a: Fig. 26.56:13), though the rim top is slightly ridged. Alongside the decline in popularity of the holemouth storage jar, another jar type becomes more common (Figs. 3.10:14–17; 3.11:11, 12). It is characterized by sloping shoulders and a short neck terminating in an everted rim that is either simple (Fig. 3.11:11) or thickened and rounded (Fig. 3.10:14–17). As only necks and rims of this type have been preserved, it cannot be determined whether all fragments belong to the same type of storage jar. Nevertheless, their stratigraphic context and close resemblance suggest that this is the case. Due to their fragmentary preservation, it is difficult to reconstruct the vessel’s shape and thus parallels are tentative. A close analogy to Fig. 3.11:11 is a storage-jar rim from Stratum 9 of the City of David (De Groot and Ariel 2000: Fig. 28:15). A parallel to Figs. 3.10:14 and 3.11:12 is a storage jar found in

81

Chapter 3: The Iron Age Pottery

2 1

4

3

5

6

7

8

9

10 12 11

13

14

15

0

10

Fig. 3.11. Pottery from Stratum IX, Room 778, Tabun 786 and Installation 788.

Cave I at Jerusalem (Eshel 1995: Fig. 27:1), and another from this cave closely parallels Fig. 3.10:17 (Eshel 1995: Fig. 29). Miscellaneous Vessels Several jugs (Fig. 3.11:13–15) and juglets (Fig. 3.10:18) were also recovered from these strata. The thick base of an oil lamp (Fig. 3.10:19) represents the typical type in late Iron Age contexts (see above, Fig. 3.8:5, 6).

Summary Based on the ceramic analysis and the stratigraphic setting, it can be cautiously suggested that Strata X– IX date sometime at the end of the Iron Age, from the later part of the seventh to the early sixth centuries BCE. Hopefully, future excavations will provide us with a more accurate dating for the entire Iron Age sequence.

82

Doron Ben-Ami

R eferences Amiran R. 1969. Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. Jerusalem–Ramat Gan. Barkay G. 1985. Northern and Western Jerusalem in the End of the Iron Age. Ph.D. diss. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Cahill J.M. 1995. Rosette Stamp Seal Impressions from Ancient Judah. IEJ 45:230–252. De Groot A. and Ariel D.T. 2000. Ceramic Report. In D.T. Ariel ed. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985, Directed by Yigal Shiloh V: Extramural Areas (Qedem 40). Jerusalem. Pp. 91–154. De Groot A., Geva H. and Yezerski I. 2003. Iron Age II Pottery. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X–2, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 1–49. Eshel I. 1995. Two Pottery Groups from Kenyon’s Excavations on the Eastern Slope of Ancient Jerusalem. In I. Eshel and K. Prag eds. The Iron Age Cave Deposits on the SouthEast Hill and Isolated Burials and Cemeteries Elsewhere. Excavations by K.M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967 4 (British Academy Monographs in Archaeology 6). Oxford. Pp. 1–157. Gitin S. 1993. Seventh Century B.C.E. Cultic Elements at Ekron. In A. Biran and J. Aviram eds. Biblical Archaeology Today: Proceedings of the Second International Congress of Biblical Archaeology, 1990. Jerusalem. Pp. 248–258. Grant E. and Wright G.E. 1938. Ain Shems Excavations IV: Pottery. Haverford.

Mazar A. and Panitz-Cohen N. 2001. Timnah (Tel Batash) II: The Finds from the First Millennium BCE (Qedem 42). Jerusalem. Shiloh Y. 1984. Excavations at the City of David I: 1978– 1982, Interim Report of the First Five Seasons (Qedem 19). Jerusalem. Singer-Avitz L. 2002. Arad: The Iron Age Pottery Assemblages. Tel Aviv 29:110–214. Stern E. 1982. Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period 538–332 B.C. Warminster. Yezerski I. 2006. Iron Age II Pottery. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: The Finds from Area E and Other Studies, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 84–93. Zimhoni O. 1990. Two Ceramic Assemblages from Lachish. Tel Aviv 17:3–52. Zimhoni O. 2004a. The Pottery of Levels III and II. In D. Ussishkin ed. The Renewed Archaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973–1994) IV (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 22). Tel Aviv. Pp. 1789–1899. Zimhoni O. 2004b. The Pottery of Levels V and IV and Its Archaeological and Chronological Implications. In D. Ussishkin ed. The Renewed Archaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973–1994) IV (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 22). Tel Aviv. Pp. 1643–1788.

Chapter 4

The Hellenistic Pottery Débora Sandhaus

Introduction The Hellenistic pottery assemblages discussed in this chapter originated on two superimposed Stratum VIII floors in Area M1.1 These floors lay upon the leveled bedrock and were sealed by the monumental complex of the Early Roman period (see Chapter 2). Despite the scant Hellenistic-period architectural remains, the pottery assemblages recovered in this context are of significance, as no other group of vessels discovered on well-stratified floors dating to this period has been published from Jerusalem. Two other Hellenistic assemblages from Jerusalem have been published recently: the pottery from the Jewish Quarter excavations (Geva 2003) originating in sealed fills, and the pottery from the International Convention Center (Binyanei Ha-’uma; Berlin 2005), recovered from the refuse of a pottery workshop. The Hellenistic assemblages from Area M1 are dated, on the basis of comparative typological study and with an appropriate measure of caution, to the second half of the second century BCE. The lower floor was probably in use during the last quarter of the century, while the upper one seems to have continued slightly later, toward the end of the century. The pottery from both floors is described together typologically (Figs. 4.1–4.3). The pottery sherds illustrated in these figures were selected almost exclusively from loci on the two floors (L782, L795, L808, L812, L814, L815). A few exceptions were made when more complete examples of a representative type were found in fills (L705, L765). As the collection lacks complete vessels, the descriptions of the shapes are based on complete exemplars uncovered at other sites. The typological discussion is followed by a presentation of the two separate assemblages, from the lower and upper floors (Figs. 4.4–4.10). Due to the relatively small amounts of material, no quantitative analyses were undertaken, our primary

objective being to provide a representative picture of the Hellenistic pottery unearthed in Area M1. The comparanda presented here are limited to finds from recently published excavations from the Jerusalem area, in particular the assemblages from the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003, with further references therein) and the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005), as well as sites in the Central Hills such as Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957), Bethel (Lapp 1968), Tell el-Fûl (Lapp 1981) and Bet Zur (Lapp and Lapp 1968), Jericho in the Judean Desert (Bar-Nathan 2002) and the well-dated assemblages from the sites of Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970), Gezer (Gitin 1990) and Khirbet er-Rasm (Sandhaus 2011) in the Shefelah. Other reports with well-established typologies are also referred to, such as Tel Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995) and Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming). For the imported wares, the reports from Dor (Marchese 1995), Tel Michal (Kapitaikin 2006) and Athens (Thompson 1934; Sparkes and Talcott 1970) were consulted. A small number of pottery types continued to appear in first-century BCE contexts in Area M1, and these are noted with a reference to their type number in Chapter 5. The Hellenistic pottery repertoire from Area M1 finds its closest counterpart in the assemblages from Areas W and X-2 in the Jewish Quarter, dated to the second half of the second century BCE (Geva 2003), although some of the vessels that appear there are not present in our assemblage, and vice versa. This could be explained by the slightly earlier date of the Area M1 repertoire, which, in my view, does not continue beyond the second century BCE. Most of the local pottery discussed in this chapter is coarse, varying in color from light brown to pink, with a gray core and many white grits, while some of the shallow plates display various tones of red with a gray core.

84

Débora Sandhaus

The repertoire includes bowls and small, shallow plates in a much larger proportion than other shapes, a well-known feature at every Hellenistic site. Noteworthy in Area M1 is the exceptional amount of imported pottery, mostly Attic Ware, but also vessels from Asia Minor and other eastern Mediterranean regional production centers (Bar-Nathan 2002:120– 121; Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003:210). This would seem to contradict the generally accepted theory that places Jerusalem of the third–second centuries BCE outside the area influenced by the material culture of the Hellenistic world (Kenyon 1974:189; Geva 2003:115), although this requires further research.

Typology Plain Ware Bowls and Plates The small, plain, locally made bowls and plates are the most abundant types in the Area M1 Hellenistic assemblage. The bowls are all made of thin, well-fired ware, and have a flat, ring or disc base bearing traces of string cutting. Three different types of small bowls are included in this category: a bowl with an incurved rim (BL1), a shallow plate with an in-folded rim (BL2) and

a plate with an inner groove (BL3). These bowls were termed ‘Judean’ types by Geva (2003:137), as they were very popular in Judea and Jerusalem during the Hellenistic period, and, as in Area M1, they were the only plain bowls found in the Jewish Quarter during the second century BCE. A decorated variant of the bowl with an incurved rim was treated with red slip (BL1c). This seems to have been a prototype of the plain bowls, and was common at every site in the Hellenistic realm from the third century BCE until the late second century BCE. It may have continued into the beginning of the first century BCE, but by then it was infrequent. Type BL1: Hemispherical bowl with incurved rim (Figs. 4.1:1–3; 4.4:1, 2; 4.8:1–11; Chapter 5: Subtype BL1a). Most of the bowls with an incurved rim were made of the typical Jerusalem ware––red clay with a gray core and white grits, although a few have a pinkish surface––and are thin walled, with some exceptions that are relatively thick. Geva suggests that this may reflect chronological differences (Geva 2003:138), although in our assemblages they appear together on the same floors. Three different subtypes can be distinguished: the first has a simple, slightly incurved rim (BL1a; Figs.

Fig. 4.1 ► No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Stratigraphic Context

1

Bowl

BL1a

812

9052/31

Upper floor

2

Bowl

BL1b

812

9060/85

Upper floor

3

Bowl

BL1c

795

9088/7

Upper floor

4

Bowl

BL2a

765

8424/32

Upper fill

5

Bowl

BL2b

814

9242/1

Lower floor

6

Bowl

BL3

812

9036/39

Upper floor

7

Fish plate

FP1

765

8424/43

Upper fill

8

Fish plate

FP2a

814

8242/18

Lower floor

9

Fish plate

FP2b

814

9240/24

Lower floor

10

Fish plate

FP3

765

8458/1

Upper fill

11

Mortar

MO

814

8456/4

Lower floor

12

Cooking pot

CP1

812

9060/41

Upper floor

13

Cooking pot

CP2

812

9060/2

Upper floor

14

Cooking pot

CP3

815

9167/5

Lower floor

15

Cooking pot

CP4

812

9054/1

Upper floor

16

Casserole

CS1

795

9078/5

Upper floor

17

Casserole

CS2

814

9221/4

Lower floor

85

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

2

1

4

3

5

7

6

8

9

10

11

13

12

14 15

16 17 0

10

Fig. 4.1. Pottery from Stratum VIII—open vessels and cooking ware.

4.1:1; 4.4:1; 4.8:1–3); the second has a sharp, incurved rim creating a sort of carination (BL1b, Figs. 4.1:2; 4.4:2; 4.8:4–10); and the third is a red-slipped bowl (BL1c; Figs. 4.1:3; 4.8:11). Subtype BL1a, a local imitation of fine, slipped Hellenistic bowls (see below, BL1c), is a type known throughout the Hellenistic East from the third century BCE onward (Sandhaus, forthcoming), and is characteristic of the second century BCE at sites in Judea such as Jerusalem (Geva 2003:138, see further

references there), Tell el-Fûl (N.L. Lapp 1981: Fig. 77:15, 16), Gezer (Gitin 1990: Type 195B, Pl. 40:1, 4) and Kh. er-Rasm (Sandhaus 2011). Subtype BL1b appears to be a later development, as bowls of this type are frequently found in contexts of the late second century BCE, and are common from the beginning of the first century BCE (see Chapter 5: Type BL1; Geva 2003:138, Pls. 5.3:22; 5.4:34–38; 5.6:8, 20; 5.9:27; 5.10:32, 33). Most of the Type BL1 bowls originating in the upper-floor assemblage are of

86

Débora Sandhaus

Subtype BL1b. Very few Type BL1 bowls appear in the lower assemblage. A single example of a red-slipped subtype was recovered on the upper floor (BL1c; Figs. 4.1:3; 4.8:11). It was made of well-fired red ware covered with a matte red slip on the interior and on the exterior rim. Such bowls usually had a ring base, and are known from the third century BCE, becoming most popular in the second century BCE throughout the Levant and the ancient Near East (for further references, see Sandhaus, forthcoming). In Judea, they are well-known from Jerusalem (Geva 2003: Pls. 5.1:33; 5.3:27, 28; 5.5:2, 3; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:98, Pl. 4.2:8) and in the Shefelah at Gezer (Gitin 1990: Types 193–195), where they continued in use during the first quarter of the first century BCE. Type BL2: Small shallow plate (Figs. 4.1:4, 5; 4.4:3– 13; 4.8:12–17; see Chapter 5: Type BL3). These are small, shallow plates with thin, flaring walls and a flat or low disc base, usually well-fired, with some thicker, coarser examples. The ware ranges from light red to pink, with a gray core and white grits. Two subtypes were identified: Subtype BL2a, with an in-folded rim, sometimes thickened inside; and BL2b, with an inward-projecting, in-folded rim. Subtype BL2a (Figs. 4.1:4; 4.4:3–12; 4.8:12–17) first appeared in late second-century BCE assemblages such as the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:138, Type BL2, Pls. 5.3:23–26; 5.4:39, 40, 42, 43; 5.7:33; 5.8:42; 5.9:29; 5.10:34) and Tell el-Fûl (Lapp 1981: Fig. 77:19–24), becoming common from the beginning of the first century BCE in Jerusalem (Chapter 5: Type BL3; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6:3:1–10; Mazar 1971: Fig. 17:2, 5; Johns 1950: Fig. 14:3, upper) and other sites (see further references in Geva 2003:138). Subtype BL2b (Figs. 4.1:5; 4.4:13), of which a single example was recovered on the floors, is common in well-dated assemblages in the Jewish Quarter and dated by Geva to the first century BCE (Geva 2003:138, Pl. 5.4:41). This dating suggests that the example from Area M1 be attributed to a later intrusion. Type BL3: Plate with rounded walls and simple rim (Figs. 4.1:6; 4.4:14; 4.8:18–20). These locally made plates with a simple rim, some with an inner groove, and slightly rounded walls, are made of well-fired, yellowish-red clay. Geva identifies these bowls as a variant of our Type BL2, found in late second-century

BCE contexts (Geva 2003:138, Pl. 5.10:35, 36), but we prefer to view them as an independent type, since they do not share the form of in-folded rim or the flaring walls of the former type. The inner groove suggests that they were either used with a lid, or they were lids themselves. An identical example was found at Bet Zur, in a second-century BCE context (Lapp and Lapp 1968: Fig. 26:6). Fish Plates Fish plates are one of the hallmarks of Hellenistic pottery. They were broadly distributed and appear in large numbers at sites throughout the eastern Mediterranean, from the fourth to the early first centuries BCE. The prototypes are Attic with the characteristic black lustrous glaze (see below, Type BA3), although locally made versions appeared throughout the Hellenistic realm. Fish plates are distinguished by a central depression and a drooping rim, although the latter can also belong to plates that were made in ‘fish-plate tradition’, which are a later development and lack the central depression. The Stratum VIII assemblage includes a large number of drooping rims belonging to one of these two categories, but as we have no complete plates, they are all included under the category of fish plates. In addition, two bases with a central depression were recovered. The plates discussed in this chapter were all locally made in the Jerusalem area. The imported examples will be discussed separately (see below). Three different rim types were distinguished in the category of fish plates: Type FP1 has a sharply drooped, triangular rim with two subtypes; Type FP2, a rounded drooping rim; and Type FP3, a thickened, in-folded rim. Type FP1: Fish plate with triangular rim (Figs. 4.1:7; 4.5:1; 4.8:21). These plates have flaring or slightly curved walls and a rim that drops downward at a sharp angle, creating a triangular profile. They are covered with a poor-quality slip, either black or red, and are made of local red clay, sometimes with white grits. The triangular-sectioned rim that bends at a sharp angle is typical of the third–second centuries BCE in Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: Figs. 54:1–4, 17; 55:15–17), and of second-century BCE contexts at almost every Hellenistic site in Coele Syria, such as Bet She’an, Dor and Maresha (for further references

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

and discussion, see Geva 2003:144; Sandhaus, forthcoming: Subtype BS-NY-PL1a). In Jerusalem and its immediate vicinity, plates of this category were found in second-century BCE contexts in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type FP2, Pls. 5.1:34; 5.10:39) and at Bet Zur (Lapp and Lapp 1968: Fig. 24:3). Type FP2: Fish plate with rounded drooping rim (Figs. 4.1:8, 9; 4.5:2–5; 4.8:22–26). This is the typical form of fish plate, with an angular profile and a rounded drooping rim. In several examples, a slight carination can be observed in the wall. They are of reddish or gray ware containing white grits, and most are poorly slipped. This is the largest group of fish plates in the assemblage, and comprises two different subtypes. Subtype FP2a (Figs. 4.1:8; 4.5:2; 4.8:22–25) has a more elongated drooping rim, and examples here are red slipped. This form probably first appeared in the late third–early second centuries BCE at Gezer (Gitin 1990: Type 214, Pls. 33:12; 35:3; 38:11, 12). Parallels from the second century BCE are found, for example, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type FP3a, Pls. 5.1:35, 36; 5.3:29; 5.5:18, 19) and in the Armenian Garden (Hayes 1985: Fig. 47:1, 2) in Jerusalem, at Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: Fig. 54:5–9), Bet Zur (Sellers 1933: Pl. XIII:1) and also at Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970: Fig. 9:5–13). Subtype FP2b (Figs. 4.1:9; 4.5:3–5; 4.8:26), probably a later variant, has a shorter down-turned drooping rim, sometimes slightly thickened. Most examples are decorated with a dull slip in various shades of red. This is the most common fish plate in the assemblage. It probably first appeared in the late second century BCE, as suggested by Gitin (1990:252) and Geva (2003:145), and was most common at second-century BCE sites in the Central Hills, as at Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: Fig. 55:1–6) and Bet Zur (Lapp and Lapp 1968: Fig. 24:14, 15), as well as at Gezer (Gitin 1990: Type 215, Pl. 40:6, 7) and elsewhere, such as Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming, see further references there). Type FP3: Fish plate with thickened, in-folded rim (Figs. 4.1:10; 4.5:6; 4.8:27, 28). This is a shallow plate with a thickened, in-folded rim, made of well-levigated buff clay and covered with light red or yellowishred slip. These plates were probably manufactured in Jerusalem or in its vicinity. They were popular in assemblages dated to the second century BCE, as

87

at Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming), Dor (GuzZilberstein 1995:293, Type BL5a, Pl. 6.4:1–9) and Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957:252, Fig. 51:5–8), although apparently they first appeared during the fourth–third centuries BCE, as they are present in some earlier assemblages, such as Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:293, Type BL5a) and Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957:221, Fig. 37:9, 10). Mortaria Type MO: Mortarium with in-folded rim (Figs. 4.1:11; 4.5:15–17). These are large bowls with thick, slightly curved walls and a thickened, in-folded rim. They are made of thick, coarse pink or light red ware with a red core and many white grits. This type of mortarium, a degenerate type that developed from a Persian prototype (Stern 1995: Fig. 2.2), is characteristic of the third century BCE at Tell Balatah (Lapp 1964: Fig. 1b:30, 31) and the first half of the second century BCE at Gezer (Gitin 1990: Types 229, 230, Pls. 33:18; 34:12). Examples dated to the second half of the second century were found in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Pl. 5.7:5, 6) and at Bet Zur (Lapp and Lapp 1968:18, Figs. 23:4–8; 26:5). Isolated specimens of this mortarium were also found in assemblages of the first half of the first century BCE in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.3:11; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:108, Pls. 4.5:2–6; 4.8:1; 4.9:13; 4.10:11). It is worth noting that in Area M1 of the Giv‘ati Parking Lot, this type was found exclusively on the lower floor of Stratum VIII. Cooking Vessels This category includes sherds of closed cooking pots and casseroles made of brown to reddish ware, welllevigated and well-fired. The closed cooking pots include five types that were popular in the second century BCE, especially during the second half of that century. They differ in rim, neck and general form. The most common cooking pot in our assemblage is Type CP2, typical of the second half of the second century BCE at Judean sites, while two other types are also abundant in the collection: Type CP1, typical throughout the Hellenistic period in Judea and the Central Hills; and Type CP4, which first appeared at the end of the second century BCE. Type

88

Débora Sandhaus

CP1 was abundant in the collection, though it appears exclusively on the upper floor, while cooking pots of Types CP2 and CP4 were found on both superimposed floors of Stratum VIII. only a single sherd of each of Types CP3 and CP5 was recovered in the excavation of Area M1, suggesting they are residual finds.

Quarter in Jerusalem (Geva 2003:134, Type CP6, Pls. 5.3:9; 5.6:38, 40; 5.7:19; 5.8:30–33; 5.10:22), Tell el-Fûl (N.L. Lapp 1981: Pl. 78:11–13), Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1964: Fig. 13:19–26), Bet Zur (Lapp and Lapp 1968: Fig. 27:6) and Kh. er-Rasm (Sandhaus 2011:115, Fig. 2.4:8, 9, Type R-CP7A).

Closed Cooking Pots Type CP1: Cooking pot with slightly concave neck and thickened inner rim (Figs. 4.1:12; 4.9:1, 2). This type is characterized by an inward-thickened rim, a tall, upright neck, slightly concave on the interior, and a globular body with relatively thick walls. It was usually made of reddish-brown ware. This type appears in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem in Cistern 745 in Area E, dated to the end of the third–first half of the second centuries BCE (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:98, Pl. 4.2:10, 11), where it was the most common cooking pot. It is most typical in second-century BCE assemblages, as in Areas W and X-2 in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:133, Type CP4, Pls. 5.3:2, 3; 5.6:36, 37; 5.8:28), Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: Figs. 41:6; 43:2), Bethel (P.W. Lapp 1968: Pl. 71:3), Tell elFûl (N.L. Lapp 1981: Pl. 78:2), Bet Zur (Sellers 1933: Pl. X:6, 7) and Gezer (Gitin 1990: Types 241, 246E, Pls. 32:21; 40:24).

Type CP4: Cooking pot with simple rim (Figs. 4.1:15; 4.6:4; 4.9:6, 7). This is a closed, globular cooking pot with a simple rim, a wide, everted, relatively high neck, and two oval-sectioned or strap handles extending from rim to shoulder. It appeared as early as the end of the second century BCE in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem (Geva 2003:134, Type CP7, Pls. 5.3:7, 10; 5.4:30; 5.6:39, 41; 5.7:1, 32; 5.8:36; 5.9:23; 5.10:23– 25; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:111, Pl. 4.5:17, 18), Bet Zur (Lapp and Lapp 1968: Fig. 27:1–4) and Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming), and was also popular in the first century BCE in Jerusalem (Geva and RosenthalHeginbottom 2003:180, Pl. 6.2:20–23; Berlin 2005:35, Fig. 3) and Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002:69, Type J-CP1), where it is defined as the typical Hasmonean type. It seems to have been the prototype of a cooking pot popular in the first century BCE (see Chapter 5: Type CP2) with a low, upright neck. There is some controversy concerning the disappearance of this type, between Geva, who believes that the type went out of use sometime at the beginning of the second half of the first century BCE (Geva 2003:134), and Bar-Nathan, who states that it disappeared toward the end of that century (BarNathan 2002:69, Type J-CP1).

Type CP2: Cooking pot with concave neck (Figs. 4.1:13; 4.6:1, 2; 4.9:3–5). This closed cooking pot has a simple rim, designed for a lid, and a low, wide, everted neck, slightly concave on the interior. This form of cooking pot was very common in the second century BCE, especially in the second half of that century. It continued to appear, though sporadically, in the early first century BCE. It is well-known in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:133–134, Type CP5a, Fig. 5.2, Pls. 5.1:28; 5.2:10, 13; 5.3:4–6; 5.4:11, 28; 5.7:31; 5.9:21; 5.10:20, 21; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.5:15, 16), and at Tell el-Fûl (N.L. Lapp 1981: Pl. 79:1–4, 8, 16), Bet Zur (Sellers 1933: Pl. X:2, 3, 7, 8; Lapp and Lapp 1968: Figs. 24:1, 2; 27:7), Gezer (Gitin 1990: Type 239, Pls. 40:26; 42:20–22) and Dor (GuzZilberstein 1995: Fig. 6.19). Type CP3: Cooking pot with simple rim with inner groove and slightly everted neck (Figs. 4.1:14; 4.6:3). The sole example of this type has parallels at sites dated to the second century BCE, such as the Jewish

Type CP5: Cooking pot with triangular rim (Fig. 4.6:5). This globular cooking pot is characterized by a triangular rim, a tall, sometimes everted neck, and thin walls. Although this cooking pot is among the distinguishing types of the late Hasmonean period (Geva 2003:135, Type CP8a; Bar-Nathan 2002:72, Subtype CP2C, Pl. 12:150), it first appeared as early as the second half of the second century BCE, as attested by assemblages from such sites as the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem (Avigad 1983: Fig. 59; Geva 2003: Pls. 5.1:4, 29; 5.3:11, 12, 15; 5.4:10, 31, 32), Bet Zur (Lapp and Lapp 1968: Fig. 26:8, 9) and Gezer (Gitin 1990: Type 233, Pl. 42:23, 24), as well as Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming) and Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:364).

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

Casseroles The casseroles include Type CS1, with a ledge rim and rounded walls, and Type CS2, a carinated casserole with everted walls. Both types are common throughout the Hellenistic period (fourth to early first centuries BCE), and they are less frequent than the closed cooking pots in Area M1, although they also appeared on both floors. Type CS1: Casserole with rounded wall and ledge rim (Figs. 4.1:16; 4.6:6; 4.9:8, 9). This shallow casserole with a slightly grooved ledge rim and rounded walls was made of medium-fired, somewhat coarse ware. It is a Hellenistic shape par excellence, appearing as early as the fourth century BCE and continuing into the first century BCE. At Dor, this type appeared in all Hellenistic strata (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:367, Fig. 6.20, Nos. 1, 4), and at Samaria it appeared in thirdcentury BCE contexts (Zayadine 1966: Pl. XXXI:90, 92), as well as in an early second-century assemblage (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957:229, Fig. 41:13–15). Examples from the second century BCE were found at Tell el-Fûl (N.L. Lapp 1981: Pl. 79:18) and Bethel (P.W. Lapp 1968: Pl. 71:6), and it was common in the late second-century BCE assemblages at Kh. er-Rasm (Sandhaus 2011:116, Fig. 2.4:14, Type R-CS1) and Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming). In the Jewish Quarter, it appeared in contexts of the late second–beginning of the first centuries BCE (Geva 2003:135–136, Type CA1, Pls. 5.1:30; 5.3:16; 5.7:2, 3; 5.8:37, 38; 5.9:25; 5.10:27; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:111, Pl. 4.5:12), as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype CS1a, No. 153). Type CS2: Carinated casserole with simple rim with inner Ridge and straight, everted walls (Fig. 4.1:17). This type appears throughout the Hellenistic period, from the fourth–third centuries BCE at such sites as Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: Fig. 41:14, 19) and Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995: Fig. 6.22), the second-century BCE assemblage at Bet Zur (Lapp and Lapp 1968: Fig. 24:4) and the first century BCE in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:112, Pl. 4.12:19). Storage Jars The assemblages from both floors in Stratum VIII included a significant number of storage-jar fragments,

89

representing a broad range of types, most of them with an out-folded rim, made of thick, medium- to wellfired ware ranging in color from light gray to various shades of pink, usually with a gray core and a large quantity of white grits in varying sizes. Five types of storage jars were distinguished. A small number of sherds of storage jars with a very short neck and a thick rim (SJ1) appeared exclusively on the earlier floor. Storage jars with a thickened, squareprofiled rim (SJ2) were common on both floors, along with the collared-rim jar (SJ3). The most abundant storage jar on the later floor was the storage jar with an everted rim (SJ4). An unusual-shaped example found on the upper floor was neckless with a collared rim (SJ5). Therefore, based on stratigraphic considerations confirmed by comparative data, Type SJ1 is the earliest type, Types SJ2 and SJ3 appeared throughout the period, and Type SJ4 is the latest type. Type SJ1: Storage jar with short neck and thickened rim (Figs. 4.2:1, 2; 4.6:7–9; 4.9:10). These are largebodied storage jars with a thickened rim and a short neck, of which two subtypes are distinguished in Area M1: Subtype SJ1a, with a rounded thickened rim; and Subtype SJ1b, with a square-sectioned rim. Both subtypes appeared exclusively on the lower floor of Stratum VIII. Subtype SJ1a developed directly from a Persian prototype (Stern 1982: Figs. 139, 140) and was common from the end of the fourth through the third centuries BCE at Samaria (Zayadine 1966: Pl. 27:1–6), Shechem (N.L. Lapp 1964: Figs. 1a:1–10; 2:1) and Wadi ed-Daliyeh (Lapp and Lapp 1974: Pls. 18–20). In Jerusalem, it appeared in the Jewish Quarter, in Cistern 745 in Area E, dated to the late third–early second centuries BCE (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.2:2), and at Gezer, this type was found in strata dated to the first half of the second century BCE (Gitin 1990: Pls. 33:2; 34:2; 36:1). During the second century BCE, Subtype SJ1a developed into a storage jar with a thickened, squaresectioned rim and a shorter neck––Subtype SJ1b. It is common in second-century BCE assemblages in the Central Hills (Geva 2003:122, see further references there). In the Jewish Quarter, this type appeared in fills dated to the second-century BCE, in particular to the second half of the century (Geva 2003: Fig. 5.1, Type SJ1a, Pls. 5.2:18, 19; 5.4:5, 14; 5.10:1, 2) and in Cistern 745, dated to the late third–early second centuries BCE (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:103).

90

Débora Sandhaus

Type SJ2: Storage jar with thickened, square-profiled rim (Figs. 4.2:3; 4.6:10, 11; 4.9:11). These storage jars have a thickened, slightly everted rim with a square profile, and relatively thick walls. They were the most common type during the second half of the second century in the Judean region (see comparative data in Geva 2003:123, Type SJ2b) and in the late secondcentury BCE assemblages in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:123, Type SJ2b, Pls. 5.1:11; 5.2:11, 20–23; 5.6:7; 5.8:1; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:103, Pl. 4.3:4–6, 9) and at the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005: Fig. 1:3–4). In the Shefelah, this type appeared in assemblages of the second half of the second century BCE at Gezer (Gitin 1990: Pl. 34:14–16). Although Geva claims that there were late survivals in first-century BCE assemblages (Geva 2003:123; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003:177, Pl. 6.1:21–23), these may well be residual, and it is likely that these storage jars did not survive later than the end of the second century BCE (author, pers. obs.). Type SJ3: Storage jar with short collared rim (Figs. 4.2:4; 4.6:12, 13; 4.9:12; Chapter 5: Subtype SJ2b). These are storage jars with a short, flat, collared rim, and a tall, upright or slightly everted neck, sometimes ending in a flange, made of relatively thin-walled, well-fired ware. Based on complete vessels from the Jewish Quarter excavations, this storage jar is characterized by a bag-shaped or cylindrical body and two loop handles (Geva 2003:123, Type SJ3a). The jar with a short collared rim probably came into use in the second century BCE, but it is particularly characteristic of the second half of that century and the beginning of the first century BCE in Jerusalem, as in Area M1 (see Chapter 5: Subtype SJ2b), the Jewish Quarter, where it was the most common type in Areas W and X-2 (Geva 2003: Fig. 5.1: Type SJ3a, Pls. 5.2:3, 12, 25, 26; 5.4:17; 5.7:21–23; 5.8:2; 5.9:5, 6; 5.10:3, 4, 6, 7), and the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005: Fig. 1:7, 8), as well as in the Shefelah at Gezer (Gitin 1990: Pls. 34:17–20; 36:12–18; 39:8, 9; 41:8), Kh. erRasm (Sandhaus 2011:107, Fig. 2.2:2, Type R-SJ1B) and Maresha, dated to the second half of the second century BCE (Levine 1999:35–36), and in the northern Jordan Valley at Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming). Type SJ4: Storage jar with everted rim (Figs. 4.2:5; 4.6:14, 15; 4.9:13, 14; Chapter 5: Subtype SJ1a).

This storage jar is characterized by a simple, sharply everted or slightly thickened rim and a tall, upright or out-curved neck, and is made of fine, well-fired ware. Based on complete vessels from the Jewish Quarter excavations, this jar was bag-shaped with two or four handles. It was common in the late second century BCE at numerous sites (Geva 2003:124–125, Fig. 5.1, Type SJ4, Pls. 5.2:27–29; 5.4:19, 20; 5.6:8, 9; 5.7:16, 24, 25; 5.8:4, 6–8; 5.9:9, 10; and further references there) and at the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005: Fig. 1:6), but was especially typical of the early first century BCE, alongside the type with the collar rim (Chapter 5: Subtype SJ1a; Geva and RosenthalHeginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.1:6, 32). Type SJ5: Storage jar with short neck and out-folded rim (Figs. 4.2:6; 4.9:15). An unusual sherd of a storage jar with an out-folded, thickened rim was found on the later floor of Stratum VIII. No parallels have been found, but as the out-folded rim is a characteristic feature of the late Hellenistic period, we suggest a late second-century BCE date. Jugs Two types of jugs were present in the Hellenistic pottery repertoire: Type JG1 with a slightly everted rim, typical of the Hellenistic period in Judea and in the Levant; and Type JG2 with a funnel-shaped rim, the most common type in Judea during the late second century BCE and also dominant in the first century BCE. Most of the jugs originated on the upper floor of Stratum VIII, with a few sherds of Type JG2 found on the lower floor. Type JG1: Jug with slightly everted, thickened rim (Figs. 4.2:7; 4.7:1; 4.10:1, 2). This type of jug is characterized by a simple, or slightly thickened, everted rim, an upright neck, and a handle extending from rim to shoulder, and is made of relatively thick, mediumto well-fired, light brown ware. Based on complete vessels from other excavations, the body was piriform, usually with an omphalos base. This jug was one of the most popular vessels during the Hellenistic period. From earlier contexts dated to the end of the third or the beginning of the second centuries BCE, parallels for these jugs are found in Cistern 745 of Stratum 5, Area E, in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.1:2, 3, 7) and at Samaria

91

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

2

1

4

3

5

8

7

6

10

9

11

12 0

13 10

17

15

16 0

4

Fig. 4.2. Pottery from Stratum VIII—closed vessels and lamps. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Stratigraphic Context

1

Storage jar

SJ1a

815

9577/5

Lower floor

2

Storage jar

SJ1b

812

9059/38

Upper floor

3

Storage jar

SJ2

814

9242/7

Lower floor

4

Storage jar

SJ3

795

8846/10

Upper floor

5

Storage jar

SJ4

795

9087/17

Upper floor

6

Storage jar

SJ5

782

8917/16

Upper floor

7

Jug

JG1

812

9097/22

Upper floor

8

Jug

JG2

815

9159/19

Lower floor

9

Juglet

JT1

812

9052/4

Upper floor

10

Juglet

JT2

815

9577/23

Lower floor

11

Juglet

JT3

808

9147/85

Lower floor

12

Unguentarium

UN1

812

8908/72

Upper floor

13

Unguentarium

UN1

815

9577/37

Lower floor

14

Flask

FK1

815

9568/4

Lower floor

15

Lamp

LP1

808

9820/6

Lower floor

16

Lamp

LP2

815

9568/9

Lower floor

17

Lamp

LP3

815

9201/26

Lower floor

14

92

Débora Sandhaus

(Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: Fig. 42:5, 6). They became very popular in the second century BCE, with many examples found in the second-century BCE strata in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:127, Fig. 5.1, Type JG1, Pls. 5.1:16, 17; 5.2:4, 35; 5.6:15–17; 5.8:14, 15; 5.9:12, 13; 5.10:12; see there for further parallels in Jerusalem and its vicinity), at Gezer from the second half of the second century BCE (Gitin 1990: Type 178, Pls. 34B:25, 26; 37:3) and at Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming). Isolated examples of this type continued into the early first century BCE, but it disappeared soon afterward (Geva 2003:127). Type JG2: Jug with funnel-shaped rim (Figs. 4.2:8; 4.7:2, 3; 4.10:3–7; Chapter 5: Subtype JG2a). This jug type is characterized by a funnel-shaped rim, a narrower neck than the preceding type, and a handle extending from rim to shoulder, and was made of very well-fired ware in shades of light brown to pink, with a gray core. Complete examples from other excavations reveal a relatively elongated, piriform body and a ring base. They first appeared in late second-century BCE contexts, as in Jerusalem (Geva 2003:127–128, Type JG2, Pls. 5.2:36, 37; 5.4:7; 5.6:18, 19; 5.7:18, 27; 5.8:16, 17), Samaria (Crowfoot, Crowfoot and Kenyon 1957: Fig. 43:11) and Tell el-Fûl (N.L. Lapp 1981: Fig. 75:25); with minor changes, they became dominant in the first century BCE, as attested at Jerusalem, in Stratum 6 of Area A in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.1:38, 39) and in Stratum VII of Area M1 (see Chapter 5: Subtype SJ1a). Juglets Type JT1: Juglet with rounded thickened rim (Figs. 4.2:9; 4.10:8) This juglet is characterized by a rounded, thickened, slightly everted rim, and a narrow, upright neck, and was made of well-levigated pink ware with a light brown core. This is a rare type, and parallels were found in Hellenistic fills in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:130, Pl. 5.2:42), where it was described as a miscellaneous juglet, and at Gezer, dated to the second century BCE (Gitin 1990: Pl. 37:6). Type JT2: Juglet with thickened, out-turned rim with inner concavity (Figs. 4.2:10; 4.7:4). Fragments of this type appear to belong to a juglet that has a squat, piriform body and a handle extending from

rim to shoulder (based on complete examples from other excavations). Such juglets are typical of the Hellenistic period, with abundant parallels dated to the second century BCE from the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:129, Type JT1, Pls. 5.1:2, 19, 20; 5.2:8; 5.5:12; 5.6:27; 5.8:24; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:97, Pls. 4.2:5; 4.4:8). Type JT3: Juglet with cup-shaped rim (Figs. 4.2:11; 4.7:5, 6; Chapter 5: Type JT1). Juglets with cup-shaped rims have a squat or globular body, a rounded base, and a strap handle extending from rim to shoulder. They are usually made of thin, delicate, well-fired, light brown to gray ware. In the Jewish Quarter, this juglet is typical mainly of Stratum 4 of Area W and Strata 6–5 of Area X-2, dated to the first century BCE (Geva 2003:129, Type JT2, Pls. 5.2:41; 5.6:28; 5.8:23; 5.9:16; 5.10:19). Geva suggests that they probably first appeared at the end of the second century BCE, as testified by examples found at Tell el-Fûl and Bet Zur, to which we can add examples from Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming). The type was most common during the first century BCE and continued in use, with minor variations, during the first century CE (see Chapter 5: Type JT1; Geva 2003:129). Fusiform Unguentaria The fusiform unguentarium is one of the hallmarks of the Hellenistic period. These vessels have been found in domestic and funerary, urban and rural, religious and secular contexts. In Area M1, they appeared on both superimposed floors of Stratum VIII. Type UN1: Fusiform unguentarium (Figs. 4.2:12, 13; 4.7:7, 8; 4.10:9, 10). These unguentaria are characterized by a down-turned, sharpened rim, a long neck, and a medium-high foot that is shorter than the neck, with a flat, button base. The examples from Area M1 were made of the local red to light brown ware with a gray core and white grits. Some are red slipped, but as no complete vessels were recovered, it is unknown if the entire vessel was slipped. It is typical of the second century BCE throughout the Hellenistic world, and it continued to appear in the early first century BCE. During the first century BCE, this type disappeared, and another, thinner type with a taller, more slender neck, remained in use (Geva 2003:132). Parallels are found in the Hellenistic strata of the

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:131–132, Type FU 2, Pls. 5.2:46–48; 5.4:25). A broad discussion of this type and parallels from the northern region of Coele Syria will be published in the report of Hellenistic pottery from Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming). Flasks Type FK1: Flask with simple rim, wide neck and twisted handles (Figs. 4.2:14; 4.7:9; 4.10:11). This type of flask is characterized by a simple or slightly thickened, everted rim, a tall, upright, relatively wide neck, and two twisted handles extending from the upper part of the neck to the shoulder, and was made of particularly coarse, thick ware in various shades of brown and red. The abundant comparative data from the second century BCE is summarized in the report of Hellenistic pottery from the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:128, Type FK2, Pls. 5.2:38; 5.4:8, 23; 5.4:24; 5.7:30; 5.8:22). An additional example was recently found in a destruction layer at Kh. er-Rasm, dated to the second half of the second century BCE (Sandhaus 2011:126, Fig. 2.7:9, Type R-FK1), and further parallels are presented in the report of Hellenistic pottery of the late second century BCE at Bet She’an (Sandhaus, forthcoming). Geva suggests that this flask had disappeared by the beginning of the first century BCE, as no parallels occur in the early levels at Qumran, Jericho and Machaerus (Geva 2003:128). These flasks were probably the prototype for the fine, slender flasks typical of the Second Temple period (see Chapter 5: Type FK1). Lamps Four lamp sherds were retrieved among the pottery from Stratum VIII, all of them upon the earlier floor. They include two wheel-made lamps, one of the folded-rim type (LP1), the other a local copy of an Attic prototype (LP2), and two mold-made lamps (LP3). The appearance of these lamps on the earlier floor is further evidence of a date no earlier than the second half of the second century BCE for this floor. Wheel-Made Lamps Type LP1: Folded-rim lamps (Figs. 4.2:15; 4.7:10). This is the traditional ‘Judean’ wheel-made, foldedrim lamp with thick walls. Folded-rim lamps were the continuation of the local Iron Age tradition, which

93

appeared throughout the Persian and Hellenistic periods and, with minor changes, into the first century BCE, when they became thinner and smaller. Parallels to this lamp in second-century BCE assemblages are found in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:139, Type LP1a), and in the earlier assemblage of Cistern 745, dated to the end of the third–second centuries BCE (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:98, Pl. 4.2:16). Type LP2: Closed lamps (Figs. 4.2:16; 4.7:11). This is the bottom part of a wheel-made lamp with a broad, flat ring base and traces of red paint, suggesting that the upper part was red slipped. Such lamps, local imitations of earlier Attic Lamps, were common in Judea throughout the Hellenistic period (Geva 2003:141), in particular in the Shefelah region during the second century BCE (Ambar-Arnon 2011:133; Fig. 2.9:11–17). The absence of these lamps at any site dating to the first century BCE is noteworthy, as observed by Ambar-Arnon (2011:133). Mold-Made Lamps Type LP3: Local mold-made lamp (Figs. 4.2:17; 4.7:12). The two sherds of mold-made lamps share the same form and decoration, and belong to a type known as the ‘Palestinian’ lamp (after Hayes 1980:16). The well-levigated clay ranges in color from reddishyellow with a red slip (Fig. 4:7:12) to gray with a gray glaze (not illustrated). The red-slipped lamp bears a band of chevrons bordered by two lines perpendicular to the rim, close to the beginning of the nozzle. Only the base of the gray specimen has survived. Such lamps appear in several sizes and forms, among them piriform lamps with one or more nozzles, and lamps resembling a star. They are adorned with several decorative designs, usually closely set grooves on the shoulder, radial at the rear and oblique on the sides, impressed herringbones between grooves at the junctions with the nozzle, impressed triangular leaves on the upper side of the nozzle, and three curved grooves marking off the wick hole. These lamps have been identified as products of local workshops, as most of them are common in Hellenistic assemblages (Hayes 1980:16; Sussman 2009:56–65), especially at inland sites such as Samaria, Tirat Yehuda and Maresha, as well as Bet She’an (for further discussion, see Sussman 2009:56– 65), and east of the Jordan River at Pella, Gadara and ‘Amman. Petrographic analysis of the lamps from Bet

94

Débora Sandhaus

She’an could not provide definitive results due to the high degree of levigation of the clay (for references, see Sandhaus, forthcoming). The lamps of this type from a workshop in Jerusalem share the same features as those from other local industries, and appear together with the folded-rim lamps (LP1) in contexts dated from the second to the first centuries BCE (Sussman 2009:59–61; Type II.III.3.1–H36, Nos. 282–293 with a slender biconical body). These Type LP3 lamps differ little from other contemporary Hellenistic lamps in the Levant. They are the prototype of the commonly known ‘Judean lamps’ with radial decoration.

Imported and Fine Wares from R egional Eastern Mediterranean Production Centers A large quantity of imports was uncovered in Stratum VIII, including Black Attic Wares represented by a variety of shapes, black glazed and slipped wares from undefined production centers in the eastern Mediterranean, and Eastern Sigillata A Ware. Black Attic Ware shapes are the most common among the imported ceramics. These sherds were recovered almost exclusively on the lower floor, with one sherd on the upper floor and a few in upper fills. The Black Attic ceramics include earlier forms, well-dated to the fourth century BCE, such as the fish plate with a broad, drooping rim (BA3a), types popular in the fourth–third centuries BCE such as the bowls with an incurved rim (BA1) or an out-turned rim (BA2), as well as fish plates with drooping rims (BA3b) characteristic of the second century BCE. It is noteworthy that the latter is the most common Black Attic form in the assemblage. Decorated bases with rouletting and stamped palmettes are included in the Black Attic Ware. Black Glazed Wares are represented by a bowl with an out-turned rim (BG1), made in an eastern Mediterranean production center, a fish plate (BG2) and a cup/kantharos (BG3), both of which suggest manufacture in Asia Minor. An additional fish plate with a banded decoration seems to have been produced somewhere in eastern Greece (EG1) perhaps in Rhodes. Sherds corresponding to Eastern Sigillata A plates (ESA1) also represent fine ware from regional production centers in the Levant.

The abundance of fish plates with a drooping rim and rounded walls, represented in various wares, and the appearance of Eastern Sigillata bowls, are diagnostic of a date in the second century BCE, more precisely in the second half of that century (see below). The appearance of earlier Attic material in later contexts is a well-known phenomenon in late Hellenistic levels at sites in the Levant, usually explained as representing heirlooms or finds of a residual nature. Type BA1: bowl with incurved rim (Figs. 4.3:1; 4.8:29). Bowls with an incurved rim made of typical, very welllevigated, reddish-brown clay with shiny grits and bearing a dull black glaze, are the most common type of Black Attic pottery at Hellenistic sites in the Levant. They were most popular in the second half of the fourth century BCE (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:295–296, Nos. 830–842, Fig. 8, Pl. 33; Guz-Zilberstein 1995:290). They are also well-represented in Persian contexts at Tel Michal (Kapitaikin 2006: Fig. 13:2, 6, 7) and Dor (Marchese 1995:127, Fig. 4.1:7). In Area M1, two sherds of this ware were recovered, one on each floor, probably representing residual finds. Type BA2: bowl with out-turned rim (Figs. 4.3:2; 4.5:7). These bowls with an out-turned rim were made of typical Athenian reddish-brown clay with shiny grits, covered with a metallic black glaze. They became popular at the end of the fifth century BCE and were very common in Athens by the fourth century BCE (Sparkes and Talcott 1970: Fig. 8, Nos. 801–808, Pl. 32). They were still in use in Athens at the beginning of the third century, with a slightly projecting rim, a flaring wall and a more metallic shine (Thompson 1934:435, Fig. 117:A9-E33). The predominant decorative motif on the Attic bowls is palmettes. This type of bowl was one of the most common in Israel during the fourth century BCE (Tal 1999:130, see further references there). It continued to appear in third-century contexts and sporadically in the second century BCE at Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:290–291, Type BL7a, Fig. 6.2:1), when the metallic black slip was replaced with one of red or reddish-black. The example from Area M1, with a metallic glaze and a slight carination, corresponds with the third-century BCE type. Type BA3: fish plate (Figs. 4.3:3, 4; 4.5:8, 9; 4.8:31). Fish plates made of Black Attic ware first appeared around 400 BCE and continued well

95

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

2

1

3

4

5

6

8

9

7

10

11 0

10

Fig. 4.3. Pottery from Stratum VIII—black glazed and red slipped wares. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

1

Bowl

BA1

782

9035/15

Stratigraphic context Upper floor

2

Bowl

BA2

814

9117/31

Lower floor

3

Fish plate

BA3

808

9122/3

Lower floor

4

Fish plate

BA3

765

8424/20

Upper fill

5

Bowl

BG1

815

9577/7

Lower floor

6

Fish plate

BG2

814

9242/26

Lower floor

7

Cup/kantharos

BG3

765

8439/12

Upper fill

8

Fish plate

EG1

795

8846/2

Upper floor

9

Bowl

ESA1

705

8468/2

Upper fill

10

Bowl

BA

782

8955/12

Upper floor

11

Bowl

ESA1

815

9161/15

Lower floor

96

Débora Sandhaus

into the Hellenistic period (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:147–148, Pl. 147). The sherds of this type in the Stratum VIII assemblage include two variants with different characteristics that place them in different chronological settings. Subtype BA3a (Fig. 4.3:3) has a broad, drooping, rounded rim with a ridge on top and flaring walls, and is made of Athenian ware with a lustrous black slip. A similar plate was found at Dor in a Persian context (Marchese 1995:127–128, Fig. 4.5:6), which in turn resembles an Athenian exemplar dated to the fourth century BCE (Sparkes and Talcott 1970: Fig. 10:1075). The second subtype, BA3b (Fig. 4.3:4), is characterized by a drooping rim and rounded walls. Although this form was known in Athens in the Hellenistic period (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:147), it is lacking in Thompson’s report (1934). While the bases of the vessels from Area M1 have not survived, the shape of the rim, drooping but not sharply down-turned, suggests a date in the second century BCE. Fish plates of this variant (BA3b) are common at all Hellenistic sites in Israel and the Levant (for further references see Guz-Zilberstein 1995:292), and were produced in Attic workshops as well as in other production centers, for example, in Ephesos in Asia Minor. Type BG1: Bowl with out-turned rim (Figs. 4.3:5; 4.5:10). This bowl has a flat, out-turned rim and flaring walls, and was made of well-levigated pink clay covered with a lustrous black glaze. It was common from the fourth to the second centuries BCE and produced throughout the Hellenistic realm, imitating the Attic prototypes (see above, Type BA2). The ware suggests a Levantine production center. The flaring walls and flat rim suggest a relatively early date; a similar vessel was found in a fourth-century BCE context at Apollonia (Tal 1999:130, Fig. 4.27:5, 6). Type BG2: Fish plate with drooping rim (Figs. 4.3:6; 4.5:11). This fish plate resembles Type BA3, but was made of buff clay with white grits and covered with a dull, black matte slip. Rosenthal-Heginbottom suggests an Ephesos production center for this ware (pers. comm.; see also Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003:206, Pl. 6.3:19).

Type BG3: Cup/kantharos with straight walls and flat projecting rim (Fig. 4.3:7). The sole sherd of a cup/kantharos with straight, upright walls and a flat, projecting rim was found in Stratum VIII. This type was produced in the same center as the fish plate of Type BG2. Type EG1: Fish plate with drooping rim and banded decoration (Figs. 4.3:8; 4.8:32). This fish plate has the same characteristics––a drooping rim and slightly curved walls––as the Attic fish plate Type BA3, but is made of red clay covered with a red matte slip and decorated with metallic-black bands. It appears to derive from an eastern Greek prototype bowl decorated with black bands, which is known at every fourthcentury BCE site. The single example of this type from Area M1 points to a date in the second century BCE. A complete bowl of the same type was found at Dor, also in a second-century BCE context (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:292, Type BL4b, Fig. 6.3:10, Photo 6.8). Type ESA1: Bowl with incurved rim (Figs. 4.3:9; 4.5:12, 13). Two fragments of bowls with slightly rounded walls ending in an incurved rim were made of well-levigated buff clay, red slipped with traces of black paint on the rim and on the exterior. This ware corresponds to Eastern Sigillata A Ware (for a discussion, see Guz-Zilberstein 1995:264, Fig. 5.6: 3, 5–7; Slane 1997:288–291, Pls. 7–11; Sandhaus, forthcoming), and the shape is typical of the late decades of the second century BCE. Decorated Bases Two ring bases of Attic plates in the corpus (Figs. 4.3:10, 11; 4.8:30) are decorated with palmettes and rouletting, a well-known pattern in Attic ceramics of the fourth– third centuries BCE. One sunken base of well-levigated pink clay covered with red slip (Fig. 4.8:33), probably belonging to a fish plate of the ESA family, was also included in the repertoire. It lacks the ridge surrounding the depression characteristic of the later exemplars, and the red slip points to an early date in the second century BCE. This vessel seems to originate in a regional production center in the eastern Mediterranean. A finely modeled ring base (Fig. 4.5:14) made of well-levigated, reddish-yellow clay, decorated with black and red glaze, belongs to an open vessel. The clay suggests a Rhodian origin.

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

Selected Loci The following discussion examines selected, wellstratified loci originating on the two superimposed floors of Stratum VIII, and concentrates mainly on the chronological framework, as well as the distribution of the pottery types from each floor. For the purposes of this analysis, the fine-ware bowls are illustrated together with the regular bowls in order to demonstrate the relatively large number of bowls in comparison with other vessels, such as storage containers, thus emphasizing the functional aspect of each assemblage.

The Lower Floor: Locus 808, L814 and L815 (Figs. 4.4–4.7) The most abundant vessel type in the assemblage from the lower floor is the small shallow plate (BL2), characteristic of the Jerusalem region in the second and first centuries BCE. Hemispherical bowls (BL1) and plates with a simple rim (BL3) appear sporadically on this floor. All shapes of fish plates are present, although the predominant type is the fish plate with a short, rounded, drooping rim (FP2b), which began to appear late in the second century BCE. Mortaria (MO) were found only on the lower floor. Several forms of cooking pots are present, including cooking pots with a concave neck (CP2), an everted, thickened neck with a simple rim (CP3), a simple rim (CP4) and a triangular rim (CP5). The cooking ware originating on the lower floor suggests a date in the second half of the second century BCE. Noteworthy is the lack of the earlier type, with an inward thickened rim (CP1), on the lower floor. Both casseroles (CS1, CS2) present on the lower floor were popular throughout the Hellenistic period. The most popular storage jar in this context is that with a thickened rim and a short neck (SJ1). Although the earlier subtype (SJ1a) was common during the third century BCE, it appeared together with the storage jar with a thickened, square-profiled rim (SJ2), which comprised a significant group in this assemblage, and with less-abundant types, such as the storage jar with a short collared rim (SJ3) and that with an everted rim (SJ4). This collection of storage jars fits well within the second half of the second century BCE.

97

A relatively small number of jugs are present in this assemblage, including both Types JG1 and JG2. While Type JG1 can be considered an earlier type, Type JG2 is definitely later, appearing in the late second and first centuries BCE. Juglets include those with a concave rim (JT2) and a cup-shaped rim (JT3). Type JT3, the most abundant of the juglets, began to appear at the end of the second century BCE. Fragments of the typical second-century BCE flask (FK1) and the fusiform unguentaria (UN1) were also found. Lamps recovered on the lower floor include those with a folded rim (LP1), a local imitation of Attic lamps (LP2) and ‘Palestinian’ lamps (LP3). These three types of lamps appear together from the second half of the second century BCE. present in the assemblage are imported Black Attic ceramics, such as bowls with an out-turned rim (BA2) and fish plates with a broad drooping (BA3a) or a drooping (BA3b) rim. Black Glazed vessels include a bowl with flaring walls and an out-turned rim (BG1) and a fish plate with a drooping-rim (BG2). While the fish plates of Subtype BA3a and Type BG2 are earlier types, the occurrence of several fragments corresponding to the drooping-rim type typical of second-century BCE contexts supports the general dating of this assemblage. Eastern Mediterrranean regional fine ware is represented by rims belonging to Eastern Sigillata A plates (ESA1), dated to the last quarter of the second century BCE. In summary, the appearance of types that first appeared in the second half of the second century BCE (e.g., SJ2, SJ3, SJ4, CP4, CP5) and other forms that were produced during the later decades of the second century BCE (e.g., FP1–FP3, JG2, JT3, ESA1), together with imported vessels that fit well within the second century, suggest that a date in the last quarter of the second century BCE for the earlier assemblage is most appropriate for the final phase of use of the lower floor. It is important to note that several earlier types, dating to the fourth–third centuries BCE, are also present in the assemblage, including not only Black Attic Ware imports, but also such local types as mortaria, the storage jar with a thick square rim (SJ2) and the jug with simple rounded rim (JG1). This would seem to suggest that elsewhere, in the nearby vicinity, an earlier Hellenistic phase lies hidden.

98

Débora Sandhaus

The Upper Floor: Locus 782, L795 and L812 (Figs. 4.8–4.10) Within the rich assemblage retrieved from the upper floor, storage jars and jugs comprise the largest group, though most of the other vessel forms are well represented, and bowls and plates are present in small amounts. The bowls and plates are mainly hemispherical bowls (BL1) and shallow plates (BL2), while other bowls occur with less frequency (BL3). All types of fish plates are present in the assemblage, the predominant type being those with a rounded, drooping rim (FP2). Although the subtype with an elongated rim (FP2a) is common in contexts of the late third and second centuries BCE, its appearance together with the shorter-rimmed subtype (FP2b) points to a date in the late second century BCE. The common cooking pots are those with simple rims (CP4) and concave necks (CP2), both of which began to appear in the second half of the second century BCE. The cooking pot with a thickened inner rim (CP1), common in the second century BCE, is also present in this assemblage, together with the ledge-rimmed casserole (CS1). Storage jars comprise the most numerous types in this assemblage. The most popular storage jar in the later assemblage is that with an everted rim (SJ4). Storage jars with a thickened, squared rim (SJ2) and those with a short collared rim (SJ3) are also present. The abundance of Type SJ4 storage jars indicates a date at the end of the second century BCE. A significant number of jugs, including both Types JG1 and JG2, are present, although JG2 is the most typical form. As mentioned above, JG2 began to appear in the late second century BCE. Juglets are represented by an earlier type (JT1), probably a residual sherd. Fragments of the typical second-century BCE flask

(FK1) and the fusiform unguentarium (UN1) are also found. Imported and fine wares are less frequent in the later assemblage, and include two Black Attic Ware vessels, one with an incurved rim (BA1), the other a fish plate of the later subtype (BA3b), one example of an eastern Greek fish plate (ES1), and one sherd of an Eastern Sigillata A plate (ESA1). All these imports fit well within the second half of the second century BCE. In summary, analysis of the upper-floor assemblage indicates a date at the very end of the second century BCE, emphasized by the abundance of Type SJ4 storage jars and Type JG2 jugs.

Conclusions The Hellenistic pottery from Area M1, Stratum VIII reveals a diverse repertoire comprising a relatively large amount of locally manufactured pottery, as well as imported ceramics, and includes types dating from the late fourth to the late second centuries. The importance of this assemblage lies in the fact that it can be divided between two well-stratified floors. From the analysis of these superimposed floors, we can assign a date no earlier than the last quarter of the second century BCE to the lower floor, while the upper floor yielded pottery dated slightly later. Based on the appearance of earlier Hellenistic ceramic types in the assemblage, we suggest that some activity took place in the immediate vicinity during the third century BCE. The two assemblages vary in nature: while the lower floor yielded a large amount of bowls and plates, together with a significant number of imported and fine wares (see Figs. 4.4–4.6), the upper floor produced mostly storage jars and jugs, and comparably few imports or fine wares (see Figs. 4.7–4.9).

99

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

2

1

4

3

6

5

7

8

10

9

11

12

13

14 0

10

Fig. 4.4. The pottery assemblage from the Stratum VIII lower floor—bowls. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

BL1a

814

9240/14

Yellowish-red clay, gray core

2

BL1b

808

9134/28

Gray clay, gray matte slip

3

BL2a

814

9221/3

Gray clay, light red-orange exterior, white inclusions

4

BL2a

814

9221/9

Light red clay, pink exterior, white grits

5

BL2a

815

9192/7

Red clay, gray core

6

BL2a

814

9240/12

Red clay, white grits

7

BL2a

815

9219/20

Pinkish-red clay, red core, white grits, traces of black bands on interior and rim

8

BL2a

815

9219/13

Light red clay

9

BL2a

814

9240/28

Red clay, white grits

10

BL2a

814

9240/18

Gray clay, light red-orange exterior, white inclusions

11

BL2a

815

9219/5

Gray clay, light red-orange exterior, white inclusions

12

BL2a

814

9221/12

Yellowish-red clay, white grits

13

BL2b

814

9242/1

Yellowish-red clay

14

BL3

808

9147/75

Red clay

100

Débora Sandhaus 1

2

4

3

6

5

8

7

9

11

10

12

14

13

17

16

15

0

10

Fig. 4.5. The pottery assemblage from the Stratum VIII lower floor. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Fish plate

FP1

808

9120/1

Red clay, white grits; red matte slip

2

Fish plate

FP2a

814

8242/18

Red clay, red glaze; shiny mottled slip

3

Fish plate

FP2b

814

9242/14

Red clay, gray core; red slip

4

Fish plate

FP2b

815

9219/4

Red clay, gray core; red slip

5

Fish plate

FP2b

814

9240/24

Red clay, gray core, red slip; black slip on rim, mottled on interior

6

Fish plate

FP3

814

9222/22

Red clay, white inclusions; peeling red slip

7

Bowl

BA2

814

9117/31

Reddish-brown clay, mica inclusions, very well-levigated; light black-silver glaze

8

Fish plate

BA3

808

9122/3

Pink clay; black glaze

9

Fish plate

BA3

815

9568/27

Reddish-brown clay, mica inclusions, very well-levigated; light black-silver glaze

10

Fish plate

BG2

814

9242/26

Buff-pink clay; black glaze

11

Bowl

BG1

815

9577/7

Buff-pink clay; black slip

12

Bowl

ESA1

815

9161/3

Buff-pink clay, red exterior; red glaze on interior, black glaze on rim

13

Bowl

ESA1

815

9161/15

Reddish-yellow to buff clay, well-levigated; red slip on interior and rim, black paint on exterior

BG

808

9075/136

Reddish-yellow clay; red and black lustrous glaze

14 15

Mortarium

MO

814

8456/4

Red clay, reddish-yellow exterior, white grits

16

Mortarium

MO

814

9117/14

Red clay, white and black inclusions; red slip on interior

17

Mortarium

MO

814

9242/4

Red clay, pink, white grits

101

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

1

2

3

4

6

5

7

8

9

11

12

10

15

13 14

0

10

Fig. 4.6. The pottery assemblage from the Stratum VIII lower floor. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Cooking pot

CP2

814

9242/13

Red clay; exterior black (burnt by use?)

2

Cooking pot

CP2

815

9126/16

Red clay

3

Cooking pot

CP3

815

9167/5

Red clay, gray exterior

4

Cooking pot

CP4

814

9221/14

Red clay

5

Cooking pot

CP5

814

9242/19

Red clay

6

Casserole

CS1

815

9126/27

Red clay

7

Storage jar

SJ1a

815

9219/7

Gray clay, white grits

8

Storage jar

SJ1b

815

9577/5

Gray clay, light brownish-red interior and exterior, white grits

9

Storage jar

SJ1b

815

9159/1

Gray clay, red exterior, gray grits

10

Storage jar

SJ2

815

9219/3

Yellowish-pink clay, gray core, white grits

11

Storage jar

SJ2

814

9242/7

Red clay, light red exterior

12

Storage jar

SJ3

815

9159/4

Red clay, light brown exterior

13

Storage jar

SJ3

815

9161/1

Gray to light gray clay, white grits

14

Storage jar

SJ4

815

9212/29

Yellowish-pink clay, gray core, white grits

15

Storage jar

SJ4

815

9201/33

Gray clay, red exterior, gray grits

102

Débora Sandhaus

1

3

2

6

4 5

9

8

7 0

10

12

10

11 0

4

Fig. 4.7. The pottery assemblage from the Stratum VIII lower floor. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Jug

JG1

815

9219/1

Reddish-yellow clay, gray core, white grits

2

Jug

JG2

815

9159/19

Gray clay, pink exterior, white grits

3

Jug

JG2

815

9191/24

Gray clay, pink exterior, white grits

4

Juglet

JT2

815

9577/23

Gray clay, orange exterior, white grits

5

Juglet

JT3

814

9240/11

Red clay, orange exterior

6

Juglet

JT3

808

9147/85

Gray clay, orange exterior, white grits

7

Unguentarium

UN1

815

9159/3

Reddish-yellow clay

8

Unguentarium

UN1

815

9577/37

Red clay; red slip

9

Flask

FK1

815

9568/4

Red clay, light red to pink exterior, many small grits

10

Lamp

LP1

808

9820/6

Yellowish-red clay, white grits, slightly coarse ware, signs of organic material

11

Lamp

LP2

815

9568/9

Reddish-yellow clay; traces of red paint on upper part

12

Lamp

LP3

815

9201/26

Buff–pink clay, well-levigated; red slip

103

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

1

5

4

3

2

7

6

9

8

10

12

11

13

15

18

21

14

16

17

19

20

22

24

23

25

27

26

28

29

31

30

32

33 0

10

Fig. 4.8. The pottery assemblage from the Stratum VIII upper floor.

104

Débora Sandhaus

◄ Fig. 4.8 No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Bowl

BL1a

812

9052/31

Pink clay

2

Bowl

BL1a

812

9052/124

Red clay

3

Bowl

BL1a

812

9036/21

Gray clay, light brownish-red exterior, white grits

4

Bowl

BL1b

795

8886/7

Light yellowish-red clay, gray core

5

Bowl

BL1b

812

9059/67

Red clay

6

Bowl

BL1b

812

9052/29

Gray core, light red exterior, white inclusions

7

Bowl

BL1b

812

9060/85

Light red clay

8

Bowl

BL1b

812

9036/44

Light yellowish-red clay

9

Bowl

BL1b

812

9054/15

Red clay, gray core, white grits

10

Bowl

BL1b

812

9036/65

Gray core, light red exterior, white inclusions, poor quality

11

Bowl

BL1c

795

9088/7

Red clay; red slip on interior and rim and red band below rim

12

Bowl

BL2a

812

9036/62

Red clay, white grits

13

Bowl

BL2a

812

9036/64

Red clay

14

Bowl

BL2a

795

9088/4

Red clay

15

Bowl

BL2a

812

9047/50

Light gray clay, pink-yellowish exterior, white inclusions

16

Bowl

BL2a

795

9100/24

Red clay

17

Bowl

BL2a

795

9087/20

Red clay, grayish-pink exterior, many white grits

18

Bowl

BL3

812

9036/39

Yellowish-red clay, white grits

19

Bowl

BL3

812

9081/21

Dark gray clay, yellowish-red exterior

20

Bowl

BL3

812

9054/9

Red clay; red slip

21

Fish plate

FP1

812

9006/33

Red clay

22

Fish plate

FP2a

812

9098/2

Red clay, gray core; red slip, black slip on rim, mottled on interior

23

Fish plate

FP2a

795

8846/14

Red clay, gray core; peeling, light black-silver slip

24

Fish plate

FP2a

795

8873/6

Red clay; red slip on rim and interior

25

Fish plate

FP2a

812

9060/17

Red clay, gray core; red matte slip on interior and rim

26

Fish plate

FP2b

812

9033/208

27

Fish plate

FP3

812

9059/207

Red clay, light gray core; red slip

28

Fish plate

FP3

795

9088/52

Red clay, gray core, red slip on inner side and rim

29

Bowl

BA1

782

9035/15

Reddish-brown clay, mica inclusions, well-levigated; lustrous black glaze

30

Fish plate

BA

782

8955/12

Reddish-brown clay, mica, well-levigated; lustrous black glaze

31

Fish plate

BA3

782

8955/22

Reddish-yellow clay, well-levigated; black-silver glaze

32

Fish plate

EG1

795

8846/2

Red clay; red matte slip, lustrous, light black glaze

33

Fish plate?

ESA

812

9036/55

Buff clay; red slip, deep interior depression

105

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

1

3 2

5

4

7

6

8

9

10

12

11

13 14

15 0

10

Fig. 4.9. The pottery assemblage from the Stratum VIII upper floor. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Cooking pot

CP1

812

9098/62

Red clay

2

Cooking pot

CP1

812

9060/41

Red clay

3

Cooking pot

CP2

812

9036/54

Brown clay

4

Cooking pot

CP2

812

9060/2

Red clay

5

Cooking pot

CP2

812

9047/48

Red clay

6

Cooking pot

CP4

812

9054/1

Red clay

7

Cooking pot

CP4

812

9036/61

Red clay

8

Casserole

CS1

795

9087/24

Red clay

9

Casserole

CS1

795

9078/5

Red clay

10

Storage jar

SJ1b

812

9059/38

Light red clay, gray core, buff exterior

11

Storage jar

SJ2

795

8886/4

Red clay, light red exterior

12

Storage jar

SJ3

795

8846/10

Red clay, pink exterior

13

Storage jar

SJ4

795

9087/17

Gray core, red exterior, white grits

14

Storage jar

SJ4

812

9047/47

Red clay, buff exterior, white grits

15

Storage jar

SJ5

782

8917/16

Gray clay, red exterior

106

Débora Sandhaus

3

2

1

5

6

8

4

7

9 11

10 0

10

Fig. 4.10. The pottery assemblage from the Stratum VIII upper floor. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Jug

JG1

812

9097/22

Red clay, yellowish-pink exterior, white inclusions

2

Jug

JG1

795

8873/5

Red core, reddish-yellow exterior, white grits

3

Jug

JG2

795

8886/2

Red core, reddish-yellow exterior, white grits

4

Jug

JG2

812

9059/31

Gray clay, pink exterior

5

Jug

JG2

812

9098/58

Gray clay, pink exterior, white grits

6

Jug

JG2

812

9052/112

Reddish-yellow clay, white small grits

7

Jug

JG2

812

9036/67

Red clay, white inclusions; metallic ring

8

Juglet

JT1

812

9052/4

Light brown clay, pink exterior

9

Unguentarium

UN1

795

8873/8

Light brown clay; burnt

10

Unguentarium

UN1

812

8908/72

Gray clay, pink–light gray exterior

11

Flask

FK1

812

9098/6

Red clay, orange exterior, many small grits

Chapter 4: The Hellenistic Pottery

107

Notes I would like to thank Renate Rosenthal-Heginbottom and Hillel Geva for their insights. Malka Hershkovitz deserves a 1

special acknowledgment for her review of the article before it was submitted.

R eferences Aharoni Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Rahel, Seasons 1961–1962. Rome. Ambar-Arnon E. 2011. Oil Lamps from Khirbet er-Rasm. In A. Faust and A. Erlich eds. The Excavations of Khirbet er-Rasm, Israel. The Changing Faces of the Countryside (BAR Int. S. 2187). Oxford. Pp. 131–134. Avigad N. 1983. Discovering Jerusalem. Nashville. Bar-Nathan R. 2002. Hasmonean and Herodian Palaces at Jericho. Final Reports of the 1973–1987 Excavations III: The Pottery. Jerusalem. Berlin A. 2005. Pottery and Pottery Production in the Second Temple Period. In B. Arubas and H. Goldfus eds. Excavations at the Site of the Jerusalem International Convention Center (Binyanei Ha’Uma): The Pottery and Other Small Finds (JRA Supplementary Series 60). Providence R.I. Pp. 29–60. Crowfoot J.W., Crowfoot G.M. and Kenyon K.M. 1957. The Objects from Samaria (Samaria-Sebaste 3). London. Geva H. 2003. Hellenistic Pottery from Areas W and X-2. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 113–175. Geva H. and Hershkovitz M. 2006. Local Pottery of the Hellenistic and Early Roman Periods. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 94–143. Geva H. and Rosenthal-Heginbottom R. 2003. Local Pottery from Area A. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 176–191. Gitin S. 1990. Gezer III: A Ceramic Typology of the Late Iron II, Persian and Hellenistic Periods at Tell Gezer (Annual of the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology 3). Jerusalem. Guz-Zilberstein B. 1995. The Typology of the Hellenistic Coarse Ware and Selected Loci of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods. In E. Stern. Excavations at Dor, Final Report IB: Areas A and C; The Finds (Qedem Reports 2). Jerusalem. Pp. 289–433. Hayes J.W. 1980. Ancient Lamps in the Royal Ontario Museum I: Greek and Roman Clay Lamps, a Catalogue. Toronto.

Hayes J.W. 1985. Hellenistic Fine Wares and Derivation, Late Hellenistic and Early Roman Fine Wares. In A.D. Tushingham ed. Excavations in Jerusalem 1961–1967 I. Toronto. Pp. 183–192, 398–412. Johns C.W. 1950. The Citadel, Jerusalem, a Summary of Work Since 1934. QDAP 14:121–190. Kapitaikin L.V. 2006. The Pottery from the IAA Excavations at Tel Mikhal (Tel Michal). ‘Atiqot (ES) 52:21–56. Kenyon K. 1974. Digging up Jerusalem. London. Lapp N.L. 1964. Pottery from some Hellenistic Loci at Balatah (Shechem). BASOR 175:14–26. Lapp N.L. 1981. The Pottery from the 1964 Campaign. In N. Lapp ed. The Third Campaign at Tell el-Fûl: The Excavations of 1964 (AASOR 45). Cambridge, Mass. Lapp P.W. 1968. Bethel. Pottery of the Late Hellenistic and the Early Roman Periods. In J.K. Kelso ed. The Excavations of Bethel 1934–1960 (AASOR 39). Cambridge, Mass. Pp. 77–80. Lapp P.W. and Lapp N. 1968. Iron II–Hellenistic Pottery Groups. In O. Sellers, R.W. Funk, J.L. McKenzie, P. Lapp and N. Lapp eds. The 1957 Excavation at Beth-Zur (AASOR 38). Cambridge, Mass. Pp. 54–79. Lapp P.W. and Lapp N. 1974. Discoveries in the Wadi alDaliyeh (AASOR 41). Cambridge, Mass. Levine T. 1999. Pottery Assemblages of the Third and Second Centuries BCE from Upper Area 61 at Maresha. M.A. thesis. Bar-Ilan University. Ramat Gan (Hebrew). Marchese R. 1995. Athenian Imports in the Persian Period. In E. Stern. Excavations at Dor, Final Report IB: Areas A and C; The Finds (Qedem Reports 2). Jerusalem. Pp. 127–182. Mazar B. 1971. The Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem near the Temple Mount––Second Preliminary Report, 1969–1970 Seasons. Eretz Israel 10:1–34 (Hebrew). Rosenthal-Heginbottom R. 2003. Hellenistic and Early Roman Fine Ware and Lamps from Area A. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 192–223, 232–255. Sandhaus D. 2011. The Pottery from Khirbet er-Rasm: The Typology of the Pottery from the Hellenistic, Roman and Later Periods. In A. Faust and A. Erlich eds. The Excavations of Khirbet er-Rasm, Israel. The Changing Faces of the Countryside (BAR Int. S. 2187). Oxford. Pp. 105–131.

108

Débora Sandhaus

Sandhaus D. Forthcoming. The Pottery. In G. Mazor and D. Sandhaus eds. Nysa-Scythopolis: The Hellenistic City at Tel Iztabba (IAA Reports). Jerusalem. Sellers O.R. 1933. The Citadel of Beth-Zur. Philadelphia. Slane K.W. 1997. The Fine Wares. In S.C. Herbert ed. Tel Anafa II, i: The Hellenistic and Roman Pottery (JRA Supplementary Series 10). Ann Arbor, Mich. Pp. 247–393. Sparkes B.A. and Talcott L. 1970. The Athenian Agora. XII: Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th and 4th Centuries B.C. Princeton. Stern E. 1982. The Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period, 538–332 BCE. Warminster. Stern E. 1995. Local Pottery of the Persian Period. In E. Stern. Excavations at Dor, Final Report IB: Areas A and C; The Finds (Qedem Reports 2). Jerusalem. Pp. 51–92.

Sussman V. 2009. Greek and Hellenistic Wheel- and MouldMade Closed Oil Lamps in the Holy Land. Collection of the Israel Antiquities Authority (BAR Int. S. 2015). Oxford. Tal O. 1999. The Persian Period. In I. Roll and O. Tal eds. Apollonia-Arsuf, Final Report of the Excavations I: The Persian and Hellenistic Period (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 16). Tel Aviv. Pp. 83–222. Thompson H.A. 1934. Two Centuries of Hellenistic Pottery, the American Excavation in the Athenian Agora, Fifth Report. Hesperia 3:311–480. Yeivin Z. and Edelstein G. 1970. Excavations at Tirat Yehuda. ‘Atiqot 6:56–67 (Hebrew). Zayadine F. 1966. Early Hellenistic Pottery from the Theatre Excavations of Samaria. ADAJ 11:53–64.

Chapter 5

The Early Roman Pottery Yana Tchekhanovets

Introduction The ceramic finds presented here originated in Building 760, uncovered in Stratum VII, and are dated in general to the first century BCE–first century CE.1 This monumental building extends over an area of nearly 150 sq m, about a quarter of the total extent of Area M1. This architectural complex, which comprises a residential building in the south and a northern annex containing a water cistern, two ritual baths (miqva’ot) and other water installations, was violently destroyed in the year 70 CE, and later covered with Late Roman– Byzantine structures of Stratum VI built directly upon it. Building 760 yielded a rich ceramic assemblage, comprising over 900 diagnostic sherds, although unfortunately, very few complete vessels were recovered, mainly of small forms. Due to the extensive activities that took place here in this period, large quantities of Early Roman pottery sherds were also unearthed in the later strata of Area M1. Nevertheless, this ceramic discussion focuses on the finds that originated within the architectural complex of Building 760 (see Plan 2.8). The entire ceramic assemblage is described together according to typology, accompanied by Figs. 5.1–5.4. Due to the small number of complete vessels recovered, the analysis is based mainly on rim typology. The ceramic assemblages from three key representative loci are presented in separate figures: Water Cistern 702 in the northern unit (Figs. 5.5–5.9), and the northern (Figs. 5.10–5.14) and central halls in the southern unit (Figs. 5.15–5.19) of Building 760. Quantitative analyses were based on diagnostic sherds, mainly rims (Table 5.1). In some cases, the vessel type was identified according to other diagnostic features. These analyses included only the pottery from the following contexts: the debris inside the various water installations located in the northern unit (Miqva’ot 704, 709, 719, Water Cistern 702, and

Table 5.1. Quantitative Representation of Pottery Classes Pottery class

N

Bowls

69

% 7.6

Cooking ware

234

26.0

Storage jars

326

36.0

Amphorae

23

2.5

Flasks

23

2.5

Jugs

21

2.3

Juglets

65

7.0

Unguentaria

36

4.0

Miniature vessels

11

1.2 5.3

Lamps

48

Varia

51

5.6

Total

907

100.0

Installations 714 and 728); the lower-story floors of the northern and central halls (L740, L760) and the collapse of the upper floors (L687, L707, L713, L720, L721, L736, L738, L739, L749). The finds recovered from the collapsed debris in the southern hall of Building 760 are excluded from this report, as they did not originate in sealed loci. The comparisons for the pottery types from Stratum VII were chosen from sites with wellstratified urban assemblages in geographical proximity to the Giv‘ati Parking Lot. Despite the large number of archaeological reports dedicated to the various excavations conducted in the City of David, a comprehensive pottery corpus of the Early Roman period has never been published. Therefore, the majority of the comparisons are drawn from the following sites in Jerusalem: the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006; Geva 2010), the Temple Mount surroundings (Mazar 1971), the Citadel (Johns 1950), the Tyropoeon Valley (Hamilton 1931), Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1962; 1964), the Armenian Garden

110

Yana Tchekhanovets

Typology

(Tushingham 1985) and Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987); of special importance is the report of the pottery from the kilnworks at the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005). Excavations outside Jerusalem that are cited here include the Herodian palace complexes at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006). For types from the end of the first–beginning of the second centuries CE, the pottery reports from ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992) and Masada Camp F (Magness 2009) were also consulted. Rural settlements and tombs were excluded from the body of comparative material. The vast majority of the vessels were made of plain ware, locally produced in Jerusalem and its vicinity, and similar to that from other regions in Judea: a light brown, grayish or pinkish-brown fabric with a small amount of white grits. In the description of the pottery in the figures, only surface treatment and decoration, painted or plastic, is noted. The decorated wares, miniature vessels, and the small number of imported wares, are considered integral parts of the assemblage and are included within the discussion of the relevant type.

Bowls Sixty-nine diagnostic fragments of bowls comprise 7.6% of the Stratum VII assemblage (Table 5.1); 65 of the sherds can be assigned to five main types, most made of a thin, well-fired ware. Such bowls have numerous parallels at excavated sites in Jerusalem and Judea. In addition, several examples of local, thickwalled, ribbed bowls and two fragments of imported Terra Sigillata bowls, probably Eastern Sigillata A, were discovered. Type BL1: Shallow Bowl with Incurved Rim. Twentyseven of the bowl fragments are classified as bowls with an incurved rim, and represent the most common bowl type in the assemblage. They are shallow bowls with a flat base, and are divided into three subtypes based on rim variations. Subtype BL1a (Figs. 5.1:1; 5.5:1–3; 5.10:1–3; 5.15:1, 2): This was the most popular type of bowl, represented by 21 fragments, and is characterized by a simple form

Fig. 5.1 ► No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Bowl

BL1a

740

8347/13

690.28–13

2

Bowl

BL1b

738

8968/13

690.42–35

3

Bowl

BL1c

702

7718/11

691.45–44

4

Bowl

BL2

702

7663/18

691.55–52

5

Bowl

BL3

760

8360/9

690.82–59

6

Bowl

BL4

702

8756/7

691.41

7

Bowl

BL4

760

8488/4

690.07–689.91

8

Bowl

BL4

702

7710/11

691.45–44

9

Bowl

BL5

702

7408/10

693.08–692.92

10

Cooking pot

CP1

713

7515/4

693.25–19

11

Cooking pot

CP2

740

8347/3

690.28–13

12

Cooking pot

CP3

736

7948/3

692.10–691.96

13

Cooking pot

CP4

721

7614/7

693.37–30

14

Cooking pot

CP5

702

8756/6

691.41

15

Casserole

CS1

687

7095/2

694.67–25

16

Casserole

CS2

738

8000/5

691.95–66

17

Casserole

CS3

713

7399/8

693.33–21

18

Cooking jug

CJ1

702

8701/13

693.66–41

111

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

with an incurved rim and a flat base. Parallels dated to the late second century BCE until the end of the first century BCE were recovered in Stratum VIII of Area M1 (see Chapter 4: Subtype BL1a) and at numerous sites in Jerusalem, such as the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type BL1a, Pls. 5.3:18–20; 5.7:7; 5.8:40–41; 5.9:28; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls.

6.1:15; 6.2:36, 37, 40, 41, 43; 6.6:15; 6.10:36; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.5:9; 4.8:2), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 17:6) and in the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 19:9, 10; 20:22–24; 23:13), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-BL3, Pls. 14:199–219; 15:220–225; 28:524) and ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 4:2). At Masada, this

2

1

3

6

5

4

7

8

9

11 10

13

12

14

15 16

17 18 0

10

Fig. 5.1. Pottery from Stratum VII—bowls and cooking ware.

112

Yana Tchekhanovets

bowl subtype appeared in Herodian contexts up to the year 6 CE (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-BL1A, Pl. 25:1–3). Subtype BL1b (Figs. 5.1:2; 5.5:9; 5.10:4; 5.15:3, 4): This subtype, represented by four fragments, is similar to BL1a, but characterized by a carinated body. These bowls are usually small and thin walled (Fig. 5.15:4), although one large example was defined (Fig. 5.15:3), and some examples bear traces of red- and brownpainted decoration on the exterior (Figs. 5.5:9; 5.10:4). Bowls with a carinated body and an incurved rim are dated to the first century BCE–first century CE based on parallels discovered in Jerusalem, for example in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type BL1b, Pls. 5.3:22; 5.4.34–38; 5.9:27; 2010: Pl. 4.6:2; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.2:43–46; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.5:7, 8; 4.9:14, 15), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 17:6), the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:3, lower row) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 20:25–27), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-BL3, Pl. 14:207, 208). At Masada, this bowl subtype was discovered in contexts defined there as the Zealot occupation, dated to 66–73/74 CE2 (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-BL1B, Pl. 25:4–16). Parallels dated from the late second to the end of the first centuries BCE were recovered from Stratum VIII of Area M1 (see Chapter 4: Type BL1). Subtype BL1c (Figs. 5.1:3; 5.5:10; 5.15:5): Only two fragments of this relatively rare subtype with an incurved, out-folded rim, were discovered. They are dated to the first century BCE–first century CE in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.8:5; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.6:4), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 17:2, 5) and in the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 20:29). No parallels for this subtype were found outside Jerusalem. Type BL2: Deep Bowl with Everted Rim (Figs. 5.1:4; 5.5:11–15; 5.10:5). Deep bowls with an everted rim (often defined as cups) are represented by four fragments. Some examples are decorated with brown paint (Figs. 5.5:13, 14). This type first appeared in the Herodian period and remained popular during the first century CE. Parallels are found in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.6:32, 33; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.8:6, 7; 4.9:12, 11, defined as a cup) and the Armenian

Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 20:33), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-CU1B-C, Pl. 16:275, 278, defined as a cup) and ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 4:1). Type BL3: Shallow Bowl with Infolded Rim (Figs. 5.1:5; 5.15:6, 7). Shallow bowls with an infolded rim, sometimes called plates, are represented by five fragments. This type first appeared in the late second century BCE (see Chapter 4: Subtype BL2a), became popular in the Herodian period, and is known from all the main excavation sites in Jerusalem—the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type BL2, Pls. 5.3:23–26; 5.4:39–43; 5.7:33; 5.8:42; 5.9:29; Geva and RosenthalHeginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.1:16; 6.3:1–10; 6.10:33; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.5:2–6; 4.8:1; 4.9:13; 4.10:11), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 17:2, 5), at the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:3) and in the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 20:34)—as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-PL1A3, Pl. 16:252–263) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-PL2; Pl. 26:54, 57). Type BL4: Jerusalemite Painted Bowls (Figs. 5.1:6– 8; 5.5:16–23; 5.10:6, 7; 5.15:8, 9). Bowls belonging to the family known as Jerusalemite Painted Ware, represented by 28 fragments, are similar in shape to Type BL3, but made of especially thin, fine, wellfired ware and decorated with floral patterns on the interior (Hershkovitz 2003). The remains of this painted decoration are preserved in various colors: red (Figs. 5.5:18, 21–23; 5.10:6, 7), brown (Figs. 5.5:16, 17, 19, 20; 5.15:8) and black (Fig. 5.15:9). Produced in Jerusalem (Perlman, Gunneweg and Yellin 1986), the painted bowls are dated to the second half of the first century CE, based on the numerous parallels discovered in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.9:29, 30; 6.10:34, 35; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.13:15; Geva 2010: Pls. 4.1:3; 4.8:6–8), the Citadel (Johns 1950: Pl. LVII.8–10; Amiran and Eitan 1970: Pl. 6C) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 20:36), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-BL8, Pl. 20:335–341) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Types M-PBL1–4, Pls. 48–50). Type BL5: Bowl with Groove under Rim (Figs. 5.1:9; 5.5:24). Only one example of this deep bowl with a hemispherical body and a groove under the rim was

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

discovered. Based on parallels from the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.3:15, 16; 6.6:25, 27, 28; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.5:12), Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-BL5, Pl. 15:235) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-BL3, Pl. 25:21), this type first appeared in the middle of the first century BCE and became especially common during the first century CE. Miscellaneous Bowls In addition to the five distinct types, two fragments of ribbed bowls with thick walls, different from the common, thin-walled Judean ware of the period, were discovered (Fig. 5.5:25). Parallels to this type are found at Jericho in Hasmonean and Herodian contexts (BarNathan 2002: Subtype J-BL3A3, Pl. 14:194–196). Two small fragments of Terra Sigillata Ware vessels, probably ESA, are a red-slipped bowl with a ring base (Fig. 5.5:26) and a fragment of a plate (Fig. 5.10:8). Cooking Ware Cooking-ware vessels, made of a dark, reddish-brown fabric, include pots, casseroles, cooking jugs, stands and varia. The cooking ware comprises 26% of the entire assemblage (Table 5.1). Cooking Pots Of 191 cooking-pot fragments identified in Stratum VII, 131 rim fragments can be classified typologically. Cooking pots comprise nearly 21% of the pottery assemblage and are the second largest group of vessels after storage jars. All the cooking pots are characterized by a relatively narrow mouth, a globular body, and strap handles extending from the rim to the shoulder. According to neck and rim variations, the cooking pots are divided into five main types, the most popular types being those with triangular and ridged triangular rims (CP3–CP4), which comprise over 50% of the cookingpot assemblage. Type CP1: Cooking Pot with High, Concave Neck (Figs. 5.1:10; 5.6:1; 5.15:10). This type of cooking pot, with a simple rim and a high neck, concave on the interior, is represented by 16 fragments. This relatively early vessel was discovered in Phases 1 and 2 of the kilnworks at the International Convention Center, dating to the middle–late first century BCE (Berlin 2005:35–36; Fig. 3:5, 6). In the Jewish Quarter

113

assemblage, this cooking pot appeared in contexts as early as the second half of the second century BCE (Geva 2003: Type CP5, Pls. 5.1:26–28; 5.4:11, 28; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.5:15, 16; 4.9:16; 4.12:14), while in the Armenian Garden in Jerusalem (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 18:25–29; 19:5) and at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-CP2A, Pl. 12:143), it is dated to the first century BCE. However, in the ‘Burnt House’ in the Jewish Quarter it was found in a context of the first century CE (Geva 2010: Pl. 4.1:6), and at Masada, in contexts of the Zealot occupation (BarNathan 2006: Type M-CP2, Pl. 29:30, 32). Type CP2: Cooking Pot with High, Straight Neck (Figs. 5.1:11; 5.6:2, 3; 5.10:9–13; 5.15:11). This type, characterized by a simple rim and a high, straight, slightly everted neck, is represented by 32 rim fragments. In addition to the standard-sized vessels of this type, a few smaller examples were present (Figs. 5.6:2, 3; 5.10:9, 10; 5.15:11). As in the case of Type CP1, this type was produced in Phases 1 and 2 of the kilnworks at the International Convention Center, from the middle–late first century BCE (Berlin 2005:35– 36, Fig. 3:1–4, 7–9). It first appeared at the end of the second century BCE (see Chapter 4: Type CP4), became especially popular during the first century BCE, and was still common during the first part of the first century CE at all the sites in Jerusalem and elsewhere in Judea. Numerous parallels are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and RosenthalHeginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.1.11; 6.2:20–23; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.5:17), the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:2b; Amiran and Eitan 1970: Pl. 6b), the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 19:1–3; 24:4) and Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987: Fig. 1.9), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-CP2A, Pl. 11:131–134). Type CP3: Cooking Pot with Triangular Rim (Figs. 5.1:12; 5.6:4; 5.10:14–16; 5.15:12, 13). The cooking pot with a triangular rim and a short neck is the most popular vessel among the cooking wares, represented by 40 fragments. In the kilns at the International Convention Center, it was produced in Phases 2–4, dating from the late first century BCE until 70 CE (Berlin 2005:36–38, Fig. 4). These vessels were very common in Judea, and numerous parallels dated to the first century BCE– first century CE are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls.

114

Yana Tchekhanovets

6.2:25; 6.5:40; 6.9:17, 18; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.5:19, 20; 4.8:9; 4.9:18), the Citadel (Amiran and Eitan 1970: Pl. 6d), the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 19:36; 22:30), Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987: Fig. 1.11) and the Tyropoeon Valley (Hamilton 1931:109, No. 2), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-CP2C, Pl. 12:149, 150). At Masada, this type was found in contexts of the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-CP1D, Pl. 28:26–29), and at ‘Aro‘er, in an early second-century CE context (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 13:9). CP4: Cooking Pot with ridged, Triangular Rim (Figs. 5.1:13; 5.6:5; 5.10:17–22). This type, characterized by an external ridge on the triangular rim, is represented by 35 fragments. In the kilnworks at the International Convention Center, its production was restricted to Phase 4, from the second half of the first century CE until 70 CE (Berlin 2005: Fig. 4). It is very common in contemporary contexts in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.5:38, 40, 41; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.10:18; 4.12:18; Geva 2010: Pls. 4.1:5; 4.5:1–8), and at Jericho (BarNathan 2002: Subtype J-CP2C, Pl. 26.476–480) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-CP4, Pl. 29:42, 43). Type CP5: Cooking Pot with Short Neck (Figs. 5.1:14; 5.6:6, 7; 5.10:23, 24). This thin-walled cooking pot, with a simple rim and a short, straight neck, is represented by only eight fragments. In the repertoire from the kilnworks at the International Convention Center, it was defined as a ‘small cooking pot’, and was produced in Phase 4, during the second half of the first century CE (Berlin 2005:42, Fig. 9:4). Other examples of this relatively rare vessel, dated to the end of the first century CE, were discovered in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 4.5:12) and Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987: Fig. 1.18), and at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-CP2D, Pl. 26:484). At ‘Aro‘er, a complete example of a similar cooking pot is dated to the first third of the second century CE (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 3.9). Casseroles Twenty-three casserole fragments were discovered in Stratum VII, comprising 2.5% of the pottery assemblage. This type of vessel was foreign to the

Judean population until it was introduced at the end of the first century BCE. The earliest type of casserole, with a ledge rim and upright walls (CS1), was probably of Greek origin, while the later type, with a triangular rim and carinated walls (CS2), is Roman, and probably imitated the shape of metal vessels. Type CS1: Ledge-Rim Casserole (Figs. 5.1:15; 5.11:1). This type of casserole with a ledge rim and upright, slightly curved walls, is represented by seven fragments. It was popular during the first century BCE in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type CA2; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.2:27, 28; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.5:21), the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:2b) and Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1964: Fig. 28:13), and was common during the entire first century CE at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-CS1, Pls. 12:160; 27:494) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-CS3A, Pl. 30:62–64). CS2: Carinated Casserole (Figs. 5.1:16; 5.6:8; 5.11:2– 6). This casserole, characterized by a wide mouth, an upright triangular rim, a sharply carinated body and strap handles, is represented by 15 fragments. Most of the vessels are of a relatively large size, and only one small example was discovered (Fig. 5.11:5). They first appeared at the end of the first century BCE and became very popular in the first century CE. In the kilnworks at the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005:39–42, Fig. 7), the production of this vessel is characteristic of Phases 3 and 4 (from the early first century CE till 70 CE). Numerous parallels dated to the first century CE are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 6.2:30; 6.5:43; 6.9:20; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.5:13), the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 22:28, 29; 23:5; 24:7, 17, 18), Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987: Fig. 1.15–17) and the Tyropoeon Valley (Hamilton 1931:109, No. 5). At Masada, this type appeared in contexts of the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-CS1, Pl. 30:51–55). Type CS3: Closed Casserole (Figs. 5.1:17; 5.11:7). A single fragment of a casserole with a wide mouth, a grooved rim designed for a lid and a very short, concave neck, was found in Stratum VII. Parallels are found at Masada in contexts of the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-CS2, Pl. 30:57–60).

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

Cooking Jugs Type CJ1: Cooking Jug (Figs. 5.1:18; 5.6:9, 10; 5.11:8, 9). Sixteen fragments of cooking jugs, comprising 1.7% of the pottery assemblage, all belong to one type with a high neck, a globular body, and one strap handle extending from the rim to the shoulder. Slight variations can be distinguished in the shape of the profiled rim: grooved (Fig. 5.6:9) or triangular (Fig. 5.6:10; 5.11:8, 9). In the kilnworks at the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005:39, Fig. 6), the production of this vessel began in Phase 2 (late first century BCE) and increased in Phases 3–4 (first century CE until 70 CE). Numerous parallels dated to the first century CE are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.9:19; 6.10:13; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.5:15), the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 25.8 ) and the Tyropoeon Valley (Hamilton 1931:109, No. 1), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-CJG1, Pls. 13:168, 169; 27:504, 505), Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-CJG1, Pl. 31:85–89) and ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 4.8). Cooking Stands Two fragments of low stands were discovered (L707, B7289/12; L720, B7606/3; not illustrated). Parallels for this type are known from the International Convention Center kilnworks, where they appear in all the ceramic phases, from the middle of the first century BCE until 70 CE (Berlin 2005:45, Fig. 11). Other parallels are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.3:18; 6.6:36, 37; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.6:12–14), the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 23:35) and Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1962: Fig. 20:25), as well as at Masada (BarNathan 2006: Type M-SD2, Pl. 38:5–7). Cooking Varia Two fragments of cooking vessels that do not belong to any of the types described above were also found (not illustrated). One is probably the handle of a frying pan (L702, B7473/7), the other apparently a fragment of a funnel (L707, B7474/5). No cooking lids were discovered. Storage Jars Storage jars form the largest ceramic category in the pottery assemblage of Stratum VII, with a total of 326

115

jar fragments, constituting 36% of the assemblage (Table 5.1). The typological differences, representing chronological developments, enable division of the jars into four main types (SJ1–SJ4). As most of the diagnostic fragments are rim and neck sherds, the typological classification is based on rim and neck variations. A clear evolution, from a simple, thickened rim to a collared rim that becomes longer and in time develops into a ridge at the lower neck, can be discerned. All types of this Judean storage jar, from the late Hellenistic examples to the late first-century CE types, are represented in the Stratum VII assemblage. Type SJ1: Storage Jar with Thickened Rim. This storage jar, with a thickened, everted rim and a short neck, is a common type in the Jerusalem and Judean assemblages of the late Hellenistic period. Sixty-five rim fragments of this type were discovered, which are divided into two subtypes. Subtype SJ1a (Figs. 5.2:1; 5.6:11; 5.11:10, 11; 5.16:1): This subtype, of which 24 fragments were recovered, has a thickened, everted rim, and first appeared in the second century BCE (Chapter 4: Type SJ4), becoming especially popular during the first century BCE. Numerous comparisons are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type SJ4, Pls. 5.2:27– 29; 5.4:19, 20; 5.7:24, 25; 5.8:7, 8; 5.10:8; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.1:6, 32), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 17:12) and in the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 19:30, 31; 20:3, 4, 8, 9). In the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.3:3; 4.9:1) and Jericho (BarNathan 2002: Type J-SJ1, Pl.1:1), they remained in use during the first part of the first century CE, while at Masada, they were still in use in the phase of the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-SJ1, Pl. 2:4). Subtype SJ1b (Figs. 5.2:2; 5.11:12; 5.16:2–6): This subtype, with a thickened, square-sectioned rim, is represented by 41 fragments. Although most typical of the second century BCE, this jar still appeared in assemblages of the first century CE. Parallels are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type SJ1, Pls. 5.1:7; 5.2:19; 5.4:5, 14; 5.10.1, 2; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.1:3, 18, 21, 22, 24; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.3:1, 2, 4, 9, the latter a complete vessel) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 18:2–4, 12, 13, 15–17), and

116

Yana Tchekhanovets

at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-SJ3, Pl. 3:12–17). At Masada, this type was also discovered in contexts of the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-SJ10A, Pl. 9:49). Type SJ2: Storage Jar with Collared Rim. The jar with a collared rim and a high neck, generally dated to the Hasmonean and Herodian periods, is represented by 121 fragments in Stratum VII. Changes in the form of the collared rim have chronological significance: the earlier types have a shorter, everted collar, which over time becomes flatter (Gitin 1990:239, Type 161), and the lengthening of the collar is generally noted (BarNathan 2002:28–31; Geva 2003:122). Based on these changes, the collared-rim jars from Stratum VII can be divided into five subtypes. SJ2a (Figs. 5.2:3; 5.6:12–14; 5.11:13, 14; 5.16:7, 8): This subtype, represented by 31 fragments, has a short, flat, collar rim and a relatively high neck. Slight variations of the rim can be seen on some examples, for instance, a rounder shape (Fig. 5.16:8), everted (Fig. 5.6:14) or with an exterior groove (Fig. 5.11:13). Parallels date this jar in general to the second–first centuries BCE in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type SJ3a, Pls. 5.2:25, 26; 5.4:17; 5.7.22; 5.9:6; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.1:26; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.3:7, 8; 4.10:1) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 19:28; 20:7; 21:38), and at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-SJ4A1, Pls. 3:18, 19; 4:22). At Masada, this type was dated to the first century BCE, and reused in the Zealot phase (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-SJ6A, Pl. 4:17). Subtype SJ2b (Figs. 5.2:4; 5.6:15–17; 5.11:15–18; 5.16:9, 10): This subtype, represented by 33 fragments, has a short, slightly concave collared rim. One example of this jar is unusually massive and amphora-like (Fig. 5.6:15). Subtype SJ2b is usually combined with the previous subtype, SJ2a, in most typologies (Geva 2003: Type SJ3a). Parallels are found in Hasmonean and Herodian contexts in Jerusalem, in Stratum VIII of this site (Chapter 4: Type SJ3), in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Pls. 5.2:3, 12; 5.7:21, 23; 5.10:3, 4; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.1:4; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.9:2), the Tyropoeon Valley

(Hamilton 1931:109, No. 8), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 17:10) and in the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 21:39), and at Jericho (BarNathan 2002: Subtype J-SJ4A2, Pls. 3:20; 4:23). At Masada, it is dated to the Herodian period, and was also reused in the Zealot phase (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-SJ6A, Pls. 14, 15). Subtype SJ2c (Figs. 5.2:5; 5.6:18; 5.12:1–3; 5.16:11): This subtype, represented by 29 fragments, has a long, flat collared rim. It appeared at the end of the second century BCE and became especially popular during the first century CE. Parallels are found in Hasmonean and Herodian contexts in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type SJ3b, Pl. 5.4:18; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.1:5, 27, 29, 31; 6.5:1–3), the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:1) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 22:39, 43, 44; 23:1), and at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-SJ4A3, Pl. 5:27). In the Jewish Quarter, use of this jar type continued into the first third of the first century CE (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.3:10; 4.7:1; 4.10:2), and at Masada, it appeared up to the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype SJ6A2, Pl. 4:17). Subtype SJ2d (Figs. 5.2:6; 5.12:4–8; 5.6:19; 5.16:12– 15): This subtype, represented by 26 fragments, is similar to the previous type, but the long collar rim is slightly concave. Subtypes SJ2c and SJ2d are often regarded as a single type, and dated mainly to the first century BCE (Geva 2003: Type SJ3b). This vessel was popular in Hasmonean and Herodian contexts in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type SJ3b, Pl. 5.9:8; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.1:25, 28; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.3:13, 14; 4.9:3; 4.10:3) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 21:40), and at Jericho (BarNathan 2002: Subtype J-SJ4A3, Pls. 4:24; 5:26). Subtype SJ2e (Figs. 5.2:7; 5.16:16): This is another variation of the collared-rim jar, characterized by a swollen neck with a groove on its interior, of which two fragments were discovered. A few parallels were found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.1:30) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Pl. 23:2, 31), dated to the first century BCE.

117

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

1

2 3

4

6

5

8

7

9 10

12

11

14

13

0

10

Fig. 5.2. Pottery from Stratum VII—storage jars. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

1

SJ1a

736

7948/5

Elevation (m) 692.10–691.96

2

SJ1b

738

8068/3

691.66–24

3

SJ2a

736

7949/4

692.10–691.96

4

SJ2b

702

6949/4

693.66–36

5

SJ2c

707

7205/7

693.64–50

6

SJ2d

721

7724/8

692.42–31

7

SJ2e

734

7949/10

692.10–691.96

8

SJ3a

749

8350/3

690.97–92

9

SJ3a

720

7997/3

691.65–12

10

SJ3b

702

7663/1

691.55–52

11

SJ3c

736

7878/1

692.33–692.10

12

SJ3c

707

7205/4

693.64–50

13

SJ3d

738

8068/4

691.66–24

14

SJ3e

739

8004/5

691.96–68

118

Yana Tchekhanovets

Type SJ3: Storage Jar with Ridged Neck. Storage jars with a ridge at the base of the neck represent a later development of this vessel form typical of the first century CE at Judean sites, including the destruction layers of 70 CE. At certain sites, this type also continued into the first third of the second century CE. Of the 121 fragments of this type, 110 are rim fragments that can be assigned to five subtypes. Subtype SJ3a (Figs. 5.2:8, 9; 5.16:17): This subtype, represented by three fragments, has a thickened, rounded or triangular rim and a short, slightly swollen neck. Parallels dated to the first century CE are found in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and RosenthalHeginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.9:3) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 21:37), and at Jericho (BarNathan 2002: Type J-SJ7, Pl. 24:403). At Masada, they originated in Herodian storerooms and were reused in the Zealot phase (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-SJ5, Pl. 3:8–12, 28). Subtype SJ3b (Figs. 5.2:10; 5.12:9; 5.7:1, 2; 5.16:18– 21): This subtype, represented by 37 fragments, has a simple straight rim and a long neck. Parallels from the last third of the first century BCE–first century CE are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.9:1, 2; 6.10:4, 5; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.13:1; Geva 2010: Pls. 4.2:1, 3; 4.8:2), the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 23:32), Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987: Fig. 1.1) and the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005: Fig. 14:1, 2), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-SJ7B, Pl. 6:41). At Masada, this type also remained in use during the Zealot occupation (BarNathan 2006: Subtype M-SJ7B, Pls. 5:21; 7:35; 8:38). Subtype SJ3c (Figs. 5.2:11, 12; 5.7:3–5; 5.12:10–12; 5.17:1, 2): Represented by 34 fragments, this type has a slightly thickened rim and a long neck. One fragment is decorated with black paint (Fig. 5.17:2). Parallels dated to the last third of the first century BCE–first century CE are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.5:10; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.13:2, 3; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.8:3), the Tyropoeon Valley (Hamilton 1931:109, No. 9) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 21:33), and at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-SJ7B, Pls. 6:40; 24:401). At Masada, this type was

discovered in contexts of the Zealot occupation (BarNathan 2006: Type M-SJ7B, Pls. 5:25; 6:30). Subtype SJ3d (Figs. 5.2:13; 5.12:13): This subtype, represented by 22 fragments, has a flat ledge rim and a long neck. One fragment bears a textile imprint on the lower neck (Fig. 5.12:13). Numerous parallels dated to the end of the first century BCE, and mainly to the first century CE, are found in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.9:5; Geva 2010: Pls. 4.2:9; 4.8:3) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 22:40), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-SJ7, Pl. 24:398; Type J-SJ10, Pl. 24:410, 411) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-SJ12, Pl. 11:60). At ‘Aro‘er, this type is dated to the first third of the second century CE (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 5:2). Subtype SJ3e (Figs. 5.2:14; 5.7:6; 5.12:14; 5.17.3): This subtype, represented by 14 fragments, has a triangular rim and a long neck. One fragment has a slightly different form––its swollen neck is shorter than usual (Fig. 5.12:14). This type appeared in the Herodian period and became especially popular during the first century CE, with parallels from Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.5:7–9; 6.10:7, 8; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.2:8) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 21:35), and from Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-SJ10, Pl. 24:413, 415–417) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-SJ8, Pl. 8:39, 41, 42; Type M-SJ12, Pl. 11:61). Type SJ4: Large Storage Jar with Everted Rim and Ridged Neck. These large jars, represented by nine fragments, have an everted rim and a ridge at the base of the neck. This type is the latest modification of the Judean storage jar in the Early Roman period. The vessels can by divided into two subtypes. Subtype SJ4a (Figs. 5.3:1; 5.7:7; 5.12:15, 16; 5.17:4): This subtype, represented by five fragments, has a wide ledge rim and a relatively short neck. It is dated to the first century CE in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.9:6; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.1:2) and at Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987: Fig. 1:3). At Masada, it appeared during the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-SJ13, Pls. 12:62–66; 13:67–71).

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

119

Subtype SJ4b (Figs. 5.3:2; 5.17:5, 6): This subtype, represented by four fragments, has a simple everted rim. Parallels dated to the first century CE are found at Herodium (Loffreda 1996: Fig. 70.4) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-SJ7B3, Pl. 6:29).

period are found in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Ariel 2003: Type A1, Pl. 6.4:16; Finkielsztejn 2006: Types A1–A3) and the City of David (Ariel 1990b:82).

Painted Storage Jars (Figs. 5.7:8, 9; 5.12:17; 5.17:7– 9). Ten body sherds of storage jars with traces of brown-, black- or red-painted decoration cannot be assigned to any specific type. Painted stripes on the body, mainly on types dated to the first century CE, are reported, for example, from the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: 103, Pl. 4.10:4; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.1:12).

Type FK1: Ovoid Flask (Figs. 5.3:5; 5.7:12–15; 5.13:3– 6; 5.18:1–6). Twenty-three flask fragments, 2.5% of the pottery assemblage (Table 5.1), belong to this type, with slight variations. This vessel is characterized by a slightly thickened rim, sometimes with an inner ledge (Figs. 5.7:12; 5.18:1), a long straight neck and two twisted strap handles extending from the middle of the neck to the shoulder. Complete examples, from the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.4:15; 4.7:20; 4.11:11, 12; Geva 2010: Pls. 4.1:4; 4.3:12, 13) and ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 5:5), have an ovoid body. This type first appeared in the first century BCE (Aharoni 1962: Fig. 6:19; BarNathan 2002: Type J-FL1, Pls. 10:120–122; 26:468– 475; Geva 2003: Type FK3, Pls. 5.2:39; 5.9:15; 5.10:13; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.1:46; 6.5:16–19) and continued without change into the first century CE until 70 CE. Numerous examples of this popular vessel, dated to the first century CE, are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.4:15; 4.7:20–21; 4.9:11; 4.10:13; 4.11:11, 12), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 18:23, 24), the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:4a), the Tyropoeon Valley (Hamilton 1931:109, No. 4), the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 21:22–26), Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987: Fig. 1.7, 8) and the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005: Fig. 16:1–4). It was also common at Masada, in contexts from the Herodian to Zealot periods (BarNathan 2006: Type M-FL1, Pl. 22:70–73).

Amphorae Twenty-three imported amphora fragments were discovered in Stratum VII, constituting 2.5% of the assemblage (Figs. 5.3:3, 4; 5.7:10, 11; 5.13:1, 2; 5.17:11–14; Table 5.1). None of the fragments are stamped, and only one fragment can be definitely attributed to a specific type (see below, Fig. 5.3:3). One large rimless neck fragment of an amphora with a single handle (Fig. 5.3:4) seems to belong to an Italian type with a cylindrical neck with concave sides. This ‘Republican’ type was widespread from the second century BCE until the beginning of the Augustan era, and parallels, including some complete examples, dated to the late Hellenistic and Herodian periods up to the first century CE, are found in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Ariel 2003: Types A4–A14; Finkielsztejn 2006: Types A17–A19) and the City of David (Ariel 1990b:83). The largest amphora fragment from Stratum VII (Fig. 5.3:3) belongs to a Koan or Pseudo-Koan amphora (Dressel Type 4), with a rolled, everted rim and a double groove below it, a straight cylindrical neck and a double-barreled handle. This type is generally dated to the second–first centuries BCE. Parallels from late Hellenistic and Herodian contexts, including complete vessels, are found in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Ariel 2003: Pl. 6.4:17; Finkielsztejn 2006: Pl. 6.1:A4) and the City of David (Ariel 1990b: Pl. 2.8). Other fragments of double handles from Stratum VII probably belong to the same type (Figs. 5.7:10; 5.13:1, 2). A body sherd with a single handle (Fig. 5.17:13) probably belongs to a Rhodian amphora type. Parallels dated to the third century BCE into the Early Roman

Flasks

Jugs Twenty-one jugs were identified in Stratum VII, comprising 2.3% of the pottery assemblage (Table 5.1). The most popular jug is the type with an everted or triangular rim (JG2), while other types are represented by isolated examples only. Three painted jug fragments were discovered that could not be assigned to a specific type. Type JG1: Wide-Necked Jug or Table Amphora (Figs. 5.3:6; 5.7:16). Two fragments of this jug type, possibly

120

Yana Tchekhanovets

a table amphora, are characterized by a slightly everted rim and a wide, straight neck. A handle, oval in section and slightly twisted, extends from under the rim to the shoulder. This vessel is rare in Judea, and parallels from Jerusalem are dated mainly to the first century BCE, as in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and RosenthalHeginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.5:11; 6.10:23, 24) and the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14.4c). Type JG2: Jug with Funnel-Shaped Rim (Figs. 5.3:7, 8; 5.13:7; 5.18:7–11). This is the most popular jug in Stratum VII, represented by 10 fragments. It has a thickened, funnel-shaped rim, which is either everted with an inner ledge (Fig. 5.18:7), or triangular in profile (Figs. 5.13:7; 5.18:9–11), and a straight neck, sometimes wider near the shoulder. No fragments with a handle were found. Numerous parallels dated to the first century BCE–first century CE are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: JG2, Pls. 5.6.18, 19; 5.8:17; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.1:9; 6.5:13, 14; 6.9:7, 8; Geva and Hershkovitz 2003: Pls. 4.4:5; 4.10:6; Geva 2010: Pls. 4.3:3, 4; 4.4:1), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 18:20), in the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 21:14–19) and at Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1962: Fig. 6:22, 26), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-JG1A1, Pl. 8:54, 55). Later examples, dating to the end of the first–beginning of the second centuries CE, are found at ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 13:1–3) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-JG5B2, Pl. 18:15). Type JG3: Jug with Rounded Funnel-Shaped Rim (Figs. 5.3:9; 5.7:17). This type, represented by two fragments, has a rounded, funnel-shaped rim and a relatively narrow neck, which widens at both ends. A handle, oval in section, extends from the rim to the shoulder. Parallels dating to the late Hellenistic and Herodian periods are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.9:7; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.4:6), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 18:19) and at the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:4c), and in Herodian contexts at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-JG4, Pl. 9:67) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-JG5B1, Pl. 18:7). Type JG4: ‘Gray Jug’ (Figs. 5.3:10; 5.7:18). This luxury vessel, represented by a single example, has a

large cup-shaped rim and a short, very narrow neck. An elegant, grooved handle extends from below the rim to the shoulder. This jug is made of well-fired, dark gray ware resembling that of molded lamps with floral decoration (Type LP2; Fig. 5.4:16). No exact parallels were found for this jug, which may be an imitation of a metal vessel. Type JG5: Wide-Mouthed Jug with Everted Rim (Figs. 5.3:11; 5.7:19; 5.13:8). Three fragments of a wide-mouthed jug with an everted rim resembling a jar rim were discovered. This is a rare type in Judea, with parallels dated to the first century CE found in the Tyropoeon Valley (Hamilton 1931:109, No. 1), and examples from the early second century CE, at ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig.13:4). A similar fragment is described in the Jewish Quarter report as a krater (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.12:5). Juglets A large group of 65 juglet fragments was discovered in Stratum VII, comprising 7% of the pottery assemblage (Table 5.1). They can be divided into five types, the most popular of which were the juglets with a cupshaped rim (JT1) and a rounded, thickened rim (JT3). Type JT1: Juglet with Cup-Shaped Rim (Figs. 5.4:1; 5.8:1–7; 5.13:9–13; 5.18:12–16). This most popular juglet type, represented by 30 fragments, has a cupshaped rim with a squarish (Figs. 5.8:2, 3, 5; 5.13:9– 11, 13) or rounded section (Figs. 5.8:1, 4; 5.13:12; 5.18:13–16), a short, narrow neck, and a twisted strap handle extending from the rim to the shoulder. While no complete fragments were found, some sherds enabled the reconstruction of a globular (Figs. 5.8:1, 4; 5.13:9; 5.18:13) or piriform body (Figs. 5.8:2; 5.13:13). This vessel was popular in Judea, and numerous parallels dated to the first century BCE–first century CE are found at all the major Judean sites, for example in Jerusalem, in Stratum VIII of Area M1 of the present site (see Chapter 4: Type JT3), in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type JT2, Pls. 5.2:41; 5.6:28; 5.8:23; 5.9:16; 5.10:19; 2010: Pl. 4.3:7–10, all complete examples; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.2:3, 4; 6.5:20, 21; 6.9:12; 6.10:9; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.4:12–14; 4.11:1–5), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 18:25), the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:14b), the Armenian Garden

121

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

1

2

3

5

4

7

8

6

11 10 9 0

10

Fig. 5.3. Pottery from Stratum VII—storage jars, amphorae, flasks and jugs. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Jar

SJ4a

720

7985/1

691.73–65

2

Jar

SJ4b

736

7878/2

692.33–10

3

Amphora

Dressel Type 4

734

7949/2

692.10–691.96

4

Amphora

740

8360/1

690.82-59

5

Flask

FK1

739

8321/9

691.10–690.27

6

Jug

JG1

702

8701/30

693.66–691.41

7

Jug

JG2

713

7515/7

693.25–19

8

Jug

JG2

738

8068/19

691.66–24

9

Jug

JG3

702

7619/13

692.20–691.55

10

Jug

JG4

702

7662/12+ 7714/19

691.61–55

11

Jug

JG5

707

7300/3

693.50–21

122

Yana Tchekhanovets

(Tushingham 1985: Figs. 19:27; 20:19; 21:27–30; 23:16, 17), the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005: Fig. 15) and Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1962: Fig. 6:17), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-JT1A, Pls. 10:88; 25:444, 446, 447) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-JT1, Pl. 33:1–14). One juglet of this type, containing the remains of balsam oil, was discovered in a cave near Qumran (Patrich and Arubas 1989: Fig. 4). Type JT2: Juglet with Everted Rim (Figs. 5.4:2; 5.13:14). This type, represented by 10 fragments, is characterized by a slightly everted, thickened rim, a short neck, and a strap handle extending from the rim to the shoulder. It appeared in the first century BCE and became popular in the first century CE, and examples from late Hellenistic and Early Roman contexts are found in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.4:10; 4.13:7; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.3:5), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 18:28), at Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987: Fig. 1:5) and at Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1962: Fig. 20:19, defined as a jug), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-JG3A2, Pls. 9:64; 25:424–427, defined as a jug) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-JT3, Pl. 33:16–19). Type JT3: Juglet with Rounded, Thickened Rim (Figs. 5.4:3; 5.8:8–10; 5.13:15; 5.18:17). This type of juglet, with a rounded, thickened rim, is relatively common in Stratum VII, represented by 20 fragments. No handles of this type were recognized. Based on the parallels from the Jewish Quarter, it appeared in the first century BCE and became popular during the first century CE (Geva 2003: Pl. 5.2:42; 2010: 4.3:6; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.2:22). This vessel has very few parallels outside Jerusalem. Type JT4: Juglet with Long Neck (Figs. 5.4:4; 5.8:10). One fragment of a delicate juglet has a flaring rim and a long, straight neck, and is made of thin-walled, well-fired ware. This type is known in contexts of the first century BCE–first century CE, for example in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.13:7) and at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-JG3B1, defined as a jug). Type JT5: Juglet with Ledge Rim (Figs. 5.4:5; 5.18:18). This type of juglet, with a flaring, almost ledged rim, is represented by a single example. Based on parallels

from the Jewish Quarter, this type dates to the first century BCE–first century CE (Geva and RosenthalHeginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.2:2; 6.10:10; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.4:10; 4.11:6). At Masada, it is dated from the end of the first century BCE until the first third of the second century CE (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-JG7, Pl. 19:20, defined as a jug). Spouted Juglet (Fig. 5.8:12). One sherd of a juglet with a small spout on the shoulder and traces of black-painted decoration on the body was discovered in Stratum VII. The vessel was probably used as a filling juglet (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:106). It is apparently a rare variant of one of the above types, and has only a few parallels dated from the Herodian period until the first century CE, for example from the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.5:37; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.7:9) and from Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-JT2, Pl. 10:90, 91). A similar juglet from Masada was discovered in a context of the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-PJT1, Pl. 46:48). Unguentaria Type UN1: Fusiform Unguentarium (Figs. 5.4:6–10; 5.8:13–16; 5.13:17–20; 5.18:19–22). Thirty-six fragments of this type of fusiform bottle were found, comprising 4% of the pottery assemblage. most of them are body and base fragments; only two rim sherds were recovered (Fig. 5.4:6, 7). This is a thick-walled, spindle-shaped vessel with a long, narrow neck and a long, solid leg with a large button base, often string-cut. The rim fragments have a disc-like form with a pointed upright (Fig. 5.4:6) or slightly flaring edge (Fig. 5.4:7). This unguentarium, especially popular in Jerusalem and its vicinity, was probably used for holding precious oils or perfumes. Complete examples are often found in funerary contexts. One of the few complete fusiform bottles originating in an urban context was discovered in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Pl. 5.2:48). Parallels for this type, dated to the first half of the first century BCE, are found in the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem (Geva 2003: Type FU3, Pls. 5.2:49; 5.7:29; 5.8:26; 5.10:18; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.2:7–13; 6.5:23, 24) and at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-UN1, Pl. 10:93–102), and it was still widespread in Judea in the Herodian period, during the first century CE, in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter

123

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

3

2

1

6

5 4

7

8 0

11

9

10

12

14

10

13

15

16

0

4

Fig. 5.4. Pottery from Stratum VII—juglets, unguentaria, miniature vessels and lamps. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Juglet

JT1

702

8701/19

693.66–691.41

2

Juglet

JT2

702

7710/39

691.45–44

3

Juglet

JT3

721

7655/12

693.00–692.42

4

Juglet

JT4

702

6970/14

693.66–36

5

Juglet

JT5

739

8128/4

691.64–59

6

Unguentarium

UN1

736

7741/18

692.68–62

7

Unguentarium

UN1

702

7055/12

693.36–17

8

Unguentarium

UN1

713

7399/7

693.33–21

9

Unguentarium

UN1

702

7055/1

693.36–17

10

Unguentarium

UN1

720

7997/2

691.65–12

11

Miniature bottle

MR1

721

7666/1

693.00–692.42

12

Miniature bottle

MR1

720

7565

692.54–41

13

Miniature cup

MR2

702

7663/10

691.55–52

14

Lamp

LP1

702

8756/23

691.41

15

Lamp

LP1

702

8701/10

693.66–41

16

Lamp

LP2

702

7662/13

691.61–55

124

Yana Tchekhanovets

(Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.4:1–4; 4.7:3; 4.9:4; 4.10:8; 4.12:2), the Citadel (Johns 1950: Fig. 14:7) and the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 22:13– 20). It is rare, however, at Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Type M-UN1, Pl. 34:1). Miniature Vessels Eleven miniature vessels were recovered in Stratum VII, comprising 1.2% of the pottery assemblage (Table 5.1). Most of the vessels are complete. They belong to two different types: bottles (MR1) and cups (or bowls; MR2). All miniature vessels were probably containers for medicinal ointments or perfumes (Hershkovitz 1989). Type MR1: Miniature Bottle (Figs. 5.4:11, 12; 5.8:17– 19; 5.14:1, 2; 5.18:23). Miniature bottles, miniature unguentaria and Judean kohl bottles are characterized by a slightly everted rim, a long, cylindrical neck, a small roundish (Fig. 5.18:23) or slightly carinated (Figs. 5.8:17; 5.14:1) body and a flat base. These vessels, all dated to the late first century BCE–first century CE, are known in small numbers from Jerusalem and other Judean sites, including the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.5:36; 6.10:27–29; Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pl. 4.9:10; Geva 2010: Pl. 4.4:13, 14), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 18:29) and Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1962: Fig. 20:10), as well as ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 4:7), Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-UN3, Pl. 26:459–461) and Masada (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-UN4A, Pl. 34:20–31). Type MR2: Miniature Cup (Figs. 5.4:13; 5.8:20, 21). Miniature cups with a wide mouth, a simple rim and a rounded body are less common than miniature bottles. Only two examples of this vessel type were discovered in Stratum VII. one is a relatively low, wide cup (Fig. 5.8:20), the other is taller and narrower (Fig. 5.8:21). Both variations have a few parallels at Masada, in contexts of the Zealot occupation (Bar-Nathan 2006: Subtype M-CU1A; Pl. 26:59–63). Lamps Forty-eight lamp fragments were discovered in Stratum VII, constituting 5.3% of the assemblage (Table 5.1), and can be divided into three main types.

Type LP1: Knife-Pared Lamp (Figs. 5.4:14, 15; 5.9:1, 2, 4–9; 5.14:4–10; 5.19:1–7). The large majority of the lamps discovered in Stratum VII, 43 fragments, belong to the ‘Herodian’, wheel-made, knife-pared lamps. Except for a few rim sherds (Figs. 5.9:1, 2; 5.14:4, 5; 5.19:1), most of the fragments are nozzles characterized by very thick clay. All the examples have a single nozzle. These lamps vary in size from small, delicate nozzles (Figs. 5.5.4:14; 5.9:4; 5.14:6, 9; 5.19:2), through wider types (Figs. 5.4:15; 5.9:5–7; 5.14:7–9; 5.19:3–7), to especially wide nozzles with large filling holes (Figs. 5.9:8, 9; 5.14:10). Most of the nozzles lack decoration, while some are decorated with two (Figs. 5.14:8; 5.19:5) or three (Fig. 5.9:4) lines of rouletted dots, a double line (Fig. 5.9:6), or a dotted line with two concentric circles (Figs. 5.9:5; 5.14:7; 5.19:6, 7). This type of lamp first appeared in the final years of the reign of Herod the Great, and a few examples dated to the end of the first century BCE were discovered in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter (Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.8:4, 5; 6.9:43, 44) and at Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1962: Fig. 20:26– 30), and at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Type J-LP4, Pl. 18:303). It became the most popular lamp during the first century CE and has been discovered at almost every Judean site, and in other areas of the country inhabited by Jews, in context up to the first third of the second century CE. The largest assemblage of knifepared lamps was discovered at Masada (80% of the lamps in the Zealot phase), where they were divided into 13 subtypes according to slight variations of form, ware and decoration (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994:24– 58, Class C). Type LP2: Molded Lamp with Floral Decoration (Figs. 5.4:16; 5.9:3). The single example of a molded lamp with floral decoration was made of fine, well-fired, dark gray ware. The body of the lamp is rounded and has a loop handle, and the rim is decorated with a relief of blossoming myrtle branches. These rare, luxury lamps appeared in the middle of the first century CE and were produced until 70 CE. They were first discovered in Jerusalem, in the excavation of the Citadel (Amiran and Eitan 1970: Pl. 7B). Other sole examples are reported from the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 4.7:7) and ‘Aro‘er (Hershkovitz 1992: Fig. 7). The largest assemblage was discovered at Masada, in the Zealot phase (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994:59–71, Class D) and in Roman Camp F (Magness 2009: Fig.

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

6:10). One of the Masada lamps is an exact parallel to the lamp from Area M1 (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994: 60, No. 107). Among the Masada lamps, one example was stamped by the Jerusalem master Joseph, the only Jewish master in antiquity whose name is known (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994: No. 111). The rarity of these lamps suggests a single source of production, probably the workshop of Joseph in Jerusalem. The floral motifs on these lamps have parallels in the local sculptural art of the period, “… among floral decoration of the roughly contemporary rock-carved facades of the tombs around Jerusalem as well as among numerous local relief-decorated stone sarcophagi and ossuaries” (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994:70). Type LP3: Folded-Rim Lamp. Only four small fragments of folded-rim, wheel-made lamps were discovered (not illustrated). This type also appeared in the Hellenistic assemblage of Area M1, Stratum VIII (see Chapter 4: Type LP1). It is dated to the late Hellenistic period in Jerusalem, in the Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Type LP1c; Geva and Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pls. 6.4:9; 6.12:5), near the Temple Mount (Mazar 1971: Fig. 17:27) and in the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Figs. 19:41–42; 22:6, 7), as well as at Jericho (Bar-Nathan 2002: Subtype J-LP1A, Pl. 17:284). Only a few examples appear in Herodian contexts in the Jewish Quarter (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006: Pls. 4.6:1; 4.9:19) and at Masada (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994:11–13, Class A). Varia Unclassified vessels comprise 5.6% of the Stratum VII pottery assemblage (Table 5.1), of which six vessels were chosen for illustration. These include two sherds of handmade vessels (Figs. 5.9:10; 5.14:3), probably clay spoons or twisted ladle handles (see Geva 2010: Pl. 4.6:10, 11), three fragments of imported vessels, probably goblets or lids, made of pinkish clay (Fig. 5.13:21) and decorated with red paint (Fig. 5.9:11) or red slip (Fig. 5.17:10), and a base of a ceramic cup imitating a contemporary stone vessel (Fig. 5.13:22).

Summary and Conclusions The Early Roman pottery assemblage of Stratum VII comprises a rich repertoire of locally manufactured vessels, similar to the ceramic assemblages discovered

125

in other parts of Jerusalem, and at other sites with a Jewish or mixed population, from the first century BCE to the first century CE. As no reports on Early Roman pottery assemblages from the Lower City have been published until now, it is worth noting that the corpus presented here demonstrates the homogenous character of the local ceramic repertoires at the end of the Second Temple period, as it does not differ from other, contemporary assemblages revealed in excavations in the Upper City of Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter and the Armenian Garden. Most, if not all, of the local vessels are known types and can be compared to the numerous parallels from well-stratified contexts. The large variety of local types revealed in Area M1 provides rich material for future comparative discussions of Jerusalem and Judean pottery. On the other hand, imported vessels are almost completely absent from the pottery assemblage of Stratum VII, in contrast to assemblages from the Upper City, where imported vessels are numerous (RosenthalHeginbottom 2003; 2006). Only amphorae appear in relatively large numbers in Area M1 (2.5% of the assemblage, see Table 5.1), along with a few isolated Terra Sigillata fragments. Imported amphorae are also found in large quantities in the Jewish Quarter (Ariel 2000; Ariel 2003; Finkielsztejn 2006) and the City of David (Ariel 1990b). It is probable that due to their high quality, amphorae remained in use as containers for relatively long periods of time. Similarly, the numismatic finds from Area M1 reflect an almost total lack of foreign coins in Stratum VII (see Chapter 11), and a similar phenomenon is witnessed in the City of David (Ariel 1990a:101). The glass assemblage of Area M1 presents a similar picture (see Chapter 12). However, despite the meager representation of imported vessels, the pottery assemblage of Stratum VII cannot be classified as a poor one. It contains a respectable quantity of locally manufactured luxury wares, including numerous fragments of Jerusalemite painted bowls, a molded lamp with a floral decoration, elegant jugs, and miniature bottles and bowls for precious ointments or perfumes. From the socioeconomic point of view, the local pottery from Building 760 is similar to that in assemblages discovered in the Upper City of Jerusalem in the excavations in the Jewish Quarter, and at Masada. It differs from the modest pottery assemblages of the Jerusalem periphery, such as those uncovered at the International Convention Center (Berlin 2005:45–50,

126

Yana Tchekhanovets

Figs. 14–19, ‘not production’), Kh. Ka‘kul (Seligman 2006: Figs. 17–20) and Kh. ‘Adasa (Khalaily and Avissar 2008:96–99, Pl. 5). The richness of the local pottery and stone assemblages, together with the lack of imports, perhaps reflects the traditional, conservative nature of the Lower City inhabitants (see also Berlin 2005:52–54, and references there). Quantitative analysis of the ceramic finds (Table 5.1) clearly demonstrates the predominance of the storage jars in the assemblage, constituting 36% of the total identified vessels. In the southern residential unit of Building 760, storage-jar rims comprise over 40% of the ceramic finds, and even in Water Cistern 702 their number is surprisingly high. The large percentage of storage jars in urban Judean assemblages dating to the end of the Early Roman period is a well-known phenomenon (for discussion and references, see Geva 2003:121). Nevertheless, the percentage of jars discovered in a dwelling area in Area M1 (Building 760) appears to be outstanding. Considering also the high frequency of stone qalal fragments discovered in Stratum VII––nearly 40% of the entire stone-vessel assemblage (see Chapter 9), it can be assumed that the basement of Building 760 was used for storage. The second-most numerous category of vessels in the assemblage is cooking pots, constituting 21% of the ceramic finds, and together with other cooking vessels, cooking wares comprise 26% of the Stratum VII pottery. The ceramic finds from the Building 760 floors, the layer of debris above the floors, and the water installations in the northern annex appear to represent a wide chronological range, and can be divided into three general chronological groups, with some overlap between them: 1. Vessels dated to the late Hellenistic period, second– first centuries BCE. To this group belong Types BL1a, CP1, CP2, SJ1a, SJ1b, some of SJ2, UN1 and LP3. 2. Vessels that appeared in the Herodian period, during the first century BCE, and continued in use in the first century CE. This group is represented by Types BL1b, BL1c, BL2, BL3, CS1, CS2, CJ1, SJ2, SJ3, FK1, JG1, JG2, JT1, JT2, JT3, JT5 and LP1.

3. Vessels typical of the second half of the first century CE, often found in the 70 CE destruction levels, or even in later assemblages dating to the first third of the second century CE. This group is represented by Types BL4, CP3, CP4, CP5, CS3, SJ4, JG4, JG5, MR1, MR2 and LP2. This simple enumeration of the pottery types presents a misleading picture of the settlement in Area M1, as one could assume that the monumental complex existed continuously from the late Hellenistic to the Early Roman periods, until its destruction in 70 CE. However, the stratigraphic evidence indicates that the southern residential unit of Building 760, together with the northern unit, were built simultaneously and had a relatively short life span (see Chapter 2). The numismatic finds also confirm the short lifetime of the complex, containing coins dated to the thirty years prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE (see Chapter 11). The largest pottery group is that of the Herodian period (Group 2), of which most of the types continue into the following period. The latest pottery group (Group 3), representing the destruction layer of 70 CE, contains a small number of new vessel types and wares that can be attributed exclusively to the second half of the first century CE. This phenomenon is also reported from the Jewish Quarter (Area E), where the pottery of Stratum 2 contains equivalents to earlier types of our Groups 1 and 2, such as our Types BL1a, BL1b, BL1c, BL2, JG2, JT1 and JT4 (Geva and Hershkovitz 2006:114, Pl. 4.13). At Masada, the pottery assemblages of the Zealot phase (66–73/74 CE) contain equivalents to our early Types BL1b, CP1, SJ1a, SJ1b, SJ2a, SJ2b, SJ3a, SJ3b, SJ3c, FK1, JG2, JT1 and JT5 (see Bar-Nathan 2006:45, 47, 51–52, 102, 104, 116, 129, 158–160, 191). A number of vessel types, e.g., BL2, CP3, JG2, JT1, SJ3c and SJ3d, continued even after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE at ‘Aro‘er, up to the final occupation level of the Bar Kokhba Revolt, dated to 132–135 CE (Hershkovitz 1992:317–318). Following the excavations in Area M1, the list of earlier types that remained in use until 70 CE can now be lengthened. It is worth noting that the earliest types in this list are storage jars of Subtypes SJ1a and SJ1b, generally dated to the second century BCE–beginning

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

of the first century CE, which are represented in Area M1 by relatively large numbers. Clearly, it is the latest types (i.e., storage jars with a ridged base, Jerusalemite painted bowls, knife-pared lamps and the molded lamp with floral decoration) that are chronologically significant, dating the entire corpus of vessels, all of which were in simultaneous

use, to the year 70 CE (see Geva 2010:120; Ben-Ami and Tchekhanovets 2011, and see discussion therein). This assemblage emphasizes the phenomenon of the long lifespans of the earlier types, already known from other large-scale excavations in the Jewish Quarter and Masada.

Fig. 5.5 ► No.

Type

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

BL1a

7710/6

691.45–44

2

BL1a

7619/5

692.20–691.55

Red paint

3

BL1a

7719/5

692.20–691.55

Red paint

4

BL1

7710/18

691.45–44

Dark brown paint

5

BL1

8701/9

693.66–41

Red paint

6

BL1

7710/7

693.45–44

7

BL1

8756/21

691.41–40

8

BL1

7619/9

692.20–691.55

Red paint

9

BL1b

8756/12

691.41

10

BL1c

7718/11

691.45–44

Red paint

11

BL2

7710/23

691.45–44

Dark brown paint

12

BL2

7710/8

691.45–44

Brown paint

13

BL2

7710/3

691.45–44

Brown paint Brown paint

14

BL2

7718/1

691.45–44

15

BL2

7663/18

691.55–52

16

BL4

7747/9

691.45–44

Brown paint

17

BL4

8756/17

691.41

Brown paint

18

BL4

8756/7

691.41

Red paint

19

BL4

8701/29

693.66–41

Brown paint

20

BL4

7710/11

691.45–44

Brown paint

21

BL4

7710/5

691.45–44

Red paint

22

BL4

7710/7

691.45–44

Red paint

23

BL4

7710/2

691.45–44

Red paint

24

BL5

7408/10

693.08–693.92

7718/10

691.45–44

Black paint

8756/4

691.41–40

Red slip

25 26

ETS

127

128

Yana Tchekhanovets

3

2

1

4

5

6

7

8

10

9

12

11

13

15

14 0

16

18

17

20

21

22 0

24

10

23

4

25

0

19

26

10

Fig. 5.5. Bowls from Stratum VII, Cistern 702.

129

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

2

1

3 4

7

6

5

8

10

9

11

12

13

14

16 15

17 18

19 0

10

Fig. 5.6. Pottery from Stratum VII, Cistern 702. No.

Vessel

Type

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Cooking pot

CP1

7425/1

692.92–43

2

Cooking pot

CP2

8756/29

691.41

3

Cooking pot

CP2

6970/13

693.66–36

4

Cooking pot

CP3

8701/18

693.66–41

5

Cooking pot

CP4

7662/8

691.61–55

6

Cooking pot

CP5

8701/15

693.66–41

7

Cooking pot

CP5

8756/6

691.41

8

Casserole

CS2

7425/3

692.92–43

9

Cooking jug

CJ1

8701/13

693.66–41

10

Cooking jug

CJ1

7663/18

691.55–52

11

Jar

SJ1a

6970/7

693.66–36

12

Jar

SJ2a

7425/2

692.92–43

13

Jar

SJ2a

6970/6

693.66.26

14

Jar

SJ2a

6949/7

693.66–36

15

Jar

SJ2b

7526/1

692.27–20

16

Jar

SJ2b

6949/4

693.66–36

17

Jar

SJ2b

7485/11

692.43–27

18

Jar

SJ2c

6970/2

693.66–36

19

Jar

SJ2d

7619/8

692.20–691.55

130

Yana Tchekhanovets

Fig. 5.7 ► No.

Vessel

Type

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Jar

SJ3b

7663/1

691.55–52

2

Jar

SJ3b

8701/11

3

Jar

SJ3c

7619/11

692.20–691.55

4

Jar

SJ3c

8701/28

693.66–41

5

Jar

SJ3c

8701/33

693.66–41

6

Jar

SJ3e

7662/10

691.61–55

Description

7

Jar

SJ4a

7425/13

692.92–43

8

Jar

-

7662/4

691.61–55

Black paint

9

Jar

-

7055/4

693.36–17

Black paint

10

Amphora

11

Amphora

12

Flask

Dressel Type 4

7526/6

692.27–20

-

6949/2

693.66–36

FK1

7663/16

691.55–52

13

Flask

FK1

7718/2

691.45–44

14

Flask

FK1

7693/10

691.52–45

15

Flask

FK1

6970/15

693.66–36

16

Jug

JG1

8701/30

693.66–41

17

Jug

JG3

7718/13

691.45–44

18

Jug

JG4

7662/12 +7714/19

691.61–55

19

Jug

JG5

8701/22

693.66–41

131

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

2

3

1

4

5

6

7 9

8

10

11

16

14

13

12

17

18

0

10

Fig. 5.7. Pottery from Stratum VII, Cistern 702.

15

19

132

Yana Tchekhanovets

2

1

5

3

8

6

9

7

10

13

12

11

14

15 0

17

4

18

19

10

20 0

16

21 4

Fig. 5.8. Pottery from Stratum VII, Cistern 702. No.

Vessel

Type

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

Juglet

JT1

8701/19

693.66–41

Black paint

2

Juglet

JT1

8701/31

693.66–41

3

Juglet

JT1

7693/12

691.52–45

4

Juglet

JT1

8701/21

693.66–41

5

Juglet

JT1

7485/10

692.43–27

6

Juglet

JT1

6947/16

693.78–76

7

Juglet

JT1

7663/2

691.55–52

8

Juglet

JT3

7718/8

691.45–44

9

Juglet

JT3

7619/3

692.20–691.55

Red paint

10

Juglet

JT4

7710/39

691.45–44

11

Juglet

-

6970/14

693.66–36

12

Juglet

-

8756/13

691.41

Black paint Red paint

13

Unguentarium

UN1

7055/12

693.36–17

14

Unguentarium

UN1

7055/5

693.36–17

15

Unguentarium

UN1

7473/8

692.92–43

16

Unguentarium

UN1

7526/4

692.27–20

17

Miniature bottle

MR1

7855/1

691.55–52

18

Miniature bottle

MR1

8701/1

693.66–41

19

Miniature bottle

MR1

7718/17

691.45–44

20

Miniature cup

MR2

7663/10

691.55–52

21

Miniature cup

MR2

7718/16

691.45–44

Red paint

133

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

1

2

4

3

5

7

6

8

9

10 0

4

11

0

5

Fig. 5.9. Pottery from Stratum VII, Cistern 702. No.

Vessel

Type

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Lamp

LP1

7710/19

691.45–44

Description

2

Lamp

LP1

8701/3

693.66–41

3

Lamp

LP2

7662/13

691.61–55

Gray ware, molded, floral decoration

4

Lamp

LP1

8756/23

691.41

Three lines of rouletted dots

5

Lamp

LP1

8701/10

693.66–41

Dotted line and two concentric circles

6

Lamp

LP1

8701/4

693.66–41

Double line decoration

7

Lamp

LP1

7710/34

691.45–44

8

Lamp

LP1

8701/2

693.66–41

9

Lamp

LP1

7055/8

693.36–17

10

Varia

-

8756/24

691.41

Ladle handle?

11

Varia

-

7425/4

692.92–43

Pinkish ware; red paint; imported

134

Yana Tchekhanovets

Fig. 5.10 ► No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Bowl

BL1a

740

8347/13

690.28–13

2

Bowl

BL1a

707

7884/26

691.97–75

3

Bowl

BL1a

721

7655/9

693.00–692.42

4

Bowl

BL1b

721

7724/11

692.42–31

5

Bowl

BL2

721

7884/3

691.97–75

6

Bowl

BL4

687

6410/2

695.05–694.84

Red paint

7

Bowl

BL4

720

7887/1

691.73–65

Red paint

8

Plate

ETS

707

7289/19

693.50–21

9

Cooking pot

CP2

720

7606/2

692.54–691.87

10

Cooking pot

CP2

720

7606/8

692.54– 691.87

11

Cooking pot

CP2

760

8430/3

690.59–46

12

Cooking pot

CP2

740

8347/3

690.28–13

13

Cooking pot

CP2

720

7518/3

692.45–41

14

Cooking pot

CP3

720

7798/5

691.80–73

15

Cooking pot

CP3

707

7474/4

693.21–692.88

16

Cooking pot

CP3

736

7948/4

692.10–691.96

17

Cooking pot

CP4

749

8304/2

690.97

18

Cooking pot

CP4

721

7655/3

693.00–692.42

19

Cooking pot

CP4

721

7614/7

693.37–00

20

Cooking pot

CP4

740

8347/10

690.28–13

21

Cooking pot

CP4

740

8347/7

690.28–13

22

Cooking pot

CP4

721

7798/1

691.80–73

23

Cooking pot

CP5

721

7884/1

691.97–75

24

Cooking pot

CP5

720

7997/4

691.65–12

Description

Red paint

135

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

2

3

1

4

5

7

6

8

9

11

10

12

13

16

19

22

15

14

17

18

21

20

24

23 0

10

Fig. 5.10. Pottery from the Stratum VII northern hall.

136

Yana Tchekhanovets

2

1

3

5

4

6

7

8

10

9

11

13

12

14

15

17

16

18 0

10

Fig. 5.11 Pottery from the Stratum VII northern hall. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Casserole

CS1

687

7095/2

694.67–25

2

Casserole

CS2

740

8129/7

691.00–690.50

3

Casserole

CS2

740

8078/9

691.01–00

4

Casserole

CS2

738

8000/5

691.95–66

5

Casserole

CS2

721

7655/9

693.00–692.42

6

Casserole

CS2

687

7122/4

694.25–693.72

7

Casserole

CS3

713

7399/8

693.33–21

8

Cooking jug

CJ1

721

7724/6

692.42–31

9

Cooking jug

CJ1

739

8321/8

691.10–690.27

10

Jar

SJ1a

720

7518/5

692.54–41

11

Jar

SJ1a

707

7205/2

693.64–50

12

Jar

SJ1b

740

8347/1

690.28–13

13

Jar

SJ2a

740

8347/11

690.28–13

14

Jar

SJ2a

740

8347/9

690.28–13

15

Jar

SJ2b

721

7724/13

691.42–31

16

Jar

SJ2b

721

7655/10

693.00–692.42

17

Jar

SJ2b

721

7614/1

693.37–00

18

Jar

SJ2b

721

7655/2

693.00–692.42

137

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

3

2

1

6

5

4

7

9

10

8

11

14 12

13

16

15

17 0

10

Fig. 5.12. Jars from the Stratum VII northern hall. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

SJ2c

721

7521/3

693.37-692.99

2

SJ2c

707

7205/7

693.64-50

3

SJ2c

740

8347/4

690.28-13

4

SJ2d

721

7614/2

693.37-00

5

SJ2d

721

7724/2

692.42–31

6

SJ2d

721

7724/8

692.42–31

7

SJ2d

721

7724/1

692.42–31

8

SJ2d

721

7655/8

693.00–692.42

9

SJ3b

721

7655/10

693.00–692.42

10

SJ3c

707

7205/4

693.64–50

11

SJ3c

721

7970/1

691.75–71

12

SJ3c

721

7655/1

693.00–692.42

13

SJ3d

721

7521/1

693.37–692.99

14

SJ3e

720

7997/3

691.65–12

15

SJ4a

720

7985/1

691.73–65

16

SJ4a

707

7289/1

693.50–21

17

-

740

8078/6

691.01–00

Description

Textile impression on neck

Black paint

138

Yana Tchekhanovets

Fig. 5.13 ► No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Amphora

-

721

7521/4

693.37–692.99

Description

2

Amphora

-

707

7205/1

693.64–50

3

Flask

FK1

687

7095/4

694.67–25

4

Flask

FK1

720

7606/1

692.54–691.87

5

Flask

FK1

721

7699/5

693.00–692.42

6

Flask

FK1

740

8347/5

690.28–13

7

Jug

JG2

707

7289/21

693.50–21

8

Jug

JG5

707

7300/3

693.50–21

9

Juglet

JT1

720

7997/1

691.65–12

10

Juglet

JT1

720

7518/8

692.45–41

11

Juglet

JT1

720

7518/9

692.45–41

12

Juglet

JT1

721

7699/6

693.00–692.42

13

Juglet

JT1

721

7614/4

693.37–00

14

Juglet

JT2

720

7606/6

692.54–691.87

15

Juglet

JT3

721

7655/12

693.00–692.42

16

Juglet

-

721

7724/3

692.42–31

17

Unguentarium

UN1

720

7997/2

691.65–12

18

Unguentarium

UN1

720

7699/4

693.00–692.42

19

Unguentarium

UN1

720

7887/2

691.73–65

20

Unguentarium

UN1

740

8129/4

691.00–690.50

21

Varia

-

707

7474/1

693.21–692.88

Pinkish clay, imported vessel?

22

Varia

-

707

7300/6

693.50–21

Imitation of stone vessel

139

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

1

2

3

5 6

4

7

8

10

9

12

11

13

14

16

15

18

17

19

21

22 0

10

Fig. 5.13. Pottery from the Stratum VII northern hall.

20

140

Yana Tchekhanovets

1

2

3

5

4

6

7

8

9 0

10 4

Fig. 5.14. Pottery from the Stratum VII northern hall. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

Miniature bottle

MR1

721

7666/1

693.00–692.42

2

Miniature bottle

MR1

720

7565/1

692.54–41

3

Spoon?

-

687

7076/1

694.67–25

4

Lamp

LP1

721

7998/4

621.31–21

5

Lamp

LP1

687

7095/6

694.67–25

6

Lamp

LP1

687

6410/3

695.05–694.84

7

Lamp

LP1

721

7614/6

693.37–00

Dotted line and two concentric circles

8

Lamp

LP1

721

7724/18

692.42–31

Two lines of rouletted dots

9

Lamp

LP1

721

7614/5

693.37–00

10

Lamp

LP1

721

7998/2

621.31–21

Handmade

141

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

1 2

4

3

6

5

7

8

9

10

13

12

11

0

10

Fig. 5.15. Pottery from the Stratum VII central hall. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Bowl

BL1a

760

8460/7

690.46–07

2

Bowl

BL1a

736

7949/7

692.10–691.96

3

Bowl

BL1b

713

7515/5

693.25–19

4

Bowl

BL1b

738

8968/13

690.42–35

5

Bowl

BL1c

760

8488/6

690.07–689.91

6

Bowl

BL3

736

7741/18

692.68–62

7

Bowl

BL3

760

8360/9

690.82–59

8

Bowl

BL4

736

7949/4

692.10–691.96

Brown paint

9

Black metallic paint

Bowl

BL4

760

8488/4

690.07–689.91

10

Cooking pot

CP1

713

7515/4

693.25–19

11

Cooking pot

CP2

736

7741/10

692.68–62

12

Cooking pot

CP3

736

7948/3

692.10–691.96

13

Cooking pot

CP3

713

7515/8

693.25–19

Description

142

Yana Tchekhanovets

Fig. 5.16 ► No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

SJ1a

736

7948/5

692.10–691.96

2

SJ1b

739

8004/1

691.96–68

3

SJ1b

738

8068/3

691.66–24

4

SJ1b

713

7515/16

693.25–19

5

SJ1b

739

8073/2

691.68–59

6

SJ1b

736

7741/6

692.68–62

7

SJ2a

736

7949/4

692.10–691.96

8

SJ2a

713

7515/1

693.25–19

9

SJ2b

713

7515/4

693.25–19

10

SJ2b

736

7741/11

692.68–62

11

SJ2c

739

8073/6

691.68–59

12

SJ2d

713

7368/8

693.60–33

13

SJ2d

736

7741/4

692.68–62

14

SJ2d

713

7368/2

693.60–33

15

SJ2d

713

7399/6

693.33–21

16

SJ2e

734

7949/10

692.10–691.96

17

SJ3a

749

8350/3

690.97–92

18

SJ3b

739

8004/1

691.96–68

19

SJ3b

713

7515/10

693.25–19

20

SJ3b

760

8430/1

690.59–46

21

SJ3b

736

7878/1

692.33–10

143

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

3

1 2

4

5

6

9

8 7

10

12

11

14

13

15

17

16

18

19

20

21 0

10

Fig. 5.16. Jars from the Stratum VII central hall.

144

Yana Tchekhanovets

1

2

3

6

4

5

7

9

8

10

11

12

14 0

13

10

Fig. 5.17. Pottery from the Stratum VII central hall. No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

Description

1

Jar

SJ3c

738

8068/2

691.66–24

2

Jar

SJ3c

713

7399/4

693.33–21

3

Jar

SJ3e

739

8004/5

691.96–68

4

Jar

SJ4a

760

8488/11

690.07–689.91

5

Jar

SJ4b

736

7878/2

692.33–10

6

Jar

SJ4b

736

7878/3

692.33–10

7

Jar

-

738

8000/1

691.95–66

Red paint

8

Jar

-

739

8128/13

691.64–59

Black paint

9

Black paint

Jar

-

736

7948/1

692.10–691.96

Brown paint

10

Lid?

-

760

8360/5

690.82–59

Hole in center; red slip

11

Amphora

-

734

7949/2

692.10–691.96

12

Amphora

-

749

8350/2

690.97–92

13

Amphora

Rhodian

740

8360/1

690.82–59

14

Amphora

-

736

7948/8

692.10–691.96

145

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

3

2

1

6

5

4

10

9

8

7

11

12

16

19

18

17

20

15

14

13

21 0

22 10

Fig. 5.18. Pottery from the Stratum VII central hall.

23 0

2

146

Chapter Yana 5: The Tchekhanovets Early Roman Pottery

◄ Fig. 5.18 No.

Vessel

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

Flask

FK1

739

8321/9

691/10–690.27

2

Flask

FK1

736

7878/11

692.33–10

3

Flask

FK1

713

7515/17

693.25–19

4

Flask

FK1

713

7515/3

693.25–19

5

Flask

FK1

736

7741/18

692.68–62

6

Flask

FK1

760

8488/3

690.07–698.91

7

Jug

JG2

736

7741/5

692.68–62

8

Jug

JG2

713

7515/7

693.25–19

9

Jug

JG2

736

7878/12

692.33–10

10

Jug

JG2

738

8068/18

691.66–24

11

Jug

JG2

738

8068/19

691.66–24

12

Juglet

JT1

736

7741/13

692.68–62

13

Juglet

JT1

739

8073/1

691.68–59

14

Juglet

JT1

736

7741/19

692.68–62

15

Juglet

JT1

739

8128/12

691.64–59

16

Juglet

JT1

760

8430/4

690.59–46

17

Juglet

JT3

760

8468/2

693.42–04

18

Juglet

JT5

739

8128/4

691.64–59

19

Unguentarium

UN1

736

7741/10

692.68–62

20

Unguentarium

UN1

713

7399/7

693.33–21

21

Unguentarium

UN1

736

7741/3

692.68–62

22

Unguentarium

UN1

760

8488/10

690.07–698.91

23

Miniature bottle

MR1

739

8325/1

691.10–690.27

147

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

2

1

4

3

5

6

7 0

4

Fig. 5.19. Lamps from the Stratum VII central hall. No.

Type

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

1

LP1

736

7741/9

692.68–62

Description

2

LP1

760

8460/5

690.46–07

3

LP1

738

8000/10

691.95–66

4

LP1

760

8360/6

690.82–59

5

LP1

739

8321/4

691.10–690.27

Two lines of rouletted dots

6

LP1

713

7368/10

693.60–33

Dotted line and two concentric circles

7

LP1

739

8128/15

691.64–59

Dotted line and two concentric circles

148

Yana Tchekhanovets

Notes I wish to thank Malka Hershkovitz for her generous help throughout the preparation of this report. 1

Use of the term ‘Zealot’ phase for the 66–73/74 CE occupation layer at Masada follows the term used by the authors of the pottery report (see Bar-Nathan 2006:13). 2

R eferences Aharoni Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Rahel, Seasons 1959 and 1960. Rome. Aharoni Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Rahel, Seasons 1961 and 1962. Rome. Amiran R. and Eitan A. 1970. Excavations in the Courtyard of the Citadel, Jerusalem, 1968–1969: Preliminary Report. IEJ 20:9–17. Ariel D.T. 1990a. Coins, Flans and Flan Molds. In D.T. Ariel. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985, Directed by Yigal Shiloh II: Imported Stamped Amphora Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory and Glass (Qedem 30). Jerusalem. Pp. 99–118. Ariel D.T. 1990b. Imported Stamped Amphora Handles. In D.T. Ariel. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985, Directed by Yigal Shiloh II: Imported Stamped Amphora Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory and Glass (Qedem 30). Jerusalem. Pp. 13–98. Ariel D.T. 2000. Imported Greek Stamped Amphora Handles. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 I: Architecture and Stratigraphy: Areas A, W and X-2, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 267–283. Ariel D.T. 2003. Imported Amphora Fragments from Area A. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X–2, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 224–230. Barag D. and Hershkovitz M. 1994. Lamps from Masada. In J. Aviram, G. Foerster and E. Netzer eds. Masada IV: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965 Final Reports. Jerusalem. Pp. 7–78. Bar-Nathan R. 2002. Hasmonean and Herodian Palaces at Jericho. Final Reports of the 1973–1987 Excavations III: The Pottery. Jerusalem. Bar-Nathan R. 2006. Masada VII: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965 Final Reports: The Pottery of Masada. Jerusalem. Ben-Ami D. and Tchekhanovets Y. 2011. The Lower City of Jerusalem on the Eve of Its Destruction, 70 C.E.: A View from Hanyon Givati. BASOR 364:61–85. Berlin A. 2005. Pottery and Pottery Production in the Second Temple Period. In B. Arubas and H. Goldfus eds. Excavations on the Site of the Jerusalem International Convention Center (Binyanei Ha’Uma): A Settlement of the Late First to Second Temple Period, The Tenth

Legion’s Kilnworks, and a Byzantine Monastic Complex. The Pottery and Other Small Finds (JRA Supplementary Series 60). Portsmouth, R.I. Pp. 29–60. Finkielsztejn G. 2006. Imported Amphoras. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 168–179. Geva H. 2003. Hellenistic Pottery from Areas W and X-2. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X–2, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 113–175. Geva H. 2010. Early Roman Pottery. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 IV: The Burnt House of Area B and Other Studies, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 118–153. Geva H. and Hershkovitz M. 2006. Local Pottery of the Hellenistic and Early Roman Periods. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 94–143. Geva H. and Rosenthal-Heginbottom R. 2003. Local Pottery from Area A. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X–2, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 176–191. Gitin S. 1990. Gezer III: A Ceramic Typology of the Late Iron Age II, Persian and Hellenistic Periods at Tell Gezer. Jerusalem. Hamilton R.W. 1931. Street Levels in the Tyropoeon Valley. QDAP 1:105–110. Hershkovitz M. 1987. The Pottery of the First and Second Centuries CE from Giv‘at Ram. Eretz Israel 19:314–325 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 83*). Hershkovitz M. 1989. Miniature Ointment Vases from the Second Temple Period. IEJ 36:45–51. Hershkovitz M. 1992. Aro‘er at the End of the Second Temple Period. Eretz Israel 23:309–319 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 156*). Hershkovitz M. 2003. Jerusalemite Painted Pottery from the Late Second Temple Period. In R. Rosenthal-Heginbottom ed. The Nabateans in the Negev. Haifa. Pp. 31–34. Johns C.N. 1950. The Citadel, Jerusalem, A Summary of Work since 1934. QDAP 14:121–190.

Chapter 5: The Early Roman Pottery

Khalaily H. and Avissar M. 2008. Khirbat ‘Adasa: A Farmstead of the Umayyad and Mamluk Periods in Northern Jerusalem. ‘Atiqot 58:91–123 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 69*–71*). Loffreda S. 1996. La ceramica di Macheronte e dell’ Herodion. Jerusalem. Magness J. 2009. The Pottery from the 1995 Excavations in Camp F at Masada. BASOR 353:75–107. Mazar B. 1971. The Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem near the Temple Mount. Preliminary Report of the Second and Third Seasons 1969–1970. Jerusalem. Patrich J. and Arubas B. 1989. A Juglet Containing Balsam Oil (?) from a Cave near Qumran. IEJ 39:43–59. Perlman I., Gunneweg J. and Yellin J. 1986. PseudoNabataean Ware and Pottery of Jerusalem. BASOR 262:76–83.

149

Rosenthal-Heginbottom R. 2003. Hellenistic and Early Roman Fine Ware and Lamps from Area A. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 192–223. Rosenthal-Heginbottom R. 2006. Late Hellenistic and Early Roman Lamps and Fine Ware. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 144–167. Seligman J. 2006. Jerusalem, Khirbat Ka‘kul (Pisgat Ze‘ev H): Early Roman Farmsteads and a Medieval Village. ‘Atiqot 54:1–74. Tushingham A.D. 1985. Excavations in Jerusalem 1961– 1967 I. Toronto.

Chapter 6

The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery Marva Balouka

Introduction The pottery assemblages described here derive from Strata VI–V and are attributed stratigraphically to the Late Roman and Byzantine periods. They originated in three separate architectural units that were only partially excavated in the 2007 season. These units were built directly upon, and sometimes penetrated into, the Stratum VII remains; therefore, the material is mixed, and contains some Early Roman material that is abundant throughout the entire area. The Early Roman pottery from these loci is not discussed. The pottery presented here originated in relatively few stratigraphically significant loci, comprising fills immediately below (i.e., the make up), and material upon, several Late Roman and Byzantine floors in the different architectural units. These loci included, from Stratum VI—Floor 633 in Building 628 and Floor 671 in Building 671 (both Phase VIB)—and from Stratum V—Floor 606 in Building 606 (general Stratum V), and Floors 741 (general Stratum V), 756 (Phase VB) and 731 (Phase VA) in the eastern building. These floors were partially exposed in Shukron and Reich’s 2003 excavation (see Chapter 1; Reich 2008), while others were excavated in the 2007 season. It should be noted that due to the restricted number of secure loci, the small assemblage discussed here cannot be considered quantitatively representative of these periods. No complete vessels were retrieved and the repertoire is comprised solely of sherds; thus, our main purpose is to assist in the dating of these structures. A thorough analysis of the Strata VI and V pottery excavated throughout the Giv‘ati Parking Lot excavation areas will be presented in a future report (see ‘Foreword’). During the Roman and Byzantine periods, ceramic traditions were regional in nature in most parts of Israel (the Galilee, Golan Heights, Negev, Jerusalem area). The common wares were largely produced in local manufacturing centers that served their immediate vicinity. Only in certain cases were fine wares or

vessels that were purchased due to their contents (e.g., amphorae) imported from afar. This phenomenon of regionalism is less evident in the coastal areas (e.g., Caesarea, Ramat Ha-Nadiv, etc.), due to the ready access to products imported from overseas. In the typology of the Jerusalem local wares during the Roman and Byzantine periods compiled by Magness (1993), which is widely accepted and cited here, she points out the strong degree of regionalism evident in the Late Roman–Byzantine pottery of the area (Magness 1993:153). In her study of the pottery from the Tenth Legion kilnworks in Jerusalem (Magness 2005), she concludes that many of the local wares were a direct development of the vessel types made by the Roman legionnaires in Jerusalem. The pottery assemblage from Strata VI–V of Area M1 consists of the pottery typical of Jerusalem in the Late Roman and Byzantine periods, most of which is known from other sites in the vicinity of Jerusalem and seems to have been locally produced. Very little imported ware is attested. Our typology is based primarily on that of Magness (1993), following her terminology and references to parallels from the Jerusalem area. When necessary, additional references from recently published excavations are cited, for example, the Temple Mount (Mazar 2003; Mazar and Gordon 2007), as well as Khirbet ed-Deir (Calderon 1999) and ‘En Gedi (de Vincenz 2007) in the Judean Desert. Most of these common-ware vessels were produced in the same forms without undergoing much change and were used over an extended period. Therefore, the difference between the pottery assemblages from the two strata is not always obvious. There are many types of vessels that appear in both strata, and it is the few diagnostic vessels that appear or disappear on which the relative dating of these strata must be based. Due to the absence of relevant ceramic lamps and coins in these strata, a more accurate dating than the fourth– fifth centuries for Stratum VI and the fifth–early seventh centuries for Stratum V is unavailable.

152

Marva Balouka

A typological discussion is followed by a brief description of the Late Roman and Byzantine assemblages of Area M1 in their stratigraphic context.

Typology The typological analysis presents the main pottery types, in chronological order, which were uncovered in the loci chosen for this analysis. The plates illustrate a representative sample of the vessels and are organized according to the architectural units and, whenever relevant, the different phases within a unit. The most common vessels in the assemblages are the rouletted bowls and the basins. Very little fine ware was found, including a few sherds of Fine Byzantine Ware (FBW) and imported red slip wares. Rims and necks of various storage-jar types were also relatively abundant, most of them of local production.

Bowls Rouletted Bowls These small and large bowls with rouletted decoration on the walls have been described and divided by Magness into several forms (Magness 1993:185–192). All were locally produced and have been found in large quantities, mainly in the vicinity of Jerusalem. In Area M1, all these bowls belong to Magness Form 1, except for one example of Magness Form 2A. Form 1 (Figs. 6.2:1–4; 6.3:1; 6.4:1; 6.5:5; 6.6:1, 2, 8, 9). These bowls have a bulbous rim and a ridge below the rim that lends them a distinctive profile, thick carinated walls and a ring base. The ware ranges in color from orange-brown to orange-red and has a gray core. Most of these bowls are decorated with rouletting on the exterior and some have a drippy red or brown slip on the interior and exterior walls. Rouletted bowls were dated by Magness from c. 200 CE or even earlier, until the fifth century CE (Magness 2005:105; 2006:184). However, they seem to be more common in the fourth–fifth centuries and the beginning of the sixth century CE, even according to most of the examples offered by Magness (1993:186– 187). In Area M1, the rouletted bowls of Form 1 were widespread, mainly in Phase VIB when they appear together with the rilled-rim basins. In Stratum V they

are the dominant open vessel type, together with arched-rim basins of Forms 1 and 2. Form 2A (Fig. 6.4:2) Around the end of the fifth or the early sixth century CE, the rouletted bowls of Form 1 were replaced by bowls with smooth, folded rims and rounded or straight walls. The rouletting became coarse or lighter, or even totally absent; some of these bowls continued to have drippy red or brown slip. The accepted date for Form 2A is the sixth century CE (Magness 1993:187–188). The only example of Form 2 in Area M1 was found below Floor 606, together with Fine Byzantine Ware (FBW) bowls, which supports a date around the second half of the sixth century CE for this floor (see below). Fine Byzantine Ware (FBW) Bowls and Lids (Figs. 6.4:3, 4; 6.5:1, 2) This is a distinct group of open and closed vessels with thin walls made of hard-fired, well-levigated clay, usually light brown, orange-brown or light orange in color with a gray core. They often have burnished bands on the exterior. These vessels were originally termed Fine Byzantine Ware by M. Gihon (1974), and later discussed by Magness (1993:166–171, 193–201, 236–241), who divided them into various forms. According to the finds from Jerusalem (Magness 1993), they date no earlier than the mid-sixth century CE. The manufacturing center of this ware was probably located in Jerusalem, although it has not yet been discovered. While FBW is very common in other Byzantine assemblages from the same region (see, for example, Magness 1993:166–171; Calderon 1999:140, 142, Pls. 2:11–14; 4:1–4; de Vincenz 2007:245, and references therein), they are quite rare in our assemblage. Not a single FBW sherd was retrieved from Stratum VI, and the few from Stratum V, mainly small bowls, lids and a jug (see below), have a similar fabric but do not all fit the typical FBW forms. The small hemispherical bowl in Fig. 6.4:3 (FBW Form IA) has a simple incurved rim and an incised wavy line beneath the rim. This form was dated by Magness from the mid-sixth to the late seventh–early eighth centuries CE (Magness 1993:194). It was found in L606 together with a rouletted bowl of Form 2A and stamped roof tiles. The small deep bowl or lid in Fig. 6.4:4, with a flaring, everted rim, resembles FBW in fabric and

Chapter 6: The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery

form, but has dark brown drips of paint from the rim down the wall, on both the interior and exterior. The small bowl in Fig. 6.5:1, with a short everted rim and thin walls, has a similar fabric to that of the FBW vessels. The larger, deep bowl or lid in Fig. 6.5:2, with a ledge rim and thin walls, is made of light orange ware and is self-slipped. It resembles Magness’ FBW Bowl Form 1F, or Lids and Stoppers Form 1, dated from the sixth to the eighth centuries CE (Magness 1993:197, 247). Imported Red Slip Ware (Fig. 6.7:4, 5) Only two sherds of bowls of this ware, also termed ‘Late Roman Pottery’ by Hayes (1972), were found in the loci chosen for analysis, both below Floor 731, representing the latest phase of Byzantine activity in Area M1 (Phase VA). The bowl in Fig. 6.7:4 belongs to Late Roman ‘C’ Ware (LRC) Form 3 (Hayes 1972: Figs. 67–69), and has a plain hooked rim. This form is a very common import in the Byzantine period, although most examples have rouletted rims. This ware is dated from the mid-fifth to the mid-sixth centuries, with a possible continuation into the seventh century CE (de Vincenz 2007:242, Pl. 8:11–29, and references therein). The base of an African Red Slip Ware (ARS) bowl (Fig. 6.7:5) is decorated with rouletting.

Basins Two types of basins are present in the Strata VI–V assemblages in relatively large quantities. Both are very common at sites in the vicinity of Jerusalem and were probably manufactured in the area. These basins were in use over a long period of time, and have been discussed in detail by Magness (1993). Rilled-Rim Basins (Figs. 6.2:5–10; 6.3:2; 6.4:5) These large, deep basins have an upward-angled ledge rim with ridges or rills on its upper surface, often ending in an axe or a hook shape. The walls are straight and everted and the base is either flat or rounded. The hard-fired ware ranges in color from orange to orangebrown, often with a gray core. some of the vessels have a light colored slip.

153

Magness first dated the rilled-rim basins from the late third–early fourth to the sixth centuries CE (Magness 1993:203–204), although recently she has lowered the date to c. 200 CE, suggesting they were inspired by the Roman legionary pottery manufactured in the Tenth Legion’s kilnworks at the site of the International Convention Center in Jerusalem (Magness 2005:15; 2006:184, Pl. 7.1:9). In Area M1, rilled-rim basins appeared mainly in Phase VIB. They were very common in L633, where they were found together with many rouletted bowls, and one example was found below Floor 671. Only a few fragments of rilled-rim basins were found in Stratum V (Fig. 6.4:5), with three ridges on the external part of the rim. Arched-Rim Basins (Figs. 6.1:1–4; 6.3:3; 6.4:16; 6.5:6; 6.6:3, 4, 10, 11; 6.7:1, 6) These are large, deep basins with an everted rim that arches outward, and flaring walls that are straight or slightly rounded. The hard-fired ware is orange, light orange or orange-brown in color, often with a gray core. some of the basins exhibit a light colored slip. This is a very common type of basin, found mainly in the vicinity of Jerusalem and in the Judean Desert (de Vincenz 2007:246–247). According to Magness, basins with plain walls (Form 1) were produced from the third to early fourth centuries CE, and continued into the sixth century CE and later, whereas those bearing combed or incised decoration (Form 2A) appeared from the sixth to the late seventh centuries CE and later (Magness 1993:204–207; 2003: Pls. 18.1:13; 18.2:13), with some earlier examples. Mazar and Gordon provide further support for this dating, noting that both forms of the arched-rim basins were in use already in the fourth–early fifth centuries CE (Mazar and Gordon 2007:150–151). In Area M1, these two basins forms are very common in both Strata VI–V, sometimes found together in the same basket (see, for example, Figs. 6.1:1–4; 6.6:3, 4). Since only rims are preserved, it is not always possible to distinguish between the two forms. It seems that the earliest possible date for the appearance of the two forms together is in the fourth–fifth centuries CE.

154

Marva Balouka

Cooking Pots (Figs. 6.1:5; 6.5:3; 6.6:12)

In many cases, only small sherds of rims and necks of storage jars (Figs. 6.1:7; 6.3:7; 6.4:6, 7; 6.6:5) and a base of an amphora (Fig. 6.3:4) were found. it was not always possible to identify the specific types.

and a ridge at the base of the neck, and the hardfired ware is light brown or orange-brown. This form was divided by Magness into three variants, of which Forms 4A and 4B appear in Strata VI–V in Area M1. The jars in Fig. 6.4:8, 9, with an incurved, thickened rim and a high neck that widens at the top, belong to Magness Form 4A (1993:223–224). This form was dated by Magness to the third–fourth centuries CE, and by Hamilton up to the fifth century CE (1944: Figs. 16.2; 21.2). In Area M1, it was found in a sixth-century CE context (below Floor 606, Stratum V). The jar necks in Figs. 6.3:6 and 6.5:4 represent Magness Form 4B (1993:224–225). The neck of this variant is a little shorter than that of Form 4A, and it narrows slightly toward the rim. Form 4B is dated by Magness to the fifth–sixth centuries CE (Magness 2003: Pl. 18.1:20). In Area M1, examples originated in Stratum VI (L671) and Stratum V (L741).

Bag-Shaped Storage Jars (Figs. 6.3:6; 6.4:8, 9; 6.5:4)

Bet She’an Bag-Shaped Jar (Fig. 6.4:10)

All the bag-shaped jars have a ridge at the base of the neck, a body that widens toward the base and resembles a bag, two loop handles on the shoulder, and a rounded base. Ribbing (prominent wheel ridges) is usually visible on part of the body surface and on the base. The well-fired ware in shades of orange-red to brown and black has a metallic ring (see Zemer 1977:71–74 for their distribution and date). These jars are distinguished from each other primarily by the shape of the rim, although there are also differences in the thickness of the wall, the color of the clay, the presence or lack of a ridge beneath the neck or a carination on the shoulder, and other details. Bag-shaped jars were the most common jars in Israel in the Roman–Byzantine periods. They were produced at various workshops throughout the country and were consumed primarily by the local market. Nevertheless, they have also been discovered at sites outside the Land of Israel, e.g., in the Athenian agora and in Corinth (Adan-Bayewitz 1986:95–96; Peacock and Williams 1986:191–192; Johnson 1988:213–214). The jars were used to store a variety of contents, such as water, wine, oil and dry goods. The most common form of the bag-shaped storage jars in the vicinity of Jerusalem in the Late Roman and early Byzantine periods is Magness Form 4 (1993:223–226). It has a thickening on the inner rim

This body sherd is decorated with white paint over black ware. The Bet She’an bag-shaped jar is not very common in Jerusalem, but is a typical jar in the north, especially in the Jezreel Valley, in the area around Bet She’an, and in the Jordan Valley. It is dated to the fifth– eighth centuries CE (Landgraf 1980:80; Mazar and Peleg 2003:87, Pls. I.14:6; I.16:22, 23).

Only a few cooking-ware fragments were found in Area M1, and they seem to be residual. The closed cooking pots characterized by a simple rim, a short neck, a ribbed shoulder and two handles drawn from rim to shoulder (Figs. 6.1:5; 6.6:12) belong to the Roman period. They correspond to Magness Form 1A, dated by her to the second–third centuries CE (Magness 1993:216). A grooved, bulbous rim of an open cooking vessel, for which no parallels were found, was also recovered (Fig. 6.5:3).

Storage Jars and Amphorae

Gaza Storage Jar (Fig. 6.7:7) This is an elongated, cylindrical jar with a rounded rim and no defined neck. Pieces of clay were applied to the rim and shoulder. A single example of this storage jar was found in the loci chosen for analysis, on Floor 731 of Phase VA. Examples were also recovered in the Early Islamic strata (IV–I), referred to as residual sherds and attributed to the ‘transitional Byzantine–Early Islamic period’ (see Fig. 7.1:3). This type of jar was manufactured in large quantities in the Gaza and Ashqelon region and was mainly used for the export of Gaza wine. These jars are most common in the south of Israel and along the coast, less so in the Jerusalem vicinity. The few examples found in other excavations in Jerusalem are dated to sixth– seventh-century CE contexts, as in the Jewish Quarter (Magness 2003: Pl. 18.1:22), the City of David Area K (Magness 1992: Fig. 9:7, 8) and the public kitchen

Chapter 6: The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery

in Area XV of the Temple Mount (Mazar and Peleg 2003: Pl. I.16:26). Wide-Necked Jars (Figs. 6.1:6; 6.2:11, 12; 6.4:11) The deep, handle-less, wide-necked jar in Fig. 6.1:6 has a ledged and arched rim, walls that slant slightly inward, and combed, horizontal stripes on the body. The ware is light brown. This vessel bears signs of black soot on the walls and the rim, suggesting that it was perhaps used as a cooking cauldron, as were the ones found in the Tenth Legion kilnworks in the International Convention Center, and dated there to the second–third centuries CE (Magness 2005:93–94, Fig. 25:2, 3, 5–9). This vessel was found in Phase VIB, below Floor 633. The two jars in Fig. 6.2:11, 12 are characterized by a ledged rim, a short, wide neck and no handles. This type belongs to Magness’ Wide-Necked Jar Form 1 (1993:235), which she dates to the third–fifth centuries CE. Our jar fragments were retrieved in Phase VIB, on Floor 633. The jar in Fig. 6.4:11, recovered below Floor 606 of Stratum V, has an everted, triangular, hooked and grooved rim, a funnel-shaped neck, and a handle drawn from the rim. It is made of red ware, with an orangered slip on the interior and a light orange slip on the exterior.

155

periods (second–fourth centuries CE), where they are made of ware very similar to that of the Galilean jars (Balouka 2004:43). However, the lids from Area M1 are made of a different, brownish ware, and were not manufactured in the same workshop as the Galilean lids. They resemble, in ware and shape, the dozens of lid fragments from Area E in the Jewish Quarter (Magness 2006:185–186, Pl. 7.2:1–6). The latter are thought to have been manufactured in Nahal Refa’im, near Jerusalem, and are dated to the third–fourth centuries CE. Our examples, however, were recovered from a Stratum V locus dated sometime in the fifth– sixth centuries (Floor 756).

Jugs Four sherds of jugs, one of which could not be identified as to type (Fig. 6.7:2), were recovered from the loci chosen for analysis. Fine Byzantine Ware (FBW) Jar/Jug (Fig. 6.4:13) This large jug or jar has a small, everted, folded rim, a wide neck, a handle drawn from the rim, and three wavy lines incised below the rim. It corresponds with Magness’ FBW Jar/Jug Form 1C, dated by her to the mid-sixth–early eighth centuries CE (Magness 1993:237–239).

Holemouth Jar (Fig. 6.6:13)

Strainer Jugs (Figs. 6.1:8; 6.7:8)

This large neckless jar has a flat, everted rim and a ridge beneath it, and a wavy line incised on the shoulder. The hard-fired ware is reddish with a gray core. There is a buff slip over the exterior. This vessel corresponds to Magness’ Holemouth Jar Form 1B, dated by her to c. the fifth–sixth centuries CE (1993:232). It was found above Floor 756 of Phase VB.

Two sherds of strainers were found, each made of distinctive ware. The example in Fig. 6.1:8 is made of buff ware, resembling that of the rouletted bowl. The example in Fig. 6.7:8 is made of light orange ware with a gray core. Strainer jugs appear at other excavations in Jerusalem in both the Fine Byzantine Ware and the local ware, and it is difficult to associate these two fragments to either type.

Storage-Jar Lids (Figs. 6.4:12; 6.6:6, 14) These lids resemble bowls with rounded rims, relatively thick walls and a small knobbed base with an omphalos that functioned as a handle. The interior walls were not smoothed, while the exterior is sometimes smooth, and sometimes bears shallow ribbing. In all probability, these vessels were lids placed on top of storage jars. Such lids are more prevalent in the north of Israel, in assemblages dating to the Middle and Late Roman

Roof Tiles Two types of roof tiles were recovered from Area M1, flat tiles (tegulae) and convex tiles (imbrices), the latter laid above the tegulae. Most of the flat tiles from Area M1 are plain, with a ledged/shelf rim (Figs. 6.4:14; 6.5:7; 6.6:7; 6.7:3), and only one example is stamped (Fig. 6.4:17). The imbrices were stamped near

156

Marva Balouka

the rounded rim (Figs. 6.3:5; 6.4:15, 18). The most common stamp at the site is a circle with two or three adjacent circles. In Area M1, the stamped imbrices were found in both Strata VI and V, while the tegulae were recovered only from Stratum V (both Phases VB and VA). Similar tiles, with the same stamps, appear in various excavations of monasteries and churches in the vicinity of Jerusalem, for example in Area XV near the Temple Mount (Peleg 2003:133–134; Pls. I.20:2, 3; 1.5:1–4), in Ramat Rahel Stratum II (Byzantine period), from a destruction layer attributed to the monastery (Aharoni 1960:76–81; 1962: Fig. 2), and in the area of the church of Horbat Berahot, belonging to its original roof (Tsafrir and Hirschfeld 1979:309, Fig. 27). All these examples date from the fifth to the seventh centuries CE, though they may have begun to appear slightly earlier, in the fourth century. Tegulae were found in the church and refectory complex at Khirbet ed-Deir, in an assemblage dated to the mid-sixth–early seventh centuries CE (Calderon 1999:146; Pl. 5:5–7).

The Pottery Assemblages in Their Stratigraphic Context Stratum VI Stratum VI was exposed in Buildings 628 and 671. Both were erected after a gap in time during which no building activity took place in this part of the city following the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans at the end of the Second Temple period, in 70 CE. Prior to their construction, the ruins in the area were leveled off; therefore, Early Roman sherds were mixed in the Strata VI–V fills. Building 628 (Figs. 6.1, 6.2) Floor 633 was the beaten-earth floor in this structure in Phase VIB. There is little difference between the pottery from the make-up fill below the floor and that directly above it. Both assemblages include sherds of bowls, cooking pots and lamps dating to the first– third centuries CE, which are not discussed here, in addition to what appears to be the main corpus of fourth–fifth-century material, along with some vessels that also continued into the fifth–sixth centuries CE. The assemblage from underneath the floor includes

many arched-rim basins of Forms 1 and 2, which generally appeared together in the sixth century, but were also known in the fourth and fifth centuries CE. The assemblage upon the floor and from the fill above it contains many rouletted bowls of Form 1 and rilledrim basins, usually dated from the third to fifth/sixth centuries CE. Wide-necked jars of Form 1 dating to the third–fifth centuries were also found here. In general, the ceramic assemblage seems to suggest a date around the fourth–fifth centuries CE for Floor 633, and thus for Phase VIB. Building 671 (Fig. 6.3) Floor 671 is a plaster floor that was uncovered beneath Floor 606 of Stratum V, and built directly over Channel 601. The fill underneath the floor yielded a similar variation of types as in the assemblage from Floor 633, including rouletted bowls of Form 1, rilled-rim basins, arched-rim basins (unidentified forms), a storage jar of Magness Form 4B, dated to the fifth–sixth centuries CE, and an imbrex. Thus, it appears that Floor 671, assigned to Stratum VI (see Chapter 2), is slightly later than Floor 633, and should be dated to the fifth–mid-sixth centuries CE.

Stratum V Building 606 (Fig. 6.4) Building 671 of Stratum VI underwent certain alterations, such as the construction of new walls and the raising of the floor level. Floor 606 (above Floor 671) was originally a mosaic floor with foundation made of plaster and cobblestones, of which only a few segments were preserved (see Chapter 2). Most of the material recovered from the fills under the floor was similar to the assemblage from the earlier floor (L671): rouletted bowls of Form 1, a rilled-rim basin, archedrim basins and imbrices. However, in this assemblage there are also a few sherds of FBW dated to the midsixth–eighth centuries CE, a rouletted bowl of Form 2A dated to the sixth century CE, a Bet She’an storage jar (fifth–eighth centuries CE) and tegulae. Thus, the proposed date for this locus is the mid-sixth to seventh centuries CE.

Chapter 6: The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery

157

1

2

3

4

5 8

6

7 0

10

Fig. 6.1. Pottery from the make-up of Phase VIB, Floor 633. No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 1

5129/1

Light orange-brown ware, gray core, few small white and black grits; hard fired; self-slip

2

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 1

5129/5

Orange ware, gray core, small white grits; hard fired; self-slip

3

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 2A

5129/11

Brown ware, many large white and black grits; very hard fired; gray slip on interior and rim, combed horizontal lines on exterior

4

Arched-rim basin

5129/10

Orange ware, gray core, small gray grits; hard fired; self-slip, groove on exterior edge of rim

5

Cooking pot, Magness Form 1A

5129/7

Red-brown ware; ribbing on shoulder

6

Wide-necked jar, Magness Form 1?

5184/11

Light brown ware; combed horizontal lines; traces of black soot on walls and rim

7

Storage jar

5129/3

Gray core, many white grits; light brown slip on exterior, incised wavy line

8

Strainer jug

5129/9

Buff ware (resembles rouletted bowls); red paint with black stripes on exterior

158

Marva Balouka

1 2

4

3

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0

10

Fig. 6.2. Pottery from Phase VIB, Floor 633.

Chapter 6: The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery

159

◄ Fig. 6.2 No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Small, delicate rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

4698/10

Orange-red ware, few white grits; red slip on rim and interior

2

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

4698/4

Orange-red ware, gray core; self-slip

3

Small rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

4739/13

Orange-red ware, gray core; self-slip

4

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

4698/2

Orange ware

5

Rilled-rim basin

4906/3

Orange ware, gray core, few white grits; hard fired

6

Rilled-rim basin

4698/3

Orange ware, dark gray core, few white grits; hard fired

7

Rilled-rim basin

4739/1

Orange ware, gray core, large and small white grits; hard fired; buff slip

8

Rilled-rim basin

4739/5

Orange ware, gray core, white grits; hard fired; buff slip

9

Rilled-rim basin

4716/1

Orange ware, gray core, large and small white grits; hard fired

10

Rilled-rim basin

4698/1

Orange ware, gray core, white grits. hard fired

11

Wide-necked jar, Magness Form 1

4698/11

Light orange ware, large white grits

12

Wide-necked jar, Magness Form 1

4698/6

Orange ware, large and small white grits

1

2

3

4

5

6 0

10

7

Fig. 6.3. Pottery from Stratum VI, Floor 671. No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Provenance

Description

1

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

5918/12

Make-up fill

Orange-red ware; self-slip

2

Rilled-rim basin

5918/5

Make-up fill

Light orange ware, small white and black grits; buff slip

3

Arched-rim basin

5918/6

Make-up fill

Light orange ware, gray core, few white and black grits; hard fired; self-slip on exterior

4

Amphora base

5867/3

Make-up fill

5

Imbrex

5918/1

Make-up fill

Stamped with two circles

6

Bag-shaped storage jar, Magness Form 4B

5854/3

Floor

Light orange ware, light brown core, white and brown grits

7

Storage jar

5854/1

Floor

Light orange ware, gray core, black and white grits; buff slip; applied clay on neck

160

Marva Balouka

Fig. 6.4 ► No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Provenance

Description

1

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

5721/1

Make-up fill

Orange-red ware; self-slip

2

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 2A

5717/9

Make-up fill

Orange-ware; self-slip; red paint on two sides of rim and below rim on exterior; no rouletting

3

FBW bowl, Form 1A

5717/11

Make-up fill

Light orange ware; self-slip, incised wavy line

4

FBW bowl/lid

5717/7

Make-up fill

Orange-brown ware, large and small white grits; dark brown drips of paint from rim on both sides

5

Rilled-rim basin

5717/8

Make-up fill

Orange ware, small white and black grits; buff slip

6

Storage jar

5723/3

Make-up fill

Red-light brown coarse ware, white grits; clay applied on neck

7

Storage jar/amphora?

5717/4

Make-up fill

Orange-brown coarse ware

8

Bag-shaped storage jar, Magness Form 4A

5717/17

Make-up fill

Gray core; buff slip

9

Bag-shaped storage jar, Magness Form 4A

5717/13

Make-up fill

Orange ware, white grits; self-slip

10

Bet She’an bag-shaped jar

5717/3

Make-up fill

black ware; white paint

11

Wide-necked jar

5723/7

Make-up fill

Red ware, white grits; self-slip

12

Storage-jar lid

5717/15

Make-up fill

Red-orange ware, white grits; buff slip on exterior; incised lines

13

FBW jar/jug, Form 1C

5723/1

Make-up fill

Light orange ware, gray core; three wavy lines incised below rim

14

Tegula

5717/24

Make-up fill

Gray-brown ware, many grits

15

Imbrex

5723/2

Make-up fill

Light brown ware, small grits; traces of black soot on interior; stamped with two circles

16

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 1

4560/1

Floor

Light orange ware, gray core, few white grits; hard fired; buff slip on exterior

17

Stamped tegula

4560/3

Floor

Light brown ware, small grits; stamped with three adjacent circles

18

Imbrex

4568/1

Floor

Light orange ware, small grits; stamped with one circle; traces of black soot on interior

161

Chapter 6: The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery

1 2

3

5

4

8

6

9

7

10

11

12

13

14 15

16

18

0

10

17

Fig. 6.4. Pottery from Stratum V, Floor 606.

162

Marva Balouka

The Eastern Building Floor 741 (Fig. 6.5) Floor 741 is a plastered cobblestone pavement of a room that was only partially excavated in the 2007 season (see Chapter 2). The fill beneath it yielded only a few diagnostic sherds, including several that resemble FBW (sixth–eighth centuries CE) and a storage jar of Magness Form 4B (fifth–sixth centuries CE). The floor itself yielded a rouletted bowl of Form 1, arched-rim basins of Form 2 and a tegula. Although the data are meager, we suggest a date around the sixth century CE for this locus. Floor 756 (Fig. 6.6) This white plaster floor was uncovered beneath Floor 731 of Phase VA in the eastern building, and

is attributed to Phase VB (see below). The make-up fill and the floor above it yielded similar material, including rouletted bowls of Form 1, arched-rim basins of Forms 1 and 2, Roman cooking pots of Form 1A (second–third centuries), a holemouth jar of Form 1B (fifth–sixth centuries), storage-jar lids and a tegula. The proposed date for this assemblage of Phase VB is around the sixth century CE. Floor 731 (Fig. 6.7) Very few sherds were recovered here; thus, a date could not be established for this Phase VA floor. The main diagnostic fragments include a bowl of LRCW Form 3 mid-fifth to seventh centuries CE), arched-rim basins (unidentified forms), a Gaza storage jar (sixth–seventh centuries) and a tegula. Therefore, this phase is tentatively dated to the sixth or seventh century CE.

3

2

1

4

5

6 7 0

10

Fig. 6.5. Pottery from Stratum V, Floor 741. No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Provenance

Description

1

Small bowl (FBW?)

8147/4

Make-up fill

Brown ware

2

FBW bowl/lid, Form 1F?

8147/3

Make-up fill

Light orange ware

3

Cooking pot

8428/13

Make-up fill

Brown cooking ware, grits

4

Bag-shaped storage jar, Magness Form 4B

8428/16

Make-up fill

Light brown ware, few white grits

5

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

8082/4

Floor

Orange-red ware; red slip on interior, brown slip on exterior

6

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 2

8082/2

Floor

Light orange ware, gray core, few white grits; hard fired; buff slip on rim and interior and exterior, combed lines

7

Tegula

8082/1

Floor

Red ware, gray core

Chapter 6: The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery

2

1

3

4

7

6

5

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 0

10

Fig. 6.6. Pottery from Phase VB, Floor 756.

163

164

Marva Balouka

◄ Fig. 6.6 No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Provenance

Description

1

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

8450/1

Make-up fill

Orange-red ware; self-slip on interior, brown/black drips on exterior

2

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

8450/6

Make-up fill

Orange-red ware; self-slip on interior, brown/black drips on interior and exterior

3

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 1

8453/3

Make-up fill

Orange ware, gray core, few white grits; hard fired; buff slip on rim and on interior and exterior

4

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 2

8453/4

Make-up fill

Light brown ware, gray core, white grits; hard fired; self-slip on exterior; incised combed lines

5

Storage jar

8450/4

Make-up fill

Light orange ware (resembles local ware), gray core, few white grits

6

Storage-jar lid

8453/5

Make-up fill

Brown ware, few white grits

7

Tegula

8450/3

Make-up fill

Orange ware; traces of relief

8

Small rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

8352/8

Floor

Orange-red ware; brown/black paint on upper interior and exterior; no rouletting

9

Rouletted bowl, Magness Form 1

8426/3

Floor

Orange-red ware, gray core

10

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 1

8352/1

Floor

Light brown ware, many large and small white grits; hard fired

11

Arched-rim basin, Magness Form 1

8352/6

Floor

Light orange ware, gray core, few large and small white grits; hard fired; brown drips of paint from rim on interior

12

Cooking pot, Magness Form 1A

8352/3

Floor

Red-brown ware

13

Holemouth jar, Magness Form 1B

8352/7

Floor

Red ware, gray core, white grits; buff slip on exterior; wavy line incised on shoulder

14

Storage-jar lid

8427/3

Floor

Brown ware, gray core, white grits; light brown-buff slip on exterior

165

Chapter 6: The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery

1 2

3

4

5

6

7

8 0 0

2

10

Fig. 6.7. Pottery from Phase VA, Floor 731. No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Provenance

Description

1

Arched-rim basin

8021/4

Make-up fill

Light brown ware; hard fired; self-slip

2

Jug

8021/1

Make-up fill

Orange ware; self-slip

3

Tegula

8021/6

Make-up fill

Light orange ware; hard fired

4

Bowl (LRC Form 3)

7848/4

Floor

Red ware; black slip on rim

5

Bowl (ARS)

7848/1

Floor

Orange ware; incised lines encircling roulette in center

6

Arched-rim basin

7848/3

Floor

Light brown ware, gray core, white grit; hard fired; self-slip

7

Gaza jar

7848/5

Floor

Brown ware; traces of black soot over entire jar

8

Strainer jug

7848/2

Floor

Light orange ware, gray core

166

Marva Balouka

R eferences Adan-Bayewitz D. 1986. The Pottery from the Late Byzantine Building (Stratum 4) and Its Implications. In L.I. Levine and E. Netzer eds. Excavations at Caesarea Maritima, 1975, 1976, 1979––Final Report (Qedem 21). Jerusalem. Pp. 90–121. Aharoni Y. 1960. Excavations at Ramat Rachel (Second Season, 1959). BIES 24:73–119 (Hebrew). Aharoni Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Rahel, Seasons 1959 and 1960. Rome. Balouka M. 2004. The Pottery from the House of Dionysos. In R. Talgam and Z. Weiss. The Mosaics of the House of Dionysos at Sepphoris, Excavated by E.M. Meyers, E. Netzer and C.L. Meyers (Qedem 44). Jerusalem. Pp. 35– 46. Calderon R. 1999. The Pottery. In Y. Hirschfeld. The Early Byzantine Monastery at Khirbet Ed-Deir in the Judean Desert: The Excavations in 1981–1987 (Qedem 38). Jerusalem. Pp. 135–147. Gihon M. 1974. Fine Byzantine Wares from the South of Israel. PEQ 106:119–139. Hamilton R.W. 1944. Excavations against the North Wall of Jerusalem, 1937–8. QDAP 10:1–53. Hayes J.W. 1972. Late Roman Pottery. London. Johnson B.L. 1988. The Pottery. In G.D. Weinberg ed. Excavation at Jalame: Site of a Glass Factory in Late Roman Palestine. Columbia, Mo. Pp. 137–226. Landgraf J. 1980. La céramique byzantine. In J. Briend and J.B. Humbert eds. Tell Keissan 1971–1976: Une cité phénicienne en Galilée. Paris. Pp. 51–100. Magness J. 1992. The Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery from Areas H and K. In A. De Groot and D.T. Ariel eds. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh III: Stratigraphical, Environmental, and Other Reports (Qedem 33). Jerusalem. Pp. 149–186. Magness J. 1993. Jerusalem Ceramic Chronology, circa 200–800 CE. Sheffield. Magness J. 2003. Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 423–432. Magness J. 2005. The Roman Legionary Pottery. In B. Arubas and H. Goldfus eds. Excavations at the Site of

the Jerusalem International Convention Center (Binyanei Ha’uma): A Settlement of the Late First to Second Temple Period, the Tenth Legion’s Kilnworks, and a Byzantine Monastic Complex. The Pottery and Other Small Finds (JRA Supplementary Series 60). Portsmouth, R.I. Pp. 69–191. Magness J. 2006. Late Roman and Byzantine Pottery. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 184–191. Mazar E. 2003. The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar. Final Report II: The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43). Jerusalem. Mazar E. and Gordon B. 2007. The Pottery from the Peristyle and Southern Houses. In E. Mazar. The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar. Final Report III: The Byzantine Period (Qedem 46). Jerusalem. Pp. 149–176. Mazar E. and Peleg O. 2003. The Pottery Assemblage from the Large Byzantine Structure in Area XV. In E. Mazar. The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar. Final Report II: The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43). Jerusalem. Pp. 86–103. Peacock D.P.S. and Williams D.F. 1986. Amphorae and the Roman Economy. New York–London. Peleg O. 2003. Roof Tiles of the Byzantine Period from Area XV. In E. Mazar. The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar. Final Report II: The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43). Jerusalem. Pp. 133–134. Reich R. 2008. Jerusalem, the Giv‘ati Parking Lot. NEAEHL 5:1807–1808. Tsafrir Y. and Hirschfeld Y. 1979. The Church and Mosaics at Horvat Berachot, Israel. DOP 33:291–326. de Vincenz A. 2007. The Pottery. In Y. Hirschfeld. En-Gedi Excavations II: Final Report (1996–2002). Jerusalem. Pp. 234–427. Zemer A. 1977. Storage Jars in Ancient Sea Trade. Haifa.

Chapter 7

The Islamic-Period Pottery K atia Cytryn-Silverman

Introduction This chapter describes the unglazed and glazed wares retrieved in the latest strata of occupation in Area M1 (Strata IV–I), associated with the Early Islamic period. In addition, a small group of tobacco pipes from the Ottoman period, sporadic finds collected amongst the pre-modern debris, is presented in an appendix. Most of the architectural remains associated with Strata IV–I were excavated by Shukron and Reich in 2003 (see Chapter 1; Reich 2008). Still, despite the limited architecture revealed in the 2007 season, the ceramic assemblages that derive from loci of stratigraphic importance related to architectural features and installations are relatively rich, though unfortunately mixed. Some loci include sherds ranging from the Iron Age to the Ottoman periods. In total, c. 1250 sherds (excluding architectural pieces such as roof tiles and drain pipes) from 30 loci were examined.1 From these loci, transitional late Byzantine–Early Islamic material (i.e., long-lived types that continued into the Umayyad or even early Abbasid periods, c. sixth–eighth centuries), and later wares were selected for analysis. Unfortunately, the absence of relevant numismatic evidence does not allow for refined chronological nuances between the strata (apart from one coin of Heraclius, all the datable coins recovered from the loci presented here date to the late Hellenistic–Early Roman periods; see Chapter 11). Therefore, a ninthcentury CE date for the lowest stratum, and a general date within the ninth to tenth centuries CE for the three upper strata, seems an appropriate time span to account for the architectural developments discerned in the area excavated in 2007 in Area M1.2 The excavations in Area M1 thus leave open questions regarding the settlement in the area of the Giv‘ati Parking Lot during the Umayyad period (c. the mid-seventh to mid-eighth centuries).

The typological description of the combined pottery repertoire from Strata IV–I, including a brief analysis of the lamps, is followed by a discussion of the pottery assemblage from each stratum. The typological discussion presents the vessels in two main categories, unglazed and glazed wares, and within these, from open to closed forms, arranged in general according to chronological order. As only representative loci were studied, and these mostly of mixed nature, only general impressions of frequencies are noted. The pottery figures are arranged according to stratum, and the loci selected for presentation in each stratum. In most cases, only representative sherds were selected for illustration.3

Typology Unglazed Wares This section groups together the daily-use common wares for preparation, cooking, serving and storage of food, as well as finer unglazed wares, usually perceived as table wares. These unglazed wares account for the majority of the sherds recovered in the studied assemblages. Bowls and Mugs Rouletted Bowls (not illustrated) Among the residual material from the fills of Strata IV and III, 13 sherds of rouletted bowls were recovered, most of them similar to Magness Form 1 (1993:185– 187), dated from the late third/early fourth through the fifth centuries (see Chapter 6). They are characterized by a rolled rim with a prominent ridge below it, a carinated body, and the usual rouletting and red slip on the exterior. Most of these sherds were found in loci containing mixed material dating no later than the eighth century.

168

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

Red Slip Ware (Figs. 7.1:1; 7.7:1) A few sherds of Red Slip Ware, of the types classified as African Red Slip Ware (ARS), Late Roman C/ Phocaean Ware (LRC) and Cypriot Red Slip (CRS; not illustrated), were recovered from loci associated with the Early Islamic strata, but seem residual from activity during the transitional late Byzantine–Early Islamic period in the area (see Chapter 6). During the dismantling of Installation 646, built atop a ninth-century fill (L665), a sherd of an ARS bowl of Hayes Form 104A (Fig. 7.1:1; Hayes 1972: Fig. 30.3, 13) was recovered. This type, dated by Hayes to the sixth century (530–600 CE), apparently continued at least until the seventh century. In a ninth–tenthcentury fill in Stratum III Channel 676, a water channel originally built in the Byzantine period (see Chapter 2), a rim of an LRC Form 3F bowl (Hayes 1972: Fig. 69:25) with a matte red slip should also be considered residual (Fig. 7.7:1). Comb-Decorated Bowls (Fig. 7.7:2) Four large bowls, hard-fired to a metallic ring and resembling in decoration the comb-decorated basins discussed below, were found among the studied assemblages. They are classified by Magness as ‘Incurved Rim Basins’ (1993:210–211), and her dating of this category to the eighth–tenth centuries is in line with the present stratigraphic context.4 The illustrated example, with a thickened, incurved rim, was recovered from Channel 676 together with typical ninth–tenth-century wares. It is worth mentioning that there is also a resemblance in fabric to the Fine Burnished Ware bowls (below), all perhaps of local production. Burnished Ware Bowls Two types of fine-ware bowls were present among the pottery assemblages of Strata IV–I, the Fine Byzantine Ware (FBW),5 and an apparent continuation of the FBW into the Early Islamic period, but not as hard fired and smooth, which I will term here ‘Fine Burnished Ware’. Fine Byzantine Ware (FBW; Figs. 7.4:1; 7.9:4). This is a well-levigated, hard-fired fabric, usually with a gray core, and a smooth, burnished finish. It has been discussed in various publications (Gichon 1974; Magness 1993:166–171, 193–201, 236–241; Stacey 2004:90; Arnon 2008a:30, 33; Tal and Taxel 2008:125;

Cytryn-Silverman 2010:108), which also consider its continuation into the Islamic period and bring further comparisons of relevance. Magness divided this ware into various forms, dated from the mid-sixth to the tenth centuries. Arnon has provided datable contexts in which this ware appeared as late as the late eighth– mid-ninth centuries (Arnon 2008a:33, in fact a later variation, Type 121, which Arnon denotes ’Marble Ware’ and includes also painted vessels).6 It is worth mentioning that in Kenyon’s excavation of the Umayyad ‘Building II’ in Jerusalem, FBW peaked in Phases 6a–6b, considered the subfloor of the Umayyad building (Prag 2008: Fig. 153a). Nevertheless, the dating of the finds from the corresponding loci of the Umayyad period should be questioned, as Prag herself cautioned the reader from the contaminated contexts (Prag 2008:164): “Phase 6b contains a lot of Fine Byzantine/metallic ware, Early Islamic Cream Ware [Buff Ware; KCS, see below], and also particularly associated with the downspouts and drains, a lot of Early Islamic Polychrome Ware [‘Splash’ and ‘Local Lead-Glazed’; KCS, see below].” The 51 sherds retrieved from Strata IV–I in Area M1 belong mainly to small bowls/mugs with flat bases, some displaying typical incised, wavy decoration, which correspond to the type discussed by Magness as Form 1 (see Chapter 6). Only one body sherd is painted, most probably of a mug (L676, not illustrated). Fine Burnished Ware (Figs. 7.2:1, 2; 7.5:1; 7.7:3, 4, 5; 7.10:1; ansate mugs, Figs. 7.2:3; 7.7:6). This variant may be a continuation of the FBW production, although differing in certain characteristics related mainly to the hardness of the fabric. While it is still well-fired, this later variation does not achieve the highly levigated cleanness of section or the clear metallic ring of the FBW. Its surface treatment is not as smooth, the application of a light colored wash directly below the rim has replaced the darker strokes applied over the body of the FBW, and the concentric pare-burnishing of the vessel is now concentrated in the lower exterior body. In addition, despite a number of shared forms, the Fine Burnished Ware developed a distinct repertoire of vessels, including a globular mug with an everted rim, usually provided with a pair of loop handles (see also jugs in this ware, below). A similar vessel, though lacking a handle, was recovered from a mixed locus in Kenyon’s excavation of the Umayyad Building II

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

in Jerusalem, and associated with Phases 6b–4, dated from the early eighth through the thirteenth/fourteenth centuries (Prag 2008: Fig. 147.9). The large, incurved bowl with combed decoration described above (Fig. 7.7:2) may also be a variant of this ware based on its well-levigated, well-fired fabric, although the shape is reminiscent of the combdecorated basins. In the studied loci, 15 sherds of these Fine Burnished Ware bowls were recovered, and they seem to be characteristic of the ninth–tenth centuries. Similar vessels were found at Abu Ghosh (céramique lissée) and dated by de Vaux and Steve (1950: Pl. B:1–13) to the tenth–eleventh centuries, though this late dating has been reassessed on various occasions, and lowered to the ninth century (Stacey 2004:12; Cytryn-Silverman 2010:142, n. 1).7 Basins Apart from residual rilled-rim basins and archedrim basins, very characteristic of Jerusalem and its surroundings during the Byzantine period (see Chapter 6)—the latter often found in transitional late Byzantine–Early Islamic contexts as well (Magness 1993:206–209)—two types of coarse-ware basins are present in the Strata IV–I assemblages: comb-decorated and gouge-decorated. Both types are decorated with straight and/or wavy horizontal bands, the first combed, the second gouged. Such vessels, apparently used for food(?) preparation, seem to have played a special role in the household, as reflected in the mending holes in various sherds (e.g., Fig. 7.2:4, 5). Rilled-Rim Basins (not illustrated) Twelve sherds of rilled-rim basins were collected in a number of loci. Rilled-rim basins, characterized by angled, wide-ledged ‘rilled’ rims, have been dated by Magness (1993:203) from the late third/early fourth to the sixth centuries. Their low numbers in the present assemblages, in clearly mixed contexts, further confirm their residual nature (see Chapter 6). Arched-Rim Basins (Fig. 7.1:2) These are basins, or rather large bowls, with a wide arched rim, made of well-levigated, hard-fired, light brown fabric, usually with a gray core (Magness 1993:157–160, 204–209). Magness maintains that the

169

arched-rim basins appeared in the late third century CE and continued into the seventh or early eighth century, although in this later period they tended to be decorated with combing (Forms 2 and 3; Magness 1993:206– 209). While arched-rim fragments are found together with ninth–tenth-century wares in all the Islamic strata in Area M1 (L601, L610, L621 and others), the mixed nature of these loci suggests that their presence is of a residual nature. As 36 sherds were recovered, a relatively large number compared to the other residual sherds, they most probably represent the latest occupation in Stratum V (see Chapter 6). The rim sherd in Fig. 7.1:2, recovered during the dismantling of Installation 646 (Stratum IV), is datable to the sixth through eighth centuries, and appeared along with an ARS bowl of Hayes Form 104A (Fig. 7.1:1), the rim of a Gaza storage jar (Fig. 7.1:3) and an FBW jug (Fig. 7.1:4). It is worth mentioning, however, that basins with similar finish and combed decoration, in which the arched rim has developed into a shelf (but differing from Magness’ Roman ‘Shelf-Rim Basins’, 1993:202), do appear in post-Umayyad assemblages at Ramla (Cytryn-Silverman 2010:100, Pls. 9.15.3; 9.16.3; 9.19.1). Comb-Decorated Basins (Figs. 7.2:4; 7.4:2; 7.9:1) This category is characterized by basins made of a well-levigated but gritty, reddish-yellow to light brown fabric, sometimes with a gray core, and the surface is often grayish-yellow to pale brown. The rim is usually thickened and incurved, and the wall varies from almost vertical to V-shaped. The basin in Fig. 7.4:2 has a thickened, incurved rim with a flattened top, and is incised rather than combed. These basins correspond to Magness’ ‘Incurved Rim Basins’ (Magness 1993:210– 211), dated to the eighth–tenth centuries, to ‘Large Plain Bowl Type 26’ of the Byzantine to Umayyad periods at Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996b:126), and to Types 422 and 432 of Stratum VII and VI at Caesarea, dated from the late eighth through the mid-tenth centuries (Arnon 2008a:36, 40). In the present excavations, fragments of such basins (rims and body sherds) were recovered in mixed fills that contained, among others, wares datable to the late Byzantine–Early Islamic transitional period (sixth– eighth centuries), as well as typical ninth–tenth-century wares, such as Buff Ware and Local Lead-Glazed Ware (see below).

170

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

Gouge-Decorated Basins (Figs. 7.2:5; 7.9:2) In addition to the combed basins, three fragments of a coarser type of preparation vessel made of a flaky, low-fired fabric were also recovered. An almost complete example (Fig. 7.2:5) originated in the fill inside Installation 646 of Stratum IV, together with wares datable to the ninth–tenth centuries. The other two originated in L639 and in the dismantling of W900 (Fig. 7.9:2). Storage Jars Bag-Shaped Storage Jars (Fig. 7.2:6) These storage containers are characterized by the traditional ribbed, bag-shaped body and rounded base, invariably provided with a pair of loop handles on the slanting shoulder. The main variations throughout the ages, from Roman times through the late Byzantine– Early Islamic periods, were manufactured with different fabrics, firing conditions, and fashioning of the neck and rim (see Chapter 6). A thorough discussion of the variants and proposed functions of this type can be found in the study by Adan-Bayewitz of the pottery from a late Byzantine building at Caesarea (Adan-Bayewitz 1986:91–97, Amphora Type 1). In a more recent report on the pottery from Caesarea, this type, termed ‘Southern Palestinian Storage Jar—Late Version’ (Arnon 2008a:32, Type 811), is said to be present in Stratum VIIIa (late seventh–first half of the eighth centuries), but absent in later layers, giving way to other types, especially the zirs (Arnon 2008a:39), which correspond to our Nabi Samwil jars below. Magness classified the variations of the bag-shaped storage jar found in and around Jerusalem in the late seventh to ninth–tenth centuries as Form 7 (Magness 1993:230–231). At Abu Ghosh, this type was recovered in a ninth-century context (de Vaux and Steve 1950: Pl. E:14).8 Thirteen sherds of bag-shaped storage jars were retrieved in fill loci of Strata IV–I, together with transitional late Byzantine–Early Islamic wares and ninth–tenth-century wares. These jars have a simple rim, a short neck (c. 2.5 cm high), a careless finish with clay accretions, and are usually made of a gritty fabric. Gaza Storage Jars (Fig. 7.1:3) These are long cylindrical jars, characterized by either a flat or beveled rim, a short neck with a rough finish and clay accretions. It is a typical Byzantine

type (see Chapter 6), which continued into the Early Islamic period. In a discussion of the late appearance of this type in Caesarea’s late Byzantine building (Adan-Bayewitz 1986:97–99), the Gaza storage jar is termed ‘Amphora Type 2’, comprising the second most popular type of container after the bag-shaped jars. Adan-Bayewitz pointed out the main differences between the variants of the Gaza storage jar and the earlier types of the fifth–sixth centuries that appeared in the Caesarea hippodrome (Riley 1975:27–31). However, Majcherek’s study of the main types of his ‘Gazan Family’ is perhaps the best classification so far (Majcherek 1995). In Arnon’s study of the ceramics from Islamic Caesarea, Gaza jars appeared in Stratum VIIIa (late seventh–first half of the eighth centuries), and apparently disappeared in the following layer (Arnon 2008a:32, Type 813), thus demonstrating a similar pattern to that of the bag-shaped storage jars discussed above. Fourteen sherds of Gaza storage jars were retrieved in Strata IV–I of Area M1, all in loci containing pottery that often appears in the transitional late Byzantine– Early Islamic period, such as imported Red Slip Ware, Fine Byzantine Ware, arched-rim basins, and others. The illustrated example originates in the dismantling of Installation 646 of Stratum IV, and corresponds to Majcherek’s Form 4 (Majcherek 1995:169). ‘Nabi Samwil’ and Related Storage Jars The containers referred to here as Nabi Samwil and related jars comprise a heterogeneous group with thick walls, made of well-levigated, highly fired fabric with a metallic ring, and usually with a notable gray core. The surface sometimes has a buff, probably self, slip.9 According to Arabic inscriptions stamped on handles of storage jars belonging to this category recovered from various excavations in Israel, the site of Nabi Samwil, to the north of Jerusalem, seems to have been the production center of these containers. This is based on one of the formulas found among the stamped handles, which reads min Dayr Samwīl,10 and the large pottery kilns excavated in the vicinity of the mosque and sanctuary (Magen and Dadon 1999:67). The epigraphic style of the inscribed handles indicates that this group of storage jars can be dated to the end of the eighth–early ninth centuries (Sharon 1999:293), and this has been refined at Caesarea, where these containers first appear in Stratum VII (late eighth– mid-ninth centuries, Arnon 2008a:39, 162–165, Type

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

171

921).11 Evidence from the present excavations (below) and Caesarea points to a terminus ad quem for the production of certain variants of these jars until at least the ninth, if not the tenth century, indicating a longstanding tradition.

seventh to the ninth–tenth centuries, to Type 2 from Ramla South (Tal and Taxel 2008:146, Fig. 6.94.3, a complete example), dated to the eighth–tenth centuries, and to Type 921a from Caesarea (Arnon 2008a:161, a nearly complete example).

Storage Jar with a Ridge at the Base of the Short Tapering Neck (Fig. 7.2:7, the ridge is missing in our example). This variant seems to continue a tradition typical of Jerusalem and its surroundings during the Byzantine period (e.g., Fig. 7.6:1), and is probably residual from Stratum V (see Chapter 6: “bagshaped” jars Subtype 4B; see also Prag 2008: Fig. 147.10 for an example from the fill underlying the Umayyad building in Jerusalem, Phase 7). These jars are related to Magness Form 4B, dated to the fifth– sixth centuries (Magness 1993:223–226).12 The sherd with a pointed rim and tapering neck, illustrated in Fig. 7.2:7, corresponds to Magness’ Storage Jar Form 6B (Magness 1993:227, 230), dated to the late sixth– seventh to eighth centuries. However, in view of the evidence from Caesarea (Arnon 2008a:39, Type 921, zir) and Ramla (Cytryn-Silverman 2010: Pls. 91:10, 9.2:1), the range of this variant should be extended through to the late ninth century, perhaps even the early tenth century.13

Storage Jar with Short Ridged Neck (Fig. 7.5:2). This jar has a short, upright neck (c. 3 cm), with a sharp ridge in the middle. The surface of our example is covered inside and out with a greenish-gray wash. A similar storage jar was recovered from a Phase 4 context in Kenyon’s excavation of the Umayyad building in Jerusalem, dated post-Umayyad (Prag 2008: Fig. 147.5).

Storage Jar with Tall, Cylindrical Neck (Fig. 7.2:8). This variant has a tall, slightly swollen neck, corresponding to Magness Form 7, dated from the late sixth–seventh to eighth centuries (Magness 1993:231), as well as to the ‘second variant’ of Type 2 from Ramla South (Tal and Taxel 2008:146, Fig. 6.94.9). It is also among the variants found in Kenyon’s excavation of the Umayyad building in Jerusalem, unfortunately in mixed fills (Prag 2008: Figs. 147.7, 149.7). Our example is not as highly fired as most of the vessels of the Nabi Samwil group, and the outer surface was treated with a buff-colored wash. Storage Jar with Thickened Rim and Swollen Neck (Figs. 7.2:9; 7.9:5). This variant of the Nabi Samwil storage jar has a thickened rim that ends at a ridge in the middle of the swollen neck. Some examples were covered with a thick buff slip. The two illustrated examples vary in the height of the neck, the first being c. 3.5 cm high, the second c. 5 cm. This variant seems to be related to two of Magness’ examples of Form 7 (Magness 1993:231, Nos. 1, 2), dated from the late

Holemouth Jar with Decorated Rim (Fig. 7.7:7). A neckless jar with a short rim, decorated with finger impressions and two thin grooves on the shoulder. It resembles a jar retrieved from an Early Islamic layer north of the White Mosque in Ramla, dated to the late eighth–early ninth centuries (Cytryn-Silverman 2010: Pl. 9.22.6), which appeared together with holemouth jars of Magness Form 2, dated by her to the sixth–early eighth centuries (Magness 1993:233–234), although clearly of a longer span. It also resembles a jar from the Citadel in Jerusalem (Geva 1983: Fig. 5:11), which appeared with glazed and unglazed vessels typical of the ninth–tenth centuries.14 Stoppers Eight fragments of stoppers, used as jar covers, were retrieved in the studied assemblages. They correspond to the two forms classified by Magness (1993:247– 248) and dated to the sixth–mid-eighth centuries. Four of them resemble Lids and Stoppers Form 1 (Magness 1993:247), fashioned as small deep bowls with a wide everted rim and a flat or disc base, while the other four (e.g., Fig. 7.6:2) are related to Form 2 (Magness 1993:248), and fashioned as shallow bowls with splaying walls, a central knob and a flat or disc base. Magness’ dating can be stretched, at least for Form 1, into the later half of the eighth century, if not into the ninth, as evinced from finds collected, for example, in the excavations at Ramla (Cytryn-Silverman 2010: Pls. 9.4:21; 9.11:18). Further evidence that bowlshaped stoppers continued into the Abbasid period is demonstrated by their appearance in Buff Ware (Cytryn-Silverman 2010: Photographs 9.10, 9.11),

172

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

although Buff Ware stoppers were not recovered among the finds from Area M1. Jugs and Small Jars Apart from some fragments of common ware jugs and jars, and a fragment of an FBW jug with a tapering, ridged neck and perhaps a pinched rim (Fig. 7.1:4), of Magness Form 2B (1993:239–241), recovered during the dismantling of Installation 646, the jugs and jars from the stratified loci of the Islamic layers correspond mainly to two categories: Fine Burnished Ware and Buff Ware, the latter perhaps the most representative ceramic group of the post-Umayyad period (see below). Common Ware Jugs and Jars (Figs. 7.2:10, 11; 7.5:3, 4) Little can be gleaned of the typology and chronology of these vessels, as mainly fragments of bases were recovered. The flat base in Fig. 7.2:10 belongs to a squat jug with surface color and signs of ‘shaving’ reminiscent of the Fine Burnished Ware bowls and jugs, although the fabric is coarser, the walls thick, and the outer surface partly flaked. The inner surface has accretions and uneven concentric turning lines, suggesting it was handmade. The ring base in Fig. 7.2:11 is covered with a thick, greenish-buff slip, somewhat reminiscent of later Islamic jugs of the Ayyubid and early Mamluk periods (Avissar and Stern 2005:108–111). However, the absence of late intrusions in L646 confirms its Early Islamic dating. Fine Burnished Ware Jugs (Figs. 7.2:12; 7.5:5; 7.6:3; 7.7:8; 7.9:6) Fine Burnished Ware jugs made of a well-levigated, highly fired fabric characterize assemblages in the Jerusalem area dating to the Early Islamic period, more specifically to the second half of the eighth century through the tenth century (see above). These jugs have wide flat bases, and examples in Area M1 have a simple or fashioned rim and a tall cylindrical neck. The typology of this group of jugs is yet to be formulated, and the rich finds from the excavations in Area M2 of the Giv‘ati Parking Lot (pers. obs.), together with the finds from the excavations in the Muslim Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, east of Herod’s Gate (studied by the author), will certainly contribute further to the understanding of this ware.

Buff Ware Jugs and Jars Buff Ware is a general designation for a wide range of fine vessels made in various techniques and styles, which all share a yellowish- to greenish-white surface. The clay is usually well-levigated. This ware was locally produced throughout the Islamic world, although it seems to have first developed in the eastern Islamic lands. It is now generally accepted that in Greater Syria and Egypt, Buff Ware appeared after the Umayyad period (Cytryn-Silverman 2010:106). This category, which includes open and closed vessels, has been discussed in various publications. many types are seen, for example, in the excavations at Abu Ghosh (de Vaux and Steve 1950:127–130, Pls. C, D, céramique blanche ou à engobe blanc). Since then, this ware has appeared in many reports under various labels, such as ‘Fine Buff Ware’ at Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996b:155–162) and Caesarea (Arnon 2008a:36–37, 41, 43, 45), and ‘Pale Cream Ware’ at Tiberias (Stacey 2004:92–93, 130–138).15 In the present excavations in Area M1, only closed vessels were recovered, including plain jugs and incisedand-hatched jugs, both sometimes provided with strainers, as well as mold-made jugs and stamped-andappliquéd Buff Ware jars. Some of these subcategories share common profiles, from rim fashioning to base type (e.g., Figs. 7.3:9, 10; 7.5:8–10, 7.6:8; 7.7:15), while others are particular to a specific type (e.g., the typical ‘stamped and appliquéd’ jar discussed below). We also include in this category vessels made of darker fabrics that were buff slipped to achieve the same effect as the plain Buff Ware finer wares (here termed BuffWare-Related; Figs. 7.5:11; 7.6:7). Plain Buff Ware Jugs. The earliest and most longlasting subgroup of Buff Ware (beginning in the late eighth century, see Stacey 2004:130; Arnon 2008a:37), is that of the plain vessels, sometimes decorated with an incised line below the rim, and at times provided with a handle that bears a stamped or applied decoration, or was fashioned as a simple, bifid (Fig. 7.9:8) or even trifid handle. The most common plain Buff Ware jugs have a simple or slightly everted rim and a cylindrical (Figs. 7.3:1; 7.5:6), or slightly funnel-shaped neck (Fig. 7.3:2; 7.6:4, 5; 7.9:7). The single handle, sometimes bifid (Fig. 7.9:8) or trifid, extends from the rim to an angular or rounded shoulder. The angular form is among the earliest examples, believed by some to have

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

been influenced by metal vessels (Rosen-Ayalon and Eitan 1969:5; Stacey 2004:132). This form is typical of central Palestine and is well-represented at Abu Ghosh and Ramla, which was probably its production center.16 The rounded form was common throughout Palestine. In central Palestine it may have been contemporary with the angular form, as in the repertoire at Abu Ghosh (de Vaux and Steve 1950: Pls. C:19, 21–24; D:16, 18, etc.). Jugs with a rounded shoulder sometimes have a neck fashioned in softer, more rounded lines, such as that illustrated in Fig. 7.3:4, in which the rim is everted and the neck splays out and is slightly swollen. Sixty-two sherds of plain Buff Ware jugs including rims, handles, bases of different types and body sherds, were recovered from the studied assemblages. Some of these pieces may in fact belong to the following subgroup (from the plain areas of the incised and hatched jugs). Incised and Hatched Buff Ware Jugs. These jugs are related to the previous subgroup of plain Buff Ware, but are decorated with incising in either abstract or calligraphic decorative themes.17 The most typical jug bearing incised and hatched designs is that in which “the necks are wide and cylindrical with a slight bulge. The handle, usually with a decorative knob at its peak, joins the shoulder of the spherical body to half way up to the neck” (Stacey 2004:132). Stacey discerned two variations, which perhaps deserve distinction. The first is a small, thinwalled (‘egg-shell’) drinking jug without a strainer (Stacey 2004: Figs. 5.41:7; 5.60:1–5),18 while the second is of larger proportions and thicker walls, with a strainer set at mid-neck (Stacey 2004: Fig. 5.41:8). A few examples from Area M1 can be associated with the first variation (Fig. 7.7:9, 10), while the neckless jug in Fig. 7.10:2, although it has an altogether different shape, shares the same ‘egg-shell’ quality and lack of strainer. The larger jugs in Figs. 7.3:5, 6 and 7.7:11, 12 are related to the second variant. The latter two, with the rim area preserved, display the breaking point of their strainers. At Tiberias, this subgroup has been dated to the tenth–eleventh centuries (see especially the finds from Locus B11, Stacey 2004: Fig. 5.60). At Caesarea, this subgroup flourished in Stratum VI and V, dated to the late ninth–early eleventh centuries (Arnon 2008a:41– 43), but appeared as early as Stratum VII (late eighth– mid-ninth centuries, Arnon 2008a:37). It was absent in

173

Stratum IV (first half of the eleventh century; Arnon 2008a:45). Incised and hatched Buff-Ware jugs also appear in Scanlon’s Catalogue of Filters from the excavations at Fustat (Scanlon 1986:62–63, Figs. 193–196, Types A-III-C–A-III-E), dated from the late ninth–early tenth centuries based on the strainer’s style. It is noteworthy that the schematic palmettes on the jug in Fig. 7.7:11 recall incised and hatched decorations on glazed bowls, also dated to the ninth–tenth centuries (Kubiak and Scanlon 1989:40, Fig. 55). Fifteen sherds (after restoration of some of the pieces) of this subgroup were recovered, thus making it the predominant decorated type of Buff Ware within the studied assemblages, especially if we consider that some of the fragmentary plain sherds and bases could also belong to such vessels. Strainers. As noted above, both plain and incised jugs were sometimes provided with a strainer attached to the upper neck (Fig. 7.7:11, 12). Most of these strainers were carved into decorative designs and often further incised and/or punctured (Scanlon 1986), but due to their fragility, little has survived of them (Fig. 7.7:13, 14).19 Later strainer-jugs, usually associated with contexts datable to the Fatimid period (late tenth– eleventh centuries), have a decorated strainer attached to the base of the neck, but this variant was not found in the excavations of Area M1. Molded Buff Ware. Despite the common ware and the many common shapes, these jugs differ technically and artistically from the other groups. They were produced in clay molds, enabling mass production. Each jug required a set of three molds: for the neck, shoulder area and lower body, in addition to the handle, which was prepared separately. The four pieces were then assembled by applying thinned clay, remains of which can often be seen at the seam lines (e.g., Fig. 7.3:7). The mold sets could be interchanged, thus creating a wide variety of decorative combinations. The typical designs of this subgroup are composed of abstract and schematic vegetal motifs, including trellises, diamonds, triangles, small circles, leaves, cones (or bunches of grapes? e.g., Fig. 7.6:6), palmettes and others (for an extensive repertoire of the motifs found on the local versions of this ware, see, for example, Khirbat al-Mafjar in Baramki 1944: Fig. 14:2, 3, 5; Caesarea in Brosh 1986: Pls. III, IV; northern Sinai in Cytryn-Silverman 2001: Pl. 1).20

174

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

The chronology of this Buff Ware subgroup, together with that of the incised and hatched (above) and stamped and appliquéd subgroups (below), is of importance for refining the dating of the present assemblages. Stacey has stated: “Whilst the manufacture of moulded ware may have overlapped that of barbotine ware [middle of the ninth century; KCS] it continued later, perhaps until 950 CE” (Stacey 2004:137). Molded Buff Ware appears at Caesarea as early as Stratum VII (late eighth– mid-ninth centuries; Arnon 2008a:37), but was already absent in Stratum VI (late ninth–mid-tenth centuries; Arnon 2008a:41), thus contradicting the results from Tiberias. The evidence from Ramla, nevertheless, supports Stacey’s dating. At the excavations north of the White Mosque, they were noticeably absent from the late eighth–early ninth centuries, but appear together with vessels typical of the second half of the ninth–tenth centuries (Cytryn-Silverman 2010:107). Only two molded sherds were retrieved from the loci studied from Area M1. In L646, one sherd was recovered together with plain (Fig. 7.3:1–4), incised and hatched (Fig. 7.3:5, 6) and stamped and appliquéd (Fig. 7.3:8) vessels, while in Channel 601, a sherd appeared with plain Buff Ware (Fig. 7.6:4, 5, 8) and the neck of a jug made of a red fabric, yet buff-slipped with incised and appliquéd decoration (Fig. 7.6:7). This may confirm a date in the late ninth–early tenth centuries for the assemblages, by which time the various categories would be overlapping. Stamped and Appliquéd Buff Ware. Designated ‘Barbotine Ware’ by Stacey (2004:136–137) and Arnon (2008a:37), this highly decorative subgroup, although made of the same buff fabric, shares little else with the other subgroups. The vessels are larger and are best described as jars both for their size and for the three handles with trefoil-shaped thumbrests attached from neck to shoulder in the typical form of this category. The fabric is heavier though hard fired, at times even achieving a metallic ring.21 The wide cylindrical neck of these vessels is usually decorated with groups of incised lines, and embellished with the application of barbotine knobs and hoops.22 The ribbon-shaped handles decorated with barbotine applications divide the neck into a number of fields. A narrow, slanting, stamp-decorated shoulder connects the neck to the body, where the main decoration is focused. Here, the decoration consists of a series of arches filled with groups of stamped circles

reminiscent of flowers (Figs. 7.3:8; 7.5:7). Each arch displays a different design, the ‘flowers’ combined with gouged lines in varying combinations. This subgroup, together with the molded Buff Ware, is best exemplified at the site of Kh. al-Mafjar, as two almost complete jars are illustrated in the publication and ever since have been quoted as reference (Baramki 1944: Fig. 5:15, 16, Pl. XIX:3, 4). However, there is no reason to attribute production of this subgroup to the Jericho area, and the stamped and appliquéd jugs may also have been produced in the coastal plain. At Caesarea, this category is present as early as Stratum VII (late eighth–mid-ninth centuries; Arnon 2008a:37) and as late as Stratum VI (late ninth–midtenth centuries; Arnon 2008a:42). Stacey dates this subgroup more specifically to the mid-ninth century (Stacey 2004:136–137).23 Only four sherds of this type of Buff Ware were recovered from the studied loci.

Glazed Wares The glazed wares in the studied assemblages are the best anchors for dating the four strata. They include mostly local wares, monochrome and polychromeglazed, which provide a range from the late eighth– early ninth through the tenth centuries. Turquoise Alkaline-Glazed Ware A single sherd of a turquoise, alkaline-glazed bowl with an everted rim was recovered from L646 (Fig. 7.3:11). It is made of a cream-colored fabric (similar to Buff Ware but softer and powdery), and is much corroded, with a golden patina covering most of the glaze. The tradition of turquoise alkaline glazing was adopted into Islamic lands through the Sasanian tradition (in itself the continuation of a long tradition going back to the Parthian period; Fehérvári 2000:23–26). The transition from the late Sasanian period into the Early Islamic period in Iran and Iraq was well-documented in the excavations at Tell Abu Sarifa, Iraq, which produced evidence from the mid-seventh–first half of the eighth centuries, thus demonstrating that the practice continued into later periods (Adams 1970:106–107). At Aqaba, Arab-Sasanian Ware jars were dated to the ninth–tenth centuries (Whitcomb 1988:212, Fig. 3), and at Tiberias, ‘Alkali-Glazed Wares’ were reported in contexts from the ninth to eleventh centuries (Stacey 2004:110–111). However, it is clear that by the ninth

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

century, the various lead-glazed wares had mostly superseded the alkaline glazes in quantity. Alkaline glazes usually have many cracks, and tend to flake (as its adhesion to the clay is often unsuccessful), and our example is in line with this tendency. It should be mentioned that on several sherds from the current excavations, it is possible to discern remnants of a white slip, much cracked and probably containing a high amount of quartz. This slip may have been a base for the turquoise glaze, which has not survived. Such a technique was described by Mason and Keall for leadglazed ‘Color-Splashed Sgraffiato’: “An interesting feature of these samples, one which is also possessed by all the other samples of this type from Samarra, Siraf, and Yemen, is its slip. This consists of angular quartz in a glass matrix and so represents the application of the stonepaste technology…. The discovery that stonepaste was used in slips in the ninth and tenth centuries in Iraq, and now also in Egypt, indicates that the technology was always part of the potter’s repertoire, but was not utilized for making entire vessels until conditions were favourable [in the twelfth century; KCS]” (Mason and Keall 1990:174–175). According to its general shape and the quartzy-slip application, the bowl in Fig. 7.3:11 should be dated to the ninth–tenth centuries. Monochrome Lead-Glazed Ware This category includes both open and closed vessels, whose common characteristic is the application of a monochrome lead glaze. Area M1 yielded 15 monochrome-glazed sherds of two main types: vessels made of a quartzy, well-fired, red fabric, and those of a very pale brown fabric. Sherds of two monochrome bowls made of red clay are illustrated. They are of different dimensions, but both have an everted rim. That in Fig. 7.8:1 is a small bowl, glazed yellow over a white slip, while that in Fig. 7.8:2 is larger, perhaps with a petal-shaped rim (for general shape, see Arnon 2008a:231, Type 241e), glazed inside and out with a deep purple glaze. The provenance of these monochrome bowls is unclear, but they are reminiscent of examples from Caesarea, also made of a pink to reddish-yellow fabric (Arnon 2008a:39, Type 231; p. 43, Type 43) and dated from the late eighth through the first half of the eleventh centuries. Therefore, these bowls cannot contribute to a more specific dating of the Strata IV–I assemblages.

175

The pale fabric of the low ring base of a monochrome yellow-glazed bowl (Fig. 7.5:12) is heavier than the red-fabric examples, and the bowl also seems to have had a different, truncated shape. The glaze was applied over a greenish-buff slip, inside and out (including the underside of the base), though partly flaked off on both sides. An important typological detail is the beveled inner edge of this ring base, reminiscent of white, tinglazed bowls from ninth–tenth-century Egypt (CytrynSilverman 1996:97–98, Fig. 17:30). This parallel, together with certain characteristics of the fabric and finish of our sherd, seems to point to an Egyptian origin. A small angular cup with a disc base (Fig. 7.3:12), made of a light brown fabric, is green-glazed all over and decorated with a couple of thin incised lines below the simple rim. The form is well-known, in both monochrome and polychrome wares (see Arnon 2008a:233, Type 242a). The small juglet with an everted rim (Fig. 7.5:13) bears a glossy green glaze outside and around the inner rim, while the inner body is covered with a colorless glaze. Vessels of similar shape are reported from other sites, with Caesarea providing references and examples in contexts datable to the late ninth–mid-tenth centuries (Arnon 2008a:41, 215–216, Type 631, Stratum VI). A complete comparable jug from Fustat (Kubiak and Scanlon 1989:44, Fig. 61), green glazed but made of gray-white fabric, is dated to the late ninth century. Yellow-Glazed Ware Six of the seven sherds of this ware from the studied assemblages are illustrated, four made of red fabric and two of pink to very pale brown, all hard fired to a metallic ring. The clear yellow glaze was applied over a white to pale brown slip, producing a light, lemonyellow, opacified color (between pale yellow 2.5Y 8/4 to yellow 5Y 8/6), often further decorated with a leafgreen glaze. The glazing covers the inside and only the rim area on the outside. The decorative schemes consist of radial lines or series of dots, which tended to run during firing. Two red bowls made of red fabric have an incurved rim (Figs. 7.3:13; 7.6:9) and one an everted rim (Fig. 7.6:10). The fourth red-fabric sherd is a grooved disc base (Fig. 7.3:15). The two sherds in a light colored fabric (Figs. 7.3:14; 7.5:14) differ from the previous examples in their decorative scheme, mainly in the use

176

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

of manganese-purple paint. The sherd with an everted rim in Fig. 7.3:14 has manganese stripes containing four preserved colored radial bands, apparently applied over the yellow glaze. The colored bands are very corroded, but some traces of darker glazes, including green, suggest that a mottled effect was sought. The flat disc bases in Figs. 7.3:15 and 7.5:14 are typical of bowls of the period. In the first, marked by two grooves, the decoration consists of dabs of green on a yellow background, unfortunately very worn. The outer surface of the second example is generally bare, and the few traces of glaze on it most probably occurred in the kiln during firing. The bowl’s inner decoration is unclear, as only part of a circular motif in manganese purple and green dripping to one side remain. However, it is probable that this bowl also bore a radial design. Noteworthy is the ‘scarring’ of the glaze in the center of the bowl, most probably resulting from the detachment of the kiln tripod after firing. It is unclear if this category is technically related to the ‘Opaque Yellow Ware’ from Nishapur in Iran, dated by Wilkinson to the ninth–tenth centuries. Despite certain similar characteristics,24 the clusters of small dots typical of examples from Nishapur differ from the decoration on our sherds, and the glaze is duller. However, as already noted by Wilkinson, opaque yellow-glazed vessels appear in Iraq (where it perhaps first developed), Arabia and Syria (Wilkinson 1973:205);25 therefore, our sherds were probably imported from one of these areas, or from a closer production center. In any case, in light of the stratigraphic results of the present excavations in Area M1, it seems that our examples are contemporary with the eastern ‘Opaque Yellow Ware’. ‘Splash’-Glazed Ware The category designated here ‘Splash’-Glazed Ware seems to be related to the previous Yellow-Glazed Ware in fabric and decorative technique, but is clearly distinguished by its clear yellowish (or sometimes greenish) glaze that covers a white to pinkish slip, over which combinations of green, yellow, brownish-yellow and manganese-purple painting tend to run. This ware was well-summarized by Fehérvári (2000:47 ff., ‘Splashed Wares’), and previously by Wilkinson (1973:55 ff., ‘Color-Splashed Ware’).26 This category can be generally dated from the ninth to the eleventh centuries.

Although the term ‘splash’ is perhaps suggestive of an unplanned splashing of colors in an aleatory fashion, the decoration was, in fact, well-planned, usually as a series of bands, lines, dots, or some combination thereof. The well-known runny effect of the colors, resulting from their tendency to diffuse under the lead glaze during firing, was used to advantage by the Islamic potters, and the ‘splash’ style became one of the most enduring ceramic fashions in the Islamic world, which was also combined with sgraffito decoration (Wilkinson 1973:56–57; Fehérvári 2000:49; CytrynSilverman 2010:111). The vessels, both open and closed, were made of buff to red fabrics. The 19 sherds from Area M1 range from very pale brown to reddish-yellow, only one of them bearing incised sgraffito decoration (not illustrated). The everted rim of a bowl in Fig. 7.8:3 is decorated inside with runny green and yellow dots; outside with green and yellow radial bands. The sherd in Fig. 7.5:15 has a very similar profile to the monochrome-glazed bowl in Fig. 7.8:1, and could, perhaps, be catalogued in the same category, although the glaze is glossier, with a dripping effect, reminiscent of the ‘Splash’-Glazed Ware. It also resembles the (locally produced?) cymarecta glazed bowls of the tenth–eleventh centuries from Tiberias (Stacey 2004:117, Fig. 5.25). If the comparison is valid, a c. tenth-century date can be surmised for the Jerusalem assemblage; however, as the origin of the fragment is unclear (it may even be an eastern import), a ninth–tenth century range is preferred. The wide ring base in Fig. 7.5:16 is glazed inside and out, and is perhaps of different origin than the previous examples, as the dots and radial bands on the inside seem to have been achieved by a further technique of background painting. Still, the green ran slightly during firing, bestowing on the vessel the typical splashed effect. The outside was painted in the regular fashion by applying green dots that diffused into blobs.27 Local Lead-Glazed Ware Monochrome and polychrome lead-glazed wares made of the same fabric used for the unglazed Buff Wares are among the glazed wares that were certainly of local manufacture (Cytryn-Silverman 2001:18, n. 100). Sherds of this category are widely distributed, from sites on the eastern boundaries of northern Sinai where they were found in notable numbers (CytrynSilverman 1996:95–96; 2001:18), to sites in northern

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

Israel such as Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996b:77, Type 2), although no clear example was discerned among the glazed material from Tiberias published by Stacey (2004:104 ff.). Avissar mentions comparable material from Fustat and Antioch, but notes that in northern Syria this type seems to be relatively rare (Avissar 1996b:77). Nevertheless, all these comparisons should be viewed with caution, as many of the forms and artistic compositions applied to this local ware were shared by other provincial polychrome-glazed wares. This category can be generally subdivided into three variants: (1) monochrome glazed; (2) polychrome glazed with stripes and dots; (3) polychrome glazed with a linear composition. These three variants share the same thin clear glaze with a yellowish or greenish tinge, and an unglazed exterior (in the case of open forms), in which case the glaze may drip down from the lip. The monochrome-glazed variant (e.g., Fig. 7.5:17) usually displays green or yellow matte glazes. The second variant is characterized by compositions of stripes and dots, usually in green and manganese purple, but sometimes also in yellow (Figs. 7.5:18, 19; 7.8:4). Examples of this variant were found at Abu Ghosh (de Vaux and Steve 1950: Pl. A:2–5), Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996b:77, Fig. XIII.2, Type 2), in northern Sinai (Cytryn-Silverman 2001: Pl. 11) and at Caesarea (Arnon 2008a:181–185, Type 232, Stratum VI, late ninth–mid-tenth centuries), as well as in the post-Umayyad layers of Building II in Jerusalem (Prag 2008: Fig. 151:11–15). Bowls of the third variant (Fig. 7.10:3, 4) are divided by thin manganese-purple lines, with green color applied mainly as a filler of selected fields. This variant has been classified by Avissar as ‘Common Glazed Bowl Type 3’ (Avissar 1996b:77–78, Fig. XIII.3), and it seems to be related to a bowl from Abu Ghosh (de Vaux and Steve 1950: Pl. A.1), as well as an example from the Umayyad Building II in Jerusalem, associated with Phase 5, i.e., the Abbasid period (Prag 2008: Fig. 151.19). A complete bowl, of similar decoration to our example, was recovered from the excavations of the Jerusalem Citadel (Geva 1983: Fig. 5.9), in conjunction with an incurved bowl (perhaps related to our bowl in Fig. 7.7:2), a holemouth jar with dented decoration (which may be similar to our example in Fig. 7.7:7) and an incised and hatched Buff Ware jug. Therefore, the assemblage from the Citadel can be considered contemporary with ours.28

177

The glaze on the base in Fig. 7.4.3 is too worn to determine its color. White Tin-Glazed Ware White Tin-Glazed Ware has been widely discussed, mainly in regard to vessels painted in cobalt blue over a white opacified background (Fehérvári 2000:37–40; Mason 2004: passim; Cytryn-Silverman 2010:112). The single example from Area M1 is seemingly of Egyptian origin (for the petrography of this group, see Mason and Keall 1990:172). This variant is characterized by a sandy buff fabric that is covered inside and out with a tin-opacified white glaze, and over-painted with patterns in bright turquoise and manganese dark purple, usually in radial compositions of runny dots and splashes. The bowl in Fig. 7.5:20 has splaying rim and walls, one of the typical forms of this category. Two well-stratified, imported white tin-glazed sherds, probably of Iraqi origin, were found at Tiberias, below a floor of Stratum II and accordingly dated to the late tenth century (Stacey 2004:120, Fig. 5.28:1, 2). At Caesarea, a few examples of blue-painted bowls were present in Stratum VII, dated to the late eighth–midninth centuries (Arnon 2008a:35–36, 118, Pl. XII.1, Type 225), though it seems that some other variations have been mistakenly grouped with her ‘Colour Splash Glazed’ from Stratum VI, dated to the mid-ninth to mid-tenth centuries (Arnon 2008a:40, Type 233, e.g. Type 233d on p. 189).

Cooking Vessels The assemblages under discussion include some 50 examples of unglazed and 3 examples of glazed cooking vessels. Among the cooking-vessel sherds were 18 lids. Residual sherds include two Roman cooking pots (L623, B5528/5; L610, B4531/3; see Magness 1993:216–217, Cooking Pot Form 1), dated to the second–third centuries, and transitional types such as two examples (L638, B5217/1, perhaps L639, B5198/3) of Magness Form 4, dated to the fifth/sixth to the late seventh/early eighth centuries (1993:219), and one casserole (L621, B4603/11) of Magness Form 2 (1993:213), dated to the sixth–seventh centuries. Unglazed vessels reminiscent of pre-Islamic types (some perhaps residual from the Byzantine period)

178

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

include a hemispherical bowl/casserole with a bevelled rim, made of a gritty, red-brick fabric and usually provided with a pair of horizontal loop handles (Figs. 7.6:11; 7.8:5). The main differences between these and previous casserole types are a deeper body and a plain or lightly ribbed wall. The grooving seen in the casserole in Fig. 7.6:11 is characteristic of Early Islamic deep casseroles that continued to appear at least until the ninth–tenth centuries (de Vaux and Steve 1950:126, Pl. B:18, 19; Magness 1993:214, Casseroles Form 3). The profiles of the matching lids (Fig. 7.6:12, 13) are hardly discernible from the pre-Islamic examples (Magness 1993:215; Avissar 1996b:146–147), though the plain wall of the lid in Fig. 7.1:5 seems to be characteristic of the Early Islamic period (de Vaux and Steve 1950: Pl. B:15, 16). The main change in cooking modes is represented by the appearance of glazed cooking vessels, both open and closed, as exemplified in the present assemblage as well (Figs. 7.6:14; 7.8:6). The fabric of the glazed cooking vessels is dark red to brown with many shiny inclusions, sometimes fired to gray on the exterior. The open pans usually have thicker walls than the cooking pots. One sherd of glazed cooking ware was recovered from Channel 601 (Fig. 7.6:14), a second from Channel 676 (Fig. 7.8:6), and two others from Stratum III Fill 613 (not illustrated). The lead-glaze is transparent brown, applied directly onto the untreated surface on the inner wall and around the outer shoulder, and dripping is common. These glazed vessels seem to have appeared in southern Greater Syria sometime in the course of the ninth century, although the prominence of unglazed cooking vessels at Abu Ghosh, for example, where the assemblages are datable to the ninth century (see n. 8), indicates that they probably only became common in the tenth century. The scarcity of such finds in Area M1 seems to imply the early/mid-tenth century as a terminus ad quem for our assemblages. The small frying pan with a folded-out rim (Fig. 7.6:14) is similar to larger glazed pans of the Early Islamic period, in which only the central portion of the pan is glazed (unlike those of the twelfth–thirteenth centuries, whose interior was usually totally glazed). It resembles the ‘Glazed Cooking Bowl’ Type 13 at Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996b:139, Fig. XIII.100). The glazed base in Fig. 7.8:6 is that of a hemispherical cooking pot, a type that usually has a short rim and a pair of strap handles (sometimes also with another pair of degenerate ledge handles). It can be paralleled

to the Early Islamic glazed cooking pots at Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996b:132–135, cooking-pot Types 2–5), though this basic shape continued until the thirteenth century (Avissar 1996b:135–137; Avissar and Stern 2005:91–93). The typological changes over the centuries are expressed mainly in the shape of the rim, unfortunately missing in our case.

Lamps Twenty-five lamps, two of which were intact, were recovered in the studied assemblages from Area M1, and they support the chronological range of the ceramic assemblages suggested here. A sherd of a candlestick lamp, recovered from the fill of Installation 646 (Fig. 7.3:16), is typical of the transitional late Byzantine–Early Islamic period (Nitovski 1974, dated to the fifth–early eighth centuries; Magness 1993:251–252, Oil-Lamp Form 3A, dated to the mid-sixth–early eighth centuries; Hadad 2002:66–68, Type 28, dated from the fifth century to the end of the Umayyad period; Arnon 2008b:216, Type TC, Strata IX–VIII, dated to the late sixth–mid-eighth centuries). Transitional wares like this lamp were found in this fill together with Early Islamic wares (Figs. 7.2, 7.3). Six other fragments of candlestick lamps were recovered in Area M1, including a fragment from L639, B5115/4, on which the Arabic letters sīn and mīm were legible, perhaps part of the word bismillah.29 Seventeen examples (two intact) of mold-made almond-shaped lamps with a small ring base and a tongue-shaped handle were recovered from the studied assemblages. Apart from one fragment, they are all unglazed. This type is dated generally to the late eighth/ early ninth through the eleventh centuries (Hadad 2002:95ff., Type 37), or more specifically to the ninth– tenth centuries, according to the dating of some variants at Tiberias (Stacey 2004:149–165). Arnon found them in Caesarea’s Strata VI–VII, dated to the late eighth– mid-tenth centuries30 (Arnon 2008b:220–222, Type MC), generally confirming Magness’ dating to the eighth–tenth centuries (1993:258, Oil-Lamp Form 5). The intact lamp in Fig. 7.8:7 bears a common type of decoration consisting of vine tendrils with bunches of grapes (Hadad 2002:95, Type 37, ‘Vegetal Decoration’; Stacey 2004:155–157, Form 2A, dated 800–950+; Arnon 2008b:242–245, Nos. 72–94). The fragment in Fig. 7.5:21 is decorated with a leaf(?) within a scroll

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

bordering the missing tongue handle. The nearly intact lamp in Fig. 7.10:5, decorated all over with a trellis pattern, has close parallels at Kh. al-Mafjar (Baramki 1944: Pl. XVII.9), Caesarea (Arnon 2008b:249, No. 126) and Jerusalem (Prag 2008: Fig. 155.10). This pattern is also found on a lamp with a conical handle from Bet She’an, apparently of earlier date (Hadad 2002:84, No. 365, Type 36, dated Umayyad–early Abbasid). The intact lamp in Fig. 7.10:6 has two rows of tendrils around the filling hole and the channel, which is decorated with an abstract motif. The latter is comparable to the decoration (but not the composition) of Tiberias Type 3D (Stacey 2004:161–165, the earliest from above a floor of Stratum III, c. 880–980, the majority dated later). A lamp from Bet She’an (Hadad 2002:103–104, No. 459, Type 37, ‘Decoration with Kufic inscriptions’) bears a similar composition, but has the Arabic word baraka (‘blessing’) molded on the channel. The lamp in Fig. 7.6:15, missing its nozzle, is decorated with a star-shaped frame around the filling hole (six triangular fields + nozzle), identical to the decoration on a lamp from Ramla, north of the White Mosque (Cytryn-Silverman 2010: Pl. 9.21.2). Each triangular field contains a cluster of six stamped circles (grapes?), interspersed with larger clusters of ten stamped circles. A lamp from Bet She’an bears a similar composition, but differs in details (Hadad 2002:96, No. 424, Type 37). The inscribed fragment in Fig. 7.9:10 bears the word baraka written in angular script within a medallion adjacent to the wick hole. To its left, an amphora is depicted. In addition to the above, a mold-made miniature lamp in the same style as the almond-shaped lamps discussed above was found in L840 (B9557, not illustrated). Such miniature lamps are common, though not numerous in Early Islamic assemblages (RosenAyalon and Eitan 1969: Hebrew side cover; Hadad 2002:105–106, Nos. 465–467).31

The Pottery Assemblages and Their Stratigraphic Context Stratum IV The few stratified pottery assemblages from Stratum IV offer a chronological range for the beginning and end of activity of this occupation. Even though the dismantling of Installation 646 (Basket 5715) yielded wares dating to the transitional late Byzantine–Early

179

Islamic period (sixth to eighth centuries; see Fig. 7.1:1–5), together with two fragments of what appear to be drain pipes (Fig. 7.1:6, 7), the fill underlying this structure (L665) contained much Abbasid pottery, typical of the ninth century.32 The contents within the installation (also L646; Figs. 7.2, 7.3) provide evidence of its latest use and the date of the overlying accumulation, datable to the ninth century.33 Floor 667, as well as Floor 664 which is also stratigraphically associated with this stratum, incorporated Installation 646 and seems to provide a more accurate chronological framework for Stratum IV. The pottery collected upon and amidst beaten-earth Floor 667 (Fig. 7.4) should be seen as representing the latest use of this floor. It yielded only 21 diagnostic fragments (including two tegula fragments, one waterpipe sherd and two Early Roman fragments), and can be roughly dated to the ninth century, mainly due to the presence of a base of a Local Lead-Glazed Ware bowl (Fig. 7.4:3). Locus 672, the fill below Floor 664 and accordingly dating it (Fig. 7.5),34 provides a rich repertoire of vessels that can be dated to the ninth century, although some of the wares are known to have continued into the tenth century. This fill provides a terminus post quem of the ninth century for the construction of the floor. The appearance, among the glazed wares, of an Egyptianimported, white tin-glazed bowl (Fig. 7.5:20) should be emphasized, as this ware is usually dated from the mid-ninth to the late tenth centuries (see above).

Stratum III The architectural remains in this stratum consist mainly of wall segments (W901, W902, W905, W942) associated with an architectural unit located immediately to the east of Channel 676 (see Chapter 2). The small ceramic assemblage recovered from Floor 621 consists of a mixture of transitional late Byzantine–Early Islamic wares, together with a few post-Umayyad sherds,35 thus contributing little to the establishment of the chronological sequence of this stratum. The two main assemblages from Stratum III discussed here are fills from within Channels 601 and 676, both first built during the Byzantine period but in continued use up to the Islamic period. Their contents differ notably from each other, although their latest use seems to coincide in the tenth century. While

180

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

Channel 601 yielded a large amount of material from the late Hellenistic–Early Roman periods together with ninth–tenth-century types (Fig. 7.6),36 Channel 676 produced mainly later material dated to the ninth–tenth centuries (Figs. 7.7, 7.8), such as incised and hatched Buff Ware jugs and strainers (early material, including even some Iron II sherds, came from baskets retrieved from the bottom of the drain). These fills obviously reflect different levels of wash-out at times of little or no maintenance of the drainage system, in which pottery from adjacent fills penetrated the channels. In both cases, the latest material recovered, datable to the ninth–tenth centuries, relates to the abandonment of this stratum, when the drainage channels went out of use. Considering that Stratum IV can be dated to the mid-ninth century, Stratum III cannot have been abandoned earlier than the end of the ninth–early tenth centuries.

Stratum II Two features are associated with this stratum, W900 and the related Floor 610, both located on the easternmost side of Area M1 (Fig. 7.9). The dismantling of W900 produced a mixed assemblage, which included a fragment of a drain pipe (Fig. 7.9:3) typical of the Early Islamic period (Tal and Taxel 2008:90–91; Prag 2008: Fig. 146.2), a Red Slip Ware bowl (LRC, Form 3), combed and gouged basins (Fig. 7.9:1, 2) and a flat, almond-shaped base of a moldmade lamp (not illustrated). The construction of an insubstantial wall (W900, only one row wide), directly over W901, implies that little time elapsed between the final use of the Stratum III wall and the construction of the Stratum II wall. Given the fact that Stratum III was apparently abandoned in the end of the ninth–early tenth centuries, and no typical wares of the eleventh century were detected, Stratum II should be dated to the early tenth century at the latest. The pottery assemblage recovered from Floor 610 is of little chronological significance (Fig. 7.9:4–10). It includes some Roman-period wares, transitional late Byzantine–Early Islamic wares such as LRC Form 3 bowls, arched-rim bowls, rilled-rim basins and bagshaped storage jars, as well as late eighth–ninth-century wares, such as typical post-Umayyad storage jars, Buff Ware jugs and Fine Burnished Ware jugs. Among the sherds dating to the Abbasid period, worth mentioning

is the fragment of a mold-made lamp decorated with an amphora and bearing an inscription that reads baraka (Fig. 7.9:10). The flat base of a bowl with glossy brown-glaze inside and out, and made of a fine, hardfired orange fabric (Fig. 7.9:9), is uncommon, and is either an early type of glazed ware, or an Ottoman intrusion.37

Stratum I This stratum is characterized by a series of pits, without architectural context, containing mixed pottery, the latest consisting of wares typical of the ninth–tenth centuries, similar to those in the assemblages discussed above. The lack of eleventh-century wares implies that the area was abandoned during the tenth century. On the other hand, there were occasional fragments of thirteenth–fourteenth-century wares, as well as some Ottoman material, including Gaza Ware and glazed fragments, but mainly tobacco pipes (Fig. 7.11).

Conclusions The study of the Islamic pottery from Area M1 is potentially of considerable importance for the understanding of urban development in this part of Jerusalem under Islamic rule. The Giv‘ati Parking Lot site is located very close to the monumental complex of Umayyad buildings adjacent to the Temple Mount, and more specifically, almost immediately to the south of Building II, interpreted as the dār al-imāra (‘the government house’; for a summary of the finds from the Temple Mount excavations by B. Mazar and M. BenDov, see Ben-Dov 1982:293–321; Bahat 1996:70–73; Rosen-Ayalon 1996:393–395). It is also located within the perimeter of the fifth-century walls of Eudocia (Mazar 2007), but outside the alleged contracted course of the city walls (from at least the Fatimid period onward); thus, the pottery analysis is potentially informative for the process of the contraction of the city boundaries (see below). Due to the limited exposure of Early Islamic remains in Area M1 in the 2007 excavation season (most of the remains of Strata IV–I were excavated and removed during the 2003 season; see Chapter 1), few secure loci associated with this period were excavated. Therefore, a cautious approach is demanded when analyzing the ceramic finds. While the meager results from Area M1

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

do not shed any light on a relationship with the nearby Umayyad building complex, they may, however, assist in determining the chronology of the contraction of the city’s southern perimeter. The pottery provides a mid-ninth-century date as the terminus post quem for the erection of the building in Strata IV and III (see Fill 672 under Floor 664 for the earliest date for Stratum IV, and fills within Installation 646 and on Floor 667 for the earliest date for Stratum III), while the end of the ninth–early tenth centuries is the latest date for Stratum III. Stratum II should be dated to the early tenth century. The many pits in Stratum I filled with similar pottery assemblages indicate a general abandonment of the area during the tenth century. Could this abandonment have resulted from the area’s exclusion from the fortified city boundaries? Most of the historical discussions dealing with the contraction of the southern city wall have centered mainly on the description of the gates of Jerusalem written by al-Muqaddasī in 985 (Ahsan al-Taqasīm, 167; Best Divisions, 152–153).38 While Bahat proposed that the Jerusalemite geographer referred to an expanded city perimeter (encircled by Eudocia’s wall, which included Mt. Zion and the pool of Silwan; Bahat 1996:43–44), Tsafrir suggested a contracted city area, in which the new southern wall was erected over the old track of the Aelia Capitolina wall (Tsafrir 1977:155; see also Gil 1997:650–651, §847). Wightman also believed that alMuqaddasī described a contracted city, but in his view that process took place much earlier than suggested by Bahat and Tsafrir. If Bahat is correct, “the reduction in Jerusalem’s area took place sometime around the end of the tenth century [i.e., after al-Muqaddasī’s description; KCS] or the beginning of the eleventh [i.e., following the earthquake of 1033; KCS]… (Bahat 1996:44).39 Bahat also noted Vincent and Abel’s proposal that Eudocia’s wall was abandoned by orders of the Fatimid caliph al-‘Azīz (975–996 CE), in view of the raid by the Byzantine emperor Johannes Tzimikes in the environs of Jerusalem in 975 CE (Bahat 1996:43).40 If Tsafrir is correct, the fortified city area contracted even earlier, between 87041 and 966.42 Wightman, on the other hand, viewed the abandonment of Eudocia’s wall as a gradual process (Wightman 1993:235–236), beginning as early as the Umayyad period, and hastened toward its end, under Marwān II (r. 127/744–132/749–750).43 The pottery results unfortunately do not enable a clear-cut conclusion as to which wall al-Muqaddasī

181

referred to. On the other hand, the presence of late ninth–early tenth-century wares underlying the building activity of Strata IV and III (supposedly built within the city limits) would seem to rule out Wightman’s interpretation (unless this was an extra-muros quarter, which would suit the concept of the rabad mentioned by al-Muqaddasī), and to undermine Tsafrir’s, as it allows little time for any major building activity to take place after the late ninth century and 966 CE. Still, the results hint that the city’s contraction happened before the end of the tenth century.44 The meager finds postdating the tenth century from Area M1—a few wares from the thirteenth–fourteenth centuries and the late seventeenth–eighteenth centuries—are testimony to the continuous exclusion of this area from the urban milieu.

Appendix 7.1 Ottoman Tobacco Pipes Eight fragments of Ottoman clay pipes were recovered from the studied loci, two from L672 (Fig. 7.11:4, 6), one from L666 (Fig. 7.11:7) and four from L840 (Fig. 7.11:1–3, 5), all of which are intrusive in the Early Islamic assemblage. The example in Fig. 7.11:8 originated in a surface deposit. The pipes in Fig. 7.11:1–5 are all typologically related, despite the varied decorative schemes, consisting of small pipes with bulbous shanks and round bowls, with a light gray, burnished surface. The example in Fig. 7.11:1 has a clear distinction between the bowl and the shank (2 cm long, opening 0.7 cm); i.e., it has no keel (cf. Dekkel 2008:139, No. 35, dated to the beginning of the eighteenth century or slightly earlier), unlike those in Fig. 7.11:3, 4 which do have a keel. The shank of No. 1 consists of a bulbous wreath with a row of stamped leaves and notch-rouletting, and two pairs of incised lines at the shank’s base. The bowl, missing the lip, is decorated with three rows of small ‘dot and bracket’ stamps (Simpson 2008:436, Fig. 268.15), contained between incised lines and notch-rouletting. The base is also decorated, though slightly worn, with a stamped, schematic, eight-petalled flower. Such ‘rosette’ stamps were production marks on the bottom of pipes lacking a keel (Dekkel 2008:128; see also Simpson 2008: Fig. 268, Nos. 9, 15). The shank in Fig. 7.11:2 is also bulbous (max. diam. c. 2 cm; the opening cannot be measured as the rim is missing), but the decoration

182

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

consists of diagonal lines bordered on the top by an incised line crowned by minute triangles, a rouletted wavy line, and a pair of incised lines at the shank’s base. The bulbous shank in Fig. 7.11:3 (max. diam. 2.2 cm, opening 0.9 cm), resembles that in Fig. 7.11:1 in shape and decorative program, but is slightly longer (c. 3 cm), while the rounded bowl is of a different type, provided with a keel. The gadrooned bowl is decorated with alternating vertical rouletted wavy lines and dots. The lower shank and keel are also decorated with a wavy roulette pattern. There is a general resemblance to a tobacco-pipe from Baniyas (Dekkel 2008:139, No. 26), though the latter lacks a keel. The pipe in Fig. 7.11:4 also differs typologically from Nos. 1 and 3. Although the bulbous shank is short, as in No. 1, the wreath reaches a diameter of 2.5 cm, and is provided with a prominent stepped ring termination (opening 1 cm). The shank is decorated with one row of cypresstree impressions, stamped alternatively up and down (Simpson 2008: Fig. 268, Nos. 7–11). The transition to the bowl is somewhat similar to that of No. 3. The bowl is unevenly stamped with small round flowers alternating with pairs of small triangular leaves joined at their points. The bottom of the bowl is also stamped with three round flowers. The shank in Fig. 7.11:5 (max. diam. of wreath 2.5 cm, opening 1 cm) is also decorated with alternating cypress-tree impressions, as in No. 4. In general, these light gray smoking pipes are considered to be the earliest types, dating to the late seventeenth–eighteenth centuries (Robinson 1983:270, Pl. 52, 1985:161–163; Dekkel 2008:116; Simpson 2008: 433–435). The shank with a stepped ring (opening 0.8–0.9 cm) in Fig. 7.11:6 is unburnished and lightly decorated with

a pair of rouletted Vs, alternating up and down and framing a plain, narrow wreath (0.8–0.9 cm high, diam. 2.4 cm. The wreath’s shape is somewhat reminiscent of that of a pipe from Baniyas (Dekkel 2008:136–137, No. 22), also dated to the seventeenth–beginning of the eighteenth centuries. The fragment in Fig. 7.11:7 stands out amongst this group in its well-burnished, dark burgundy color. The shank is as short as that of No. 1 (c. 2 cm, opening 1 cm), but is decorated with a pair of narrow incised lines marking the beginning of a flaring wreath, while a single line separates the flaring top from two plain, prominent rings. This dark purplish-red pipe, with a plain but shiny finish, is reminiscent of Types 17– 21 from Corinth (Robinson 1985:164), dated to the eighteenth century, and of examples from Baniyas dated to the end of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth centuries (Dekkel 2008:121, Nos. 27–30). The long, faceted shank (hexagonal in section) in Fig. 7.11:8 is of an altogether different style. It measures 5.3 cm long (from rim to transition to bowl), terminating in a stamped wreath (diam. 2.2 cm), framed by rouletted lines. The stepped ring around the opening (0.8 cm wide) is thickened, setting it apart typologically from the previous example. The burnished, reddish-yellow surface of this pipe also contrasts with the previous examples. The faceted shank seems to correspond to a group from Corinth and the Athenian Agora dated by Robinson to the late eighteenth–first half of the nineteenth centuries (Robinson1985:164, C-33–C-78), although its length and the stepped ring are features not seen among those assemblages.

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

183

1

2

3 4

5

6 7

0

10

Fig. 7.1. Pottery from the dismantling of Stratum IV, Installation 646. No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Red Slip Ware bowl (ARS)

5715/5

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6 fabric, many minute shiny inclusions, gritty, dense; interior and exterior slipped and burnished to intense red–reddish yellow 2.5YR 5/8–5YR 6/8

2

Arched-rim basin

5715/1

Light brown 7.5YR 6/3 fabric, mostly light brownish gray 10YR 6/2 core, uneven light brown 7.5YR 6/3 to pinkish gray 7.5YR 6/2 interior and exterior, small white, black grits and shiny inclusions, very dense; hard fired

3

Gaza storage jar

5715/2

Pink/reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/5 fabric, gritty and very micaceous; medium-hard fired

4

FBW jug

5715/3

Pink/reddish yellow 5YR 7/5 fabric, lighter 7.5YR 8/5 interior and exterior, perhaps a self-slip, many small white grits and minute shiny inclusions; medium-hard fired; gouged diagonal incision on lower neck

5

Cooking lid

5715/6

Red 2.5YR 4/8 fabric

6

Drain pipe?

5715/4

Pink 7.5YR 7/4 fabric, uneven pink 7.5YR 8/4 exterior, gritty, dense; hard fired; rough finish on ‘rim’

7

Drain pipe?

5715/7

Pink 7.5YR 8/3 fabric, gritty, dense; rough finish interior, exterior fired to very pale brown 10YR 8/3; hard fired to metallic ring

184

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

Fig. 7.2 ► No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Fine Burnished Ware bowl with incurved rim

5287/21

Light brown 7.5YR 6/4 fabric, mostly gray core, very pale brown 10YR 7/3–7.5/3 interior and exterior, dense with small white and shiny inclusions; hard fired to metallic ring

2

Fine Burnished Ware hemispherical bowl

5227/20

Pink 7.5YR 7/4 fabric, thin gray core, very pale brown 10YR 8/3 interior and exterior, well-levigated, though not as dense as No. 1; hard fired

3

Fine Burnished Ware ansate mug

6359/1, 6,7

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6 fabric, pink/reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/5 interior and exterior, some small white grits, dense, well-levigated

4

Comb-decorated basin

4958/1

Reddish yellow 5YR 7/6 fabric; gray core; gritty dense fabric; hard fired; very pale brown 10YR 8/2 interior and exterior, probably a slip, horizontal and wavy combed decoration below rim

5

Gouge-decorated basin, complete profile

6487/1

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 8/5 fabric, very gritty and porous; poorly fired, tending to flake; gouged wavy line decoration

6

Bag-shaped storage jar with short neck

4958/5

Light yellowish brown 10YR 6/4 fabric; brownish yellow/yellow 10YR 6.5/6 interior and exterior, slightly sandy; hard fired

7

Nabi Samwil storage jar with tapering neck

5227/1

Pink/light brown 7.5YR 6.5/4 fabric, pink 7.5YR 8/4 interior and exterior, visible white, gray, black and some brown grits, dense; hard fired

8

Nabi Samwil storage jar with tall, cylindrical neck

5227/2

Pink 7.5YR 7.5/4 fabric, very gritty, dense; hard fired; pink 7.5YR 8/4 interior, very pale brown 10YR 8/3 exterior, probably a wash

9

Nabi Samwil storage jar with swollen neck

4998/6

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric; pink/reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/5 interior and exterior; gritty including shiny material, dense; hard fired to metallic ring

10

Common Ware jug with flat base

6487/5

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6 fabric; uneven reddish yellow 5YR 7/6 interior and exterior and flaky; gritty, lower body seems to have been smoothed by paring, upper body coarser; medium-hard fired

11

Common Ware jug with ring base

6296/6

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric, many white and shiny inclusions, some black and brown (grog?) grits; light gray 10YR 7.5/2 slip; hard fired to metallic ring

12

Fine Burnished Ware jug with flat base

6296/7

Light reddish brown 5YR 6/4 fabric; smooth pink/reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/5 interior and exterior, small white grits, dense; hard fired to metallic ring

185

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

2

1

3

4

5

6 7 8

9 11

10

12 0

10

Figs. 7.2. Pottery from the fill of Stratum IV, Installation 646.

186

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

Fig. 7.3 ► No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Plain Buff Ware jug

6487/6

Pink 5YR 7/4 fabric, slightly sandy and gritty; hard fired to metallic ring; very pale brown slip 10YR 8/2 interior and exterior; combed band on upper neck

2

Plain Buff Ware jug

6497/2

Yellow 10YR 7/6 fabric, very pale brown 10YR 8/2 interior and exterior, slightly sandy and gritty; hard fired

3

Plain Buff Ware jug

5227/8

Pale brown 2.5Y 8/2 fabric, uniform color, slightly sandy and gritty; small round application on handle—remains of a thumbrest

4

Plain Buff Ware jug

6497/1

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3 fabric, uniform color, slightly sandy and gritty; metallic ring

5

Incised and hatched Buff Ware jug

6528/2

fabric as No. 4, yellowish pale brown (lighter than 2.5Y 8/3) interior and exterior

6

Buff-Ware jug, probably incised and hatched

6359/3

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric, pale brown (lighter than 2.5Y 8/3) interior and exterior

7

Molded Buff Ware jug

6487/4

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric; seam visible on interior

8

Stamped and appliquéd BuffWare jar

6487/2

Yellow 10YR 7/6 fabric, very pale brown/pale brown 10YR 8/4–2.5Y 8/3 interior and exterior, gritty and dense; hard fired

9

Buff Ware jug with flat base

6487/3

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric, light buff interior and exterior

10

Buff Ware jug with disc base

4998/1

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric, pale yellow 5Y 8/2.5 interior and exterior; hard fired

11

Turquoise AlkalineGlazed Ware bowl

6528/1

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3 fabric; glaze (on slip) corroded to golden patina

12

Monochrome LeadGlazed Ware cup

5346/4

Very pale brown 10YR 7.5/4 fabric, sandy with many shiny inclusions; green glaze on interior and exterior (similar to bowl in Fig. 7.5:16)

13

Yellow-Glazed Ware (with green decoration) bowl

6487/7

Reddish yellow 5YR 6.5/6 fabric, gritty with shiny particles, dense; hard fired; glaze applied over very pale brown 10YR 8/3 slip interior and exterior

14

Yellow-Glazed Ware bowl

6487/10

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3 fabric, gritty; hard fired; pale yellow 5Y 8/3 slip interior and exterior; radial manganese-purple stripes over yellow glaze

15

Yellow-Glazed Ware bowl with disc base

6359/2

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6 fabric, small white and shiny inclusions, slightly sandy; hard fired; very pale brown 10YR 7.5/3 slip interior and exterior

16

Molded candlestick lamp fragment

5346/14

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric; thick, very pale brown 10YR 8/2 wash

187

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

2

3

1

6

5 4

7

8

10

9

12

11

13

14

16

15 0

10

Fig. 7.3. Pottery from the fill of Stratum IV, Installation 646 (cont.).

188

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

1

2

3 0

10

Fig. 7.4. Pottery from Stratum IV, Floor 667. No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

FBW mug with ring base

5713/2

Light brown 7.5YR 6/4 fabric, mottled light brown to brown 10YR 5/3 interior and exterior, well-levigated; hard fired to metallic ring

2

Comb-decorated basins

5713/1

Very pale brown 10YR 7/3 fabric; (lighter) very pale brown 10YR 7/4–8/4 interior and exterior; sandy with many small inclusions; well-fired

3

Local Lead-Glazed Ware bowl with flat disc base

5781/1

Very pale brown 10YR 8/2 fabric, sandy; well-fired; glaze very worn

189

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

2 1

3

4

6 7 5

8

9

10

12

11

13

14

15 16

18

17

19 0

10

0

4

21

Fig. 7.5. Pottery from Stratum IV L672, fill under Floor 664.

20

190

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

◄ Fig. 7.5 No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Fine Burnished Ware mug, complete

-

Light brown/reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/5 fabric, some small to medium-sized white grits; dense; fired to metallic ring; apparently thin slip applied to upper portion and fired to buff (10YR 8/4)

2

Nabi Samwil storage jar with short ridged neck

6288/9

Pink 7.5YR 7/4 fabric; gray core, gritty; dense; fired to metallic ring; very pale brown 10YR 8/2–2.5Y 8/2 slip on interior and exterior

3

Common Ware jug with disc base

6288/15

Light red exterior 2.5YR 6/6 fabric, pink/reddish-yellow 7.5YR 7/5 interior, mainly white inclusions, voids from decayed organic matter; very gritty

4

Common Ware jug with flat base

6288/16

Yellowish red 5YR 5/6 fabric, light red 2.5YR 6/6 exterior

5

Fine Burnished Ware jug

6137/11

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6 fabric; pink 7.5YR 7.5/4 to very pale brown/yellow 10YR 7/5 interior and exterior, many small grits, mainly white, some shiny, dense; fired to metallic ring; slip on interior and exterior

6

Plain Buff Ware jug

6137/3

Pinkish white 5YR 8/2.5 fabric, mainly small brown and white grits, porous and gritty

7

Stamped and appliquéd Buff Ware jar

6269/6

Pinkish white 5YR 8/2.5 fabric, porous and gritty

8

Buff Ware jug with flat base

6497/6

Pink 7.5YR 8/3 fabric; dense; hard fired; very pale brown 10YR 8/2 slip

9

Buff Ware jug with carinated base

6845/3

Pale brown 2.5Y 8/3 fabric, gritty, many voids from decayed organic matter; hard fired

10

Buff Ware jug with disc base

6288/13

Pale brown 2.5Y 8/3 fabric, very gritty; hard fired

11

Buff Ware-related jug with slightly concave base

6288/14

Light brown 7.5YR 6/4 fabric, very gritty and hard; unevenly fired white/very pale brown 10YR 8/1.5 to pink 7.5YR 8/4 slip

12

Monochrome Lead-Glazed Ware bowl with ring base

6288/12

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3.5 fabric, gritty; hard fired; yellow glaze on interior and exterior over very pale brown 10YR 8/2 slip, yielding a light yellow 2.5Y 7.5/8 tinge

13

Monochrome Lead-Glazed Ware juglet

6499/1

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/8 fabric; colorless glaze on interior; glossy green 5G 4.5/2 glaze on lip and exterior

14

Yellow-Glazed Ware bowl with disc base

6521/3

Pink 7.5YR 7/4 fabric; mainly white and brown (grog?) grits, gritty dense; hard fired; unglazed surface covered with buff wash; green and manganese-purple splashes on yellow

15

‘Splash’-Glazed Ware bowl

6288/10

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3 fabric; glossy green glaze on interior and exterior

16

‘Splash’-Glazed Ware bowl with ring base

6269/9

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3.5 fabric; radial stripes and dots in transparent colorless glaze, amidst a dark green glaze (reserve glazing) on interior and exterior; possible radial green stripes, applied on an overall transparent glaze

17

Local Monochrome Lead-Glazed Ware hemispherical bowl

6765/1

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3 fabric; green glaze on interior, plain exterior with some dripping

18

Local Polychrome LeadGlazed Ware small bowl

6137/9

Pale brown 2.5Y 8/3 fabric; glaze partly worn

19

Local Polychrome LeadGlazed Ware bowl

6137/14

Pale brown 2.5Y 7.5/4 fabric; glazed on interior, plain exterior with some dripping over lip

20

White Tin-Glazed Ware bowl

6137/15

Pale yellow 2.5Y 8/4 fabric; white tin glaze on interior and exterior, over-painted with turquoise and manganese purple glazes

21

Mold-made lamp fragment

-

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/5 fabric

191

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

1

2 3

5 6

4

0

2

0

2

9

8 7

10 11

12

14

13 15 0

10

Fig. 7.6. Selected Islamic-period pottery from Channel 601.

192

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

◄ Fig. 7.6 No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Nabi Samwil storage jar (Byzantine)

6482/2

Pink 5YR 6/8 fabric; thin gray core; many small white grits, dense; hard fired to metallic ring

2

Stopper

6024/15

Light yellowish-brown 10YR 6/4 fabric, very pale brown 10YR 7/3.5 interior and exterior

3

Fine Burnished Ware jug with flat base

6692/1

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric, light gray core, many small black and white grits, gritty, dense

4

Plain Buff Ware jug

6684/2

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/6 to very pale brown 10YR 7/3 fabric; pale brown 2.5Y 8/2 interior and exterior; combed decoration under rim

5

Plain Buff Ware jug

6024/11

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric; pale brown 2.5Y 8/4 interior and exterior

6

Molded Buff Ware jug

6024/5

Yellow 10YR 7/6 fabric, sandy and gritty; white 2.5Y 8/2 slip

7

Incised and appliquéd Buff Warerelated jug

6482/3

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6 fabric, sandy and gritty; hard fired; very pale brown 10YR 8/2 slip

8

Plain Buff Ware jug with flat base

6024/16

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric, lighter 10YR 8/2.5 interior and exterior

9

Yellow-Glazed Ware bowl

6024/8

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6 fabric

10

Yellow-Glazed Ware bowl

6024/7

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/6 fabric; green radial stripes over yellow glaze

11

Cooking bowl

6684/1

Yellowish red 5YR 5/6 fabric, reddish brown 5YR 5/4 interior and exterior

12

Cooking lid

6684/3

Yellowish red 5YR 5/6 fabric, reddish gray 5YR 5/2 interior, dark gray 5YR 4/1 exterior

13

Cooking lid

6684/4

Yellowish red 5YR 5/6 fabric, light reddish brown/reddish-brown 5YR 5.5/4 interior and exterior

14

Glazed frying pan

6684/11

Brown 7.5YR 5/4 fabric; light brown 7.5YR 6/4 exterior with remains of dark lead glaze

15

Mold-made lamp, nozzle missing

6707

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 7.5/6 fabric

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

193

Fig. 7.7 ► No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Red-Slip Ware bowl (LRC)

5935/5

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6 fabric, light red/red 2.5YR 5.5/8–6/8 interior and exterior, light brown 7.5YR 6/3 outer lip, many small inclusions and some minute shiny particles, dense

2

Comb-decorated large bowl

6291/7

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric; many small white and black grits, dense; hard fired to metallic ring; combed decoration

3

Fine Burnished Ware bowl

5935/6

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/8 fabric; reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6–7/6 interior and exterior; dense; well-levigated; hard fired to metallic ring; area above the carination slipped and fired pink 7.5YR 7/3; exterior burnished.

4

Fine Burnished Ware mug

5935/3, 6291/10

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/8 fabric, many white grits; pink 7.5YR 7/3 slip under rim; lower body burnished

5

Fine Burnished Ware large bowl

6358/1

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric, reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/6 to very pale brown 10YR 7/4 interior and exterior; well-levigated and hard fired to metallic ring; exterior pare burnished

6

Fine Burnished Ware mug, probably ansate as in Fig. 7.2:3

6358/24

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/8 fabric, as No. 3; very hard fired

7

Holemouth jar

5935/2

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/6 fabric, pink to reddish yellow 7.5YR 8/4–8/6 interior and exterior; many minute grits, including shiny particles; well-levigated; hard fired; finger impressions on rim, a double groove on shoulder

8

Fine Burnished Ware jug with flat base

6291/17

Brown 10YR 5/3 fabric, dense; well-levigated; very hard fired to metallic ring

9

Incised and hatched Buff Ware jug

6291/3, 4, 13

Pale brown 2.5Y 8/3 fabric, slightly gritty

10

Incised and hatched Buff Ware jug

6358/15, 20

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric, pale brown 10YR–2.5Y 8/4 interior and exterior, slightly gritty, as No. 10 remains of single handle

11

Incised and hatched Buff Ware jug with strainer

6358/4, 5, 8, 16 6291/2

Very pale brown 10YR–2.5Y 8/2 fabric

12

Incised and hatched Buff Ware jug with strainer

6358/13

Pale brown 10YR–2.5Y 8/2 fabric, pale brown 2.5Y 8/2 interior and exterior

13

Buff Ware jug with strainer

6635/1, 6358

Yellow 10YR 7.5/6 fabric; yellowish buff slip (or self slip?); strainer punctured and incised

14

Buff Ware jug with strainer

6635/2

Pale brown 2.5Y 8/4 fabric; molded decoration

15

Buff Ware jug with grooved disc base

6291/16

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric, pale brown 2.5Y 8/2 interior and exterior

194

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

1 2

3 4

6 5

8

7

10

9

12

11

13

14

15 0

10

Fig. 7.7. Selected Islamic-period pottery from Channel 676.

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

1 2

3 4

5

0

10

0

4

6

7

Fig. 7.8. Selected Islamic-period pottery from Channel 676 (cont.). No.

Vessel Type

Basket

Description

1

Monochrome Lead-Glazed Ware small bowl

6358/20

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric, sandy and gritty; hard fired to metallic ring; light yellow glaze on interior and exterior over cream slip

2

Monochrome Lead-Glazed Ware bowl

6358/12

Light brown 7.5YR 6/4 fabric; dark purple glaze interior and exterior; lip indented in two places, suggesting a petal-shaped rim

3

‘Splash’-Glazed Ware bowl

6358/9

Light brown/reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/5 fabric, sandy and gritty

4

Local Polychrome LeadGlazed Ware bowl

6291/11

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric, sandy, dense; hard fired; green stripes and manganese-purple dots on white background on interior, plain exterior, apart from some glazing below the rim

5

Deep cooking bowl

6358/10

Very dark gray 2.5Y 3/1 fabric

6

Glazed cooking pot with flat base

6291/18

Yellowish red 5YR 4/6–5/6 fabric

7

Mold-made lamp, intact

6807

Light red to reddish yellow 2.5–5YR 6/6 fabric

195

196

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

Fig. 7.9 ► No.

Vessel Type

Locus/Wall

Basket

Description

1

Comb-decorated basin

W900

4667/2

Light brown/reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/5 fabric, gray core throughout, gritty and dense; hard fired

2

Gouge-decorated basin

W900

4695/7

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric, mainly small white inclusions, very gritty and dense

3

Drain pipe

W900

4695/3

Light brown to reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/5 fabric; covered with accretions interior and exterior

4

FBW mug with flat base

610

4567/2

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6/6 fabric, gray core; very hard fired; burnished interior and exterior

5

Nabi Samwil storage jar with swollen neck

610

4546/2

Pink 7.5YR 8/4 fabric, minute grits; dense; hard fired to metallic ring

6

Fine Burnished Ware jug with flat base

610

4567/5, 4563/5

Brown 7.5YR 5/4 fabric

7

Buff Ware jug

610

4546/10

Very pale brown 10YR 8/4 fabric, lighter 10YR 8/2 interior and exterior; combed band under rim

8

Buff Ware jug with bifid handle and small pyramidal thumbrest

610

4531/18

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3 fabric

9

Glazed bowl with flat base

610

4546/4

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/8 fabric, very micaceous; hard fired; brown glaze on interior and exterior

10

Mold-made lamp fragment

610

4531/8

Pinkish gray 5YR 7/2 fabric; decorated with amphora motif and inscribed with word baraka within medallion near channel and wickhole

197

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

1

2 3

4

6

5

7

8

9

0

10

0

4

10

Fig. 7.9. Pottery from Stratum II, W900 and related Floor 610.

198

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

1

2

3 4 0

5

10

0

4

6

Fig. 7.10. Selected pottery from various fills. No.

Vessel Type

Locus

Basket

Description

1

Fine Burnished Ware mug, complete

638

5348

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 6.5/6 fabric

2

Incised and hatched BuffWare neckless jug

688

5900/8

Very pale brown 10YR–2.5Y 8/2 fabric

3

Local Polychrome LeadGlazed Ware small bowl

604

4527

Pale yellow 2.5Y 8/3 fabric, sandy; polychrome painting under clear, yellowish glaze inside, remains of worn yellowish glaze outside

4

Local Polychrome LeadGlazed Ware bowl

604

4527/11

Very pale brown 10YR 8/3 fabric; green stripes, manganese-purple dots on interior in the center of bowl, and yellow ‘half-moons’ on rim, under transparent yellowish glaze; exterior bare, except for some glaze dripping

5

Mold-made lamp, nearly intact

674

6059

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/5 fabric

6

Mold-made lamp, intact

Surface

8384

Reddish yellow 5YR 6/6–6/8 fabric

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

2 1

3

4

5

6

7

8 0

2

Fig. 7.11. Tobacco pipes. No.

Locus

Basket

Description

1

840

9558/19

White 2.5Y 8/1 fabric, light gray 10YR 7.5/1 exterior

2

840

9558/18

White 10YR 8/1 fabric, light gray 10YR 7.5/1 exterior

3

840

9558/16

White 10YR 8/1 fabric, mottled, light gray 10YR 7/1 to gray 2.5Y 6/1 exterior

4

672

6288/4

White (10YR 8/1) fabric, light gray 10YR 7/1 exterior

5

840

9558/17

Light gray 10YR 7/1 fabric, light gray to gray 2.5Y 5/1 exterior

6

672

6288/1

White 10YR 8/1 fabric, light gray 10YR 7.5/1 exterior

7

666

6314

mottled, weak red 10R 4/2 to dark gray exterior, dark gray core

8

Surface

9576

Reddish yellow 7.5YR 7/6 fabric

199

200

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

Notes Locus 601, L602, L603, L610, L613, L615, L616, L617, L618, L621, L623, L625, L627, L638, L639, L646, L654, L656, L658, L665, L667, L668, L672, L676, L677, L682, L684, L693, L696, W900. 2 It is clear that in reality the chronological span for Strata III–I is probably much narrower, and that most of the activity reported in this specific excavation area may have taken place over less than a hundred years (from the mid-ninth to the early tenth centuries). For Stratum IV, we have a clear terminus ad quem around the ninth century. 3 In the text, colors of fabrics, slips and glazes, etc., are described according to the author’s color perception. However, in the figure descriptions, colors are noted according to the Munsell Soil Color Charts (1975). While I acknowledge the shortcomings of such a method, I believe that this standard is preferable to an even more subjective system that describes sherds solely according to the author’s perceived tones. 4 A similar bowl from the Damascus Gate has been dated to no later than the eighth century (Wightman 1989:25, Fig. 32.10). See also Tushingham 1985: Figs. 28.9, 29.12, 33.19, dated to the Byzantine period. 5 Despite my dissatisfaction regarding the label Fine Byzantine Ware, especially when referring to vessels recovered in Islamic layers, I shall retain this by-now popular denomination. 6 Laboratory analyses of some of the variants of FBW, focusing on the decorated specimens, have been conducted by Shoshana Agady within the framework of her research toward a Masters degree at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, supervised by Myriam Rosen-Ayalon and the author. The results will appear in her forthcoming thesis. 7 A bowl with an angular rim, similar to Fig. 7.7:6 and to de Vaux and Steve 1950: Pl. B:5, has been published among the finds from the Damascus Gate (Fill ZII.29; Wightman 1989: Fig. 20.5), dated “not later than the early years of the eighth century A.D.” (Wightman 1989:5), which is apparently too early. For a review of Wightman’s stratigraphy and chronology, see Magness 1993:37–43, who dates Level ZII.36–27 to the late seventh–mid-eighth centuries (Magness 1993:40). Similar vessels from excavations by Yuval Baruch at Herod’s Gate in Jerusalem in 2004–2007 were analyzed by the author. They usually appear with glazed bowls and Buff Ware, hinting at a post-Umayyad date. 8 For the reassessing of the dating of Abu Ghosh, see, for example, Stacey 2004:12; Cytryn-Silverman 2010:142, n. 1. 9 Similar fabric and surface treatment are found among the comb-decorated basins, to which this group are apparently related, perhaps originating from the same production center. 10 See a note by Hamilton on two such handles from the Ophel (1944:16, n. 1). Apart from this formula, the inscriptions Baraka Ayyb, Baraka liāhibihi, Allahu Ahad are also common, as well as geometric motifs such as five-pointed stars. Their respective containers all seem to originate from the same source. Among the many examples of these formulas, as well as the geometric renderings, worth 1

mentioning are the handles from the Armenian Garden in Jerusalem (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 35, No. 13), bearing Baraka Ayyb, and those from Caesarea (Sharon 1999:292– 294; Arnon 2008a:162–164) and Ramla (Cytryn-Silverman 2010:102, Photo 9.3, bearing Allahu Ahad; Tal and Taxel 2008:147, Type 6, Fig. 6.94.31, bearing an octagonal star with dots). 11 Worthy of note is the appearance of two variants of such large storage jars (one with a tapering neck, the other a long upright neck) in the excavations against the northern city wall of Jerusalem (Hamilton 1944: Figs. 7.1, 7.2), where they were accompanied by arched-rim bowls, cooking pots with splaying necks, FBW bowls and mugs with or without incised wavy lines, slipper lamps, and others. Hamilton compared this assemblage to that excavated at the Ophel dated to the sixth–early seventh centuries, but for his excavations at the northern wall he suggested a “somewhat longer range…, not earlier than the second half of the seventh century, and perhaps even later,” especially as most of the associated coins were datable to the seventh century (Hamilton 1944:14). 12 A study on the development of this type, from the Byzantine to the Early Islamic periods, is still in order, and the typology proposed by Magness should be refined. 13 In Kenyon’s excavations of the Umayyad building in Jerusalem, such storage jars were recovered from Phase 4 (Prag 2008: Fig. 147.3, post-Umayyad up to the fourteenth century), but also from one of the baskets from Locus J.11.3, considered uncontaminated and associated with Phase 6a (subfloor of the Umayyad building, i.e., containing pottery up to the eighth century). It was found together with one deep casserole with no ribbing (Magness Casserole Form 3, dated to the late seventh–ninth/tenth centuries; Prag 2008:167). 14 A jar of similar type was recovered at the Damascus Gate, from a fill (JIV.12) dated to the first sixty years of the eighth century (Wightman 1989:25, Pl. 33:1). According to our results, Wightman’s range should be updated. 15 Both Avissar and Stacey also discuss a series of bowls made of a buff fabric and bearing incised decoration on the outer surface (Avissar 1996b:120, Type 6, only four sherds; Stacey 2004:92–93), absent from the Area M1 assemblages. Stacey argues that this group is characteristic of northern sites around Tiberias, which may have been their production center (Stacey 2004:93). 16 Petrographic analysis of five plain Buff Ware sherds collected in the North Sinai Survey (directed by Eliezer Oren of the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev) conducted in the 1990s by Yuval Goren (of Tel Aviv University, then of the IAA), indicated that the sherds were made “in a marly and silty undifferentiated ware, typical of the central Palestinian coastal plain. The area of Ramla-Lod is a good candidate for the source of these vessels. It should be brought to attention that the two sherds of Common Lead-Glazed Ware analyzed, as well as the mold … reveal similar results” (CytrynSilverman 1996:70–71, n. 73). 17 A jug fragment similar to Fig. 7.7:11 was recovered among the debris above the Umayyad building of Jerusalem, Phase 5,

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

dated to the Abbasid period (Prag 2008: Fig. 150.19). The set of characters that appears on these vessels usually repeats itself, sometimes in different combinations. Recently, it has been suggested by Tal and Taxel that an incised flask found at Ramla South, incised with similar characters (identified by the excavators as a West Semitic script), bears the word L-‘T, translated as the imperative of the verb “to swallow, to sip, to eat or even to lick” (Tal and Taxel 2008:213). If this reading is correct, our complete example (Fig. 7.7:11) would then read L-‘-T-‘-T (?). An in-depth paleographical study of the various pieces excavated so far (e.g., Stacey 2004: Fig. 5.60:4; Cytryn-Silverman 2010: Pl. 9.24:3) is necessary to establish the nature of this script, or pseudo-script. Worth noting is the neck of a jug from Caesarea (Brosh 1986:68, Pl. II.1b) with a different set of letters, reminiscent of Kufic script. 18 Perhaps also Stacey 2004: Fig. 5.41:6, though not included in his reference on the following page. 19 The earliest type of strainer related to the Buff Ware jugs was attached to the base of the neck, and consisted of simple sets of perforations (de Vaux and Steve 1950: Pl. D:18; Scanlon 1986:3–4, Figs. 1–6, Category A.I, ‘Simple/ Mechanical’ Filters; Arnon 2008a:131–133, Types 521i, dated to the late eighth to mid-ninth centuries). 20 For ceramic molds that confirm local production in the central coastal plain of Palestine, see the finds from the supposed workshop at Shikun Giora–Ramla (Rosen-Ayalon and Eitan 1969:15, 17; see also Cytryn-Silverman 2010: Photograph 9.12, Pl. 9.12:6). 21 Needless to say that petrographic analysis of this group, for comparison with other Buff Wares, is most desirable. 22 Note that the jug in Fig. 7.6:6 bears similar decorative characteristics, but shares neither the fabric nor the typical neck form. This jug is made of a coarse red fabric and covered with a thin buff slip, which lightens the surface color to a light red. It is comparable to a Buff Ware sherd from Caesarea, Stratum VI (late ninth–mid-tenth centuries; Arnon 2008a:211, Type 531m). 23 Even though the sherd illustrated in Stacey 2004: Fig. 5.48:6 is reported as originating from Stratum III/II, i.e., 880– 980/980–1033, associated with the two buildings erected in Area C1. 24 Wilkinson describes it as: “A ware with an opaque yellow glaze, produced by the application of a yellow engobe… The decoration of the ware is almost invariably in green. The reddish body is similar to that of the color-splashed, black on white and polychrome on white wares as made in Nishapur” (Wilkinson 1973:205). 25 See further, Watson 1999:81–82, 84, Pls. 94–96, 97a–e, for a discussion on the ‘Yellow Glazed Family’ in general and for specimens from Tell Aswad, Raqqa in particular. I would like to thank Donald Whitcomb of the Oriental Institute of Chicago for pointing out this reference, and Oliver Watson of the Khalili Research Centre, Oxford, for making available his article on Tell Aswad and his forthcoming article on early Islamic glazes and a revised view of Chinese influences. The illustrated examples from Tell Aswad seem distinct from the sherds found in Jerusalem, but as demonstrated by

201

Watson (1999; forthcoming), the ‘Yellow Glaze Family’ was produced in several different centers. 26 Wilkinson’s assumption of a Chinese inspiration for this ware (1973:54), an idea that permeated into academic circles as early as the 1920s by Frederik Sarre (1925:66–77), but mainly by Arthur Lane (1947:12), is not accepted by all researchers of Islamic pottery (e.g., Crowe 1976:297; Fehérvári 2000:47; Watson, forthcoming). 27 This sherd may perhaps be associated with Watson’s category of ‘Inglaze Decorated’, which should be differentiated from ‘Splash’-Glazed Ware, for these two groups applied different decoration techniques (Watson, forthcoming; pers. comm., March 27, 2013). 28 This would enable the dating of what Geva has described as “strengthening walls (…) added [to the extension walls of the round Early Islamic tower; KCS] later in the Early Islamic period” to the late ninth–early tenth centuries, further evidence for works on the city’s perimeter wall during that time. 29 For lamps inscribed in Arabic, see Khairy and ‘Amr 1986; Hadad 2002:93, 104–105, and more recently, Johnson 2010, with references therein. 30 It should be noted that the stratigraphic sequence differs slightly in Arnon 2008a:9; 2008a:17–27; 2008b:214. 31 The Schloessinger Collection of the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem holds six miniature lamps of the Early Islamic period, five of them with a tongue-shaped handle, one of them multi-nozzled (Rosenthal and Sivan 1978:137, Nos. 564–568). 32 The content of this fill resembles that of L672, with which it should be associated. 33 The 124 sherds recovered in the fill of Installation 646 (excluding Basket 5715 of the dismantling) also included some earlier, Roman intrusions (11 sherds), and even an Iron IIA burnished bowl fragment, all doubtless a result of wash-out after the area was abandoned. However, the majority of the material is very homogeneous, generally datable to the ninth–tenth centuries. 34 This fill also contained some residual pre-Islamic material, which could be clearly isolated from the later wares. More puzzling is the presence of two late Ottoman tobacco pipes (Fig. 7.11:4, 6), which somehow permeated into this Early Islamic layer. 35 Among the transitional types are the rims of hard-fired storage jars (related to the Nabi Samwil jars), the rim of an FBW mug decorated with a wavy incised line, the rim of an LRC bowl Form 3 and the handle of an amphora (cf. Hamilton 1944: Fig. 21.5; Adan-Bayewitz 1986: Fig. 3.7, related to Kellia Type 165), as well as a tubular wishbone handle of a cooking bowl (as in Hamilton 1944: Fig. 7.7; Adan-Bayewitz 1986: Fig. 3: 22). These transitional wares seem to be residual from the latest use of Stratum V, or perhaps evidence of a settlement at this site, in the vicinity of Area M1, during the Umayyad or early Abbasid period, i.e., mid-seventh to eighth centuries. Certainly post-Umayyad are the upper portion of the neck of a Buff Ware jug (similar to Fig. 7.3:1) and a small Local Lead-Glazed bowl, much worn but probably monochrome.

202

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

The incised and appliquéd neck of a buff-slipped jug of ninth–tenth-century date (Fig. 7.6:7), collected during the dismantling of this Byzantine drain, can only be an intrusion from the adjacent Abbasid fill, which in its turn was also contaminated with many late Hellenistic–Early Roman sherds. 37 While its shape is reminiscent of Fine Burnished Ware mugs, the fabric is different. It could be an early attempt to produce a glazed version of such wares, but the orange fabric is somehow reminiscent of imported Ottoman wares. 38 Although al-Muqaddasī’s work was published at the end of the tenth century, his description of Jerusalem most probably refers to the middle of that century, when he still lived there (according to his biography, he was born in Jerusalem in 946 and left in 966). My thanks to Amikam Elad of the Dept. of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies of the Hebrew University for elucidating this important detail on the chronological framework of al-Muqaddasī’s work. 39 Elsewhere, Bahat argued that Eudocia’s wall still existed in 1033 (Bahat 1996:57). This view has also been supported by Prawer, who proposed that the works were undertaken sometime between 1033 and 1063 (Prawer 1984:312). This dating, nevertheless, does not match the present archaeological results. 40 Vincent and Abel write: “Recouvrer les provinces orientales perdues par Héraclius, délivrer les Lieux saints, cette partie du programme de Nicéphore Phocas faillit être remplie par son successeur Jean Zimiscès qui exécuta un raid audacieux en 975 jusqu›aux environs de Jérusalem, au moment où la domination fatimite était à peine assise dans ces contrées. 36

Cette vive alerte dut engager, pensons-nous [underline by KCS], le calife el-‘Aziz qui venait de succéder à Mou‘izz, à rendre plus forte la Ville sainte en abandonnant la ligne, trop développée au sud, du rempart d’Eudocia” (Vincent and Abel 1926:939–940). Prawer (1984:312) strongly disagreed with Vincent and Abel’s view, by stressing that Nicéphore Phocas never got close enough to Jerusalem to constitute a threat to the city. Prawer also believed that if such a great work had taken place around 968 CE, it would have been reflected in alMuqaddasī’s description. However, see n. 38 above, that 968 would have been after he left Jerusalem. The main flaw in Vincent and Abel’s proposition is its purely deductive nature, lacking any clear historical sources to corroborate it. 41 Bernard the Monk’s description of Jerusalem in 870 still refers to Jerusalem’s expanded boundaries (Tsafrir 1977:157–158; Bahat 1996:43). 42 The year 966 would, in fact, be too late if one assumes that if al-Muqaddasī had been an eye-witness to such an important event, it would be somehow reflected in his work. Therefore, the range 870–946 seems more plausible. 43 Wightman refers to both Marwān’s measures against cities that rebelled against his rule by destroying their fortifications, and to the earthquake of the mid-eighth century. 44 In should be noted, nevertheless, than in his recent doctoral dissertation, Omar Abed-Rabo claims for a clear post-1033 date for the contraction of the southern city wall, most probably during the 1060s (Abed-Rabo 2012:195–200). His dating, while convincing according to the historical evidence brought forward, is not endorsed by the current results. However, future research on the pottery from the other areas in the Giv‘ati Parking Lot may yield finds of the eleventh century and throw some new light onto this complex urban topic.

R eferences Abed-Rabo O. 2012. Jerusalem during the Fātimid Period: Archaeological and Historical Aspects. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew, English summary, pp. III–XXXI). Adams R.C.Mc.1970. Tell Abū Sarīfa: A Sassanian–Islamic Ceramic Sequence from South Central Iraq. Ars Orientalis 8:87–119. Adan-Bayewitz D. 1986. The Pottery from the Late Byzantine Building (Stratum 4) and Its Implications. In L.I. Levine and E. Netzer eds. Excavations at Caesarea Maritima, 1975, 1976, 1979—Final Report (Qedem 21). Jerusalem. Pp. 90–121.

Arnon Y.D. 2008a. Caesarea Maritima, the Late Periods (700–1291 CE) (BAR Int. S. 1771). Oxford. Arnon Y.D. 2008b. The Ceramic Oil Lamps of the Transitional and Medieval Periods (640–1300): A Chronological and Typological Study. In K.G. Holum, J.A. Stabler and E.G. Reihnardt eds. Caesarea Reports and Studies: Excavations 1995–2007 within the Old City and the Ancient Harbor (BAR Int. S. 1784). Oxford. Pp. 213–264. Avissar M. 1996a. The Clay Tobacco Pipes. In A. Ben-Tor, M. Avissar and Y. Portugali eds. Yoqne‘am I: The Late Periods (Qedem Reports 3). Jerusalem. Pp. 198–201.

Chapter 7: the Islamic-Period Pottery

Avissar M. 1996b. The Medieval Pottery. In A. Ben-Tor, M. Avissar and Y. Portugali eds. Yoqne‘am I: The Late Periods (Qedem Reports 3). Jerusalem. Pp. 75–187. Avissar M. and Stern E.J. 2005. Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk Periods in Israel (IAA Reports 26). Jerusalem. Bahat D. 1996. The Physical Infrastructure. In J. Prawer and H. Ben-Shammai eds. The History of Jerusalem: The Early Islamic Period 638–1099. Jerusalem. Pp. 38–100. Baramki D.C. 1944. The Pottery from Kh. El Mefjer. QDAP 10:65–103. Ben-Dov M. 1982. In the Shadow of the Temple: The Discovery of Ancient Jerusalem. Jerusalem. Brosh N. 1986. Pottery of the 8th–13th Centuries C.E. (Strata 1–3). In L.I. Levine and E. Netzer eds. Excavations at Caesarea Maritima 1975, 1976, 1979—Final Report (Qedem 21). Jerusalem. Pp. 66–89. Crowe Y. 1976. The Islamic Pottery and China. Apollo 103 (170):296–301. Cytryn-Silverman K. 1996. The Islamic Period in North Sinai: The Pottery Evidence. M.A. thesis. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem. Cytryn-Silverman K. 2001. The Settlement in Northern Sinai during the Islamic Period. In J.M. Mouton ed. Le Sinaï, de la conquête arabe à nous jours (Cahiers des Annales Islamologiques 21). Cairo. Pp. 3–36. Cytryn-Silverman K. 2010. The Pottery Results. In O. Gutfeld ed. Ramla—Excavations North of the White Mosque (Qedem 51). Jerusalem. Pp. 87–211. Dekkel A. 2008. The Ottoman Clay Pipes. In V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli eds. Paneas II: Small Finds and Other Studies (IAA Reports 38). Jerusalem. Pp. 113–164. Fehérvári G. 2000. Ceramics of the Islamic World in the Tareq Rajab Museum. London–New York. Geva H. 1983. Excavations in the Citadel of Jerusalem. IEJ 33:55–71. Gichon M. 1974. Fine Byzantine Wares from the South of Israel. PEQ 106:119–139. Gil M. 1997. A History of Palestine 634–1099. Cambridge. Hadad S. 2002. Excavations at Bet Shean I: The Oil Lamps from the Hebrew University Excavations at Bet Shean (Qedem Reports 4). Jerusalem. Hamilton R.W. 1944. Excavations against the North Wall of Jerusalem, 1937–8. QDAP 10:1–53. Hayes J.W. 1972. Late Roman Pottery. London. Johnson N.J. 2010. Inscribed Lamps. In P.M.M. Daviau ed. Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan 4: The Early Islamic House. Leiden–Boston. Pp. 341–350. Khairy N.I. and ‘Amr A.-J.A. 1986. Early Islamic Inscribed Pottery Lamps from Jordan. Levant 18:143–153. Kubiak W. and Scanlon G.T. 1989. Fustāt Expedition Final Report 2: Fustāt-C. Winona Lake. Lane A. 1947. Early Islamic Pottery—Mesopotamia, Egypt and Persia. London. Magen Y. and Dadon M. 1999. Nebi Samwil (Shmuel Hanavi–Har Hasima). Qadmoniot 118:62–77 (Hebrew).

203

Magness J. 1993. Jerusalem Ceramic Chronology, circa 200–800 CE. Sheffield. Majcherek G. 1995. Gazan Amphorae: Typology Reconsidered. In H. Meyza and J. Mlynarczyk eds. Hellenistic and Roman Pottery in the Eastern Mediterranean—Advances in Scientific Studies (Acts of the II Nieborów Pottery Workshop, Nieborów, 18–20 December 1993). Warsaw. Pp. 163–178. Mason R.B. 2004. Shine Like the Sun: Lustre-painted and Associated Pottery from the Medieval Middle East. Costa Mesa, Calif.–Toronto. Mason R.B. and Keall E.J. 1990. Petrography of Islamic Pottery from Fustat. JARCE 27:165–184. Mazar E. 2007. The Ophel Wall in Jerusalem in the Byzantine Period. In E. Mazar ed. The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar. Final Reports III: The Byzantine Period (Qedem 46). Jerusalem. Pp. 181–200. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Baltimore 1975. al-Muqaddasī Ahsan al-Taqasīm. al-Muqaddasī, Muhammad ibn Ahmad Shams al-Dīn. Ahsan al-Taqasīm fī Ma‘rifat al-Aqālīm M.J. de Goeje ed. London 1906. al-Muqaddasī. Best Divisions. al-Muqaddasī. The Best Divisions for Knowledge of the Regions, a Translation of Ahsan al-Taqasīm fī Ma‘rifat al-Aqālīm. B.A. Collins transl. Reading 1994. Nitovski E.L. 1974. Inscribed and Radiated-Type Byzantine Lamps. Andrews University Seminar Studies 12:18–34. Prag K. 2008. Excavations by K.M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967 V: Discoveries in Hellenistic to Ottoman Jerusalem. Centenary Volume: Kathleen M. Kenyon 1906– 1978 (Levant Supplementary Series 7). Oxford. Prawer J. 1984. A Contribution to the Medieval Topography of Jerusalem—The Crusader Conquest of 1099. EretzIsrael 17:312–324 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 13*– 14*). Reich R. 2008. Jerusalem, the Giv‘ati Parking Lot. NEAEHL 5:1807–1808. Riley J.A. 1975. The Pottery from the First Session of Excavation in the Caesarea Hippodrome. BASOR 218:25– 63. Robinson R. 1983. Clay Tobacco Pipes from the Kerameikos. Athenische Mitteilungen 98:265–285. Robinson R. 1985. Tobacco Pipes of Corinth and of the Athenian Agora. Hesperia 54:149–203. Rosen-Ayalon M. 1996. Art and Architecture in Jerusalem in the Early Islamic Period. In J. Prawer and H. Ben-Shammai eds. The History of Jerusalem: The Early Islamic Perod 638–1099. Jerusalem. Pp. 386–412. Rosen-Ayalon M. and Eitan A. 1969. Ramla Excavations— Finds from the VIIIth Century C.E. (The Israel Museum: Catalogue of Exhibition at the Rockefeller Museum, Nov.– Dec. 1969). Jerusalem. Rosenthal R. and Sivan R. 1978. Ancient Lamps in the Schloessinger Collection (Qedem 8). Jerusalem. Sarre F. 1925. Die Ausgrabungen von Samarra 2: Die Keramik von Samarra. Berlin.

204

Katia Cytryn-Silverman

Scanlon G.T. 1986. Fustāt Expedition Final Report 1: Catalogue of Filters (American Research Center in Egypt Reports 8). Winona Lake. Sharon M. 1999. Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum Palaestinae 2. Leiden. Simpson S.J. 2008. Late Ottoman Pipes from Jerusalem. In K. Prag ed. Excavations by K.M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967 V: Discoveries in Hellenistic to Ottoman Jerusalem. Centenary Volume: Kathleen M. Kenyon 1906–1978 (Levant Supplementary Series 7). Oxford. Pp. 433–446. Stacey D. 2004. Excavations at Tiberias, 1973–1974. The Early Islamic Periods (IAA Reports 21). Jerusalem. Tal O. and Taxel I. 2008. Ramla (South)—An Early Islamic Industrial Site and Remains of Previous Periods (Salvage Excavation Reports 5). Tel Aviv. Tsafrir Y. 1977. Muqadassī’s Gates of Jerusalem: A New Identification Based on Byzantine Sources. IEJ 27:152– 161. Tushingham A.D. 1985. Excavations in Jerusalem 1961– 1967 1. Toronto.

de Vaux R. and Steve A.M. 1950. Fouilles à Qaryet el-‘EnabAbū Ġôsh. Paris. Vincent L.H. and Abel F.M. 1926. Jérusalem: Recherches de topographie, d’archéologie et d’histoire II: Jérusalem nouvelle IV: Sainte-Anne et les sanctuaires hors de la ville, histoire monumentale de Jérusalem. Paris. Watson O. 1999. Museums, Collecting, Art History and Archaeology. Damaszener Mitteilungen 11:421–432. Watson O. Forthcoming. Revisiting Samarra: The Rise of Islamic Glazed Pottery. (Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie). Weisbaden. Whitcomb D. 1988. A Fatimid Residence at Aqaba, Jordan. ADAJ 32:207–223. Wightman G.J. 1989. The Damascus Gate, Jerusalem, Excavations by C.-M. Bennett and J.B. Hennessy at the Damascus Gate, Jerusalem, 1964–66 (BAR Int. S. 519). Oxford. Wightman G.J. 1993. The Walls of Jerusalem: From the Canaanites to the Mamluks. Sydney. Wilkinson C.K. 1973. Nishapur: Pottery of the Early Islamic Period. New York.

Chapter 8

The Architectural Fragments Orit Peleg-Barkat

Introduction Several pieces of architectural decoration made of hard limestone (Arabic, mizzi hilu and meleke) include three column drums, an Attic base of a heart-shaped column, two pseudo-Doric capitals, an architrave fragment, a decorated niche or door frame and two fragments of what appears to be a large banister (Figs. 8.1, 8.2). The architectural fragments vary in scale and quality of execution and seem to derive from more than one architectural unit. None of the elements were found in situ; most had been incorporated in secondary use into walls of Late Roman–early Byzantine structures in Stratum (VI), and probably originated in the Early Roman Stratum VII (first century CE).

The Architectural Fragments Column Drums Three column drums were found throughout the excavation site. The different diameters of the drums attest to their origin in several architectural units or structures. Due to their poor preservation, it cannot be ascertained if they bear mason’s marks typical of Second Temple-period architecture (Foerster 1995:80– 90; Peleg 2006:324; Peleg-Barkat 2007:142–143), or signs of lifting bosses characteristic of the architecture of first-century CE Jerusalem (Reich and Shukron 2005:94; Peleg 2006:321; Peleg-Barkat 2007:267).1 Nevertheless, the drums can be dated based on marks of a fine claw chisel discernible on their smooth faces, typical of the work of Second Temple-period stone masons. Also indicative of the date is the fact that the columns are not monolithic, but comprised of drums, as became customary in Judea only from the second century CE onward. The column drum (Fig. 8.1:1) with the largest diameter (c. 68 cm) was found incorporated into a

Late Roman–early Byzantine wall (W883). Less than half the circumference of the column is preserved and only one of the faces is smooth. Therefore, the original height of the drum cannot be determined, nor its original function as either a freestanding column or an attached half-column. It should be noted that the average diameter of Second Temple-period columns in tombs and private dwellings, including the ones in King Herod’s palaces, is c. 50 cm (Foerster 1995:81– 82; Peleg-Barkat 2007:197). In a few cases, columns with a diameter of 70 to 100 cm adorned the most important parts of some palaces, such as the triclinium of Herod’s Third Palace in Jericho (Locus B70; Netzer 2001:236). Columns with an even larger diameter existed on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (PelegBarkat 2007:292–293) and in the temples erected by Herod in honor of Augustus at Caesarea and Samaria (Reisner, Fischer and Lyon 1924:191–192, Figs. 111– 112; Holum 2004:41, 57). It seems, therefore, that this particular column certainly adorned an important part of a rich dwelling or public edifice. Another column drum with a diameter of 46 cm (Fig. 8.1:2) was found incorporated into the same early Byzantine wall (W883), while an even smaller drum with a diameter of 39 cm (Fig. 8.1:3) was found in a nearby wall of the same period (W914). This smaller drum was preserved to its entire original height (98 cm). On one of its straight faces a small round dowel hole is carved (5 cm in diameter). Such holes appear regularly on column drums, although normally square in shape, and are believed to have been utilized for attaching the column drums to one another with wooden or iron dowels (Nylander 1970:45–46, Figs. 6, 13; Connolly and Dodge 1998:67; Clarke 2001:217, Fig. 5). It is also possible that in some cases these holes functioned either as gripping points for the crane lifting up the drum into place, or for holding the stone block while forming the drum on a lathe.

206

Orit Peleg-Barkat

2

1

3 0

40

4

6 7 5 0

20

Fig. 8.1. Architectural fragments. No.

Type

Locus/Wall

Basket

1

Column drum

W883

7172

2

Column drum

W883

7173

3

Column drum

W914

6900

4

Column base

W883

7071

5

Capital

W870

6840

6

Capital

734

8037

7

Architrave

761

8667

Column Base A fragment of an Attic base from a heart-shaped column,2 that is, a pier with two attached half-columns (although only one has survived; Fig. 8.1:4), was found incorporated into the same Late Roman–early Byzantine wall (W883). The fragment measures 100 × 17.5 × 45 cm and is too small to allow an accurate calculation of the original diameter of the column (probably 40–50 cm for an attached half-column). Attic bases, characterized by two tori separated by a scotia or trochlius and two fillets, were the most

common type used in Judea during the Second Temple period (Peleg 2006:325–326). Also characteristic of local types is the upper torus being half as high as the lower. This column base is remarkably well-executed, though the scotia is somewhat angular instead of being rounded as in the Classical examples. This feature is, however, quite common in Judean architecture of the time (see, for example, Reisner, Fischer and Lyon 1924: Figs. 112, 118:4–7; Kahn 1996: Fig. 2; Clamer 1997: Fig. 68). Several of the base’s features deserve particular attention. Interestingly, the base was carved together

Chapter 8: the Architectural Fragments

with the plinth and stylobate. There are several examples in Jerusalem and Herodium of Attic bases carved together with a plinth (Schick 1892: Pl. 18:6; Avigad 1945: Fig. B3, 1989:34; Netzer 1981: Fig. 69; Corbo 1989: DF40, DF104), although normally plinths are missing from the local architecture of the Second Temple period. Since all the Roman column bases carved with plinths date no earlier than King Herod’s reign, it seems that this architectural feature was introduced into Judea under his rule, presumably due to Roman influence. Although the use of plinths was already common outside Judea during the Hellenistic period, it was only under Augustus that it became an integral part of column bases throughout the empire. The incorporation of the plinth made it easier to achieve the desirable proportion of 5:6 between the height of the shaft and that of the column together with its base and capital (Wilson-Jones 2003:152). However, no examples of a base being carved together with its stylobate on one block are known. Another interesting feature is the carving style of the stylobate. On the right-hand side of the preserved facade, a smooth, finely chiseled rectangular frame surrounds the central part of the roughly finished stone. This carving technique, known as anathyrosis, was meant to create a perfect fit between building stones (Nylander 1970:36–38, 58–59, Figs. 4, 5, 17:3). Such uncommon carving in Judea attests to the attention and meticulous work invested in this base.

Pseudo -Doric Capitals Two pseudo-Doric capitals were found during the excavation. One was broken into two (Fig. 8.1:5), with both pieces incorporated into a Late Roman– early Byzantine wall (W870). It originally belonged to a 37.5 cm diameter column and therefore may be part of the same colonnade or architectural component as column the small column drum (see Fig. 8.1:3). The capital was carved together with the topmost section of the shaft ending with a small cavetto (c. 2 cm). The echinus has a profile of a tall cavetto (28 cm), while the abacus also has a cavetto profile (56 × 6 cm). Similar capitals were found in three Jerusalem tombs dated from the end of the first century BCE to the first century CE (the “Two Storey Tomb,” Tomb VII in Sanhedria, and another in Wadi Qadum; see Galling 1936: Fig. 4; Jotham-Rothschild 1952: Pls. VI–VII; Avigad 1967: Fig. 11). This type of capital

207

certainly continues a local Hellenistic tradition, as they are similar to the cyma recta and the simpler cavetto capitals common in the third and second centuries BCE at Marissa (Oren and Rappaport 1984:133–135, Fig. 11, Pls. 12C; 17B–E, H; 18A–B). The Marissa capitals were clearly influenced by Alexandrian lotus capitals (see, for example, McKenzie 1990: Pl. 191c). The second capital is simpler and not as well executed (Fig. 8.1:6). Although it was found in a fill (L734) and not incorporated into a wall, its current shape implies that it was re-cut for secondary use. It originally belonged to a 42 cm diameter column. It has a simple, rounded echinus (9 cm tall) with no annuli, and the abacus is plain (c. 60 × 10 cm). Such simplified Doric capitals with a rounded or straight echinus and no annuli are common in first-century CE Judea. The closest parallels are found at Caesarea and Gamla (Peleg 2006:326–327; Peleg-Barkat 2007:252, 267–268, Figs. 354, 364, 2010:164–166, Figs. 12–16).

Architrave Fragment A fragment of a large Ionic architrave was found in L761 (Fig. 8.1:7), preserved almost to its entire original height (c. 45 cm). According to Vitruvian proportions, we can calculate that the architrave stood above columns with a diameter of about 90 cm (Vitruvius De architectura III:5.8), indicating that it belonged to a monumental building or architectural feature. The two fasciae and the crowning cavetto are undecorated, as was customary in this period throughout Judea. Only from the second century onward were architraves normally decorated with beads and rills or a cymatium pattern between the fasciae (Turnheim 1996:125, Fig. 1). The upper fascia is 2 cm shorter than the lower fascia, as is customary for Ionic architraves. In contrast, the crowning cavetto is 2 cm taller than the lower fascia, instead of being shorter, as is usually the case. Two Herodian examples of an Ionic architrave carved together on one block with a Doric frieze were found below the Southern Wall of the Temple Mount (PelegBarkat 2007:301, Fig. 626, Cat. Nos. 1133, 1134). An Ionic architrave and a Doric frieze also decorate the so-called Qasr al-Bint Temple in Petra, dated to the end of the first century BCE or the first century CE (McKenzie 1990:135–138, Pls. 70, 71; Dentzer-Feydy 2003b:55–60). Both the fasciae on the architraves found below the Temple Mount and at Qasr al-Bint

208

Orit Peleg-Barkat

were left undecorated. However, these architraves are crowned by a cyma reversa molding and not by a cavetto. Cyma reversa moldings normally crown Ionic and Corinthian architraves, as stated by Vitruvius (De architectura III:5.10). Corinthian architraves of the late Second Temple period carved with three fasciae were found in Caesarea, where they originally adorned Herod’s Temple of Augustus and Roma by the port (Kahn 1996:141, Fig. 4). These were also crowned by a cyma reversa molding, as are the ones that adorned the Khirbet Omrit temple near Baniyas (unpublished). Nevertheless, the cavetto molding often replaces more elaborate moldings. This kind of simplification has parallels beyond the realm of Herodian architecture, in late Hellenistic and Early Roman architecture, for example on cornice fragments found along the Via Appia in Rome and those from the first-century BCE Temple of the Dioscuri in Cori (von Hesberg 1980:96– 97, Fig. 3; 100–103, Fig. 4). An architrave crowned by a cavetto molding and dated to the Herodian period was discovered in Mambre, north of Hebron (Mader 1957: Figs. 12, 99). In addition to these examples from the Temple Mount, Caesarea, Omrit and Mambre, no other architraves dated to the Second Temple period have been found in Judea. Therefore, this new discovery of a large Ionic architrave is a significant contribution to our understanding of architecture and architectural decoration of the time. The scarcity of architraves in local assemblages dated to the late Hellenistic and Early Roman periods may be explained by the preference of local artists and architects for the Doric frieze. Typically, the Doric frieze was carved above a simple, undecorated stone beam—the Doric architrave—as can be seen in the rock-cut tombs in the necropolis of Jerusalem (for example, Avigad 1954: Figs. 29, 31, 43–46, 52, 54, 56, 58). At some sites, wooden beams covered with stucco may have been used instead, while at other sites the stone architraves, being regular in shape and thus suitable for reuse, were incorporated into buildings in later periods.

Decorated Niche or Door Frame A richly decorated stone fragment (47.5 × 46.0 × 50.0 cm; Fig. 8.2:8) was partially covered with remains of mortar, testifying to its incorporation in secondary use into a later wall. Two parallel decorated strips were partially preserved on the fragment: one was carved

with a rinceau combining laurel branches, vine leaves, tendrils and small flowers or bunches of fruit. The rinceau was framed on both sides by an ovolo carved with eggs and tongues.3 The second strip was recessed 3 cm in relation to the first and was decorated with an acanthus rinceau. A simple fillet, 2 cm wide, separated the two decorated strips. Several characteristics of the carving style suggest a date in the late Second Temple period, such as the preference for symmetrical compositions that tend to fill the entire designated space, the tendency toward a two-dimensional depiction of different motifs, and especially the bas-relief that gradually slants toward the background (Peleg-Barkat 2007:361–364). Combinations of different types of leaves and fruit on one rinceau are common in Herodian art and appear, for example, on the domes of the Double Gate in the southern wall of the Temple Mount, on the facade of Jehoshaphat’s Tomb, and on several sarcophagi found in Jerusalem (Mathea-Förtsch 1996: Figs. 16, 17; Peleg-Barkat 2007:230). In Jerusalem, the local artists adopted a scheme that was widespread in Asia Minor during the late Hellenistic period and Early Imperial Rome. Especially rich rinceaux patterns adorn the Ara Pacis erected in Rome in 12–9 BCE, the Temple of Apollo on the Palatine, and several public buildings in Pompeii, all erected in the time of Augustus. The combination of a large variety of plants carved on these buildings testified to the wealth and prosperity under his regime (Castriota 1995:13–14; Mathea-Förtsch 1999: Pls. 2, 57, 75:1–3). The general composition and profile of this fragment point to its original function as a frame of a door or niche. Such richly decorated door frames are uncommon in local architecture. Only two examples are known from Second Temple-period Judea, although both are somewhat different in their composition. One is on the first-century CE facade of the Tomb of Queen Heleni of Adiabene, north of Damascus Gate, where a stylized garland decorated with rosettes, acanthus leaves, pomegranates, pine cones, vine leaves and laurel branches was carved around the upper part of the opening (Kon 1947: Pls. IX–XI; Vincent and Steve 1954: Pl. XCII:2). The original intention was certainly to continue this floral ornamentation along the entire perimeter of the opening. Similar door frames outside of Judea were common during the first century BCE– first century CE in Italy (see, for example, the entrance to the Eumachia in Pompeii; Dobbins 1994: Fig. 17).

209

Chapter 8: the Architectural Fragments

8

A-A

9

A

B

A

B

B-B

10 0

10

Fig. 8.2. Architectural fragments. No.

Type

Locus/Wall

Basket

8

Door(?) frame

656

5578

9

Banister

W914

6311

10

Banister

W924

9567

A much simpler decoration appears in a late Second Temple-period tomb at Khirbet Abud, 30 km northwest of Jerusalem. In this example, a band carved with a simple double meander or Greek key pattern encircles the doorway leading from the entrance hall into one of the burial chambers (Magen 2002:29). The door-frame fragment discussed here is, nevertheless, different from the abovementioned examples, as it is decorated with at least two bands of decoration. Parallels for door and niche frames with two or three carved bands are common in late Hellenistic and Roman Syria. Examples are especially abundant in the Hauran, but exist also in Ba‘albek and Palmyra (Butler 1919: Pl. XXVIII; Colledge 1976: Fig. 11; Dentzer-Feydy 1985: Pls. IIIa, VIa, c, VII, VIII, 2003a:87–99, Pls. 62–65, 81–85).4 Many Syrian examples were decorated with vine or acanthus rinceaux, although other motifs, such as laurel branches and meanders, are also known. A door frame with a similar arrangement of an inner, wider band carved with a vine rinceau and separated by a simple fillet from a thinner band decorated with an

acanthus rinceau, is found in Temple 3 at Sī‘ in the Hauran, dated to the end of the first century BCE or the first century CE (Dentzer-Feydy 2003a: Pl. 85:1–2). An interrelation between the architectural decoration of Southern Syria and that of Second Temple-period Jerusalem is also attested in the Corinthian capitals and soffits found below the southern enclosure wall of the Temple Mount (Peleg-Barkat 2007:297, 313).

Large Banister Fragments Two large stone fragments bearing a profile of a quarter circle (Fig. 8.2:9, 10) were found incorporated in secondary use into Late Roman–early Byzantine walls (W914 and W924, respectively). A similar profile and dimensions characterize banisters discovered at the foot of the Western Wall of the Temple Mount that apparently originated from the roof of the tower at the southwestern corner of the Temple Mount, and from the staircase structure of “Robinson’s Arch” (Mazar 1971:5–12). Similar banister stones were recently uncovered around the Pool of Siloam in the southern

210

Orit Peleg-Barkat

part of the City of David (Reich and Shukron 2005). It seems reasonable to assume that these two banister fragments were brought either from the Temple Mount area or from the Pool of Siloam and reused during the Byzantine period.

Discussion The City of David and the Tyropoeon Valley, together with the Ophel Hill to the north, comprise the ‘Lower City’ of Second Temple-period Jerusalem. The character of this quarter of the city is difficult to define as it seems to have been occupied by varied and sometimes even opposing elements. Josephus implies that the quarter was the residence of the middle and lower classes. He also wrote that Menahem son of Judas, the leader of the Sicarii, found refuge in the Lower City during the First Revolt, an area that was one of the major strongholds of the rebels (Josephus War II:422, 448). Furthermore, the Lower City also housed Herod’s hippodrome (Josephus Antiquities XVII:255; War II:44) and the palaces of the royal family of Adiabene, who arrived in the city sometime during the 40s of the first century CE (Josephus Antiquities XX:17–96). The ‘Theodotus Inscription’, discovered in a cistern in the City of David, attests to the existence of a synagogue in the vicinity that included an inn for Diaspora Jews on pilgrimage (Weill 1920:186–190). The street running through the Tyropoeon Valley, comprising the border between the Upper and Lower Cities, was a major traffic route and a commercial center with shops along the street (Levine 2002:319–326). Decorative architectural elements of the Second Temple period have been found in the Lower City of Jerusalem in several excavations. R.A.S. Macalister and J.G. Duncan, who excavated the upper part of the eastern slope of the City of the David above the Gihon Spring between 1923 and 1925, exposed a Second Temple-period fortification, which they mistakenly dated to the days of the Jebusite city and to the reigns of King David and King Solomon. In close proximity to the fortification, a residential structure was exposed and dated by the excavators to the Second Temple period. However, since this structure was built above one of the gates in the fortification wall, it should be dated later, sometime in the Late

Roman or Byzantine period. Several column drums, an Attic column base and a Doric capital were found incorporated in secondary use into the building and seem to originate from several earlier buildings dating to the Second Temple period. South of this structure were revealed several Herodian buildings, one of which was paved with mosaic floors. Stucco pieces from a decorated cornice were also found (Macalister and Duncan 1926:97–100, Figs. 83–86; Peleg-Barkat 2007:192). More recently, several column drums and Doric capitals were discovered around the Pool of Siloam on the southern edge of the City of David. They originated from a colonnade that originally stretched along the northern side of the pool (Reich and Shukron 2005:94). In contrast to the finds from the Pool of Siloam, the finds from Macalister and Duncan’s excavation, as well as the finds discussed here, cannot be attributed with certainty to any private or public building exposed in excavations. They can only testify that some of the buildings in the Lower City were decorated with stone architectural elements of various degrees of quality and scale, indicating both middle- and upper-class residents in this quarter of the city. The eclectic nature of the assemblage discovered in Area M1 on the western slope of the City of David, together with the existence of banisters that seem to have come from either the Temple Mount area or from the Pool of Siloam, suggests that these elements originated in more than one architectural unit. Some of them certainly were brought from a rather distant location during the Byzantine period. Indeed, the decorated door frame, the 68 cm diameter column drum and the finely carved column base, as well as the Ionic architrave, are examples of high-quality, largescale architectural decoration. Since they were found together with elements of lesser quality and smaller scale, and since none of the fragments was found in situ, they cannot provide much insight into the function of the architectural complexes exposed at the site, nor can they shed any light on their first-century CE residents. Unfortunately, the conceptual similarity between the decorated door frame found at this site, and the one that adorns the façade of the Tomb of Queen Helena, is too vague to imply any connection with the royal family of Adiabene.

Chapter 8: the Architectural Fragments

211

Notes Two series of large Ionic columns were also found in the Upper City of Jerusalem (Avigad 1983: Figs. 158, 177–181; Reich 2003:271–291, Pl. 8.7:1–8). One dates to the Seleucid era or Hasmonean rule, while the other may originate from the Herodian Temple Mount. 2 Heart-shaped columns normally stood at junctions of colonnades of peristyle courtyards or halls. All examples in Judea date from Herod’s reign or later (Peleg 2006:321; Peleg-Barkat 2007:140). 1

The apsidal shape of the egg and the casing that closely follows its outline is typical of Early Roman Judea. In contrast, from the time of the Flavian dynasty onward, the carving of the casing was much more accentuated, leaving a wide depression (Kähler 1939:70–72, Fig. 13). 4 In contrast, Attic door frames common in Jerusalem during the Second Temple period are rare in southern Syria (Dentzer-Feydy 2003a:87). 3

R eferences Avigad N. 1945. Umm el-‘Amad Cave. Qedem 2:75–82 (Hebrew). Avigad N. 1954. Ancient Monuments in the Kidron Valley. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Avigad N. 1967. Jewish Rock-Cut Tombs in Jerusalem and in the Judean Hill-Country. Eretz Israel 8:119–142 (Hebrew; English summary, p.72*). Avigad N. 1983. Discovering Jerusalem. Nashville, Tenn. Avigad N. 1989. The Herodian Quarter in Jerusalem. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Butler H.C. 1919. Ancient Architecture in Syria, Division 2, Section A: Southern Syria (Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expedition to Syria in 1904– 1905). Leiden. Castriota D. 1995. The Ara Pacis Augustae and the Imagery of Abundance in Later Greek and Early Roman Imperial Art. Princeton. Clamer C. 1997. Fouilles archéologiques de ‘Aїn Ez-Zãra/ Callirrhoé: villégiature hérodienne. Beirut. Clarke G.W. 2001. The Governor’s Palace, Acropolis, Jebel Khalid. In I. Nielsen ed. The Royal Palace Institution in the First Millennium BC: Regional Development and Cultural Interchange between East and West (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 4). Athens. Pp. 215−247. Colledge A.R. 1976. The Art of Palmyra. London. Connolly P. and Dodge H. 1998. The Ancient City: Life in Classical Athens and Rome. Oxford. Corbo V. 1989. Herodion—gli edifici della reggia-fortezza. Jerusalem. Dentzer-Feydy J. 1985. Décor architectural et développement du Hauran du 1er siècle avant J.-C au VIIIe siècle après J.-C. In J.M. Dentzer ed. Hauran I(1): Recherches archéologiques sur la Syrie du sud à l’époque hellénistique et romaine (Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique 124). Paris. Pp. 261–309.

Dentzer-Feydy J. 2003a. Décor architectural. In J. DentzerFeydy, J.M. Dentzer and P.M. Blanc eds. Hauran II: Les installations de Sí 8 du sanctuaire à l’établissement vinicole (Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique 164). Beirut. Pp. 79–101. Dentzer-Feydy J. 2003b. Le décor sculpté et stuqué. In F. Zayadine, F. Larché and J. Dentzer-Feydy eds. Le qasr al-Bint de Pétra: L’architecture, le décor, la chronologie et les dieux. Paris. Pp. 45−75. Dobbins J.J. 1994. Problems of Chronology, Decoration, and Urban Design in the Forum at Pompeii. AJA 98:629–694. Foerster G. 1995. Masada V: Art and Architecture, The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965 Final Reports. Jerusalem. Galling K. 1936. Ein Etagen-Pilaster Grab in norden von Jerusalem. ZDPV 59:111–123. von Hesberg H. 1980. Konsolgeisa des Hellenismus und der frühen Kaiserzeit. Mainz. Holum K.G. 2004. Building Power: The Politics of Architecture. BAR 30:36–45, 57. Josephus Antiquities. Josephus. Jewish Antiquities. R. Marcus transl. (Loeb Classical Library). London 1963. Josephus War. Josephus. The Jewish War. H.St.J. Thackeray transl. (Loeb Classical Library). Cambridge, Mass.–London 1927–1928. Jotham-Rothschild J. 1952. The Tombs of Sanhedria. PEQ 84:23–38. Kähler K. 1939. Die römischen Kapitelle des Rheinsgebietes. Berlin. Kahn L.C. 1996. King Herod’s Temple of Roma and Augustus at Caesarea Maritima. In A. Raban and K.G. Holum eds. Caesarea Maritima: A Retrospective after Two Millennia. Leiden–New York–Cologne. Pp. 130–145. Kon M. 1947. The Tomb of the Kings. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Levine L.I. 2002. Jerusalem: A Portrait of the City in the Second Temple Period (538 B.C.E.–70 C.E.). Philadelphia.

212

Orit Peleg-Barkat

Macalister R.A.S. and Duncan J.G. 1926. Excavations on the Hill of Ophel, Jerusalem, 1923–25 (PEFA 4). London. Mader E. 1957. Mambre: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen im heiligen Bezirk, Râmat el-Halîl in Südpalästina 1926– 1928. Freiburg im Breisgau. Magen Y. 2002. Tombs Decorated in Jerusalem Style in Samaria and the Hebron Hills. Qadmoniot 123:28–37 (Hebrew). Mathea-Förtsch M. 1996. Scroll Ornamentations from Judaea and their Different Patterns. In K. Fittschen and G. Foerster eds. Judaea and the Greco-Roman World in the Time of Herod in the Light of Archaeological Evidence: Acts of a Symposium Organized by the Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Archaeological Institute, Georg-August University of Göttingen at Jerusalem, Nov. 3rd–4th 1988. Göttingen. Pp. 177–196. Mathea-Förtsch M. 1999. Römische Rankenpfeiler und Pilaster. Mainz. Mazar B. 1971. The Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem near the Temple Mount: Second Preliminary Report, 1969–70 Seasons. Eretz Israel 10:1–34. McKenzie J. 1990. The Architecture of Petra. Oxford. Netzer E. 1981. Greater Herodium, Final Reports (Qedem 13). Jerusalem. Netzer E. 2001. Hasmonean and Herodian Palaces at Jericho. Final Reports of the 1973–1987 Excavations I: Stratigraphy and Architecture. Jerusalem. Nylander C. 1970. Ionians in Pasargadae: Studies in Old Persian Architecture (Uppsala Studies in Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern Civilization 1). Uppsala. Oren E.D. and Rappaport U. 1984. The Necropolis of Maresha-Beth Govrin. IEJ 34:114–153. Peleg O. 2006. Herodian Architectural Decoration. In E. Netzer. The Architecture of Herod, the Great Builder

(Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 117). Tübingen. Pp. 320–338. Peleg-Barkat O. 2007. The Herodian Architectural Decoration in Light of the Finds from the Temple Mount Excavations. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Peleg-Barkat O. 2010. Architectural Decoration. In D. Syon and Z. Yavor eds. Gamla II: The Architecture; the Shmarya Gutman Excavations, 1976–1989 (IAA Reports 44). Jerusalem. Pp. 159–174. Reich R. 2003. Stone Vessels, Weights and Architectural Fragments. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982. Final Report II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Jerusalem. Pp. 263–291. Reich R. and Shukron E. 2005. The Shiloah Pool during the Second Temple Period. Qadmoniot 130:91–96 (Hebrew). Reisner G.A., Fischer C.S. and Lyon D.G. 1924. Harvard Excavations at Samaria 1908–1910. Cambridge, Mass. Schick C. 1892. Recent Discoveries at the Nicophorieh. PEFQSt 24:115–120. Turnheim Y. 1996. Formation and Transformation of the Entablature in Northern Israel and the Golan in Roman and Byzantine Periods. ZDPV 112:122–138. Vincent L.H. and Steve P.M.A. 1954. Archéologie de la Ville: Jérusalem de l’Ancien Testament, recherches d’archéologie et d’histoire I. Paris. Vitruvius. De Architectura. F. Granger transl. (Loeb Classical Library). London 1970. Weill R. 1920. La Cité de David, Campagne de 1913–1914. Paris. Wilson-Jones M. 2003. Principles of Roman Architecture. New Haven–London.

Chapter 9

The Stone Vessels and Furniture of the Early Roman Period Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Introduction the more than 450 fragments of chalk vessels dating to the Early Roman period recovered from Area M1 testify to their popularity in this period. Some of them originated in Stratum VII Building 760 and the ritual baths (miqva’ot) of its northern annex (see Chapter 2), while others were found in later contexts, often in secondary use, and can be attributed to the Early Roman period. Parallels to the finds from Area M1 are cited primarily from excavations in and around Jerusalem, such as the City of David (Cahill 1992), the Jewish Quarter (Avigad 1983; Reich 2003; Geva 2006b, 2010) and the excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002). The chalk vessels are divided into hand-carved and lathe-turned artifacts, including cores; 207 diagnostic fragments could be assigned to specific vessel types and considered for quantitative analysis (see below). These are presented in typological order, and representative examples are illustrated in Figs. 9.1–9.6. Additionally, a number of fragments of hand-carved and lathe-turned tabletops were also discovered (Figs. 9.7, 9.8).

Early Roman Chalk Vessels The popularity of chalk vessels in the Early Roman period is well-known in the Jerusalem area, and fragments of typical stone vessels have been found at many Jewish sites throughout Israel, from the north of the country to the northern Negev, as well as at sites in Perea (Magen 2002:162). The use of these vessels increased greatly at the end of the first century BCE, during the Herodian period (Magen 2002:162; Geva 2006a), and into the first century CE (Cahill 1992:232; Gibson 2003:301–302). The destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE brought about a decline in the production of these vessels, but they were still

in use until the Bar Kokhba Revolt (Cahill 1992:233; Magen 2002:162; Gibson 2003:302; Amit 2010:55). Their continued production following the Bar Kokhba Revolt until the Byzantine period is still controversial, although it is commonly held that these chalk vessels almost disappeared after the Bar Kokhba Revolt (Cahill 1992:233; Magen 2002:162; Gibson 2003:302). Amit has suggested that in areas where Jewish settlement continued, so did the use of these vessels (Amit 2010:56). Two manufacturing techniques of stone vessels are known in the Early Roman period, hand carving with a chisel and lathe turning. Both techniques have been studied by numerous scholars, such as Cahill (1992:218–225), Magen (2002:116–131) and Amit, Seligman and Zilberbod (2001; 2008). Recently, Amit (2010:56–60) has challenged the strict dichotomic division between the hand-carved and lathe-turned vessels, based mainly on mugs found in a workshop near Nazareth that were hand carved with a latheturned interior. However, we have retained here this division, as it is best suited to most of the artifacts in the Area M1 assemblage.

Hand-Carved Vessels Bowls (Fig. 9.1) The hand-carved bowls are grouped here into three types, which are probably related to function. Two are differentiated according to size—small and large— while the third type is based on its design as a ‘divided bowl’. The small and large-sized bowls are usually characterized by a relatively polished interior and a rougher exterior, with unpolished chisel marks. The quality of production varies among the vessels. On some fragments, an elongated ledge handle is preserved near the rim. As they were hand carved, every bowl is somewhat different.

214

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Fig. 9.1 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus

Basket

1

Small bowl

VII

740

8261

Description*

Parallels City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 20:11, Photographs 197–199); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.60:11)

2

Small bowl

VII

761

8387

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.60:12)

3

Small bowl

VI

688

6610/1

D 20 cm

4

Small bowl

VII

772

8619

D 18 cm

5

Small bowl

VII–VI

700

7080

D 11 cm

6

Small bowl

VII

739

8161

7

Large bowl

V

748

8375

8

Large bowl

VII

740

8233

9

Large bowl

VII

721

7770, 7659

10

Large bowl

VII–VI

700

7379

D of base 34 cm

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.60:8)

11

Rounded divided bowl

VII

721

7730

D 17 cm

Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl 5.6:5)

12

Quadrangular divided bowl

VI

668

5728

Jewish Quarter (Avigad 1983: Fig. 208)

13

Quadrangular divided bowl

VII–VI

700

7059

Jewish Quarter (Avigad 1983: Fig. 208)

14

Quadrangular divided bowl

VI

645

5583/1

Jewish Quarter (Avigad 1983: Fig. 208)

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 20:9, Photographs 195, 196); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.63:d)

D 30 cm City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 20:15, 16); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.5:5)

* D = diameter

Small Bowls (Fig. 9.1:1–6) The small bowls present a variety of forms and finish, and can be divided into two general shapes: rounded and quadrangular. Eight rim and base fragments of rounded bowls were found (Fig. 9.1:1–5), some with a disc or ring base (Fig. 9.1:1, 2), and some with an elongated ledge handle near the rim (Fig. 9.1:3). Two rim and base fragments of small quadrangular bowls with a flat rim, a flat base and slightly polished walls were recovered (Fig. 9.1:6). Large Bowls (Fig. 9.1:7–10) Three rim fragments of this type were recognized, and they can also be divided into rounded/elliptical (Figs. 9.1:7, 8) and rectangular shapes (Fig. 9.1:9). Some examples have an elongated ledge handle near the rim. The base in Fig. 9.1:10 belongs to a large rounded bowl with a thick base and walls.

Such hand-carved vessels are sometimes termed ‘basins’ (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.4:1; Geva 2010: Pl. 5.5), ‘trays’ (Geva 2006b: Pl. 9.5:13) or ‘tubs’ (Cahill 1992: Fig. 20:15, 16). Divided Bowls (Fig. 9.1:11–14) Two forms of hand-carved divided bowls were found. Rounded divided bowl (Fig. 9.1:11). This bowl is relatively roughly made and has three symmetrical, equally rounded cells in the center. One fragment of this type was discerned. Quadrangular divided bowls with square cells (Fig. 9.1:12–14). The three fragments of this bowl type are finely chiseled, with inner walls dividing the bowl into square cells.

215

Chapter 9: the Stone Vessels and Furniture of the Early Roman Period

1

2

4

3

7

6

5

9

10

8

11

13

12

0

10

Fig. 9.1. Hand-carved bowls.

14

216

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Mugs (Fig. 9.2:1–6) This group comprises 39 rim and base fragments and 13 diagnostic body and handle fragments; not a single complete mug was recovered from Area M1. Most of the fragments were found in contexts of the Early Roman period (Stratum VII), the rest in later fills. They were all made by the simple technique of hand carving with a wide chisel, and belong to one standard type: thick, rough vessels with rounded bases ranging in diameter from 5 to 12 cm. Excluding the example in Fig. 9.2:1, which has a relatively rounded wall, the mugs from Area M1 have high, straight walls. The rim is pointed and the vertical handle has a rectangular profile with a small round hole

in the middle. Chisel marks are visible all over the vessel, both in the interior and on the exterior surface. Six fragments of mugs have a relatively small base diameter of c. 5 cm, which may be related to a different function for these smaller vessels (Fig. 9.2:5, 6).

Lathe-Turned Vessels Bowls (Fig. 9.2:7–15) The lathe-turned bowls are smooth on both the interior and exterior, and are frequently decorated with latheincised lines on the outer surface. Five types of latheturned bowls were discerned here.

Fig. 9.2 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/Wall

Basket

Description*

Parallels

1

Mug

VII–VI

707

7374

D 11.5 cm

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 20:3)

2

Mug

W930

8170

General parallels: City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 20:4); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.60:1, 2 [spouted mugs]); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.3:11–15; Geva 2010: Pl. 5.4:1–3)

3

Mug

VI

736

8054

As No. 2

4

Mug

VI

707

7591/1

5

Mug

VII

702

7524

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 20:1); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.60:4); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.3:14)

6

Mug

VII

708

7276

As No. 5

7

Shallow bowl with straight walls

VI

697

6975

D 16 cm

8

Shallow bowl with straight walls

VII

702

7692

D 15.5 cm

9

Shallow bowl with straight walls

VII

740

8172/1+2

City of David (Cahill 1992: Figs. 15:13; 17); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.5:3, 4); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.10:13–15)

10

Bowl with outcurved walls

VI

679

6719

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.5:8; 3.8)

11

Narrow bowl

VII

738

8270

D 7.5 cm

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 16:7–10); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.13:4–6); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.10:1–5)

12

Narrow bowl

VII

702

8877

D 14 cm

As No. 11

13

Hemispherical bowl

VII

787

8791/1+2 D 13.5 cm

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.13:3; 3.14:b); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.10:7, 8)

14

Hemispherical bowl

VI

674

6463

D 12 cm

As No. 13

15

Divided bowl

VII

736, 760

7983, 8418

D 8 cm

16

Platter

VI

674

6681

D 35 cm

* D = diameter

D 14 cm

As No. 2

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.5:4; 3.6; 3.7); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.10:13–15)

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 15:23); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.12); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Fig. 5.21:1)

217

Chapter 9: the Stone Vessels and Furniture of the Early Roman Period

Shallow Bowls with Straight Walls (Fig. 9.2:7–9) Thirteen fragments of wide, relatively shallow bowls are characterized by straight walls joining the base at a

right angle, and are usually decorated with lathe-incised lines on the exterior (Fig. 9.2:7, 8). The example in Fig. 9.2:9 is a disc base of such a bowl.

2

1

4

3

5

6

9 8

7

10

12

11

14

13

16 15

0

10

Fig. 9.2. Hand-carved mugs, lathe-turned bowls and a platter.

218

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Bowl with Out-Curved Walls (Fig. 9.2:10) This type of bowl is represented by a single example. Only the disc base and part of the walls are preserved. Narrow Bowls (Fig. 9.2:11, 12) Four fragments of lathe-turned narrow bowls have walls that are rounded at the base and straighten toward the rim, and are decorated with protruding ridges. These narrow bowls are sometimes termed ‘cups’ (Magen 2002:24, 71; Geva 2010:170). Hemispherical Bowls (Fig. 9.2:13, 14) Five fragments of hemispherical bowls have an incurved holemouth rim and smoothed, polished walls on both surfaces, the outer face usually bearing characteristic lathe lines below the rim (Fig. 9.2:14). Based on their total absence in strata dated to the first century BCE in Area E of the Jewish Quarter, Geva has suggested dating these bowls no earlier than the first century CE (Geva 2006a:196–197).

Divided Bowl (Fig. 9.2:15) A single example of a unique, small, rounded, lathe-turned divided bowl was recovered. It is 8 cm in diameter and 4 cm high, and has three deep, rounded cells and three (perhaps more) shallow, rounded depressions on the upper surface between the cells. These cells and depressions were hand carved and symmetrical. On the underside is a small leg—the original number of legs could not be discerned. The clear difference in size and quality between this bowl and the much larger, hand-carved divided bowls may imply different functions for these two types. Two lathe-turned divided bowls were found in the Temple Mount excavations (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.21– 3.23), but they differ in size and design from the Area M1 example. Platters (Fig. 9.2:16) Two fragments of very large shallow, lathe-turned platters have low walls and are decorated on the

Fig. 9.3 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description

Parallels

1

Regular quadrangular rim

VII

740

8130

Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.2:6)

2

Stepped quadrangular rim

VII

737

7860

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 18:6–12); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.34:3); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.2:4, 9; Geva 2006b: Pl. 9.2:1, 4, 2010: Pl. 5.7:2)

3

Stepped quadrangular rim

VI

695

7411

As No. 2

4

Stepped quadrangular rim

VI

695

6882

As No. 2

5

Regular triangular rim with lathe-turned decoration

VII

708

7224

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 18:3); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.34:1, 2; 3.35; 3.36); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.2:1, 3; Geva 2010: Pl. 5.7:1, 3)

6

Triangular rim with handcarved decoration

VII–VI

699

6212

Leaf-pattern frieze decoration

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.38:1; 3.40:a)

7

Triangular rim with handcarved decoration

VI

W914

5404

Fluted frieze decoration

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 18:1); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.38:3–8; 3.39; 3.40:g); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.2:11; Geva 2006: Pl. 9.2:7)

8

Triangular rim with handcarved decoration

VII

721

8039

Fluted frieze decoration

As No. 7

9

Triangular rim with handcarved decoration

VII

736

8014

Fluted frieze decoration

As No. 7

Holemouth rim

VI

W930

8093/1+2

10

11

Flaring rim

VI

W916

6340/1

12

Simple rim

VII

740

8227

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.51:1; 3.53); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2006: Pl. 9.2:8) excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.34:5)

219

Chapter 9: the Stone Vessels and Furniture of the Early Roman Period

and a decorated rim. The exterior was well-polished and lathe decorated, the interior was chiseled and smoothed, and the rim was lathe polished on the inside. Numerous fragments of these kraters were found and comprise the most common type in the stone-vessel repertoire. Unfortunately, not a single stone krater survived intact. Based on rim and base typology, 99 fragments could be assigned to specific types (Figs. 9.3, 9.4). In addition to the 11 handles and the 4 decorated body fragments presented below (Fig. 9.5), another 172 body fragments, both decorated and undecorated, were also recovered.

exterior with lathe-turned lines. No base has survived, but based on parallels, hand-carved legs can be reconstructed along the perimeter of the vessel (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.12), or on a protrusion in the center of the base (Geva 2010:183, Fig. 5.21:1). Kraters (Qalals) (Figs. 9.3–9.5) Large stone kraters, made on a large lathe out of a single block of chalk, were produced during the Early Roman period. These vessels are basically barrel-shaped jars with an open mouth (except for one special subtype, see below)

1

2

3

4 5

7

6

8

9

10

11 0

10

Fig. 9.3. Krater (qalal) rims.

12

220

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Quadrangular Rims (Fig. 9.3:1–4) Regular quadrangular rims (Fig. 9.3:1). This profile is quadrangular and decorated on the outside with three horizontal ridges. In most cases, the central ridge is wider than the adjacent ones, in other cases the ridges are of identical thickness (Fig. 9.3:1). This is one of the most popular rim decorations, represented by 20 fragments. Stepped quadrangular rims (Fig. 9.3:2–4). This type is identical to the regular rim type, except for a step on the interior face, apparently designed to hold a large lid (see below). Nine such examples were found. Triangular Rims (Fig. 9.3:5–9) Simple triangular rims with lathe-turned decoration (Fig. 9.3:5). This rim is often decorated on the outside with simple ridges and lathe-turned lines; in most cases, the line decoration is on the lower part of the triangular rim (Fig. 9.3:5). This is the most common type of krater rim found, represented by 25 rim fragments. Triangular rims with hand-carved decoration (Fig. 9.3:6–9). These triangular rims bear various handcarved decorations under the rim, the most common being variations of a fluted frieze (Fig. 9.3:7–9); there

is one example of a frieze with a geometrical triangle pattern (Fig. 9.3:6). Ten fragments of such decorated triangular rims were found. Holemouth Rim (Fig. 9.3:10) A single fragment of a holemouth rim bears three horizontal lathe-carved ridges a few centimeters below the rim. No parallels were found in Jerusalem. According to Magen (2002:90), the holemouth rim appears only on a rare form of stone krater found in Qalandiya, which has a narrow, cylindrical base (see below). Flaring Rim (Fig. 9.3:11) a single example exemplifies this type of rim, which is very similar to the triangular rim (Fig. 9.3:5). However it differs in its flaring stance, testifying to the wide mouth diameter of this vessel as compared to the other krater types. Simple Rim (Fig. 9.3:12) Interestingly, the straight, simple rim is not a common type among the stone kraters, and only a single example was found. The rim is flat on top with two horizontal lathe lines on the exterior, a few centimeters below the rim.

Fig. 9.4 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Parallels

1

Concave trumpet base

VII VII–VI

723, 706

7562, 7238

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 19:8, 9, Photographs 187, 188); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.34:1, 2; 3.35; 3.36); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.2:14; Geva 2006b: Pl. 9.2:9, 2010: Pls. 5.7:1, 4; 5.8:4–6)

2

Concave trumpet base

VI

661

5531

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.34:1, 2; 3.35; 3.36); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.2:14; Geva 2006b: Pl. 9.2:9, 2010: Pl. 5.7:2)

3

Concave trumpet base

VII

W934

8226

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.34:1, 2; 3.35; 3.36); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.2:14; Geva 2006b: Pl. 9.2:9, 2010: Pls. 5.7:1, 4, 5.8:4–6)

4

Concave ring base

-

Balk

9093

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.37; 3.44:3; 3.45)

5

Concave ring base

VII

740

8098

As No. 4

6

Column-like on square plinth

VI

W934

?7870/1+2?

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.49; 3.50)

7

Column-like on square plinth

-

Balk

8291

As No. 6

8

Column-like on square plinth

VII

739

8192

As No. 6

9

Narrow cylindrical base

VII

721

7629

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.51:2; 3.52:a, b); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.9:1); related to a holemouth qalal

10

Narrow cylindrical base

-

Balk

9520

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.51:5, 3.52:c); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.9:1)

Chapter 9: the Stone Vessels and Furniture of the Early Roman Period

Concave Bases (Fig. 9.4:1–5) These bases were roughly worked in the interior, while the exterior was polished and usually decorated with lathe-turned lines. The trumpet-shaped concave base

(Fig. 9.4:1–3) comprises the most common type of krater base found here. The fragment in Fig. 9.4:3 is the connection between the top of the trumpet-shaped base and the body. This form of base is represented

2

1

4 3

5

6

7

9

8

10 0

221

10

Fig. 9.4. Krater (qalal) bases.

222

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

by 23 examples. Parallels are found at many sites in Jerusalem and further north (Cahill 1992:209). Two concave bases are ring shaped (Fig. 9.4:4, 5) Column Bases (Fig. 9.4:6–8) Five examples of bases that resemble a simple column base, with a square plinth of varying thickness, were found. It should be noted that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between this massive stone krater base and a table column base. Narrow Cylindrical Bases (Fig. 9.4:9, 10) These bases have a cylindrical shape and are very narrow relative to the large body they supported. This type is represented by two examples only. That in Fig. 9.4:9 is a small, narrow, cylindrical base with an interior hollow. The example in Fig. 9.4:10 represents a very large, massive vessel without an inner hollow. Handles and Decorations (Fig. 9.5) Eleven hand-carved krater handles were divided into three types: triangular-profiled (Fig. 9.5:1), narrow, upturned (Fig. 9.5:2) and trapezoidal handles (Fig. 9.5:3). Elongated fluted friezes often accompanied the simple, horizontal lathe-turned lines on the bodies of kraters (Fig. 9.5:4–6). A single example of a narrow, zigzag decoration was also uncovered (Fig. 9.5:7). Lids and Stoppers (Fig. 9.6:1–6) During the Early Roman period, stone lathe-turned lids and stoppers were used to cover and seal various types of vessels, especially in the Jerusalem environs (Magen 1988:49–50). A clear-cut distinction between them is not always possible, and the main difference seems to lie in their placement—lids were placed on the rim, while stoppers were meant to seal the neck of the vessel. Lids usually have a flat underside, while the upper side is sometimes equipped with a small knob handle. These covering devices were produced in a wide range of sizes. Stoppers, on the other hand, are relatively smaller, characterized by a T-shaped profile comprising a flat disc top with a conical protrusion that fit into the neck of the pottery vessel. Lids (Fig. 9.6:1–4) The seven lathe-turned lids are divided into two main types:

Lathe-turned lids with a handle (Fig. 9.6:1–3). The fragment in Fig. 9.6:1 is a relatively flat lid, with sloping sides and a large knob handle in the center. This type of lid was probably used to seal relatively large or open vessels. Such large stone lids were found in Jerusalem and its close surroundings, but are almost absent in other regions of the country (Magen 2002:90– 94). Two other lids are characterized by a curved body and a knob handle, and seem to have sealed smaller vessels (Fig. 9.6:2, 3). Lathe-turned lids without a handle (Fig. 9.6:4). Four examples of small, flat lids with a few lathe-turned lines on the top were recovered. The rim of the lid is either straight or triangular in profile with a step (Fig. 9.6:4). Stoppers (Fig. 9.6:5, 6) Stoppers are represented by five objects. The most common type, represented by four examples, has a deep groove or step around the edge (Fig. 9.6:5). This type is very common in other chalk-vessel assemblages (Magen 2002:76–77). The stopper in Fig 9.6:6 has a flat edge, and perhaps its production was not completed. An incision with an ‘X’ in a frame appears on the underside, which may indicate rejection of this stopper. Cores and Debitage (Fig. 9.6:7–17) Sixteen complete or fragmentary lathe-turned cores were found in Area M1. The shape of these latheturned cores is mostly cylindrical, and their diameter ranges from 5 to 9 cm. Some examples have a depression on the top formed by chisel marks, perhaps the point of attachment to the lathe (Fig. 9.6:11, 12). Three fragments of lathe waste (debitage) were also found (Fig. 9.6:16, 17). It should be noted that the relatively large quantity of cores and debitage, some originating in sealed loci of the Early Roman period, raises the question as to their presence in an urban context. However, this does not necessarily reflect the presence of a workshop at the site. While thousands of cores of different sizes were found in the Hizma workshop (Magen 2002: Figs. 2.23–2.28), they have also been found at urban sites such as the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.29) and the City of David, where twelve objects were identified as cores or lathe waste and sorted according to type (Cahill 1992: Fig. 17:26, Photographs 165–176).

Chapter 9: the Stone Vessels and Furniture of the Early Roman Period

1

223

2

3

4

6

7

5 0

10

Fig. 9.5. Krater (qalal) fragments. No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description

Parallels

1

Handle with triangular profile

VI

661

5760

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.51)

2

Narrow up-turned handle

VI

W924

7587

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Figs. 3.41:6; 3.43)

3

Trapezoidal handle

VII

720

7632/1+2

4

Decorated body fragment

VI

688

6677

Fluted frieze

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 19:5, 7); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.41:7)

5

Decorated body fragment

VI

662

5554

Fluted frieze

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 19:6); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.41:7)

6

Decorated body fragment

VI

643

4803

Fluted frieze

As No. 4

7

Decorated body fragment

VI

679

6448

Triangles

224

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

2

1

3

7

6

5

9

10

4

8

11

12

16

13

14

0

10

15

17

Fig. 9.6. Lathe-turned lids, stoppers, cores and debitage. No.

Form

Stratum

Locus

Basket

Parallels

1

Lid

VI

635

5068

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 17:6) (identified as a stopper); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.54:4)

2

Lid

VII

719

7599

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.25:1, 2) (but with flat body)

3

Lid

VI

674

6337/1

As No. 2

4

Lid

VII

760

8518

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 17:7)

5

Stopper

VI

697

7180

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 17:4); excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.25:8–11); Jewish Quarter (Reich 2003: Pl. 8.3:8, 9; Geva 2010: Pl. 5.11:1–4)

6

Stopper

-

Balk

8542

7

Core

VI

673

6224

8

Core

VII–VI

706

7278

9

Core

VI

660

5762

10

Core

VI

657

6005/1

11

Core

VI

674

6602/1

12

Core

VII–VI

706

7252

13

Core

V

748

8338

14

Core

VII

740

8131

15

Core

VII

702

8789

16

Debitage

VII

691

7251

17

Debitage

VII

702

8721

Chapter 9: the Stone Vessels and Furniture of the Early Roman Period

225

stone Furniture

Summary

Fragments of both hand-carved rectangular tabletops that stood on a stone pedestal against a wall, and round tabletops that stood on three legs, were recovered in Area M1. In addition, another ten tabletop fragments could not be assigned to rectangular or rounded types.

The large quantity of chalk vessels recovered in Area M1, and particularly in the sealed loci in a relatively small area (Building 760), testifies to the intensity of their use in Jerusalem during the first century CE. The use of these vessels at the site ended with the destruction of Stratum VII in 70 CE. Many of these vessels bear signs of burning, evidence of the violent destruction of Building 760. Quantitative analysis of the chalk-vessel assemblage (Fig. 9.9) considered all the rim and base fragments, as well as a minor amount of diagnostic body sherds of the smaller vessels. On the other hand, the large quantity of the qalal body fragments was excluded from the count in Fig. 9.9 (see below). It should be noted that when fragments of the same vessel could be identified, they were counted as one fragment. Based on these analyses, in Area M1, the lathe-turned chalk vessels were more popular (66%) than the hand-carved vessels (34%). This is in contrast to the chalk-vessel repertoire of the same period at Gamla, where the large lathe-turned qalal vessels were totally absent. However, the small lathe-turned chalk vessels at Gamla constituted 34% of the assemblage (Gibson 2003:304–305), a relatively similar percentage to that in the Area M1 assemblage. The qalal kraters were the most popular vessels in the Early Roman chalk-vessel assemblage in Area M1, the rims and bases, comprising 48% of the vessels. If we also include the qalal body fragments, the percentage rises to 73% of the chalk-vessel assemblage. These data present an interesting comparison with statistical studies of stone-vessel assemblages from Galilean and Golan sites. At Nabratein, as at Gamla (above), no qalal fragments were recovered. At Capernaum, the qalals comprise 2% of the stonevessel assemblage, while at the urban site of Sepphoris they were only 15% of the stone-vessel fragments (Reed 2003:394–395). Gibson (2003:301) and Reed (2003:392–401) suggest that in contrast to the other stone vessels, which were used by all socio-economic classes, the qalal kraters were luxury items, since the production of such vessels required much effort and skill. Thus, as Reed claims, the data from Galilean sites indicate that the qalals were more popular at urban sites such as Sepphoris, which were settled by a population with a relatively high socio-economic position (Reed 2003:392–399).

Hand-Carved R ectangular Tables (Fig. 9.7) Nine fragments of hand-carved, rectangular tabletops were identified. They are carved from white chalk or hard limestone (Fig. 9.7:1). Rectangular tabletops have a smooth upper face and usually a rough underside, although sometimes the lower face is also smooth. In most cases, the edges are smoothed (Fig. 9.7:2). Based on complete examples of tabletops discovered at other sites, it appears that the ornamentation was applied on the front and two side edges, but not on the back edge, which was placed against a wall (Magen 2002:103). Thus, some of the tabletop fragments with smoothed edges may have been the rear sides of tables. The single fragment of an ornamented tabletop surface from Area M1 shows a carved design of rectangular frames, one of them containing a circular motif (Fig. 9.7:3). These tabletops stood upon a central pedestal. Noteworthy is a large fragment of a hard limestone tabletop (Fig. 9.7:1) with a square depression in its underside, and a small square protrusion in the center. This depression was most likely intended to fit a pedestal, as exemplified by a lathe-turned, round column pedestal (Fig. 9.7:4).

Lathe-Turned Round Tabletops (Fig. 9.8) Twelve fragments of round tabletops are made from either white or bituminous chalk on a large lathe. The upper surface is smoothed and polished and the underside roughly worked, bearing chisel marks. The edges are mostly simple and flat (Fig. 9.8:3, 4), sometimes with a small step or ridge (Fig. 9.8:5–7). Legs were connected to the tabletops by two different methods. In some cases, narrow depressions were carved in the underside, into which legs were inserted (Fig. 9.8:3, 6). In other examples, small protruding ring or concave disc bases (Fig. 9.8:1, 2) were probably connected to the legs by an additional ring that joined the two parts together.

226

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

2

1

3

0

10

4

Fig. 9.7. Rectangular tabletops and table pedestal. No.

Object

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description

Parallels

1

Tabletop

VII–VI

700

7303

Hard limestone tabletop fragment with square depression and small square protrusion in center

Jewish Quarter (Geva 2006: Pl. 9.6:1 [base of tabletop])

2

Tabletop

VII

738, 739

8211, 8408

Chalk; two fragments of same tabletop with smooth edge

3

Tabletop

VII

703

7225

Chalk; carved decoration

4

Pedestal

VI

W924

7409

Round, white chalk

excavations near the Temple Mount (Magen 2002: Fig. 3.67); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.17:1)

Chapter 9: the Stone Vessels and Furniture of the Early Roman Period

In light of this discussion, the high percentage of qalals in the Area M1 chalk-vessel assemblage in general, and specifically in that from Building

227

760 of the Early Roman period, seems to suggest a relatively high socio-economic level of the residents. Nevertheless, to reach a more conclusive understanding

2

1

3

4

5

6

7 0

10

Fig. 9.8. Round tabletops. No.

Stratum

Locus

Basket

Description*

1

VII

737

8240

White chalk

2

VI

697

6934

White chalk

3

VI

674

6418

Gray chalk D 46 cm

4

VIII–VII

766

8621

Bituminous chalk D 20 cm

5

VII–VI

767

8531

Bituminous chalk D 42 cm

6

VI

695

6920

Bituminous chalk D 52 cm

7

VII

740

8174

White chalk D 56 cm

* D = diameter

Parallels

City of David (Cahill 1992: Fig. 21:6, Photographs 211–213) Jewish Quarter (Avigad 1983: Fig. 188)

228

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

of the relationship between the components of chalkvessel assemblages and the socio-economic level of the inhabitants, additional statistical studies of such assemblages from Jerusalem and its vicinity are necessary. The large number of qalals (probably used for storage), along with the clear predominance of ceramic storage vessels (see Chapter 5) in the same context, indicates a storage function for parts of Building 760. Moreover, it is also interesting to find large quantities of these two types of storage containers together. In the Burnt House of Area B in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, for example, large quantities of qalals were found alongside relatively small amounts of ceramic storage jars (Geva 2010:121), suggesting that the stone qalals alone fulfilled the storage function (Geva 2010:154).

Fig. 9.9. Relative frequencies of Early Roman chalk vessels.

R eferences Amit D. 2010. The Manufacture of Stone Vessels in Jerusalem and the Galilee: Technological, Chronological, and Typological Aspects. Michmanim 22:49–66 (Hebrew). Amit D., Seligman J. and Zilberbod I. 2001. Quarry and Workshop for the Production of Stone Vessels on the Eastern Slope of Mount Scopus. Qadmoniot 34:102–110 (Hebrew). Amit D., Seligman J. and Zilberbod I. 2008. Stone Vessel Production Caves on the Eastern Slope of Mount Scopus, Jerusalem. In Y.W. Rowan and J.R. Ebling eds. New Approaches to Old Stones: Recent Studies of Ground Stone Artifacts. London–Oakville. Pp. 320–342. Avigad N. 1983. Discovering Jerusalem. Nashville. Cahill J.M. 1992. The Chalk Vessel Assemblages of the Persian/Hellenistic and Early Roman Periods. In A. De Groot and D.T. Ariel eds. Excavation at the City of David 1978–1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh III: Stratigraphical, Environmental and Other Reports (Qedem 33). Jerusalem. Pp. 190–274. Geva H. 2006a. A Proposal for Jerusalemite Stone Vessel Typology of the Second Temple Period. In E. Baruch, Z. Greenhut and A. Faust eds. New Studies on Jerusalem 11. Ramat Gan. Pp. 193–200 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 41*–42*). Geva H. 2006b. Stone Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by

Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 218–238. Geva H. 2010. Stone Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 IV: The Burnt House of Area B and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 154– 212. Gibson S. 2003. Stone Vessels of the Early Roman Period from Jerusalem and Palestine: A Reassessment. In G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and L.D. Chrupcala eds. One Land— Many Cultures: Archaeological Studies in Honour of S. Loffreda OFM. Jerusalem. Pp. 187–308. Magen Y. 2002. The Stone Vessel Industry in the Second Temple Period, Excavation at Hizma and the Jerusalem Temple Mount (JSP 1). Jerusalem. Reed J.L. 2003. Stone Vessels and Gospel Texts. Purity and Socio-Economics in John 2. In S. Alkier and J. Zangenberg eds. Zeichen aus Text und Stein: Studien auf dem Weg zu einer Archäologie des Neuen Testaments. Tübingen. Pp. 381–401. Reich R. 2003. Stone Vessels, Weights and Architectural Fragments. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 2­ 63–291.

Chapter 10

The Early Roman Stone Scale Weights Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Introduction Stone scale weights are known almost exclusively from the Early Roman period in Jerusalem. The scale weights in use in other places in this period were usually made of metal, particularly lead (Reich 2006:341). Of the 470 stone scale weights known from Early Roman sites throughout Israel, 449 were unearthed in Jerusalem (Reich 2009: Table 1). According to the data at hand, no metal weights of this period have been found in Jerusalem, indicating that the use of stone scale weights was particular to the Jewish population of Jerusalem. It should be noted that as opposed to the stone vessels of this period, which were made of chalk (see Chapter 9), the weights were produced of semihard limestone, known locally as mizzi hilu and hard meleke (Reich 2006:341–342). The major study conducted by Reich (2006) of Early Roman period weights from the Jewish Quarter, which

0

comprises the largest corpus of weights from Jerusalem, is the most comprehensive research published on this subject to date. We therefore follow his methodology and terminology (Reich 2006:329–330).

The Weight Assemblage from Area M1 Thirty-four items are presented here (Table 10.1; Fig. 10.1), of which 31 can be defined as stone scale weights (Figs. 10.2), while the remaining three are of uncertain identification (Fig. 10.2:32–34). These items were recovered in contexts of Strata VII–III and are attributed to the Early Roman period. The scale weights all have a squat cylindrical or drum shape, slightly convex upper and lower surfaces, and a diameter that is larger than the height. Two stone objects (Fig. 10.2:33, 34) may be considered cubic weights, although their identification as scale weights is doubtful due to their rough finish, and therefore they are excluded from the

10

Fig. 10.1. Stone scale weights.

230

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Table 10.1. Catalogue of Stone Scale Weights Cat. No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Current Mass (gm)

Approximated Original Mass (gm)

Surviving Volume (%)

Diam. (cm)

1

Cylindrical

VI

W924

7499

243.76

291.50

2

Cylindrical

VI

W932

7964

1143.55

3

Cylindrical

VII

722

7775

163.60

4

Cylindrical

VII

721

7657

5

Cylindrical

VII

740

8199

6

Cylindrical

VI

W930

7

Cylindrical

VII

737

8

Cylindrical

VII

702

7102

Height (cm)

Recalibration in Antiquity

Comments

83.62

7.0

4.3

 

Irregular shape

1293.25

88.42

173.83

94.12

10.5

6.5

 

 

5.5

3.0

 

 

173.69

173.69

167.92

176.23

100.00

6.0

4.0

 

 

95.28

5.0

3.7

 

 

7558

660.21

687.19

96.07

8296

49.07

49.07

100.00

9.0

4.8

 

 

4.0

2.0

 

45.48

45.48

100.00

 

3.0

1.9

 

Marble

9

Cylindrical

VI

660

6232/1

92.13

92.13

100.00

4.4

3.0

?

 

10

Cylindrical

VI–III

601

6192

100.60

100.60

100.00

4.0

2.9

 

Burn marks?

11

Cylindrical

VII–VI

706

7240

157.15

185.08

84.91

5.0

3.7

+

Palm incision

12

Cylindrical

VI

W915

6893

186.09

188.21

98.87

6.0

2.5

 

 

13

Cylindrical

V–III

676

7959

190.78

190.78

100.00

5.5

3.3

+

 

14

Cylindrical

VII

739

8222

359.15

361.79

99.27

8.2

4.0

 

 

15

Cylindrical

VII

759

8521

365.09

365.09

100.00

6.0

4.7

+

 

16

Cylindrical

VI

W909

6748

353.79

371.43

95.25

7.5

4.4

 

 

17

Cylindrical

VI

W927

8698

378.84

381.44

99.32

7.0

4.5

 

 

18

Cylindrical

VII

740

8260

383.47

383.47

100.00

7.0

4.4

 

Palm incision

19

Cylindrical

IV

666

6914

350.29

384.99

90.99

6.5

4.7

+

 

20

Cylindrical

VI

W938

8480

644.79

722.42

89.25

8.3

6.5

+

 

21

Cylindrical

VI

W931

7706

722.33

728.76

99.12

8.3

6.0

?

Depression on both sides

22

Cylindrical

VI–V

608

4694

743.44

746.20

99.63

10.0

5.2

 

 

23

Cylindrical

VII

718

7442

738.6

751.00

98.35

8.0

5.5

+

Burn marks?

24

Cylindrical

VII

721

7630

745.77

760.19

98.10

9.0

5.2

+

Burn marks

25

Cylindrical

VI

W931

8044

639.23

769.68

83.05

8.3

6.8

 

 

26

Cylindrical

VII

758

8351

989.93

1488.66

66.50

10.5

8.0

 

Palm incision, burn marks?

27

Cylindrical

VII

712

7364

56.05

56.05

100.00

3.0

2.2

 

 

28

Cylindrical

VI

692

6886

63.19

63.19

100.00

4.5

1.4

 

 

29

Cylindrical

V

696 Balk

7182

394.84

402.51

98.09

6.5

4.4

 

 

30

Cylindrical

VII

739

8099

677.60

713.36

94.99

9.0

5.0

 

Burn marks

31

Cylindrical

VII

702

7856

292.28

 

7.8

-

?

Broken

32

Cylindrical

VIII

833

9424

90.08

90.08

100.00

4.8

2.3

 

Hellenistic context

33

Cubic

VI–III

601

6891

273.43

288.77

94.69

 

3.5

 

Rectangular, possibly a weight

34

Cubic

VII

737

7962

611.00

611.00

100.00

 

5.0

 

Rectangular, possibly a weight

 

Chapter 10: the Early Roman Stone Scale Weights

current analysis. Also excluded is a single stone weight, distorted in shape and rougher than the others, which originated in a Hellenistic context (Stratum VIII; Fig. 10.3:32).

R ecalibrated Weights (Fig. 10.2:9, 11, 13, 15,

19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 31)

A number of the stone weights display metal casting added to the stone for recalibration purposes. Recalibration was probably carried out after a weight was damaged in order to return it to use, or perhaps, if a weight was produced slightly underweight. The recalibration process consisted of first perforating a hole in the center of the weight, then filling it with metal, and finally flattening the metal insert with a hammer (Reich 2006:346). Seven scale weights with a hole or metal casting were definitively identified (Fig. 10.2:11, 13, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24), a relatively large number, comprising 23% from the entire assemblage. An additional three weights with a small hole may also belong to this group (Fig. 10.2:9, 21, 31).

Incised Weights (Fig. 10.2:11, 18, 26) Three of the weights bear incisions in the form of a palm branch (or grain spike). This motif is known on several stone scale weights from other excavations in Jerusalem, and is also depicted on one stone weight from Qumran (Lemaire 2003:358, No. KhQ 2115). Several lead weights from various sites also bear a palm motif (Kushnir-Stein 2002:225–226; Lemaire 2003:347). All the stone weights that bear palm-branch incisions differ significantly in mass, but they all belong to Weighing System IV (see below). The meaning of the palm-branch (or grain-spike) motif depicted on these weights is uncertain. Reich (2006:347) raises a few options, such as an official mark, a mark of a specific commodity, or a representation of the grain spikes known on coins of King Agrippa I.

Marble Weight (Fig. 10.2:8) One small cylindrical marble weight was found in Cistern 702 in the Early Roman building complex (Building 760) of Stratum VII. It is noteworthy that during this period, the use of marble for any purpose was very rare in Israel, and only one other Early Roman marble weight is known: a cubic weight from

231

Masada (Reich 2007: Fig. 1:11). The rarity of this material and the incompatibility of the mass of the weight from Masada to that of other cubic weights led Reich to conclude that it was imported (Reich 2007:210). However, the Area M1 marble weight is identical in form to the other small cylindrical weights, and its mass corresponds to one of Reich’s groups (Group 42 in Weighing System IV; Reich 2006:362). Therefore, it seems that although it was made of a rare raw material, this small weight is nevertheless a local product, perhaps representing secondary use of a valuable broken marble vessel.

Weight Groups And Weighing Systems A ‘weight group’ is a group of weights that belong to the same mass range and was in use in the same period of time. A ‘weighing system’ comprises a series of ‘weight groups’ whose masses are multiples or fractions of a certain mass standard (Reich 2006:329– 330), according to a binary progression: 4:1, 2:1, 1:1, 1:2, 1:4, 1:8, etc. According to Reich’s comprehensive research, the stone scale weights can be divided into four weighing systems that succeeded each other chronologically. Weighing System I comprises cubic weights, while the next three weighing systems consist of cylindrical weights. The earliest weighing system (I) is dated by Reich to the second half of the first century BCE, and the latest (IV) to the second quarter of the first century CE until the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE (Reich 2006: Table 18.16). In order to determine whether the Area M1 weights correspond with Reich’s typology, the weights were weighed (incomplete examples were first reconstructed) and their approximate original mass was compared to the mass of Reich’s weight groups (Table 10.2).

Calculating the Mass of Broken Weights (Table 10.2)1 In order to calculate the original mass of the broken weights, two values are required: the volume of the missing part of the weight, and the density of the material (in this case stone) of the weight. By multiplying these values it is possible to calculate the mass of the missing part, and combine it with the mass of the surviving part of the weight. The following is a detailed description of the process:

232

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

18

16

17

19

20

0

21

10

Fig. 10.2. Stone scale weights.

233

Chapter 10: the Early Roman Stone Scale Weights

23

22

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

0

10

Fig. 10.2 (cont.). Stone scale weights.

234

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

1. The complete shape of each weight was reconstructed with plasticine, and the plasticine was weighed (Table 10.2: plasticine mass in g). 2. The density is the mass/volume. In order to calculate the density of the weights, each weight was weighed (Table 10.2: surviving mass in g), and the volume was calculated by placing the weight in a measuring vessel with water (Table 10.2: weight volume). Reich, who dealt with a large corpus of weights, adopted an average density value of 2.2 for all hard limestone weights (Reich 2006:341). The relatively small number of weights from Area M1 allowed us to calculate the density of each individual weight. The results have shown a wide range of densities (1.7–2.7). It should be noted that the larger weights were measured in a wide vessel that may have affected the accuracy of the results. The degree of accuracy is designated in Table 10.2 by the letters (A) for higher accuracy, and (B) for lower accuracy. The density of the plasticine was calculated by the same method, and its density was evaluated as 1.51. 3. By dividing the mass of the reconstructed plasticine part (Table 10.2: plasticine mass in g) with the plasticine density (1.51), the volume of the missing part was achieved. 4. By multiplying the missing volume with the stone density (Table 10.2: density), the mass of the missing part was ascertained (Table 10.2: reconstructed mass of the missing part in g).

5. To achieve the original mass of the weight, the following formula was applied: (P/1.51× S) + M = the reconstructed mass P = the mass of the reconstructed plasticine. S = the density of the weight. M = the mass of the surviving part of the weight.

Conclusions As shown in Table 10.2, 26 of the 30 scale weights for which we were able to calculate their original mass can be assigned to Reich’s weighing systems. Of these, 20 are related to Reich’s weighing system IV, the latest weighing system in use, which Reich dated to the last decades of the Early Roman period. This dating is further supported by the high percentage of these weights (73%) that originated in Stratum VII of Area M1, dated to the same period. The diameter/height ratio (D/H) of the Area M1 weights presents a wide range of proportions, apparently in use simultaneously (Table 10.2). Therefore, no clear tendency can be discerned. The large quantity of scale weights recovered in Area M1, together with the clear predominance of storage vessels such as ceramic jars and the large stone kraters (qalals; see Chapter 9), suggests that the weights played an integral role in the storage system in use in Building 760 during the later part of the Early Roman period.

Table 10.2. Scale Weights Grouped According to Reich’s (2006) Weighing Systems and Weight Groups Cat. No.

Surviving Volume %

Plasticine Mass (g)

Weight Volume (cc)

Density

Surviving Mass (g)

Reconstructed Mass of the Missing Part (g)

Approximated Original Mass (g)

Reich’s Weighing System and Group

D/H*

1

83.62

37.55

126.47 (A(

1.92

243.76

47.74

291.50

II—25**

1.62

2

88.42

93.41

472.22 )B(

2.42

1143.55

149.70

1293.25

II—27**

1.61

3

94.12

7.55

80.00 )B(

2.045

163.60

4

100.00 5.33

70.58 (A(

5

95.28

10.225

173.69 2.37

167.92

8.31

173.825

III—34

173.69

III—34

1.50

176.23

III—34

1.35

* D/H = diameter/height ** Weights with a mass that corresponds to the specific weight group according to Reich’s method of calculating the original mass with the average density of 2.2 *** Weights with a deviation of 1.00 to 3.80 g from the mass of the specific weight group

235

Chapter 10: the Early Roman Stone Scale Weights

Table 10.2 (cont.) Cat. No.

Surviving Volume %

Plasticine Mass (g)

17.19

Weight Volume (cc) 277.77 (B(

Density

Surviving Mass (g)

2.37

660.21

Reconstructed Mass of the Missing Part (g) 26.98

Approximated Original Mass (g) 687.19

Reich’s Weighing System and Group

D/H*

III—36

1.70

6

96.07

7

100.00

49.07

49.07

IV—42***

2.00

8

100.00

45.48

45.48

IV—42

1.57

IV—43

1.46

9

100.00

41.17 (A(

10

100.00

42.00 (A(

2.39

100.60

11

84.91

20.58

76.47 (A(

2.05

157.15

27.93

185.08

IV—44

1.35

12

98.87

1.22

70.58 (A(

2.63

186.09

2.12

188.21

IV—44

2.40

13

100.00

190.78

IV—44

1.66

2.32

208.33 )B(

361.79

IV—45***

2.00

365.09

IV—45

1.66

2.23

92.13

92.13 100.60

IV—43***

1.37

190.78 1.72

359.15

2.64

14

99.27

15

100.00

16

95.25

12.45

164.70 (A(

2.14

353.79

17.64

371.43

IV—45

1.81

17

99.32

1.71

164.70 (A(

2.30

378.84

2.6

381.44

IV—45

1.55

18

100.00

383.47

IV—45

1.59

19

90.99

19.41

129.41 (A(

2.70

350.29

34.70

384.99

IV—45

1.27

20

89.25

60.74

333.33 )B(

1.93

644.79

77.63

722.42

21

99.12

4.42

365.09

383.47

~2.2

722.33

IV—46**

1.23

728.76

IV—46

1.33

2.76

746.20

IV—46

1.92

22

99.63

2.11

374.99 (B(

23

98.35

9.18

361.11 (B(

2.04

738.60

12.40

751.00

IV—46

1.45

24

98.10

8.93

305.55 (B(

2.44

745.77

14.42

760.19

IV—46

1.73

25

83.05

81.74

264.70 (A(

2.41

639.23

130.45

769.68

IV—46

0.97

26

66.50

328.86

430.55 )B(

2.29

989.93

498.73

1488.66

IV—47***

1.125

100.00

25.00 (A(

2.24

56.05

56.05

Unknown

100.00

23.00 (A(

2.74

63.19

63.19

Unknown

27 28 29 30

1.98

743.44

98.09

4.75

161.76 (A(

2.44

394.84

7.67

402.51

Unknown

94.99

28.88

361.11 (B)

1.87

677.60

35.76

713.36

Unknown

236

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Note 1 We wish to thank Ronny Reich and Gerald Finkielsztejn for their generous guidance.

R eferences Kushnir-Stein A. 2002. New Hellenistic Lead Weights from Palestine and Phoenicia. IEJ 52:225–230. Lemaire A. 2003. Inscriptions du Khirbeh, des grottes et de ‘Ain Feshkha. In J.B. Humbert and J. Gunneweg eds. Khirbet Qumran et ‘Ain Feshkha II: Etudes d’anthropologie, de physique et de chimie. Fribourg. Pp. 341–388. Reich R. 2006. Stone Scale Weights of the Late Second Temple Period from the Jewish Quarter. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem

Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 329–388. Reich R. 2007. Stone Scale-Weights from Masada. In J. Aviram, G. Foerster, E. Netzer and G.D. Stiebel eds. Masada VIII: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965, Final Reports. Jerusalem. Pp. 207–215. Reich R. 2009. The Distribution of Stone Scale Weights from the Early Roman Period and Its Possible Meaning. IEJ 59:175–184.

Chapter 11

The Coins Donald T. Ariel

Introduction The numismatic finds are represented by 736 coins and a flan mold. All coins from well-stratified contexts were cleaned, and a further selection for cleaning was made among the remainder, based upon numismatic criteria, resulting in the cleaning of 236 coins. Not all of these coins were identifiable, and ultimately 188 were identified and included in the catalogue below. All but one of the coins are bronze (Cat. No. 106 is silver). Table 11.1 summarizes the coins and their dates, according to locus.1 The numismatic profile of the City of David (Shiloh excavations) and the adjacent Tyropoeon Valley (Crowfoot and FitzGerald excavations) has been discussed in the past (e.g., Ariel 1990:111–115), as has the coin currency in Jerusalem in general (Ariel 1982; Gitler 1996:318–340). While there is no intention here to relate to the many newly published and unpublished coin finds in greater Jerusalem, it should be noted that a very large number—almost 4000—have been found in excavations in the City of David since the excavations directed by Shiloh between 1985 and 2007, one-sixth of which derive from the earlier excavations at the Giv‘ati Parking Lot (Shukron and Reich 2005). Less than one-tenth of all these finds have been published to date (Ariel 2008, 2011a; Bijovsky 2010). The coin assemblage from the excavations directed by Shiloh is proportionally similar to that of the finds published here, and may serve as a general comparison. It is also worth comparing the finds from the present excavation with the coins published from the two excavation areas closest to the Giv‘ati Parking Lot, the 1927 excavations of Crowfoot and Fitzgerald, just south of Area M1 (Crowfoot and FitzGerald 1929:103–120), and the 1961–1967 excavations of Kenyon, primarily in the vicinity of the City of David (Reece et al. 2008).

The Coins Early (Pre-Hasmonean) Coin Finds The assemblage of 14 pre-Hasmonean coins in the catalogue (Cat. Nos. 1–14) resembles those of the same period from the nearby Tyropoeon Valley excavations (Crowfoot and FitzGerald 1929:106–107, Nos. 4–15), the relevant areas of Kenyon’s excavations (Reece et al. 2008:412) and Shiloh’s City of David excavations (Ariel 1990:99–101, Nos. 2–22). The same small number of Ptolemaic coins relative to Seleucid coins is seen, and the general predominance of coins of Antiochus III, IV and VII, are common to all the groups. As advances in numismatic research in recent years, particularly in the Seleucid class, have enabled a greater refinement of identification, it is likely that the coins of Antiochus III previously identified in the City of David were mainly imitations of the Antioch mint bronzes produced in ‘Akko-Ptolemais, comparable to Cat. No. 4 here. Similarly, coins identified prior to 1999 as Antiochus IV (Bijovsky 1994–1999), should now probably be attributed to either that king or Demetrius I (see Cat. Nos. 9–12). In addition, the coin with the obverse identified as a lotus (Crowfoot and FitzGerald 1929:107, No. 15) is certainly the same type as Cat. No. 14. Although the City of David was occupied in the Persian period, the numismatic remains from Area M1 do not attest to anything earlier than the Hellenistic period. The enigmatic groups of purportedly Persianperiod coins (hoards?) from two locations in the 1927 Tyropoeon Valley excavations (Crowfoot and FitzGerald 1929:106, Nos. 1–3), and the exceptional fifth-century BCE silver stater from Lycia found in Shiloh’s excavations (Ariel 1990:99, No. 1), have no parallels in the Area M1 excavations. It is noteworthy that the excavations of Crowfoot and FitzGerald also yielded another small, essentially

238

Donald T. Ariel

overlooked hoard of 24 copper coins, most of them stuck to one another, which, “from their size and weight . . . belong to the Seleucid period,” recovered in what is likely to have been a Hellenistic context (Crowfoot 1929:14). In 1945, Crowfoot added that this hoard dated to the second century BCE (Crowfoot 1945:71, n. 2). Of the 14 identified pre-Hasmonean coins from Area M1, 6 derived from Stratum VIII contexts. Two of these (Cat. Nos. 2, 4) were found on the upper of two superimposed plaster floors close to the western side of W969, together with a rich ceramic assemblage that included Rhodian amphora fragments. These two coins constitute the only numismatic evidence for the dating of the ‘large structure’ west of W969 to the early Hellenistic period (see Chapter 2). It would appear that the finds from Stratum VIII of the current excavations, together with the wealth of Hellenistic finds from Crowfoot and FitzGerald’s excavations just south of Area M1, present a picture of a more intensive Hellenistic occupation than that uncovered in Shiloh’s extramural excavations on the eastern slope of the City of David (De Groot and Bernick-Greenberg 2012:177).

Coin Finds from the Peak Period of the J erusalem Mint Although it is unusual to group three-quarters of the identified coins published here (Cat. Nos. 15–159), i.e., all of the Hasmonean, Herodian, Prefect/Procurator and First Jewish Revolt coins, into one group, most of these coins originate from the mint of Jerusalem in the heart of the city. It should be noted, however, that four coins also minted in Jerusalem (Cat. Nos. 14, 160, 161, 163) are not discussed in this category. Catalogue No. 14, noted above, a Seleucid coin, was the first bronze coin minted in Jerusalem, in 132/131 BCE. Catalogue Nos. 160, 161 and 163 were minted after the destruction of the city and belong to its refounding as Aelia Capitolina. Catalogue No. 165, dating to 314 CE and found in a Stratum VII context, probably implies a disturbance in that locus. It is clear from the list of coins according to loci in Table 11.1 that the coins contribute little to refining any internal phasing within Stratum VII. Most of the loci of Stratum VII contained coins dating to the last thirty years of the city, prior to its destruction. One notable exception is L709, which yielded the latest coin (of three) struck by John Hyrcanus I (129–105 BCE).

The bronze coins of the local Jerusalem mint naturally dominated the coin currency of that city, and most of Judea, in the Early Roman (late Second Temple) period (first century BCE–first century CE). The coins from Area M1 reflect a normal sequence of types from the mint, appearing in regular frequencies. The same types and frequencies are found in the agricultural Judean periphery, where in many cases only Jerusalem coins are found (e.g., Qalandiya; Ariel 2004:154–167, Nos. 61–449). In the more cosmopolitan capital itself, a few dozen other coins have appeared (Ariel 1982:317–318, Table 4, under the Hasmonean and Herodian periods), some from the City of David. These include silver coin finds, almost all of which are Tyrian sheqels and half sheqels. In the City of David, only two autonomous Tyrian silver coins date to the Early Roman period (Ariel 2008:147; and an unpublished Tyrian half sheqel excavated by David Amit in 2006). In addition, an ancient forgery of a Tyrian sheqel was discovered (Ariel 1990:101, C24). To this short list may now be added the silver coin from Area M1 (Cat. No. 106), which, unfortunately, is very poorly preserved. From the City of David we may also note eight illegible Hellenistic bronzes (Ariel 1990:101, C23; Reece et al. 2008:413), a mid-first century BCE Antiochene bronze (Ariel 1990:103, C136), and three bronzes from the autonomous mint of Side (Reece et al. 2008:413, 424; also noted in Ariel 2000:47*). The Nabatean coin from Area M1 (Cat. No. 71) is also included in this group, and may be related in general to seven other published Nabatean coins of the period from greater Jerusalem (Ariel 1982:323), and almost double that number of unpublished coins found since that publication. Also in this group is Cat. No. 107, an autonomous bronze of Tyre or Sidon, probably no different from one (or two?) published by Crowfoot and FitzGerald from the Tyropoeon Valley excavations (Crowfoot and FitzGerald 1929:109–110, Nos. 71[?]–72). Finally, there is a coin of Claudius from Alexandria (50/51 CE) found in Area M1 (Cat. No. 86). Five (possibly six) unpublished coins of Claudius from Alexandria have been found elsewhere in Jerusalem: three or four in the Burnt House in the Jewish Quarter (Ariel 2010:241, Nos. 30–32, and possibly No. 96; our Cat. No. 86 is the same as No. 32 from the Burnt House), one in the 1935 excavations at the Citadel (IAA 85454, RPC I:703, No. 5184; 50/51 CE), and another in excavations in the southwestern corner of the Temple Mount (IAA 84183, RPC I:703, No. 5187; 51/52 CE).2 There is no obvious

239

Chapter 11: The Coins

explanation for the high number of coins of Claudius from Alexandria in Jerusalem. One may conclude from these non-Jerusalem coins only that Jerusalem was slightly more cosmopolitan than its hinterlands and, from a general knowledge of the great variety of coin finds from other urban sites in the southern Levant (e.g., Sheedy 2001), much less cosmopolitan than others. The latest coins in the category of the peak period of Jerusalem’s mint are the coins of ‘year four’ of the First Jewish Revolt. The twenty ‘year four’ coins from Area M1 comprise an unexpectedly high proportion of the First Revolt coins, and this may have ramifications for another site, Qumran. Meshorer suggested (2003– 2006:21) that Qumran was conquered in 73 CE, at the same time as Masada, and not in 68 CE, as de Vaux had

supposed (1973:70). Coins of ‘year four’ of the revolt are rare, but as they were missing entirely in the Qumran coin profile, Meshorer rationalized their absence by claiming that they were pocketed by de Vaux’ workers. However, here in Area M1, at a site definitely destroyed in the summer or autumn of 70 CE, ‘year four’ coins are relatively numerous. In Area M1 the ratio of ‘year two’:‘year three’:‘year four’ coins is 1.25:0.3:1, that is, almost as many coins of ‘year four’ were found (20) as those of ‘year two’ (25). On the other hand, in the Burnt House in the Jewish Quarter, destroyed at the same time, the ratio is 10:3⅓:1 (Ariel 2010:242–243). And both these ratios are high in relation to Qumran. This supports the view that Qumran came to an end in 68 or early 69 CE (Ariel, forthcoming).

4

6

9

16

19

29

44

51

60

73

94 86 0

2

Fig. 11.1. Coins.

240

Donald T. Ariel

111

131

140

133

142

148

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

166

167

180

181

187

0

2

Fig. 11.2. Coins.

Chapter 11: The Coins

Coin Finds from after the Destruction of J erusalem until Constantine I This category includes the period from the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, the founding and building of Aelia Capitolina in the Late Roman period, until the city’s expansion under Byzantium (Cat. Nos. 160–164). Five Roman provincial coins from Area M1 from this period of time may be added to other coins from the City of David: eight from Crowfoot and FitzGerald’s excavations (1929:112, Nos. 115–122), twenty-six from relevant areas of Kenyon’s excavations (including four from nearby Area M; Reece et al. 2008:414–415) and one from the 2003 season at the Giv‘ati Parking Lot (Bijovsky, forthcoming). After these five coins, there is a numismatic gap between the end of provincial minting and the appearance of coins of Constantine the Great. This gap may be filled by more than twenty coins of that period found in Crowfoot and FitzGerald’s excavations (1929:112, Nos. 123–145) and seven from relevant areas of Kenyon’s excavations (Reece et al. 2008:415). Finds of Roman provincial coins in Jerusalem have been concentrated in the excavations immediately west and south of the southwestern corner of the Temple Mount. Of 316 coins dating between 135 and 260 CE that were found in Jerusalem until 1979, 192 originated in the excavations of B. Mazar near the Temple Mount (Ariel 1982:310–311, Table 2), as did 67 of the 80 coins of the mint of Aelia Capitolina (Ariel 1982:319, and see there for further references). Until now, this has supported E. Mazar’s contention that the camp of the Roman Tenth Legion was located here (Mazar 1999:58). However, this should now be reevaluated in the light of the new, as yet unpublished, finds from excavations north of the Western Wall precinct (Ariel and Berman, forthcoming) and the appearance of the five Roman provincial coins in Area M1, including three of the mint of Aelia Capitolina (Cat. Nos. 160–161, 163),3 which may also relate to these finds further north. On the other hand, there may have been a second–third-century CE occupation closer to Area M1, although apparently not in Area M1, as no architecture was found here. Moreover, the relatively large number of Roman provincial coins from Area M1 is brought into sharper contrast by their total absence in Shiloh’s excavations on the eastern slope of the City of David.

241

One coin, stuck by Julia Domna in Corcyra in Epirus (Greece), is an exceptional find (Cat. No. 162). Corcyra was the main city on the island west of the Greek mainland (present-day Corfu). Few Roman provincial coins, in particular of copper, from the Greek mainland or islands, have appeared in excavations in the Roman East. Only nine other provenanced Roman provincial coins from Greece and western Anatolia are documented in the IAA database, almost all unpublished. They are presented in Table 11.2 to emphasize their rarity among well over 4000 contemporaneous Roman provincial coins documented in the IAA. The copper issue of Corcyra, moreover, derives from the most distant mint of all the finds from Greece.4

Coin Finds from the Byzantine (Strata VI–V) through the Early Islamic Periods Catalogue Nos. 170 (378–383 CE), 172 and 175 (late fourth century CE) were found in Building 671 of Stratum VI, thus supporting the date of the building to the Late Roman–early Byzantine period (see Chapter 2). Catalogue No. 182, a follis of Heraclius I (627/28 CE), was recovered in Drainage Channel 601, which continued in use from Stratum VI until Stratum III, the second construction phase of the Abbasid period at the site. The only other substantial structure in Stratum VI is Building 628, which yielded no Byzantine coins. However, as so few coins originated in well-stratified Byzantine loci, their absence in Building 628 appears to be of no significance. Overall, the post-Roman numismatic profile from Area M1 (Cat. Nos. 167–188) spans the fourth and sixth–seventh centuries CE. The well-known gap of coins from the fifth century (see Bijovsky 2000–2002) should not prevent us from positing a more-or-less continuous occupation at the site from the fourth through seventh centuries CE, particularly as the coins from the nearby Crowfoot and FitzGerald excavations (1929:112–120, Nos. 146–235) span these centuries in a substantial way, including one coin of Leo I (457– 474 CE; Crowfoot and FitzGerald 1929:115, No. 175). The appearance of a coin of Constans II (Cat. No. 185) and two Arab-Byzantine coins (Nos. 187, 188) allows us to extend this occupation into the first half of the eighth century CE. While the absence of Abbasid coins (second half of the eighth–ninth centuries CE)

242

Donald T. Ariel

at Abbasid sites is not unknown (Magness 1997:482– 483), the lack of Umayyad coins, which do circulate in the Abbasid period, is perplexing

A Flan Mold (Fig. 11.3) One fragment of a flan mold, made of chalk, was found in the excavations (Reg. No. 8708, from a balk). The maximum preserved length of the mold is 11.8 cm, the maximum preserved width is 11.2 cm, and its thickness is 3.4 cm. No edges of the original slab are preserved and it is impossible to determine the orientation of the fragment or reconstruct its original dimensions. The largest known mold is roughly 33 × 40 cm (Ariel 2012:55, Table 2, No. 1). The mold’s thickness is consistent with other flan molds, which generally measure between 2.2 and 7.4 cm (Ariel 2006:214). The side of the fragment with the drilled depressions is highly smoothed, while the reverse is even but rough. The shallow depressions are well-spaced, connected by channels chiseled by hand. Two channels and one halfchannel are preserved on the face, with no more than five depressions preserved in any channel. No signs were found of the characteristic funnels that directed the molten metal into the channels. There is discoloration over most of the face of the fragment, probably a result of its exposure to the hot molten metal poured through the mold. Central holes in the depressions are the remains of the protruding (roughly 1 mm) end of the drill bit. Many flan molds have been discovered in Jerusalem since the late 1960s (Ariel 2012:65–66, Table 3, Nos. 1–35), most of which have not been fully published. Of twelve that derive from the City of David, only two are published (Ariel 2012:65, Table 3:20, 21). A few molds have been found outside of Jerusalem (Ariel 2011b:21*; 2012:65, Table 3:36–43). The Judean flan molds have been divided into three groups based on the dimensions of the depressions: 20–21 mm, 13–15 mm and 9–12 mm (Ariel 1990:116–

117). The depressions in the flan mold from Area M1 measure 16.4 mm in diameter, representing an intermediate dimension. One of the presumed advantages of using the Judean (and Cypriot) stone flan molds (Ariel 1990:117; 2003:117) is that the coin striking took place while the flans were still attached (Nicolaou 1990:132; Ariel 2003:118; but see Zlotnik 2012). After striking, larger coins such as those struck from flans produced in the Area M1 mold would have been separated from each other, and then would have required additional clipping to remove the flanges. Most of the cases in which the flanges were not removed involve coins smaller than 16 mm (e.g., Gitler 2003:460, Nos. 68, 69, 94; fig. on p. 471). Apparently, more care was taken to remove the flanges on larger coins. The flans produced in the Area M1 mold would roughly suit the common size of coins struck in the Jerusalem mint in the first century BCE–first century CE.

0

4

Fig. 11.3. Flan mold.

243

Chapter 11: The Coins

Table 11.1. List of Coins according to Loci (Coins Bearing an Asterisk Appear in Figs. 11.1, 11.2) Locus/Wall (Stratum)

601 (VI–III)

Qty.

Date (CE)

Cat. No.

1

4 BCE–6 CE

3

67/68

Locus/Wall (Stratum)

Qty.

Date (CE)

57

643 (VI)

17

Unidentified

122, 124, 125

644 (VI)

16

Unidentified

1

98/7 BCE– 195/6 CE

1

68/69

135

1

67/68

123

1

627/28

182

Total per Locus

645 (VI)

Cat. No.

Total per Locus 17 16

106

22

Unidentified

23

646 (IV)

4

Unidentified

4 1

3

Unidentified

10

647 (IV)

1

Unidentified

602 (III)

1

Unidentified

1

648 (VIB)

1

Unidentified

603 (III)

1

Unidentified

1

651 (Modern)

1

Umayyad

605 (II)

3

Unidentified

3

653 (III)

1

Unidentified

1

606 (Vb)

2

Unidentified

2

654 (III)

1

Unidentified

1

608 (VI–V)

1

41/42

76

1

138–161

1

68/69

136

2

69/70

145, 140*

7

Unidentified

11

610 (II)

2

Unidentified

2

613 (III

1

37–4 BCE

1

Unidentified

2

622 (IV)

5

Unidentified

5

623 (III)

1

569/70

180*

1

629/30

183

1

641–661

185

11 625 (I)

655 (VI)

56

Unidentified

14

1

383–395

173

1

132/131– 131/130 BCE

14

1

41/42

84

1

58/59

104

4

Unidentified

1

80/79 BCE

24

1

After 80/79 BCE

31

1

Hasmonean

48

1

67/68

110

7

Unidentified

635 (VI)

1

285–246 BCE

3

Unidentified

638 (III)

1

58/59

94*

1

351–361

169

5

Unidentified

1

41/42

5

Unidentified

6

2

Unidentified

2

633 (VIB)

634 (VIB)

641 (VI) 642 (VI–V)

11

11

656 (VI)

7

Unidentified

7

657 (VI)

1

41/42

78

2

69/70

146, 154

4

Unidentified

1

41/42

79

2

69/70

147, 152

658 (VI)

77

7

25

Unidentified

28

660 (VI)

24

Unidentified

24

661 (VI)

2

Unidentified

2

2

69/70

662 (VI)

155, 148*

10

Unidentified

12

663 (VI–V)

1

Unidentified

1

664 (IV)

5

Unidentified

666 (IV)

1

251–253

6

Unidentified

1

383–395

174

1

Later 4th c.

171

1

Unidentified

3

668 (VI)

7

Unidentified

7

669 (VI)

9

Unidentified

9

670 (VI)

14

Unidentified

1

After 80/79 BCE

38

1

378–383

170

1

Unidentified

3

672 (IV)

12

Unidentified

12

673 (VI)

14

Unidentified

14

674 (VI)

15

Unidentified

15

1

After 80/79 BCE

667 (IV)

4

7

160*

Unidentified

671 (VI)

1

1

10

1

7

1 188

675 (IV)

5 164* 7

14

25

244

Donald T. Ariel

Table 11.1 (cont.) Locus/Wall (Stratum)

Date (CE)

Cat. No.

1

7th c.

186

1

Unidentified

3

676 (V–III)

2

Unidentified

2

677 (IV)

1

Unidentified

1

678 (VI)

1

Unidentified

1

679 (VI)

1

50/51

4

Unidentified

5

680 (IV)

1

Unidentified

1

681 (VI)

2

Unidentified

2

682 (IV)

1

6th–7th c.

684 (VI)

2

Unidentified

2

686 (VII–VI)

1

Unidentified

1

2

After 80/79 BCE

27 28

1

Hasmonean

49

1

29/30

67

708 (VII)

2

41/42

80, 85

709 (VII)

1

54

92

3

Unidentified

10

688 (VI)

4

Unidentified

4

689 (VI)

1

Unidentified

1

1

173/2–168 BCE

675 (IV)

687 (VII–VI)

690 (VI)

691 (VII)

692 (VI)

Qty.

Total per Locus

Date (CE)

Cat. No.

4

67/68

113, 126–128

1

193–211

162*

2

Unidentified

1

58/59

4

Unidentified

1

125 BCE–60 CE

2

Unidentified

1

69/70

5

Unidentified

6

706 (VII–VI)

6

Unidentified

6

707 (VII)

1

41/42

81

1

69/70

150

1

Unidentified

8

Unidentified

1

173/2–168 BCE

8

1

173/2–150 BCE

13

1

129–105 BCE

16*

1

222–187 BCE

3

2

Unidentified

3

712 (VII)

1

Unidentified

1

713 (VII)

1

Unidentified

714 (VII)

1

54

1

Unidentified

715 (VII)

3

Unidentified

717 (II)

1

54

87

1

c. 533–539

178

1

572/73

181*

1

Unidentified

718 (VII)

1

67/68

129

719 (VII)

1

41/42

82

1

341–346

168

1

Unidentified

1

54

88

7

1

67/68–68/69

139

1

69/70

158*

14

1

Unidentified

2

104–80/79 BCE

184

1

80/79 BCE

23

5

After 80/79 BCE

33–37

1

703 (VII)

704 (VII)

705 (VII–VI)

710 (VI)

6*

4

Unidentified

5

1

30/31

68

1

69/70

156

5

Unidentified

1

c. 532–537

177

1

ArabByzantine

187*

7

Unidentified

22

693 (VI)

3

Unidentified

3

694 (VI)

4

Unidentified

4

695 (VI)

2

Unidentified

2

697 (VI)

4

Unidentified

4

698 (VI)

3

Unidentified

3

699 (VII–VI)

1

69/70

6

Unidentified

1

58/59

702 (VII)

702 (VII)

86*

20

700 (VII–VI)

Locus/Wall (Stratum)

157

720 (VII)

105

13

Unidentified

3

After 80/79 BCE

29*, 30, 39

1

40–37 BCE

44*

1

5/6–10/11

63

721 (VII)

Qty.

Total per Locus

12 102 5 107 3 149

3 8

3

1 93 2 3

4 1

3

4 19*, 20

245

Chapter 11: The Coins

Table 11.1 (cont.) Locus/Wall (Stratum) 721 (VII)

Qty.

Date (CE)

Cat. No.

1

Hasmonean

45

2

37–4 BCE

54, 55

1

8/9

1

17/18–24/25

1

Qty.

Date (CE)

1

Hasmonean

46

1

37–4 BCE

53

60*

1

10/11

64

65

1

29/30

66

30/31–31/32

69

1

41/42

74

2

41/42

72, 73*

1

54

91

1

54

90

1

58/59

101

7

58/59

95–100, 103

1

67/68

121

108, 109, 114–117, 123, 131*

1

69/70

144

2

Unidentified

741 (V)

1

Later 4th c.

1

Unidentified

2 1

8

67/68

Total per Locus

740 (VII)

742 (VII)

1

Unidentified

69/70

141, 142*, 143, 153

743 (VII)

1

Unidentified

744 (Vb)

1

315–316

1

Unidentified

2

748 (V)

2

Unidentified

2

749 (VII)

1

Unidentified

1

752 (VII)

1

Unidentified

1

755 (VIII– VII)

1

Unidentified

1

758 (VII)

1

314

759 (VII)

1

Unidentified

1

80/79 BCE or later

43

1

41/42

75

1

68/69

138

1

Unidentified

1

723 (VII)

2

Unidentified

2

1

After 80/79 BCE

32

1

Hasmonean

50

3

67/68

111*, 112, 130

7

Unidentified

1

Hasmonean

47

1

67/68

118

2

Unidentified

4

730 (VII)

1

Unidentified

1

735 (VII)

1

41/42

738 (VII)

739 (VII)

176

4

722 (VII)

737 (VII)

11

133*

50

736 (VII)

Total per Locus

68/69

Unidentified

726 (VII)

Cat. No.

1

13

725 (VII)

Locus/Wall (Stratum)

12

83

1

Unidentified

2

69/70

151, 159*

2

1

Hasmonean

51*

760 (VII)

1 166*

165

1

1

Unidentified

761 (VII)

2

Unidentified

4 2

766 (VIII– VII)

1

Unidentified

1

767 (VII–VI)

3

Unidentified

3

775 (VIII– VII)

1

Unidentified

1

1

175–173/2 BCE

5

30

Unidentified

33

6

Unidentified

6

3

67/68

119, 120, 132

1

173/2–168 BCE

7

1

68/69

134

2

173/2–150 BCE

11, 12

2

Unidentified

2

222–187 BCE

2

Unidentified

1

5/6–8/9

61

1

138–161

161*

808 (VIII)

6 2

1

812 (VIII)

6 2, 4*

2

246

Donald T. Ariel

Table 11.1 (cont.) Locus/Wall (Stratum)

Qty.

814 (VIII)

1 1

Unidentified

2

822 (VIII)

1

Unidentified

1

824 (VIII)

1

Unidentified

1

W864 (VI–V)

1

129–105 BCE

15

1

After 80/79 BCE

26

1

68/69

137

1

378–383?

172

1

Later 4th c.

175

3

Unidentified

8

1

Unidentified

1

1

104–80/79 BCE

21

1

326–330

167*

1

Unidentified

1

After 80/79 BCE

W881 (VI) W882 (VI)

W883 (VI) W884 (Va)

Date (CE)

Cat. No.

162–150 BCE

9*

Total per Locus

Locus/Wall (Stratum)

Qty.

W917 (IV)

4

Unidentified

W918 (IV)

1

30/31–31/32

70

1

104–76 BCE

18

2

1

After 80/79 BCE

41

1

W921 (Vb)

1

Unidentified

W922 (VII)

1

125 BCE–6 CE

59

1

104–80/79 BCE

22

4

Unidentified

5

1

Unidentified

1

W919 (VI)

W924 (VI)

2 1

40

W930 (VI–V)

Date (CE)

W932 (VI–V)

1

Unidentified

W940 (VII)

1

104–76 BCE

W949 (VII)

Cat. No.

4

1

1

1

Unidentified

1

After 80/79 BCE

42

2

58

1

125 BCE–6 CE

W952 (VII)

1

Unidentified

1 1

1

Unidentified

2

W955 (VII)

1

Unidentified

4

Unidentified

4

W970 (V)

1

Unidentified

W907 (Va)

1

Unidentified

1

Surface

1

162–150 BCE

10

W909 (VI)

1

Hasmonean

52

1

25–70

71

1

5/6–10/11

62

1

567/68

179

1

54

89

3

1

218–222

163*

1

W916 (VI)

2

Unidentified

2

1

17

W906 (III)

W914 (VI)

Total per Locus

11 Total

736

Unidentified

2

1

14

247

Chapter 11: The Coins

Table 11.2. Provenanced Roman Provincial Coins Minted in Greece and Western Anatolia in the IAA IAA No.

Mint

Date (CE)

Ruler

Provenance

Notes

117616

Corcyra

193–211

Julia Domna

Jerusalem, Giv‘ati Parking Lot

31581

Thessalonica (Macedonia)

112–117

Marciana

Caesarea

Unpublished; identified by G. Bijovsky; excavator: Y. Porat

36754

Thessalonica (Macedonia)

238–244

Gordian III

H. Kosit

Unpublished; identified by M. Reshef

-

Cyparissia (Messenia)

193–211

Julia Domna

Shuni (Kh. esh-Shuna)

Unpublished; identified by A. Berman; excavator: K. Abu Mokh

81750

Elis

193–211

Septimius Severus

Ashqelon (Marina)

Unpublished; identified by D.T. Ariel; excavator: S. Yisraeli

102604

Bithynia

128–137

Sabina

H. ‘Omrit

Syon 2011:109, No. 7

47059

Nicomedia (Bithynia)

218–222

Elagabalus

Nahal Hagit

Bijovsky 2011:179, No. 42

94829

Alexandria (Troas)

238–244 ?

Gordian III?

Baniyas

Unpublished; identified by G . Bijovsky; excavator: M. Hartal

61273

Dardanos (Troas)

198–217

Caracalla

Giv‘at Yasaf

Bijovsky 1997:44, No. 1

-

Magnesia ad Maeandrum (Ionia)

138–161

Antoninus Pius

Nablus

Bijovsky 2009

Locus/ Wall

635

812

710

812

808

690

808

709

Cat. No.

1

2

3

4*

5

6*

7

8

7315

9110

6548

9111

9099

7342

9051

4886

Reg. No.

2.75

2.02

2.56

2.08

2.73

0.88

0.62

4.87

Weight (g)

14

14

14

14

12

9

6×11

19×21

Diam. (mm)











↓?



Axis

Same

ΒΑΣΙΛΕ[ΩΣ]/ΑΝ[ΤΙΟΧΟΥ] Same

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Apollo stg. l.

Obliterated

[- - -] Same

[Β]ΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ/[ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΥ] Veiled and draped female figure, stg. facing, holding long scepter or torch

[- - -] Elephant head l.

Antiochus IV (175–164 BCE)

Diademed, radiate head r.

Same

[ΒΑΣ]ΙΛΕ[ΩΣ– ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΟΥ] Eagle stg. l. on thunderbolt, wings open

Seleucids Antiochus III (222–187 BCE)

Veiled, diademed bust of Laodice IV r.; behind bust, unclear

Same

Head r.

Head r. ?

Reverse Ptolemy II? (285–246 BCE)

Laureate head of Apollo r., with long curls

Obverse

Same

173/2–168 BCE

175–173/2 BCE

198–187 BCE

Date (CE)

Same

Same

Same

Same

‘AkkoPtolemais

Antioch ?

Mint

Same Same; identification of king uncertain

Cf. SC 1:92, No. 1479

Same

SC 2:92, No. 1479

Same

Serrated

SC 2:91, No. 1477.2

Cf. SC 1:416, No. 1096

117622

115282

117599

115283

115287

117624

Cf. SC 1:403, No. 1062

117568

IAA No.

115286 Imitation

Notes

Cf. SC 1:402, No. 1055

Reference

All the coins are bronze, except No. 106, which is silver. The coins are arranged chronologically, according to types. Coins bearing an asterisk are illustrated in Figs. 11.1, 11.2.

Catalogue

248 Donald T. Ariel

Surface

808

808

709

633

W864

709

W924

W918

11

12

13

14

15

16*

17

18

814

9*

10

Locus/ Wall

Cat. No.

6917

7456

7316

6481

4838

7301

9235

9138

4509

9113

Reg. No.

1.65

1.04

1.13

1.90

1.77

1.73

2.15

1.68

2.87

2.52

Weight (g)

13×14

13

14

13×14

13

14

13×14

13

14×15

14

Diam. (mm)

 

¾

?







¼

Axis

[- - -] Figure stg.

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ]/ ΔHMHTΡ[ΙΟΥ] Same

[ΒΑ]ΣΙΛΕΩ[Σ]/ ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟ[Υ] Veiled and draped female figure, stg. facing, holding long scepter or torch

Same

]- - -[/] - - -[/‫חנן כוה‬/‫יהו‬ Same

In wreath: ]- - -[/]- - -[; On edge, anchor?

In wreath: /‫הן הגד‬/]‫נתן ה[כ‬/]‫[יהו‬ ]- - -[

Double cornucopias?

Obliterated

Alexander Jannaeus (104–76 BCE)

Double cornucopias with pomegranate between horns

In wreath: ]- - -[/‫יהוחנן‬ ]- - -[/‫[ל וח]בר הי‬/‫גד‬

Hasmoneans Hyrcanus I (129–105 BCE)

[ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ/[ΑΝΤΙ] ΟΧΟ[Υ/Ε]Υ[ΕΡΓΕ]ΤΟΥ Anchor

Antiochus VII (138–129 BCE) Lily on stem

Head r. ?

Same

Head r.

Same

Reverse Demetrius I (162–150 BCE)

Head r. with taenia

Obverse

132/131– 131/130 BCE

Same

Same

173/2–150 BCE

Date (CE)

Same

Same

Same

Same

Jerusalem

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Mint

117658

117663

117623

TJC:202, Group D

117563

117621

117649

Overstrike? Identification of priest uncertain

Same; identification uncertain

115285

115284

117666

115288

IAA No.

TJC:202, Group B

Cf. SC 2:392, No. 2123

Same

Same

Same

Cf. SC 2:92, No. 1479 Same

Same

Serrated

Notes

Same

SC 2:181, No. 1679

Reference

Chapter 11: The Coins

249

721

671

702

37

39

721

36

38

721

721

34

721

33

35

634

725

31

702

30

32

702

675

25

687

634

24

29*

721

23

28

W922

22

W864

W882

21

687

721

20

26

721

19*

27

Locus/ Wall

Cat. No.

7645

5862

7916

7807

7720

7576

7575

7671

4832

7617

6956

7328

6819

6595

6054

4828

7684

7024

6778

7917

7805

Reg. No.

0.90

0.33

0.40

0.57

0.96

0.53

0.46

0.63

0.80

0.56

0.89

0.58

0.67

0.82

0.96

1.35

0.76

1.29

0.94

2.19

2.03

Weight (g)

11

7×9

9×12

10×13

13

10×13

10

8×15

10

11

11

10×12

11

11×12

11

12×14

13×15

13×14

13

15×18

13×16

Diam. (mm) 

Axis

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Star

Obliterated

Same

Same

Same

Same

Star

Remains of star

Same

Six dots

Same

Obliterated Anchor in circle

Six-pointed star

Same

Same

Eight-pointed star

Obliterated

Anchor in circle

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Eight-pointed star in border of dots

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

Star within diadem; between rays: [- - -]

Reverse

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Anchor in circle

Obliterated

[ΒΑΣΙΛ]EΩ[Σ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ] Same

ΒΑ[ΣΙΛEΩΣ ΑΛΕΞ] ΑΝ[ΔΡΟΥ] Same

[- - -] Anchor

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

After 80/79 BCE

Same

80/79 BCE

Same

Same

Same

104–80/79 BCE

Date (CE)

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Mint

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

117615

117585

115238

115230

115222

115215

115214

TJC:210, Subgroups L7–14 Same

117567 117635

Same TJC:210, Subgroup L15

117614

TJC:210, Subgroup L10

117598 117610

Same

Same

117650 117596

Same

117589

TJC:210, Subgroup L7

TJC:210, Subgroup L9

117564

Same

115218

TJC:210, Subgroups L1–6

117652

115239

115228

IAA No.

117662

Notes

Same

Same

Same

TJC:209, Group K

Reference

250 Donald T. Ariel

W918

W940

760

702

721

740

726

634

687

725

736

W909

740

41

43

44*

45

46

47

48

49

50

51*

52

53

W884

40

42

Locus/ Wall

Cat. No.

8142

5271

7727

7681

6559

4829

7539

8143

7996

6954

8355

7611

6918

5676

Reg. No.

0.82

1.66

1.93

1.80

1.91

2.10

1.71

1.74

1.34

1.74

0.78

0.52

1.13

1.15

Weight (g)

14×16

14

12×14

12×14

14×16

13

15

13

13×15

12×15

13×15

10

12×14

11×13

Diam. (mm)



→

↓



¢

Axis

BA[Ç I–HPW] Anchor

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

Double cornucopia; between horns, caduceus

Herod (37–4 BCE)

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

/]- - -[/‫]הכה‬- - -[/]- - -[‫יהו‬ ]- - -[ Same [- - -] Same

Double cornucopias with pomegranate between horns

In wreath: ]- - -[/]- - -[/]- - -[/]- - -[ ]- - -[‫הי‬

Unclear Hasmonean ruler

Double cornucopias with ear of corn between horns

80/79 BCE or later

Same

Star

Same

Obliterated

Same

Date (CE)

Same

Same

Reverse

Mattathias Antigonus (40–37 BCE) In wreath: ]- - -[

Same

Same

Same

Same

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Mint

TJC:222–223, No. 59

TJC:220, No. 39

Misstrike; flanges of flan visible

115261

117655

117641

117638

117593

117565

115250

115262

115246

117608

115279

TJC:210, Group L

117659

117654

IAA No.

117664

Barbarous letters

Notes

Same

Same

Same

Reference

Chapter 11: The Coins

251

Locus/ Wall

721

721

613

601

W949

W919

721

739

W909

702

740

721

740

687

Cat. No.

54

55

56

57

58

59

60*

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

6563

8144

7921

8363

7722

6820

8180

7690

6814

8440

6502

5076

7918

7804

Reg. No.

2.05

1.22

1.36

2.36

1.40

1.52

1.63

1.89

1.02

1.17

0.73

0.78

0.72

1.58

Weight (g)

15

12×16

16

17

16

15

16

16×18

11

13×15

10×14

11×13

13×15

15

Diam. (mm)



¾

©

¾





©

Axis

Same; in fields: L–MA

Same; in fields: [∙]–[∙]

Same; in fields: L–Λ[∙]

Same; in fields: L–Λ[∙]

Palm tree; in fields: L–ΛΘ

[IOVΛIA KAICA]POC Same

[- - -] Three ears of grain

Palm branch; in fields: [IO]V–[ΛIA] [L–∙]

Tiberius (14–37 CE)

[TIBEPIOY KAICAP] OC LI[ς] Simpulum

Same

Obliterated

[K]AIC[A]–POC Same

KAI[CA–POC] Same

KAIC[A–POC] Same

[- - -] Same

Same

Double cornucopia; between horns, unclear

In wreath: EΘ/AÚ

Roman Prefects in Judea Augustus (27 BCE–14 CE) KAICA–POC Ear of barley

Same

[border of dots]

Anchor in circle with Y pattern

Same; above caduceus, two dots visible

Reverse

Herod Archelaus (4 BCE–6 CE)

Obliterated

Anchor

[border of dots]

[- - -]

Obliterated

Obverse

Same

Year 16= 29/30

17/18– 24/25

Year 41= 10/11

Same

5/6– 10/11

5/6– 8/9

Year 39= 8/9

Same

125 BCE– 6 CE

Date (CE)

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Mint

117595

115263

TJC:258, No. 331 Same

115243

115265

TJC:256, No. 315

TJC:257, No. 327

117616

117656 Same

Same

115256

Cf. TJC:256, No. 311

117661

115289

115220

Same

Identification unclear

117548

117556

TJC:256, No. 313

TJC:224, No. 69b

Identification unclear

115240

TJC:223, No. 61

IAA No. 115227

Notes

Same

Reference

252 Donald T. Ariel

Locus/ Wall

691

721

W914

Surf.

721

721

740

760

608

641

657

658

687

Cat. No.

68

69

70

71

72

73*

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

7327

6154

5664

4873

4878

8382

8096

7808

7803

6496

6813

8011

6552

Reg. No.

2.21

3.36

2.97

2.15

1.59

2.46

1.56

2.50

2.31

2.10

2.24

1.49

2.15

Weight (g)

15×17

16×17

15×17

16×18

17

18

13×15

17

17

14×16

15

16

16

Diam. (mm)

















¾

¢



Axis

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

In wreath: [L]IZ

Reverse

[BACIΛEWC AΓP]IΠA Same

BACI[ΛEWC AΓPIΠA] Same

[BACIΛEWC AΓPI]ΠA Same

[BACI]ΛEW[C AΓP] IΠA Same

[BACIΛEWC AΓP]IΠA Same

BACIΛEWC [AΓP]IΠA Same

[BACIΛEW]C AΓPIΠA Same

Same; in fields: [L]–ς

Same; in fields: L–[ς]

Same; in fields: [L]–ς

Same; in fields: [L]–ς

Same; in fields: L–ς

Same; in fields: L–[ς]

Same; in fields: L–ς

Same; in fields: [L]–ς

Three ears of grain; in fields: L–ς

Herodians Agrippa I (37–44 CE)

Two crossed cornucopias; between them, above and below, in three lines: \]- - -[ ]‫שקי\לִ[ת‬

Nabateans

BACI[ΛEWC A]ΓPIΠ] A Same

[BACIΛΕ]WC– A[ΓΡΙΠΑ] Canopy

Jugate busts r.

TIBEP[IOY]– KAICAPOC] Same

[- - -] Same

[TIBEPI]OY– [KAICAPOC] Lituus

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Year 6= 41/42

25–70

Same

30/31– 31/32

Year 17= 30/31

Date (CE)

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Jerusalem

Petra

Same

Same

Same

Mint

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

TJC:231, No. 120

Cf. Meshorer 1975:105, No. 112.l

Same

117597

117579

117576

117570

117553

115280

115257

115231

115226

117668

117657

115248

Cf. TJC:258, No. 333

IAA No. 117600

Notes

TJC:258, No. 333

Reference

Chapter 11: The Coins

253

Locus/ Wall

707

719

735

633

687

679

717

720

W909

721

740

Cat. No.

81

82

83

84

85

86*

87

88

89

90

91

8335

7810

6210

7618

7742

7040

6558

4837

7716

7801

7325

Reg. No.

2.23

2.27

2.25

1.25

0.96

8.09

2.33

2.17

1.51

1.67

2.42

Weight (g)

16

18

17

15

9×11

25

17

16

16×17

15×18

17

Diam. (mm)























Axis

Same; in fields: [L–ς]

Same; in fields: [L–ς]

Same; in fields: L–ς

Same; in fields: L–ς.

Same; in fields: [L]–ς

Reverse

[TI KΛAYΔIOC KAICAP] ΓEPM Same; in field: LIΔ

TI KΛAYΔI[OC KAICAP ΓEP]M Two crossed palm branches; in field: [L]IΔ

[NEPW KΛA]Y KAICAP Same

[N]EPW [KΛAY KAICAP] Same

[N]EPW [KΛAY KAICAP] Two oblong spears and two shields

IOV/ΛIA AΓ/PIΠΠI/NA Same

In wreath: IOV/ΛIA AΓ/PIΠΠI/[NA]

BPI[T]/L–[IΔ/K–AI] Same

[BPIT/L–IΔ]/K–AI Same

[BPIT/L–IΔ]/K–[AI] Palm tree

Roman Procurators in Judea Claudius (41–54 CE)

Winged caduceus and four ears of corn; above: AYTO–KPA

Roman Provincial Claudius (41–54 CE) [TIB] KΛAY KAI CEBAC ΓEPMA Laureate head r.; in front: LAI

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[BACIΛ]EWC [AΓPIΠA] Same

BACIΛEW[C AΓPIΠA] Same

BAC[IΛEWC AΓ]PIΠA Same

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Same

Year 14= 54

Year 11= 50/51

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Date (CE)

Same

Same

Same

Same

Jerusalem

Alexandria

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Mint

Same

115264

115232

TJC:259, No. 342

117632

117627

117590

117592

117562

117640

117630

117620

IAA No.

117660

Notes

Same

Same

TJC:259, No. 340

RPC I:703, No. 5182

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Reference

254 Donald T. Ariel

Locus/ Wall

687

714

638

721

721

721

721

721

721

740

703

721

633

700

Cat. No.

92

93

94*

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

7317

4727

7709

7035

8110

8020

7919

7813

7735

7647

7626

7987

7217

6560

Reg. No.

1.69

0.41

2.35

1.63

1.67

1.21

2.80

1.83

0.94

1.66

1.85

2.17

2.10

2.06

Weight (g)

16

14

17

15

16

14×17

16×18

16

15×17

17×19

16

14×16

16

17

Diam. (mm)



¾





¼

½

↓

½





Axis

Same

Same

Obliterated

NEP/WNO/[C] Same

[NEP]/WN[O/C] Same

[N]EP/[W]N[O/C] Same

NEP/WNO/C Same

NEP/WNO/[C] Same

[- - -] Same

NEP/WNO/C Same

NEP/WNO/∩ Same

In wreath: NEP/ WNO/∩

[IOV]/Λ[IA AΓ]/P[IΠΠI]/NA Same

[IOV]/ΛIA A[Γ]/PIΠΠ[I]/ [NA] Same

Reverse

[LE KA]IC–APO[C] Same

[LE KAIC]–AP[OC] Same

L[E KAIC–A]PO[C] Same

[LE] KAIC–APO[C] Same

LE KAI[C]–APOC Same

[L]E KA[IC–A]P[OC] Same

LE KA[IC]–APOC Same

LE K[AIC–AP]OC Same

[- - -]A  ∃ L Same

LE KA[IC]–APOC Same

LE KAIC–[APOC] Same

[LE] KAIC–APOC Palm branch

Nero (54–68 CE)

[- - -] Same; in field: [- - -]

TI KΛAYΔI[OC KAICAP ΓEPM] Same; in field: [- - -]

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Year 5= 58/59

Same

Date (CE)

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Mint

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

117606

117561

115221

117617

115260

115249

115241

115234

TJC:260, No. 345 Same

115224

TJC:260, No. 345l

115217

TJC:260, No. 345

115213

117625

117594

IAA No.

115216 Double strike

Notes

Same

TJC:260, No. 345a

Same

Same

Reference

Chapter 11: The Coins

255

Locus/ Wall

704

645

721

721

634

725

725

702

721

721

721

721

726

738

Cat. No.

106

107

108

109

110

111*

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

7995

7738

7922

7913

7812

7729

7010

7680

7678

4830

7915

7686

5471

7131

Reg. No.

2.13

2.39

2.16

1.50

3.67

2.15

2.73

2.50

3.26

2.40

3.65

2.70

6.13

13.28

Weight (g)

19

18×20

17

15×17

19

17

17

16×18

17

18

19

19

20×22

23×25

Diam. (mm)



¾

¾





↓

↓

↓

↓





¼





Axis

]‫[ש]נת–שתי[ם‬ Same

‫[שנת–ש]תים‬ Same

‫ִש[נת]–שתים‬ Same

‫שנ[ת]–[ש]תים‬ Same

‫[ש]נִת–שתים‬ Same

]‫[ש[נת–שת]ים‬ Same

‫ש[נת–ש]תים‬ Same

]‫חר[ת ציון‬ Same

‫[חרת] ציון‬ Same

]- - -[ Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

‫[חרת צי]ון‬ Same ‫ח[רת ציו]ן‬ Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Year 2= 67/68

98/7 BCE– 195/6 CE

125 BCE– 60 CE

Date (CE)

]‫[חר]ת [ציון‬ Same

]‫חרת [ציון‬ Same

‫ח[ר]ת [צי]ון‬ Same

‫ִש‬ ‫[נת]–שתִים‬ ִ Same ‫שנ[ת–שת]ים‬ Same

‫חרת ציון‬ Same

]‫חרת [ציון‬ Same

‫חרת ציון‬ Same

‫[ח]רת ציון‬ Vine leaf

‫שנת–שתים‬ Same

‫שנת–שתים‬ Same

[- - -] Galley

Roman Provincial

[ΤΥΡ]Ο[Υ ΙΕΡΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΑΣΥΛΟΥ] Eagle stg. l. on prow, palm branch behind shoulder; in l. field, club surmounted by ¾

First Jewish Revolt (66–70 CE)

Head of Tyche r.

‫שנת–שתים‬ Amphora

Reverse Roman Provincial, Silver Sheqel

Laureate head of Heracles (Melqart) r., with lion-skin knotted about neck

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Jerusalem

Tyre

Mint

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

115254

115251

115244

115235

115233

115223

Cf. TJC:241, No. 196

117637

117636

117566

115237

115219

117571

117607

IAA No.

117612

Tyre or Sidon

Notes

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

TJC:241, No. 196

Cf. BMC Phoen.:255, No. 252

Reference

256 Donald T. Ariel

8107

5637

6495

740

601

601

601

601

702

702

702

718

725

721

738

721

738

601

608

W864

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131*

132

133*

134

135

136

137

6821

4882

6826

7971

7762

7986

7914

7682

7410

7487

7009

6955

6503

6827

8010

738

120

Reg. No.

Locus/ Wall

Cat. No.

2.27

2.72

2.35

2.49

2.28

1.39

2.37

2.64

2.99

2.00

2.62

0.74

1.96

2.31

3.21

2.17

2.94

2.00

Weight (g)

16×17

16×18

16×18

17

17

10×18

17

16

17

14×16

17

8×16

16×18

14×16

16×18

16

17

16×18

Diam. (mm)



¾





↓





←







←













Axis

‫[חרות צ]יון‬ Same ‫[חרות צי]ון‬ Same

‫שנת–[של]וִש‬ Same

‫ח[רות צי]ון‬ Same

‫[חרות צ]יון‬ Same

‫חרת ציון‬ Same

]‫[חר]ות צ[יון‬ Same

‫חרות ציון‬ Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Year 3= 68/69

Same

Same

Same

Same

]‫[חרת צ]יו[ן‬ Same ]- - -[ Same

Same

Same

‫[חרת] ציון‬ Same ‫ִח ִר ִת ציון‬ Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Date (CE)

]‫[חרת] צ[יון‬ Same

‫שנ[ת–ש] ִלוִש‬ Same

‫שנ[ת–של]וש‬ Same

]‫שנִתִ–ש[לוש‬ Same

‫שנת–שתים‬ Same

]‫שנ[ת–שתים‬ Same

‫שנת–שתים‬ Same

]‫שנת–[שתים‬ Same

‫שנת–שתים‬ Same

ִ ִ‫שנת–שתי‬ ‫ם‬ ִ Same

ִ ִ‫ִשנִתִ–שתי‬ ‫ם‬ Same

‫[שנת]–ש[תי]ם‬ Same

‫[חרת] ציון‬ Same

‫ח[רת צי]ון‬ Same

‫[ש]נִתִ–שתיִם‬ Same ‫[שנת]–שתים‬ Same

]‫חרִ[ת ציון‬ Same

]‫[חר]ת צ[יון‬ Same

‫[חרת צ]יון‬ Same

]‫[חרת] ציו[ן‬ Same

Reverse

‫שנת–שתים‬ Same

‫[שנת–ש] ִתיִם‬ Same

‫שנת–שתים‬ Same

‫שנ[ת]–שתים‬ Same

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Mint

115252

TJC:242, No. 204

Same

Same

117651

117554

117549

115225

TJC:242, No. 203

Same

115253

Same

115236

TJC:241, No. 197

117626

117613

117611

117609

117551

117550

117547

117545

115259

115255

IAA No.

117639

Notes

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Reference

Chapter 11: The Coins

257

Locus/ Wall

760

720

608

721

721

721

740

608

657

658

662

705

707

736

658

721

657

662

691

Cat. No.

138

139

140*

141

142*

143

144

145

146

147

148*

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

6652

5817

5272

7806

5461

7939

7309

7337

5643

5269

5273

4880

8105

8009

7992

7920

4883

7817

8449

Reg. No.

7.01

4.02

4.29

7.22

8.02

7.56

7.59

9.72

8.98

6.46

6.00

8.79

7.26

5.39

7.76

6.82

14.34

1.72

1.70

Weight (g)

20×22

18

18×20

24

22

21×23

22×24

23

22

21

19

22

22

20×22

22

22

26

14×16

14×17

Diam. (mm)





¾



¾

↓

¾

©





¾

↓





↓





Axis

]‫לגאלת צי[ון‬ Same

‫לג[אלת צ]יון‬ Same

‫לגאלת ציון‬ Cup

‫לגאלת ציון‬ Same

‫לגאלת ציון‬ Same

‫לגאלת ִציִון‬ Same

]‫[לג]אִלת צי[ון‬ Same

]‫[ל]גאל ִת [ציון‬ Same

‫שנת ארבע‬ Same

‫שנת אר[ב]ע‬ Same

‫שנת ארבע‬ Lulab between two ethrogs

‫שנת ארבע‬ Same

]‫שנ[ת ארבע] רבי[ע‬ Same

‫שנת ארבע ִר ִביִִע‬ Same

]‫[שנ]ת [ארבע רביע‬ Same

‫ש[נת ארבע] רביע‬ Same

‫[שנת ארבע רב]יע‬ Same

‫שנת ארבע רביע‬ Same

]- - -[ Same ‫לגאל[ת] ִציִון‬ Same

‫שנת ארבע רביע‬ Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

]‫שנת ִא ִר ִב ִע [רביע‬ Same ]‫שנ[ת א]רבע [רביע‬ Same

Same

Same

Same

Year 4= 69/70

67/68– 68/69

Same

Date (CE)

‫[שנת ארבע רבי]ע‬ Same

]‫ִשנת ארבע [רביע‬ Same

]‫[שנת א]ר[בע רביע‬ Two lulabs

‫[שנת] ארבע‬ Ethrog between two lulabs

]- - -[ Same

]‫חרוִ[ת ציון‬ Same

Reverse

‫לגאלת ציון‬ Same

]‫ל[גא]ל ִת צ[יון‬ Same

‫לגאלת ציון‬ Same

]- - -[ Same

‫לגאלת ציון‬ Same

]‫[לג]אלת צי[ון‬ Ethrog

‫לגאלת ציון‬ Palm tree

]- - -[ Same

]- - -[ Same

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Mint

115242

TJC:243, No. 213

Same

117601

117581

117574

TJC:243, No. 214 Same

115229

117578

TJC:243, No. 213a Same

117643

117619

117618

117580

117577

117575

117552

115258

115247

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

Same

115245

117555

TJC:243, No. 211

Same

117634

Cf. TJC:241, No. 196

IAA No. 115281

Notes

Same

Reference

258 Donald T. Ariel

Locus/ Wall

699

720

736

655

739

702

W909

666

Cat. No.

157

158*

159*

160*

161*

162*

163*

164*

6179

6820

7722

8180

5455

7935

7816

7011

Reg. No.

9.89

6.81

9.40

8.42

6.92

5.38

5.39

6.09

Weight (g)

20

23×25

25

22

22

19

18×20

18

Diam. (mm)



¾

©



↓

¾



¼

Axis

]‫שנת אִ[רבע‬ Same

‫שנת ארבע‬ Same

‫שנת ארבע‬ Same

Reverse

CO A–E[ CA] Dioscuri stg. to front; one hand on spear, the other on hip; between them, eagle

Pegasus r.; above, in semicircle: KOPKY; below: PAIΩN

COL AEL CAC PF Dioscuri riding horses; between the horses, wine jar

[IMP CC VO] LVSSIA[NVS PF AVG] Laureate, draped bust r.

[- - -] Victory l., with palm and wreath

Volusian (251–253 CE)

[IMP CM]A A– NT[ONINVS] Laureate, cuirassed bust r., with paludamentum and gorgon head on chest

Elagabalus (218–222 CE)

IOYΛIA ΔOMNA CEBACT Bust r.

Julia Domna (193–211 CE)

[IMP ANTO–NINVS AVG] PPP Same

[CO]L AE–[L] Bust of Tyche r.

Antoninus Pius (138–161 CE) [- - -] Laureate, draped bust r.

‫לגִ[אלת] צִיון‬ Same

‫לגאלת ִציִון‬ Same

‫לגאלת ציון‬ Same

Obverse

Same

Same

Same

Date (CE)

Caesarea

Aelia Capitolina

Corcyra (Epiri)

Same

Aelia Capitolina

Same

Same

Same

Mint

Kadman 1957:142–143, No. 225

Meshorer 1989:102, No. 127

SNG Denmark III: Pl. 6, No. 265

Meshorer 1989:74, No. 22

Meshorer 1989:74, No. 21

Same

Same

Same

Reference

Original flan’s shape visible

Notes

117582

117656

117616

115256

117573

117642

117633

117605

IAA No.

Chapter 11: The Coins

259

Locus/ Wall

758

744

W882

719

638

671

667

W864

625

667

W864

Cat. No.

165

166*

167*

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

6063

5680

5491

6458

5855

5864

5292

7802

6787

8280

8412

Reg. No.

0.51

0.70

0.81

0.72

0.63

1.08

1.05

1.22

2.94

3.52

2.25

Weight (g)

9×10

12

12×14

10×12

14

12

14

17×19

19

21

17×19

Diam. (mm)



↓

?

¿

↓

©



↓





↓

Axis

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

[- - -] Same

Within wreath: [VO]T/ X / MVLT / XX; in ex.: Π(sic) [- - -]

[- - -] Virtus spearing falling horseman

Within wreath: VOT/ XX / MVLT / XXX

PROVIDEN–TIAE CAESS Camp–gate. Above, star. In ex.: MNΔ

SOLI INVI–CTO COMITI Sol stg. l., holding globe; in fields: TF–*; in ex.: PLG

SOLI INV–I–CTO COMITI Sol stg. l., holding globe; in fields: R–F

[- - -] Figure l

[- - -] Same

SALVS REI–PVBLICAE Victory advancing l., dragging captive and holding trophy

[- - -] Figure on throne

Within wreath: VOT/ X / MVLT / XX

Late 4th c. CE

[- - -] Pearl-diademed, draped bust r.

[- - -] Pearl-diademed head r.

FL IVL CONSTANTIVS NOB C Laureate, cuirassed bust l., with paludamentum

IMP CONSTANTIN[VS PF AVG] Same, but seen from rear

[- - -] Same

Reverse House of Constantine

IMP CONSTANTIN[VS PF AVG] Laureate, draped, cuirassed bust r.

Obverse

Same

383–395

378–383?

Same

378–383

351–361

341–346

326–330

315–316

314

Date (CE)

Nicomedia

Lyons

Rome

Mint

Same

Cf. LRBC II:89, No. 2183

Same

Cf. LRBC II:101, No. 2732

117647

117583

117560

117648

117584

117587

117569

Constantius II

117653

Cf. LRBC II:87, No. 2039

Constantius II

LRBC I:26, No. 1104

117645

117631

Same

RIC VII:124, No. 38

117646

IAA No.

Cf. LRBC I:31, No. 1398

Constantine I, follis

Notes

Cf. RIC VII:298, No. 19

Reference

260 Donald T. Ariel

Locus/ Wall

741

692

717

Surf.

623

717

601

Cat. No.

176

177

178

179

180*

181*

182

5681

7945

5495

4618

7943

6691

8092

Reg. No.

2.99

7.31

10.52

5.49

0.34

13.78

1.19

Weight (g)

20

23

28

20×22

9

29×32

12

Diam. (mm)



↓

↓

↓

↓

Axis

° in ex.: +THE[UP]+

M To l. and r., star;

[- - -]S PP AVC Justin and Sophia facing, enthroned

N/O; beneath: Δ; to r.: ³ I

K Above, ½; to l.: A/N/

Three imperial figures stg. facing

cross; to l.: Ð. ; to r., X ³ I

M Above, [A]/N/N/O and

Heraclius I (610–641 CE)

dN IVSTI[NVS PP AVC][ Same

A/N/N/O to r., ³; beneath: B; in ex.: NIKO

M Above, cross; to l.:

A/N/N/O; beneath: [TE]S; to r.: III

K Above, cross; to l.:

Justin II (565–578 CE)

A

Justinian I (527–565 CE), Nummus Obliterated

[- - -] Same

Obliterated

Reverse

Justinian I (527–565 CE), Follis [DN IVS]TINI–ANVS PP AVC Diademed, cuirassed bust r., with paludamentum

[- - -] Same

Obverse

627/28

572/73

569/70

567/68

c. 533– 539

c. 532– 537

Date (CE)

Same

Const.

Nicomedia

Thessalonica

Carthage

Antioch

Mint

DOC 2/1:294, No. 101

DOC 1:216, No. 52

DOC 1:227, No. 95

Cf. DOC 1:221, No. 63

MIBE I:159, No. 192

MIBE I:143, No. 126

Reference

Follis

Half follis

Follis

Half follis

Notes

117546

117629

117558

117667

117628

117603

117644

IAA No.

Chapter 11: The Coins

261

Locus/ Wall

623

682

623

675

692

651

Cat. No.

183

184

185

186

187*

188

5581

6658

5962

5973

6583

5297

Reg. No.

3.46

2.69

4.88

4.01

4.33

4.51

Weight (g)

19×2

20×24

26×28

19×21

17×24

23×26

Diam. (mm)

↓

©

¿

Axis

[N/N/O]

K Above, cross; to l.: A/

6th–7th c. CE

‫الاله \ االاهلل \ وحده‬

m

To l.: II; beneath: II

‫محمد \ رسول \ اهلل‬

Umayyad, Fals

Above, cross; to l.: a; to r.:«; in ex.: XAI

m

Arab-Byzantine, Fals

m

7th c. CE, Follis

Emperor stg. facing

Obliterated

629/30

K To l.: A/[N/N/O]; to r.: XX

Date (CE)

Reverse

Constans II (641–661 CE) Emperor stg. facing

Obliterated

Two imperial figures stg. facing

Obverse Same

Mint

SICA 1: Type E

DOC 2/1:302, No. 118

Reference

Pierced

Follis

Half follis

Half follis; overstruck

Notes

117572

117602

117588

117559

117591

117557

IAA No.

262 Donald T. Ariel

Chapter 11: The Coins

263

Notes 1 Ariel Berman identified the Umayyad coin (Cat. No. 188). The coins were cleaned in the laboratories of the IAA by Lena Kupershmidt, Raisa Vinitzky and Gali Beiner, and were photographed by Clara Amit of the IAA photography studio. 2 thanks to Ronny Reich for permission to note the coin. 3 Three others comprise: one from Crowfoot and FitzGerald’s excavations (1929:112, No. 119), one of the same type

(Elagabal, wolf and twins) from the Giv‘ati Parking Lot 2003 season (IAA No. 76525), and one from Kenyon’s Area M (Trajan Decius; Reece et al. 2008:414). 4 Interestingly, a coin possibly minted in Corcyra was recently published from a survey at Faynan in Jordan (Kind et al. 2005:171: No. 1, Corcyra appears with a question mark, and BMC Thess.:123, No. 155 is cited as a comparanda).

R eferences Ariel D.T. 1982. A Survey of the Coins in Jerusalem (until the End of the Byzantine Period). LA 32:273–326. Ariel D.T. 1990. Excavations in the City of David 1978–1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh II: Imported Stamped Amphora Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory, and Glass (Qedem 30). Jerusalem. Ariel D.T. 2000. Coins from the Synagogue at Korazim. In Z. Yeivin ed. The Synagogue at Korazim: The 1962–1964, 1980–1987 Excavations (IAA Reports 10). Jerusalem. Pp. 33*–49*. Ariel D.T. 2003. Flan Molds from the Temple Mount Excavations. In E. Mazar ed. The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar. Final Report II: The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43). Jerusalem. Pp. 115–119. Ariel D.T. 2004. The Coins from Qalandiya. In Y. Magen, D.T. Ariel, G. Bijovsky, Y. Zionit and O. Sirkis. The Land of Benjamin (JSP 3). Jerusalem. Pp. 145–177. Ariel D.T. 2006. Coins. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 192–217. Ariel D.T. 2008. Silver Coin. P. 147 in E. Shukron and R. Reich. Initial Report on the Excavation of the Second Temple Period Central Drainage Channel in the Tyropoeon Valley in Jerusalem. In E. Meiron ed. City of David: Studies of Ancient Jerusalem: The 9th Annual Conference. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Pp. 137–158. Ariel D.T. 2010. Coins. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 IV: The Burnt House of Area B and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 236– 247. Ariel D.T. 2011a. Coins from Excavations in the Domestic Quarter of the City of David, Jerusalem. In K. Galor and G. Avni eds. Unearthing Jerusalem: 150 Years of Archaeological Research. Grand Rapids, Mich. Pp. 294– 298.

Ariel D.T. 2011b. A First Century CE Mint South of Jerusalem? Numismatic Evidence. New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and Its Surroundings. Collected Papers V:16*–23*. Ariel D.T. 2012. Judean Perspectives of Ancient Mints and Minting Technology. INR 7:43–80. Ariel D.T. Forthcoming. Coins from Excavations at Qumran. In Y. Magen and Y. Peleg. Excavations at Khirbet Qumran. Ariel D.T. and Berman A. Forthcoming. Coins from Excavations in Jerusalem alongside the Western Wall of the Temple Mount. In S. Weksler-Bdolah and A. Onn. Excavations in Jerusalem in the Area West of Wilson’s Arch: Architecture, Stratigraphy and Numismatics (IAA Reports). Jerusalem. Bijovsky G. 1994–1999. A Coin of Demetrius I from AkkoPtolemais. INJ 13:39–45. Bijovsky G. 1997. The Coins. Pp. 43–45 in H. Abu ‘Uqsa. A Burial Cave from the Roman Period East of Giv‘at Yasaf. ‘Atiqot 33:30–46 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 10*–11*). Bijovsky G. 2000–2002. The Currency of the Fifth Century C.E. in Palestine––Some Reflections in the Light of the Numismatic Evidence. INJ 14:196–210. Bijovsky G. 2009. A Unique Coin of Magnesia ad Maeandrum Discovered in Εxcavations at Neapolis, Samaria (Nablus). In Y. Magen ed. Flavia Neapolis: Shechem in the Roman Period (JSP 11). Jerusalem. Pp. 277–279. Bijovsky G. 2010. A Single Die Solidi Hoard of Heraclius from Jerusalem. Mélanges Cécile Morrisson (Travaux et Mémoires 16). Paris. Pp. 57–92. Bijovsky G. 2011. The Coins. In J. Seligman. A Roman and Mamluk Farmstead in the Southern Carmel (IAA Reports 43). Jerusalem. Pp. 169–190. Bijovsky G. Forthcoming. Coins from Jerusalem, City of David—Area M. In E. Shukron. Excavations at the City of David—Area M. BMC Phoen.: G.F. Hill. Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Phoenicia. London 1910.

264

Donald T. Ariel

BMC Thess.: P. Gardner. A Catalogue of the Greek Coins in the British Museum. Thessaly to Aetolia. London 1883. Crowfoot J.W. 1929. Excavations at Ophel, 1928: Preliminary Report to December 8. PEFQSt 61:9–16. Crowfoot J.W. 1945. Ophel Again. PEFQSt 77:66–104. Crowfoot J.W. and FitzGerald G.M. 1929. Excavations in the Tyropoean Valley, Jerusalem 1927 (PEFA 5). London. De Groot A. and Bernick-Greenberg H. 2012. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh VIIIA: Area E: Stratigraphy and Architecture (Qedem 53). Jerusalem. DOC 1: A.R. Bellinger. Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection 1. Anastasius I to Maurice. 491–602. Washington, D.C. 1966. DOC 2/1: P. Grierson. Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection 2: Phocas to Theodosius III. 602–717. Washington, D.C. 1968. Gitler H. 1996. A Comparative Study of Numismatic Evidence from Excavations in Jerusalem. LA 46:317–362. Gitler H. 2003. The Coins. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Jerusalem. Pp. 453–492. Kadman L. 1957. The Coins of Caesarea Maritima (Corpus Nummorum Palestinensium II). Jerusalem. Kind H.D., Gilles K.J., Hauptmann A. and Weiserberger G. 2005. Coins of Faynan, Jordan. Levant 37:169–195. LRBC I: P.V. Hill and J.P.C. Kent. Part I: The Bronze Coinage of the House of Constantine, A.D. 324–46. In Late Roman Bronze Coinage A.D. 324–498. London 1965. Pp. 4–40. LRBC II: R.A.G. Carson and J.P.C. Kent. Part II: Bronze Roman Imperial Coinage of the Later Empire, A.D. 346–498. In Late Roman Bronze Coinage A.D. 324–498. London 1965. Pp. 41–114. Magness J. 1997. The Chronology of Capernaum in the Early Islamic Period. JAOS 117:481–486. Mazar E. 1999. The Camp of the Tenth Roman Legion at the Foot of the South-West Corner of the Temple Mount Enclosure Wall in Jerusalem. In A. Faust and E. Barukh eds. New Studies on Jerusalem. Proceedings of the Fifth Conference. December 23rd 1999. Ramat Gan. Pp. 52–67. Meshorer Y. 1975. Nabatean Coins (Qedem 3). Jerusalem. Meshorer Y. 1989. The Coinage of Aelia Capitolina. Jerusalem. Meshorer Y. 2003–2006. The Coins from Qumran. INJ 15:19–23.

MIBE: W. Hahn. Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire (Anastasius I–Justinian I, 491–565) (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte der Universität Wien 6). Vienna 2000. Nicolaou I. 1990. Paphos 2: The Coins from the House of Dionysos. Nicosia. Reece R., Brown H., Butcher K. and Metcalf M. 2008. Jerusalem: The Coins. In K. Prag ed. Excavations by K.M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967 V: Discoveries in Hellenistic to Ottoman Jerusalem. Centenary Volume: Kathleen M. Kenyon 1906–1978 (Levant Supplementary Series 7). Oxford. Pp. 411–431. RIC VII: P.M. Bruun. The Roman Imperial Coinage VII: Constantine and Licinius A.D. 313–337. London 1966. RPC I: A. Burnett, M. Amandry and P. Ripolles. Roman Provincial Coinage I: From the Death of Caesar to the Death of Vitellius (44 BC–AD 69). London 1992. SC 1: A. Houghton and C. Lorber. Seleucid Coins. A Comprehensive Catalogue Part I: Seleucus I through Antiochus III. New York–Lancaster, Penn.–London 2002. SC 2: A. Houghton, C. Lorber and O. Hoover. Seleucid Coins. A Comprehensive Catalogue Part 2: Seleucus IV through Antiochus XIII. New York–Lancaster, Penn. 2008. Sheedy K. 2001. Pella in Jordan, 1979–1990: The Coins. Sydney. Shukron E. and Reich R. 2005. Jerusalem, City of David, the Giv‘ati Car Park. HA 117 (accessed November 14, 2012): http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng. asp?id=250&mag_id=110. SICA 1: S. Album and T. Goodwin. Sylloge of Islamic Coins in the Ashmolean 1: The Pre-Reform Coinage of the Early Islamic Period. Oxford 2002. SNG Denmark III: Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum: The Royal Collection of Coins and Medals Danish National Museum III: Greece: Thessaly to Aegean Islands. West Milford, N.J. 1982 (reprint of the first Copenhagen edition). Syon D. 2011. Omrit—The Coins (1999–2001). In J.A. Overman and D.N. Schowalter eds. The Roman Temple Complex at Horvat Omrit: An Interim Report (BAR Int. S. 2205). Oxford. Pp. 105–117. TJC: Y. Meshorer. A Treasury of Jewish Coins from the Persian Period to Bar Kochba. Jerusalem–Nyack 2001. de Vaux R. 1973. Archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls. London. Zlotnik Y. 2012. Were Jewish Coins Struck on Attached Strips of Flans? Israel Numismatic Research 7:81–92.

Chapter 12

The Glass Finds Dorit Gutreich

Introduction Hundreds of glass fragments were collected in the excavations in Area M1. This report presents 260 diagnostic fragments that are dated to the Early Roman, Late Roman–early Byzantine, Byzantine– Umayyad and Abbasid periods. These include 242 vessel fragments, 15 fragments of various glass objects such as jewelry and windowpanes, and three faience beads.1 In addition to these dated fragments, the assemblage also includes 75 fragments that could not be assigned with certainty to any specific period based on typology or context. Also found were a few pieces of modern glass (up to the twentieth century CE), and dozens of non-diagnostic fragments, most of which were discarded. The glass items of each period are divided according to vessel types, with the plain vessels of each type described prior to the decorated examples. A short review of the characteristics of the type, its date and comparanda is presented. The figures illustrate 125 representative examples of the types and subtypes, numbered consecutively through Figs. 12.1–12.8, and accompanied by specific details of each illustrated glass item and its parallels. Most of the glass items from Area M1 are relatively small fragments of translucent glass covered with weathering crust, and some feature iridescence, pitting or distortion due to heat. Many of these glass fragments were recovered from fills, and in such cases they were dated according to typological characteristics, and context whenever possible.

Glass Finds from the Early Roman Period The Early Roman glass repertoire comprises fragments of 125 vessels and 10 miscellaneous objects, 56 of which are illustrated in Figs. 12.1–12.3. The vessels are presented in chronological order, from cast bowls (40 fragments) to mold-blown (6 fragments) and free-

blown (79 fragments) vessels. In the case of common and widespread types, comparisons are restricted to sites in the vicinity of the Giv‘ati Parking Lot, such as the City of David (Ariel 1990), the Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003, 2006; Israeli and Katsnelson 2006; Nenner-Soriano 2006) and the Akeldama tombs in the Kidron Valley (Winter 1996). When necessary, additional parallels from more distant regions, such as the Judean Desert caves (Avigad 1962; Barag 1962, 1963) and ‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007), are mentioned. Most of the types presented here are discussed in detail by R. Jackson-Tal (2009:207–295), with further references to parallels from other sites. Cast Bowls (Fig. 12.1:1–14) Forty fragments were identified as parts of cast bowls, and they are divided here, following Grose (1979:54), into four groups differing in shape, decoration, color and date: grooved bowls, fluted bowls, ribbed bowls and linear-cut bowls. Grooved Bowls (Nos. 1–5) Grooved bowls are characterized by a conical or hemispherical shape, thick walls, deep horizontal grooves below the rim on the interior and a convex base (Grose 1979:54, Group A). Seventeen fragments were identified as cast grooved bowls, three of them from loci that are well-dated to the Early Roman period (Stratum VII). One rim fragment of a grooved bowl (not illustrated) was found embedded in Byzantine W884. Fifteen are rim fragments and two are body fragments with characteristic grooves and wall thickness; no base fragments were found. The bowls differ in rim and body shape, and in the number of grooves. It should be noted that the rim fragments are usually too small to determine whether there were additional grooves further down the wall. One body fragment of a grooved bowl had been re-shaped to function as a stopper (see No. 50).

266

Dorit Gutreich

Grooved bowls are the most common glass-vessel type of the late Hellenistic period (Gorin-Rosen 2003:375–376) and are dated to the second half of the

second–beginning of the first centuries BCE (Grose 1979:58). They were found in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter and the City of David.

Fig. 12.1 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description

Parallels

1

Grooved bowl

VII–VI

687

7246

Colorless/light green; thick black crust

Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pls. 15.1; 15.3: G21–G29; 15.7: G68; 2006: Pls. 10.1; 10.2: G14–G17; Israeli and Katsnelson 2006: Pls. 21.12–21.19); City of David (Ariel 1990: Figs. 27: GL8–GL13; 33: GL79)

2

Grooved bowl

VII

720

7566

Colorless/light green; thick black crust

As No. 1

3

Grooved bowl

VI

669

9046

Colorless/light green; thick black crust

As No. 1

4

Grooved bowl

VII–VI

706

7192

Rim lathe-turned inside; brown

As No. 1

5

Grooved bowl

VII

770

8471

Rim lathe-turned on both sides; deep yellow

As No. 1

6

Fluted bowl

VII

763

8581

Lathe-turned inside, cut-off, polished rim; colorless/light olivegreen; iridescence

Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2006: Pl. 10.2: G18, G19; Israeli and Katsnelson 2006: Pls. 21.20: GL183– GL187; 21.21: GL188–GL191); Maresha (Jackson-Tal 2000b: Pls. 7–9, 28)

7

Ribbed bowl

VI

660

6076

Rim lathe-turned on both sides; light green; white crust

Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pls. 15.2: G15; 15.4: G34–G42; 15.5: G52–G56; 15.7: G74, G75; 15.8: G85; 15.9: G105; 2006: Pl. 10.3: G26–G39; Israeli and Katsnelson 2006: Pl. 21.23: GL205); City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 28: GL14–GL20)

8

Ribbed bowl

VII

702

7712/3

Rim lathe-turned on both sides; brown; white crust

Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pls. 15.2: G17; 15.5: G57; 15.6: G58, G59; 15.7: G76–G78; 15.8: G82, G86, G87; 2006: Pl. 10.3: G40); City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 33: GL80–GL82)

9

Ribbed bowl

-

W934

7980

Rim lathe-turned on both sides; bluishgreen; black crust, pitting

As No. 8

10

Ribbed bowl

VI

641

4757/1

Rim lathe-turned on both sides, ribs with ground tops; deep yellow; thick white crust

As No. 8

11

Ribbed bowl

VII–VI

705

7447

Rim lathe-turned on both sides, ribs with ground tops; deep bluish-green

As No. 8

12

Ribbed bowl

VII

712

7441/1

Rim lathe-turned on both sides; bluish-green

As No. 8

13

Ribbed bowl

VII

749

8308/1

Bluish-green; thick black crust

As No. 8

14

Linear-cut bowl

VII

749

8308/2

Wall lathe-turned inside; bluish-green

Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pls. 15.3: G26– G33; 15.5: G44–G50; 15.7: G69–G73; 15.8: G79, G80, G83, G84; 2006: Pl. 10.4: G41–G49); City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 28: GL21, GL22)

267

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

2

1

4 3

5

6

8

7

10

9

11

12

14

13 0

4

Fig. 12.1. Early Roman glass.

268

Dorit Gutreich

Fluted Bowls (No. 6) These bowls are usually deep and hemispherical and decorated with vertical flutes and horizontal grooves cut on the exterior surface. In most cases, the base is decorated with a rosette motif. Fluted bowls are less common than the grooved bowls, and imitate silver and bronze vessels (Grose 1979:54, 60, Group B). Three fragments of fluted bowls were found, all made of light yellowish or light olive-green glass. Item No. 6 is a fragment characterized by its upright rim and the horizontal groove below it (Jackson-Tal 2004:19). Also recovered were a body fragment with vertical flutes and a small base fragment with part of a circular groove and the beginning of vertical flutes (for parallel, see Gorin-Rosen 2006: Pl. 10.2:G18). Fluted bowls are found in small numbers at most late Hellenistic sites in the Syro-Palestinian region (Grose 1979:54, 60; Jackson-Tal 2004:19), in contexts dated from the mid-second to the mid-first centuries BCE (Jackson-Tal 2000b:67), e.g., in the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem and at Maresha. Ribbed Bowls (Nos. 7–13) Ribbed bowls are characterized by a flat or slightly concave base and ribs around the body. Apart from these general attributes, these bowls are heterogeneous and can be divided into several subtypes based on body shape and the nature of the ribs (Grose 1979:61, Group C). Gorin-Rosen (2003:378–380) distinguishes between ‘early’ and ‘late’ groups of ribbed bowls. Eighteen fragments could be identified as cast ribbed bowls, seven of which originated in welldated Early Roman contexts (Stratum VII). Nine are rim fragments, one is a base and the remainder are ribbed body fragments. Only one rim fragment (No. 7) was positively identified as an ‘early’ ribbed bowl, characterized by its flaring rim with a horizontal groove below it on the interior, thick walls and short dense ribs on the upper exterior below the internal groove (Gorin-Rosen 2003:379). The other ribbed-bowl rims, represented by Nos. 8–12, probably belong to the later group of ribbed bowls, mostly characterized by an upright, lathe-turned rim with a narrow horizontal groove just below it on the interior and ribs with rounded or ground tops (Gorin-Rosen 2003:379–380). Item No. 13 is a typical base of this later group, with long ribs extending onto the base of the bowl (Grose 1979:62).

Ribbed bowls were widespread in the second half of the first century BCE and the first century CE and were found, for example, in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter and the City of David. Linear-Cut Bowls (No. 14) The linear-cut bowls are described by Grose (1989:247), as ‘ribless variants’ of the ribbed bowls, although they have relatively thin walls (Grose 1979:63, Group D). They were named after the horizontal cut grooves decorating the interior wall, which are similar to those of the ribbed bowls (Grose 1979:54, 63). The only glass fragment from Area M1 positively identified as a linear-cut bowl (No. 14) originated in an Early Roman context. A base fragment decorated inside with circular grooves from a similar context may also belong to a linear-cut bowl (see Grose 1979:62). Linear-cut bowls are dated to the last quarter of the first century BCE and the first half of the first century CE (Gorin-Rosen 2003:380), and were found, for example, in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter and the City of David. Mold-Blown Vessels (Fig. 12.2:15–17) Six fragments were identified as Early Roman moldblown vessels. Item No. 15 belongs to a type of bowl characterized by a pronounced shoulder between the ribbed wall and the upright rim. According to the angle of the shoulder, it seems to have been a shallow bowl, which is characterized by a more pronounced shoulder than the deeper type (Stern 1995:111–113). This fragment, and three other very small, ribbed, moldblown pieces, originated in Early Roman loci. Item No. 16 is a mold-blown body fragment of a cup found in a fill rich in Early Roman pottery. It has a cylindrical shape and bears a pattern of vertical and horizontal lines. Item No. 17 is a base of a date-shaped vessel––a small mold-blown bottle imitating a date fruit, with the ‘wrinkles’ pattern and brownish color characteristic of the type. Mold-blown ribbed bowls were found in numerous first-century CE contexts throughout the Roman Empire, although examples from the Syro-Palestinian region are relatively rare (Stern 1995:112). A fragment similar to our No. 15 was found at Caesarea, and an example of a deep bowl in the Victoria and Albert Museum glass collection is said to have originated in Jerusalem (V&A No. 899-1902; see Stern 1995:113, n. 21).

269

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

16

15

17

19

18

21

20

23

22

25

24

26

27

30

29

28

31

32

34

33

0

35

4

Fig. 12.2. Early Roman glass.

A cylindrical cup of similar shape, color and moldblown pattern as No. 16, exhibited in the Corning Museum of Glass, is dated to the first century CE (Smith 1957:57, Cat. No. 69). Date-shaped vessels like No. 17 were very common throughout the Roman Empire during the first century CE, especially in the Near East, most of them found in

burial contexts. However, date-shaped vessels are quite rare in Israel (Stern 1995:91–93). A fragment was found in stratigraphic context in a yet-unpublished excavation at Gamla (Jackson-Tal 2009:279), another in a tomb at Samaria, and two complete date vessels were retrieved in a burial cave near Mishmar Ha-‘Emeq, dated to the first century CE (Israeli 1988:226–228).

270

Dorit Gutreich

◄ Fig. 12.2 No.

Type

Stratum

Locus

Basket

Description

Parallels

15

Mold-blown ribbed bowl

VII

760

8489/1

Bluish-green; black crust, pitting

Caesarea (Israeli 2008: No. 20)

16

Mold-blown cup

VII–VI

705

7201

Cylindrical; brown; thick white/yellow crust

17

Mold-blown, dateshaped vessel

VII

761

8661

Golden brown; silver crust

Gamla (Jackson-Tal 2009: Pl. 5.42:6); Samaria (Crowfoot 1957: Fig. 95:23); Mishmar Ha-‘Emeq (Israeli 1988: No. 137)

18

Bowl with firerounded rim

VI

669

9010

Bluish green; iridescence, pitting

City of David (Ariel 1990: Figs. 30: GL24, GL25; 33: GL90–GL94)

19

Bowl with firerounded rim

VI

660

6469

Bluish green

As No. 18

20

Bowl with tubular rim

VII

720

7795/1

Bluish-green; white crust

21

Bowl with tubular rim

VII

760

8489/2

Light green; black/silver crust

22

Bowl with tooled fold below rim

VII

702

7712/1

Light green; thick white crust

City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 33: GL89); ‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007: Pl. 4:3)

23

Bowl with solid base

VII

702

8703/2

Black/white crust

City of David (Ariel 1990: Figs. 30: GL26; 33: GL85)

24

Bowl with solid base

VI

669

6236

Bluish green; black/ silver crust

As No. 23

25

Bowl with solid base

VII–VI

699

7073

Bluish green

City of David (Ariel 1990: Figs. 30: GL27; 33: GL86)

26

Bowl with tubular ring base

VII

702

7056/1

Bluish-green

Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pl. 15.6: G63); City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 33: GL87); ‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007: Pls. 1:8–10; 4:6)

27

Bowl with double fold on wall

VII

702

7712/2

Thick white crust

‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007: Pls. 1:7; 4:2)

28

Bowl with tooled ribs and solid base

VII

760

8441

Bluish-green; black/ silver crust, pitting

City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 33: GL84, identified as a bottle)

29

Bowl with tooled ribs and concave base

VI

693

6927

Bluish-green; severe pitting

Hurfeish (Aviam and Gorin-Rosen 1997: Fig. 2:2); Cave of the Pool (Avigad 1962: Fig. 6:2, identified as a bottle); Cave of the Horror (Barag 1962: Fig. 18, Pl. 33B, identified as a bottle)

30

Skyphos

VII

721

8028

White crust, iridescence

Masada (Jackson-Tal 2009: Pl 5.17:1); Gamla (Jackson-Tal 2009: Pl. 5.17:2, 3)

31

Beaker with tubular rim

VII

760

8534/1

Thick white crust

32

Indented beaker

VII

745

8340

Colorless/light green; black/silver crust

Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2006: Pl. 10.5: G65)

33

Beaker with wheelcut lines

VII

787

9041/1

Cut-off rim; light green

Akeldama tombs (Winter 1996: Fig. 5.1:1); Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pls. 15.2: G18; 15.8: G89; 2006: Pl. 10.5: G66)

34

Beaker with wheelcut lines

VI

655

5024/1

Deep yellow

As No. 33

35

Ribbed beaker

VII

720

7795/2

Bluish-green; black crust, pitting

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

Free-Blown Vessels (Figs. 12.2:18–35; 12.3:36–49) The Area M1 glass assemblage includes 79 fragments of free-blown vessels of the Early Roman period. Bowls (Nos. 18–29) Thirty-three fragments were identified as various types of Early Roman bowls. Item Nos. 18 and 19 are two of five fragments with straight walls and firerounded rims recovered from fill loci that yielded mostly Early Roman pottery sherds. This type is wellknown throughout the Roman and early Byzantine periods (Jackson-Tal 2000a:75–76), and in Jerusalem, examples dated to the Early Roman period were found, e.g., in the City of David. Item Nos. 20 and 21 are two of eight fragments from Early Roman contexts and identified as tubular bowl rims. Item No. 22 is one of three rim fragments that belong to bowls characterized by a rounded rim with a tooled fold below it, an out-curved wall and a tubular ring base (Barag 1970:139, Type 3:10, Pl. 31:10). All three originate in loci well-dated to the Early Roman period. Bowls of this type were found in Israel in first-century CE assemblages (Jackson-Tal 2009:242), for example in the City of David and at ‘En Gedi. Four fragments are of vessels with a solid base and a thin, out-curved, rounded wall (Nos. 23, 24). This type of vessel is usually referred to as a bowl, although most of the known fragments are bases, making it impossible to determine whether these were actually bowls or bottles (Jackson-Tal 2007:480–482). Item No. 23 was found in a locus dated to the Early Roman period, and No. 24 in a Late Roman–early Byzantine fill containing pottery of the first century CE. A fragmentary base with a thin rounded wall was found in a fill rich in Early Roman to early Byzantine pottery, and another in an Abbasid drain containing Early Roman pottery among others. Item No. 25, part of a bowl with a solid base and an out-curved, rounded wall, made of thick glass, was found in a fill containing mostly first-century CE pottery. Similar solid base fragments, both thin and thick, were found in the City of David in contexts dating until 70 CE (Ariel 1990:156, 161). Vessels with solid bases are known mainly from sites in Judea, where they were probably made (Jackson-Tal 2009:243). Two tubular ring bases of bowls were recovered from Early Roman loci. Item No. 26 is very low, a type

271

usually dated to the Early Roman period (JacksonTal 2007:480). Tubular ring bases were found, for example, in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter and the City of David, and at ‘En Gedi. Item No. 27 is one of two bowl fragments with a double fold in the wall retrieved from Early Roman loci. Bowls of this type were found in the Judean Desert in contexts dated to the Bar Kokhba period (the first third of the second century CE), as at ‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007:475, 479). It should be noted, however, that this type of decoration appears on bowls of later periods as well (see, for example, Barag 1970:140, Type 3:18). Indeed, Area M1 has yielded several other fragments exhibiting a double fold that should be dated by their contexts to the Byzantine and Abbasid periods (not illustrated). Seven fragments are of vessels with tooled vertical ribs and solid bases; four are bases with the beginning of the wall and the ribs (No. 28), and three are body fragments with thin, tooled ribs. Although it is impossible to determine if these fragments belonged to bowls or bottles (Jackson-Tal 2007:480–482), here they are considered bowls. Ribbed vessels with solid bases are known in Early Roman contexts, especially at Judean sites, and were probably made in this region (Jackson-Tal 2009:243). For example, fragments of two vessels of this type were found in the City of David in a context dating until 70 CE (Ariel 1990:161–163, identified as bottles). Item No. 29 is a fragment of a bowl with pinched ribs on the wall and a concave base. Only a few vessels of this type have been discovered in Israel (JacksonTal 2009:243), such as a complete example in a burial cave at Hurfeish, and two fragments in Judean Desert caves––the Cave of the Pool and the Cave of the Horror––dated to the Bar Kokhba period (Avigad 1962:177; Barag 1962:208, both identified as bottles). Cup (Skyphos) and Beakers (Nos. 30–35) Skyphoi are cups or deep bowls with thumb-tab handles attached to the rim. These vessels, made of metal, pottery or glass, are known in the Roman world from the first century CE (Jackson-Tal 2009:244). Glass thumb-tab handles are usually plain, but several examples, found mainly in Italy, were stamped with the name of the artisan who made them and the city of ‘Sidon’ (Israeli 2003:121; Jackson-Tal 2009:244). Item No. 30, a plain thumb-tab handle of a skyphos, was recovered in an Early Roman context. Only a few

272

Dorit Gutreich

parallels are known from other sites in Israel, all from as-yet unpublished excavations (Masada, Gamla, Jaffa; see Jackson-Tal 2009:244–245). Nine fragments of various types of beakers are dated to the Early Roman period. Item No. 31 is a tubularrim fragment of a vessel of small diameter, probably a beaker (rather than a bowl). Item No. 32 is a slightly concave, square-shaped base fragment with an indented wall, probably belonging to an indented beaker (Isings 1957:46, Form 32). This type of beaker, characterized by a cylindrical body decorated with four indentations, is known in the first to mid-second centuries CE, and a base similar to No. 32 was found in the Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2006:254). Five beaker fragments are decorated with wheel-cut lines (Nos. 33, 34), attributed to a type characterized by a cut-off rim, a cylindrical body and wheel-cut lines on the exterior (Winter 1996:96). The fragments differ in color, wall thickness and the pattern of the decoration. In Jerusalem, beakers of this type were found, for example, in a tomb at Akeldama, dated to the first century CE (Winter 1996:96), and in the Jewish Quarter (see Jackson-Tal 2009:261–262 for further references). Item No. 35 is one of two body fragments exhibiting a straight wall decorated with thin tooled ribs, both probably belonging to a cylindrical, ribbed beaker. Barag published a beaker of this type from the British Museum collection (Barag 1985:103; Pl. 17:153), which probably came from Bet Guvrin, and mentions an unpublished parallel from a tomb near Mishmar Ha‘Emeq, dated from the mid-first to the early second centuries CE. Bottles (Nos. 36–42) Twenty-nine fragments were identified as parts of bottles or flasks of the Early Roman period. Twenty-three of them are fragments of pear-shaped or candlestick-shaped bottles (Nos. 36–39), both characterized by a small body and a long cylindrical neck, the candlestick-shaped type having a longer neck and a squatter body. Ten of these bottle fragments are rims and eleven are bases, and most are difficult to assign to a specific bottle type. Nevertheless, it seems that neck Nos. 36 and 37 are too short to be of candlestick-shaped bottles, and No. 38 has a rather elongated body, typical of pear-shaped bottles. Eight of the fragments were found in Early Roman loci, six

of these in the same locus, cistern 702. Item No. 39 is a relatively large bottle with a rim that was folded outward, then inward and flattened. It represents a subtype of a pear-shaped or candlestick-shaped bottle dated to the mid-first–early second centuries CE (examples are found in the British Museum collection; see Barag 1985:95–96; Fig. 9:124–127; Pls. 14:124; 15). Another rim and neck fragment of the same type of bottle was recovered from a Late Roman–early Byzantine fill rich in Early Roman pottery. Pear-shaped and candlestick-shaped types were very common funerary gifts in the first-century CE ossuary tombs of Jerusalem (Israeli 2003:207). For example, a few pear-shaped bottles and dozens of candlestickshaped bottles were discovered in the tombs at Akeldama (Winter 1996:96–98). However, these bottles were also found in settlement sites such as the Jewish Quarter, testifying to their use as perfume flasks in daily life as well (Israeli 2003:207). Item No. 40 is a rim fragment of a large vessel, probably a bottle, retrieved from an Early Roman plastered bath. It is made of thick glass and the flaring rim was folded inward and polished diagonally. Item No. 41 is a body fragment of a globular vessel with spiraling white-thread decoration, found in an Early Roman context together with a base fragment bearing a similar decoration. These fragments apparently belong to a bottle with white thread spiraling from base to shoulder. Two additional threaddecorated fragments, too small to be diagnostic, also originated in Early Roman loci. Globular bottles, both plain and decorated, are known in settlement and funerary contexts from the first and second centuries CE (Jackson-Tal 2009:257). For example, a base with spiraling thread was found in the City of David, and a complete decorated bottle of this type was recovered from a tomb at Dominus Flevit in Jerusalem dated to the first century CE (Barag 1970:188). Item No. 42 is a body fragment of a globular bottle or flask with a cut decoration of facets arranged in a honeycomb pattern. This type of decoration was popular on various vessel types at the end of the first century CE. Several fragments bearing honeycomb cut decoration are known from Dura-Europos (Clairmont 1963:60–61), including a fragment similar to No. 42 that was identified as a flask. To the best of our knowledge, no parallels have yet been published from Israel.

273

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

40 36 41

37

39

38

43

42

45

46

44

47

49

50

48

52

53

54 0

0

55

51

56

1

4

Fig. 12.3. Early Roman glass.

Jugs, Juglets and Aryballos(?) (Nos. 43–49) The handle, No. 43, assigned to a jug, was retrieved in an Early Roman context. Three additional jug fragments (Nos. 44–46) belong to the same jug type with a short neck, a square or cylindrical body, a flat base and a ribbed strap handle that extends horizontally from the neck of the jug and then descends vertically

to the shoulder (Jackson-Tal 2007:476, 483). The rims are either flattened collar rims (i.e., folded outward, downward, upward and outward) or folded inward and pressed flat horizontally (Isings 1957:64–69). Such jugs (Isings 1957:63–69, Forms 50, 51) are a common find throughout the Roman world in contexts of the first and second centuries CE.

274

Dorit Gutreich

◄ Fig. 12.3 No.

Type

Stratum

Locus

Basket

Description

Parallels

36

Pear-shaped bottle

VI

662

6061

Black/yellow crust

Akeldama tombs (Winter 1996: Fig. 5.4:1–4, 6); Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pl. 15.2: G19

37

Pear-shaped bottle

VII

702

7707/1

Thick white crust

Akeldama tombs (Winter 1996: Fig. 5.2:1); Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pl. 15.2: G19)

38

Pear-shaped bottle

VII

702

6978

Thick white crust, iridescence

As No. 37

39

pear-shaped or candlestickshaped bottle

VII

702

8703/1

Uneven rim; thick white crust, iridescence

40

Large bottle

VII

714

7384

Bluish green; thin white crust

41

Thread-decorated globular bottle

VII

702

7707/3

White thread (body probably darker); black/ silver crust

City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 33: GL88); Dominus Flevit (Bagatti and Milik 1958: Fig. 33:13)

42

Cut-decorated globular bottle or flask

VI

648

5213

Colorless/very light yellow; white and golden-yellow crust, pitting

Dura-Europos (Clairmont 1963: Pl. XXV:242)

43

Jug

VII

761

8668

Bluish green; white crust

44

Jug with ribbed handle

VI–V

768

8577

Light yellow; iridescence, pitting

‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007: Fig. 6, Pls. 1:13; 5:8); ‘En Boqeq (Jackson-Tal 2000a: Fig. 4.2:2); Cave of the Letters (Barag 1963: Fig. 38, Pl. 30)

45

Jug with ribbed handle

VI

645

5547/1

light olive green; black/white crust

As No. 44

46

Jug with ribbed handle

VII

737

7858

Bluish green; black/ white crust, iridescence

‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007:476, 483, Fig. 6, Pls. 1:13; 5:8); ‘En Boqeq (Jackson-Tal 2000a: Fig. 4.2:2)

47

Juglet

VII

761

8669

Bluish-green; black/ white crust

48

Juglet

VI

660

5402

Bluish green; white crust, iridescence

49

Aryballos?

VII

719

7430

Bluish green; black/ white crust

‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007: Fig. 4, Pl. 2:4)

50

Stopper

VI

669

6022

Thick black crust

51

Stirring rod

VII

759

8463

Deep blue; white crust

52

Spindle whorl

-

Surface

8150

Light olive green (yellowish); white crust

53

Game piece/inlay

VIII

795

9090

Thick white crust

City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 31: GL37–GL40)

54

Glass bead

VIII

824

9404

Deep blue; black crust

‘Akko (Fortuna 1965: Fig. 13)

55

Faience bead

VIII

823

9355

Light bluish-green; severe pitting

56

Faience bead

VI

660

6416

Bluish green

Jewish Quarter (Nenner-Soriano 2006: Pl. 15.1:8)

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

Item No. 44 is a broad, ribbed handle. Two similar ribbed handles were found at ‘En Gedi, and a close parallel at ‘En Boqeq, in a context of the first half of the first century CE (Jackson-Tal 2000a:73, 75). Item No. 45 is a flattened collar rim. A cylindrical jug with a rim similar to No. 45 and a broad ribbed handle is known from the Cave of the Letters. Item No. 46 is a rim fragment that is folded inward and flattened, common in square and cylindrical jugs of this type (Isings 1957:64–69). Item No. 47, a small, right-angled handle with two ribs, was retrieved from an Early Roman floor and probably belonged to a juglet of this period (for a parallel dated to the first century CE from the Israel Museum glass collection, see Israeli 2003:180, No. 208). Item No. 48 is a small handle with a decorative folded end, which was found in a fill rich in Early Roman pottery and probably also belongs to a juglet of this period. Aryballoi are small globular vessels with a flaring, infolded, rounded, thick rim, a short cylindrical neck and two small handles drawn from below the rim to the sloping shoulders (Barag 1970:165, Pl. 37:1, 2). One rim fragment (No. 49) from Area M1, found in a ritual bath (miqveh) of the Early Roman period, may be identified as an aryballos. Aryballoi are dated from the mid-first to the mid-second centuries CE, and were used mainly as oil containers in bathhouses, as at ‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007:477). Varia (Fig. 12.3:50–56) Stoppers (No. 50) A number of sherds of glass and pottery vessels functioned in secondary use as stoppers for jugs and other containers. The glass examples include No. 50, a sherd of a late Hellenistic, cast grooved bowl, and two disc bases that were trimmed in a similar manner (see No. 69, below). Stirring Rod (No. 51) Large, sturdy, twisted glass rods with one ledge-shaped end and one ring-shaped end were probably used for stirring wine or water. Item No. 51 is the ledge-shaped end of such a rod recovered on an Early Roman floor. An almost identical rod is located in the Israel Museum glass collection (Spaer 2001: Pl. 49, Cat. No. 634). These rods are dated mainly to the first and second centuries CE (Spaer 2001:262–264).

275

Spindle Whorl (No. 52) Item No. 52 is a plain, plano-convex glass object vertically perforated in the center, found on the surface in Area M1. Objects of this type are usually identified as spindle whorls used in the manufacture of delicate cloth, and some have indeed been found on rods likely to have functioned as spindles. Glass whorls found in the Mediterranean region are either plain or threaddecorated, and are common in contexts of the first or early second century CE (Spaer 2001:259–260). Game Pieces or Inlays (No. 53) These objects are mostly small plain glass objects of rounded or oval shape and plano-convex section. They are known since the Late Bronze Age, and are found at most Hellenistic and Roman sites. Many objects identified as game pieces could also have been used for other purposes, such as ring inlays (Spaer 2001:233, Cat. No. 548). Of the four plain game pieces or inlays discovered, only No. 53 originated in a secure context, in Hellenistic Stratum VIII. The others are impossible to date accurately; one is of the same size as No. 53 and two are smaller. Game pieces (or inlays) of this type were found, for example, in the City of David, in contexts ranging from the Iron Age to the Byzantine period (Ariel 1990:157). Beads (Nos. 54–56) Three of the four beads originated in Hellenistic and Roman contexts and are presented here. Bead No. 54 is made of glass and Nos. 55 and 56, of faience. Beads of both materials were used in necklaces and earrings (Chernov 2007:525). Item No. 54, found in a Hellenistic fill, is a small biconical glass bead. This type was common during the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine periods (Spaer 2001:74), and examples are known, for example, from an Early Roman tomb at ‘Akko (Fortuna 1965:22). Item No. 55 is a small, round, light colored, faience bead recovered from a Hellenistic fill. Light blue faience beads were used throughout the ages, from the Late Bronze Age to the Byzantine period (Chernov 2007:525). Item No. 56 is a bluish, ribbed faience bead from a Late Roman–early Byzantine fill rich in Early Roman pottery. A similar bead was recovered, for example, in a second-century BCE context in the Jewish Quarter (Nenner-Soriano 2006:310).

276

Dorit Gutreich

Glass Finds from the Late Roman– Early Byzantine Period The repertoire of the Late Roman–early Byzantine period (late third–fourth centuries CE) comprises 43

fragments of free-blown vessels and four fragments of glass objects, 27 of which are presented here (Figs. 12.4, 12.5). Glass of the Late Roman–early Byzantine period is not well-represented in excavation reports of settlement sites around Jerusalem.2 Thus, parallels

Fig. 12.4 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/Wall

Basket

Description

Parallels

57

Bowl with thickened rim

VIA

624

4682/4

Black/silver crust, pitting

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–2:11 or Fig. 4–10:85–87)

58

Bowl with outfolded rim

VI

633

4741/1

Colorless/light yellow; thin white crust, iridescence

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–3); Hanita (Barag 1978: Figs. 6:3–8; 7:9; 9:31; 10:32–34)

59

Bowl with outfolded rim

VI

633

4741/3

Black crust

As No. 58

60

Bowl with outfolded rim

VI

671

5920/2

Colorless/olive green; white/silver crust, pitting

As No. 58

61

Bowl with outfolded rim

VI

671

5860/1

Bluish green; white/silver crust

As No. 58

62

Bowl with outfolded rim

VI

W919

6248/1

Bluish green; black/silver crust, pitting

As No. 58

63

Bowl with outfolded rim

VIA

624

4682/3

Bluish green; thin white crust

As No. 58

64

Bowl with cut-off rim

VI–V

769

8474/2

Colorless/light bluish green; iridescence

Dominus Flevit (Bagatti and Milik 1958: Fig. 35:18)

65

Bowl with ‘toes’ base

VIB

634

9012/1

Circle of small ‘toes’ (6 remain); colorless/light green; iridescence, severe pitting

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–22:161); Nahariyya (Barag 1970: Pl. 32:25); Dura-Europos (Clairmont 1963: Pl. VI:211)

66

Bowl/jar with basket handle

VI

688

6745

Light green; iridescence, pitting

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–42); Hammat Gader (Cohen 1997: Pl. IV:1, 2)

67

Beaker with disc base

VB

756

8354

Pontil scar; bluish green; black/white crust

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–23:169–179); Hammat Gader (Cohen 1997: Pl. III:14–17)

68

Beaker with disc base

VI

650

5089/1

Pontil scar; bluish green; black/white crust

As No. 67

69

Beaker with disc base

VI

W909

5214

Trimmed edges; pontil scar; light green; white crust

As No. 67

70

Beaker with disc base

VII

750

8444

Pontil scar; bluish green; black/white crust

As No. 67

71

Beaker or bowl

VI

688

6644/3

Colorless/light yellow; thick white crust

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–23:162, 163 or Fig. 4-2:6, 7)

72

Beaker

VI–V

769

8493

Colorless/light yellow; black crust, iridescence

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–25); Hanita (Barag 1978:28, Fig. 14:66) or Hanita (Barag 1978: Fig. 14:60, 62, 64)

73

Jar?

VI

688

6644/2

Greenish-yellow; white crust, iridescence

74

Lamp with three handles

-

W912

5371

bluish green, handle bluish green or light green; thin silver crust

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–44:402); Dominus Flevit (Bagatti and Milik 1958: Fig. 35:11)

277

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

Bowls (Fig. 12.4:57–66)

to the Area M1 assemblage were found mainly in the large glass assemblages of two sites of the period: Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988) and the Roman baths of Hammat Gader (Cohen 1997). When necessary, parallels from sites as distant as DuraEuropos (Clairmont 1963) are also cited.

Seventeen fragments from Late Roman–early Byzantine contexts were identified as bowls of various types. Item No. 57 represents three rims belonging to bowls with thickened rims and straight (cylindrical)

58 57

59 61

60

62

63

65

64

66

67

68

69

72

71

73 74

0

4

Fig. 12.4. Late Roman–early Byzantine glass.

70

278

Dorit Gutreich

walls, or to a variant of this type with a ‘triangular lip’ (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:50). Both types are relatively common in the glass-factory dump at Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:40, 50). Five rim fragments and six base fragments are attributed to a type of bowl characterized by an outfolded, usually tubular rim and a pushed-in (pinched) ring base (Nos. 58–63). Item Nos. 58 and 59 were both retrieved from the same Late Roman– early Byzantine locus (L633). Item No. 59 and three other rim fragments have a small tubular fold. Item Nos. 60–63 and two other fragments are high and low base rings, both characteristic of this bowl type (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:41). Thousands of rim and base fragments of bowls of this type were found in the factory dump at Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:41), and a few similar bowls come from a tomb at Hanita, dated to the third–early fourth centuries CE (Barag 1978:9). It should be mentioned that at Jalame, similar pushed-in base rings were also attributed to jugs (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:65, and see Fig. 4-29). Other types of bowls include No. 64, a bowl with an upright, cut-off rim and a hemispherical body. This type is known from a few sites, e.g., a tomb at Dominus Flevit in Jerusalem, and is dated to the end of the fourth century CE (Barag 1970:135). Item No. 65 is a flat base with a ring of small ‘toes’ (six remain) and the beginning of a curve toward a cylindrical wall. It was retrieved on a Late Roman– early Byzantine floor. This type of deep bowl should probably be dated to the third century CE (Barag 1970:141, Type 3:25). One example was found at Jalame, and close parallels were retrieved in a tomb at Nahariya and at Dura-Europos (dated to the second or early third century; Clairmont 1963:51). Item No. 66 is a fragment of a straight, rounded rim with a broad, flat, basket handle attached to it, found in a Late Roman–early Byzantine fill. Deep bowls and jars with basket handles attached to the rim are known in contexts of the third and fourth centuries CE, e.g., at Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:38) and Hammat Gader (Cohen 1997:396); however, these specimens have an outfolded rim. Beakers (Fig. 12.4:67–72) Item Nos. 67–70 represent eight disc bases that were found in different contexts and attributed to a certain type of Late Roman–early Byzantine beaker. These

beakers (or cups) are characterized by concave walls that flare slightly near the bottom before joining the thick, solid disc base (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:60). Thus, the diameter of the base is usually much smaller than the lower part of the beaker (Cohen 1997:410). The bottom of the base bears a pontil scar, and its upper face is either flat, convex or domical (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:60). These bases correspond to Barag’s Types 4:6 and 4:7, which he dates to the fourth century CE (Barag 1970:143–144, Pl. 32:6, 7). Beakers with disc bases are typical of the Syro-Palestinian region, and hundreds of fragments were found at Jalame, where they were produced (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:60). Several fragments were also discovered at Hammat Gader. The edges of No. 69 were trimmed, implying that it was in secondary use as a stopper after the beaker had broken (see also No. 50, above). Item No. 71, with its rounded rim and concave wall, may also belong to a beaker with a disc base, although it lacks the characteristic thread decoration of this type (see Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:60). Alternatively, it could be part of a deep bowl with a thickened rim (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:40). Fragments of both types, which are similar to Item No. 71, were found, for example, at Jalame. Item No. 72 probably represents a beaker characterized by a flaring rim, a concave base and usually a decorative thread below the rim (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988:63). Two types of beakers share these characteristics: cylindrical––examples of which were found at Jalame and in the tomb at Hanita; and globular––like most of the examples from Hanita. Jar (Fig. 12.4:73) Item No. 73, with its very short, wide neck and probably globular body, may be identified as a large jar. It was found in a Late Roman–early Byzantine fill. Lamps (Fig. 12.4:74) Item No. 74, recovered from Byzantine W912, is a rim and wall fragment of a bowl with a small handle attached to the top of its flaring rim. Six other fragments were also assigned to the same vessel type, including one characteristic handle and three flaring rims that originated in Late Roman–early Byzantine contexts, and two rims also discovered embedded in a Byzantine wall and dated typologically. All seven

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

fragments probably belong to bowl lamps of Barag’s Type 13:15, with three small handles around the rim and a cylindrical tube attached to the center of the interior base (Barag 1970:185, Pl. 40:15). A fragment similar to No. 74 was found at Jalame, and a complete lamp of this type (though less globular than No. 74), in a tomb at Dominus Flevit in Jerusalem, dated to the fifth century CE (Barag 1970:185). Bottles, Jugs and Flasks (Fig. 12.5:75–80) Two rim fragments are attributed to bottles with a funnel-shaped mouth, a cylindrical neck and a globular body, characteristic of the Syro-Palestinian region during the Late Roman period. They can be divided into subtypes according to the shape of the rim and its decoration (Cohen 1997:419–425). Item No. 75, from a Late Roman–early Byzantine floor, belongs to a bottle of Barag’s Type 15:17.1 (Barag 1970:192– 193, Pl. 42:17.1), characterized by a simple, rounded, funnel-shaped rim decorated with a single horizontal thread, usually of the same color as the body (Cohen 1997:424). Similar bottles were found at Jalame and Hammat Gader. Item No. 76, from the same locus, represents another subtype of this bottle, characterized by a pinched ridge below the outer rim (Barag 1970:192–193, Type 15:17, Pl. 42:17). Bottles of this subtype were found, for example, at Jalame and ‘En Gedi, and in a tomb at Dominus Flevit in Jerusalem dated to the end of the third or the first half of the fourth centuries CE (Barag 1970:193). Fragments of two other Late Roman–early Byzantine bottle types were recovered. Item No. 77, from a Late Roman–early Byzantine context, is the rim and partial neck of a bottle with a long cylindrical neck and a globular body. Such bottles were common in the SyroPalestinian region in the fifth–seventh centuries CE, and examples were found, for example, at Hammat Gader (Cohen 1997:426). Item No. 78, from a fill containing Roman and Byzantine finds, is the base of a small cylindrical bottle or flask decorated with threads around its lower part. Two handles were attributed to jugs of the Late Roman–early Byzantine period; No. 79 came from a fill locus containing mostly early Byzantine pottery. Two fragments apparently belonged to flasks. Item No. 80, from a Late Roman–early Byzantine floor, is a body fragment of a closed vessel, probably a large globular flask (see Clairmont 1963:73, Pl. VII:277),

279

decorated with bands of wheel-cut, geometric and vegetal designs. The decoration includes lines, squares, a ‘chain’ motif and a stylized grapevine. Cut decoration appears on various types of vessels from the first century CE to Islamic times (Clairmont 1963:56–57). Nevertheless, no exact parallel of the cut design depicted on No. 80 is known on any vessel. The grapevine motif was rarely employed in this decoration technique, and apparently only on open vessels. For example, one deep bowl depicting this motif was found at Dura-Europos and dated to the third century CE (Clairmont 1963:77, Pls. VII:300; XXVIII:300). Varia (Fig. 12.5:81–83) Windowpanes (No. 81) Item No. 81 is one of two items identified as cast windowpane fragments that were dated to the Late Roman–early Byzantine period by their context. They are characterized by their flat shape and circular marks of lathe-polishing on one surface (fire-polishing on the other). A similar glass plaque was found at ‘En Gedi, where it was identified as a windowpane or mirror glass, and dated to the Byzantine period (Jackson-Tal 2007:478). Bracelet (No. 82) Glass bracelets are a very common type of jewelry throughout the Syro-Palestinian region, from the Late Roman period onward (Spaer 2001:193). The early types are monochrome and usually made of dark glass that appears opaque (Spaer 1988:60). Item No. 82 is a vertically ribbed, dark monochrome bracelet. Monochrome bracelets with tooled decoration are known mainly from the third through the seventh centuries CE (Spaer 2001:194), while the vertically ribbed subtype is usually dated to the third– fourth centuries CE (Spaer 1988:55). Thus, No. 82 is dated to the Late Roman–early Byzantine period, although it originated in a later context. A similar bracelet was found in a Roman tomb at Dominus Flevit in Jerusalem. Faience Bead (No. 83) Faience beads are known from the Late Bronze Age to the Byzantine period (Chernov 2007:525). Item No. 83 is a round, light colored faience bead found embedded in a Late Roman–early Byzantine wall, and was thus dated to this period.

280

Dorit Gutreich

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83 0

4

Fig. 12.5. Late Roman-early Byzantine glass. No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description

Parallels

75

Bottle with funnelshaped mouth and thread decoration

VI

633

4741/2

Thread decoration of same color below rim outside; bluish green

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–31); Hammat Gader (Cohen 1997: Pl. VI:7, 8)

76

Bottle with funnelshaped mouth

VI

633

5131

Colorless/light olive-green; black/silver crust, iridescence

Jalame (Weinberg and Goldstein 1988: Fig. 4–34); ‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007: Pl. 2:6); Dominus Flevit (Bagatti and Milik 1958: Fig. 33:12, 20, 24–26)

77

Bottle with cylindrical neck

VI

671

5920/4

Bluish green; thin white crust, severe pitting

Hammat Gader (Cohen 1997: Pl. VIII:5–7)

78

Cylindrical bottle/ flask with thread decoration

VII–VI

700

7296/1

Slightly concave base; body colorless, threads light orange; white crust

79

Jug

III

614

4647/2

Bluish green; thin white crust

80

Flask with cut decoration

VIA

624

4682/1

Three fragments joined; colorless/light yellow or light olive-green; thick black crust

81

Windowpane

VI

678

6128

Bluish-green

‘En Gedi (Jackson-Tal 2007: Pl. 2:7)

82

Bracelet

VB

756

8400/2

Opaque(?) black/dark green

Dominus Flevit (Bagatti and Milik 1958: Fig. 37:35)

83

Faience bead

VI

W882

6345

White

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

Glass Finds from the Byzantine – Umayyad Periods Forty-one glass fragments constitute the Byzantine– Umayyad repertoire (fifth to mid-eighth centuries CE), of which twenty are presented here (Fig. 12.6). All but one (No. 99, a mold-blown bottle) were manufactured in the free-blowing technique. Most of the parallels to this assemblage are cited from Umayyad Bet She’an (Hadad 2005), others from sites in Jerusalem such as the Temple Mount (Hadad 2003) and Khirbet Tabaliya (Giv‘at Ha-Matos; Gorin-Rosen 2000). Bowls and Beakers (Fig. 12.6:84–89) Six fragments from Byzantine–Umayyad contexts were identified as bowls of various types. Item No. 84 is an upright rim of a bowl with conical walls. Similar bowls were found in an Umayyad context at Bet She’an (Hadad 2005:21). Item No. 85 has a thickened rim with a dark blue edge and a decoration of very thin horizontal threads on the wall below the rim. Thickened rims, sometimes with fused-in threads on their edge in a different color from that of the vessel, are characteristic of deep bowls or beakers of the Byzantine and Umayyad periods. In some cases, the bowl is decorated with threads on the wall as well (Gorin-Rosen 2010:215). Bowls of this type were found, for example, in Umayyad contexts at Bet She’an and Ramla (none feature both the different-colored rim and the thread decoration on the body as on No. 85). Item No. 86 is a rim fragment of a deep bowl decorated with one thin, marvered thread below the rim. Item No. 87 is one of two similar fragments decorated with parallel threads below the rim, which were identified as bowl rims due to their large diameter. Item No. 88 has an outsplayed, infolded rim and a rounded basket handle with a pinched end. It may belong to a bowl or a jar—a type characterized by an infolded rim (Hadad 2005:28, Pl. 20:369–377). Three fragments from Byzantine–Umayyad contexts probably belonged to beakers: two low, tubular ring bases (No. 89), and a plain rim of small diameter. Lamps (Fig. 12.6:90–94) Two types of glass lamps of the Byzantine–Umayyad periods were recovered from Area M1. Interestingly, these are also the only two types of lamps found in

281

the ‘House of the Menorot’ in the nearby Temple Mount excavations (Hadad 2003:191, 193). Item Nos. 90–92 are three of six fragments identified as lamps of the type characterized by a bowl with an outfolded rim and three handles (Hadad 2005:29, Type 1). This type was found at various sites of the Byzantine and Umayyad periods, including the Temple Mount, Kh. Tabaliya (Giv‘at Ha-Matos), Bet She’an and Tiberias. During the Byzantine period, outfolded rims appeared mainly on bowl-shaped lamps rather than simple bowls (Amitai-Preiss 2004:179); therefore, No. 92 and two other outfolded rim fragments are identified here as lamps, although no handles were detected. Similar fragments from Kh. Tabaliya (Giv‘at Ha-Matos) were also identified as lamps (Gorin-Rosen 2000:89*– 90*). The rim of No. 92 was folded twice, creating a decorative ‘wavy’ fold. Item Nos. 93 and 94 represent lamps of a type characterized by a small bowl and a hollow, cylindrical stem (Hadad 2005:29, Type 4). Two additional fragments similar to No. 94 were also uncovered. This type, found, for example, in Byzantine or Umayyad contexts in Jerusalem in the Jewish Quarter, the Temple Mount, the City of David and Kh. Tabaliya (Giv‘at Ha-Matos), and at Bet She’an, is usually not encountered in contexts postdating the Umayyad period (Hadad 2003:194). Wineglasses (Fig. 12.6:95–98) Wineglasses were very widespread during the Byzantine period, and still common in the Umayyad period (Hadad 2005:28). Sixteen fragments of bases and stems of different types were recovered. Item No. 95 is a complete tubular base with a straight hollow stem (another base of this type was also found), Nos. 96 and 97 (a complete base) represent two variants of a wineglass with a tubular base and a hollow knobbed stem (another base similar to No. 97 was also found), and No. 98 is a solid knobbed stem. A poorly preserved solid concave base was also recovered. Straight, hollow stems like No. 95 were found, for example, in Jerusalem at Kh. Tabaliya (Giv‘at HaMatos) and at Tiberias. Knobbed stems such as Nos. 96–98 are characteristic of Byzantine wineglasses from the Jerusalem area, e.g., Kh. Tabaliya (Giv‘at HaMatos; Gorin-Rosen 2000:87*) and the City of David. Among the wineglasses found in Byzantine contexts in the City of David, there is also a tubular base similar to Nos. 95 and 97 (it lacks the stem).

282

Dorit Gutreich

Fig. 12.6 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description

Parallels

84

Conical bowl

V

W884

5598/1

Bluish green; iridescence

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 1:6–8)

85

Bowl with thread decoration

V

606

4522

Light blue body, dark blue rim and threads

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 1:16); Ramla (Gorin-Rosen 2010: Pls. 10.1:1–4; 10.2:1)

86

Deep bowl with thread VI–V decoration

663

5733

Bluish green body, slightly darker thread; white crust

87

Bowl with thread decoration

V

606

5719/1

Colorless/bluish green body, blue thread; thin white crust

88

Bowl/jar with basket handle

V

606

5719/2

Bluish green; white crust, iridescence

89

Beaker with low tubular ring base

V

W884

5615/4

Light green

90

Lamp with out-folded rim and three handles

III

638

4706

Light olive green

Khirbet Tabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000: Fig. 3:29–33); Temple Mount (Hadad 2003: Photo II.33, Pl. II.5:1–5); Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 22:413–423); Tiberias (Lester 2004: Fig. 7.11:131–133)

91

Lamp with out-folded rim and three handles

II

611

4637

Tip of handle folded on top; light green; white crust

As No. 90

92

Lamp with out-folded rim and three handles

IV

680

6183

Bluish green; iridescence

As No. 90

93

Lamp with small bowl and hollow cylindrical stem

VB

756

8400/1

Smoothed stem; pontil scar; bluish green; pitting

Jewish Quarter (Gorin-Rosen 2003: Pl. 15.9:G94); Temple Mount (Hadad 2003: Photo II.35, Pl. II.5:6–15); Kh. Tabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000: Fig. 3:34–37); City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 32: GL77, GL78); Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 22:436–442)

94

Lamp with small bowl and hollow cylindrical stem

III

623

5898

Pontil scar; bluish green; thick white crust

As No. 93

95

Wineglass with tubular base and straight hollow stem

-

840

9562

Bluish green; thin white crust

Khirbet Tabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000: Fig. 2:14); City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 32: GL74); Tiberias (Amitai-Preiss 2004: Fig. 11.1: 8)

96

Wineglass with tubular base and hollow, knobbed stem

VB

732

7905

Light green; thin white crust

Khirbet Tabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000: Fig. 2:15); City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 32: GL71, GL72)

97

Wineglass with tubular base and hollow, knobbed stem

VI–V

644

4902

Bluish green

Khirbet Tabaliya (Gorin-Rosen 2000: Fig. 2:15); City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 32:GL71, GL72, GL74)

98

Wineglass with solid knobbed stem

II

717

8159

Bluish green

City of David (Ariel 1990: Fig. 32: GL71, GL72)

99

Mold-blown bottle

VB

756

8580

Uneven base; pontil scar; bluish green; black/white crust

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 16:324)

100

Bottle with infolded rim

VB

744

8276/3

Colorless/light green; white crust

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pls. 8:155–164; 9:165–168); Tiberias (Amitai-Preiss 2004: Fig. 11.2:15)

101

Bottle with thread decoration

VIA–V

W864

6051/1

Light yellow or light olivegreen body, blue thread; thin white crust, iridescence

102

Bracelet

VB

744

8276/1

Opaque(?) black

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 23:458)

103

Bracelet

V

W884

5615/1

Opaque(?) black/brown

Tyropoeon Valley (Crowfoot and FitzGerald 1929: Pl. XXI:11)

283

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

84

85

87 86

90

89

88

92

93

91

95

97

96

100

94

98

102

101

0

99

103

4

Fig. 12.6. Byzantine–Umayyad glass.

Bottles (Fig. 12.6:99–101) Four fragments from Byzantine–Umayyad contexts were identified as bottles of various types. Item No. 99 is a disc base of a ribbed, mold-blown vessel. It is identified here as a bottle based on a close parallel found in Umayyad context at Bet She’an. Item No. 100 is one of two fragments of bottles with an infolded rim and a straight neck. Similar fragments from Bet She’an and Tiberias were also identified as bottles. Item No. 101 is a body fragment of a globular bottle decorated with a dark spiraling thread. Applied threads are the most common type of decoration in the Umayyad period, although usually applied to the neck of the

bottle. The color combination seen in No. 101 is known from thread-decorated bottles of the Umayyad period, e.g., at Bet She’an (Hadad 2005:25, Nos. 223–280). Varia (Fig. 12.6:102, 103) Bracelets (Nos. 102, 103) Two fragments of monochrome bracelets dated to the Byzantine–Umayyad periods are made of typical dark glass (Spaer 1988:60). Item No. 102 is a plain, narrow bracelet with a D-shaped section, a type that was very common during the Byzantine period (Spaer 1988:54, Type A2a). A similar bracelet (though made of turquoise glass) came from in an Umayyad context

284

Dorit Gutreich

at Bet She’an. Item No. 103 is a densely twisted bracelet, a type relatively common in the Byzantine period during the sixth–seventh centuries CE (Spaer 1988:59, Type C1a; 2001:195). A bracelet of this type was found, for example, in the Tyropoeon Valley in a contemporaneous context (Spaer 1988:59).

Glass Finds from the Abbasid Period Thirty-seven glass fragments are attributed to the Abbasid period (mid-eighth to tenth centuries CE). Most originated in loci of Strata III–II, and not a single fragment in Stratum I. All the identified vessels were free-blown, 22 of which are presented here (Figs. 12.7, 12.8). Parallels to this assemblage are cited mainly from Abbasid–Fatimid Bet She’an (Hadad 2005), Ramla (Pollak 2007; Gorin-Rosen 2010) and Caesarea (Pollak 2003). Bowls and Cup (Fig. 12.7:104–115) Eighteen fragments from Abbasid contexts were identified as bowls of various types. Item No. 104 exhibits an almost-complete profile of a large cylindrical bowl. Cylindrical bowls, of various sizes and rim shapes, are known since the mid-eighth or early ninth century until the eleventh century CE, for example at Ramla (Pollak 2007:104) and Caesarea, where they are among the most common vessel types in the late ninth– mid-tenth centuries (Pollak 2003:167). Item No. 104 was found in a fill that yielded pottery sherds from the Byzantine through Early Islamic periods, and is dated typologically to the Abbasid period. Item No. 105 is a rim of a small shallow conical bowl. Item No. 106 has a flaring upright rim. A large bowl with a similar rim is known from an Abbasid–Fatimid context at Bet She’an. Item Nos. 107–109 are three of six outfolded tubular rims of bowls that differ mainly in the length of the fold. Bowls of this type were common during the Roman, Byzantine and Early Islamic periods (Pollak 2007:100). Examples from Abbasid–Fatimid contexts include bowls from Ramla and Bet She’an. Item Nos. 110 and 111 are tubular base rings, the most commonly found base of bowls with outfolded rims, as at Ramla (Pollak 2007:100). Item No. 111 was recovered from a locus containing mostly Abbasid pottery. Another base similar to No. 111 also came from Area M1. Item No. 112 is a fragment of an outfolded rim (probably of a bowl), featuring a very long tubular fold with a dark

thread inside it. Item No. 113 is part of a deep bowl with distinct, light green ‘stains’ on its rim and traces of lathe-turning on its outer face. Three other (plain) rims of the same shape were also found in Abbasid loci, two of them are lathe-turned. Item No. 114, with a flaring rim and a horizontal ridge below it, may be identified as a bowl based on a rather similar fragment (made of thick glass) found in an Abbasid–Fatimid context at Bet She’an. Item No. 115 is a fragment of a rounded handle attached to a convex wall. Handles of this type are usually attributed to cups or cup-shaped oil lamps, for example at Ramla (Pollak 2007:110; Gorin-Rosen 2010:253). Several rounded handles were retrieved in Abbasid–Fatimid contexts at Bet She’an, although the type of vessel to which they belonged is not identified (Hadad 2005:46). An almost-complete lamp with crude rounded handles was found at Tiberias, where the type is dated to later than the Umayyad period (AmitaiPreiss 2004:181). Bottles (Figs. 12.7:116–119; 12.8:120–122) Six fragments from Abbasid contexts represent plain bottles of the period. Item No. 116 is a large cylindrical bottle reconstructed from two parts that probably belonged to the same vessel (although the glass seems to be distorted). As its body is incomplete, the original height of the bottle cannot be estimated. It has a wide flaring rim, a cylindrical neck and a flat base. At Caesarea, such bottles (with cylindrical or tapering necks) first appeared at the end of ninth or the beginning of the tenth century CE (Pollak 2003:167). Rim and neck fragments of this bottle type were also found at Ramla and Bet She’an. Item No. 117 is one of two bottle-rim fragments characterized by a slightly infolded rim and a cylindrical neck. A similar bottle was found in an Abbasid–Fatimid context at Bet She’an. Item No. 121 is a decorated example of the same bottle type (see below). Item No. 118 is a slightly concave, distorted base; a similar base of smaller diameter was also discovered. These are identified here as bottles based on parallels from a context of similar date at Bet She’an. Item No. 119 is a disc base with a circular ridge around the pontil scar on its bottom. It originated in an Abbasid context and although no exact parallel was found, it is attributed to a bottle, as were the disc bases from a contemporaneous context at Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pls. 38:797–800; 39:801, 802).

285

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

105

106

104

107 108

109

110

111

112

114 113

115

5

0

116

117

118

119 0

4

Fig. 12.7. Abbasid glass.

286

Dorit Gutreich

◄ Fig. 12.7 No.

Type

Stratum.

Locus

Basket

Description

Parallels

104

Cylindrical bowl

IV

639

4816/1

Bluish green; black crust, pitting

Ramla (Pollak 2007: Fig. 3:13– 17); Caesarea (Pollak 2003: Figs. 1:18; 3:40)

105

Shallow, conical bowl

VI–III

601

6709/1

Black crust, severe pitting

106

Bowl with flaring upright rim

III

654

5388/2

Bluish green

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 27:545)

107

Bowl with outfolded rim

III

613

4600/4

Bluish green; thin white crust

Ramla (Pollak 2007: Fig. 1); Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pls. 28:558–563; 29:564, 565)

108

Bowl with outfolded rim

II

610

4553/1

Bluish green

As No. 107

109

Bowl with outfolded rim

III

613

4600/3

Bluish green; thin white crust

As No. 107

110

Bowl with outfolded rim

VI–III

601

6689/2

Bluish green; thin white crust

Ramla (Pollak 2007: Fig. 1:6)

111

Bowl with outfolded rim

IV

646

6702/1

Bluish green; thin white crust

As No. 110

112

Bowl with outfolded rim and thread decoration

V–III

676

5937/2

Light green body, blue thread

113

Deep bowl

III

602

5391

Bluish green with light green ‘stains’ on rim

114

Bowl with flaring rim and thread decoration

II

610

4553/3

Colorless/very light yellow (thread of the same color)

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 27:541)

115

Cup with rounded handle

IV

664

5757/1

Light green(?); black crust

Ramla (Pollak 2007: Fig. 6:34; Gorin-Rosen 2010: Pl. 10.11:4); Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pls. 44:927–941; 45:942–946); Tiberias (Amitai-Preiss 2004: Fig. 11.3:22)

116

Large cylindrical bottle

VI–III

601

6697

Mended; colorless/light yellow; silver crust, iridescence

Caesarea (Pollak 2003: Fig. 3:43, 44); Ramla (gorinRosen 2010: Pl. 10.6:17, 18); Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pls. 37:728; 38:761)

117

Bottle with infolded rim

III

613

4600/5

Bluish green; thin white crust

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 37:746)

118

Bottle with concave base

V–III

676

5937/1

Pontil scar; light green; black/silver crust, distortion due to heat, pitting

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 38:793, 795, 796)

119

Bottle(?) with disc base

II

604

4521

Circular ridge around pontil scar; bluish green; black crust

Seven fragments of decorated bottles were recovered from Abbasid contexts. Item Nos. 120 and 121 represent five bottles decorated with threads. Item No. 120, from a locus containing mostly Early Islamic pottery, has one thread of the same color as the body. A close parallel came from an Abbasid–Fatimid context at Bet She’an. Item No. 121 is part of a bottle with an infolded rim

and a cylindrical neck, decorated with a thread around the rim and a thin dark thread winding around the neck. A neck fragment with this type of thread decoration was also discovered. Similarly decorated bottles are known from Abbasid–Fatimid Bet She’an. Item No. 122 is an almost-complete, miniature cylindrical bottle with cut decoration. Fragments of a

287

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

similar bottle were also found in the same locus. Both belong to a group of cut-decorated bottles characterized by a funnel-shaped neck, a thick flat base and lightcolored glass, a type found in contexts of the eighth– tenth centuries CE, as at Bet She’an (Hadad 2005:44). Rim and neck fragments of this bottle type were also found in ninth–tenth-century contexts at Caesarea (Pollak 2003:167) and Ramla (Gorin-Rosen 2010:228). Jug/Juglets (Fig. 12.8:123, 124) Three fragments were identified as jug/juglets. Item No. 123 has an infolded rim and is decorated with a thread below the rim and a small, horizontal, leafshaped handle (or thumb-tab). Its size and delicacy

120

121

123

124

suggest that it belonged to a juglet. It was found in Stratum II and is thus dated to the Abbasid period. Item No. 124 is one of two jug/juglet handles from Abbasid contexts. Varia (Fig. 12.8:125) Windowpanes (No. 125) Item No. 125 represents two fragments of cast windowpanes discovered in Abbasid contexts, and characterized by their flat shape and circular marks of lathe-polishing on one surface (fire-polishing on the other). A few fragments of windowpanes were found in Abbasid–Fatimid contexts at Bet She’an (Hadad 2005:49).

122

125 0

4

Fig. 12.8. Abbasid glass. No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description

Parallels

120

Bottle with thread decoration

VI

678

6259

Three fragments joined; light bluish green; white crust, pitting

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 39:821)

121

Bottle with thread decoration

II

W900

4923

Bluish green body, blue threads; white/silver crust

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 39:815–820)

122

Miniature bottle with cut decoration

V–III

676

6403

Colorless/light olive green (or yellow); black/ silver crust

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 41:857); Caesarea (Pollak 2003: Fig. 3:49); Ramla (Gorin-Rosen 2010: Pl. 10.10:4)

123

Juglet with thread decoration

II

604

4500

Bluish green; white/ silver crust

124

Jug/juglet

IV

664

5695/1

Bluish green; thin white/ silver crust

125

Windowpane

III

614

4647/1

Bluish-green; thin white crust

Bet She’an (Hadad 2005: Pl. 49:1016–1018)

288

Dorit Gutreich

Summary The importance of the glass assemblage from Area M1 lies mainly in its presentation, as it is the most comprehensive glass assemblage published so far from the City of David. Furthermore, with the exception of the late Hellenistic and Byzantine periods, glass is poorly represented in the reports of other settlement sites in Jerusalem. The vast majority (80%) of the vessels identified were made in the free-blowing technique. Most of

them are common, plain tableware, while some are decorated with pinched ribs, wheel-cut lines or applied threads. A few of the fragments are relatively rare in the local repertoire of their respective periods, for example the mold-blown vessels (Nos. 15–17) and the cut-decorated vessel (No. 42) of the Early Roman period, and the bowl with a ‘toes’ base (No. 65) and the elaborate, cut-decorated flask (No. 80) of the Late Roman–early Byzantine period.

Notes I wish to thank Shulamit Hadad for her generous help throughout the preparation of this report, although the conclusions are solely the author’s. 1

For example, only a few fragments were published from the City of David excavations (Ariel 1990). 2

R eferences Amitai-Preiss N. 2004. Glass and Metal Finds. In Y. Hirschfeld. Excavations at Tiberias, 1989–1994 (IAA Reports 22). Jerusalem. Pp. 177–190. Ariel D.T. 1990. Glass. In D.T. Ariel. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985, Directed by Yigal Shiloh II: Imported Stamped Amphora Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory, and Glass (Qedem 30). Jerusalem. Pp. 149–166. Aviam M. and Gorin-Rosen Y. 1997. Three Burial Caves from the Roman Period at Hurfeish. ‘Atiqot 33:25–37 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 9*). Avigad N. 1962. Expedition A––Nahal David. IEJ 12:169– 183. Bagatti B. and Milik J.T. 1958. Gli scavi del “Dominus Flevit” (Monte Oliveto – Gerusalemme) I: La necropoli del periodo romano. Jerusalem. Barag D. 1962. Glass Vessels from the Cave of the Horror. IEJ 12:208–214. Barag D. 1963. The Glassware. In Y. Yadin. The Finds from the Bar Kokhba Period in the Cave of the Letters (Judean Desert Studies). Jerusalem. Pp. 101–110. Barag D. 1970. Glass Vessels of the Roman and Byzantine Periods in Palestine. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew; English summary, pp. i–viii). Barag D. 1978. Hanita, Tomb XV: A Tomb of the Third and Early Fourth Century CE (‘Atiqot [ES] 13). Jerusalem. Barag D. 1985. Catalogue of Western Asiatic Glass in the British Museum I. London.

Chernov E. 2007. Metal Objects and Small Finds from EnGedi. In Y. Hirschfeld ed. En-Gedi Excavations II: Final Report (1996–2002). Jerusalem. Pp. 507–543. Clairmont C.W. 1963. Dura-Europos IV, V: The Glass Vessels. New Haven. Cohen E. 1997. Roman, Byzantine and Umayyad Glass. In Y. Hirschfeld. The Roman Baths of Hammat Gader: Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 396–431. Crowfoot G.M. 1957. Glass. In J.W. Crowfoot, G.M. Crowfoot and K.M. Kenyon. The Objects from Samaria (Samaria-Sebaste 3). London. Pp. 403–422. Crowfoot J.W. and FitzGerald G.M. 1929. Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley, Jerusalem, 1927 (PEFA 5). London. Fortuna M.T. 1965. I vetri soffiati della necropoli di Akko. JGS 7:17–25. Gorin-Rosen Y. 2000. The Glass Vessels from Khirbet Tabaliya (Giv‘at Ha-Matos). ‘Atiqot 40:81*–95* (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 165–166). Gorin-Rosen Y. 2003. Glass Vessels from Area A. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X–2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 364–400. Gorin-Rosen Y. 2006. Glass Vessels. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 239–265.

Chapter 12: The Glass Finds

Gorin-Rosen Y. 2010. The Islamic Glass Vessels. In O. Gutfeld. Ramla: Final Report on the Excavations North of the White Mosque (Qedem 51). Jerusalem. Pp. 213–264. Grose D.F. 1979. The Syro-Palestinian Glass Industry in the Later Hellenistic Period. MUSE 13:54–67. Grose D.F. 1989. Early Ancient Glass: Core-Formed, RodFormed, and Cast Vessels and Objects from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Roman Empire, 1600 B.C. to A.D. 50. Toledo, Ohio. Hadad S. 2003. Glass Lamps from the “House of the Menorot” in Area VI. In E. Mazar. The Temple Mount Excavations in Jerusalem 1968–1978 Directed by Benjamin Mazar, Final Reports II: The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (Qedem 43). Jerusalem. Pp. 191–195. Hadad S. 2005. Excavations at Bet Shean 2: Islamic Glass Vessels from the Hebrew University Excavations at Bet Shean (Qedem Reports 8). Jerusalem. Isings C. 1957. Roman Glass from Dated Finds (Archaeologica Traiectina II). Groningen. Israeli Y. 1988. Glassware and Other Vessels from a Tomb in Mishmar Ha-‘Emeq. In B. Mazar ed. Geva: Archaeological Discoveries at Tell Abu-Shusha, Mishmar Ha-‘Emeq. Jerusalem. Pp. 226–232 (Hebrew). Israeli Y. 2003. Glass in the Roman-Byzantine Period. In Y. Israeli. Ancient Glass in the Israel Museum, the Eliahu Dobkin Collection and Other Gifts (Israel Museum Catalogue 486). Jerusalem. Pp. 91–316. Israeli Y. 2008. The Glass Vessels. In J. Patrich. Archaeological Excavations at Caesarea Maritima: Areas CC, KK and NN, Final Reports 1: The Objects. Jerusalem. Pp. 367–418. Israeli Y. and Katsnelson N. 2006. Refuse of a Glass Workshop of the Second Temple Period from Area J. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 411–460. Jackson-Tal R.E. 2000a. Glass Vessels. In M. Fischer, M. Gichon and O. Tal eds. ‘En Boqeq: Excavations in an Oasis on the Dead Sea II: The Officina; an Early Roman Building on the Dead Sea Shore. Mainz. Pp. 73–80. Jackson-Tal R.E. 2000b. The Hellenistic Glass Finds in the Land of Israel in Light of Excavations at Marisa and

289

Dor. M.A. thesis. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Jackson-Tal R.E. 2004. The Late Hellenistic Glass Industry in Syro-Palestine: A Reappraisal. JGS 46:11–32. Jackson-Tal R.E. 2007. Glass Vessels from En-Gedi. In Y. Hirschfeld. En-Gedi Excavations II: Final Report (1996– 2002). Jerusalem. Pp. 474–506. Jackson-Tal R.E. 2009. Early Roman Glass Vessels from Dated Contexts in Palestine: From Pompey to Hadrian (63 BCE–135 CE). Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Lester A. 2004. The Glass. In D. Stacey. Excavations at Tiberias, 1973–1974: The Early Islamic Periods (IAA Reports 21). Jerusalem. Pp. 167–220. Nenner-Soriano R. 2006. Miscellaneous Finds. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 310–314. Pollak R. 2003. Early Islamic Glass from Caesarea: A Chronological and Typological Study. Excavation in Marcus Street. In Annales du 15e congrès de l’Association internationale pour l’histoire du verre, New York–Corning 2001. Nottingham. Pp. 165–170. Pollak R. 2007. Excavations in Marcus Street, Ramla: The Glass Vessels. Haifa. Contract Archaeology Reports II:100–133. Smith R.W. 1957. Glass from the Ancient World: the Ray Winfield Smith Collection. Corning, N.Y. Spaer M. 1988. The Pre-Islamic Glass Bracelets of Palestine. JGS 30:51–61. Spaer M. 2001. Ancient Glass in the Israel Museum, Beads and Other Small Objects (Israel Museum Catalogue 447). Jerusalem. Stern E.M. 1995. Roman Mold-Blown Glass: the First through Sixth Centuries. Rome. Weinberg G.D. and Goldstein S.M. 1988. The Glass Vessels. In G.D. Weinberg ed. Excavations at Jalame: Site of a Glass Factory in Late Roman Palestine. Columbia, Mo. Pp. 38–102. Winter T. 1996. The Glass Vessels. In G. Avni and Z. Greenhut. The Akeldama Tombs: Three Burial Caves in the Kidron Valley, Jerusalem (IAA Reports 1). Jerusalem. Pp. 95–103.

Chapter 13

The Metal Objects Masha K rakovsky

Introduction a total of 477 metal objects were recovered from Area M1, over 50% from the Early Roman–early Byzantine periods (Strata VII–VI; 256 items).1 The metal assemblage consists of 239 iron, 183 copper-alloy and 55 lead objects. Four groups could be distinguished based on typological considerations: nails, rings (nonjewelry), weights, and the vast majority of the metal artifacts, which could not be assigned to any typological group, were grouped under the category ‘varia’. In addition, 4 arrowheads and a (possible) spearhead are discussed in Chapter 14 with other military artifacts, and 21 iron and 2 copper-alloy(?) slags were also found. These slags may imply a possible metallurgical industry in the vicinity of the site. The catalogue below presents a selected assemblage of representative metal objects: nails (Nos. 1–5), rings (Nos. 6–10), weights (Nos. 11–14) and varia. As the majority of the varia is poorly preserved and unrecognizable, only seven examples are presented here (Nos. 15–21). The objects are illustrated in Figs. 13.1 and 13.2, ordered sequentially according to their catalogue numbers. Most of the objects discussed in this chapter have parallels at sites in Jerusalem or in the immediate vicinity. When no close parallels are known in the Jerusalem area, artifacts from sites in other regions are cited. The chronology of the metal objects is based largely on their stratigraphic context, the bulk originating in the Early Roman to early Byzantine periods (Strata VII–VI).

Catalogue Nails (Fig. 13.1:1–5) The 176 nails include 34 complete and 142 nail fragments. All were made of iron except one of copper alloy. The majority of the nails originated in three strata: Stratum VII, dated to the Early Roman period (40 items); Stratum VI, dated to the Late Roman–early Byzantine period (42 items), and Stratum IV, dated to the Early Islamic period (39 items). Parallels are found at virtually every site dated to these periods, for example, the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem (Zitronblat and Geva 2003:355; Gutfeld and Nenner-Soriano 2006:276–277). Iron nails were commonly used in carpentry for construction and the production of furniture and wooden coffins (Mazar 1973:222; Zitronblat and Geva 2003:355; Gutfeld and Nenner-Soriano 2006:277), whereas copper-alloy nails were used mainly in furniture production (Chernov 2007:507). Nails found in excavations appear in a variety of shapes and sizes, apparently due to their different functions rather than chronological factors. Thus, the dating of these nails is based on their stratigraphic context. The catalogue below presents four iron nails and one copper-alloy nail as representative of the nail assemblage. No. 1. Stratum III, L623, B5793 Iron nail; complete; square cross-section. L 11 cm, W 1.5 cm, D of head 2.7 cm.2

292

Masha Krakovsky

No. 2. Strata VI–V, L608, B4928 Iron nail; complete; square cross-section. L 8.1 cm, W 0.7 cm, D of head 2 cm. Parallels: ‘En Gedi (Chernov 2007: Pl. 1:16).

No. 8. Strata VII–VI, L705, B7336 Copper-alloy ring; complete. D 2.4 cm, Th 0.3 cm; iron stick attached to ring: L 2.2 cm, W 0.8–1 cm.

No. 3. Stratum VI, L655, B5399 Iron nail; complete; square in cross-section. L 6.2 cm, W 0.8 cm, D of head 1.8 cm. Parallels: ‘En Gedi (Chernov 2007: Pl. 1:15).

No. 9. Stratum VI, L645, B5466 Copper-alloy ring; complete. D 2.5 cm, Th 0.1 cm.

No. 4. Stratum IV, L639, B4894 Iron nail; complete; square cross-section. L 5.3 cm, W 0.7 cm, D of head 2.7 cm. Parallels: Jewish Quarter, Jerusalem (Zitronblat and Geva 2003: M13). No. 5. Stratum VIII, L808 , B9078 Copper alloy nail; complete, round cross-section. L 4.4 cm, W 0.2 cm, D of head 1 cm. Parallels: Ramat Ha-Nadiv (Kol-Yaakov 2000: Pl. X:11).

R ings (Fig. 13.1:6–10) Twelve rings are of an industrial nature; five complete examples are presented in the catalogue. Such rings probably had multiple functions, such as door fittings, handles, etc. Other possible uses are mentioned in the literature (e.g., Cleere 1958:63; McClellan 1975:663– 666; Manning 1989:140). The assortment of shapes and sizes of these rings do not indicate any chronological development, and their dating is based on their context; rings presented in this catalogue are dated to the Roman and Byzantine periods. No. 6. Stratum VI, L655, B5453 Copper-alloy ring with small iron ring on it; complete; D 2.7 cm, Th 0.5 cm. Parallels: Jewish Quarter, Jerusalem (Zitronblat and Geva 2003: M41). No. 7. Stratum VI, L690, B6594 Iron ring; complete. D 5.45 cm, Th 1.1 cm. Parallels: Jewish Quarter, Jerusalem (Gutfeld and Nenner-Soriano 2006: M32); ‘En Gedi (Chernov 2007: Pl. 1:21).

No. 10. Stratum VII, L736, B7932 Copper-alloy ring; complete. D 2.25 cm, Th 0.4 cm. Parallels: Jewish Quarter, Jerusalem (Zitronblat and Geva 2003: M41).

Weights (Fig. 13.1:11–14) Four weights of different types, three made of lead and one of copper alloy, were recovered. Weight No. 11 was probably used as a plumb, while the rest can be defined as measure units. In the ancient Near East, different weighing systems were in use from at least the Iron Age onward (Qedar 2001:23*). The Romans applied a universal standardized weighing system throughout their empire. However, various types of weights discovered at sites within the empire suggest that this system was not enforced everywhere in the same manner and was probably used only in trade with non-local merchants (Qedar 2001:24*). This system of standard weight denominations continued in use during the Byzantine period and into the Early Islamic period. It was eventually replaced by a new system at the end of the seventh century CE (see below; Qedar 2001:24*). Weights of the Roman–Byzantine periods were made of metal––usually lead, but also copper alloy or iron and stone (Qedar 2001:24*). Three weights in this catalogue are dated stratigraphically to the Late Roman–early Byzantine period (Stratum VI), although we cannot assign them to any specific denominations used at this time. weights similar to No. 11 were found at Dor, where they were described as plumb weights attributed to the Phoenician culture, and dated to the Hellenistic period (Nagar-Hilman 2004:71). During the Early Islamic period, two new weighing systems were established: the dinar and the dirham systems, based on units of 4.25 g and 2.97 g,

293

Chapter 13: The Metal Objects

2

1

4

3

5

7

6

8

10

9

12

11

0

4

13

14

Fig. 13.1. Metal objects.

respectively (Khamis 2008:165). They usually have a barrel (sometimes faceted) or rectangular form. The specific purpose of these weights is currently under debate (Holland 1986:185–192; Khamis 2008:165– 166, 2010:279–280). It is interesting that most researchers assume that weights of the Early Islamic period (Umayyad and

Abbasid) were made of glass, and the production of metal weights was only renewed later, during the Fatimid period (Khamis 2008:165, and references therein). However, the copper-alloy weight in this catalogue (No. 13) was found in Stratum III, assigned to the Abbasid period, and thus apparently contradicts the above assumption; only future research can clarify this matter.

294

Masha Krakovsky

No. 11. Stratum VI, L694, B6833 Lead weight; complete; conical in shape with lug hole at the top and flat base. H 3.1 cm, D of the base 2.6 cm, Wt 80.74 g. Parallels: Dor (Nagar-Hilman 2004:71). No. 12. Stratum VI, L692, B6648 Lead weight; complete; rounded with flat base. H 1.2 cm, Th 1.45 cm, D of the base 1.3 cm, Wt 16.09 g. No. 13. Stratum III, L623, B5304 Copper-alloy weight of the dirham system (based on a unit of 2.97 g); complete; barrel shaped. This weight equals approximately 10 dirham. H 1.6 cm, Th 1.9 cm, D of the base 1.55 cm, Wt 29.18 g. Parallels: Islamic bronze weights (Holland 1986: Pl. 34:81, 29.47 g). No. 14. Stratum VI, L661, B5641 Lead weight; complete; square shaped. 1.0 × 1.0 cm, H 0.2 cm, Wt 1.89 g. Parallels: Ramat Ha-Nadiv (Kol-Yaakov 2000: Pl. XI:13, 6.55 g).

Varia (Figs. 13.2:15–21) As mentioned above, the vast majority of the metal varia are unidentifiable. The seven objects presented here were chosen mainly for their uniqueness and state of preservation. No. 15. Stratum II, L605, B4520 Copper-alloy object, pyramidal in shape with three holes. D at base 4.1–4.4 cm. No. 16. Stratum VI, L660, B5477 Copper-alloy, decorative part of a jug handle shaped in the form of the head and beak of a bird; soldered to the rim from outside. Parallels: Cave of the Letters (Yadin 1963: Fig. 19:8–11). No. 17. Stratum VII, L739, B8031 Copper-alloy kohl stick; broken in two parts. This artifact has a long, curved stem that is round in section and decorated with notches toward its functional end;

the functional end is broad and flat. Kohl sticks were used for mixing ointments or liquids for cosmetic purposes (Chernov 2007:509–510). L 7.9 cm and 4.5 cm (both parts); Th 0.25 cm. Parallels: ‘En Gedi (Chernov 2007: Figs. 8–10, Pl. 2:1–7). No. 18. Stratum II, L717, B7946 Copper-alloy chain; each link is made from a strip with two rings on its ends attached to each other; each strip is decorated with notches. Such a chain could have had multiple functions, such as part of a chandelier holder, or part of a balance scale (Gawlikowski and Musa 1986; Chernov 2007:523). No. 19. Stratum VI, L658, B5880 Copper-alloy incense shovel; fragment; back corner with one foot. Such utensils appear in Jewish iconography (Goodenough 1954:195–197; Yadin 1963:55–57), which suggests that they were used for burning incense during rituals (see discussion in Goodenough 1954:197–206). The specific type of incense shovel represented by the fragment from Area M1 probably originated in the Greek and Roman world (Yadin 1963:58). Parallels: Cave of the Letters (Yadin 1963: Fig. 13, Pl. 16). No. 20. Stratum VI, L643, B4865 Copper-alloy key; complete; the key has a ring handle for hanging, the bit has six tines of the same height and shape. This type of key was common in the Mediterranean region during the Hellenistic and Roman periods (Kol-Yaakov 2000:493–494). L 4.2 cm, bit: 0.9 × 2.1 × 1.0 cm. Parallels: Ramat Ha-Nadiv (Kol-Yaakov 2000: Fig. 9, Pl. IX:3). No. 21. Strata VI–V, L608, B4659 Copper-alloy rose-water bottle; complete, without the base; cast-made shoulder and neck, sheet-metal body and foot, decorated with vegetal design. Bottles of this type, called fatl in Arabic and golabdan in Persian, were used for sprinkling rose-water or perfume on different occasions, for example on the hands and face after a meal, or on a bride going to her bath (Ziffer 1996:44*). They date to the tenth–twelve centuries CE, and were also made of gold and silver.

295

Chapter 13: The Metal Objects

Although this bottle was found in fills dated to the Late Roman–Byzantine periods, we assume that it is intrusive due to later activities.

L 14.9 cm, W of the body 5.7 cm, D of the base 5.1 cm, D of the opening 3.1 cm. Parallels: Eastern Iran (Ziffer 1996: Fig. 63).

16

17

15

18

19

21

20 0

4

Fig. 13.2. Metal objects.

296

Masha Krakovsky

Notes I wish to thank Guy Stiebel for his generous help and advice on the material; however, the conclusions are solely those of the author. 1

Abbreviations: L = length; W = width; Th = thickness; D = diameter; Wt = weight.

2

R eferences Chernov E. 2007. Metal Objects and Small Finds from EnGedi. In Y. Hirschfeld ed. En-Gedi Excavations Final Report (1996–2002) II. Jerusalem. Pp. 507–541. Cleere H.F. 1958. Roman Domestic Ironwork, as Illustrated by the Brading, Isle of Wight, Villa. Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology, University of London 1:55–74. Gawlikowski M. and Musa A. 1986. The Church of Bishop Marianos. In F. Zayadine ed. Jerash Archaeological Project 1981–1983. Amman. Pp. 152–155. Goodenough E.R. 1954. Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period: The Problem of the Method, Symbols from Jewish Cult IV. New York. Gutfeld O. and Nenner-Soriano R. 2006. Metal Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 272–282. Holland L. 1986. Islamic Bronze Weights from Caesarea Maritima. American Numismatic Society: Museum Notes 31:171–201. Khamis E. 2008. The Metal Artifacts. In V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli. Paneas II: Small Finds and Other Studies (IAA Reports 38). Jerusalem. Pp. 165–188. Khamis E. 2010. The Metal Artifacts. In O. Gutfeld ed. Ramla: Excavations North of the White Mosque (Qedem 51). Jerusalem. Pp. 279–285. Kol-Yaakov S. 2000. Various Objects from the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Periods. In Y. Hirschfeld ed. Ramat

Hanadiv Excavations: Final Report of the 1984–1998 Seasons. Jerusalem. Pp. 473–503. Manning W.H. 1989. Catalogue of Romano-British Iron Tools, Fittings and Weapons in the British Museum. London. Mazar B. 1973. Beth She‘arim, Report on the Excavations during 1936–1940 I: Catacombs 1–4. Jerusalem. McClellan J.A. 1975. The Iron Objects from Gordion: A Typological and Functional Analysis. Ph.D. diss. University of Pennsylvania. Ann Arbor. Nagar-Hilman O. 2004. Typology, Chronology and Metrology of Metal Weights from Tell Dor, Dated to the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Periods. M.A. thesis. University of Haifa. Haifa (Hebrew). Qedar S. 2001. Weights of Eretz Israel in the RomanByzantine Period. In I. Ronen and A.M. Goldstein eds. Measuring and Weighing in Ancient Times. Haifa. Pp. 23*–25*. Yadin Y. 1963. The Metal Utensils. In Y. Yadin ed. The Finds from the Bar Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters. Jerusalem. Pp. 42–100. Ziffer I. 1996. Islamic Metalwork. Tel Aviv (Hebrew; English translation, pp. 7*–59*). Zitronblat A. and Geva H. 2003. Metal Artifacts. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 353–363.

Chapter 14

The Military Equipment Guy D. Stiebel

Introduction The small assemblage of 35 items of military equipment comprises metal artifacts of copper-alloy, iron and lead (Fig. 14.1), as well as groups of stone balls (Figs. 14.2, 14.3). Typologically, the finds range in date from the Persian to the Roman periods. The importance of this assemblage derives first and foremost from its geographic location, in the northwestern sector of the City of David. Until now, most evidence of martial material culture from Jerusalem in the Classical periods has originated from the Upper City of Jerusalem (Zitronblat and Geva 2003: Cat. Nos. M 10, M 51; Stiebel 2007: III.12–14; Nenner-Soriano 2010; but see also Stiebel 2007: I.7; III.10–11). It is striking that to date (as of 2012), mainly projectiles, including archery equipment as well as light and torsion artillery projectiles (see below), have been uncovered in the excavations in the Giv‘ati Parking Lot (pers. obs.). Tables 14.1–14.3 present catalogues of the stone balls from the 2007 excavations.

The Military Equipment Archery Equipment (Fig. 14.1:1–4) Three arrowheads were uncovered in the excavations (Fig. 14.1:1–3), all made of copper-alloy. Copper-alloy arrowheads were commonly used during the Persian and Hellenistic periods. In addition, a fragmentary pointed iron rod can be identified as a bodkin arrowhead (Fig. 14.1:4). No. 1. Stratum VIII, L815, B9575 (Fig. 14.1:1) Socketed, trilobate copper-alloy arrowhead with three vanes. It was found on a Stratum VIII floor and dated to the Hellenistic period. This type of arrowhead is classified as Irano-Scythian (Stern 2001:532, Fig. III.45, Type Irano-Scythian 1b; for parallels see Stern 1973:155 and nn. 34, 35), and Hellenistic specimens

were documented, for example, at the Citadel in Jerusalem (Johns 1950:130). The latest example, presumably of Hellenistic/Herodian date, was reported from Masada, with a terminus ante quem of 73/74 CE (Stiebel and Magness 2007:24, Pl. 23:1, IN 1169– 1552). Total L 31 mm, W of vanes 9 mm, D of socket 4 mm.1 No. 2. Stratum VIII, L824, B9371 (Fig. 14.1:2) Socketed, trilobate copper-alloy arrowhead with three vanes. It came from a Stratum VIII fill and was dated to the Hellenistic period. Dimensions: Total L 30+ mm, W 10 mm. No. 3. Stratum VII, L702, B7486 (Fig. 14.1:3) Flat, tanged, copper-alloy arrowhead. It exhibits a flat head with a bulb crowning the head of the tang. It was recovered inside a Stratum VII cistern of the Early Roman period. This was the common type of arrowhead during the Hellenistic period in Palestine (Tal 2006:320–321). It may be a residual find, or perhaps it was reused in the later period––a wellattested phenomenon (Stiebel 2007:251; Stiebel and Magness 2007:24). Total L 87.5 mm, L of blade 48 mm, W of blade 16 mm, thickness of bulb 9 mm, thickness of tang 4 mm. No. 4. Stratum VI, L692, B6603 (Fig. 14.1:4) Badly damaged iron point. Square cross-section of the head suggests it is a fragment of a bodkin arrowhead, a type used by the Romans and most apt for penetration of shields or armor. It was found in a Stratum VI fill of the Byzantine period. Parallels from Roman Palestine include examples from Samaria (Stiebel 2007: I.6/I.1, 2), Meroth (Stiebel 2007: III.1/I.1–7), Jotapata (Stiebel 2007: III.2/I), Gamla (Stiebel 2007: III.3/I), Magdala (Stiebel 2007: III.4/I.1), the Site of the Caves (Stiebel 2007: III.5/I.1–35), the Sandal Cave (Stiebel 2007: V.14/I.1) and the Spear Cave (Stiebel 2007: V.17/I.1). It is also a rather common

298

Guy D. Stiebel

1

3

2

5

4

6

7 0

1

Fig. 14.1. Metal items of military equipment.

Chapter 14: The Military Equipment

find in Crusader arsenals (Ben-Dov 1975:107; Boas 1999:174, Fig. 6.3). Total L 41 mm, L of blade 32 mm, Th of blade 8 × 8 mm.

Edged or Shafted Weapon? No. 5. Stratum XIA, L794, B8930 (Fig. 14.1:5) Fragment of an iron point. The lenticular cross-section suggests it may be part of the head of a shafted or edged weapon, though it is too small for certain identification. The item derives from a Stratum XIA floor (Iron Age III). L 44 mm, Th 7 mm.

Light Artillery (Figs. 14.1:6, 7; 14.2) The largest group of military equipment from Area M1 consists of small and medium-sized stone balls that may be interpreted as light-artillery ammunition (Stiebel 2007:187–190). The most common use of such projectiles was as sling pellets, a function clearly associated with the pair of leaden pellets (Fig. 14.1:6, 7), and probably also the stone balls (Fig. 14.2). Three of the stone balls have a single flat face, and may have been used as hand-thrown stones (see below). No. 6. Strata VI–III, L601, B6439 (Fig. 14.1:6) Near complete, biconical leaden pellet. It exhibits a rhomboid cross-section. One end still bears the detachment scar as a remnant of its production method. Considered to be most common in the Hellenistic period, leaden sling pellets continued in use well into the Roman period, and examples as late as the second century CE are attested (Griffiths 1989:271). In Palestine, the latest examples derive from the late first century BCE at Gamla (Stiebel 2007: III.3/K.1), the Herodian period at Jerusalem (Stiebel 2007: III.12/K.1, 2; III.14/K.1, 2) and Jericho (Stiebel 2007: I.4/K.1), and the late first century CE at Jotapata (Stiebel 2007: III.2/K).2 This pellet was discovered in a drainage channel (L601), and is clearly a residual find. No. 7. Stratum VIII, L822, B9231 (Fig. 14.1:7) Oval leaden pellet. It is less regular in shape than the biconical example (No. 6). Such irregularly shaped slingshots are not uncommon in the Hellenistic to Roman periods, and in fact, there was no necessity for aerodynamic outlines, as casting of leaden pellets took

299

place even in the heat of battle (Bosman 1995; Stiebel 2007:377). It was found in a Stratum VIII fill of the Hellenistic period. Nos. 8–19. Slingstones (Table 14.1; Figs. 14.2, 14.4) Twelve stone balls, most of flint, some of local limestone, form a homogenous group and appear to have functioned as slingstones. The category of small rounded stone balls used as sling pellets commonly slips between the cracks in publications, as they are often identified as industrial implements or torsion artillery shots. Nonetheless, as attested in several ancient conflict lands and literary sources, small round stone balls that weigh less than 655 g (2 Roman pounds or librae) were indeed used as slingstones (Stiebel 2003:218, Fig. 2). Roughly three groups of slingstones were in use in the Roman world: under 200 g, 200–300 g and 300–655 g (Fig. 14.4). Of particular interest are the items that belong to the latter group, which were used as funda librilia, i.e., heavy slingstones that were hurled by a three-thonged pouch sling (Stiebel 2003:218; 2007:187–190). Nos. 20–22. Hand-Thrown(?) Stones (Table 14.2; Fig. 14.2) Three flint balls have a single flat face, unlike weights or grinding stones that frequently exhibit multiple flat surfaces. They were ideal for heaping on top of battlements, as modern experiments have demonstrated (Griffiths 1992). In light of parallels from both Palestine and the Roman West (Baatz 1983; Stiebel 2007:189, n. 22), it appears that the use of hand-thrown stones was much more prevalent than has been previously appreciated in modern scholarship.

Torsion Artillery Nos. 23–35. Ballista Balls (Table 14.3; Figs. 14.3, 14.5) Thirteen ballista balls, all made of local limestone, were recovered from Area M1. This accords well with the well-established observation that armies produced most of their torsion-artillery ammunition at the site of the siege (Stiebel 2003:220). Half the projectiles derive from the Hellenistic and Early Roman strata (VIII–VII), while the others were reused in later periods as building material. The account of the siege of Jerusalem by Josephus is strewn with references to the effectiveness and formidable impact of the Roman artillery (Shatzman 1989). The broken ballista balls

300

Guy D. Stiebel

0

4

Fig. 14.2. Slingstones and hand-thrown stones.

0

4

Fig. 14.3. Ballista balls.

uncovered in Area M1 bear witness to the destructive force of this ammunition upon impact. The plotting of the weight/diameter relation of the ballista balls (Fig. 14.5) indicates that the majority clusters around the low end of the range, suggesting that Roman artillerymen targeted mainly humans. The sample is too small to indicate which caliber method this assemblage represents––the Hellenistic method described by Philo, or the Roman method provided by Vitruvius (cf.

ballista balls at Masada in Holley 1994:353–359, and at Herodium in Stiebel 2003:217, 238–240).

Discussion Taking into consideration the small size of the assemblage, one may still cautiously offer some insights regarding the nature of the military events that took place at this location, mainly during the

301

Chapter 14: The Military Equipment

80

Diameter (mm)

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

0

100

200

300 Weight (g)

500

400

600

Fig. 14.4. Weight/diameter relation of slingstones.

200 180 160

Diameter (mm)

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

0

500

1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500

6000 6500

7000 7500 8000

Weight (g)

Fig. 14.5. Weight/diameter relation of ballista balls.

Early Roman period. The martial material culture from Area M1 is characterized by the predominance of projectiles. This suggests it is unlikely that door-todoor combat raged in this sector, of which evidence was discerned, for example, in the destruction layer of the Upper City during the First Revolt. Wealthy dwellings, such as the ‘Burnt House’ of the priestly family Katros, yielded stratified militaria, including armor fittings as well as edged and shafted weapons (Stiebel 2007: III.12), which are little attested if not

absent from Area M1. The presence of projectiles thus seemingly reflects incoming Roman fire, presumably fired from commanding areas, most likely the Temple Mount in the north. According to Josephus, following the conquest of the Temple compound, the Romans set fire to the northern part of the City of David (War 6.354–355), routed the rebels, and scorched the City of David all the way down to the Siloam Pool (War 6.363). It seems very likely that during that combat, which took place on the 17th of Ab, 70 CE, artillery

302

Guy D. Stiebel

Table 14.1. Slingstones No.

Stratum (Period)

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Provenance

Max. Diam. (mm)

Min. Diam. (mm)

Average Diam. (mm)

Weight (g)

Estimated original Weight (g)

Material

8

XIC (Iron III)

830

9439

Fill

67

-

-

283.01

-

Flint

9

VIII (Hell.)

808

9164

Floor

69

64

66.50

332.14+

~370

Flint

10

VIII (Hell.)

824

9390

Floor

76

64

70

502.28

-

Flint

11

VII (ER)

725

8204

Fill

70

-

-

360.11

-

Flint

12

VII (ER)

734

7907

Fill

68

65

66.50

283.52

-

Flint

13

VII (ER)

721

7616

Fill

65

58

61.50

297.95

-

Flint

14

VII (ER)

708

7275

Fill

70

-

-

242.41

-

Limestone

15

VII (ER)

W948

8620

Wall

67

60

63.50

290.08

-

Flint

16

VI (Byz.)

679

6105

Fill

48

45

46.50

103.15

-

Limestone

17

VI–V (Byz.)

608

4564

Fill

66

63

64.50

408.63

-

Flint

18

V (Byz.)

W931

8285

Wall

62

57

59.50

222.95

-

Limestone

19

-

-

-

-

59

57

58

143.90+

~290

Flint

No.

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Max. Diam. (mm)

Min. Diam. (mm)

Average Diam. (mm)

Weight (g)

20

Balk

8341

76

62

69

540.45

21

Balk

8831

72

70

71

534.07

22

W969

8813

59

53

56

203.21+

Table 14.2. Flint Hand-Thrown(?) Stones

Table 14.3. Limestone Ballista Balls No.

Stratum (Date)

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Provenance

Max. Diam. (mm)

Min. Diam. (mm)

Average Diam. (mm)

Weight (g)

Estimated original Weight (g)

23

VII (ER)

702

8671

Cistern

118

116

24

VI (Byz.)

660

5914

Fill

80

76

117

931.13+

~1862.26

78

690.17

-

25

VIII (Hell.)

815

9574

Floor

136

26

VIII (Hell.)

824

9359

Floor (fill?)

101

-

746.40+

99

100

447.56+

~1790.24

27

VI (Byz.)

656

5534

Fill

107

103

105

943.75+

~1887.50

28

VII (ER)

772

7514

29

VI (Byz.)

695

6881

Fill

97

93

95

Fill

91

81

86

556.30+

30

VIII (Hell.)

791

8958

Fill

120

116

118

1272.59+

31

VII (ER)

32

VI–V (Byz.)

W954

8371

Wall

90

107

1021

-

W864

6651/1

Wall

166

-

-

2000+

-

33 34

VI–V (Byz.)

W864

6651/2

Wall

138

126

132

3000+

~4000

V (Byz.)

W931

7875

Wall

127

125

126

1890.82+

35

~3151

V (Byz.)

W931

7868

Wall

105

90

1079.39

-

-

98.50

97.50

1284.49

7500

~741 2545.18

Chapter 14: The Military Equipment

machines were operated against the rebels. The most apt locations for these machines would have been the Temple compound and the Ophel, which dominated the City of David (and Area M1). The discovery of ballista balls in Area M1 provides an insight into urban warfare of the period (Stiebel 2007:170–172). It is quite rare to find artillery shots at a distance from

303

the fortification lines, within the boundaries of the city. Several intra muralis examples were attested at Masada and Gamla (Stiebel 2005). At Gamla, these ballista balls seemingly represent supporting fire that assisted the Roman forces operating within the city, and this may very well be the case here as well.

Notes Abbreviations: L = length; W = Width; Th = thickness; D = diameter.

1

For discussions of leaden sling pellets in Hellenistic and Roman Palestine, see Schlesinger 1982, 1984; Gera 1985a, 1985b; Sivan and Solar 1994:173–174; Stiebel 1997. 2

R eferences Baatz D. 1983. Town and Defensive Weapons. In J. Maloney and B. Hobley eds. Roman Urban Defences in the West. A Review of Current Research on Urban Defences in the Roman Empire with Special References to the Northern Provinces (Council for British Archaeology Research Report 51). London. Pp. 136–140. Ben-Dov M. 1975. Crusader Fortresses in Eretz-Israel. Qadmoniot 32:102–113 (Hebrew). Boas A.J. 1999. Crusader Archaeology: The Material Culture of the Latin East. London. Bosman A.V.A.J. 1995. Pouring Lead in the Pouring Rain, Making Lead Slingshot under Battle Conditions. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 6:99–103. Gera D. 1985a. Tryphon and the Lead Projectile from Dor. Qadmoniot 69–70:54–55 (Hebrew). Gera D. 1985b. Tryphon’s Sling Bullet from Dor. IEJ 35:153–163. Griffiths W.B. 1989. The Sling and Its Place in the Roman Imperial Army. In C. van Driel-Murray ed. Roman Military Equipment: the Sources of Evidence, Proceedings of the Fifth Roman Military Equipment Conference (BAR Int. S. 476). Oxford. Pp. 255–279. Griffiths W.B. 1992. The Hand-Thrown Stone. The Arbeia Journal 1:1–11. Holley A.E. 1994. The Ballista Balls from Masada. In J. Aviram, G. Foerster and E. Netzer eds. Masada IV: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965 Final Reports. Jerusalem. Pp. 349–365. Johns C.N. 1950. The Citadel, Jerusalem, A Summary of Work since 1934. QDAP 14:121–190. Josephus War. Josephus. The Jewish War. H.St.J. Thackeray transl. (Loeb Classical Library). Cambridge, Mass– London 1927.

Nenner-Soriano R. 2010. Metal Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 IV: The Burnt House of Area B and Other Studies. Jerusalem. Pp. 248– 260. Schlesinger D. 1982. A Lead Slingshot from Dor. Qadmoniot 60:116 (Hebrew). Schlesinger D. 1984. More on Slingshots. Qadmoniot 66– 67:89 (Hebrew). Shatzman I. 1989. Artillery in Judaea from Hasmonaean to Roman Times. In D.H. French and C.S. Lightfoot eds. The Eastern Frontier of the Roman Empire (BAR Int. S. 553). Oxford. Pp. 461–484. Sivan R. and Solar G. 1994. Excavations in the Jerusalem Citadel 1980–1988. In H. Geva ed. Ancient Jerusalem Revealed: Archaeology in the Holy City, 1968–1974. Jerusalem. Pp. 168–176. Stern E. 1973. The Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period, 538–332 BCE. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Stern E. 2001. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible II: The Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian Periods, 732–332 BCE. New York–London–Toronto–Sydney–Auckland. Stiebel G.D. 1997. “...You Were the Word of War”—A Sling Shot Testimony from Israel. Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies 8:301–307. Stiebel G.D. 2003. The Militaria from Herodium. In G.C. Bottini, L. Di Segni and L.D. Chrupcala eds. One Land–– Many Cultures: Archaeological Studies in Honour of Stanislao Loffreda O.F.M. (SBF Collectio Maior 41). Jerusalem. Pp. 214–244. Stiebel G.D. 2005. ‘Dust to Dust, Ashes to Ashes’–– Military Equipment from Destruction Layers in Palestine. Archäologie der Schlachtfelder––Militaria aus

304

Guy D. Stiebel

Zerstörungshorizonten, Tagungsakten der 14. ROMEC Konferenz Wien 2003, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2005. vienna. Pp. 99–108. Stiebel G.D. 2007. Armis et Litteris––The Military Equipment of Early Roman Palestine in Light of the Archaeological and Historical Sources. 3 vols. Ph.D. diss. University of London. London. Stiebel G.D. and Magness J. 2007. The Military Equipment from Masada. In J. Aviram, G. Foerster, E. Netzer and G.D.

Stiebel eds. Masada VIII: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965, Final Reports. Jerusalem. Pp. 1–97. Tal O. 2006. The Archaeology of Hellenistic Palestine: Between Tradition and Renewal. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Zitronblat A. and Geva H. 2003. Metal Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2, Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 353–363.

Chapter 15

The Stamped Impressions of the Legio X Fretensis Stella Behar

Introduction

Catalogue

Following the repression of the First Jewish Revolt in 70 CE, the Roman Tenth Legion was stationed in Jerusalem to ensure order in the province (Arubas and Goldfus 1995:107). The exact location of the Tenth Legion’s camp in Jerusalem is unknown, as no archaeological evidence of any camp has been found to date. According to Josephus (War VII:1–2(, this camp was situated on the southwestern hill of Jerusalem (Geva 2003:412–413). Other locations have also been suggested (e.g., Bar 1998; Mazar 1999; Stiebel 1999). According to the Roman military system, in times of peace Roman soldiers did not remain unoccupied. Manpower was directed to building roads or manufacturing building materials such as bricks, roof tiles, water pipes, etc. The Tenth Legion stationed in Jerusalem during the Late Roman period was not an exception. The main archaeological evidence of the legion’s manufacturing activity in Jerusalem is the excavation of the kilnworks at the International Convention Center (Arubas and Goldfus 1995:107). Roman stamped tiles are among the most important evidence for the presence of the Roman Legion in Jerusalem during the first through the third centuries CE (Geva 2003:413–414), and they have been found in many archaeological sites in the Jerusalem area (for a detailed list, see Geva 2003:412–413). The excavations in Area M1 have yielded several dozen Roman roof tiles, only two of which bear an impression. These two tiles are flat, tegula-type roof tiles and bear stamps of the Legio X Fretensis, well-known in Jerusalem (see Geva 2003:406– 407). Although meager in quantity, these finds are another contribution to the growing corpus of stamp impressions of the Tenth Legion found in Jerusalem.

No. 1 (Fig. 15.1:1) Fragment of a tegula. Although it is impossible to reconstruct the tile’s measurements, it is logical to assume that it conforms with Roman tegula tiles known from other places, measuring about 54 × 44 cm (Geva 2003:406–407). It was stamped with a round stamp used only for tegulae (Barag 1967:245–247, Type I). This type of impression is considered rare among the stamped roof tiles of the Legio X Fretensis (Barag 1967:245–247; Geva 2003:409(. It depicts the last three letters of the legion’s name, separated by dots: [LE]G·X·F. Above it are the remains of a poorly preserved, raised relief that is almost completely worn, therefore difficult to identify. Based on other roof tiles with round stamps, we may conclude that this upper motif should be identified as a galley (Geva 2003:409). In the lower part of the impression appears a boar, facing right. This motif of a galley and a boar is not restricted to stamped roof tiles, but also appears on the coins of Aelia Capitolina (Meshorer 1989:22, Nos. 30–32). Roof Tile No. 1 presents an interesting phenomenon of two parallel rows of at least three circles, each 9 mm in diameter, stamped above the impression. This ‘motif’ of parallel rows of circular depressions is relatively rare among the stamped roof tiles of Legio X Fretensis and it has been suggested that the depressions are in fact caliga-nail imprints. This interpretation is based on the diameter of each depression, 8–9 mm, the exact measurement of the nail head in the caliga sole (Geva 2003:413). It should be noted that to our knowledge, this combination of a galley, the legion’s name, a boar and the circular depressions is not depicted on any other roof tile from Jerusalem.

306

Stella Behar

1

2 0

2

Fig. 15.1. Roman stamped tegulae. No.

Stratum

Locus

Basket

Elevation (m)

Type

Reading

Parallels

1

VI

643

5423

695.32–695.28

Tegula

[LE]G·X·F

Giv‘at Ram (Barag 1967: Figs. 2:1, 2; 4:1–3); Jewish Quarter (Avigad 1983:255; Geva 2003: Pls. 17.1:T2; 17.3:T45); for parallels to the caliga imprints on a roof tile, see International Convention Center (Goldfus and Arubas 2001:117); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003:413, Photograph 17.1)

2

IV

672

6325

697.29–697.27

Tegula

LXFR[E]

Giv‘at Ram (Barag 1967: Figs. 3:5, 5:6); Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 66:3); Jewish Quarter (Geva 2003: Pl. 17.2:T18)

Roof Tile No. 1 was found in Stratum VI, in an early Byzantine construction fill rich in Early Roman finds. According to Barag (1967:263–264), this type of stamped roof tile (Type I) belongs to the first period of the Tenth Legion’s stationing in Jerusalem, i.e., between the end of the Jewish Revolt and the Bar Kokhba Revolt. He claims that at first, the Tenth Legion produced tiles stamped with a round stamp, and only later began to

make rectangular stamp impressions. The occurrence of such roof tiles in stratigraphic contexts, especially in the excavation at the International Convention Center in Jerusalem (Arubas and Goldfus 1995:100–104), supports the early date assigned by Barag to this type of roof tile. Thus, it seems that the round stamp type was produced sometime around the establishment of the Tenth Legion’s camp, i.e., at the end of the first century or the beginning

Chapter 15: the Stamped Impressions of the Legio X Fretensis

of the second century CE (Geva 2003:412). On the other hand, it is also possible that this special type of stamp had a functional purpose, and was used in the construction of selected buildings (Geva 2003:412). Of course, both interpretations may be relevant. No. 2 (Fig. 15.1:2) Fragment of a flat tegula roof tile. This roof tile is stamped with a rectangular stamp (Barag 1967:258– 261, Type IIf5) bearing an abbreviated form of the legion’s name: LXFR[E]. The last letter is not preserved. This stamp impression is one of the most common subvariants of the LXFRE group in Jerusalem (Geva 2003:410). It was used to stamp both tegulae and

307

imbrices (roof tiles used to cover the joints between the tegulae). Although it originated in a later context (Stratum IV), this tile should be dated typologically to the end of the second century CE (Barag 1967:266). However, it is problematic to assign relative or absolute dates to the different variants of the rectangular stamp impressions. Rectangular stamped roof tiles from the excavations in the Jewish Quarter and the Armenian Garden have revealed great similarity in fabric, quality and workmanship (Geva 2003:411), and it seems that the roof tiles, like most other building materials used by the legion, were manufactured and stamped in the short period of time when the legion was stationed in Jerusalem, during the second century CE (Geva 2003:411–412; Magness 2005:104–105).

R eferences Arubas B. and Goldfus H. 1995. The Kilnworks of the Tenth Legion Fretensis. In J.H. Humphrey ed. The Roman and Byzantine Near East: Some Recent Archaeological Research (JRA Supplementary Series 14). Ann Arbor. Pp. 95–107. Avigad N. 1983. Discovering Jerusalem. Nashville. Bar D. 1998. Aelia Capitolina and the Location of the Camp of the Tenth Legion. PEQ 130:8–19. Barag D. 1967. Brick Stamp-Impressions of the Legio X Fretensis. Bonner Jahrbucher Band 167:244–267. Geva H. 2003. Stamp Impressions of the Legio X Fretensis. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 405–422. Goldfus H. and Arubas B. 2001. The Kilnworks of the Tenth Legion at the Jerusalem Convention Center. Qadmoniot 122:111–118 (Hebrew). Josephus War. Josephus. The Jewish War. H. St.J. Thackeray transl. (Loeb Classical Library). London–New York 1927– 1928.

Magness J. 2005. The Roman Legionary Pottery. In B. Arubas and H. Goldfuss eds. Excavations on the Site of the Jerusalem International Convention Center (Binyanei Ha’Uma): A Settlement of the Late First to Second Temple Period, the Tenth Legion’s Kilnworks, and a Byzantine Monastic Complex. The Pottery and Other Small Finds (JRA Supplementary Series 60). Portsmouth, R.I. Pp. 69–191. Mazar E. 1999. The Camp of the Tenth Legion at the Foot of the South-West Corner of the Temple Mount Enclosure Wall in Jerusalem. In A. Faust and E. Baruch eds. New Studies on Jerusalem. Proceedings of the Fifth Conference. Ramat Gan. Pp. 52–67 (Hebrew). Meshorer Y. 1989. Coinage of Aelia Capitolina. Jerusalem. Stiebel G. 1999. The Whereabouts of the Xth Legion and the Boundaries of Aelia Capitolina. In A. Faust and E. Baruch eds. New Studies on Jerusalem. Proceedings of the Fifth Conference. Ramat Gan. Pp. 68–103 (Hebrew). Tushingham A.D. 1985. Excavations in Jerusalem 1961– 1967 I. Toronto.

Chapter 16

The Stone Objects Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Introduction A large number of stone artifacts, mainly of basalt or limestone, and including grinding bowls, a mortar, pestles, lower and upper millstones, basins, miscellaneous objects and an ossuary, were recovered from all the strata of Area M1. Most of these artifacts were roughly made. Unlike the chalk vessels that are characteristic of a specific period (see Chapter 9), many of the artifacts presented here are types that were in use throughout the ages, sometimes with little if any change in shape. Therefore, they are organized according to shape and function, and whenever relevant, chronological and stratigraphic observations are included. Comparanda appear in the figure tables.

The Artifacts Grinding Bowls (Fig. 16.1) The grinding bowls constitute a number of types: flatbased, three-footed, and single examples of a fourfooted grinding bowl and one with a thick base. All are

made of basalt except for one three-footed bowl and the thick-based bowl. Flat-Based Grinding Bowls (Fig. 16.1:1) Three fragments of flat-based grinding bowls have wide and flat bases. In a few examples, a small, barely visible ring was shaped on the bottom of the bowl to add stability. They were found in Early Roman-period contexts, and one, in a Late Roman–early Byzantine wall. Three-Footed Grinding Bowls (Fig. 16.1:2–4) These are the most common grinding bowls in Area M1, represented by 14 fragments. They are relatively shallow, with an upright rim (e.g., Fig. 16.1:2; although the base of the example in Fig. 16.1:2 is very fragmentary and no legs have survived, it probably belongs to this type) or a simple rounded rim that slopes inward (e.g., Fig. 16.1:3, 4). All are made of basalt except for one limestone example (Fig. 16.1:3). Figure 16.1:2 has two protrusions on the outer rim. Six of the three-footed grinding bowls were found in Stratum VII of the Early Roman period, including an almost-complete example

Fig. 16.1 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description*

1

Grinding bowl with flat base

VII

W954

8370

Basalt, D 39 cm

2

Grinding bowl with three feet

VI

674

6758

Basalt, D 18 cm

3

Grinding bowl with three feet

III

W867

4768

Limestone, D 20 cm

Jewish Quarter (Geva 2006: Pl. 9.1:5, 6); ‘En Gedi (Sidi 2007: Fig. 6, Pl. 7:1)

4

Grinding bowl with three feet

VII

721

7675

Basalt, D 41 cm

City of David (Hovers 1996: Fig. 27:5); H. ‘Eleq (Kol-Yaakov 2000: Pl. III:4); Jewish quarter (Geva 2006: Pl. 9.1:4, 2010: Pl. 5.1)

5

Grinding bowl with four feet

VII

736

7898

Basalt, D 29 cm

Jewish quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.1)

6

Grinding bowl with thick base

VI

W909

6839

Limestone, D 32 cm

D = Diameter

Parallels

310

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

2

1

3

4

5

6

0

10

Fig. 16.1. Grinding bowls.

311

Chapter 16: THE Stone Objects

Mortar (Fig. 16.2:1)

(Fig. 16.3:4) from the destruction layer of Building 760. The rest were recovered in Late Roman–early Byzantine fills of Stratum VI, except the limestone example, which originated in an Abbasid context.

One rounded basalt mortar with very smooth walls was discovered in a Late Roman–early Byzantine fill. In contrast to the grinding bowls, this vessel is deep and probably served for pounding.

Four-Footed Grinding Bowl (Fig. 16.1:5) A single fragment of a basalt grinding bowl with four feet and an upright rim was found in an Early Roman context.

Pestles (Fig. 16.2:2–8) Ten pestles were found in loci dating from the Hellenistic to the Late Roman–early Byzantine periods. Pestles appear in various shapes, and are grouped here according to raw material. Most of them were made of basalt (Fig. 16.2:4–6, 8), two of limestone (Fig. 16.2:3), one of flint (Fig. 16.2:2) and one of granite (Fig. 16.2:7). The material may have been related to the function, or to its availability. Although basalt pestles were more popular, as this hard material is more appropriate for its purpose, the presence of the limestone implements

Grinding Bowl with Thick Base (Fig. 16.1:6) A single hard limestone bowl has a very thick base with three low protrusions. The shallow interior is smoothed and the exterior face is rough. This bowl was found in a Late Roman–early Byzantine wall.

1

2

4

3

5

6

7

8 0

10

Fig. 16.2. Mortar and pestles. No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description

1

Mortar

VI

663

5735

Basalt

2

Pestle

VII

723

7556

Flint

3

Pestle

VIII–VII

754

8597

Limestone

4

Pestle

VI

W909

6740

Basalt

5

Pestle

VII–VI

699

7075

Basalt

6

Pestle

VII

720

7772

Basalt

7

Pestle

VII

759

8462

Granite

8

Pestle

VI

643

5028

Basalt

312

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

is probably due to its availability in Jerusalem. The basalt pestles include one rectangular (Fig. 16.2:4), two trapezoidal (Fig. 16.2:5, 6), one cylindrical (Fig. 16.2:8) and two elliptical examples. The flint pestle has a globular shape, and may have been a ballista in secondary use (Fig. 16.2:2). The limestone pestles have an irregular shape (Fig. 16.2:3) and the granite pestle is a squat cylinder (Fig. 16.2:7).

Lower and Upper Millstones (Fig. 16.3) The millstones can be divided into a number of types based on their technology, and in some cases their original source of influence. Simple Quern Grinding Stone (Fig. 16.3:1–3) The set comprises a simple quern and an upper handstone made of limestone or basalt. the six simple basalt lower grinding stones have a flat, active surface. Two are quadrangular in shape, two are rounded objects and two are of irregular shape (Fig. 16.3:1). they originated in different contexts, ranging from the Iron Age to the Late Roman–early Byzantine periods: Of four upper handstones, one of limestone (Fig. 16.3:2) and one of flint originated in Early Roman to early Byzantine contexts; and two of basalt (Fig. 16.2:3), in late Hellenistic–Early Roman contexts. Olynthus Mills (Fig. 16.3:4–6) These basalt implements, also called ‘hopperrubbers’ or ‘frame querns’ (Frankel 2003:5–6), are more sophisticated than the previous type. The lower millstone has grooves on its surface, and the upper

stone is rectangular in shape with a rectangular hole in its center and sloping inner walls. These mills were worked by a rod that was attached to the upper stone (for a detailed description, see Frankel 2003:11–13). This type of millstone originated in the eastern Mediterranean, apparently in mainland Greece or Anatolia (Frankel 2003:18), was introduced into Israel in the Persian period, and continued in use until the Byzantine period (Frankel 2003:7). Three fragments of lower stones of Olynthus mills, with straight grooves on their flat surface, were found in Late Roman–early Byzantine to Abbasid fills and in a wall (Fig. 16.3:4). Three fragments of upper stones of Olynthus mills were also recovered, one from an Early Roman context (Fig. 16.3:5) and two other fragments from Late Roman–Byzantine walls (Fig. 16.3:6). Rotary Mill (Fig. 16.3:7) Rotary mills comprise a pair of round flat stones, which were turned by a vertical handle that was socketed into the upper stone (White 1984:64–65). They developed in western and central Europe during the fifth–fourth centuries BCE (Frankel 2003:19), and, according to Runnels (1990:153), were brought to the east by the Roman army, and thus to Israel as well (Frankel 2008:19*–20*). In strata of the first century CE in Israel, rotary mills are found only in Roman military contexts, and only in later periods were they assimilated into civilian use. By the Byzantine period, the rotary mill finally replaced the Olynthus mill (Frankel 2003:18). The example from Area M1, a fragment of a flat, rounded, upper rotary millstone, originated in a Late Roman–early Byzantine context.

Fig. 16.3 ► No.

Type

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description*

1

Simple quern

XIA

801

9264

Basalt

2

Upper stone of simple quern mill

VII–VI

767

8592

Limestone

3

Upper stone of simple quern mill

VII

745

8623

Basalt

4

Lower stone of olynthus mill

VI–V

W864

7377

Basalt

Jewish quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.20:2)

5

Upper stone of olynthus mill

VII

720

7654

Basalt

Jewish quarter (Geva 2010: Pl. 5.20:2)

6

Upper stone of olynthus mill

V

W884

5748

7

Upper stone of rotary mill

VI

635

4733

D = Diameter

Basalt, D 18 cm

Parallels

Chapter 16: THE Stone Objects

1

2

4 3

6

5

7

0

10

Fig. 16.3. Lower and upper millstones.

313

314

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Donkey Mills (Mola asinariae) (Fig. 16.4)

Basins (Figs. 16.5; 16.6:1, 2)

A donkey mill is a large basalt grinding device composed of a conical, stationary lower stone (meta) and an upper stone with an hourglass profile (catillus), which functioned by the rotary motion of animals (White 1984:65). This implement was first introduced into Israel in the Hellenistic period and became common during the Roman period (Frankel 2008:19*). In Area M1, seven fragments of upper donkey-mill stones were retrieved: one from in an Early Roman context (Fig. 16.4:1), five from Early Roman–early Byzantine fills, and one from a balk (Fig. 16.4:2).

A total of 26 basin fragments were identified in Area M1, some in Early Roman contexts, some in Late Roman–early Byzantine fills, and many in secondary use incorporated into Late Roman–early Byzantine walls. These large, deep vessels were produced of both chalk and hard limestone in various sizes and shapes, most of which have rough, thick walls and bases. Two main types of basins were distinguished by their general form––rounded or quadrangular. Rounded Basins (Fig. 16.5) Nineteen fragments of rounded basins were found. Noteworthy are three fragments of deep basins with thick, rough walls (Fig. 16.5:1), three fragments of basins with smooth walls (Fig. 16.5:2) and two basins with smooth walls and applied knobs (Fig. 16.5:3).

1

2 0

10

Fig. 16.4. Donkey mills. No.

Type

Stratum

Locus

Basket

Parallels

1

Upper stone of donkey mill

VII

702

7548

Horbat ‘Eleq (Kol-Yaakov 2000: Fig. 1); ‘En Gedi (Sidi 2007: Pl. 4:1, 2)

2

Upper stone of donkey mill

-

Balk

6885

Horbat ‘Eleq (Kol-Yaakov 2000: Fig. 1); ‘En Gedi (Sidi 2007: Pl. 4:1, 2)

315

Chapter 16: THE Stone Objects

2

1

3

0

10

Fig. 16.5. Rounded basins. No.

Stratum

Wall

Basket

1

VI

W883

6841

2

VI

W870

6905

D 52 cm

3

V

W931

7975

D 56 cm

D = Diameter

Description*

316

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Stone Varia (Fig. 16.7)

Quadrangular Basins (Fig. 16.6:1, 2) Seven fragments of quadrangular basins are characterized by their large size and thick, rough walls (Fig. 16.6:1). The example in Fig.16.6:2 is a relatively small, quadrangular vessel with a ridge on the rim, made of soft limestone.

Among the over 60 miscellaneous stone objects recovered in various strata in Area M1, 16 are presented in Fig. 16.7, including 4 small limestone bowls (Fig. 16.7:1–4), a loom weight (Fig. 16.7:6), and another 11 unidentified basalt, limestone and chalk objects.

1

2

0

10

Fig. 16.6. Quadrangular basins. No.

Stratum

Locus

Basket

Parallels

1

VI

679

6696

Horbat ‘Eleq (Kol-Yaakov 2000: Pl. VI:7)

2

VII

720

7609

317

Chapter 16: THE Stone Objects

2

1

3

5

4

6

8

7

9

11

10

13

12

14

15 0

16 10

Fig. 16.7. Varia.

318

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

◄ Fig. 16.7 No.

Form

Stratum

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Description*

1

Miniature bowl

VII

709

7495/1

White limestone, flat base, straight walls, two horizontal lines incised on outer rim D 3.5 cm, H 2.5 cm

2

Quadrangular bowl

VII

738

8271

White limestone, rough wall, no chisel marks 10 × 8 cm, H 6.5 cm

3

Small round bowl

VI

650

5175

White limestone, roughly made D 5 cm, H 3 cm

4

Small bowl

VII

708

7469

White limestone, very roughly made, almost quadrangular 8 × 6.5 cm, H 2.5 cm

5

Small vessel

IX–VIII

789

9108

Basalt, smoothed with cells divided by an inner wall, only one cell preserved measurements of cell: 10 × 8 cm, H 6 cm

6

Elliptical loom weight

VI

643

5038

Gray chalk (probably not original color), hole near the edge max. L 7 cm

7

Object

VIII

823

9524

White limestone, roughly made, square on one side, round on other, perhaps a stopper 9 × 9 cm, H 5 cm, D of round side 7 cm

8

Round object

XII

835

9488

White limestone, well-made, perhaps a stopper upper D 9.5 cm, lower D 7.8 cm, H 5.3 cm

9

Small rounded object

VII

736

8053

Basalt, conic protrusion, perhaps a millstone or a stopper D 10 cm, H 5.5 cm

10

Quadrangular object

X

799

9057

White limestone, large central hole and small hole on one side L over 6 cm, W 5.5 cm, H 4.6 cm

11

Object

VI–V

W924

7431

Gray limestone, half ellipse in profile, protrusions (4.5 × 2.5 cm, H 0.6 cm) on one side, decorated on all sides with incised lines L over 6.5 cm, W 8.8 cm, H 8 cm

12

Square flat object

VI

655

5057

Brown limestone, hand-carved, one of four small legs preserved on bottom side, walls smoothed and slant outward, perhaps a stand 19.5 × 19.5 cm, H 6.5 cm

13

Rounded biconical object

IV

665

5564

Chalk, incomplete D 15 cm, H over 10 cm

14

Irregular-shaped object

VII

721

7748

Chalk, smoothed, broken, divided by internal walls, beginning of two holes clearly visible; there may have been several others

15

Irregular-shaped object

VI

W927

9552/2

Chalk, chisel marks in square pattern on one surface suggest part of object was cut off, very light weight and gray in color resulting from exposure to fire max. L 11 cm

16

Object

VII

725

7766

Chalk, complete, semi circular profile, made from a core of a lathe-turned vessel, round protrusion on one end, decorated with two vertical incised lines on one side 3.2 × 6.8 cm, H over 6 cm

* L = length; W = width; H = height; D = diameter

Parallels

Jewish Quarter (Geva 2006: Fig. 9.5:11)

Chapter 16: THE Stone Objects

Ossuary (Fig. 16.8) A corner fragment of a white limestone ossuary was found in the uppermost layer of debris in Stratum VII, which sealed Early Roman Building 760. The decoration consists of a design of large triangles bordered by a frame of a zigzag pattern. The rim is flat and thick, and at the lower corner of the fragment are the remains of a square leg. The overall shape and the motifs recall stone ossuaries of the Early Roman period (Rahmani 1994:36–37), although the relatively small size of

0

319

this ossuary, measuring about 22 cm in height, with an internal depth of 15 cm, distinguishes it from the common stone ossuaries known from this period. However, some small ossuaries have been reported from several sites, such as Ramallah and Jerusalem (Rahmani 1994: Nos. 81, 160, 186). A similar ossuary (of larger dimensions) was found at Site SI of Kenyon’s excavations in Jerusalem (Prag 2008: Fig. 247:8), and another one, although rougher, from an unknown provenance (Rahmani 1994: Pl. 125:835).

10

Fig. 16.8. Ossuary (Stratum VII; Locus 721, Basket 7697; Parallel, Site SI, Kenyon excavations, Jerusalem [Prag 2008: Fig. 247:8]).

Summary Most of the types of grinding and pounding utensils from Area M1 were recovered in a range of strata, indicating the long time span that such vessels were in use. It should be noted that the earlier periods (Iron Age–Hellenistic period) were exposed in very limited areas, which probably influenced the relative quantity of vessels from these strata. A number of grinding-

stone types, such as the olynthus, rotary and donkey mills, were introduced into Israel during relatively late periods (i.e., the Persian–Roman periods); in the Area M1 assemblage, they appear from the Early Roman period onward. The large assemblage of vessels and utensils recovered from Early Roman Building 760 includes a variety of grinding bowls, an olynthus mill, a donkey mill and a number of large basins.

320

Ayala Zilberstein and Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

R eferences Frankel R. 2003. The Olynthus Mill, Its Origin, and Diffusion. AJA 107:1–22. Frankel R. 2008. Corn, Oil, and Wine: Food Processing and Food-Processing Installations in Galilee in the First Century CE. In O. Rimon ed. The Great Revolt in the Galilee. Haifa. Pp. 19*–27*. Geva H. 2006. Stone Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 218–238. Geva H. 2010. Stone Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 IV: The Burnt House of Area B and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 154– 212. Hovers E. 1996. The Groundstone Industry. In A. De Groot and D.T. Ariel eds. Excavations at the City of David 1978– 1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh IV: Various Reports (Qedem 35). Jerusalem. Pp. 171–203.

Kol-Yaakov S. 2000. The Excavations at Horvat ‘Eleq: Various Objects from the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Periods. In Y. Hirschfeld ed. Ramat Hanadiv Excavations, Final Report of the 1984–1998 Seasons. Jerusalem. Pp. 473–503. Prag K. 2008. Sites SI, III–VI. The Defences of the Ottoman City. In K. Prag ed. Excavations by K.M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967 V: Discoveries in Hellenistic to Ottoman Jerusalem. Oxford. Pp. 243–378. Rahmani L.Y. 1994. A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries in the Collections of the State of Israel. Jerusalem. Runnels C.N. 1990. Rotary Querns in Greece. JRA 3:147– 154. Sidi N. 2007. Stone Utensils. In Y. Hirshfeld ed. En-Gedi Excavations II: Final Report (1996–2002). Jerusalem. Pp. 544–573. White K.D. 1984. Greek and Roman Technology. London.

Chapter 17

The Bone Objects Ariel Shatil and Stella Behar

Introduction Thirty-five bone objects was found in Area M1 of the Giv‘ati Parking Lot. Of these, five were identified as the remains of bone-object production, although the evidence is too meager to enable any further discussion. The remaining objects were identified, and fifteen representative examples are presented here in catalogue format, and illustrated in Fig. 17.1. All the objects were crafted from mammalian bones, usually from the thick cortical diaphysis of long bones, most notably the metapodials. Some were made from flat bones such as the scapulae and ribs. Most examples were handmade, although a few exhibit the use of a lathe. All the objects were smoothed and polished to some degree, and some were decorated. The most popular decorative technique is incision, and the various geometric motifs include dotted circles and parallel or concentric lines in different patterns. The bone assemblage originated in numerous strata, from the Iron Age to the Early Islamic period, although the majority was found in the Early Roman stratum (Stratum VII). The bone objects are described here according to typological criteria. Selected parallels are cited from sites in Jerusalem (e.g., the Armenian Garden, the City of David, the Jewish Quarter and the Temple Mount), as well as from other sites such as Caesarea, Meiron and Sepphoris. Further parallels can be found in E. Ayalon’s publication of the bone and ivory assemblage from Caesarea Maritima (Ayalon 2005).

Catalogue Spoons (Fig. 17.1:1–5) Of the five bone spoons recovered, four lack their handles, and the complete length of only one example (No. 1) is known. Most bone spoons are too small to have been used for eating, and were probably used for

mixing cosmetics, paint or medicine (Ayalon 2005:46). Spoons can be divided into two distinct types: spoons with a flat, decorated or undecorated bowl (Nos. 1–3); and the more concave, leaf-shaped spoons (Nos. 4, 5). Spoons were common during the Roman and Byzantine periods (Ayalon and Sorek 1999:38), although the flat, decorated examples (Nos. 2, 3) appear only in Israel, and only during the Early Roman period (Geva 2003:346; Ayalon 2005:74). However, these are usually more elliptic in shape than our two spoons. Thus, Nos. 2 and 3, together with the four parallels we have found (see below, all from Jerusalem) belong to a type of flat, rounded, decorated spoon dating to the Early Roman period and known to date only from Jerusalem. It is also worth noting that the decoration of Nos. 2 and 3 is relatively careless and does not include the common three-leaf rosette motif (compare, for example, Ayalon 2005: Fig. 18:165). Spoon Nos. 2 and 3 were found next to each other, and are both decorated with five dotted concentric circles––one at the center of the flat bowl and four set in a square around it. During the Early Roman period, dotted concentric circles were a very popular motif, appearing on a variety of bone artifacts (see, for example, Ayalon and Sorek 1999: Ills. 40, 55, 63, 91, 92). The dotted concentric-circle motif was also applied to knife-pared lamps in Judea during the first century CE (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994: Fig. 8:58– 60; Rosenthal-Heginbottom 2003: Pl. 6.12:15–18). Leaf-shaped spoons are generally undecorated (Nos. 4, 5) and are characterized by a V-shaped protrusion where the spoon’s handle and bowl meet. This may have been an effort to strengthen that particular area of the spoon, or an imitation of the soldering of metal spoons (Ayalon 2005:46). No. 1. Stratum VI, L619, B4697 Spoon; complete; hand-crafted from the diaphysis of a long bone. The bowl is round in shape, smoothed and polished, and decorated with a line around its

2

3

4

1

5

7

6

9 8 10 11

0.5

0

13 0

12

14 1

0

15 4

Fig. 17.1. Bone objects.

Chapter 17: The Bone Objects

circumference that was probably made with a compass. Originated in the foundation of a Late Roman–early Byzantine floor. Parallels: The Jewish Quarter (first century CE; Nenner-Soriano 2010: Pl. 11.1:B4), Meiron (Late Roman; Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981: Pl. 9.6:2), Sepphoris (Byzantine; Yeivin 1937: Pl. I: Fig. 2). No. 2. Stratum VII, L739, B8097 Spoon; fragment (part of handle missing); crafted from the diaphysis of a long bone. The bowl is round in shape, smoothed and polished, decorated with four dotted concentric circles set in a square pattern, with a fifth in the center. Found together with No. 3 in a destruction layer dated to the end of the Early Roman period. No. 3. Stratum VII, L739, B8095 Spoon; fragment (handle missing); crafted from the diaphysis of a long bone. The bowl is round in shape, smoothed and polished, and decorated with dotted concentric circles as in No. 2. Parallels: The Armenian Garden (first century CE; Tushingham 1985: Fig. 68:13), the Jewish Quarter (first century BCE–first century CE; Geva 2006: Pl. 11.1:B9), the Temple Mount (Early Roman; BenDov 1982: fig. on p. 165), Jerusalem, unprovenanced (Ayalon and Sorek 1999: Fig. 43). No. 4. Phase VIA, L618, B4591 Spoon; fragment (handle missing); crafted from the diaphysis of a long bone; leaf-shaped bowl (length 7 cm); smoothed, polished and undecorated. The spoon has a V-shaped protrusion on the back side, at the joint between the handle and the bowl. Found on a Late Roman–early Byzantine floor, dated to the third–fourth centuries CE. No. 5. Stratum VII, L704, B7116 Spoon; fragment (handle missing); the thin, curving section of the spoon suggests that it might have been carved from a large, thick rib; leaf-shaped bowl, smoothed, polished and undecorated. The spoon has a V-shaped portrusion on the back side, at the joint between the handle and the bowl. Found in an Early Roman miqveh.

323

Parallels: The Jewish Quarter (first century CE; Nenner-Soriano 2010: Pl. 11.1: B2, B3), Caesarea (sixth century CE; Ayalon 2005: Fig. 17:161), Meiron (Late Roman; Meyers, Strange and Meyers 1981: Pl. 9.6:5), Sepphoris (Byzantine; Yeivin 1937: Pl. I: Fig. 2).

Spatulas (Fig. 17.1:6, 7) Twelve spatulas form the largest group among the bone artifacts. Bone spatulas were usually made from ribs or other flat bones such as scapulae or pelvic bones, their curved shape reflecting the shape of the bone. One end of the spatula was sharpened to a point, the other end was rounded. Spatulas were usually smoothed along their length, while some were also smoothed laterally. This polishing does not seem to be a result of use. However, many spatulas show striations that are considered to be use marks (Ariel 1990:127–128). Spatulas are found in a variety of shapes that may be indicative of function, or, in our opinion, reflect the ad-hoc nature of this tool, which was produced by the user. Spatulas are often considered as tools used in the weaving industry (Ariel 1990:130). The majority of the spatulas from Area M1 preserves the pointed end, while other fragments have only the lower, rounded part preserved. Most of them were found in contexts ranging from the Iron Age to the Early Roman period, with some fragments from Byzantine contexts. As in Area M1, spatulas make up nearly half the bone assemblage in the City of David (Ariel 1990:127). In the Jewish Quarter, on the other hand, few spatulas were found (Geva 2003:344). No. 6. Strata VII–VI, L706, B9018 Spatula; fragment, sharp pointed edge (8.2 × 2.4 cm); crafted from a large rib or even a scapula; smoothed and polished. Found in a fill containing Early Roman finds. No. 7. Stratum VI, L645, B5605 Spatula; fragment (8.8 × 1.6 cm); crafted from a large rib; smoothed and polished. Found in a Late Roman– early Byzantine fill rich in pottery of the first century BCE–first century CE.

324

Ariel Shatil and Stella Behar

Parallels: The Armenian Garden (first century CE; Tushingham 1985: Fig. 68:17,18), the City of David (Iron Age II–Byzantine; Ariel 1990: Figs. 14, 15), the Jewish Quarter (first century BCE–first century CE; Geva 2003: Fig. 13.1:B2, B3, 2006: Fig. 11.1:B1–B5; Nenner-Soriano 2010: Fig. 11.1:B1).

Pins, Needles and Rods (Fig. 17.1:8–10) Eight cylindrical, elongated objects where recovered. Pins are thin (~2–4 mm diameter), cylindrical, elongated artifacts with a modeled head. They are usually considered to be hair pins to hold simple hairdos, or garment pins. Needles are cylindrical, elongated objects with one or more holes drilled through the head. They were probably used to weave threads through the hair to create and hold complicated hairdos (Stephens 2008:115–123). Rods are also cylindrical, elongated objects, but have a much larger diameter and are longer than pins. The shafts are sometimes decorated with composite patterns and the heads are stylized and pointed. Their exact function is unknown. These objects originated in a variety of archaeological contexts, ranging from the Iron Age to the Byzantine and Early Islamic periods. Most were found broken, without the head, which hindered accurate identification as pins, needles or other elongated cylindrical objects, such as styli, kohl sticks, etc. Item No. 8 is a complete pin with a drop-shaped decorative head. The head of No. 9 was preserved, thus enabling us to define it as a needle. Item No. 10, 7 mm in diameter, is sturdy enough to be a rod or even a spindle. The rest of the artifacts from this group are shaft fragments. Two examples (No. 8 and another shaft fragment), were evidently made on a lathe, while the others were handmade. No. 8. Strata VI–V, W864, B6530 Hairpin; complete (length 4.0 cm); crafted from compact bone cortex; smoothed and polished; latheturned, with the lathe indentation on top of the pin head. The head is shaped in the form of a small drop upon a protruding collar of five delicate, incised rings. Found embedded in a wall dated to the Byzantine period. This type of pin, with a drop-shaped head and a decorated collar, is very common at Caesarea (c. 75 items), but rare elsewhere. Ayalon tentatively suggests

that this type, and similar examples with drop-shaped heads, may have been manufactured in Caesarea during the Roman period (Ayalon 2005: footnote on p. 59). Parallels: The Temple Mount (Early Roman– Byzantine; Macalister and Duncan 1926: Fig. 180; Ben-Dov 1982: fig. on p. 165), Caesarea (Late Roman– Byzantine; Ayalon 2005: fig. 21:215–218), Sepphoris (Byzantine; Yeivin 1937: Pl. I: Fig. 2). No. 9. Stratum IV, L664, B5779 Bone needle; fragment; crafted from compact bone cortex; smoothed and polished. The head is truncated, and has one drilled hole; the sharp tip is broken and missing. Originated on an Early Islamic floor. Parallels: The Temple Mount (Early Roman; Ben-Dov 1982: fig. on p. 165), Caesarea (Roman; Ayalon 2005: Nos. 104, 105), Sepphoris (Byzantine; Yeivin 1937: Pl.1: Fig. 2). No. 10. Strata IX–VIII, L789, B9039 Rod; shaft fragment; crafted from compact bone cortex; lightly polished. This object is thick enough to be considered a rod or a spindle. Found in a fill among pottery dated to the late Iron Age. Parallels: The Jewish Quarter (first century CE; Nenner-Soriano 2010: Pl. 11.1:B12, B13).

Handle (Fig. 17.1:11) One bone handle was found in Area M1. No. 11. Phase VB, L744, B8281 Handle; fragment (6 cm in length); crafted from compact bone cortex; cylindrical; smoothed and highly polished. The handle was lathe-turned, and has a large lathe indentation on its bottom. The hole for insertion of the implement was drilled off-center into the bone cortex from the top, which is not preserved. Close to the base of the handle are three wide, decorative, latheturned rings. Originated in the make-up of a Byzantine floor. Parallels: The Jewish Quarter (Early Roman; Geva 2003: Pl. 13.1:B13; 2006: Pl. 11.1:B11; both are hollow cylindrical decorated handles), Caesarea (undated; Ayalon 2005: Fig. 2:14).

Chapter 17: The Bone Objects

325

Doll (Fig. 17.1:12)

Die (Fig. 17.1:14)

One partial doll was identified. Schematic dolls were common throughout the Middle East during the Early Islamic period. They were crafted from long flat bones, and their features (arms, legs, feet/shoes) were incised on the bone surface with deep grooves. The dolls are too schematic for gender to be recognizable.

A single die was found in Area M1. Bone game dice were very popular in Greco-Roman times. Most dice are solid, some are hollow. Bone plugs were used to fill the natural cavity of the bone from which the hollow die was crafted, and to maintain the die’s weight balance. The numbers were usually depicted with the popular dotted-circle motif. Many dice were found in Roman theaters, and it seems that people used to play during breaks between the games (Ayalon and Sorek 1999:51).

No. 12. Stratum III, L613, B4636 Doll; fragment of the left side (8.0 × 2.2 cm); crafted from the diaphysis of a long bone, probably a metapodial; smoothed, polished and burnished. Incised diagonal line signifies the left arm, while a central vertical line defines the legs. A horizontal incision divides the legs from the feet. Found in a fill containing pottery ranging from the Early Roman to the Mamluk periods. Parallels: Baniyas (Early Islamic; Wilson 2001: Item 65; identified there as a box lid), Caesarea (tenth– eleventh centuries CE; Ayalon 2005: Fig. 34:329), Yoqne‘am (Ummayad; Agadi 1996: Fig. XIX.1:7–9).

Button/Spindle Whorl (Fig. 17.1:13) One item could possibly be identified as a button or spindle whorl. These round, squat, conical or planoconvex discs made of bone, stone, glass or wood, vertically perforated in the center, are a very common find throughout the ages. Many suggestions have been raised as to their function (Ayalon and Sorek 1999:28), the most common being buttons (Davidson 1952:296–302; Ariel 1990:139) and spindle whorls (e.g., Oldenburg 1969:118–128). No. 13. Stratum V–III, L676, B6402 Button(?); complete (1 cm diameter); crafted from compact bone cortex; smoothed and burnished, decorated with engraved dotted circles linked by parallel lines, and a bird motif. Found in a drain channel that was in use from the Byzantine to Abbasid periods. Parallels: Caesarea (undated; Ayalon 2005: Fig. 7:72, 76), Yoqne‘am (Early Islamic; Agadi 1996: Fig. XIX.1:1–3).

No. 14. Stratum VI, L643, B5029 Die; complete (each face measures c. 2 ×2 cm); hollow; crafted from a complete section (roundel) of a thick long bone, probably a metapodial. It was squared using a saw, and the bone cavity was plugged. The plug was glued in place with a white plaster-like substance. The numbers were then incised on the six faces using a cup-shaped drill to make the dottedcircle motif, and filled with the same white plaster-like substance. Finally, the die was smoothed and polished. Examples of a die still preserving the plug glued in place are very rare (see Ayalon 2005:74, Item 281, a hollow dice with two flat plugs on opposing faces). Found in a Byzantine fill rich in first century BCE– first century CE pottery sherds. Parallels: The Jewish Quarter (Early Roman; Geva 2006: Pl. 11.1:B19), Caesarea (Roman; Ayalon 2005: Fig. 27:281, 282).

Unidentified Tool (Fig. 17.1:15) No. 15. Strata VI–VB, Balk, B7305 Unidentified tool; fragment; crafted from compact bone cortex; smoothed and polished. This object is pointed on one end, and has a sharp lateral side that seems to have been the working edge of a tool. This sharpened, knife-like edge bears striations that may be use marks. Below the working edge are the remains of two broken carved ridges, probably for decorative purpose only. The rest of the object (its handle?) is broken. Found in a balk of a Byzantine stratum. No parallels are known.

326

Ariel Shatil and Stella Behar

R eferences Agadi S. 1996. The Bone Objects. In A. Ben-Tor ed. Yoqne‘am I: The Late Periods. Jerusalem. Pp. 236–238. Ariel D.T. 1990. Worked Bone and Ivory. In D.T. Ariel. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985, Directed by Yigal Shiloh II: Imported Stamped Amphora Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory and Glass (Qedem 30). Jerusalem. Pp. 119–148. Ayalon E. 2005. The Assemblage of Bone and Ivory Artifacts from Caesarea Maritima, Israel 1st–13th Centuries CE. Oxford. Ayalon E. and Sorek C. 1999. Bare Bones: Ancient Artifacts from Animal Bones. Tel Aviv (Hebrew; partial English translation). Barag D. and Hershkovitz M. 1994. Lamps from Masada. In J. Aviram, G. Foerster and E. Netzer eds. Masada IV: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965 Final Reports. Jerusalem. Pp. 7–78. Ben-Dov M. 1982. The Dig at the Temple Mount. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Davidson G.R. 1952. Corinth XII: The Minor Objects. Princeton. Geva H. 2003. Bone and Ivory Artifacts. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 343–350. Geva H. 2006. Bone Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 266–271. Macalister R.A.S. and Duncan J.G. 1926. Excavations on the Hill of Ophel, Jerusalem 1923–1925 (PEFA 4). London.

Meyers E.M., Strange J.F. and Meyers C.L. 1981. Meiron Excavation Project III: Excavations at Ancient Meiron, Upper Galilee, Israel 1971–72, 1974–75, 1977. Cambridge, Mass. Nenner-Soriano R. 2010. Bone Artifacts. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 IV: The Burnt House of Area B and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 284–286. Oldenburg E. 1969. Les objets en faïence, terre-cuite, os et nacre. In G. Ploug, E. Oldenburg, E. Hammershaimb, R. Thomsen and F. Løkkegaard eds. Hama, fouilles et recherches, 1931–1938 IV, 3: Les petits objets médiévaux sauf les verreries et poteries. Copenhagen. Pp. 107–141. Rosenthal-Heginbottom R. 2003. Hellenistic and Early Roman Fine Ware and Lamps from Area A. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X–2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 190–223. Stephens J. 2008. Ancient Roman Hairdressing: On (Hair) pins and Needles. JRA 21:111–132. Tushingham A.D. 1985. Excavations in Jerusalem 1961– 1967 I. Toronto. Wilson J.F. 2001. Rediscovering Caesarea Philippi: The Ancient City of Pan. Malibu, Calif. Yeivin S. 1937. Historical and Archaeological Notes. In L. Waterman ed. Preliminary Report of the University of Michigan Excavation at Sepphoris, Palestine, in 1931. Ann Arbor. Pp. 17–34.

Chapter 18

The Stamped Amphora Handles Donald T. Ariel

Introduction Twenty-eight stamped amphora handles were found in Area M1. Twenty-seven are of the Rhodian class, and the exception, No. 28, is of the Koan class. Since the first stamped amphora handle was found in Jerusalem 140 years ago (Clermont-Ganneau 1896:148–149), many have been reported (Ariel 1990:14–16), and including the recently published examples from Kenyon’s excavations and unpublished examples from more recent excavations, the number is now approaching two thousand, close to the number found at Samaria (Ariel 1990:17; and see discussion of quantities in Snow et al. 2008:408). The first synthesis of the Jerusalem finds comprised a report of 42 such handles from the 1927 excavations of Crowfoot and Fitzgerald (1929:88–89) in the Tyropoeon Valley, very close to the current Giv‘ati Parking Lot site. Since that short synthesis, much has been written of their appearance in this city, including discussions of the amphorae’s contents (Kenyon 1974:189; Ariel 1990:16–18), their spatial (Ariel 1990:21–23, 2000:267–268; Finkielsztejn 1999:24*, 28*–29*) and chronological distribution (Ariel 1990:21–25), the historical setting that brought about the end of their importation (Constantiniou 1972; Dequeker 1985:210; Finkielsztejn 1999), the reasons for this cessation, and other cultural and religious issues (Ariel 1990:25–28, 2000:276–280; Finkielsztejn 1999:31*–32*). The 28 stamped handles published in the catalogue below support the end date of these imports relating to the siege of the Akra by Jonathan in 146 BCE (Ariel 1990:19), or 145 BCE (Finkielsztejn 1999:27*). One stamped handle from Area M1 (Cat. No. 10), dates very close to this end date. The main contribution of the amphora finds from Area M1, however, is that they overwhelmingly derive from Hellenistic (Stratum VIII) contexts, whereas other amphora finds in Jerusalem were mostly found in later contexts. Altogether, 24 handles— over 85% of the assemblage—originated in loci dating

to the late third–second centuries BCE, 22 of these from clean Stratum VIII loci. Two additional handles, Nos. 8 and 25, were retrieved in loci dated to Iron IIA–III (L829 and L805 respectively), although they can definitely be attributed to the foundations of the wide Hellenistic wall (W969) that cut through the Iron Age strata. Five handles from post-Hellenistic contexts comprise Cat. No. 4, from the Hellenistic (Stratum VIII), Cat. Nos. 26 and 28 from early Byzantine (Strata VI) and Early Roman (Strata VII) loci respectively, and Nos. 6 and 22 from a mixed Hellenistic–Early Roman context. Of the 24 contextually Hellenistic handles, 17 were found in a stratigraphic sequence composed of two superimposed floors laid above two fills (Table 18.1). Six handles were recovered on the upper floor (L795 + L812), including one handle found on a localized repair of the floor (L782), and six on the lower floor (L814 + L815). The two fills (L824, L833) were both found under the lowest floor. The upper fill yielded two handles, and the lower one, three handles. The two handles (Nos. 3, 10) that are dated latest in the Area M1 assemblage were each retrieved on one of the two superimposed floors. Another late handle (No. 7) derived from the upper fill below the lower floor (L824). Thus, the dates of these handles suggest that the floors were laid in quick succession and cannot date earlier than the mid-second century BCE. It should be noted that the upper floor (L812) also produced two small bronze coins (see Chapter 11: Cat. Nos. 2, 4), both dated to the reign of Antiochus III (222–187 BCE), and the date of No. 4 can be further refined to the second half of that king’s reign (198–187 BCE). The correspondence of the dates of three of the five stamped handles (Nos. 12, 16 and 23) with the dates of the coins upon the floor should not mislead one to the conclusion that the floor dates to the early second century BCE, and the other handles are misdated or intrusive, as small bronzes of Antiochus III are known to have remained in use throughout the first half of the second century BCE.

328

Donald T. Ariel

Table 18.1. Stratigraphic Sequence of Floors and Fills of Stratum VIII with Stamped Amphora Handles Cat. No.

Date (BCE)

Locus

Description

Stratigraphic Relationship

c. 193–c. 174/172

782

Floor

Localized repair above part of Floor 812

10

c. 154/153–145 (c. 127)

795

Floor

Above Floor 814

12

c. 219–c. 210

795

Floor

Above Floor 814

5

16

c. 189

795

Floor

Above Floor 814

17

c. 164/162

795

Floor

Above Floor 814

23

c. 233

812

Floor

Below Floor 782; above Floor 814

2

c. 197

815

Floor

Below Floor 812; above Fill 824

3

c. 160–146

815

Floor

Below Floor 812; above Fill 824

15

Penultimate decade of third century

814

Floor

Below Floor 812; above Fill 824

18

(Late in?) Period III until at least until c. 153

815

Floor

Below Floor 812; above Fill 824

20

c. 203–c. 199

815

Floor

Below Floor 812; above Fill 824

24 7

n.d.

815

Floor

Below Floor 812; above Fill 824

c. 160–c. 156

824

Fill

Below Floor 814; above Fill 833

13

c. 216–c. 205

824 (822)

Fill

Below Floor 814; above Fill 833

11

c. 195–167/165

833 (834)

Fill

Below Fill 824

14

c. 234–194

833

Fill

Below Fill 824

27

Late in third or early in second century

833

Fill

Below Fill 824

The dates of the amphora handles on the floors and in the fills follow the clustering of the entire assemblage. They span well over three-quarters of a century, from the beginning of the last third of the third century BCE to close to the cessation of imports in 145 BCE. Elsewhere I have noted a Rhodian amphora produced 54 years earlier than the floor upon which it was found (Ariel 2004a:29). The range of the handles on the floors in Area M1 is even greater. However, one cannot be certain that the earliest stamped handles belonged to intact amphorae when they arrived to those floors. The floors were not completely exposed, and it is hoped that further excavation will yield a better understanding of the nature of the floors and the building itself (see Chapter 2). As the date of these floors based on the handles and coins––no earlier than roughly the mid-second century BCE––also approaches the cessation date for the importation of stamped amphora handles in Jerusalem, it must be viewed strictly as a terminus post quem date.

In other words, in light of the larger picture of amphora imports to Jerusalem, the stratigraphic sequence described above can—and perhaps should—date later than the mid-second century BCE. While the stamped handles may not provide a refined end date for Stratum VIII, it is nevertheless important that imported amphora handles have, for the first time, been found in situ on Hellenistic floors, for a number of reasons. First, it suggests that the concentration of amphora handles found in Room 44 in the Crowfoot and Fitzgerald excavations—nearly all of the amphora handles found in their dig (Crowfoot and FitzGerald 1929:88)—may also have originated on floors. Second, it indicates that such amphoras were not concentrated in the hands of one class of population, the presumably wealthier—and more Hellenized(?)—residents who lived in the Upper City of Jerusalem. Nor are they solely associable with one building (the Akra), as other scholars have proposed (Constantinou 1972; Dequeker 1985:210).

329

Chapter 18: THE Stamped Amphora Handles

Catalogue The dates in the catalogue are based upon G. Finkielsztejn’s lower chronology (Finkielsztejn 2001; 2004a), and should be viewed as approximate. Unless otherwise noted, all dates refer to Finkielsztejn’s tables (2001:188–195). The arrangement of the handles and the conventions regarding the readings also follow Finkielsztejn (2001:213–216). The color of the clay and slip is described according to the Munsell Soil Color Charts (1975). The catalogue is arranged alphabetically and is followed by an index of names, months and devices found on the stamps.

R hodian Stamped Handles No. 1. Stratum VIII, L823, B9482. Rectangular stamp. ’Epˆ ’Agestr£t[ou] Badrom…ou

Cat. No. 1.

The eponym ’Agšstratoj 2nd officiated c. 161 BCE. Handles bearing his name were found in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:203–204; Ariel 1990:39–40, S72–83; Snow et al. 2008:392–395, Nos. 0653, 1102, 2508 and 3498; and two unpublished examples uncovered in 1995 and 2012 by Reich and Shukron, pers. obs.). The eponym ’Agšstratoj 2nd also appears on a stamped handle in the Istanbul Museum that derives from Jerusalem (Şenol 1996:43, No. 9). No. 2. Stratum VIII, L815, B9572. Rectangular stamp. ’Epˆ ’Agloum brÒto[u] `Ua[k]inq[…ou]

Cat. No. 2.

The eponym ’AgloÚmbrotoj is dated to c. 197 BCE. He endorsed amphorae found elsewhere in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:204; Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929:86, No. 2). No. 3. Stratum VIII, L815, B9154. Rectangular stamp. [’Akta]…w/noj caduceus, head right

Cat. No. 3.

The reading and reconstruction of the name was kindly provided by G. Finkielsztejn (pers. comm.), based upon a similar stamp in Virginia Grace’s card files in Athens. ’Akta…wn evidently was a rare fabricant. Grace’s unpublished numbered list of fabricants provides a date in Period IV. No. 4. Stratum VIII, L785, B8973/1. Rectangular stamp. ’Antim£cou caduceus, head right

Cat. No. 4.

The fabricant ’Ant…macoj made amphorae found elsewhere in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:204; Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929:87, No. 5; Ariel 1990:42–43, S104–110; and two unpublished finds uncovered in 1996 and 1999 by Reich and Shukron, pers. obs.). A comparison of the eponymic year connections noted by Jöhrens (1999a:65, Nos. 167–168) and Aubert (2004:34) reveals that Aubert rejected Jöhrens’ earliest two connections and suggested a date for the fabricant between c. 170 and 147 BCE.

330

Donald T. Ariel

No. 5. Stratum VIII, L782, B9000. Rectangular stamp. Dal…ou ’Ariste…d(aj) eight-rayed star

Cat. No. 5.

A particularly large star device on the left or right of the stamp is characteristic of two fabricants only. A handle of the earlier one (active in Period II), ‘IeroklÁj 1st, was found in the City of David (Ariel 1990:63, S302; the fabricant’s name should be corrected there). Amphorae produced by ’Ariste…daj 2nd, who apparently succeeded ‘IeroklÁj 1st, also arrived to the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:205; Ariel 1990:33, S18). ‘Ariste…daj 2nd is dated by Jöhrens (1999a:67, No. 175) between Periods IIIa (c. 198–c. 190 BCE) and IIId (c. 176/173–c. 169/167 BCE) at least. This date can perhaps be further refined. Based upon the eponyms connected to ’Ariste…daj 2nd gathered by Jöhrens, and Finkielsztejn’s dating of them (2001), ’Ariste…daj 2nd was active between c. 193 BCE (KleitÒmacoj) and c. 174/172 BCE (Kleukr£thj) at least. No. 6. Strata VIII–VII, L766, B8636. Rectangular stamp. ’Arist…wnoj

Cat. No. 6.

A range of 12 years was attributed by Grace (1985:40) to this fabricant. Finkielsztejn’s datings of the eponym connections noted by Brugnone (1986:48–50, Nos. 68–70) expand the range significantly, to over 30 years (Finkielsztejn 2001). However, the earliest and latest dated eponyms associated with the fabricant ’Arist…wn (QeÚdwroj 2nd [c. 203–199 BCE] and ’Aratof£nhj 1st [c. 169/167 BCE], respectively, according to Finkielsztejn), are only noted as possible connections

by Brugnone. Discounting these two eponyms yields a somewhat shorter period of activity, throughout the first quarter of the second century BCE. Conovici and Garlan (2004:112, No. 21) and Nicolaou (2005:138, No. 337) maintained there was an even shorter period of activity, from the end of Period II to the beginning of Period III (two decades?). Aubert’s date, however, is closer to that proposed here: circa 198–c. 173 BCE (Aubert 2004:34). ’Arist…wn’s amphorae have been found in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:205; Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929:87, No. 7; and an unpublished handle found in the 2003 excavations at the Giv‘ati Parking Lot). No. 7. Stratum VIII, L824, B9399. Circular stamp. ’Ep’ ieršwj ’Aristom£cou Dal…ou reading outward rose

Cat. No. 7.

Many amphorae endorsed by the eponym ’AristÒmacoj 1st reached the City of David (Ariel 1990:60–61, S276–280; Snow et al. 2008:394, No. 2294). Finkielsztejn dated ’AristÒmacoj 1st’s activity between c. 160 and c. 154/3 BCE. This eponym, however, does not appear in a listing of handles with secondary stamps, beginning in 155 BCE (Palaczyk 2001:328), suggesting the eponym’s term may have fallen between c. 160 and c. 156 BCE. Conovici and Garlan (2004:113–114, No. 28) date ’AristÒmacoj 1st to 156/155 BCE. No. 8. Stratum XIC, L829, B9501. Rectangular stamp. ’E[pˆ D]amo qšmioj

Cat. No. 8.

331

Chapter 18: THE Stamped Amphora Handles

Complete amphorae (of ‘Aghs…laj 1st) dated by the term of DamÒqemij were found just north of the City of David, in excavations south of the Temple Mount (BenDov 1985:70), as well as in Romania (Lungu 1990:212, No. 2.1). Handles with DamÒqemij’s endorsement were recovered in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:207; Snow et al. 2008:391, No. 0251). According to Finkielsztejn (2001:192), DamÒqemij officiated in c. 191 BCE. Conovici and Garlan (2004:108, No. 8), however, express reservations about Finkielsztejn’s seriation of DamÒqemij because it would imply two consecutive intercalated years. However, even if Finkielsztejn’s date changes due to these reservations, it would not change by very much. No. 9. Stratum VIII, L823, B9377. Circular stamp. Damokr£teuj rose

Cat. No. 9.

The long-lived fabricant Damokr£thj 1st, well-known for his use of secondary stamps, was active in the first quarter of the second century BCE. Finkielsztejn (2000:136, ARh2) refined this date to c. 200–c. 172 BCE. However, based upon the dates of the eponymic connections noted by Jöhrens (1999b:246–247, No. 10) and Nicolaou (2005:149–150, No. 370), Finkielsztejn’s dating is not exact. Aubert (2004:34) provides a date of 198–133 BCE, but this is clearly a typographical error for 198–173 BCE (based on his designation of Periods IIIa–IIId). Damokr£thj 1st’s amphorae are plentiful in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:207; Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929:87, No. 9; Ariel 1990:49–50, S169–177, S275–280; Snow et al. 2008:390, Nos. 0082 and 0130).

No. 10. Stratum VIII, L795, B8856. Rectangular stamp. [DiÒk]leiaj asterisks in corners

Cat. No. 10.

As far as I am aware, the earliest eponym who endorsed this fabricant’s amphorae was GÒrgwn (c. 154/153 BCE), and the latest, Leont…daj (c. 127 BCE; for both connections, see Finkielsztejn 2001:173, n. 41). According to Finkielsztejn (2000:141, BRh1), DiÒkleia was the last in a series of fabricants to employ the asterisks-in-corners device. He added that DiÒkleia eventually abandoned this device; therefore, this stamp dates early in DiÒkleia’s period of activity. This conforms in general to the clustering of dates in the City of David that ends around 146 BCE (Ariel 1990:19), or 145 BCE, according to Finkielsztejn (1999:27*), upon the beginning of the siege of the Akra by Jonathan. It is no surprise that only one other amphora of DiÒkleia has been identified from the City of David (Snow et al. 2008:396, No. 4457). No. 11. Stratum VIII, L834, B9622. Rectangular stamp. D[…]ou Handles bearing the name of this fabricant are common in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:207; Ariel 1990:50, S178–182; and two unpublished examples found in 1996 by Reich and Shukron, pers. obs.). According to Finkielsztejn (2000:146, CRh20), D…oj produced amphorae between c. 192 and c. 169 BCE. Based upon the dates of eponyms endorsing the amphoras of D…oj (Finkielsztejn 2001), these dates should be extended somewhat. The eponym Sèdamoj associated with the fabricant (Brugnone 1986:56, under No. 85) is now dated to c. 195 BCE, while ’Ar…stwn 2nd (with a connection noted in Shelov 1975:43, No. 68; see also Jöhrens 1999a:41, No. 97) officiated in c. 167/165 BCE. The period of activity of D…oj should therefore be dated to c. 195–167/165 BCE.

332

Donald T. Ariel

No. 12. Stratum VIII, L795, B9033. Rectangular stamp. Qesmofor…o(u) D…skou

No. 14. Stratum VIII, L833, B9473. Rectangular stamp. Pan£mou eight-rayed star I˜rokle[àj ?]

Cat. No. 12.

Cat. No. 14.

D…skoj 1st is differentiated from his later, more prolific homonym by the appearance of the month on stamps bearing his name. He worked during the term of XenÒstratoj (Grace 1963:334, No. 8), who is dated by Finkielsztejn to Period IIb (c. 219–c. 210 BCE), although he may date later (Finkielsztejn 2001:191). One stamped handle bearing this fabricant’s name was found in the City of David (Ariel 1990:34, S30).

‘IeroklÁj 1st is the earlier of two fabricants who employed a large star device on the left or right of the stamp (see No. 5 above). He was active after the appearance of months on stamps, c. 234 BCE (Finkielsztejn 2001:196; see also EAD 27:309, E 24). As ’Ariste…daj 2nd’s period of activity began between c. 198 and c. 190 BCE (or possibly between c. 193 and c. 190 BCE) the period of ‘IeroklÁj 1st’s production may be dated to c. 234–c. 194 BCE. Two handles bearing this fabricant’s name were found elsewhere in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:208; Ariel 1990:63, S302 [corrected reading]).

No. 13. Stratum VIII, L822, B9361. Rectangular stamp. [’Ep]igÒnou

No. 15. Stratum VIII, L814, B9247. Rectangular stamp. Mšnwnoj Pan£mou Cat. No. 13.

In the City of David, 14 stamped amphora handles of the fabricant ’Ep…gonoj 1st were recovered. Five name the fabricant (Ariel 1990:35, S31; Snow et al. 2008:390, No. 0127; 395, No. 2836; the fifth, Ariel 1990:42, S103, was preserved very much like No. 13, but was misread and may now also be identified as ’Ep… gonoj 1st). Nine others bear ivy-leaf shaped stamps characteristic solely of this fabricant (Macalister and Duncan 1926:211; Ariel 1990:37, S47–48; Snow et al. 2008:391–393, Nos. 0177, 0212, 0252, 0652, 784; 396, No. 4384). According to Finkielsztejn (2000:143, CRh7), the fabricant ’Ep…gonoj 1st was active c. 216– c. 205 BCE.

Cat. No. 15.

Finkielsztejn has suggested that there may have been two roughly contemporary homonym fabricants named Mšnwn, one employing circular stamps (which he dates c. 215–c. 204 BCE) and one using rectangular stamps (Finkielsztejn 2000:143, CRh6). The rectangular type has been discussed by the present author (Ariel 1987– 1989), and should be dated to the middle of Period II, around the penultimate decade of the third century BCE. Handles bearing the named Mšnwn were found in the excavations of Macalister and Duncan (1926:209), Kenyon (Snow et al. 2008:391–392, Nos. 0131, 0175, 0283; No. 0131 was impressed using the same stamp as No. 15), and Shiloh (Ariel 1990:36, S43–44).

333

Chapter 18: THE Stamped Amphora Handles

No. 16. Stratum VIII, L795, B8897. Rectangular stamp. ’Epˆ Xenof£neuj `Uak…nqioj

Cat. No. 16.

The name of the month is unexpectedly in the nominative case. The eponym Xenof£nhj endorsed amphorae found in many excavations in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:209–210; Ariel 1990:56, S234–235; and an unpublished example from the 1998 excavations by Reich and Shukron, pers. obs.). Xenof£nhj officiated c. 189 BCE. No. 17. Stratum VIII, L795, B8862. Rectangular stamp. ’Epˆ XenÒfwn {p}oj Pan£mou

Cat. No. 17.

XenÒfwn 1st, who officiated c. 164/162 BCE, is also named on amphora handles from earlier excavations in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:210; Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929:87, No. 16; Ariel 1990:56, S236–238; Snow et al. 2008:395, No. 3494). On this stamp, the tau is mistakenly rendered as a pi.

(Börker 1998:50, Nos. 499–500; Burow 1998:97, Nos. 308–310), indicating that he began to produce amphorae in (late in?) Period III, and continued well into Period IV, at least until c. 153, the year of the eponym Pausan…aj 3rd (Gentili 1958:35, No. 7; Nachtergael 1978:54, n. 11). No. 19. Stratum VIII, L815, B9569. Circular stamp. ’Epˆ Pausan…a Qesmofor…ou rose

Cat. No. 19.

Handles with the eponyms Pausan…aj have appeared in all the excavations in the City of David, including an unpublished one discovered in 2000 (by Reich and Shukron, pers. obs.). This stamp apparently names Pausan…aj 2nd, based upon the profile of the handle. Pausan…aj 2nd is dated by Finkielsztejn (2001) to Period IIc (c. 203–c. 199 BCE). For the three homonyms of this eponym, see EAD 27:304–305, under E12. No. 20. Stratum VIII, L823, B9383. Rectangular stamp. Pau[sa]n…a rose

No. 18. Stratum VIII, L815, B9571. Rectangular stamp. ’Ona[s]io…kou Cat. No. 20.

Cat. No. 18.

Handles naming ’Onas…oikoj were found elsewhere in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:210; Ariel 1990:57, S243–247), as well as in Pergamon

This fabricant, who used a rose device, is the third homonym of three of this name. The same stamp type was found elsewhere in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:210; Ariel 1990:57–58, S248– 252; Snow et al. 2008:395, No. 2718). Pausan…aj 3rd was active at the end of Period III to Period IV (Finkielsztejn 2001:76 n. 55; Nicolaou 2005:337– 338, No. 282).

334

Donald T. Ariel

No. 21. Stratum VIII, L823, B9502. Rectangular stamp. ’Epˆ Pra tof£neu(j)

Cat. No. 21.

The eponym Pratof£nhj endorsed amphorae found in the City of David (Macalister and Duncan 1926:210; Ariel 1990:58, S255; one from the 2003 season at the Giv‘ati Parking Lot, and possibly another uncovered by Reich and Shukron in 2004, pers. obs.), and his eponymic year was c. 188 BCE.

eponym Filèndaj, has recently been proven correct (Finkielsztejn, pers. comm.). This will require some movement in the dates for the eponyms of Period II. One handle each of Filwn…daj and Filèndaj has been found in the City of David (Ariel 1990:38, S56 and S57 respectively), and another handle impressed with the same seal as No. 23 was also uncovered in the City of David (Snow et al. 2008:390, No. 128). Rhodian Stamped Handles: Illegible Names No. 24. Stratum VIII, L815, B9570. Circular stamp. Sw[- - -] rose

No. 22. Stratum VIII–VII, L766, B8635. Rectangular stamp. Swkratšuj burning torch Cat. No. 24.

No. 25. Phase XIA, L805, B9133. Circular stamp. [- - -]eu rose Cat. No. 22.

The prolific Swkr£thj 2nd, with his trademark burning-torch device, produced amphorae between c. 202 and c. 172/1 BCE (Finkielsztejn 2006:151, Rh2). Stamps of this fabricant were found in all the excavations in the City of David, including the 2003 season in the Giv‘ati Parking Lot, and in the nearby Tyropoeon Valley (Crowfoot and Fitzgerald 1929:87, No. 12).

This handle’s angular profile suggests a date in the beginning of the second century BCE.

No. 23. Stratum VIII, L812, B9094. Rectangular stamp. [’Epˆ] Filwn…da [D]al…ou

No. 26. Phase VIB, L634, B4808. Rectangular stamp. [- - -]s [- - -]euj

Cat. No. 23.

The proposed date for the eponym Filwn…daj is c. 233 BCE. Finkielsztejn’s suspicion (2001:76) that Filwn…daj was not a different spelling of the

Cat. No. 25.

Cat. No. 26.

The handle is missing its slip, and only the light brown core is preserved. The light brown core and the handle’s round profile suggest a date in the third century BCE.

335

Chapter 18: THE Stamped Amphora Handles

No. 27. Stratum VIII, L833, B9481. Illegible circular stamp. [- - -] rose

Cat. No. 27.

Only a ceramic chip comprising most of the stamp is preserved. It has a reddish-yellow (7.5YR 6/6) core, and a peeling pink (5YR 8/3) slip. The rose has a threepetal design, which suggests that the fragment dates late in the third or early in the second century BCE.

Koan Stamped Handle No. 28. Stratum VII, L726, B8237. Rectangular stamp. ’Antip£trou

S458–463; Snow et al. 2008:391, No. 0176; 396, No. 6406; and three unpublished examples from the 1996, 1997 and 2009 seasons by Reich and Shukron, pers. obs.). Outside the City of David, three examples were recovered in the Jewish Quarter (Ariel 2000:274, Nos. 28–30) and four in the Citadel (Johns 1950: Pl. 57:2; three others from the 1977–1989 excavations by Sivan and Solar, noted in Ariel 2004b:184). Another derives from the Kikkar Safra (City Hall) site (Ariel 2004b:183–184), two from the excavations near the Temple Mount (one is Mazar 1971: Pl. XXI:3), and four others are located in the Saint Anne Museum, Jerusalem, probably also deriving from Jerusalem (Finkielsztejn 2004b:159, Table 1). The Koan class gained in importance over the Rhodian class in some regions during the second half of the second century BCE (Berlin 1997:16, n. 52; 161, nn. 338, 339; Ariel 2003:225). Based on the end date of amphora imports to the City of David, it would appear that the ’Ant…patroj stamped on this handle dates prior to 145 BCE.

Index Boldface numbers refer to the catalogue numbers of the names and words published here.

Cat. No. 28.

This handle is roughly identified as true Koan (as opposed to pseudo-Koan or Dressel 2–4) because of its ware (reddish clay with a light greenish cast on the surface, and mica inclusions), as well as its characteristic, double-barreled handle. However, its actual source may, nevertheless, be elsewhere (Monsieur 2002). For the Koan class, see EAD 27:363– 364 and Finkielsztejn 2004b. This stamp is one of four variations of Koan Type 355 listed in Grace’s unpublished corpus of Koan amphora stamps (my thanks to Philippa M.W. Matheson for this information). True Koan and pseudo-Koan handles date in general to the second century BCE. Based upon Grace’s unpublished corpus from the Athenian Agora (Fraser and Matthews 1987:47), the general date of ’Ant…patroj falls within the second–first centuries BCE. Koan stamped handles have been found in Jerusalem, particularly in the City of David (Ariel 1990:75–76,

Names of Persons ’Agšstratoj 2nd 1 Ep. ‘Aghs…laj 1st 8 Fab. ’AgloÚmbrotoj 2 Ep. ’Akta…wn 3 Fab. ’Ant…macoj 4 Fab. ’Ant…patroj 28 Koan ’Aratof£nhj 1st 6 Ep. ’Ariste…daj 2nd 5 Fab. ’Arist…wn 6 Fab. ’AristÒmacoj 1st 7 Ep. GÒrgwn 10 Ep. DamÒqemij 8 Ep. Damokr£thj 1st 9 Fab. DiÒkleia 10 Fab. D…oj 11 Fab. D…skoj 1st 12 Fab. ’Ep…gonoj 1st 13 Fab. QeÚdwroj 2nd 6 Ep. ‘IeroklÁj 1st 5, 14 Fab. KleitÒmacoj 5 Ep. Kleukr£thj 5 Ep.

336

Donald T. Ariel

Rhodian Months BadrÒmioj 1 Δάλιος 5, 6, 23 QesmofÒrioj 12, 19 Πανάμος 14, 15, 18 ‘Uak…nqioj 2, 16

Leont…daj 10 Ep. Mšnwn 15 Fab. XenÒstratoj 12 Ep. Xenof£nhj 16 Ep. XenÒfwn 1st 17 Ep. ’Onas…oikoj 18 Fab. Pausan…aj 3rd 20 Fab. Pausan…aj 2nd 19 Ep. Pausan…aj 3rd 18 Ep. Pratof£nhj 21 Ep. Swkr£thj 2nd 22 Fab. Filèndaj 23 Ep. Filwn…daj 23 Ep.

Devices Asterisks 10 Burning torch 22 Caduceus 3–4 Rose 20 Star 5

R eferences Ariel D.T. 1987–1989. A Rhodian Stamped Amphora. In N. Feig. Wine Presses of the Hellenistic Period from Tell esSamariya. Israel—People and Land 5–6:73–92 (Hebrew). Ariel D.T. 1990. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh II: Imported Stamped Amphora Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory, and Glass. (Qedem 30). Jerusalem. Ariel D.T. 2000. Imported Greek Stamped Amphora Handles. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 I: Architecture and Stratigraphy: Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 267–283. Ariel D.T. 2003. Imported Amphora Fragments. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X-2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 224–230. Ariel D.T. 2004a. Stamped Amphora Handles from BetShe’an: Evidence for the Urban Development of the City in the Hellenistic Period. In J. Eiring and J. Lund eds. Transport Amphorae and Trade in the Eastern Mediterranean. Acts of the International Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens, September 26–29, 2002 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 5). Aarhus. Pp. 23–30. Ariel D.T. 2004b. Stamped Handles. Pp. 183–184 in A.M. Maeir and D. Bahat. Excavations at Kikkar Safra (City Hall), Jerusalem 1989. ‘Atiqot 47:169–192. Aubert C. 2004. Le commerce antique en Phénicie ďaprès les amphores locales et importées de Beyrouth. In J. Eiring and J. Lund eds. Transport Amphorae and Trade in the Eastern Mediterranean. Acts of the International Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens, September 26–29, 2002 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 5). Aarhus. Pp. 31–41.

Ben-Dov M. 1985. In the Shadow of the Temple. The Discovery of Ancient Jerusalem. Jerusalem. Berlin A. 1997. The Plain Wares. In S.C. Herbert ed. Tel Anafa II, i: The Hellenistic and Roman Pottery (JRA Supplementary Series 10). Ann Arbor. Pp. ix–244. Börker C. 1998. Der Pergamon-Komplex. In C. Börker and J. Burow eds. Die Hellenistischen Amphorenstempel aus Pergamon (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Pergamenische Forschungen 11). Berlin–New York. Pp. 1–70. Brugnone A. 1986. Bolli anforari rodi dalla necropoli di Lilibeo. ΚΩΚΑΛΟΣ 32:1–82. Burow J. 1998. Die Ubrigen Stempel aus Pergamon. In C. Börker and J. Burow eds. Die Hellenistischen Amphorenstempel aus Pergamon (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Pergamenische Forschungen 11). Berlin–New York. Pp. 71–138. Clermont-Ganneau C. 1896. Archaeological Researches in Palestine during the Years 1873–74. London. Conovici N. and Garlan Y. 2004. Les timbres amphoriques étrangers trouvés à Sinope (1). Anatolia Antiqua 12:105– 122. Constantinou V.H. 1972. The Fortress of Akra. Christian News from Israel 23:97–99. Crowfoot J.W. and Fitzgerald G.M. 1929. Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley, Jerusalem 1927 (PEFA 5). London. Dequeker L. 1985. The City of David and the Seleucid Akra. In E. Lipiński ed. The Land of Israel: Cross-roads of Civilization (Orientalia Louvaniensia Analecta 19). Leuvan. Pp. 193–210. EAD 27: V.R. Grace and M. Savvatianou-Pétropoulakou. Les timbres amphoriques grecs. In U. Bezerra de Menesis, A. Bovon, P. Bruneau, G. Donnay, V. R. Grace, T. Hackens, E. Levy, E. Lyding Will, M. Savvatianou-Pétropoulakou, G. Siebert and C. Vatin. ĽÎlot de la maison des comédiens

Chapter 18: THE Stamped Amphora Handles

(Exploration archéologique de Delos faite par ľécole française ďAthènes 27). Paris 1970. Pp. 277–382. Finkielsztejn G. 1999. Hellenistic Jerusalem: The Evidence of the Rhodian Amphora Stamps. In A. Faust and E. Barukh eds. New Studies on Jerusalem. Proceedings of the Fifth Conference. December 23rd 1999. Ramat Gan. Pp. 21*–36*. Finkielsztejn G. 2000. Amphoras and Stamped Handles from ‘Akko. ‘Atiqot 39:135–153. Finkielsztejn G. 2001. Chronologie détailée et révisée des éponymes amphoriques rhodiens de 270 à 108 av. J.-C. environ. Premier bilan (BAR Int. S. 990). Oxford. Finkielsztejn G. 2004a. Establishing the Chronology of Rhodian Amphora Stamps: The Next Steps. In J. Eiring and J. Lund eds. Transport Amphorae and Trade in the Eastern Mediterranean. Acts of the International Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens, September 26–29, 2002 (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 5). Aarhus. Pp. 117–121. Finkielsztejn G. 2004b. Koan Amphorae Imported in the Southern Levant in the Hellenistic Period. In E. Höghammer ed. The Hellenistic Polis of Kos. State, Economy and Culture. Proceedings of an International Seminar Organized by the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University, 11–13 May, 2000 (Boreas 28). Uppsala. Pp. 153–164. Finkielsztejn G. 2006. The Stamped Amphora Handles. In N. Getzov. The Tel Bet Yerah Excavations, 1994–1995 (IAA Reports 28). Jerusalem. Pp. 151–152. Fraser P.M. and Matthews E. eds. 1987. A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names I: The Aegean Islands, Cyprus, Cyrenaica. Oxford. Gentili G.V. 1958. I Timbri Anforari nel Museo Nazionale di Siracusa. Archivio Storico Siracusano 4:18–95. Grace V.R. 1963. Notes on the Amphoras from the Koroni Peninsula. Hesperia 32:319–334. Grace V.R. 1985. The Middle Stoa dated by Amphora Stamps. Hesperia 54:1–54. Johns C.N. 1950. The Citadel, Jerusalem. QDAP 14:121– 190. Jöhrens G. 1999a. Amphorenstempel im Nationalmuseum von Athen. Zu den von H.G. Lolling aufgenommenen “uneditierten henkel-inschriften”. Mit einem Anhang: Die

337

Amphorenstempel in der Sammlung der Abteilung Athen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Mainz. Jöhrens G. 1999b. Griechische Amphorenstempel hellenistischer Zeit der Grabungen 1974–1994. In F. Rakob ed. Die deutschen Ausgrabungen in Karthago (Karthago 3). Pp. 239–258. Kenyon K.M. 1974. Digging Up Jerusalem. New York. Lungu V. 1990. Nouvelles données concernant la chronologie des amphores rhodiennes de la fin du IIIe siècle au début du IIe siècle av. J.C. Dacia (new series) 34:209–217. Macalister R.A.S. and Duncan J.G. 1926. Excavation on the Hill of the Ophel, Jerusalem (PEFA 4 [1923–1925]). London. Mazar B. 1971. The Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem near the Temple Mount: Preliminary Report of the Second and Third Seasons 1969–1970. Jerusalem. Monsieur P. 2002. Amphores de Cos et amphores italiques à Pessinonte: Croiser les données archéologiques et petrographiques. Anatolia Antiqua 10:155–175. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Evanston, Ill. 1975. Nachtergael G. 1978. La collection Marcel Hombert I: Timbres amphoriques et autre documents écrits acquis en Egypte (Papyrologica Bruxellensia 15). Brussels. Nicolaou I. 2005. Paphos V: The Stamped Amphora Handles from the House of Dionysus. Nicosia. Palaczyk M. 2001. Rhodische Rundstempel mit Helioskopf. Zur Chronologie der Perioden V und VI. In S. Buzzi, D. Käch, E. Kistler, E. Mango, M. Palaczyk and O. Stefani eds. Zona Archaeologica. Festschrift für Hans Peter Isler zum 60. Geburtstag (Antiquitas 3, 42). Bonn. Pp. 319–329. Şenol G.C. 1996. Some Rhodian Stamped Amphora Handles in the Istanbul Museum. Arkeoloji Dergisi (Ege Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi, İzmir) 4:37–57. Shelov D.B. 1975. Керамические клейма из Танаиса III–I вв. до н.э. (Pottery Stamps from Tanais. 3rd–1st centuries B.C.). Moscow. Snow D., Prag K., Dimoulinis A., Koehler C.G. and Matheson P.M.W. 2008. The Stamped Amphora Handles. In K. Prag ed. Excavations by K.M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967 V: Discoveries in Hellenistic to Ottoman Jerusalem. Centenary Volume: Kathleen M. Kenyon 1906–1978 (Levant Supplementary Series 7). Oxford. Pp. 389–409.

Chapter 19

The Provincial Stamp Impressions Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

Introduction Three storage-jar handles bearing stamp impressions of the province of Judea were found in Area M1. The three stamp impressions, which are typologically different, were all discovered in Stratum VIII contexts dated no later than the Hellenistic period. Of these three impressions, the ‘roaring lion’ stamp impression (Fig. 19.1:1) is considered an early type, while the other two represent later official stamps of the Judean province.

The Stamp ImpressionS The ‘Roaring Lion’ Impression (Fig. 19.1:1) In this circular impression, the lion is standing in right profile in the center of a circle. One schematic eye in the shape of a circle is visible. The tail is upturned and the mouth is slightly open. The ‘roaring lion’ stamp is very common at sites in Jerusalem and other areas, for example, the City of David (Ariel and Shoham 2000:140–143), Nebi Samwil (Magen and Har-Even 2007:44–46) and Ramat Rahel (Garbini 1962). Although all examples are very similar to one another, the Area M1 stamp impression is the only one that clearly depicts the eye of the lion. Chronologically, Stern tends to date the lion stamps to the sixth–fifth centuries BCE, under a strong iconographic influence of the Persian world (Stern 1971). A similar view is held by Ariel and Shoham, based on the finds from the 1978–1985 excavations in the City of David, where 23 storage-jar handles bearing lion impressions were found (Ariel and Shoham 2000:140–143). These 23 impressions are not homogeneous and were probably stamped with different seals. Twelve show a circular impression in which a lion is depicted facing right, roaring, with upturned tail, as in the impression discussed here. Interestingly, seven of the lion stamp impressions from the City of David were found in contexts related

to Stratum 9 of the Persian period. The other 14 impressions of this type were found in Strata 8–5 and from the surface (Ariel and Shoham 2000:141). The 14 lion stamp impressions from Nebi Samwil are very important to the study of these impressions. They were catalogued by Magen and Har-Even into four variants, 10 of which belong to the ‘roaring lion’ variant, although none of them depicts the eye. Based on this assemblage, Magan and Har-Even determined that the lion stamp impressions should be regarded as one of the official stamp impressions of the provincial administration during the Persian period, antedating the Yehud stamp impressions (Magen and Har-Even 2007:44–46). The rich assemblage of 45 lion stamps from Ramat Rahel was also dated to the Persian period (Aharoni 1962:34; 1964:22, 45). While the handle from Area M1 was found in a fill attributed to Stratum VIII, in light of the above examples, it must have originated in an earlier context. It was probably brought to its find spot as part of the fills accumulated here in preparation for the construction of the Stratum VIII structures.

The Five-Pointed Star Impression (Fig. 19.1:2) This type of stamp impression depicts a five-pointed star within a circular impression, 1.5 cm in diameter. These impressions bear the inscription of the city of Jerusalem (yrslm; see Ariel and Shoham 2000:161– 163) and were stamped in or for the city. The letters on the five-pointed-star impression from Area M1 are poorly preserved, with only one letter (shin) clearly visible. Twenty-two handles of this type were retrieved in the City of David excavations, with the yrslm inscription between the star points, and the date of these impressions is well-established in the third–second centuries BCE (Ariel and Shoham 2000:161). At Ramat Rahel, 37 examples of this type were found in contexts dated from the end of the fourth century

340

Noga Nissim Ben Efraim

BCE to the end of the Hellenistic period (Aharoni 1962:29; 1964:43). Avigad (in Reich 2003:258) dates such pentagram stamp impressions to the second century BCE, based on a jug handle from the Jewish Quarter excavation.

The stamped handle from Area M1 was found on a floor of the Hellenistic period (Stratum VIII), dated no earlier than the second century BCE. This dating is in line with the other examples described above.

1

2

3 0

4

Fig. 19.1.(1) ‘Roaring lion’ impression (Stratum VIII, L765, B8707); (2) five-pointed star impression (Stratum VIII, L812, B9132); (3) YH ligature(?) impression (Stratum VIII, L822, B7260).

Chapter 19: the Provincial Stamp Impressions

The Yh Ligature(?) Impression (Fig. 19.1:3) The third stamp impression is a square impression of a stamp carved in relief, resulting in intaglio letters on the handle. The impression depicts what appears to be the ligature of two letters, yod and heh, resembling a reversed ‘F’, which is widely recognized as the abbreviation of the word Yehud (yhd; see Vanderhooft and Lipschits 2007:29–30). Since the first Yehud stamped handle was found in the Western Hill excavations in Jerusalem, and published in 1898 (Bliss and Dickie 1898: Pl. 27:47), a large number of these stamped handles have come to light. Thus far, more than 530 Yehud impressions have been discovered in excavations in Jerusalem and the Judean region (for a distribution analysis, see Lipschits and Vanderhooft 2007: Fig. 2). Of these, 23 handles with stamps inscribed with the yh ligature(?) were found in the City of David, dated to the second century BCE (Ariel and Shoham 2000:152–155). Finkielsztejn and Gibson suggest that the single handle from Suba should be dated to the end of the Hasmonean revolt, c.140 BCE (Finkielsztejn and Gibson 2007:110).

341

The yh ligature(?) impression from Area M1 originated in a Stratum VIII context, and it constitutes further support for the second-century BCE dating of this type.

Conclusions The three stamp impressions from Area M1 are another contribution to the growing corpus of provincial stamp impressions dated between the sixth–fifth and second centuries BCE found in Jerusalem. Interestingly, the stamp impressions of the Persian and Hellenistic periods uncovered so far in excavations along the eastern slopes of the City of David significantly outnumber those uncovered along its western slopes, where the Giv‘ati Parking Lot excavation area is located. Although this distribution pattern could simply be the result of the larger area excavated to date on the eastern side of the hill, the contrast is striking. It is hoped that further excavations on the western slope of the City of David will contribute to a better understanding of this phenomenon.

R eferences Aharoni Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Rahel I: Seasons 1959 and 1960. Rome. Aharoni Y. 1964. Excavations at Ramat Rahel II: Seasons 1961 and 1962. Rome. Ariel D.T. and Shoham Y. 2000. Locally Stamped Handles and Associated Body Fragments of the Persian and Hellenistic Periods. In D.T. Ariel ed. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh VI: Inscriptions (Qedem 41). Jerusalem. Pp. 137–169. Bliss F.J. and Dickie A.C. 1898. Excavations at Jerusalem 1894–1897. London. Finkielsztejn G. and Gibson S. 2007. The Retrograde-FShaped yh(d) Monogram: Epigraphy and Dating. Tel Aviv 34:104–113. Garbini G. 1962. The Dating of Post-Exilic Stamps. In Y. Aharoni. Excavations at Ramat Rahel I: Seasons 1959 and 1960. Rome. Pp. 61–68.

Lipschits O. and Vanderhooft D. 2007. Yehud Stamp Impressions: History of Discovery and Newly-Published. Tel Aviv 34:3–11. Magen Y. and Har-Even B. 2007. Persian Period Stamp Impressions from Nebi Samwil. Tel Aviv 34:38–58. Reich R. 2003. Local Seal Impressions of the Hellenistic Period. In H. Geva ed. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 II: The Finds from Areas A, W and X–2. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 256–262. Stern E. 1971. Achemenid Lion-Stamps from the Satrapy of Judah. BASOR 202:6–16. Vanderhooft D. and Lipschits O. 2007. A New Typology of the Yehud Stamp Impressions. Tel Aviv 34:12–37.

Chapter 20

A Greek Abecedary I nscription Yana Tchekhanovets

The Greek abecedary inscription published here (Fig. 20.1) was discovered in Area M1 in a construction fill intentionally brought by the builders to form a raised platform on which the Stratum VI (Late Roman–early Byzantine) buildings were constructed (L673, B6032). This fill contained pottery sherds and fragments of stone vessels dating to the Early Roman period (first century BCE–first century CE), as well as fragments of stucco and fresco. AABB ΑΒΓΔΕΖ This inscription was incised on a body fragment of a large stone vessel, most probably a lathe-turned chalk krater (qalal), characteristic of the Early Roman period (see Chapter 9). The inscription, made after the vessel was broken, includes two lines of letters: one with a double alpha and beta, and the following line with the first six letters of the Greek alphabet, from alpha to zeta (Fig. 20.1). The stone fragment is covered with a net of diagonal incisions. On the reverse side of the fragment (Fig. 20.1), similar diagonal incisions are visible, and a single letter (delta?) appears in the upper left corner. All the letters are similar in size,

0

c. 2 cm high, carelessly incised with a fine-pointed instrument. Nevertheless, the incision was made by a skilled hand, and therefore cannot be interpreted as a scribal exercise, but may have had a mystic purpose (for discussion, see Dornseiff 1922; Patrich 1989; BenAmi and Tchekhanovets 2008). A number of abecedary inscriptions have been discovered in Israel in contexts ranging from the Iron Age to Late Antiquity. Abecedaries dating to the late Hellenistic and the Early Roman periods are numerous. Some were discovered in funeral contexts such as the tombs at Jericho (Hachlili 1999:145; 2005:508–511), and Akeldama (Avni and Greenhut 1996:12–13, Figs. 1.17, 1.18, 1.21) and Rehavya (Misgav 1996:47–49, Fig. 1) in Jerusalem. Others were written on parchment or ostraca, or incised on plaster, such as those from the Jewish Quarter (Eshel 2006) and Um-Tuba (CIIP I/2, No. 1116) in Jerusalem, Gezer (Macalister 1912:276– 277, Fig. 425), Qumran (de Vaux 1954:229), Masada (Yadin and Naveh 1989:61, Pl. 51, Nos. 606, 607), Herodium (Testa 1972:77–80, 95; Puech 1980; Naveh 1981:71, Ill. 98; Amit 2010; Ecker 2012:15, 17, Figs. 2, 3), Wadi Murrabba‘at (Benoit, Milik and de Vaux 1961: Nos. 10B, 11, 73, 78–80) and Wadi Mikhmas (Patrich 1989: Pl. XV).

3

Fig. 20.1. Greek abecedary inscription.

344

Yana Tchekhanovets

R eferences Amit D. 2010. An Abecedary from Herodium. Qadmoniot 140:135–137 (Hebrew). Avni G. and Greenhut Z. 1996. Architecture, Burial Customs and Chronology. In G. Avni and Z. Greenhut eds. The Akeldama Tombs: Three Burial Caves in the Kidron Valley, Jerusalem (IAA Reports 1). Jerusalem. Ben-Ami D. and Tchekhanovets Y. 2008. Abecedary Fragment from the City of David. PEQ 140:195–208. Benoit P., Milik J.T. and de Vaux R. 1961. Les grottes de Murabba‘ât I (Discoveries in the Judean Desert 2). Oxford. CIIP: Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae-Palaestinae I: Jerusalem, Part 2: 705–1120. H. Cotton, L. Di Segni, W. Eck, B. Issac, A. Kushnir-Stein, H. Misgav, J. Price, I. Roll and A. Yardeni eds. Berlin 2012. Dornseiff F. 1922. Das Alphabet in Mystic und Magie. Leipzig. Ecker A. 2012. Homer in Herodium: Graffito of Il.6.264. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 183:15–20. Eshel E. 2006. Hebrew and Aramaic Inscriptions. In H. Geva. Jewish Quarter Excavations in the Old City of Jerusalem, Conducted by Nahman Avigad, 1969–1982 III: The Finds from Area E and Other Studies. Final Report. Jerusalem. Pp. 301–302.

Hachlili R. 1999. The Inscriptions. In R. Hachlili and A.E. Killebrew eds. Jericho: The Jewish Cemetery of the Second Temple Period (IAA Reports 7). Jerusalem. Pp. 142–158. Hachlili R. 2005. Jewish Funerary Customs, Practices and Rites in the Second Temple Period. Leiden. Macalister R.A.S. 1912. The Excavations of Gezer 1902– 1905 and 1907–1909 II. London. Misgav H. 1996. An Alphabetical Sequence on an Ossuary. Atiqot 29:47*–49* (Hebrew; English summary, p. 110). Naveh J. 1981. The Inscriptions. In E. Netzer ed. Greater Herodium (Qedem 13). Jerusalem. P. 71. Patrich J. 1989. Refuges juifs dans les gorges du Wadi Mukhmas. RB 96:235–239. Puech E. 1980. Abécédaire et liste alphabétique de noms hébreux du début du IIe s. AD. RB 83:118–126. Testa E. 1972. Herodion IV: I Graffiti e gli Ostraka. Jerusalem. de Vaux R. 1954. Fouilles au Khirbet Qumran: Rapport préliminaire sur la deuxième campagne. RB 61:206–236. Yadin Y. and Naveh J. 1989. The Aramaic and Hebrew Ostraca and Jar Inscriptions. In J. Aviram, G. Foerster and E. Netzer eds. Masada I: The The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965 Final Reports. Jerusalem. Pp. 1–68.

Chapter 21

A Roman Vessel Fragment With a Figurative Scene Yana Tchekhanovets

Two pottery sherds decorated with a figurative scene in relief (Fig. 21.1) were discovered in a Stratum VI fill (L660, B5536) sealed by the floors of a Late Roman– early Byzantine building. The fill was rich in pottery sherds dating mainly to the Early Roman period, along with a number of Hellenistic and Late Roman–early Byzantine sherds.

Description The two sherds were joined together, giving maximum dimensions of 10.5 × 7.0 cm. They comprise a body fragment of a mold-made vessel of smooth, pinkishbrown ware, covered with a glossy brown slip on the exterior. Despite the small size of the fragments, the figurative scene depicted in the relief can be interpreted as erotic. On the left, a nude male figure is standing in a slouching pose, with his right arm on his hip and his left hand stretched toward his penis. In the lower right, a sitting female figure is depicted with a high hairstyle or headgear, her arm extended toward the man. In the background, part of a curtain, branches and details of a medallion are visible.

0

Discussion The fragmentary preservation of the find makes determination of the vessel type difficult, but it was most likely a large vessel, for example a krater or a vase. The pinkish-brown clay recalls the Moza ware of the legionary kilnworks at the International Convention Center in Jerusalem (Magness 2005:70). It is highly probable that this vessel was a local attempt to imitate a luxurious Roman ware. Mold-made vessels bearing relief decoration were produced mainly in Italy, Gaul and other western provinces of the Roman Empire from c. 40 BCE until the beginning of the third century CE, and are generally known as Western Sigillata ware (Dragendorff 1948; Stanfield and Simpson 1958; Oxe 1968; Bemont 1977; Rossetti Tella 1996). Other groups of relief-decorated pottery vessels were produced in the major centers of Asia Minor: Pergamon (Mandel 1988) and Ephesus (Mitsopoulos-Leon 1991; Gassner 1997). The closest stylistic parallel to our vessel is a terracotta kantharos from Pergamon, depicting a battle scene, from the collection of the Mainz Museum (Koeppel 1972).

2

Fig. 21.1. Roman vessel fragment with figurative scene in relief.

346

Yana Tchekhanovets

Based on the Roman and Asia Minor parallels, the vessel found in Area M1 can be dated to the second or third century CE. A number of Roman vessels with relief decoration have been discovered at sites in Jerusalem, such as the Armenian Garden (Tushingham 1985: Fig. 55.1, 2), Giv‘at Ram (Hershkovitz 1987:320, Pl. 11.8, 9), the International Convention Center (Magness 2005:72, Fig. 10.5, 6), and recently, the Western Wall Plaza (Weksler-Bdolah 2009:23–24, Figs. 5, 6) The decoration of vessels with erotic motifs, especially large wine vessels and oil lamps, was extremely popular in Classical Antiquity (Johns 1993:117). Roman pottery lamps with erotic scenes have been reported from a few archaeological sites in Israel, including Jerusalem (Ben-Dov 1982:202–203; Stager 1991:45–47). However, none of them is a close parallel to the find from Area M1. Considering the grotesque style of the composition and the caricature-like faces of both the male and female figures, with huge noses and bulging eyes, the scene appears to have a humorous character, while the large size of the vessel suggests a cultic use. If so,

this composition may be interpreted as a bacchanalian representation, dedicated to the god of wine, and certain details depicted in the relief seem to accord with this proposition. The high hairstyle of the woman resembles the representations of Maenads that often decorate the Roman relief pottery, as tousled hair, banded with ribbons, is one of their most characteristic features (Oxe 1968: Pls. XXII:106a; LXII:146; Rossetti Tella 1996:82, Type 88, and references therein). The slouching, perhaps drunken pose of the man, who possibly has a small satyr tail, are wellknown features in numerous representations of the god of wine’s followers, as seen in representations on drinking vessels (Oxe 1968: Pl. LXVI:286). It is not surprising that no identical parallel to this scene is found among either the Western Roman or the locally made legionary pottery, as the variability in the decor and relief scenes on luxury pottery is extremely wide. Considering the data at hand, it seems reasonable to suggest that this vessel was produced in a local Roman workshop for cultic purposes, and the figurative decoration of the vessel was probably connected with bacchanalian ceremonies.

R eferences Bemont C. 1977. Moules de goblets ornés de la Gaule Centrale au Musée des Antiquités Nationales. Paris. Ben-Dov M. 1982. Temple Mount Excavations. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Dragendorff H. 1948. Arrentinische Reliefkeramik, mit Beschreibung der Sammlung in Tübingen. Reutlingen. Gassner V. 1997. Forschungen in Ephesos XIII/1/1: Das Sudtor der Tetragonos-Agora, Keramik und Kleifunde. Vienna. Herschkovitz M. 1987. The Pottery of the First and Second Centuries A.D. from Giv‘at Ram. Eretz Israel 19:314–325 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 83*). Johns C. 1993. Sex or Symbol? Erotic Images of Greece and Rome. London. Koeppel G. 1972. A Roman Terracotta Cantharus with Battle Scenes in Mainz. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz 19:188–201. Magness J. 2005. The Roman Legionary Pottery. In B. Arubas and H. Goldfus eds. Excavations on the Site of the Jerusalem International Convention Center (Binyanei Ha’Uma): A Settlement of the Late First to Second Temple Period, the Tenth Legion’s Kilnworks, and a Byzantine Monastic Complex. The Pottery and Other Small Finds

(JRA Supplementary Series 60). Portsmouth, R.I. Pp. 69– 191. Mandel U. 1988. Kleinasiatische Reliefkeramik der Mittleren Kaiserzeit. Die ‘Oinophorengruppe’und Verwandtes (Pergamenische Forschungen 5). Berlin–New York. Mitsopoulos-Leon V. 1991. Forschungen in Ephesos IX 2/2: Die Basilika am Staatmarkt in Ephesos. Keramik hellenisticher und romisher Zeit. Vienna. Oxe A. 1968. Aretinische Reliegefasse vom Rhein. Bonn. Rossetti Tella C. 1996. La Terra Sigillata tardo-italica decorate del Museo Nazionale Romano. Rome. Stanfield J.A. and Simpson G. 1958. Central Gaulish Potters. Oxford. Stager L. 1991. Ashkelon Discovered: From Canaanites and Philistines to Romans and Moslems. Washington, D.C. Tushingham A.D. 1985. Excavations in Jerusalem 1961– 1967 I. Toronto. Weksler-Bdolah S. 2009. The Relations between the Eastern Cardo of Jerusalem and the 10th Roman Legion, in Light of the Western Wall Plaza Excavations. In D. Amit, G.D. Stiebel and O. Peleg-Barkat eds. New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and Its Region 3. Jerusalem. Pp. 19–27 (Hebrew).

Chapter 22

The Human R emains Yossi Nagar

Introduction Human skeletal remains were found on two floors associated with the Early Roman period (Stratum VII), dated to the first century BCE–first century CE (see Chapter 2). The bones were relatively well-preserved, but found scattered, thus the original postures of the bodies could not be determined. The bones were visually examined at the site upon discovery, but were left in the ground without further excavation.

Description of the R emains Floor 759 The remains from this locus included two skulls and postcranial bone fragments representing at least two individuals. In addition, a few animal-bone fragments were also discerned. Indicative osteological elements included: Skull of a Young Individual The sutures were still open, indicative of an individual younger than 35 years (Hershkovitz et al. 1997:396, Table 4, Fig. 1). The tooth attrition rate in the maxilla was minimal, a canine and the premolars showed enamel attrition only, the first molar showed slight dental exposure in one cusp, the second molar showed enamel attrition and a root not fully completed, all indicative of an adolescent aged 13–15 years (Hillson 1993:176–201). Pathology included porosity (cribra orbitalia) of at least one (right) orbital roof (the other side was broken); no trauma or porosity of the vault (porotic hyperostosis) was noticed. Skull of an Adult The morphology was indicative of a male: the glabella and the supraorbital ridges were pronounced, and

the mastoid process and superior nuchal line were moderately pronounced. An upper premolar tooth showed attrition, which created dentine cups in both cusps, the right first molar showed a deep dentine cup in all cusps, the right second molar and left first molar were lost antemortem and the relevant sockets were closed. The individual’s age based upon toothattrition rate is estimated as 40–60 years (Hillson 1993:176–201). Pathology included a traumatic lesion in the center of the right parietal bone, and no healing response (remodeling) was noticed; porosity (cribra orbitalia) of the right and left orbital roofs, but no porosity of the vault (porotic hyperostosis) were noticed. Postcranial Bones These included a cervical vertebra manifesting fused ring epiphysis, indicative of an aged individual over 20 years, and several thoracic vertebrae manifesting yet-unfused ring epiphysis, indicative of an individual less than 20 years old (Johnston and Zimmer 1989). The left humerus showed fused distal epiphysis and an unfused proximal head, indicative of a young individual aged 15–19 years (Johnston and Zimmer 1989: Table 1). Two fragments of tibia of different sizes showed an unfused proximal epiphysis versus a fused distal epiphysis, indicative of two different individuals, aged less than 18 and over 20 years (Johnston and Zimmer 1989).

Floor 760 The remains from this locus included a few postcranial bone fragments representing at least two individuals. In addition, a few animalbone fragments were also discerned. Indicative osteological elements included:

348

Yossi Nagar

Long Bones Right and left humeri with fused epiphyses are indicative of an individual aged over 20 years (Johnston and Zimmer 1989: Table 1). The bicondylar width was measured as 62 mm, indicative of a male (Bass 1987:151). Vertebrae A lumbar vertebra showed an osteophyte measuring 2 mm, indicative of an individual aged over 50 years (Bass 1987:20–21). Teeth An upper canine showed a dentine cup, indicative of an individual aged 30–40 years (Hillson 1993:176–201).

Discussion The skeletal remains represent at least two individuals: a young individual aged c. 15 years, and a male individual aged over 40 years. Both individuals suffered porosity of the orbital roof (cribra

orbitalia), indicative of anemia. This pathology could have resulted from various sources, such as infectious diseases, a genetic defect or malnutrition. Cribra orbitalia is a condition relatively common in areas infected by malaria, where its frequency can reach up to 90% in the anthropological findings (Sameora 2006). However, in the Jerusalem region, malaria-related lesions are relatively rare; therefore, in this case an interpretation of the cribra orbitalia as the result of malnutrition, such as scurvy, is more probable. In addition, a lesion in the center of the right parietal bone was noticed in the older individual’s skull, indicative of an unhealed trauma. Epigenetic traits were recorded from the adult skull and postcranial bones. Considering the contexts in which these human skeletal remains were found, they appear to constitute additional evidence of the violent end of the Stratum VII occupation. They were found beneath the enormous destruction layer that came to rest on the cellar floor inside the monumental Building 760 (see Chapter 2). The archaeological evidence indicates that this building was demolished in the year 70 CE, the date of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans at the end of the Second Temple period.

R eferences Bass W.M. 1987. Human Osteology. A Laboratory and Field Manual. Columbia, Mo. Hershkovitz I., Latimer B., Dutour O., Jellema L.M., WishBaratz S., Rothschild C. and Rothschild B.M. 1997. Why Do We Fail in Aging the Skull from the Sagittal Suture? American Journal of Physical Anthropology 103:393–399. Hillson S. 1993. Teeth. Cambridge.

Johnston F.E. and Zimmer L.O. 1989. Assessment of Growth and Age in the Immature Skeleton. In M.Y. Iscan and K.A.R. Kennedy eds. Reconstruction of Life from the Skeleton. New York. Pp. 11–22. Sameora G. 2006. Cribra Orbitalia: Osteoarchaeological and Paleopathological Aspects. M.A. thesis. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv.

Chapter 23

The Faunal R emains Guy Bar-Oz and Noa R aban-Gerstel

Introduction The faunal remains described in this chapter were recovered primarily from contexts of the Hellenistic (Stratum VIII) and the Early Roman (Stratum VII) periods. Smaller bone assemblages were also encountered from Iron IIA–III (Strata XII–IX) and the Late Roman–Byzantine (Strata VI–V) and Early Islamic (Strata IV–I) periods. A general summary of the faunal assemblage retrieved from each period is presented, including species representation, bone surface modifications, skeletal-parts profile, and demographic composition. Tentative explanations for the patterns observed are suggested. The assemblages consist of a wide range of animal species including domestic livestock as well as birds, fish and several remains of small mammals, such as carnivores and rodents.1 It should be noted that animal bones were collected manually and no sieving was performed.

Methodology All the animal bones were examined and documented in the laboratory. Only bones from stratigraphically secure loci, as defined by the excavators, were included in the analysis. The bones from each basket were weighed, and then separated into identified and unidentified fragments. The identified bone remains were classified according to element and species using the comparative collection of the Laboratory of Archaeozoology, University of Haifa. The separation of sheep (Ovis aries) from goat (Capra hircus) was based on morphological criteria of selected bones (following Boessneck 1969; Davis 1987: Fig. 1.8; Zeder and Lapham 2010). Sheep and goat skeletal elements that could not be identified to species were combined in a sheep/goat category.

Bone measurements, following von den Driesch (1976), were recorded to 0.1 mm, using a digital caliper (sylvac model S225).2 The relative frequency of the various taxa was calculated according to MNE (Minimum Number of Elements) and MNI (Minimum Number of Individuals), based on the assumptions described in Klein and CruzUribe (1984) and Lyman (1994). The NISP (Number of Identified Specimens) was used as a basic measure of taxonomic frequency (Grayson 1984). Age at death of the major culled species was analyzed on the basis of epiphyseal closure (Silver 1969). Calculation of the ratio between young and old individuals was based on selective epiphysis that fused around the age of two years (Davis 1983). Bone elements were inspected for macroscopic surface modifications such as signs of animal activity (i.e., rodent gnawing, carnivore punctures and digestion), butchery marks and sawing/chopping (see Lyman 1994). Butchery marks were coded according to Binford (1981) and classified into three categories indicating stages in the butchery sequence: removal of the skin, dismemberment of the carcass, and filleting of meat from the bones. Evidence of burning was recorded for each of the identified elements.

The Faunal Assemblages The total assemblage of animal remains from Area M1 weighs over 43 kg, and contains a total NISP of 1635 complete and fragmentary identified skeletal elements. The dimensions of all measurable bones are given in Appendix 23.1, and the distribution and weight of identified and non-identified bone remains according to locus and basket are detailed in Appendix 23.2. The breakdown according to species and period is presented in Table 23.1, and the NISP, MNE and MNI of each species per period appear in Tables 23.7–23.11 at the end of the chapter. The comparative distribution

350

Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

Table 23.1. Total NISP and Species Representation According to Period Stratum

Period

Total NISP

Species

XII–IX

Iron IIA–III

90

Cattle, sheep/goat, goat, sheep, pig, chicken

VIII

Hellenistic

691

Cattle, sheep/goat, goat, sheep, pig, chicken

VII

Early Roman

540

Cattle, sheep/goat, goat, sheep, pig, horse, dog, chicken

VI–V

Late Roman–Byzantine

121

Cattle, sheep/goat, goat, sheep, pig, horse, chicken

IV–I

Early Islamic

121

Cattle, sheep/goat, goat, sheep, pig, horse, cat, chicken

Total

1563

of mammal taxa in the five periods is illustrated in Fig. 23.1. The faunal assemblages of all the periods are dominated by sheep and goat, and to a lesser extent by domestic cattle (Bos taurus). On the basis of taxonomically distinctive features, sheep (Ovis aries) and goat (Capra hircus) are equally represented in all periods. The percentage of cattle is most pronounced in the Early Roman period, when it reaches almost 25%. Pig remains are present in all periods; however, they differ significantly in their frequency in the Iron IIA–III, Hellenistic and Early Roman assemblages, when they were found as isolated remains in singular loci, and the Late Roman–Byzantine and Early Islamic periods, when they are distributed in multiple loci. The small assemblages of pig remains from the three earlier periods did not enable differentiation between wild (Sus scrofa) and domestic animals (Sus scrofa domesticus). However, the Byzantine and Early Islamic pig remains are of domestic boar. This is also evident from their demographic profile, which is dominated

by piglets. The Early Roman, Late Roman–Byzantine and Early Islamic bone assemblages also include small numbers of isolated teeth of horse (Equus caballus, identification based on teeth morphology; see Davis 1980). In addition, isolated remains of a dog (Canis sp.) and a complete skull of a weasel (Mustella nivalis; Fig. 23.2) were retrieved from the Early Roman stratum, and several specimens of cat (Felis sp.; Fig. 23.3) from Early Islamic strata. Another species that is well-represented in all periods is the domestic fowl (Gallus gallus), in particular in the Hellenistic stratum, when it comprised the second most abundant species in the assemblage (outnumbering cattle remains; Fig. 23.1). Fowls are also represented in relatively high numbers in the early Hellenistic and Late Roman–Byzantine strata. Fish remains are found mainly in the Hellenistic stratum (NISP = 25) and to a lesser extent in the Late Roman–Byzantine (NISP = 2) and Early Islamic (NISP = 2) strata. The main fish species include Nile Perch (Lates niloticus) imported from Egypt, Sea Bass

80% 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Iron IIA-III Bos taurus

Hellenistic

Early Roman

Capra/Ovis

Sus scrofa

Late RomanByzantine Other mammals

Fig. 23.1. Distribution of mammal taxa according to period.

Early Islamic Gallus gallus

351

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

0

1 cm

Fig. 23.3. Lateral view of a young cat mandible (Felis sp.; Inv. No. 1404; Strata VI–III, L601, B6687).

0

2

cm

Fig. 23.2. Ventral (above) and lateral (bottom) view of a complete skull of a weasel (Mustella nivalis; Inv. No. 1179; Stratum VII, L702, B7711).

(Serranidae) and Sea Bream (Sparidae). The presence of imported Egyptian fish is also evidenced in the

Byzantine strata by two complete vertebrae spines of Nile Catfish (Claridae bagrus). The demography of the culled sheep and goat sheds light on the exploitation of livestock. While the sample size of each period is inadequate for a detailed demographic analysis, the mortality profiles of the Hellenistic, Early Roman and Late Roman–Byzantine periods appear to be characterized by relatively low proportions of juvenile sheep and goat (less than 30%; Table 23.2). This pattern is even more pronounced in the Early Islamic assemblage, in which young individuals

Table 23.2. Mortality Profile of Sheep/Goat and Cattle Period

  Cattle

Iron IIA–III Sheep/Goat Cattle Hellenistic Sheep/Goat Cattle Early Roman Sheep/Goat

Late Roman– Byzantine

Cattle  Sheep/Goat Cattle

Early Islamic Sheep/Goat

 

D. Radius

D. Metapod

D. Femur

D. Tibia

D. Calcaneum

Total

Unfused

0

0

0

0

0

0

Fused+Unfused

0

0

0

0

1

1

Unfused

1

0

1

1

1

4

Fused+Unfused

1

1

2

1

1

6

Unfused

0

3

0

1

0

4

Fused+Unfused

0

10

0

1

2

13

Unfused

0

8

2

1

6

17

Fused+Unfused

0

29

4

13

14

60

Unfused

0

1

0

0

2

3

Fused+Unfused

1

10

0

3

7

21

Unfused

1

4

4

1

5

15

Fused+Unfused

7

25

8

10

11

61

Unfused

0

0

0

0

0

0

Fused+Unfused

0

1

0

0

2

3

Unfused

0

3

0

0

0

3

Fused+Unfused

0

6

1

3

1

11

Unfused

0

0

0

0

0

0

Fused+Unfused

0

1

0

0

0

1

Unfused

0

0

0

0

1

1

Fused+Unfused

1

4

2

3

6

16

% of Young Individuals 0 67 31 28 14 25 0 27 0 6

352

Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

are almost entirely absent (6%). These patterns reflect a culling practice that placed high value on secondary products such as milk and wool, as well as breeding. On the other hand, the small Iron II–III assemblage is dominated by young sheep and goat, indicating a husbandry system that focused on meat production. The age structure of Hellenistic and Early Roman cattle reflects some slaughtering of prime adults, with a particular emphasis on individuals between 20 and 30 months of age. It appears that in the Hellenistic period, about one-third of the cattle were slaughtered before they reached their third year of life, while in the Early Roman assemblage this decreased to less than 15%. The high proportion of mature cattle bones in the Early Roman period suggests a husbandry system that placed high value on products obtained from live cattle, such as milk, as well as labor and breeding. The relatively high proportion of young individuals in the Hellenistic assemblage reflects a culling pattern geared toward meat production. Evidence for bone-surface attrition in the bone assemblages is very low, and the preservation is excellent. The few surface modifications include mostly traces of carnivore gnawing, chewing and digesting (Hellenistic NISP = 1, Early Roman NISP = 1, Early Islamic NISP = 1), most probably re-

lated to post-depositional dog activities. Additional bone modifications, which reveal the significance of butchery practices in the formation of the bone assemblages, comprise a small number of butchery marks (N = 51), mainly on sheep and goat bones (Table 23.3). Single butchery marks on domestic fowl and pig bones were discerned in the Early Roman and Early Islamic assemblages, respectively. Most butchery marks were made during the process of dismemberment of the carcass (after Binford 1981), while other cut marks represent filleting and skinning. A total of 271 burnt bones, less than 2% of the total NISP, were recovered from Area M1. Of these, an exceptionally high number (261) derived from the Hellenistic deposits (about 36% of the NISP of that period; Table 23.4). Furthermore, of the 261 Hellenistic burnt specimens, the vast majority (over 90%) was concentrated on one floor (L808; Table 23.5). The remaining burnt bones were randomly dispersed without any particular spatial distribution. Fifteen bones were sawed or chopped (Table 23.6), representing production debris; some of the objects made of long bone shafts are rectangular in shape. The orientation of most of the sawing/chopping is perpendicular to the main axis of the skeletal element. The majority of the objects are horns of sheep/goat

Table 23.3. Distribution of Butchery Marks according to Period (after Binford 1981)

Table 23.4. Distribution of Burnt Bones according to Period

Period

Species

Purpose

Iron IIA–III

Sheep/goat

Dismemberment

5

Cattle

Dismemberment

2

Dismemberment

6

Filleting

1

Skinning

1

Dismemberment

6

Filleting

1

Skinning

5

Hellenistic

Sheep/goat

Cattle Early Roman

Dismemberment Sheep/goat

Late Roman– Byzantine Early Islamic

NISP

14

Skinning

4

Unknown

1

Domestic fowl

Unknown

1

Sheep/goat

Dismemberment

1

Period

Total NISP

Burnt NISP

% Burnt

Iron IIA–III

90

1

1.1

Hellenistic

716

261

36.4

Early Roman

541

7

1.3

Late Roman–Byzantine

163

0

-

125

2

1.6

1635

271

Early Islamic Total

Table 23.5. Distribution of Burnt Bones in Hellenistic Stratum VIII Locus

Total NISP

Burnt NISP

% Burnt

795

67

6

9.0

808

258

254

92.4

812

198

1

0.5

814

89

0

0

79

0

0

691

261

Sheep/goat

Dismemberment

2

815

Pig

Dismemberment

1

Total

353

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

(total NISP = 8, Fig. 23.4). The most complete bone tool recovered in the assemblage is a broad bone spatula made from an equid scapula shoulder blade found in the Early Roman stratum (Fig. 23.5). The spatula was fashioned by the removal of the scapula spine and the coracoid process (see Horwitz 2011). While the bone assemblages are too small to allow detailed analysis of anatomical representation, there appears to be no major variation in the representation of sheep and goat skeletal parts between the Hellenistic and Early Roman deposits (Fig. 23.6). Although nearly 0

Species

Bone

Hellenistic 

1

Astragalus

1

Horn

1

Horn

1

Horn

4

Frontal

1

Cattle

Metatarsal

1

Horse

Scapula

1

Sheep/goat

Horn

1

Sheep/goat

Horn

2

Sheep/goat

Astragalus

1

Cattle Sheep/goat Early Roman 

Byzantine Abbasid

NISP

Radius Sheep/goat

Total

cm

Fig. 23.4. A collection of sawed sheep/goat horns from various strata.

Table 23.6. Distribution of Sawed or Chopped Bones Period

5

0

3

cm

Fig. 23.5. Bone tool in the shape of a spatula made from an equine scapula: top lateral view; bottom ventral view (Inv. No. 66, Stratum VII, L760, B8361).

15

100% 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Horn and skull

Neck

Hellenistic

Axial

Upper limbs Middle limbs Lower limbs Phalange

Early Roman

Fig. 23.6. Skeletal-part distribution of sheep and goat from the Hellenistic and Early Roman strata.

354

Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

all elements are represented to some degree, some are present in a higher proportion, in particular the skull and limbs, while both assemblages are relatively poor in phalanx representation. This may be interpreted as evidence of a preference for ‘rich meaty’ parts.

Conclusions The bone assemblages from Area M1 are dominated by certain skeletal parts, which resulted from cooking and bone-processing activities. The taxa represent major food resources, composed primarily of sheep and goat and to a lesser extent of cattle. Similar frequencies of domesticated livestock are reported from other zooarchaeological assemblages from Jerusalem (Horwitz and Tchernov 1989, 1996a, 1996b; RabanGerstel and Bar-Oz 2008). Pigs are present mainly in the Late Roman–Byzantine and Early Islamic strata, when they played a role in the subsistence strategy, even though consumption, and in some cases even the raising of pigs, was taboo in the city of Jerusalem, according to Jewish and Muslim religious laws. Domestic fowl were exploited in low numbers in all periods, except during the early Hellenistic period, when they were the second most abundant taxon. Some of the fish remains, in particular those from the Hellenistic deposits, include Nile perch, which clearly attests that the inhabitants of Jerusalem in the Hellenistic period enjoyed imported food products. The role of long-distance trade in supplying the needs of the population reflects the longstanding importance of Jerusalem as a political, economic, and religious

center. Furthermore, Nile Perch is usually considered as a luxury food in the old world (e.g., Van Neer, Zohar and Lernau 2005). Other species that occur in the assemblage in lower proportions, such as cats, dogs and other small carnivores, would have been common residents of the ancient urban landscape of Jerusalem. The presence of carnivore modifications on some of the bones in all strata indicates that domestic carnivores had access to the refuse that had possibly been discarded near the houses. The evidence of butchery marks representing all stages of butchery, and the presence of skeletal elements from nearly all parts of sheep, goat and cattle, further demonstrates that the majority of these animal remains represent food refuse. The chopped/ sawed specimens, many of which exhibit markedly rectangular shapes, apparently comprise debris from bone-working industries (see Chapter 17). The relatively low frequency of young sheep and goats in the assemblages from the Hellenistic period onward suggests that these animals were primarily raised for milk or wool. This pattern is evident in all strata except the Iron IIA–III assemblage, which is dominated by a high percentage of young sheep and goat. It could also be suggested that the relatively high proportion of young cattle individuals in the Hellenistic, and to a lesser extant in the Early Roman period, implies that cattle were raised predominantly for meat at that time. This latter finding accords with the role of Jerusalem in those periods as an urban consumption center that depended for its subsistence on rural producers.

1 2

2

1

1

2 2

4th central Metatarsus proximal

2

2

1

1

1

Calcaneus distal

1

1

2

1

2

1 1

Calcaneus complete

1

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) distal Astragalus

2

Femur distal

1

2

1

1

Femur proximal

1

1

1

Pelvic acetabulum ischium Femur caput

1

Pelvic acetabulum illium

1

2

Hindlimb

2

1

Metacarpus proximal

1

Ulna proximal

Radius distal

2 1

Radius proximal

3

Humerus proximal

Scapula glenoid fossa

Forelimb

3

Rib head Coracoid

8 8

Vertebra thoracic spine

4

6

1 2

1

1

Axis 2

1

Maxilla teeth Body

1

Mandible teeth

Teeth

2

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

8

8

1

3

2

3

1

MNE

Capra/Ovis NISP 1

1

MNE

Capra hircus NISP

3

1

MNE

Ovis aries NISP

Mandible ramus condyle

2

MNE

Occipital

Head

NISP

Bos taurus

1

1

NISP

1

1

MNE

Sus scrofa

1

1

NISP

1

1

MNE

Gallus gallus

Table 23.7. Number of Identified Specimens (NISP), Minimum Number of Elements (MNE) and Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) of Each Taxon Represented in Iron IIA–III Strata XII–IX Total

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

355

1

Phalanx 1 proximal

1 1

Phalanx 2 distal Phalanx 3 complete

2

5.6

5

2

2

MNE

Capra hircus NISP

2

60.0

54

1

1

1

1

MNE

4

NISP

10 11

Mandible teeth Maxilla teeth

1

2.2

2

MNE

Sus scrofa NISP

1

2.2

2

60

18

2

1

13

1

1

1

NISP

1

60

22

5

2

42

1

MNE

15

16

1

14 16

NISP

14

1

MNE

Gallus gallus

Forcula

19

1 1

1

15 49

1

6

2

MNE

Sus scrofa

MNE

Gallus gallus NISP

Coracoid

Rib head

2 1

Axis Vertebra thoracic spine

Atlas

4

3

2

2

1

NISP

Mandible ramus condyle

MNE

Capra/Ovis

4

2

NISP

Capra hircus

3

1

MNE

Ovis aries

Horn

1

NISP

Bos taurus

6

Body

1

1

1

MNE

Capra/Ovis NISP

Petrosum

Occipital

Head

3

7.8

7

MNE

Ovis aries NISP

Table 23.8. Number of Identified Specimens (NISP), Minimum Number of Elements (MNE) and Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) of Each Taxon Represented in Hellenistic Stratum VIII

1

22.2

% NISP MNI

20

NISP

Metapod condyle

1

1

Phalanx 2 proximal 1

1

1

1

1

1

Phalanx 2 complete

Phalanx 1 distal

1

Phalanx 1 complete

Phalanges

MNE

Bos taurus NISP

Table 23.7 (cont.)

Total

10

100.0

90

Total

356 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

6

3

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

3

1

2

1

2

1

4

5

6

1

1

Calcaneus proximal

1

10

1

Calcaneus complete

3

1 12

Metatarsus (tarsusmetatarsus) complete

3

Astragalus

1

4th central

3 1

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) proximal Tibia (tibio-tarsus) distal

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) complete

2

2

1

1

1

Femur proximal Femur distal

2

Femur caput

Femur complete

5

5

Pelvic acetabulum pubis

1

1

1 12

1

1

12

Pelvic acetabulum ischium

Pelvic acetabulum illium

Pelvic acetabulum complete

Hindlimb

Metacarpus distal

2

1

9

2

4

4

11

1

2

2

2

4

7

4

1

8

4

8

14

1

7

7

7

7 4

Captometacarpus complete Metacarpus proximal

2

6

4

Ulna distal

10

3 7

2

5

9

4

3

1

4

1

8

Ulna complete

1

7

1

1

Ulna proximal

6

2

1

1

1

6

1

Radius Proximal

2

3

6

4

8

14

1

7

7

7

7

2

4

7

1

4

9

3

3

8

8

MNE

Gallus gallus NISP

Radius distal

6

Humerus distal

5

8

MNE

Sus scrofa NISP

3

3

MNE

Capra/Ovis NISP

3

3

MNE

Capra hircus NISP

Humerus complete 2

MNE

Humerus proximal

NISP

Table 23.8 (cont.).

9 3

MNE

Ovis aries

Scapula complete

Scapula glenoid fossa

Forelimb

NISP

Bos taurus

Total

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

357

3

Metatarsus (tarsusmetatarsus) distal

7

Metapod condyle

2

2

Phalanx 3 proximal

MNI

2

Phalanx 3 complete

17.4

5

Phalanx 2 distal

% NISP

3

Phalanx 2 proximal

120

7

Phalanx 2 complete

NISP

2 3

Phalanx 1 proximal Phalanx 1 distal

8

Phalanx 1 complete

Phalanges

7

Metatarsus (tarsusmetatarsus) proximal

2

2

2

3

1

6

2

2

8

3

4

MNE

Bos taurus NISP

4

3.8

26

3

3

3

3

MNE

Ovis aries NISP

2

3.2

22

1

1

4

3

NISP

1

1

4

3

MNE

Capra hircus

Table 23.8 (cont.)

8

56.7

392

15

2

1

1

5

5

2

7

8

22

8

2

1

1

4

5

1

5

8

12

MNE

Capra/Ovis NISP

1

0.6

4

MNE

Sus scrofa NISP

14

18.4

127

4

2 4

2

MNE

Gallus gallus NISP

31

100.0

691

Total

358 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

1

3

NISP

2

MNE 3

NISP

Maxilla teeth

1

Metacarpus distal

Metacarpus proximal

Metacarpus complete 10

9 1

1

2

8

1

1

2

8

1

2

4

1

2

4

3

4

12

5

1

2

2

14

7

1 2

1

4

8

5

11

4

1

Radius d’istal

8

5

39

12

3

3

16

Ulna proximal

6

Radius proximal

5

4

1

2

1

12 30

Ulna complete

2

Humerus distal

Humerus proximal

Humerus complete 5

4

Scapula glenoid fossa

Scapula neck

1

2

12

Scapula complete

Forelimb

Coracoid

Rib head

Sacrum

Vertebra thoracic spine 12

2

1

Axis

Vertebra

1

5

3

6

6

Atlas

5

9

Mandible teeth

Body

6 11

Mandible camus condyle

6

1

MNE

3

2

NISP

2

11

6

5

1

2

4

7

2

1

2

37

11

2

1

6

12

10

2

1

3

MNE

Capra/Ovis

Horn

1

MNE

Capra hircus

1

1

NISP

Ovis aries

Petrosum

Occipital

Head

Bos taurus NISP

MNE

Sus scrofa

1

1

NISP

1

1

MNE

Equus

1

1

1

1

NISP

1

1

1

1

MNE

Canis

Table 23.9. Number of Identified Specimens (NISP), Minimum Number of Elements (MNE) and Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) of Each Taxon Represented in Early Roman Stratum VII

1

3

1

1

3

1

NISP

1

3

1

1

3

1

MNE

Gallus gallus

Total

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

359

1

Femur proximal

1

1

2

2

4

1

1

9

9

4 5

3

23.9 5

% NISP

MNI

6 129

NISP

Metapod condyle

Phalanx 3 proximal

Phalanx 3 complete

Phalanx 2 distal 2

3

Phalanx 2 proximal

5

5

Phalanx 1 distal

Phalanx 2 complete

3

2

3

1

Phalanx 1 proximal

5 1

5

Phalanx 1 complete

Phalanges

5

7.6

41

1

1

1

1

6

8.1

44

2

2

9

53.7

290

4

2

1

9

13

9

4

4

10

11

Metatarsus distal

1

Metatarsus proximal

2

2 4

4th central

4

2

4

Metatarsus complete

2

4

4

2

4

2

3

4

Calcaneus distal

3

Calcaneus complete

2 2

3

Astragalus

3

Calcaneus proximal

4 3

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) proximal

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) distal

10

2

2

1

7

12

7

4

1

2

1

4

3

10

5

2

4

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

MNE

Canis NISP

2

2

0.2 1

1

0.9

5

1

1

1

1

1

0.9

5

3

4.6

25

3

1

1

3

1

1

5

1

2

2

MNE

Gallus gallus NISP

5

4

8

2

4

MNE

Equus NISP

1 2

1

1

4

8

3

5

MNE

Sus scrofa NISP

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) complete

Femur distal

1

Femur caput

Femur complete

4

11

Pelvic acetabulum ischium

Pelvic acetabulum pubis

4

MNE

Capra/Ovis NISP 5

1

MNE

Capra hircus NISP

Pelvic acetabulum illium 1

MNE

Ovis aries NISP

Pelvic acetabulum complete

Hindlimb

MNE

Bos taurus NISP

Table 23.9 (cont.)

31

100.0

540

Total

360 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

2

2

1

Maxilla teeth

Metacarpus distal

1

1 2 3

Pelvic acetabulum illium

Pelvic acetabulum ischium

Hindlimb

1

2

3

2

3

2

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

2

2

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

3

1

2

3

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

MNE

Sus scrofa NISP

Metacarpus proximal

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

3

1

3

6

3

MNE

Equus NISP

Metacarpus complete

Ulna proximal

1

1 1

Radius proximal

Radius distal

2 1

1

1

1

Humerus distal

Humerus proximal

Humerus complete

Scapula glenoid fossa

Forelimb

Coracoid

2

1

Rib head

Sternum

1

Vertebra thoracic spine

Vertebra

Axis

Atlas

Body

4 1

Mandible teeth

Teeth

2

1

MNE

Capra/Ovis NISP

3

2

MNE

Capra hircus NISP

3

2

MNE

Ovis aries NISP

Mandible ramus condyle 2

MNE

Horn

Petrosum

Occipital

Head

NISP

Bos taurus

1

NISP

1

MNE

Felis

Table 23.10. Number of Identified Specimens (NISP), Minimum Number of Elements (MNE) and Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) of Each Taxon Represented in Late Roman–Byzantine Strata VI–V

1

1

MNE

Gallus gallus NISP

Total

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

361

1

18 14.9 1

NISP

% NISP

MNI

Metapod condyle

Phalanx 3 proximal

Phalanx 3 complete

Phalanx 2 distal

1

Phalanx 2 proximal

5

1

Phalanx 2 complete

Phalanx 1 distal

Phalanx 1 proximal

Phalanx 1 complete

Phalanges

Metatarsus distal

Metatarsus proximal

Metatarsal complete

4th central

Calcaneus distal

Calcaneus proximal

Calcaneus complete

Astragalus

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) distal

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) proximal

Tibia complete

Femur distal

Femur proximal

Femur caput

Femur complete

Pelvic acetabulum pubis

1

1

5

1

MNE

Bos taurus NISP

2

10.7

13

1

2

3

1

2

3

MNE

Ovis aries NISP

2

8.3

10

3

1

NISP

3

1

MNE

Capra hircus

2

45.5

55

1

3

2

2

1

3

2

1

2

NISP

1

3

2

2

1

3

2

1

2

MNE

Capra/Ovis

Table 23.10 (cont.)

1

2.5

3

MNE

Equus NISP

1

12.4

15

2

1

1

2

1

1

MNE

Sus scrofa NISP

1

3.3

4

1

2

1

2

MNE

Felis NISP

1

2.5

3

1

1

1

1

MNE

Gallus gallus NISP

11

100.0

121

Total

362 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

2

MNE

2

NISP

2

MNE 1

1

Maxilla teeth

1 2 3

Pelvic acetabulum illium

Pelvic acetabulum ischium

Hindlimb

Metacarpus distal

1

2

3

2

3

2

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

MNE

Sus scrofa NISP

Metacarpus proximal

1

2

2

1

1

2

3

1

2

3

MNE

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

3

1

3

6

3

NISP

Equus

Metacarpus complete

Ulna proximal

1

1

Radius distal

2

Radius proximal

1

1

1

1

Humerus distal

Humerus proximal

Humerus complete

Scapula glenoid fossa

Forelimb

Coracoid

2

1

Rib head

Sternum

1

Vertebra thoracic spine

Vertebra

Axis

Atlas

Body

4

Mandible teeth

Teeth

2

1

MNE

Capra/Ovis NISP

3

2

NISP

Mandible ramus condyle 2

MNE

Capra hircus

3

NISP

Ovis aries

Horn

Petrosum

Occipital

Head

Bos taurus

1

NISP

1

MNE

Felis

Table 23.11. Number of Identified Specimens (NISP), Minimum Number of Elements (MNE) and Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) of Each Taxon Represented in Early Islamic Strata IV–I

1

NISP

1

MNE

Gallus gallus

Total

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

363

1

2

2

8.3

2

45.5

1

10.7

14.9

%NISP

3

2

2

1

3

2

1

2

NISP

MNI

3

1

MNE

1 10

3

1

NISP

55

1

2

3

MNE

1

3

2

2

1

3

2

1

2

MNE

Capra/Ovis

18

13

1

2

3

NISP

Capra hircus

NISP

1

1

5

1

MNE

Ovis aries

Metapod condyle

Phalanx 3 proximal

Phalanx 3 complete

Phalanx 2 distal

1

Phalanx 2 proximal

5

1

NISP

Phalanx 2 complete

Phalanx 1 distal

Phalanx 1 proximal

Phalanx 1 complete

Phalanges

Metatarsus distal

Metatarsus proximal

Metatarsal complete

4th central

Calcaneus distal

Calcaneus proximal

Calcaneus complete

Astragalus

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) distal

Tibia (tibio-tarsus) proximal

Tibia complete

Femur distal

Femur proximal

Femur caput

Femur complete

Pelvic acetabulum pubis

Bos taurus

Table 23.11 (cont.)

1

2.5

3

NISP

MNE

Equus

1

12.4

15

2

1

1

NISP

2

1

1

MNE

Sus scrofa

1

3.3

4

1

2

NISP

1

2

MNE

Felis

1

2.5

3

1

1

NISP

1

1

MNE

Gallus gallus

11

100.0

121

Total

364 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

365

Notes The complete research protocol and dataset for each of the identified zooarchaeological specimens is stored in the IAA archives, or can be acquired from the authors; the bone assemblage was returned to the excavator. 1

Measurements were registered into a standard Windows Excel worksheet using OptoFace (version 1.01) software. 2

R eferences Binford L.R. 1981. Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. New York. Boessneck J. 1969. Osteological Differences between Sheep (Ovis aries) and Goat (Capra hircus). In D.R. Brothwell and E. Higgs eds. Science in Archaeology. London. Pp. 331–358. Davis S.J.M. 1980. Late Pleistocene and Holocene Equid Remains from Israel. Zoological Journal of the Linnaean Society 70:289–312. Davis S.J.M. 1983. The Age Profiles of Gazelles Predated by Ancient Man in Israel: Possible Evidence for a Shift from Seasonality to Sedentism in the Natufian. Paléorient 9(1):55–62. Davis S.J.M. 1987. The Archaeology of Animals. New Haven–London. Driesch von den A. 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites (Peabody Museum Bulletin 1). Cambridge. Grayson D.K. 1984. Quantitative Zooarchaeology: Topics in the Analysis of Archaeological Faunas. New York. Horwitz L.K. 2011. Partners in Purity: Second Temple Oil Presses and Scapulae Scoops. Near Eastern Archaeology 74:241–246. Horwitz L.K. and Tchernov E. 1989. Subsistence Patterns in Ancient Jerusalem: A Study of Animal Remains. In E. Mazar and B. Mazar eds. Excavations in the South of the Temple Mount: The Ophel of Biblical Jerusalem (Qedem 29). Jerusalem. Pp. 144–154.

Horwitz L.K. and Tchernov E. 1996a. Bird Remains from Areas A, D, H and K. In D.T. Ariel and A. De Groot eds. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985, Directed by Yigal Shiloh IV: Various Reports (Qedem 35). Jerusalem. Pp. 298–301. Horwitz L.K. and Tchernov E. 1996b. Faunal Remains from Areas A, B, D, H and K. In D.T. Ariel and A. De Groot eds. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985, Directed by Yigal Shiloh IV: Various Reports (Qedem 35). Jerusalem. Pp. 302–315. Klein R.G. and Cruz-Uribe K. 1984. The Analysis of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Chicago. Lyman R.L. 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge. Raban-Gerstel N. and Bar-Oz G. 2008. Archaeozoological Analysis of the Faunal Remains from the Iron Age City of David Visitor Center 2007 (unpublished report in the IAA archives). Jerusalem. Silver I.A. 1969. The Aging of Domesticated Animals. In D.R. Brothwell and E. Higgs eds. Science in Archaeology. New York. Pp. 283–302. Van Neer W., Zohar I. and Lernau O. 2005. The Emergence of Fishing Communities in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: A Survey of Evidence from Pre- and Protohistoric Periods. Paléorient 31(1):131–157. Zeder M.A. and Lapham H.A. 2010. Assessing the Reliability of Criteria Used to Identify Postcranial Bones in Sheep, Ovis, and Goats, Capra. Journal of Archaeological Science 37:2887–2905.

1732 1321

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Islamic

Scapula Scapula Scapula Scapula

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa Capra/Ovis

Scapula

Capra/Ovis Sus scrofa

Scapula Scapula

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Scapula Scapula

Sus scrofa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Glenoidfossa

Illium, ischium, pubis

Illium, ischium, pubis

Illium, ischium, pubis

Illium, ischium, pubis

Illium, ischium, pubis

Illium, ischium, pubis

Axis

Axis

Axis

Atlas

Part

Measurement abbreviations after von den Driesch 1976; F = Fused Bone, UF = Unfused Bone

2838 1628

Late Roman–Byzantine

2805

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2797 1552

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

3043 1641

Early Roman

Late Roman–Byzantine

Capra/Ovis

Scapula

Sus scrofa

2364

Early Roman

Scapula Scapula

1821 2146

Early Roman

Early Roman

Sus scrofa

Scapula Scapula

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Pelvic Pelvic

Sus scrofa

Sus scrofa

3016 3094

Early Roman

Early Roman

2170 2977

Early Roman

Late Roman–Byzantine

Sus scrofa

Pelvic

Sus scrofa

Early Roman

2046

2373 3048

Early Roman

Early Roman

Pelvic

Pelvic

Equus Pelvic

3138

Early Roman

Vertebra

Capra/Ovis

Sus scrofa

1783

Late Roman–Byzantine

Vertebra Vertebra

Capra/Ovis

Vertebra

Sus scrofa

Capra/Ovis

Bone

Species

Sus scrofa

2387 2452

Early Roman

1313

Early Islamic

Early Roman

Database Inventory number

Period

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

Burnt

0

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

33.38

36.28

38.92

37.07

34.13

32.31

36.92

33.94

35.31

35.82

30.37

37.31

GLp

33.59

39.11

31.54

31.97

36.76

52.16

LA

49.16

48.81

47.46

BFcr

51.17

BFcd

Bone Measurements of Faunal Specimens from Area M1 (mm).

Appendix 23.1

24.52

29.99

30.71

25.33

26.01

24.62

27.51

26.05

27.46

27.59

29.58

25.21

29.68

LG

23.63

22.56

24.13

20.19

21.97

21.31

21.26

22.17

22.54

23.48

21.97

21.07

21.48

24.76

BG

366 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

1419 1418 1343 1344

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

1793 1744

Late Roman–Byzantine

1591

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1701 1621

Late Roman–Byzantine

2809

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2924 1630

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2118 1718

Early Roman

Late Roman–Byzantine

Humerus Humerus Humerus Humerus

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Ovis aries Ovis aries

Humerus Humerus

Ovis aries

Humerus

Ovis aries Sus scrofa

Humerus Humerus

Capra/Ovis

Humerus

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Humerus Humerus

Capra sp. Capra/Ovis

Humerus Humerus

Sus scrofa Capra sp.

Humerus

Sus scrofa

3036

Early Roman

Humerus Humerus

3012 1079

Early Roman

Early Roman

Sus scrofa

Humerus Humerus

Sus scrofa

Humerus

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Humerus Humerus

Ovis aries

Humerus

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Humerus Humerus

Capra/Ovis Equus

Humerus Humerus

Capra/Ovis

Humerus

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Humerus Humerus

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Humerus Humerus

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Bone

Species

Sus scrofa

2049 2371

Early Roman

3084

Early Roman

Early Roman

2380 2101

Early Roman

2083

Early Roman

Early Roman

2503 2489

Early Roman

Early Roman

2312 1840

Early Roman

2472

Early Roman

Early Roman

2111 2530

Early Roman

Early Roman

2107 2100

Early Roman

Early Roman

Database Inventory number

Period

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Distal

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Burnt

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

32.4

29.5

39.15

37.15

34.56

34.5

34.26

36.7

39.25

41.51

42.84

39.5

40

35.4

38.8

30.6

33.08

33.87

31.61

BD

BFcd

31.5

30.4

33.32

32.4

34.14

33.37

33.84

34.56

30.4

32.7

32.6

32.14

36.5

24.08

35.67

35.67

33.4

34.6

31.4

32.5

34.8

29.4

51.9

33.8

31.8

34.6

36.5

31.56

29.27

31.42

32.65

BT

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

367

1182 2239 1756 1804

Early Roman

Early Roman

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Islamic

Ulna Ulna Ulna Ulna

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa Bos taurus Capra/Ovis

Radius

Early Islamic Ovis aries

1394

Early Islamic

Radius

1392

Late Roman–Byzantine Radius

758

Late Roman–Byzantine

Capra/Ovis

1559

Late Roman–Byzantine

Capra/Ovis

1551

Late Roman–Byzantine

Radius

1471

Late Roman–Byzantine

Ovis aries

1764

Late Roman–Byzantine

Radius

1577

Late Roman–Byzantine

Radius

2561

Late Roman–Byzantine

Ovis aries

2991 1745

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Ovis aries

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Radius

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Radius

1727

Late Roman–Byzantine

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

2770

Late Roman–Byzantine

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

1731

Late Roman–Byzantine

Radius

Capra sp.

1813

1629

Late Roman–Byzantine

Radius

Sus scrofa

2829

1733

Late Roman–Byzantine

Radius

Sus scrofa

Radius

1830

Early Roman

Radius

Sus scrofa

Capra/Ovis

2043

Early Roman

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Radius

3011

Early Roman

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Radius

3112

Early Roman

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

2385

Early Roman

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

3111

Early Roman

Radius

Capra/Ovis

Radius

2068

Early Roman

Radius

2462

Early Roman

Radius

Capra sp.

Capra/Ovis

3023

Early Roman

Bone

Species

Capra/Ovis

Database Inventory number

Period

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

Yes

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

Burnt

F

F

UF

0

F

F

0

F

F

F

UF

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

39.59

37.32

36.24

34.67

25.43

32.99

36.19

23.07

28.81

24.88

34.38

33.67

28.62

34.04

24.64

27.72

30.15

34.54

37.59

32.37

28.51

37.34

Bp

BFcd Bd

30.15

33.84

31.11

29.67

33.74

28.75

64.02

36.24

30.21

29.46

DPA

368 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

2058 1865 2943

Early Roman

Early Roman

Late Roman–Byzantine

2057 1891

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Tibia Tibia Tibia

Sus scrofa Bos taurus

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Tibia Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

2006

Early Roman Capra/Ovis

2368

Early Roman 2026

2426

Early Roman Tibia

2460

Early Roman Tibia

2177

Early Roman

Capra/Ovis

2397 2374

Early Roman

Early Roman

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

2389

Early Roman

Tibia

Canis sp.

Tibia

2254

Early Roman

Femur

Ovis aries

Tibia

2085

Early Roman

Femur

Sus scrofa

Capra/Ovis

876

Early Islamic

Femur

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

822

Early Islamic

Femur

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

751

Early Islamic

Tibia

719

Early Islamic

Femur

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

717

Early Islamic

Femur Femur

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Femur Femur

Capra/Ovis

Femur

Capra/Ovis Ovis aries

Femur Femur

Ulna

Sus scrofa Capra/Ovis

Ulna

Sus scrofa

Canis sp.

Bone

Species

Capra/Ovis

419 431

Early Roman

Early Roman

361 2381

Early Roman

2397

Early Roman

Early Roman

464 688

2968

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Roman

2925

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Roman

Database Inventory number

Period

Part

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

Burnt

F

F

UF

UF

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

0

F

0

0

F

UF

F

UF

F

F

F

0

F

F/UF

GL

33.68

46.61

22.26 Bp

22.67

21.54

21.28

15.13

DC

46.92

23.08

49.52

Bp

BFcd

13.97

SD

36.19

39.05

38.16

42.86

39.99

33.11

Bd

29.41

33.46

55.05

29.37

29.29

26.28

29.47

23.55

23.53

30.18

29.23

25.02

26.25

26.43

27.15

24.44

19.87

Bd

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

369

1773 1450 1746 1634 1747

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1792 2748 1496 1431

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Islamic

1797

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1719 1497

Late Roman–Byzantine

1447

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2372

2071

Early Roman 2162

2091

Early Roman

Early Roman

2518

Early Roman

Early Roman

3072 2505

Early Roman

Early Roman

2540

1723

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Roman

2993

Late Roman–Byzantine

1445

1790

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Islamic

2936

Late Roman–Byzantine

1411

2839

Late Roman–Byzantine

1345

2935

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Islamic

1482

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Islamic

Database Inventory number

Period

Tibia Tibia Tibia Tibia Tibia

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Ovis aries

Tarsal Tarsal Tarsal Tarsal

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Bos Taurus

Tarsal

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Tarsal Tarsal

Capra sp.

Tarsal

Capra sp. Capra/Ovis

Tarsal

Tarsal

Capra/Ovis Tarsal

Tarsal

Capra/Ovis Sus scrofa

Tarsal

Capra/Ovis

Sus scrofa

Tarsal Tarsal

Capra sp. Capra/Ovis

Tarsal

Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Bos taurus

Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

Tibia

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

Tibia

Capra sp.

Capra sp.

Bone

Species

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

Yes

0

0

yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Burnt

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

UF

F/UF

Bd

44.89

46.62

BFcd

Gli

66.08

30.57

28.92

30.79

33.36

30.83

29.98

30.13

39.19

46.85

30.94

28.91

29.87

35.18

34.22

78.16

Glm

60.17

29.83

27.91

31.72

28.86

28.21

37.38

44.65

27.31

27.46

32.12

31.18

73.55

16.61

17.65

17.78

17.91

16.74

23.58

24.99

16.32

19.27

19.4

Dm

27.95

26.4

30.15

26.21

27.44

31.86

25.62

30.54

24.11

28.9

32.27

23.21

28.02

17.94

15.18

17.71

18.48

16.76

16.05

15.12

22.23

24.03

17.21

14.91

16.51

18.84

19.19

Dl

370 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

1734 2773 1563

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2751 2948

Late Roman–Byzantine

1724

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2425 2806

Early Roman

Late Roman–Byzantine

Tarsal Tarsal Tarsal

Capra sp. Capra sp. Capra sp.

Tarsal Tarsal

Capra sp.

Tarsal

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Tarsal Tarsal

Sus scrofa Capra sp.

Tarsal

Sus scrofa

2117

Early Roman

Tarsal Tarsal

2345 2230

Early Roman

Early Roman

Ovis aries

Tarsal Tarsal

Capra sp.

Tarsal

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Tarsal Tarsal

Tarsal

Ovis aries Capra sp.

Tarsal

Ovis aries

Capra sp.

Tarsal Tarsal

Capra/Ovis

Tarsal

Bos Taurus Capra/Ovis

Tarsal Tarsal

Bos Taurus Bos Taurus

Tarsal Tarsal

Bos Taurus

Tarsal

Bos Taurus Bos Taurus

Tarsal Tarsal

Bos Taurus Bos Taurus

Tarsal Tarsal

Bos Taurus

Tarsal

Bos Taurus Bos Taurus

Bone

Species

Sus scrofa

2453 2383

Early Roman

2114

Early Roman

Early Roman

3032 3002

1311

Early Islamic

Early Roman

864

Early Islamic

Early Roman

1390 1317

Early Islamic

1430

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

1435 1433

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

1440 1339

Early Islamic

1439

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

1442 1441

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

1432 1438

Early Islamic

1434

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Database Inventory number

Period

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Astragalus

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

Yes

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Burnt

F

F

F

F

F

UF

UF

UF

F

F

F

F

F

F

UF

UF

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

62.45

58.08

63.92

GL

BFcd

20.71

16.77

19.16

20.24

21.14

18.12

18.51

23.11

22.37

19.05

18.51

19.41

23.01

18.24

18.71

19.76

GB

33.18

33.42

28.92

34.32

71.29

73.65

65.64

63.89

72.06

63.36

72.11

74.87

77.56

31.56

30.53

26.77

32.92

64.42

58.46

58.91

65

60.02

64.08

62.09

63.89

65.46

69.07

18.23

17.79

18.04

13.73

18.82

18.51

18.34

14.91

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

371

1381 1382 867 2402 2457 3107 2393 2394 2182 2334 2445 3025 1899 2263 2446 2459 2473 1463 1754 2772 1699 2937 2810 2754 2753 1639 1636

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1788 2808

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1465 1464

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Database Inventory number

Period

Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Ovis aries

Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Metapod

Metapod

Capra/Ovis

Capra/Ovis

Metapod

Capra/Ovis

Metapod

Metapod

Bos taurus

Metapod

Metapod

Bos taurus

Capra sp.

Tarsal

Ovis aries

Bos Taurus

Tarsal Tarsal

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Tarsal Tarsal

Ovis aries Sus scrofa

Tarsal Tarsal

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Bone

Species

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Calcaneum

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

Burnt

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

UF

UF

F

F

F

F/UF 18.52

21.77

23.85

24.31

28.21

19.71

22.13

24.29

59.09

22.74

24.73

21.42

20.57

24.71

20.69

22.79

22.47

28.41

46.77

109.61

GL

Bp 51.19

19.83

17.69

23.62

20.85

22.49

19.07

63.55

58.23

67.07

60.31

BFcd

16.31

SD

24.68

24.49

25.07

28.06

29.67

29.69

Bd

372 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

2967 1472 2767 1565 2934 1696 1759 1410 883 893

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

3033 3154 1839

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

2461 2115

Early Roman

2399

Early Roman

Early Roman

2538 2401

Early Roman

2400

Early Roman

Early Roman

2492 2398

Early Roman

Early Roman

2106 2510

Early Roman

2519

Early Roman

Early Roman

2410 2479

Early Roman

Early Roman

2081

2950

Late Roman–Byzantine

2493

1774

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Roman

2896

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Roman

Database Inventory number

Period

Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod Metapod

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Ovis aries Bos Taurus Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp.

Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp.

Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Phalanx Phalanx

Bos taurus Capra sp.

Phalanx Phalanx

Bos taurus

Phalanx

Bos taurus Bos taurus

Phalanx Phalanx

Bos taurus Bos taurus

Phalanx

Metapod

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Metapod

Capra/Ovis

Bos taurus

Metapod

Capra/Ovis

Bos taurus

Bone

Species

1

1

1

1

0

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

Yes

0

0

0

Yes

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

Burnt

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

UF

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

12.64

13.01

11.88

13.27

13.76

14.38

13.27

11.22

23.11

26.99

28.23

28.04

24.51

Bp

41.02

25.78

20.28

26.03

23.19

21.21

20.91

BFcd

11.46

12.21

11.98

11.01

9.69

10.21

14.69

11.67

13.72

11.16

23.79

21.27

25.56

25.11

25.94

25.65

22.43

27.22

Bd

40.03

36.65

24.94

24.19

37.08

24.53

39.16

37.91

56.82

38.25

37.94

36.12

54.33

GL

DLS

29.47

27.84

26.37

25.82

25.05

30.34

LD

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

373

2290 2206 2150 3082

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

2103

Early Roman

Early Roman

2145 2175

Early Roman

2206

Early Roman

Early Roman

2257 2255

Early Roman

Early Roman

2636 3057

Early Roman

3106

Early Roman

Early Roman

1876 3124

Early Roman

Early Roman

1839 1867

Early Roman

1845

Early Roman

Early Roman

2341 2409

Early Roman

Early Roman

2025 2324

Early Roman

2419

Early Roman

Early Roman

1866 2506

Early Roman

2511

Early Roman

Early Roman

2340 2183

Early Roman

Early Roman

3034 3170

Early Roman

Early Roman

2084 2434

Early Roman

Early Roman

Database Inventory number

Period

Phalanx Phalanx Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa

Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Phalanx Phalanx

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Phalanx Phalanx

Equus

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Galus galus

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Bone

Species

2

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

2

0

1

3

3

1

2

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Part

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

Burnt

F

F

F

F

F

F

UF

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

17.33

12.14

16.24

13.93

16.81

12.61

12.99

14.35

54.56

12.94

12.81

14.05

13.69

11.48

12.75

12.61

13.16

12.89

13.38

14.54

BFcd 14.45

14.48

14.25

10.91

13.44

16.03

12.28

14.25

15.92

11.51

12.11

12.97

49.31

12.31

12.62

10.35

11.49

13.22

10.08

8.83

9.84

12.33

11.51

11.75

14.36

10.53

14.81

9.73

14.31

11.88

24.31

36.22

22.68

22.82

36.5

35.46

23.37

26.94

87.04

20.48

41.48

35.31

24.16

21.25

25.42

38.77

41.21

24.85

41.05

43.09

30.3 32.62

26.69

374 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

1720 1605 1752

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1655 1661

Late Roman–Byzantine

1664

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1666 1550

Late Roman–Byzantine

1659

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1645 1781

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1564 1649

Late Roman–Byzantine

1650

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1518 1510

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1477 1521

Late Roman–Byzantine

1451

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2868 1516

Late Roman–Byzantine

1476

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2798 1642

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2328 1892

Early Roman

2103

Early Roman

Early Roman

1846 1885

Early Roman

Early Roman

1823 3042

Early Roman

2207

Early Roman

Early Roman

Database Inventory number

Period

Phalanx Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp.

Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp.

Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp.

Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Phalanx Phalanx

Bos taurus Bos taurus

Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa

Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa

Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Bone

Species

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

3

3

2

2

1

1

1

1

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Burnt

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

13.51

15.14

11.73

11.79

12.57

12.17

11.68

12.76

12.19

12.74

11.09

11.91

11.57

10.93

14.28

13.41

12.17

13.07

29.31

16.29

15.89

16.99

BFcd

11.71

11.35

11.23

13.65

11.76

12.36

13.41

11.72

14.26

9.49

10.43

9.78

9.31

9.81

9.03

9.51

12.69

14.01

10.76

11.67

10.99

24.77

28.52

15.42

12.81

15.21

15.77

15.89

15.32

37.67

37.88

33.99

33.64

33.64

37.28

22.22

20.68

22.68

21.72

39.41

22.61

21.72

41.55

24.76

37.95

34.01

39.21

22.71

21.46

44.33

28.67 27.52

26.97 26.78

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

375

1520 1478 1481

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1514

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1501 1519

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1500 1479

Late Roman–Byzantine

1512

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1475 1653

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1594 1515

Late Roman–Byzantine

1513

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1675 2928

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1670 1672

Late Roman–Byzantine

1668

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1654 1782

Late Roman–Byzantine

1499

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1523 1612

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1656 1662

Late Roman–Byzantine

1522

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1511 1658

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1663 1657

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

1660 1517

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Database Inventory number

Period

Phalanx Phalanx Phalanx

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Phalanx

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Phalanx Phalanx

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Phalanx Phalanx

Ovis aries

Phalanx

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Phalanx Phalanx

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Phalanx Phalanx

Ovis aries

Phalanx

Ovis aries Ovis aries

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Equus

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis

Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis

Bone

Species

3

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

3

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Burnt

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

10.62

12.64

12.18

10.76

11.61

11.62

14.53

12.47

11.52

12.65

12.91

40.37

12.21

13.68

11.05

13.55

10.93

11.81

11.85

10.64

12.08

13.38

10.43

12.71

11.72

12.32

BFcd 11.51

8.51

10.72

10.53

9.29

9.27

9.18

8.66

12.67

11.66

13.31

11.51

11.42

11.79

38.78

11.87

10.32

10.84

10.35

11.39

8.58

10.11

10.99

8.69

11.15

12.01

9.71

12.02

10.23

35.61

20.11

19.97

22.61

21.41

20.21

24.06

39.98

22.55

40.35

21.08

36.61

36.88

38.42

34.84

32.39

22.06

35.51

34.48

23.21

33.03

39.69

35.01

38.78

22.33

27.56

28.51

34.74

22.52

22.59

27.49

376 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

1397 892 1310 1316 871

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

1326 897

Early Islamic

1331

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

1384 1309

Early Islamic

1385

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

2803 2842

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2911 2804

Late Roman–Byzantine

1583

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2843 1557

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

2844 2951

Late Roman–Byzantine

2819

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Database Inventory number

Period

Phalanx Phalanx Phalanx Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Capra/Ovis Sus scrofa

Phalanx Phalanx

Capra sp.

Phalanx

Capra sp. Capra sp.

Phalanx Phalanx

Bos Taurus

Phalanx

Bos Taurus Bos Taurus

Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa

Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Phalanx Phalanx

Sus scrofa

Phalanx

Sus scrofa Sus scrofa

Bone

Species

2

2

2

0

1

1

1

1

3

3

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

Part

0

0

0

0

0

0

yes

0

0

0

0

Yes

0

0

Yes

0

0

0

0

0

0

Burnt

UF

F

F

UF

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

F/UF

12.26

11.84

31.75

12.47

12.89

10.49

14.11

14.86

14.77

16.58

15.99

14.38

12.41

BFcd

13.49

11.21

11.19

29.63

10.76

12.71

9.67

14.31

25.05

11.81

13.91

15.57

13.41

12.59

14.71

14.38

13.43

13.48

14.75

23.87

23.82

60.06

37.36

38.31

34.76

39.41

21.61

22.78

13.09

37.05

33.88

24.07

80.35 59.41

60.23 50.01

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

377

9023 9089

Hellenistic

Hellenistic

8906

Hellenistic 8924

8874

Hellenistic

Hellenistic

8853 795

8847

9309

Hellenistic

827

Iron IIA–III

9287

9244

Hellenistic

826

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

820

9225

9031

807

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

9176

9158

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

9066

Iron IIA–III 806

9207

9055

Iron IIA–III

799

9032

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

9064 8970

798

Iron IIA–III

8938

9050

8390

8845

8881

Iron IIA–III

797

794

793

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

8805

Iron IIA–III 788

8869

8779

Iron IIA–III

Iron IIA–III

8751

Iron IIA–III 778

91

8726

Iron IIA–III

431

164

444

442

759

207

295

125

52

113

36

28

129

44

101

171

60

114

69

54

129

120

55

72

42

23

47

60

165

Total Weight (g)

Locus/ Wall

Basket

Period

354

73

252

292

530

77

246

0

16

34

26

26

37

34

53

82

17

73

43

45

55

40

36

0

38

15

25

36

134

27

Weight of Unidentified Bones (g)

4

2

16

8

15

11

12

3

3

6

2

1

6

3

3

7

3

4

2

2

7

9

4

0

3

1

3

5

4

4

Number of Identified Bones

9123

Hellenistic

9037 9058 9061

Hellenistic Hellenistic Hellenistic

7527 7620

Early Roman

7491

Early Roman Early Roman

7427 702

6950 Early Roman

7096

6516 Early Roman

Early Roman

687

8584

Hellenistic–Early Roman Early Roman

9220 775

9213 Hellenistic

9193

Hellenistic Hellenistic

9160

Hellenistic 815

9127

9223

Hellenistic Hellenistic

9118

Hellenistic

9241

9103

Hellenistic

Hellenistic

9102

Hellenistic

814

9239

Hellenistic

9062

9199

Hellenistic

Hellenistic

9182

Hellenistic

812

9121

Hellenistic 9148

9080

Hellenistic

9076

Basket

Hellenistic

808

Locus/ Wall

Hellenistic

Period

448

146

117

123

283

35

120

332

56

26

347

975

390

433

581

601

573

825

358

454

692

725

1444

237

348

495

1398

201

608

190

Total Weight (g)

Distribution and Weight of Identified and U nidentified Bones According to Locus and Basket

Appendix 23.2

242

45

68

72

106

25

101

184

33

21

315

615

324

256

239

319

269

535

261

205

497

451

1050

156

185

438

941

97

437

140

Weight of Unidentified Bones (g)

10

5

2

6

8

2

2

10

5

2

15

35

22

18

21

50

32

66

26

7

51

19

84

14

18

10

96

7

34

13

Number of Identified Bones

378 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

7660

Early Roman

341

8218 7506

Early Roman

727

168

8203

Early Roman

312

607

283

532

Early Roman

8005

Early Roman

184

8112

7582

Early Roman

956

573

Early Roman

7581

Early Roman

348 1015

8063

7541

Early Roman

726

7504

Early Roman

281

134

197

196

420

65

100

96

247

107

81

64

54

441

307

228

188

222

439

193

480

850

280

Total Weight (g)

Early Roman

8065

Early Roman

7734

7673

Early Roman

Early Roman

7509

Early Roman 725

7500

Early Roman 7555

8029

Early Roman

Early Roman

7885

Early Roman

724

7628

Early Roman 7723

7522

Early Roman

Early Roman

8049

721

7808

Early Roman

7794

Early Roman

Early Roman

7607

Early Roman 720

7519

Early Roman

7400

7369

Early Roman 713

7290

Early Roman

Early Roman

8757

8702

Early Roman 702

7711

Early Roman

7664

Basket

Early Roman

Locus/ Wall

Early Roman

Period

256

224

0

311

113

313

147

536

247

666

177

78

29

82

28

85

7

62

42

152

67

55

0

33

262

61

72

64

141

183

112

157

354

83

Weight of Unidentified Bones (g)

4

2

4

17

10

9

4

20

20

30

11

7

3

8

5

8

5

2

5

6

6

3

1

2

15

13

8

4

7

16

9

12

38

9

Number of Identified Bones

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Early Roman

Period

633

801

760

749

746

745

739

738

736

734

730

Locus/ Wall

5185

9262 (disturbed)

8487

8481

8361

8305

8298

8320

8273

8322

8193

8090

8069

8002

7951

7879

7742

8189

8120

8087

8085

7990

7867

7783

5071

8250

8215

8184

8115

8050

7649

7637

Basket

16

54

225

34

141

169

55

112

326

197

164

42

226

190

432

183

141

38

91

141

146

183

33

166

135

206

372

365

269

64

190

471

Total Weight (g)

0

0

0

15

46

59

27

81

287

164

73

20

122

51

108

0

51

31

68

43

94

86

24

103

67

105

136

142

130

55

92

273

Weight of Unidentified Bones (g)

0

6

8

1

6

4

1

2

4

4

6

3

8

10

2

3

5

2

3

7

8

6

2

6

12

5

14

5

5

1

10

11

Number of Identified Bones

Chapter 23: The Faunal Remains

379

W882

Late Roman–Byzantine

6541 6687

Early Islamic

6505

Early Islamic 601

6409

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

6092

Early Islamic

7476

Late Roman–Byzantine

W924

5787

5616

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

5297

Late Roman–Byzantine W884

6869

W870

Late Roman–Byzantine 6792

7267

6534

W864

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

8451

8353

8429

8148

6050

756

741

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

7849

Late Roman–Byzantine

731

5919

5904

671

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

5041 5857

648

4770

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

636

4735

Late Roman–Byzantine

4944

Late Roman–Byzantine

4792

Late Roman–Byzantine

634

4744

Late Roman–Byzantine

Late Roman–Byzantine

Basket

4717

Locus/ Wall

Late Roman–Byzantine

Period

87

183

56

152

67

32

91

103

112

48

202

64

22

31

89

32

16

116

89

122

144

37

33

236

162

68

196

367

266

Total Weight (g)

26

155

27

84

20

0

27

80

72

0

96

46

6

21

46

11

8

96

49

115

84

30

9

137

145

28

159

264

231

Weight of Unidentified Bones (g)

6

1

2

1

3

2

3

5

3

2

5

2

2

2

1

4

2

1

12

4

5

4

3

15

2

7

6

8

4

Number of Identified Bones

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Early Islamic

Period

646

W917

676

666

664

646

627

621

613

610

603

602

Locus/ Wall

4999

5411

6876

6727

6695

6395

5756

5754

5694

6529

6360

6297

5347

5228

4959

4658

4605

4666

4611

4598

4537

5104

4979

5412

5156

5032

Basket

137

46

63

72

49

450

82

145

119

230

75

19

36

30

154

34

171

93

679

204

110

20

20

206

19

30

Total Weight (g)

53

32

9

48

36

270

12

51

63

85

61

16

31

11

44

0

51

57

311

130

105

17

11

7

1

0

Weight of Unidentified Bones (g)

4

5

4

2

2

10

1

4

2

6

2

1

1

1

5

0

5

6

37

7

2

2

1

2

2

0

Number of Identified Bones

380 Guy Bar-Oz and Noa Raban-Gerstel

Appendix 1

Locus List

No.

Square

Stratum

Locus/Wall Above

Locus/Wall Below

Opening Level (m asl)

Closing Level (m asl)

Type

Plan

600

D2

III

-

- 

698.29

697.30

Drain

2.14

601

D2

VI–III

L671, L606

L668

697.25

694.55

Drain

2.10, 2.11, 2.12, 2.13, 2.14

602

D2–3

III

-

L664

698.34

697.75

Drain

2.14

603

E2

III

-

L664

698.53

697.83

Drain

2.14

604

E–D3

II

-

L610, L611, W900

699.81

699.33

Fill

605

E–D3–4

II

-

L615, L616

700.11

699.44

Fill

606

D2

V

-

L671

697.78

697.47

Floor

2.11, 2.12 2.10

607

F2

VIA

-

L633

696.78

696.55

Floor

608

D2

VI–V

-

L658

696.33

696.03

Fill

609

F2

V

-

L633

696.57

696.52

Pit

610

E–D3

II

L604

L613

699.33

699.04

Floor

611

D3

II

L604

L614

699.33

698.88

Fill

2.15

612

D1

VB

-

-

697.06

696.33

Fill

2.11, 2.12 2.14

613

D–E3

III

L610

L638

699.04

698.46

Fill

614

D3

III

L611

L639

698.99

698.56

Fill

615

D–E3–4

II

L605

L620

699.44

699.07

Fill

616

D3–4

II

L605

L621

699.44

698.93

Fill

617

D2

VA

-

-

697.63

697.35

Floor

2.12 2.10

618

E–F2

VIA

-

L619

696.75

696.62

Floor

619

E2

VI

-

L635 (S), L634 (N)

696.84

696.47

Floor

620

D–E3–4

III

L615

L622

699.09

698.66

Fill

621

D3–4

III

L616

L623

698.93

698.38

Floor

622

D3–4

IV

L620

L666

698.66

698.21

Fill

623

D3–4

III

L621

L675

698.38

697.52

Fill

624

F1

VIA

-

L636

696.46

696.27

Floor

2.10

625

D4

I

-

-

699.36

-

Pit

2.16

626

D3

III

L621

W902

698.96

698.89

Fill

627

D3

I

L614

L639

699.36

698.98

Pit

2.16 2.9, 2.10

628

E1

VI

-

L637

696.46

696.27

Floor

629

F2–3

VI–V

-

-

699.36

696.83

Fill

630

E3

VI–V

-

-

697.54

696.88

Fill

631

D–E3

I

L613

L664

699.41

697.87

Pit

632

F1

VI

-

-

696.58

696.54

Fill

2.14

2.16

633

F2

VIB

L607

L648

696.55

696.33

Floor

2.9

634

E–F2

VIB

L619

L645

696.47

696.14

Floor

2.9

635

E2

VI

L619

L657

696.47

695.91

Floor

382

Doron Ben-Ami

No.

Square

Stratum

Locus/Wall Above

Locus/Wall Below

Opening Level (m asl)

Closing Level (m asl)

Type

Plan

636

F1

VIB

L624

L643

696.27

696.14

Floor

2.9

637

E1

VI

L628

L644

696.27

696.03

Fill

638

D3

III

L613

L664

698.46

697.75

Fill

639

D3

IV

L614

L665

698.56

697.79

Fill

640

E1

VI

L637

L.644

696.34

696.15

Pit

641

D1

VI

-

L656

696.93

695.78

Fill

642

D1

VI–V

-

L656

696.07

695.78

Fill

643

F1

VI

L636

L661

696.14

695.13

Fill

644

E1

VI–V

L637

L655

696.03

695.84

Fill

645

E–F2

VI

L634

L669

696.14

695.43

Fill

646

D3

IV

L639

L665

698.40

696.93

Installation

647

D–E3

IV

L638

L664

698.30

697.80

Installation

648

F2

VIB

L633

L660

696.33

696.28

Floor

649

D1

VI–V

-

L641

696.73

696.55

Collapse

650

F2

VI

W867

L648

697.82

696.62

Other

651

D4

Modern

-

L666

700.25

698.87

Staircase

2.13 2.9

2.17

652

D1

I

-

-

698.50

697.51

Pit

2.16

653

D3

III

L623

L675

698.85

697.81

Installation

2.14

654

D3

III

L638, L639

L664, L665

698.44

697.94

Drain

2.14

655

E1

VI

L644

L662, L663

695.84

695.21

Fill

656

D1

VI

L641

L663

695.78

695.18

Fill

657

E2

VI

L635

L669

695.91

695.43

Fill

658

D–E2

VI

L608

L683

696.03

695.16

Fill

659

D1

I

-

-

697.97

696.92

Pit

660

F2

VI

L648

L690

696.28

694.42

Fill

661

F1

VI

L643

L673

695.13

694.64

Fill

662

E1

VI

L655

L679

695.21

694.49

Fill

663

E1

VI

L655

L674

695.21

694.99

Fill

664

D–E3

IV

L638

L672

697.75

697.66

Floor

665

D3

IV

L639

L693

697.79

696.58

Fill

666

D–E3–4

IV

L622

–

698.21

697.28

Floor

2.13 2.13

667

D3–4

IV

L666

L677

697.93

697.56

Floor

668

D1

VI

L601

L695

696.43

696.02

Fill

669

E–F2

VI

L657, L645

L688

695.43

694.64

Fill

670

E–F2

VI

L645, L657

L688

695.43

693.89

Fill

671

D2

VI

L606

L678

697.50

697.29

Floor

672

D3

IV

L664

L711

697.66

696.26

Fill

673

F1

VI

L661

L691

694.64

693.67

Fill

674

D–E1

VI

L663

L697

694.99

693.57

Fill

675

D3–4

IV

L623

L680

696.51

696.38

Floor

676

D4

V–III

L667, L623

L734

697.85

695.48

Drain

677

D3–4

IV

L667

L682

697.56

697.31

Fill

2.13

2.9, 2.10

2.11, 2.12, 2.13, 2.14

383

appendix 1: Locus List

No.

Square

Stratum

Locus/Wall Above

Locus/Wall Below

Opening Level (m asl)

Closing Level (m asl)

Type

678

D2

VI

L671

L684

697.33

697.29

Fill

679

E1

VI

L662

L704

694.49

693.07

Fill

680

D3–4

IV

L675

L682

697.38

697.24

Fill

681

D2

VI

L671

L689

697.29

696.97

Other

682

D3–4

IV

L677

L696

697.31

696.86

Fill

683

D–E2

VI

L658

L686, L687

695.16

695.05

Fill

684

D2

VI

L678

L694

697.29

696.68

Fill

685

C–D2

V

-

-

697.35

697.24

Floor

686

D–E2

VII–VI

L683

W627

695.05

693.39

Collapse

687

D2

VII–VI

L683

L721

695.05

693.72

Collapse

688

E–F2

VI

L669

L699

694.64

693.78

Fill

689

D2

VI

L681

L698

696.97

695.81

Fill

690

F2

VI

L660

L700

694.42

693.85

Fill

691

F1

VII

L673

L709

693.67

692.55

Fill

692

D1

VI

L674

L697

694.55

693.95

Fill

693

D3

VI

L665

L703

696.58

695.85

Fill

694

D2–3

VI

L684

L698

696.68

695.74

Fill

695

D1

VI

L668

L697

696.02

694.52

Fill

696

D3–4

V

L682

L710

696.86

696.28

Fill

697

D1

VI

L692, L695

L707, L708

694.52

693.64

Fill

698

D2

VI

L694

L705, L706

695.74

695.81

Fill

699

E2

VII–VI

L688

L733

693.78

693.39

Fill

700

F2

VII–VI

L690

L719

693.85

693.26

Fill

701

D4

V

-

L710

697.51

696.82

Other

702

E2

VII

L699

-

693.66

691.41

Cistern

703

-

VII

L693

L723

695.85

695.23

Fill

704

E1

VII

L679

-

693.07

692.01

Miqveh

705

D2

VII–VI

L698

L725

695.81

694.66

Fill

706

D2–3

VII–VI

L698

L715

695.81

695.21

Fill

707

D1

VII

L697

L721

693.64

693.21

Fill

708

D1

VII

L697

L722

693.64

693.48

Fill

709

F1

VII

L691

-

692.55

692.14

Fill

710

D3–4

VI

L696

-

696.28

695.99

Collapse

711

D3

VII–VI

L672

L723

696.26

695.87

Collapse

712

D1

VII

L707

L720

693.21

692.88

Collapse

713

D1

VII

L708

L722

693.60

692.85

Fill

714

F2

VII

L700

-

693.77

693.18

Bath

715

D2–3

VII

L706

L724, L725

695.21

695.20

Fill

716

C4

II

-

L731, L732

698.91

698.50

Fill

717

B4

II

-

L741

698.90

697.05

Fill

718

F2

VII

L700

-

693.26

693.05

Fill

719

F2

VII

L700

-

693.26

691.17

Miqveh

720

D1

VII

L712

L740

692.88

691.12

Collapse

721

D2

VII

L707

L740

693.21

691.31

Collapse

Plan

2.11, 2.12

2.8 2.8

2.8

2.8

384

Doron Ben-Ami

No.

Square

Stratum

Locus/Wall Above

Locus/Wall Below

Opening Level (m asl)

Closing Level (m asl)

Type

722

D2

VII

L708

L736

693.48

692.68

Collapse

723

D3

VII

L703, L711

L734

695.23

695.09

Fill

Plan

724

D2–3

VII

L715

L726, L727

695.38

695.37

Fill

725

D2–3

VII

L715

L743

695.20

692.90

Fill

726

D3

VII

L724

-

695.37

693.69

Fill

727

D2

VII

L724

L730

695.37

694.87

Fill

728

F1

VII

L709

-

691.87

690.82

Shaft

2.8

729

D3

VII

L711, L724

-

696.35

696.02

Stone platform

2.8

730

D2–3

VII

L727

L777

694.87

693.69

Fill

731

C4

VA

L716

L756

698.50

697.37

Floor

732

B–C4

VB

L716

L744

698.50

697.57

Floor

733

E2

VII

L699

-

693.39

693.39

Fill

734

D3

VII

L723

L745, L746

695.09

694.25

Fill

735

C2

VII

-

L743

693.86

693.00

Fill

736

D2

VII

L722

L738

692.68

691.96

Collapse

737

C–D2

VII

-

L749

692.68

691.72

Collapse

738

D2

VII

L736

L749

691.96

690.97

Collapse

739

D1

VII

L736

L759, L760

691.96

690.82

Collapse

740

D1

VII

L720

-

691.12

690.11

Floor

2.12

2.8

741

B4

V

L717

L768

697.05

696.79

Floor

2.11, 2.12

742

C–D2

VII

W940

W940

694.06

691.93

Niche

2.8

743

D2

VII

L725

L776

692.90

692.45

Fill

744

B–C4

VB

L732

L748

697.57

696.34

Make–up

745

C–D3

VII

L734

L776

694.25

693.02

Collapse

746

D2

VII

L734

L775

694.25

693.90

Collapse

747

C2

VII

-

L755

693.77

693.04

Fill

748

B–C4

V

L744

L757

697.34

696.52

Fill

749

DC2

VII

L738

L759, L760

690.97

690.75

Collapse

750

C1

VII

-

L761, L762

691.62

691.19

Collapse

751

B–C1

VII

-

L761, L762

691.70

691.55

Collapse

752

C23

VII

-

L763

693.63

691.49

Fill

753

B4

VII

-

L765

692.61

691.55

Fill

754

B–C3–4

VIII–VII

-

L778

692.35

692.03

Fill

755

C2

VIII–VII

L747

L763

693.04

691.71

Fill

756

C4

VB

L731

L769

697.37

697.07

Floor

757

B–C4

V

L748

-

696.52

696.01

Fill

758

B–C2

VII

-

L763

692.23

691.47

Fill

759

D12

VII

L739, L749

L760

690.75

690.06

Floor

760

C–D1

VII

L749

-

690.82

689.89

Floor

761

C1

VII

L750, L751

L783

691.19

689.47

Floor

762

C1

VII

L750, L751

L762

691.55

691.27

Collapse

2.11

2.8

385

appendix 1: Locus List

No.

Square

Stratum

Locus/Wall Above

Locus/Wall Below

Opening Level (m asl)

Closing Level (m asl)

Type

763

C2

VII

-

L782

693.27

690.65

Fill

764

B3

VII

-

L765

694.43

693.83

Other

765

B3

VIII–VII

L764

L793, L794

693.83

690.73

Fill

766

B3

VIII–VII

-

L789, L790

693.56

690.77

Fill

767

B3

VII–VI

-

L791, L792

693.55

690.90

Fill

768

B4

VI–V

L741

-

696.79

695.64

Fill

769

C4

VI–V

L756

L773

697.12

696.52

Fill

770

B1

VII

-

-

691.27

690.98

Fill

771

B2-3

VI ?

-

-

693.63

693.56

Fill

772

C1

VII

L761

L761

691.73

690.50

Fill

773

C4

VI

L769

-

696.52

696.12

Fill

774

C3

VIII–VII

L754

L781, L782

692.10

691.15

Fill

775

D3

VIII–VII

L746

L776

693.27

692.21

Fill

776

C3

VIII–VII

L745

L784, L785

693.02

692.21

Fill

777

D2–3

VII

L730

L785

693.69

693.59

Fill

Plan

2.8

778

B–C4

IX

L754

L799

692.03

691.61

Floor

2.6

779

C1

VII

L761

L783

689.30

688.86

Installation

2.8

780

C4

IX–VIII

L754

W967

692.03

691.74

Fill

781

C3

IX–VIII

L774

L800

691.15

690.79

Fill

782

C3

VIII

L774

L812

691.15

689.85

Floor

783

B–C1

VII

L761

-

689.47

689.04

Fill

784

C–D3

VIII

L776

L782

692.21

690.32

Collapse

785

C–D2–3

VIII

L776

L810, L811

692.21

691.13

Collapse

786

B4

IX

L778

L799

691.81

691.59

Tabun

787

E2

VII

W922

W922

692.68

691.98

Other

788

C4

IX

L778

L799

691.92

691.4

Installation

789

B3

IX–VIII

L766

L805

690.77

690.19

Fill

790

B3

VIII

L766

L792

690.77

690.77

Fill

791

B2–3

VIII

L767

-

690.90

690.05

Fill

792

B2–3

VIII

L767

L808, L809

690.90

689.91

Fill

2.8

2.6 2.6

793

B4

XIA

L765

L798

690.73

690.27

Floor

2.4

794

B4

XIA

L765

L806

690.73

690.23

Floor

2.4

795

D3

VIII

L784

L815

691.47

689.74

Floor

2.7

796

C4

-

-

-

696.12

696.02

Fill

797

B–C4

-

-

-

696.01

695.64

Fill

798

B4

XIB

L793

L813

690.27

690.11

Floor

2.3 2.5

799

B–C4

X

L778

L804

691.61

690.82

Floor

800

B–C3

IX–VIII

L781

L802

670.79

690.42

Fill

801

B4

XIA

L794

L825

690.57

690.21

Installation

802

B–C3

XIB

L800

L803

690.42

689.84

Floor

803

B–C4

X

L802

L819

689.84

689.71

Fill

804

B–C4

X

L799

L820, L821

690.82

690.60

Fill

805

B3

XIA

L789

L817

690.19

689.47

Fill

2.4 2.5

806

B4

XIC

L794

L818

690.05

689.74

Floor

2.2

807

B4

X

L799

L804

690.98

690.78

Tabun

2.5

386

Doron Ben-Ami

No.

Square

Stratum

Locus/Wall Above

Locus/Wall Below

Opening Level (m asl)

Closing Level (m asl)

Type

Plan

808

B–C3

VIII

L792

L823

689.91

689.53

Floor

2.7

809

B–C2

VIII–VII

L792

-

689.91

689.70

Collapse

810

D3

VIII–VII

L785

-

691.13

691.10

Collapse

811

C3

VIII–VII

L785

-

691.13

690.13

Collapse

812

C3

VIII

L782

L814

689.85

689.72

Floor

2.7

813

B4

XIC

L798

L816

690.11

689.92

Floor

2.2

814

C3

VIII

L812

L824

689.72

689.48

Floor

2.7

815

D3

VIII

L795

L822

689.74

689.42

Floor

2.7

816

B4

XIC

L813

L818

689.92

689.74

Fill

817

B3

XI

L805

L831

689.47

689.20

Fill

818

B4

XII

L806

L838

689.74

688.22

Fill

819

B–C3

XII–XI

L803

L830

689.71

689.37

Fill

820

B4

XIB

L804

L827

690.60

690.16

Floor

821

C4

XIB–XIA

L804

L826

690.60

689.99

Floor

822

C–D3

VIII

L815

L834

689.73

688.68

Fill

823

B–C3

VIII

L808

Bedrock

689.53

687.57

Fill

824

C3

VIII

L814

L833

689.48

688.42

Fill

825

B4

XIB

L801

L829

690.21

689.66

Floor

2.3

826

C4

XIC

L821

L830

689.99

689.74

Floor

2.2 2.2

827

B4

XIC

L820

L828

690.16

689.91

Floor

828

B4

XIC

L827

L826

689.91

689.77

Fill

829

B4

XIC

L825

L832

689.66

689.15

Fill

830

C4

XIC

L826

L835

689.74

689.24

Fill

831

B3

XIC–XIA

L817

-

689.20

687.54

Fill

832

B4

XII

L829

-

689.15

687.98

Fill

833

C3

VIII

L824

-

688.42

687.73

Fill

834

D3

VIII

L822

-

688.68

687.66

Fill

835

B–C4

XII

L830

-

689.24

688.18

Fill

836

B3

XII

L830

L837

689.24

689.06

Fill

837

C3

XII

L836

-

689.06

688.17

Fill

838

B4

XII

L818

-

688.22

687.84

Fill

839

B–C1–2

VIII–VII

L779

-

690.14

689.04

Fill

840

F1

III–II

Surface

-

699.64

699.56

Fill

841

F1

VIA

-

L636

697.10

696.32

Installation

2.3, 2.4 2.1

2.2, 2.3, 2.4

2.1 2.1

2.10

Appendix 2

Wall List

No.

Square

Stratum

Top level (m asl)

Bottom level (m asl)

Width (m)

Plan

864

D1–3

VI–V

698.51

695.52

0.97

2.10, 2.11, 2.12

867

F2

III

698.05

697.82

0.35–0.40

870

F1–2

VI

696.72

694.90

0.85

2.9, 2.10

878

D2

VA

698.41

697.84

c. 0.2–0.3

2.12

881

D–E1

VI

693.62

691.10

1.0

2.9, 2.10

882

F1

VI

697.18

696.28

0.8

2.9, 2.10

883

E–F2

VI

697.49

695.02

0.6

2.9, 2.10

884

F2

V

 

 

0.9

885

D1

VI–V

 

 

0.9

2.10, 2.11, 2.12

887

D2

VB–VA

 

 

0.9

2.11, 2.12

888

D2

VA

 

 

-

2.12

889

D2

VA

 

 

0.3

2.12

900

D3–4

II

699.19

698.77

0.4–0.8

2.15

901

D4

III

699.51

699.01

0.8

2.14

902

D3

III

699.07

698.57

c. 0.5

2.14

903

D3

III

699.26

698.98

0.4

2.14

904

E–F1

VI

696.86

696.12

0.6–0.9

2.9, 2.10

905

D4

III

699.45

698.74

0.7

2.14

906

D3

III

699.30

698.64

0.6

2.14

907

D2

VA

698.41

697.84

c. 0.2

2.12

908

F1–2

VIA

696.85

696.62

c. 0.2–0.3

2.10

909

E1–2

VI

695.95

 

1.5

2.9

910

F2

VI

697.47

696.76

0.75

2.9, 2.10

911

F12

VI

696.49

696.74

0.7

2.9, 2.10

912

F1–2

VI

696.02

696.20

0.85

2.9, 2.10

913

E2

VI

692.85

691.60

1.1

914

E–F1–2

VI

696.12

692.20

1.2

2.9

915

F1

VI

696.28

 

1.2

2.9

917

D3

IV

698.34

697.28

1.0

2.13

918

D3–4

IV

698.37

697.12

0.8

2.13

919

E–F1–2

VI

696.20

693.58

1.52

2.9

920

D3

V

697.77

696.86

0.6

2.11, 2.12

921

D3

VI–V

697.78

696.82

922

D–E2–3

VII

695.08

923

F1

VII

693.60

924

C–D1–3

VI–V

696.75

925

D–E2–3

VII

926

E1

VII

916 = 909

0.65

2.10, 2.11, 2.12

0.8

2.8

693.02

0.35

2.8

695.09

0.75

2.10, 2.11

695.08

 

0.8

2.8 (= W922)

693.12

 

0.8

2.8

388

Doron Ben-Ami

No.

Square

Stratum

Top level (m asl)

Bottom level (m asl)

Width (m)

Plan

927

E2

VI

693.39

691.41

1.0

928

F2

VII

693.28

 

0.55

929

C3

VI

696.22

 

0.5

930

B–C12

V

696.72

692.29

0.95

931

C1–3

V

697.08

692.92

1.1

932

B1

V

697.23

692.90

0.82

934

B2–3

V

697.28

938

C4

V

697.42

694.86

0.96

940

B–E2

VII

956.60

 

2.1

2.8

941

C4

V

697.80

696.49

0.85

2.11, 2.12

942

C4

III

698.92

698.03

0.30

2.14

948

D3

VII

696.20

693.27

1.65

2.8

949

D3

VII

695.37

693.69

0.4

2.8

950

D3

VII

695.24

694.89

0.5

2.8

951

E–F2

VII

693.39

 

0.85

2.8

952

D12

VII

693.75

 

1.5

2.8

953

D12

VII

691.57

 

0.9

2.8

954

C3–4

VII

695.94

695.14

0.9

955

D3

VII

695.95

693.56

1.2

956

B–C2

VII

693.77

693.06

0.4

2.8

958

C1–2

VII

691.91

 

1.5

2.8

959

B4

V

697.59

696.53

1.0

2.11, 2.12

961

C4

V

697.98

696.39

0.9

2.11, 2.12

962

C4

VB

697.55

696.79

0.6

2.11

963

B4

VB

697.46

 

0.5

2.11, 2.12

965

B1–2

VII

692.04

 

0.6

2.8

966

B–C1

VII

691.56

 

Western face beyond excavation boundary

2.8

967

B–C3–4

IX

691.74

691.11

0.7

2.6

968

B34

IX

692.57

691.46

0.5–0.8

2.6

969

B–C3

VIII

691.55

688.72

1.0

2.7

970

B2–3

V

691.12

690.11

0.60

971

B4

XIB–XIA

691.69

690.16

0.4

2.3, 2.4

974

C4

IX

691.17

690.87

0.5

2.6

975

B3–4

XIC–XIA

690.21

687.54

0.8

2.2, 2.3, 2.4

976

B3–4

X

691.46

689.85

0.85

2.5

977

B–C4

X

691.11

690.44

0.7

2.5

978

B3

XIC–XIA

689.92

687.54

0.75

2.2, 2.3, 2.4

979

C4

XIA

690.60

690.16

0.4

2.4

980

C4

XIA

690.67

690.44

0.65

2.4

981

B4

XIC–XIA

690.40

689.77

0.5

2.2, 2.3, 2.4

982

B4

XIC

690.16

689.61

0.6

2.2

983

B–C3

VIII

688.72

688.14

Eastern face under W969

984

C3–4

XII

689.32

688.12

0.4

2.1

985

B4

XII

689.51

688.49

0.5–0.6

2.1

986

B4

XII

689.16

688.66

0.70–0.75

2.1

987

C3

XII

689.06

688.34

0.5

2.1

2.8

0.82

IAA R eports

No. 1 G. Avni and Z. Greenhut, The Akeldama Tombs: Three Burial Caves in the Kidron Valley, Jerusalem, 1996, 129 pp.

No. 16 Y. Goren and P. Fabian, Kissufim Road: A Chalcolithic Mortuary Site, 2002, 97 pp.

No. 2 E. Braun, Yiftah’el: Salvage and Rescue Excavations at a Prehistoric Village in Lower Galilee, Israel, 1997, 249 pp.

No. 17 A. Kloner, Maresha Excavations Final Subterranean Complexes 21, 44, 70, 2003, 183 pp.

No. 3 G. Edelstein, I. Milevski and S. Aurant, Villages, Terraces and Stone Mounds: Excavations at Manahat, Jerusalem, 1987– 1989, 1998, 149 pp. No. 4 C. Epstein, The Chalcolithic Culture of the Golan, 1998, 352 pp. + plans. hardcover. No. 5 T. Schick, The Cave of the Warrior: A Fourth Millennium Burial in the Judean Desert, 1998, 137 pp. No. 6 R. Cohen, Ancient Settlement of the Central Negev I: The Chalcolithic Period, the Early Bronze Age and the Middle Bronze Age I (Hebrew, English Summary), 1999, 396 pp. No. 7 R. Hachlili and A. Killebrew, Jericho: The Jewish Cemetery of the Second Temple Period, 1999, 202 pp. No. 8 Z. Gal and Y. Alexandre, Horbat Rosh Zayit: An Iron Age Storage Fort and Village, 2000, 247 pp. No. 9 U. Dahari, Monastic Settlements in South Sinai in the Byzantine Period: The Archaeological Remains, 2000, 250 pp. No. 10 Z. Yeivin, The Synagogue at Korazim: The 1962–1964, 1980–1987 Excavations (Hebrew, English Summary), 2000, 216 pp. No. 11 M. Hartal, The al-Subayba (Nimrod) Fortress: Towers 11 and 9, 2001, 129 pp. No. 12 R. Gonen, Excavations at Efrata: A Burial Ground from the Intermediate and Middle Bronze Ages, 2001, 153 pp. No. 13 E. Eisenberg, A. Gopher and R. Greenberg, Tel Te’o: A Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Site in the Hula Valley, 2001, 227 pp.

Report

I:

No. 18 A. Golani, Salvage Excavations at the Early Bronze Age Site of Qiryat ‘Ata, 2003, 261 pp. No. 19 H. Khalaily and O. Marder, The Neolithic Site of Abu Ghosh: The 1995 Excavations, 2003, 146 pp. No. 20 R. Cohen and R. Cohen-Amin, Ancient Settlement of the Negev Highlands II: The Iron Age and Persian Period (Hebrew, English Summary), 2004, 258 pp. No. 21 D. Stacey, Exavations at Tiberias, 1973–1974: The Early Islamic Periods, 2004, 259 pp. No. 22 Y. Hirschfeld, Excavations at Tiberias, 1989–1994, 2004, 234 pp. No. 23 S. Ben-Arieh, Bronze and Iron Age Tombs at Tell Beit Mirsim, 2004, 212 pp. No. 24 M. Dothan and D. Ben-Shlomo, Ashdod VI: The Excavations of Areas H and K (1968–1969), 2005, 320 pp. No. 25 M. Avissar, Tel Yoqne‘am: Excavations on the Acropolis, 2005, 142 pp. No. 26 M. Avissar and E.J. Stern, Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk Periods in Israel, 2005, 187 pp. No. 27 E.C.M. van den Brink and Ram Gophna, Shoham (North), Late Chalcolithic Burial Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel, 2005, 214 pp. No. 28 N. Getzov, The Tel Bet Yerah Excavations, 1994–1995, 2006, 204 pp. No. 29 A.M. Berlin, Gamla I: The Pottery of the Second Temple Period, the Shmarya Gutmann Excavations, 1976–1989, 2006, 181 pp.

No. 14 R. Frankel, N. Getzov, M. Aviam and A. Degani, Settlement Dynamics and Regional Diversity in Ancient Upper Galilee: Archaeological Survey of Upper Galilee, 2001, 175 pp.

No. 30 R. Greenberg, E. Eisenberg, S. Paz and Y. Paz, Bet Yerah: The Early Bronze Age Mound I: Excavation Reports, 1933–1986, 2006, 500 pp.

No. 15 M. Dayagi-Mendels, The Akhziv Cemeteries: The Ben-dor Excavations, 1941–1944, 2002, 176 pp.

No. 31 E. Yannai, ‘En Esur (‘Ein Asawir) I: Excavations at a Protohistoric Site in the Coastal Plain of Israel, 2006, 308 pp.

No. 32 T.J. Barako, Tel Mor: The Moshe Dothan Excavations, 1959–1960, 2007, 276 pp.

No. 43 J. Seligman, Nahal Haggit: A Roman and Mamluk Farmstead in the Southern Carmel, 2010, 277 pp.

No. 33 g. mazor and a. najjar, Bet She’an I: nysa-scythopolis: the caesareum and the odeum, 2007, 316 pp.

No. 44 D. Syon and Z. Yavor, Gamla II: The Architecture, the Shmarya Gutmann Excavations, 1976–1989, 2010, 216 pp.

No. 34 R. Cohen and H. Bernick-Greenberg, Kadesh Barnea (Tell el-Qudeirat) 1976–1982, 2007. In 2 parts. Part 1: Text, 410 pp.; Part 2: Plates, Plans and Sections, 332 pp.

No. 45 A. Kloner, E. Eshel, H.B. Korzakova and G. Finkielsztejn, Maresha Excavations Final Report III: Epigraphic Finds from the 1989–2000 Seasons, 2010, 247 pp.

No. 35 A. Erlich and A. Kloner, Maresha Excavations Final Report II: Hellenistic Terracotta Figurines from the 1989–1996 Seasons, 2008, 208 pp.

No. 46 Y. Dagan, The Ramat Bet Shemesh Regional Project: The Gazetteer, 2010, 360 pp.

No. 36 G. Avni, U. Dahari and A. Kloner, The Necropolis of Bet Guvrin—Eleutheropolis, 2008, 238 pp. No. 37 V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli, Paneas I: The Roman to Early Islamic Periods: Excavations in Areas A, B, E, F, G and H, 2008, 196 pp. No. 38 V. Tzaferis and S. Israeli, Paneas II: Small Finds and Other Studies, 2008, 256 pp. No. 39 Z. Greenhut and A. De Groot, Salvage Excavations at Tel Moza: The Bronze and Iron Age Settlements and Later Occupations, 2009, 363 pp. No. 40 M. Hartal, Paneas IV: The Aqueduct and the Northern Suburbs, 2009, 212 pp. No. 41 N. Getzov, R. Lieberman-Wander, H. Smithline, and D. Syon, Horbat ‘Uza, the 1991 Excavations I: The Early Periods, 2009, 168 pp. No. 42 N. Getzov, D. Avshalom-Gorni, Y. Gorin-Rosen, E.J. Stern, D. Syon, and A. Tatcher, Horbat ‘Uza, the 1991 Excavations II: The Late Periods, 2009, 232 pp.

No. 47 Y. Dagan, The Ramat Bet Shemesh Regional Project: Landscape of Settlement: From the Paleolithic to the Ottoman Periods, 2011, 356 pp. No. 48 R. Bar-Nathan and W. Atrash, Bet She’an II: Baysān: The Theater Pottery Workshop, 2011, 411 pp. No. 49 Y. Alexandre, Mary’s Well, Nazareth: The Late Hellenistic to the Ottoman Periods, 2012, 180 pp. No. 50 D. Ben-Shlomo, the azor cemetery: moshe dothan’s excavations, 1958 and 1960, 2012, 238 pp. No. 51/1 E.J. Stern, ‘akko i: the 1991–1998 excavations, the crusader-period pottery, part 1: Text, 2012, 192 pp. No. 51/2 E.J. Stern, ‘akko i: the 1991–1998 excavations, the crusader-period pottery, part 2: plates, 2012, 172 pp. No. 52 D. Ben-Ami, Jerusalem, Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley (Giv‘ati Parking Lot) I, 2013, 396 pp.