Maresha Excavations Final Report I: Subterranean Complexes 21, 44, 70 9654061503, 9789654065566, 9789654061506

Citation preview

IAA Reports, No. 17

MARESHA EXCAVATIONS FINAL REPORT I S UBTERRANEAN C OMPLEXES 21, 44, 70

AMOS KLONER

With contributions by Donald T. Ariel, Gerald Finkielsztejn, Chava Korzakova, Tikva Levine, Dalit Regev, Nahum Sagiv and Naomi Sidi

ISRAEL ANTIQUITIES AUTHORITY JERUSALEM 2003

IAA Reports Publications of the Israel Antiquities Authority Editor-in-Chief: Zvi Gal Series Editor: Ann Roshwalb Hurowitz Volume Editor: Barbara L. Johnson

Front and Back Covers: Views of the oil press in Subterranean Complex 44.

Typesetting, Layout, Cover Design and Production: Ann Abuhav Graphics: Natalia Zak, Tania Kornfeld Printed at Keterpress Enterprises, Jerusalem © THE ISRAEL ANTIQUITIES AUTHORITY, 2003 POB 586, Jerusalem 91004 ISBN 965–406–150–3 eISBN 9789654065566

CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS

iv

PREFACE

vii

BACKGROUND TO THE EXCAVATIONS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

9

THE 1980–1989 EXCAVATIONS CHAPTER 3: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 70

31

CHAPTER 4: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 21

41

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

Amos Kloner and Nahum Sagiv

51

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Tikva Levine

73

CHAPTER 7: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 44

Tikva Levine

131

CHAPTER 8: AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS

Donald T. Ariel and Gerald Finkielsztejn

137

CHAPTER 9: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

153

APPENDIX 1: MARESHA: SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Naomi Sidi, Chava Korzakova and Amos Kloner

157

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA—SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 70, 21, 58

Dalit Regev

163

iv

ABBREVIATIONS

AASOR

Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research

ADAJ

Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan

AJA

American Journal of Archaeology

AJSLL

American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures

APEF

Annual of the Palestine Exploration Fund

ASAA

Annuario della Scuola Archeologica de Aténe

‘Atiqot (ES)

English Series

‘Atiqot (HS)

Hebrew Series

BA

Biblical Archaeologist

BAIAS

Bulletin of the Anglo-Israel Archaeological Society

BAR

Biblical Archaeology Review

BAR Int. S.

British Archaeological Reports International Series

BASOR

Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

BCH

Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique

BIES

Bulletin of the Israel Exploration Society

BIFAO

Bulletin de l’Institut Français d‘Archéologie Orientale

BJPES

Bulletin of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society (Hebrew)

BMB

Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth

CE

Chronique d’Egypte

CR

Classical Review

EAEHL

Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Jerusalem 1975–1978

EI

Eretz-Israel

EO

Echos d’Orient

EPRO

Etudes préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire romain

ESI

Explorations and Surveys in Israel

HA

Hadashot Arkheologiyot (Archaeological News; Hebrew)

IEJ

Israel Exploration Journal

IMJ

Israel Museum Journal

v

INJ

Israel Numismatic Journal

JDAI

Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts

JGS

Journal of Glass Studies

JPOS

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society

JRA

Journal of Roman Archaeology

LA

Liber Annuus Studium Biblicum Franciscanum

MB

Le Monde de la Bible

MNDPV

Mitteilungen und Nachrichten des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins

NEAEHL

New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Jerusalem 1993

NZ

Niqrot Zurim, Journal of the Israel Cave Research Center (ICRC).

OBO

Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis

PEQ

Palestine Exploration Quarterly

PEFQSt

Palestine Exploration Foundation Quarterly Statement

PWRE

Pauly-Wissowa Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft

QDAP

Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine

RA

Revue Archéologique

RAO

Recueil d’Archéologie Orientale

RB

Revue Biblique

RDAC

Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus

SEG

Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum

TA

Teva va-Aretz

TAPA

Transactions of the American Philological Association

ZDPV

Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins

ZPE

Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik

PREFACE

This volume, first in a series of final reports on excavations at Maresha during the 1980s and 1990s, deals with work undertaken in the 1980s. The excavations and surveys centered in the lower city, as described in detail in Chapter 1. Ancient Maresha consisted of a high mound (tell)—the upper city—and a lower city that extended over some 320 dunams (80 acres) enclosing the upper area. The impressive remains of the lower city include extensive man-made subterranean complexes. A necropolis consisting of three major tomb concentrations surrounded the lower city. The largest group was located to the east, the second largest lay in a valley to the north and the smallest was to the southwest. Chapter 1 is divided into two sections. In the first the setting of the site—its location and its place in the geology and geography of the Judean Shephelah—is discussed, as well as the hewing process of the subterranean complexes. In the second part a brief history of Maresha is given. Chapter 2 presents a short review and reevaluation of previous excavations at Maresha from the turn of the century until 1980—among the most important dealing with the early Hellenistic period in the Levant. The discussion includes the work of Bliss and Macalister (1902) in the upper city, and presents some new perspectives on the date of the ‘purity installations’ and on a limestone tabletop. The necropolis, with its painted tombs published by Peters and Thiersch (1905), is also discussed together with a burial from one of the tomb concentrations mentioned above. It is our intention to provide the reader with an overview of the site and the work accomplished there. The exposition of the 1980s excavations begins with Chapter 3, which describes Subterranean Complex 70, consisting of four separate systems of rooms, passageways, cisterns, etc., in the eastern part of the lower city. Fieldwork in this complex was carried out in 1980 and additional surveys and verification of the plan took place in 1984.

Chapter 4 presents Subterranean Complex 21, in the western part of the lower city, made up of eight different systems of rooms, cisterns, passageways, etc. A previously unknown columbarium (System B) was discovered in 1972 (Kloner and Hess 1985:122 –124) and a sounding in this system was conducted in the same year. Additional surveying and mapping of Complex 21 was carried out in 1986 and 1987. The olive-oil press in Complex 21, dated to the second half of the third and the second centuries BCE, is typical of those found at Maresha. Chapter 5 details Subterranean Complexes 44 and 45, in the southwestern section of the lower city. The olive-oil press in Complex 44 was comprehensively excavated in 1989. It was subsequently reconstructed and in 1991 opened to the public as part of the Bet Guvrin National Park. The oil press in Complex 44 is yet another example of the oil-press phenomenon at the site, expounded here. Both Dalit Regev and Tikva Levine studied the pottery recovered in 1980 and 1981 in Complexes 21 and 70. Since the pottery from Complexes 21 and 70 is similar, the two groups are dealt with as a single Hellenistic assemblage. Dalit Regev worked on this collection of pottery from 1988 to 1991. Her report appears at the end of this volume as Appendix 2. In 1994 and 1995 Tikva Levine studied the material; it is the results of her work that appear in Chapter 6. Professional differences in their approach are reflected in the conclusions they have reached. The small finds from 1980 to 1984 (Permit No. A-930) were registered and catalogued by Tessa Mindel-Genosar and Amos Kloner. The work then concentrated mainly on photographing and drawing the finds from Complex 70. At the same time and shortly thereafter, a large number of random finds were collected from the columbarium of Complex 21. Fortunately, all were presented to the Department of Antiquities (since 1990—the Israel Antiquities Authority) with a statement of their provenance. These finds are all included in Chap. 6.

viii

PREFACE

Chapter 7 encompasses Tikva Levine’s work with both the pottery and the small finds from the oil press in Complex 44. Chapter 8 presents Donald T. Ariel and Gerald Finkielsztejn’s analysis of the imported amphoras from the excavations of the 1980s. Chapter 9 ties together the threads presented in the above chapters, presenting the human face of the information presented here. Appendix 1 is a list of publications related to the site of Maresha. It was prepared by Chava Korzakova and Naomi Sidi based on earlier versions by Amos Kloner, director of the excavations. It aims to provide the reader with up-to-date references to the fieldwork as well as other studies related to the site, dating back to the early twentieth century; reports on chance finds, notes and new items, and publications in Hebrew are also noted. The forthcoming volume on the inscriptions recovered at Maresha includes Greek and Semitic ostraca, lead weights, lead sling bullets, astragali and inscriptions on altars. The volume on Hellenistic terracotta figurines is in press as well. Additional volumes in the series will deal with the pottery from Area 61, the imported amphoras and the stamped handles, the coins, the loom weights, altars and

stone vessels, lamps and the faience. Surveys of the subterranean complexes, cemeteries and burials and the architecture of the site are also in preparation. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Excavations at Maresha in 1972 (Permit No. 372), 1980 and from 1984 to 1989 (Permit No. 930) were directed by Amos Kloner on behalf of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums (since 1990—the Israel Antiquities Authority) with the cooperation of a large and devoted staff. The various area supervisors, assistants and other professionals involved in the work are mentioned in the notes for the individual chapters. In particular we would like to thank Yair Zoran, whose participation in the cave survey greatly contributed to the study of the subterranean complexes at Maresha, and Naomi Sidi, who organized and computerized the material, as well as assisted in preparing the English text. We are also deeply grateful to Dr. Barbara L. Johnson for leading us patiently with a firm and scholarly hand through the editing process. It has been a pleasure working with her as well as with the other contributors to this volume.

R EFERENCES Bliss F.J. and Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine during the Years 1898–1900. London. Kloner A. and Hess O. 1985. A Colombarium in Complex 21 at Maresha.‘Atiqot (ES) 17:122–133.

Peters J.P. and Thiersch H. 1905. Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa. London.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

LOCATION Maresha (Marisa, Marissa) is located in the Judean Shephelah 35 km east of Ashqelon, 40 km southwest of Jerusalem and about 1.5 km south of Bet Guvrin (map ref. 140/110; Fig. 1.1). It is generally agreed today that Maresha (Marissa is the Greek form of the Hebrew name) is to be identified with Tell Sandahanna (the Arabic name for the tell, after the ruins of a church situated northeast of the mound). The site is mentioned several times in the Bible but its location has been identified on the basis of references in which

it appears together with other places in the Judean Shephelah. Thus Maresha is among the Judean cities in Josh. 15:44 together with Keilah and Achzib. In the list of fortified cities of Rehoboam (2 Chron. II:7–9) Maresha appears after Adullam and Gat and together with Adoraim, Ziph and Lachish. In Micah 1:13–15, our site is mentioned with Lachish, Adullam, Achzib and Moreshet-Gath. In Josephus Flavius (Antiquities VIII, 246) the list is repeated and Maresha is noted as being in the vicinity of towns in the Judean Shephelah. Eusebius located the town two miles from Bet Guvrin (Onomasticon 130:10–12). The site’s identification

Fig. 1.1. Hellenistic and Early Roman sites in central Israel.

2

AMOS KLONER

has been verified by excavations and especially by an inscription discovered in Painted Tomb I (551; see below, Chap. 2) in the eastern cemetery, mentioning the Sidonian community “residing at Marissa” (Peters and Thiersch 1905:36–39; see also below, Chap. 2). GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF THE JUDEAN SHEPHELAH Judea, a mountainous zone in central Israel, can be divided into three parallel units on the basis of its geological structure, rock formations and climate: (1) the Judean mountains, which form a broad anticline in the center; (2) the Shephelah, a syncline located to

the west; and (3) the Judean Desert, a parallel syncline to the east (Figs. 1.2, 1.3). The Shephelah, meaning ‘low’ or ‘lowland’, is a syncline of soft limestone and chalky formations extending from the Senonian to the Miocene. The hilly character of the area is the result of erosion of these rocks. The boundaries discussed here are based on geological data without exact correspondence to the limits of the Shephelah as described in the Bible (Smith 1966:143–167; Dagan 1996:136–137). In the east the Shephelah is separated from the mountains at the western bend of the central anticline, which inclines 30–40°. The bend is clearly visible along its entire length from the southern Shephelah,

Fig 1.2. Geological map of central Israel with Maresha in the center.

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

3

Fig. 1.3. East–west geological section of Judea, south of Jerusalem (after Flexer 1992:283).

through the area of Lahav to the northeast, to the area of Sha‘ar Ha-Gāy and Bet Horon. In the west the Shephelah is separated from the Judean coastal plain along a twisting line running between the rock formations and the alluvial soil. Although the name has occasionally been used to include the coastal plain, the Shephelah proper is the region of low hills between that plain and the Judean mountains (Smith 1966:144–145). In the north the Shephelah is bounded by the drainage area of Nahal Ayyalon that includes Nahal Modi‘in and Nahal Gimzo. Although the drainage area does not form a sharp line, it is commonly accepted as the connection between the moderately hilly Senonian layers and the rocky Turonian landscape. In the south the Judean Shephelah includes the entire Eocene block as far as Nahal Be’er Sheva‘, which forms a distinct border. The Judean Shephelah, as defined here, lies between Nahal Modi‘in and Nahal Be’er Sheva‘, in a band that extends northnortheast–south-southwest for about 80 km. Its width in the center, in the Bet Guvrin area, is about 20 km and in the north and south, about 15 km. This band is drained by a number of small nehalim (ephemeral streams), generally flowing southeast–northwest, thus running perpendicular to the axis of the main anticline of the Judean mountains. The beginning of Nahal Soreq, Nahal Ha-Ela and Nahal Guvrin is in the Judean mountains themselves, whereas the others drain

only the Shephelah, or begin in Nahal Telem, which developed along the border between the mountains and the Shephelah. The Shephelah can be divided into three parts from north to south: 1. The northern part includes the area between the alluvial basins of Nahal Ayalon and Nahal Soreq. This area is cut by the nehalim running east–west. 2. The central part lies between Nahal Soreq and Nahal Guvrin. This area is divided in the middle by Nahal Ha-Ela, which breaks the connection between the two parts of the central anticline, i.e. the Hebron and the Jerusalem mountains. The Eocene coat hides the bend created at this point, but a retreat eastwards on the border between the mountain and the Shephelah is recognizable. 3. The southern part is located between Nahal Guvrin and the Be’er-Sheva‘ Valley. This Eocene block is divided at its center by Nahal Shiqma and Nahal Shoval, which create a wedge of alluvial soil. In the northern part, Nahal Adorayim and Nahal Kelekh drain to the northwest, in the southern area, Nahal Gever, Nahal Pahar and Nahal Karkor drain to the west. These three units of the Shephelah are also divided from north to south. This division emphasizes the two existing bands: the lower Shephelah to the west and the upper Shephelah to the east. The division is based on a difference in absolute height between the two parts: the lower consisting mainly of hills whose height reaches

4

AMOS KLONER

150–300 m above sea level; and the upper one, where the height of the hills attains 360–550 m asl. In the lower Shephelah the relief is moderate, and there are vertical differences of 10 to 30 m between the peaks of the hills and the valleys at their feet. In the upper Shephelah, the differences between the peaks and the valleys are more than 25 m and reach, in some cases, 70–80 m. In the northern Shephelah the connecting point between the two vertical bands runs close to its eastern limit, from the hills of Yalu and Khirbet el-‘Aqd, to the Zor‘a range. In the central Shephelah a clear line continues from this area southward to H. Husham, Tel ‘Azeqa, Mizpé Massu’a, Ramat Avishur and Tel Goded. This line consists partly of hills whose height reaches 365–380 m asl. At some places they are covered with Miocene sea sediments of the Ziqlag formation. These two bands of the Shephelah represent levels of abrasion. In the southern section the eastern abrasion level is made from the top level of the Bet Nir conglomerate formation, in the west it is the abrasion level upon which the Bet Nir conglomerate formation rests (Nir 1970:185 and references therein). In this section as well, the line that separates the two vertical bands retreats slightly eastwards in the Maresha area, but protrudes again at the line of Giv‘at Gad, Horbat Zeta, Horbat Ginta, Horbat Kishor, Horbat Migdalit, Horbat Karkor and the Be’er Sheva‘ shoulder. Some scholars are convinced that the line dividing the two Shephelah bands is a fault line, whose eastern side (the upper Shephelah) is higher than the western side (the lower Shephelah). Maresha is located in the transition area between the central and southern parts of the Shephelah and on the dividing line between the upper (eastern) and lower (western) sections. Its location between those blocks made it an excellent observation point and gave it the advantage of roads in all directions. THE ROCK FORMATIONS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR THE HEWING PROCESS OF THE SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES The Judean Shephelah consists of layers of limestone and chalky rocks from the Senonian, Paleocene and Eocene periods. The dominant rock is the chalk of the Maresha detail of the Zor‘a Formation, dating to the Eocene. This white, soft, compact and homogenous rock is protected from erosion by a relatively thin covering layer of limestone. The thickness of the Maresha detail is generally between 30 and 100 m and

it reaches its thickest point at the tell. The subterranean complexes and the burial caves at Tell Maresha, as well as other underground complexes in the area (Buchbinder 1969; Hirsch 1983; Kloner 1987:25–26 and nn. 2–11 with references therein) were hewn in the Maresha detail. A more complete discussion of the rock cutting will be presented in the forthcoming volume on the survey of the caves. Above the compact chalk of the Maresha detail the limestone crust created a surface layer whose thickness reaches up to three meters. The crust consists of hard, non-homogeneous, peeled and fissured limestone, which has a tendency to collapse relatively easily (Kloner 1987:27–28). This tendency was known to the stonemasons who cut the early subterranean complexes. The first stage of hewing a cave was to create a square or rectangular opening in the upper limestone crust. From the opening a vertical shaft or stepped entrance led through the hard limestone layer to the chalk below. The depth of the vertical shaft or stepped entrance varied from two to four meters, according to the thickness of the limestone layer. Below the limestone the hewing process of the entrance continued in the soft chalk until the stonemasons reached a level were they could be sure that the ceiling of the underground rooms existed only in the chalk layer and did not reach the upper limestone crust which was fissured and less stable. The fact that the combination of limestone and chalk layers made it possible to hew large underground rooms that were relatively stable, together with the ease of cutting the soft limestone, has made the Judean Shephelah rich in artificial rooms cut in bedrock. Throughout this area thousands of underground chambers were cut. They served as water cisterns, quarries, oil presses, columbaria, stables, cult rooms, hiding systems and burial caves (Bliss and Macalister 1902:204–270; Kloner 1987). The accessibility and relative ease with which the rock could be cut were also the main reasons for creating subterranean complexes in the lower city of Maresha. Generally, it was not necessary to strengthen the ceiling of the rooms. However, in those chambers that were more than two meters wide, the ceiling was supported by leaving piers or by cutting vaulted ceilings. Sometimes the stonemasons used natural, horizontal fissures within the chalk as floor or ceiling lines along which to hew the rooms. The aligning of a room along natural fissures made the work easier.

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

However, natural fissures did not dictate the layout of a complex.

BRIEF HISTORY OF MARESHA The Earlier Periods Maresha is included within the borders and among the cities of Judah. It was populated by families of the sons of Shela (1 Chron. 4:21) and of the Calebites (1 Chron. 2:42). During their excavations in 1900, Bliss and Macalister (1902:58) distinguished an Iron Age II stratum below two strata dated to the Hellenistic period. Presumably, there was also a Persian level, although the excavators did not recognize it. The new excavations carried out between 1989 and 1997 revealed clear evidence of occupation in the Iron II and Persian periods. In addition there are a few sherds dated to the tenth–ninth centuries BCE. During the excavations of 1995 a fragmentary ostracon, dated to the seventh century BCE, was discovered among other objects in the fill layers of the large subterranean complex, 147, in the lower city (Kloner and Eshel 1999).1 It was recently suggested again that Lachish Ostracon No. 4 was written and sent from Maresha (Begin and Grushka 1999:8–12; Begin 2000:152–159). In the sixth century BCE, probably shortly after the fall of the Judean kingdom in 586 BCE, Edomites settled all over the southern Shephelah and the Hebron mountains. They came from the southeast and the region was called Edom (Idumea in Greek). In the fourth century BCE, most likely in the second half, Sidonians and possibly also Greeks settled at Maresha. They were the main settlers and presumably also those who introduced Greek culture and language to the area. A recently published Aramaic ostracon dated to the fourth century BCE bears the toponym of Maresha (Lemaire 1996:84–85). On two ostraca found in the 1990s the toponym Maresha appears, once in Aramaic and once in Idumean. During the third century BCE Maresha was under Ptolemaic rule and became the main city of Idumea. It is mentioned in several of the Zenon papyri (P. Cairo 59006, 59015, 58537) dated 259–257 BCE, shedding light on intensive commercial activities and trade between the city, the centers of the coastal plain and Egypt. At this time the town was also the seat of various governmental officials. It remained an Egyptian possession until the battle of Paneas in 198 BCE and came under Seleucid

5

control during the reign of Antiochus III. The graves in all the cemeteries around Maresha were cut during the first half of the third century BCE and remained in use for about two centuries. During the wars of the Hasmoneans, Maresha served as a stronghold of the Seleucid army and as a base for their attacks on Judea (1 Macc. 5:66). Hence, it suffered from acts of retaliation by the Maccabees (2 Macc. 12:35). Hyrcanus I captured Maresha together with all of Idumea (Josephus Antiquities XIII, 257; War I, 63) and completely destroyed the city in the year 112/111 BCE or shortly thereafter. According to Josephus (Antiquities XIII, 257), Hyrcanus took “Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise themselves, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living, at which time therefore, this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.” (The massive destruction of the city in 112/111 BCE is clearly attested by the 1900 excavations as well as by the renewed excavations of 1989 to 1997). After destroying Maresha and subduing the Idumeans, Hyrcanus I permitted those who were willing to embrace Judaism to remain in the country. It follows that those Idumeans who refused to accept Judaism were expelled. Among the population that remained in Idumea are numbered the forefathers of Herod the Great. It is quite probable that some kind of Hasmonean rule was established in the region by Hyrcanus I (Josephus Antiquities XIII, 396). Of the 61 coins recovered in the excavations of 1900, 25 come from the time of John Hyrcanus I. The numerous Hyrcanus coins are evidence of a Hasmonean occupation force stationed in the upper city. The absence of coins of Alexander Jannaeus (103–76 BCE) in stratigraphic contexts suggests that the upper city was deserted at this time, and that it was occupied for a very short period, probably during the last years of John Hyrcanus. Apparently, this occupation force, stationed at Maresha, established the policy of prohibiting the civilian population from residing in the upper city. This probable reoccupation at the very end of the second and the beginning of the first century BCE was the last occupation of the upper city (Kloner 1991).

6

AMOS KLONER

Although no physical evidence of a renewed city has been discovered so far, according to historical sources it was rebuilt by Gabinius, governor of Syria from 57 to 55 BCE (Josephus Antiquities XIV, 75; War I, 156). It may be assumed that the town was handed over to Herod together with all of Idumea in 40 BCE—the same year in which it was destroyed by the Parthians and never rebuilt. A few coins of the first century BCE and the early first century CE discovered during recent excavations in the lower city indicate that some activity did take place at the site after the second-century BCE destruction. However, since these coins are surface finds they cannot be taken as evidence of an occupation stratum following the Hyrcanus conquest. There are three possibilities for the location of the first-century BCE town: (1) A part of the upper mound may have been rebuilt and some of the underground installations, excluding dwellings, in the lower city reused. This possibility has not been confirmed by recent excavations and a close examination of the archaeological finds and remains of the 1900 excavations on the mound clearly shows that there was no new or renewed settlement after the second century BCE. The only possible evidence of a later occupation was discovered immediately south of the northwestern tower where three squares were dug in the 1989 season in an area not excavated by Bliss and Macalister. The few walls discovered could not be dated from the finds, but their position close to the surface and their lack of consistency with the town plan of the second century BCE city suggest a later dating. (2) The possibility of the reconstruction of some part of the lower city or some other place close by as the new Maresha has not been confirmed by archaeological evidence at the site or its environs. Only four out of the thousand coins found in our excavations in the Hellenistic levels of the lower city are dated later than 112 BCE (Barkay 1992/3). The same situation is also shown by the stamped amphora handles (see below, Chap. 8). (3) It is possible that the hill of Bet Guvrin was used as the central settlement of the district and called Maresha from the end of the second century BCE until 40 BCE. Further support for this suggestion comes from a firstcentury BCE coin, presumably minted by the people of Maresha, which was discovered during the excavations of Bet Guvrin (Qedar 1992/3). Very few finds from the 1900 excavations date to the first century BCE. Among these are the Judean

molded radial lamps (Bliss and Macalister 1902:129, Pl. 62:4, 5), common in Jerusalem and other Judean sites dated generally to the first century BCE (Barag and Hershkovitz 1994:14–24). These later lamps, along with the 25 Hyrcanus coins from the upper city, suggest a date at the end of the second century BCE. On the other hand there are no typically Hasmonean pottery types from Maresha such as the wheelmade folded lamps of the first century BCE. First-century BCE remains are indicated only by coins occasionally found on the surface (Kloner and Asaf 1995:119). These surface finds include coins of Alexander Jannaeus and Herod the Great. The Later Periods Archaeological surveys and excavations have revealed occupational remains postdating the forced evacuation of the site in the first century BCE. At the end of the first century CE certain parts of the subterranean complexes in the lower city were reused, but with a function different from their original one. For example, one part of Complex 51 was used for burials, as shown by broken ossuaries discovered in niches within it. Evidence for the second century CE is found in tunnels characteristic of the hiding complexes of the Judean Shephelah. These tunnels and small rooms were identified in several underground areas at Maresha, for example, in Complexes 30, 45, 90 and 109. They were dated approximately to the Ben Kosba (Bar-Kokhba) War between the years 132 and 135 CE. According to studies of the hiding places in the Judean Shephelah (Kloner and Tepper 1987:76–80, 374), the systems were cut below already existing settlements, which implies that a small population resided in the lower city of Maresha during the second century CE. The site was known to Eusebius who describes it in the Onomasticon as a ruined place in his time (third century CE), located two miles south of Bet Guvrin (Klosterman 1904: No. 682). During the Byzantine period a small village of about 15 dunams was founded in the west-southwestern part of the lower city. Between 1985 and 1987 a church dated to the fifth–sixth centuries CE was excavated at the southwestern perimeter of the lower city (Kloner 1993). However, it was not until soundings were made in Area 600 in the 1990 season that the full size of the village was established.

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Occupation during the Early Islamic period is shown by the reuse of Subterranean Complex 30 (the es-Sûk Cave) as a mosque. Christian graffiti and other symbols carved on a wall of the same complex predate the Islamic period. During the Late Byzantine or Early Islamic period Complex 105 (the ‘Polish’ Cave) was transformed from a circular water cistern to a columbarium.

7

Remains from the Byzantine and Crusader periods have been discovered in the area of the Sandahanna church, which is located 450 m northeast of the tell. The Byzantine basilica was altered by the Crusaders (Conder and Kitchener 1883:275–278; ClermontGanneau 1896:447–451). The site was recently included, with photographs, in the popular Maresha guidebook (Kloner 1996:46–49).

NOTE 1

The general history of Maresha has been presented by several scholars in the past. The first two and among the most important are T. Tobler (1959:129–137) and V. Guérin (1868:225–229), who identified Maresha with Mer’ash. Tobler’s main contribution was his description of some of the subterranean complexes at Tell Sandahanna, while Guérin wrote the most detailed history of the site. Tobler and Guérin were the first scholars to use modern research methods such as surveying in their work at Maresha. F.J. Bliss’ greatest contribution was the excavation of the site itself in 1900. In

the excavation report published in 1902, R.A.S. Macalister presented a short history of the site in the chapter dealing with its identification (Bliss and Macalister 1902:67–68). J.P. Peters wrote an extensive history of Maresha, dating it on the basis of evidence from the tombs (Peters and Thiersch 1905: 6–14). For the history of Maresha see also E. Schürer (1979: 3–4 n. 8), M. Hengel (1974:317 s.v.) and A. Kloner (1994). For a short history and report of the excavations of the upper and lower cities and the necropolis see M. Avi-Yonah and A. Kloner (1993).

R EFERENCES Avi-Yonah M. and Kloner A. 1993. Maresha (Marisa). In E. Stern ed. NEAEHL 3. Pp. 948–957. 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. 1–47. Barkay R. 1992/3. The Marisa Hoard of Seleucid Tetradrachms Minted in Ascalon. INJ 12:21–26. Begin B.Z. 2000. As We Do Not See Azoqa. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Begin B.Z. and Grushka A. 1999. Where was Ostracon Lachish-4 Written? EI 26:13–24 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 226*–227*). Bliss F.J. and Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine during the Years 1898–1900. London. Buchbinder B. 1969. Geology of the Shephelah Region. Jerusalem. Clermont-Ganneau Ch. 1896. Archeological Researches in Palestine II. London. Conder C.K. and Kitchener H.H. 1883. The Survey of Western Palestine III: Judea. London. Dagan Y. 1996. Cities of the Judean Shephelah and Their Division into Districts Based on Joshua 16. EI 25:136–146 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 92*). Finkielsztejn G. 1988. More Evidence on John Hyrcanus I’s Conquests: Lead Weights and Rhodian Amphora Stamps. BAIAS 16:33. Flexer A. 1992. Geology, Principles and Processes. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Guérin V. 1868. Description géographique, historique et archéologique de la Palestine I: Judée. Paris.

Hengel M. 1974. Judaism and Hellenism II. London. Hirsch F. 1983. Bet Guvrin–Geological Map. Jerusalem. Josephus Antiquities: Josephus. Jewish Antiquities. H. St.J. Thackeray, R. Marcus and A. Wikgren transls. (Loeb Classical Library). Cambridge, Mass. 1930–1963. Josephus War: Josephus. The Jewish War. H. St.J. Thackeray transl. (Loeb Classical Library). Cambridge, Mass. 1927–1928. Kloner A. 1987. The Judean Shephelah—Geology. In A. Kloner and Y. Tepper eds. The Hiding Complexes in the Judean Shephelah. Tel Aviv. Pp. 23–29 (Hebrew). Kloner A. 1991. Maresha 1989. ESI 10:38–40. Kloner A. 1993. A Byzantine Church at Maresha (Beit Govrin). In Y. Tsafrir ed. Ancient Churches Revealed. Jerusalem. Pp. 260–264. Kloner A. 1994. A Unique Hellenistic Juglet from Maresha (Marissa/Tell Sandahannah) In S. Drougou ed. 3rd Scholarly Conference on Hellenistic Pottery. Thessalonika. September 1991. Athens. Pp. 269–271. Kloner A. 1996. Maresha. Archaeological Guide. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Kloner A. and Asaf E. 1995. Maresha 1992. ESI 14:118–119. Kloner A. and Eshel E. 1999. A Seventh-Century BCE List of Names from Maresha. EI 26: 147–150 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 233*–234*). Kloner A. and Tepper Y. 1987. The Hiding Complexes in the Judean Shephelah. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Klosterman E. 1904. Das Onomasticon der biblischen Ortsnamen. Leipzig.

8

AMOS KLONER

Lemaire A. 1996. Nouvelles inscriptions araméenes d’Idumée au Musée d’Israël. Paris. Nir D. 1970. Geomorphology of Israel. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Peters J.P. and Thiersch H. 1905. Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa. London. Qedar S. 1992/3. The Coins of Marisa: A New Mint. INJ 12: 27–33.

Schürer E. 1979. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ II. (Revised by G. Vermes and F. Millar). Edinburgh. Smith G.A. 1966. The Historical Geography of the Holy Land. Jerusalem. Tobler T. 1859. Dritte Wanderung nach Palästina im Jahre 1857. Gotha.

CHAPTER 2

OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

This overview of the excavations covers previous excavations on the mound, burial chambers, and a brief introduction of the lower city—all briefly updated based on the recent excavations of the Israel Antiquities Authority. EXCAVATIONS OF THE UPPER CITY ON THE MOUND Tell Maresha was excavated during the summer of 1900 by F.J. Bliss and R.A.S. Macalister on behalf of the British Exploration Fund. This was part of a series of excavations carried out in the Shephelah from 1898 to 1900 (Bliss and Macalister 1902). H. Thiersch (1908) published a detailed analysis of their report. (For summaries, see Avi-Yonah 1977; Avi-Yonah and Kloner 1993:948–949.) THE UPPER CITY The mound is about 160 m in diameter with a 3.6–6.1 m thick accumulation of occupational debris on its summit. During excavation of this accumulation, Bliss and Macalister identified two distinct strata on the basis of pottery, the lower of which was Jewish and the upper, Seleucid (Bliss and Macalister 1902: 52).1 The Hellenistic accumulation was subsequently divided in two (primarily by Thiersch and adopted by Avi-Yonah), thus making a total of three strata, two Hellenistic and one Israelite (Jewish). The changes in the orthogonal plan by blocking streets and changing their straight courses into crooked paths was not considered a distinct stratum by the excavators. In order to prove the existence of a Jewish (Iron Age II) town underlying the Seleucid one, Bliss and Macalister (1902:58) excavated down to bedrock in the eastern part of the open space marked ‘court’ (Block II: Pl. 16), clearing an area of 10 × 15 m, about 6 m below the surface. Immediately under the floor level of the ‘court’ they found a series of chambers

that proved to be independent of the ‘court’, clearly belonging to an earlier stratum. “These chambers appear to have formed part of the upper city, and to have been destroyed to give place to the court at some period of town improvement. Below these rooms was another series of chambers and part of a street with a small drain below it, connected with a larger vaulted drain” (Bliss and Macalister 1902:58). However, Bliss concluded from the pottery that this was an earlier, about 3 m thick, Seleucid occupation, below which the Jewish stratum continued down to bedrock. Bliss noticed, as shown above, two strata between the second-century BCE uppermost surface stratum and the Iron II stratum. The accumulation, too thick to be slighted, is clearly of two horizons, which can be dated to the third and early second centuries BCE. Ptolemaic (third century BCE) remains were clearly found in the 1900 excavations. Several architectural fragments, both decorative and functional, were recovered from the second-century BCE city (Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pls. 18,19). The column drums, the Ionic capitals and the bases are clear evidence of colonnades even though they were not in situ; no other architectural remains of peristyles were reported. A triglyph built into the jamb of a door opening onto Street H was in secondary use, indicating the existence of third-century BCE ornamented monumental buildings. Column drums, Ionic capitals and Doric friezes belonging to an earlier stratum were reused in structures of the second-century BCE upper city. Evidence for the third-century stratum is provided by two Greek inscriptions of Hellenistic date (Bliss and Macalister 1902:67–70). One, on a cylindrical base, is dedicated to Arsinoë II, queen of Egypt and wife of Ptolemy IV Philopater (221–203 BCE). The second, on a limestone fragment, mentions Berenice, a common name in the Ptolemaic dynasty. A third inscription, not precisely dated but clearly Hellenistic (probably also of the third century BCE), was carved on the base of a huge statue of an eagle, dedicated to Apollo by “…s

10

AMOS KLONER

the son of Kraton”. These Ptolemaic inscriptions may be connected with the triumphal march of Ptolemy IV through Palestine after the battle near Raphia (217 BCE). Of the coins from the earlier excavations 61 were identifiable. Thirteen were Ptolemaic, 19 Seleucid and 25 belonged to John Hyrcanus (134–104 BCE), who had stationed a garrison in the city after 111 BCE. Of the remaining four coins, one belonged to Herod the Great, two were Greek of uncertain date and the fourth was Roman, also of uncertain date (Bliss and Macalister 1902:68). The Ptolemaic coins, the inscriptions, the architectural fragments and the tomb caves may all be dated to the third century BCE. Also, historical sources

such as the Zenon papyri leave no doubt about the Ptolemaic dating of the third-century stratum between the upper Seleucid and the lower Iron II (Jewish) strata, unidentified by previous excavations. After three days of excavation, Bliss and Macalister began uncovering rooms by clearing three walls of each room and piling the debris against the fourth. In this manner they gradually uncovered the entire upper stratum and established a full plan of the upper city in its latest phase of occupation: In its last phase the upper city was almost square (158 m from east to west, 152 m from north to south), covering an area of about 24 dunams (Plan 2.1). It

Plan 2.1. Map of the upper city of Hellenistic Maresha (second century BCE) showing town plan and fortifications (after Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 16).

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

was enclosed by a wall with square and rectangular towers. Aside from the corner towers, of which the northwestern one projects from the wall towards the northwest and was excavated in 1989 (Avi-Yonah and Kloner 1993:949–950), 1991 and 1993 (Kloner, Finkielsztejn and Arbel 1998; and see below), there were three towers in the western wall. In the center of the northern wall two 90° angles were found, but no tower. Near these angles, inside the wall, a massive structure was uncovered, perhaps the remains of a gate. The northern wall stood on a foundation of rough fieldstones and was built in part of small, hewn limestone blocks laid as headers and stretchers (0.15 × 0.52 × 0.28 m). The eastern wall—constructed of large blocks laid in mortar—had no gates. The structure Bliss identified as a gate near the southeastern corner is actually a tower, preserved to the threshold of the door. It may be assumed that the gates were located near the ends of the main streets. The orthogonal Hippodamian system is easily recognized in the original plan of the upper city: two parallel main streets run east–west (see Plan 2.1 and 1902 Report, A and q) and three north–south streets (E+B, Z+G, H+D) intersect the main streets at right angles. The grid enclosed twelve blocks (insulae) of buildings. The width of the streets varies, from 2 to 6 m. In most of them, segments of paving stones were still preserved. The main street contained part of a drainage system. The municipal drainage network branched off to private houses, but this was not examined in detail, as the excavators confined themselves to uncovering the upper stratum without destroying buildings. Block I was square, 45 m on each side. In its center was an enclosed court, surrounded by rooms and halls of various sizes. To the west an additional row of six rooms of equal size opening onto Street E was added to the inner set of rooms. The former were apparently offices or guardrooms. A small building (3 × 9 m) in the center of the court was divided into three compartments. Some scholars (Avi-Yonah 1977:783; Avi-Yonah and Kloner 1993:949) assume that this was a temple dedicated to an Idumean triad of gods, as yet unidentified. It seems that one of the tutelary deities of the city was Apollo, perhaps to be identified with the Idumean divinity Qos. The court surrounding the assumed temple may have been an outer court. In any case, this was clearly an important building, for it to occupy such an extensive area in so crowded a city.

11

Block II, between streets A, H, Z and Q, was also a square structure, 42 m along each side. Here were two courts, one, extending along Street A, was paved with stones, and the other (15.2 × 24.5 m), south of the first, was surrounded by a porch, of which the foundations were cleared. West of the first court was a large house with a small enclosed court at the center (see Plan 2.1:a), surrounded by smaller rooms. Apparently the northern court was a marketplace and the southern, an inn. Two walls ran along the slopes of the mound. The excavators suggested that these walls were contemporaneous and linked, and that the outer one served to support the rough stone foundations upon which the inner wall stood. This explanation, however, does not seem plausible. In an earlier phase, the city was surrounded by a wall which, judging from its remains, enclosed a slightly larger area. Excavations between 1989 and 1993 indicated that it is more likely that the lower wall belongs to the Israelite (Iron II) city, and that it was reused and repaired in the Persian and early Hellenistic periods. Three types of buildings were discovered in the city: (1) large buildings consisting of rooms surrounding an enclosed court; (2) small buildings with rooms haphazardly arranged; (3) one- or two-room structures that served as shops and servants’ quarters. In several buildings there was evidence for hearths, basins, shelves and steps leading either to the roof or the cellar. A house in the south of the city contained a granary. In the middle of one of the northern blocks is a structure with thick walls and a barrel-vaulted ceiling (Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pls. 16, 17). At least two installations identified by us as ritual baths were constructed in Blocks k and n (Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pls. 16, 17). From the few architectural fragments and from the plans of the buildings, it is evident that the architecture of the city was a blend of Hellenistic and Eastern elements, corresponding well with the history of Maresha. Ionic and Corinthian capitals of large and small columns, capitals of pillars and tabletops presumably belonging to the third century BCE stratum, decorated with rosette and meander motifs, (see below) were also found. The 1900 excavation revealed that the original orthogonal plan was changed slightly in the second century BCE. Some streets were blocked by rooms, or were diverted from straight lines into crooked paths. The changes certainly belonged to the later Hellenistic

12

AMOS KLONER

stratum, but they do not seem to have created two separate strata. The plans produced by Bliss and Macalister have become the standard for the study of Hellenistic town planning in Palestine and as such are applied to other sites of the period. Though we have treated their reconstructed town plan as an established fact, it should, however, be taken into consideration that Bliss and Macalister may have slightly adjusted their basic data (cf. also the study of Tell Goded—Gibson 1994). THE NORTHWESTERN TOWER (AREA 100) During our excavations in 1989, 1991 and 1993 a corner tower was exposed in the northwestern sector of the high mound. Two main building phases, both Hellenistic, were identified. The outline of the tower had already been noted in the 1900 excavations, when the excavators went down 0.30–0.45 m and reconstructed it on the basis of the courses of the upper, later walls. The surprisingly strong and wellpreserved structure formed part of the northern line of fortifications of the acropolis (Fig. 2.1). Earlier

constructions, dated to the Iron Age and the Persian period, stood beneath and south of these fortifications. The tower was built against the northern wall of the upper city and above the earlier masonry (Kloner, Finkielsztejn and Arbel 1998:154–155). The first phase (early Hellenistic in date), which projected north and westward from the wall, was trapezoidal. The estimated length of its southern wall, part of which coincided with the city wall (see above), was 16 m, the length of its northern wall 14 m, the length of its eastern wall 9 m and the length of its western wall 14 m. The thickness of the tower walls was approximately 3.5 m (Fig. 2.2). Two rectangular rooms, each 7.5 m long and 3.5 m wide, occupied the upper part of the tower. Soundings over about one-third of the area of each hall, below the estimated floor level, revealed walls of the Iron Age and the Persian period. At least three phases were distinguished—two Iron Age and one Persian—dating from the eighth to the fourth century BCE. Among the notable finds were ostraca with names and short phrases in Aramaic—used by the Idumean population of the vicinity for administrative and economic purposes—written in ink. The crushed

Fig. 2.1. Aerial view of the northwestern tower in Area 100 from the west. The four squares opened in the 1989 season are clearly seen in the upper part of the photograph.

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

13

Fig. 2.2. Aerial view of the northwestern tower. Notice the rounded walls and the shops at its base.

chalk floors of the halls from the Hellenistic period were preserved mainly in the south. Some of the walls beneath the floors from the Iron II and Persian periods had collapsed even before the tower was built. When the towers were constructed at the beginning of the Hellenistic period, parts of earlier walls were incorporated into the fill under the halls. There may have been an earlier tower in this area, whose outer walls were dismantled and entirely removed, in order to make room for the Hellenistic tower. The tower was built of local chalk, quarried in rectangular blocks from caves in the lower city. A typical block measured 40 × 20 × 18 cm. They were laid across the width of the wall, eight or nine alongside one another, creating strong and thick tower walls. They were laid chiefly as headers, although the wall also contained numerous stretchers along the edges (Plan 2.2). Larger blocks of limestone were also used occasionally as reinforcement. Their use as reinforcing masonry requires further study and will be published in the future. This early tower, dating to the beginning of the third century (c. 300 BCE), was founded in earth and ash

debris of the Persian period. In the second phase, a new tower was built, of which two walls survived: the western one, 2.35 m thick, and the eastern one, 2.20 m thick (see Plan 2.2; Fig. 2.2). It was constructed of large limestone blocks, on a rectangular plan. The walls were partially inset within the earlier tower and not as thick, creating a slightly smaller structure. The later phase of the tower, dated to the first half of the second century BCE, was probably destroyed toward the end of the century. On its west the tower rose to a height of at least 12 m. During the Hellenistic phases the foundations were apparently deepened, penetrating earlier levels, and more earth and stones were deposited in order to support and reinforce the lower third of the structure. An Iron II wall (W30), c. 3.5 m wide and built of limestone blocks laid as headers and stretchers, was discovered north of the tower (Plan 2.2). This wall, topographically lower and constructed partly on a fill of larger stones sealed by a stepped wall, served as an outer defensive line for the city. Except for a few Iron Age sherds most of the finds along the wall were from the Hellenistic period. The section opposite the northwestern corner of the Hellenistic tower was built

14

Plan 2.2. Maresha. Area 100. The northwestern tower and the shops and workshops (A–F) northwest of it.

AMOS KLONER

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

of rectangular limestone blocks. The width of the wall in its upper part was 1.70 m and it was preserved to a height of c. 2 m. This wall was probably erected in the Iron Age and repaired to use as a retaining wall during the Hellenistic period. This wall continued in use together with the Hellenistic tower at the beginning of the third century BCE (Kloner, Finkielsztejn and Arbel 1998:154–157). Wall 30, discovered by Bliss and Macalister in 1900 (1902:54), formed part of the outer perimeter of the mound; they attributed it to the Hellenistic period, since its general course, including offsets and insets, conformed to the line of the upper wall. As we have just shown, this wall was, in fact, part of the lower enclosure wall of the mound in Iron II, and was known,

15

at least in part, to the builders of the Hellenistic tower, who probably used it as a retaining wall.

FINDS WITHIN THE UPPER CITY Purification Installations (Miqva’ot) Several installations identified by the authors of this volume as ritual baths (miqva’ot) were uncovered during the 1900 excavations but not recognized as such at that time. Technical components identifying these installations include a vaulted roof above the main body of water and steps leading down to their bottom, allowing access to the lowest part. These steps limited the capacity of the reservoir. Plaster coated the walls and steps to prevent seepage and water loss; in some cases two distinct layers of plaster could be discerned. These installations, termed ‘small vaulted cisterns’ (Bliss and Macalister 1902:56), were discovered in houses: h in the northern part of the town, near the city wall, and n in the center, north of Street A (see Plan 2.1; Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 17). Cistern n, including its steps, was 6.5 m long and 2.3 m wide, including seven steps. In the southern part of the town, south of Street Q, Cistern k

Plan 2.3. Purification installations (after Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 17).

16

AMOS KLONER

measured 8.5 m in length and 3 m in width, including its eleven steps (Plan 2.3; Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 17). The entrances to n and k were intentionally narrow to restrict evaporation and protect the water from contamination, whereas in h the entrance to the installation was wide and high enough to allow easy access and movement up and down the stairs. The installations formed part of the original construction of the houses. Even if we accept that purification in a miqveh was introduced among the Edomites after John Hyrcanus’ conquest in 112/111 BCE, we lack archaeological evidence relating to Maresha at such a late date. The installations—evidently earlier than the end of the second century BCE—also occur in houses and underground complexes in the lower city. In Area 53, on the southern slope of the mound, a small plastered chamber with four wide steps was excavated. The chamber was situated in the southwestern corner of a house that was destroyed and went out of use in 112 or 111 BCE (Kloner 1991:40; Barkay 1992/3:25–26). The small bathtubs found by the dozens in the subterranean complexes probably served both for bathing and for purification (Kloner and Arbel 1996:162). The Pottery and Small Finds The finds from the Israelite stratum include seventeen lamelekh stamps—eleven of the double-winged type and six of the four-winged type: three from Hebron; three from Mm˜st; six from Socoh; two from Ziph, and three seals bearing illegible names (Bliss and Macalister 1902:106–107). A large quantity of Hellenistic pottery, over 400 complete or nearly complete vessels, was found in the excavations. The discovery of so many wellpreserved specimens indicates that the destruction of the city was sudden and traumatic, probably a siege followed by conquest and destruction. Similar assemblages of pottery were found in the lower city, in the buildings and in the subterranean complexes (see Chap. 6). This constitutes one of the richest assemblages of this period in the country (Bliss and Macalister 1902:124–134). Among the finds were 328 Rhodian amphora handles, as well as complete Rhodian amphoras. The stamps on the handles date from the beginning of the third to the end of the second century BCE (Bliss and Macalister 1902:131–134, Pl. 64). The excavations and surveys at Maresha since

1980 have not revealed any stamped amphora handles later than the end of the second century BCE. Some of the imported vessels published by Bliss and Macalister (1902:124–134) can possibly be dated to the first half of the first century BCE. The imported wares also included early types of Eastern Sigillata A, as well as fragments of Megarian bowls (Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pls. 58–63.) Sixteen small (5–8 cm high) lead figurines were discovered in the 1900 excavations (Bliss and Macalister 1902:154–155, Pl. 85). Most are anthropoid (male and female), with slightly rounded heads, on which eyes, nose and mouth are indicated. The figures are bent in different positions and their hands or feet (or both) are bound with an iron, copper or lead wire, or they are tied to what appear to be instruments of torture. The figurines were found in the rooms surrounding the court in Block I, which the excavators named the Seleucid barracks. Apparently these were execration figurines, serving as a representation of the cursed enemy and set near the temple. A figurine of this type was recovered in the excavation of Subterranean Complex 51 in 1990. The practice of magic of this type must have been common in Hellenistic Maresha, as demonstrated by the 51 limestone tablets and fragments, some in cursive Greek, discovered in the southwestern corner of the city, apparently in a fill. Four of the tablets were inscribed in square Hebrew script and two were in an unknown script (Demotic or Coptic?). The Greek inscriptions were deciphered and published by R. Wünsch (Bliss and Macalister 1902:158–187), while the remainder are unread. Other small fragments bear phrases and isolated names in Greek. One tablet is divided into seven columns and apparently contains a list of the days of the week for the whole year. Each day is designated by the letters G, D (day of good fortune), or in reverse order D, G (day of ill fortune). The long passages (one is 23 lines, and two are 17 lines) are prayers and appeals to unspecified gods to give retribution to the writer’s enemies. The names of the supplicants are mainly Greek, but Semitic (Adam, Zabatos), Roman (Rusticus, Crispa) and Egyptian (Thoargos, Aegyptos, Memnon) names also occur. The Limestone Tabletop From amongst the remains of stone furniture discovered in a second-century context at Maresha,

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

Bliss and Macalister published a limestone tabletop (“slab of clunch”) from the Seleucid stratum (1902:57, Pl. 18:9). Since we have no evidence of a first-century BCE stratum, aside from the brief occupation of the site by John Hyrcanus and a few finds dated to the first century BCE, it might be considered the earliest example of such a tabletop from the Hellenistic period in the Levant. The stone slab measures 1.13 × 0.35 × 0.10 m. It is decorated on two adjacent edges with frets and circles (Fig. 2.3). These motifs, apparently executed in the chipped carving technique (kerbschnitt), are common on the edges of such tables (Rahmani 1976; Avigad 1983:174–182; Wilkinson 1993–1994). The six-petalled rosette is a popular decorative motif on both religious and secular objects (Kloner 1990:59–60, n. 8; Rahmani 1994:39–41). Bliss suggested that the top may have been a shelf supported by a leg, which stood in the corner of a room, the plain sides abutting or perhaps inserted into the wall (Bliss and Macalister 1902:57, Pl. 18). Unfortunately, the underside of the tabletop is not described and we do not know whether it had a knob or depression for attaching the leg. In his study of oriental elements in Roman Palestine Avi-Yonah (1961:18) mentioned the table as a link to Sidon and the Mesopotamian world; Rahmani (1994:57) identified it as local, dating it to the late Second Temple period, similarly to those discovered in the upper city of Jerusalem; Barag (1992/3:5, n. 14) suggested a first-century BCE date. The square table (monopodium or cartibulum) normally stood in a fixed place on a single pedestal foot (Rahmani 1974:66; 1976). Made

17

of a variety of materials such as wood, stone or metal, these tables were seldom free-standing and were usually placed against a wall or in a corner as was the case with the Maresha piece; hence its decoration only on the sides visible to the viewer. The space underneath could be used for the storage of large vessels. A single pedestal foot is mentioned in the Tosefta (Kelim, Baba Bathra 3, 4; Zuckermandel 1881:592) and several tabletops were recovered in excavations of the Second Temple period in Jerusalem (Avigad 1983:174–184; Wilkinson 1993–1994). To the best of our knowledge the example from the upper city of Maresha is the earliest found in our region. Two shafts of irregular shape with square ends were published together with the tabletop as stands or table legs (Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 18:7, 8). No. 7 is 0.47 m high and thickens from 0.09 m at one end to 0.12 m at the other; No. 8 is 0.30 m high, and is 0.076 m wide at both ends (Fig. 2.4). The objects are too short to have been table legs and should probably be identified as stands. Two small columns were discovered in the 1900 excavation (Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 19:2, 13). No. 2 is 0.90 m high, topped by a plain, square capital and base. There is a square hole in the top of the capital measuring 0.13 × 0.13 m and 0.06 m deep. No. 13 is 0.74 m high; it is topped by a crude Ionic capital. The front of the shaft is roughly fluted while the back of both capital and shaft is plain, clearly indicating that the column stood against a wall. A square depression at the top of the capital measures 0.13 × 0.13 m and 0.07 m deep (Fig. 2.5). It seems that these were legs

Fig. 2.3. Limestone tabletop (after Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 18:9).

18

AMOS KLONER

Fig. 2.4. Limestone table legs or stands (after Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 19:7, 8).

Fig. 2.5. Limestone table legs (after Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 19:2, 13).

that supported either circular or square tabletops. The underside of the tabletop would have had a square knob that would be inserted into the depression in the leg. The joint may have been secured with mortar.

of the second century BCE, an early dating, important as few depictions of ships exist from the Hellenistic period (Gibson 1992:29).

The Ship Graffito

THE LOWER CITY AND THE SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES (Plan 2.4)

Another significant find was the graffito of a ship (Figs. 2.6, 2.7) carved on a slab of local limestone, found during Bliss and Macalister’s 1900 season. It depicts a ship in profile, its stern to the right and prow to the left (Gibson 1992:27). The slab was misplaced and rediscovered by Macalister only in 1903, and was thus not included in the main report; it was first published by Brindley in 1919. Following recent analysis, conducted after it had been cleaned by the British Museum in 1990, S. Gibson suggested a date at the end

This part of the town occupies an extensive area about 15–30 m lower than the top of the mound. It encloses the tell in a strip of uneven width within a radius of 250 to 400 m and occupies about 320 dunams (80 acres). During the last excavations, initiated at the end of the 1980s, it became clear that all the area of the lower city of Maresha was intensively built up. At least the southern and presumably the eastern part of the lower city were surrounded by a wall. In the survey at the southern part of the lower city a wall

Fig. 2.6. Ship graffito (after Brindley 1919:76).

Fig. 2.7. Ship graffito (after Gibson 1992:28).

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

19

Plan 2.4. Plan of the subterranean complexes in the lower city (after Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 15).

1.2–1.5 m thick, with shallow offsets and insets, was uncovered near the southeastern corner of the town. From there it ran westward for about 200 m. In 1993 a section (Area 920), excavated along the central part of the wall, was found to consist of casemates, built of well-made ashlars, the inner walls of chalk and the

outer face of larger limestone blocks. About 250 m south of this wall, a construction c. 2.2 m wide was uncovered in two probes. This proved to be a siege wall dated by coins to the reign of John Hyrcanus I, and thus clearly related to his occupation of Maresha in 111 BCE (see below, Plan 3.1).

20

AMOS KLONER

The lower city was also largely subterranean. All the subterranean complexes at Maresha were formed in the same method: a hole was cut through the relatively hard stone crust, and the soft chalk beneath it was hewn away, creating a short ‘chimney’ that gradually widened as it deepened. The shape and the character of each complex depended on its intended use. Usually, the complexes, with all their internal installations, were linked to buildings, streets and other open areas on the surface, and often located directly beneath them. Unfortunately, only the lower construction courses of these surface structures have survived. Once the blocks of stone of which they were constructed had been removed for reuse, the buildings deteriorated. The lower city thus consisted of residential dwellings, as well as public buildings, workshops, retail shops, alleys and streets, overlying many hundreds of subterranean complexes. Access to these complexes was through the courtyards of the houses, or the alleys between the buildings. Most walls of the lower city seem to reflect the general north–south and east–west orientation of the upper city. During Bliss and Macalister’s excavations at Maresha in the summer of 1900, while Bliss was supervising the work above ground, Macalister was deep in the bowels of the earth conducting the first systematic examination of these enigmatic and puzzling underground rooms and passages. This labor was by no means simple, and involved spending long hours in stifling air, creeping on hands and knees through long passages, and ascending steep slopes of chalky debris in an attempt to secure measurements (Bliss and Macalister 1902:11). A number of caves had been observed and described in the second half of the nineteenth century. The es-Sûk cave (Bliss and Macalister 1902: No. 30) and the water cistern system (Bliss and Macalister 1902: No. 53) were mapped by the Survey of Western Palestine team (Conder and Kitchener 1883:289–292). But only the 1970 and 1980 surveys led to the conclusion that these were not just underground complexes or mysterious souterrains, but artificial, created spaces that were an integral part of the lower city. THE NUMBERING SYSTEM OF THE SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES During the survey of the subterranean complexes Macalister described most of them in general outlines, without referring to details of quarrying and use.

He numbered them from 1 to 63 (see Plan 2.4), and published a map of their location (Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 15). He pointed out that many of them had not been surveyed, and only their positions were indicated. Some of the complexes were defined as ‘unpenetrable’ or ‘unreachable’. He numbered a group of interconnected rooms or chambers as one complex, even though it was obvious that some passages were later breaches or damages in the side-walls of rooms or chambers and that their original function had been abandoned. Some of the complexes included only a few rooms and pits, while others consisted of several dozen chambers and rooms, which clearly served different functions: e.g. olive presses, cisterns, storage pits, quarries, large halls, baths and filtering chambers. The various installations such as the olive presses, filtering chambers and baths were located in rooms or in small groups of chambers. Only at a later stage breaches—mainly horizontal— allowed passage between the rooms within a system and also between different systems. These additional and new passages were not part of the original constructions. These interconnections between and among the systems created the subterranean complexes. Macalister’s numbering began at the eastern side of the tell, and continued counterclockwise to the north, west and south, reaching No. 63. With the renewal of systematic exploration of Maresha and its subterranean complexes, we decided to continue Macalister’s numbering system (see Plan 3.1). The complex east of the tell, discovered and studied in 1980, is No. 70 (Kloner 1981). In order to distinguish between the old and the new excavations, Nos. 64–69 were not used. New subterranean complexes, unknown to Macalister, were designated 71–94, following the order of their excavation and survey. Nos. 95 to 156 were numbered and ordered in a concentric manner around the mound of the upper city, counterclockwise from the east. Those discovered during the excavations in the mid-1990s, Nos. 157–169, were again enumerated in the order of their discovery (departing once again from the concentric pattern). Surface areas directly above the subterranean complexes numbered by Macalister follow the designation of the underground complex, for example: the excavation over the columbarium (the es-Sûk cave) of subterranean Complex 30, received the number ‘30’, the upper excavations over subterranean Complex 53 became Area 53 and the excavation area over Complex 61 was termed Area

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

61. In areas excavated from 1993 on, the subterranean complexes and the surfaces areas carry completely different numbers (e.g. 100 and 930–940) as we realized that several subterranean complexes could be attached to the same surface unit. The numbers 400–449 were allocated to the underground complexes east of the road running from north to south along the eastern slope of the lower city; some of them have already been assigned. Numbers 500–599 were reserved for the burial caves: Nos. 500–509—the tombs of the southwestern necropolis; Nos. 510–549—the tombs of the northern necropolis, and Nos. 550–599—the tombs of the eastern necropolis.2 CEMETERIES AND TOMB-CAVES The tomb-caves serving the population of Hellenistic Maresha form a ring surrounding the city and may be separated into three geographic groups. So far all the tomb-caves discovered at Marsesha date to the Hellenistic period (Nos. 500–599). Seven constructed shaft tombs, presumably Persian in date, were excavated in the 1994 season in Area 940; only one contained a complete skeleton, while the remainder appeared to have been emptied in antiquity. THE EASTERN NECROPOLIS East of Maresha, along a valley running north–south at a distance of 250 to 300 m from the upper mound, is a concentration of at least twenty-five tomb-caves arranged in a band nearly a kilometer in length. Their basic plan is a rectangular hall with benches along the walls and kokhim (loculi) with gabled façades cut in the wall. The tomb-caves of the eastern necropolis attracted much attention because of their unique Egyptian–Palestinian plan; in some cases there is more than one hall. Almost all the kokhim had gabled façades, and some of them were inscribed with Greek inscriptions. The first three tombs were discovered and described, but not drawn, in 1873 by Conder and Kitchener (1883:272). Also in 1873, ClermontGanneau (1896:445–446) presented the plan of the third tomb mentioned by Conder and Kitchener, and described another, possibly identical to one of those mentioned by the Survey of Western Palestine team. Thus, this area of the tomb-caves was already known in 1902, when J.P. Peters and H. Thiersch studied and published four tombs, two of which (Tombs I and II)

21

contained wall paintings and many Greek inscriptions. These tombs, as well as two others (Tombs III, IV), were looted in 1902 after the completion of the 1900 excavations (Peters and Thiersch 1905). In 1913 Moulton (1915) located another tomb of the same type. In 1923, the Dominican fathers explored several more tombs with inscriptions (Tombs V, VI and VII—Abel 1925; Tomb VII had been originally published twelve years earlier by Moulton). There are some sixteen additional tombs found in the eastern necropolis, about ten of which are situated near Painted Tombs I and II and to the east of them. One of these, Tomb VIII (Oren and Rappaport 1984:133–135), is characterized by architectural elements of engaged pillars and capitals. The northern extension of the eastern necropolis contained a tomb-cave (No. 557) with twenty-eight kokhim, twenty-one of them gabled, the other seven with flat ceilings. The kokhim were arranged in two rows, with a row of dentils above each row. Additional caves with gabled or rectangular kokhim were discovered in the vicinity of the bell-shaped caves at Bet Guvrin. The latter were hewn at the same time as the quarries—in the Late Byzantine/Early Islamic period—and damaged the earlier burial caves. Two large kokh caves with Greek graffiti, naming among other things, Gades (No. 559) and Qosnatan (No. 558), were found in the eastern row of tombs, some 250 m from the acropolis fortifications. The painted tombs published by Peters and Thiersch in 1905 are considered to be the most important Sidonian–Idumean burial caves ever discovered and will be described in detail here with special reference to their contribution to an understanding of the site. Tomb I (551) This is the largest (17 × 21 m) and the most richly decorated tomb (Plan 2.5). It consists of a decorated central chamber entrance (A) which leads to three burial halls (B, C, D). Chamber A opens onto Hall D by means of a wide opening flanked by a pedestal for a statue on one side and an altar on the other. Thirteen gabled kokhim pierce the walls of Hall D, six in the north and seven in the south. Beneath them two long benches run along the walls. In the rear wall, a recess flanked by pilasters serves as a passage to three additional chambers. Hall B has five kokhim in each of its long walls and four in the short wall opposite the entrance. Hall C has five kokhim

22

AMOS KLONER

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

◄ Plan 2.5. Tomb I (551). Plan and sections (after Peters and Thiersch 1905:16–17, Figs. 1, 2).

in each long wall and three in the short wall. One of the main interests of the tomb lies in its wall paintings and inscriptions. On the longer walls of Hall D is a carved garland, painted with dots, over a continuous frieze of hunting scenes and animals. Most of the animals are identified in Greek script. The scene starts at the southwestern corner with a youth blowing his trumpet. Following is a horse and rider and a running hunting dog. The rider hurls a spear at a bleeding leopardess with an arrow in her breast; another hunting dog attacks the beast from the rear. Above is the inscription (IPPO$ LIBANOU TOU IPPIKOU) (Peters and Thiersch 1905:24) “The horse from the Lebanon of the rider”; but see “The horse of Libanus the cavalry commander” (Meyeboom 1995:44, 282). The hunted beast is named ‘leopard’ (PARDALO$). A black palm tree separates the leopard from a lion stalking to the left. This lion is erroneously called a ‘panther’ (PANQHRO$) in the inscription above. The figure of the following animal was destroyed when two of the kokhim were joined. To the left is a huge bull (TAURO$) collapsed on his forelegs, with blood running from his mouth. To the left of the bull writhes a large snake. Behind the bull are a giraffe (KAMElOPARDALO$) facing left and a boar facing right. To the left is a griffin (GRUY) composed of a lion’s body and eagle’s head and wings. In the same direction is a running antelope (ORUX). A tree, similar to the previous one, separates the antelope from a red rhinoceros (hippopotamus?) ambling to the left; above, the inscription rhinoceros (RINOKER#$). To his left strides a black war elephant (ELEFA$), equipped with a saddle for the mahout and a canopy. Two figures to the left of the elephant were destroyed in 1902, as were the faces of the trumpeter and the rider (Peters and Thiersch 1905:2, 23). The defaced figure is identified as AIqIOPIA, Ethiopia, thus ending the right-hand frieze. Continuing on the opposite side are two fish, one with the trunk and nose of an elephant, and the other with the head of a rhinoceros. To their left is a crocodile (KROKODILO$), with an ibis (IBIS) perched on its back. Behind them are a hippopotamus (without an inscription), a wild ass (ONAGRIO$) struggling with a snake and a wolf crowned by an upright tuft of hair. To its left is another rhinoceros with one horn, which might be identified with the

23

Indian rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornus). Next is a porcupine (U$TRIX) whose body is directed down and forward. Further to the left is a lynx (LINX). At the end of the frieze stands a lamassu—a lion with a human face and beard. Beneath the frieze is a painted band, and below it laurel wreaths, tied with red ribbons; below them, at the tops of the pilasters, between the kokhim, are painted Ionic capitals. In Chamber A, above the altar, is a drawing of a red cock, and probably a matching one above the pedestal, flanking the doorjamb. On the doorjamb near the entrance to the middle hall (Room D) is an image of Kerberos (Cerebus). The recess in the middle burial chamber leading to the rear burial room is decorated with a triangular pediment similar to that of a Greek temple. The pediment is ornamented with a stylized leaf design, and below it runs a Doric frieze. The two pilasters flanking the entrance are painted red and have a rosette under the capital. On either side of the pilasters are tall painted amphoras, the one on the right surrounded with a wide, white-painted band, and that on the left with a red band. The amphoras are covered with lids painted in the same colors and have long fillets tied to the handles (Kloner 2000:11–14; and see also below, p. 24). At the base of the recess the legs of a bed are carved in relief. In front of the recess at either side of the pediment two eagles with outspread wings stand on the garland that runs the entire length of the walls. Under each eagle is a yellow table whose legs end in a lion’s foot. On each table rests a white (silver) incense burner in the form of three griffins set on a base (Peters and Thiersch 1905:21). Thirty inscriptions, mainly names of the deceased, and five graffiti, all in Greek, were found in the tomb in addition to the sixteen appellations of the animals and human in the main frieze. Above the entrance to Burial Chamber XXXVI to the right of the above recess (Room E) is the epitaph of Apollophanes, son of Sesmaios, head of the Sidonian colony in Marisa (Peters and Thiersch 1905:37–38): Apollophanes, son of Sesmaios, thirty-three years chief of the Sidonians at Marise, reputed to be the best and most kin-loving of all those of his time; he died, having lived seventy-four years. Many members of his family are buried in this tomb. The names of the fathers are generally Semitic, while a few of those of the sons are Greek. The Idumean names (Babas and names compounded with ‘Qos’) attest to the assimilation of the Sidonian family

24

AMOS KLONER

into the Edomite population among whom they dwelled. The Greek names are evidence of gradual Hellenization. Graffiti No. 33, inscribed in four lines, is either a poetic dialogue between a pair of lovers or a letter addressed to a lover (Peters and Thiersch 1905:56–59). The interpretation of this dialogue has given rise to much debate as to whether it is actually a poem or merely a letter. In another carved inscription (No. 34), the priest Miron and a woman named Calypso are mentioned. It is to this Calypso that the ‘poem’ is attributed, but without any justification. The dates found in Tomb I are according to the Seleucid era (196–119 BCE), and a regnal era from years 1–5. The suggestion by Peters and Thiersch (1905:76–80) that these dates refer to a local era at Maresha is unacceptable. The eras they suggest are too late and do not correspond to historical fact. Moreover, this hypothesis does not explain the fact that the dating under discussion consists of only five years. According to U. Rappaport, the dating would seem rather to be a Ptolemaic one, in which years were counted according to regnal years. Therefore, years A, B and E signify years 1, 2 and 5 of a Ptolemaic kind (Oren and Rappaport 1984:148). Ptolemy V Epiphanes ruled in Egypt between 204 and 180 BCE, but his control over Palestine ended with the fifth Syrian war in c. 200 BCE. The years would cover his rule in Palestine, and no later dates are to be expected. Consequently, year Z (=7), discovered in an inscription in Tomb 500 (see below, pp. 27–28), should be attributed to an earlier Ptolemaic king. The dates of Ptolemy V’s reign are followed in the Maresha inscriptions by dates according to the Seleucid era, of which the earliest is year IZP, i.e. 196 BCE. Thus there is a sequence of dates at Maresha from the Ptolemaic to the Seleucid period. It becomes clear that the family of Sesmaios began to use its tomb in the first half of the third century BCE, since the great-grandsons of Sesmaios were buried there in year B (203/2 BCE) and year E (201/200 or 200/199 BCE; Oren and Rappaport 1984:149). Tomb II (552) This tomb, about 80 m south of Tomb I, is similar in plan to the former, but smaller (16 × 17 m; Plan 2.6). From the hallway (A) one enters the central hall (D), with five kokhim along each side. Behind it

to the east is another room, from which seven small burial chambers branch off. In the hall (B) north of the entrance chamber are eight kokhim. The southern hall (C) does not contain any kokhim. Above the kokhim in Hall D is a painted decoration of garlands interrupted by wreaths. Large amphoras, similar to those in Tomb I, are painted at either side of the entrance to Hall D. These amphoras represent loutrophori. Loutrophori, generally made of stone, especially marble, were used to mark graves in the Greek world (Bergemann 1996). The vessel standing above a grave mound in vase paintings and adorned with ribbons on a grave relief is common in Greek funerary art (Kurtz and Boardman 1971:152). This custom evidently became widespread in the Hellenistic period, mainly in the fourth to third centuries BCE. There are two types of loutrophoroi—with three handles (hydria) and with two handles (amphora). Those at Maresha are of the two-handled type (Kloner 2000:11–14). On the pilasters between Hall D and the one behind it (Room E) are tall candelabra with burning candles (Peters and Thiersch 1905:32). Beside each candelabrum are two small figures. On the panel to the left of the door to the central burial room (XVII), a fresco shows a man crowned with a wreath, wearing a striped tunic and playing a double flute. Behind him walks a woman wearing a multicolored dress and playing a harp. On the other side of the opening is a libation scene and, behind it, a tripod and kantharos. In Tomb II are twelve inscriptions, dated by Peters and Thiersch from 188 to 135 BCE. These burial caves at Maresha are similar to ones at Alexandria from the time of the Ptolemaic dynasty of the early Hellenistic period (McKenzie 1990:63–69). The closest parallel to Painted Tombs I (551) and II (552) is found at Shatby, Alexandria. The gabled kokhim, characteristic of almost all the Maresha tombs, appears in Hypogeum A at Shatby, dated to 280–250 BCE (McKenzie 1990:63–64). The paintings in the Maresha tombs are characterized mainly by Greek sepulchral elements: the eagles, the flutist, Kerberos, the cock, the amphoras (Kloner 2000) and probably also the rider; the harpist is probably Egyptian. The animal frieze is influenced by Ptolemaic menagerie drawings, which are known to have existed in Alexandria in the Hellenistic period. Under Aristotle’s influence, there was great popular interest in the natural sciences. From descriptions of the

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

25

Plan 2.6. Tomb II (552). Plan and section (after Peters and Thiersch 1905: Figs. 5, 6).

menageries of Ptolemy II (according to Agatharchides) we know that it included lions, leopards and other felines, rodents, buffaloes from India and Africa, a wild ass from Moab, large snakes, a giraffe, a rhinoceros and various birds—these are in fact some of the very animals represented at Maresha. The griffin was a Persian legacy. The animal with the human face was a version of the Assyrian lamassu (a fabulous creature with a lion’s body, eagle’s wings and human face, statues of which guarded the palace entrances). Fish with an elephant or rhinoceros’ face are taken from legends based on the belief of Greek scholars that an exact correspondence existed between land and marine animals. Hellenistic travel stories are replete with descriptions of animals of this kind, which were

found, they claimed, in remote corners of the earth. The animal frieze at Maresha is a unique document of its kind in the Hellenistic world. Only Roman mosaics, such as the one at Palestrina that predates ours by c. 140 years, show influences from the same Hellenistic– Egyptian sources which the artist at Maresha used for his inspiration (Meyeboom 1995:43–80). According to Roll (1985) the Maresha wall paintings should be classified as provincial in comparison with other western Hellenistic centers such as Palestrina. Tomb IV (554) This tomb (Peters and Thiersch 1905:29–33), located near the Sandahanna Church, was reexamined in 1984.

26

AMOS KLONER

Peters and Thiersch gave only a general description, without drawing a plan, and the position of the tomb has not been accurately marked on maps published since. Tomb IV was not decorated with paintings but is important because of its inscriptions, which will be described briefly. The tomb consists of two rectangular halls containing twenty gabled kokhim (each c. 2 m long, 0.50–0.60 m wide and 1.25 m high). They were sealed with stones and mud and bore Greek inscriptions, mainly the names of the deceased, incised on the walls above and between them. Additional inscriptions in a less formal hand were painted in reddish brown on the walls. The two scripts and the plan of the tomb attest to chronological stages in the functioning of the cave: it was hewn around the mid-third century BCE and the incised inscriptions were made about that time and toward the end of the century; the painted inscriptions were added at the end of the third century and during the second century BCE. The majority of the names are Greek, a few are Semitic, that is, Idumean or Sidonian (Avi-Yonah and Kloner 1993:955). Tomb 561 In 1985, during the course of work to deepen the bed of the highway along the ancient road from Bet Guvrin to the Hebron Hills, another burial cave (No. 561) was discovered east of the mound, in the eastern necropolis, some 300 m from the defensive line of the acropolis, not far from Peters and Thiersch’s Tomb I (Plan 2.7). This was the first tomb ever uncovered at Maresha that had not been broken into by grave robbers and was resealed when the road was paved. The cave was located while surveying Subterranean Complex 71, also found during the road-works, when the examination of a plastered crack in Complex 71 led us to one of the kokhim (Plan 2.7:6). From the kokh it was possible to reach a rectangular hall (5.1 m long, 3.5 m wide and 2.2 m high), along the walls of which is a low stone bench (0.4 m wide and 0.5 m high). In the south the wide, high entrance to the hall had been blocked with masonry. Most of the kokhim are 2.2 m long and 0.7 m wide. Each has a gabled façade and roof 1.3 m above floor level. The kokhim were sealed with masonry and contained primary burials. Kokh 7 held the remains of a man and woman laid in opposite directions: one inward, the other facing the opening of the kokh. Only Kokh 3 contained collected bones, belonging to nine adults and two children. A

Plan 2.7. Burial Cave 561. Plan and sections.

few bones of those buried in this kokh were found in other kokhim, in which they had been buried first—yet another indication of secondary burial. A quarter of those buried in the tomb were youths and infants. The bones of three adults showed identifiable signs of tuberculosis, a phenomenon which is uncommonly found in archaeological contexts. Ten pieces of pottery were discovered in the tomb: nine fusiform unguentaria

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

which by their form indicated an early Hellenistic, that is third-century BCE, use of the cave, and a small jar (Regev 1994:272). The tomb also contained fragments of glass vessels, a bronze ring and bracelet, and an iron ring and ax. The pottery allowed us to date the tomb to the third century BCE. Only one graffito was found with an unclear name that might be read as MEG I$[TA$]. THE SOUTHWESTERN NECROPOLIS Three tombs (Nos. 500, 501 and 502) were discovered in the southwestern necropolis, 250–500 m from the slope of the high mound, thus providing an outer limit for the lower city in this area, like the tombs of the eastern necropolis. Tomb 500 was first surveyed and examined in the 1980s and excavated in 1989. The other tombs, closer to the upper city, are probably relatively early, having been hewn before the expansion of the lower city. Tomb 500, aligned east–west, was cut in the soft chalk. It was entered from the surface through a 5.4 m long, rock-cut passage with eleven steps, widening out

27

from 1.1 to 1.42 m; the lowest step is 2.2 m below the highest. The entrance is 0.8 m wide and 1.79 high and faces west. The arrangement consists of a hall divided into three chambers with kokhim (Plan 2.8). In the first chamber a bench was built along the walls, doubling as a step at the entrance. Three gabled kokhim were hewn into the wall on each side of the chamber. Columns in low relief with Doric capitals decorate the area between the kokhim, six on each side, with an irregular bench in front. The ceiling, most of which had collapsed, took the form of a gable with a groove running along its length. Columns like those in the first chamber were carved only along the northern wall, but a cornice runs along both walls. Pillars with different capitals were carved at either side of the passage from the second to the third chamber. The third chamber differs from the others in the direction of the stone cutting marks and in the lower level of its floor. A bench of uniform width runs all around it and the only decoration is a cornice carved above the kokhim, six of which were hewn in each of the long walls with four rectangular ones in the rear wall, across the width of the chamber.

Plan 2.8. Burial Cave 500. Plan and section.

28

AMOS KLONER

Because most of the ceiling had collapsed, it was not possible to determine the original shape of this third chamber, which is probably a later extension of the original tomb. In all the chambers traces of plaster used to seal the kokhim with a stone were visible around the openings. These stones, some of which bore fragmentary inscriptions, were found scattered on the benches and floors of the chambers. About a dozen Greek inscriptions, mainly names and dates, had been incised or painted on the cornices above the kokhim; these inscriptions attest to the use of the tomb in the third and second centuries BCE. Pottery discovered during the 1989 excavation of the tomb dates from the beginning of the third to the end of the second century BCE. The vessels include amphoras, jars, amphoriskoi, jugs, juglets, fusiform unguentaria, cooking pots, kraters, lamps and bowls of various types; few of them were intact. The amphoras, twelve in number, came only from the vicinity of the dromos. They were all Rhodian imports, with dates ranging over seventy years in the second century BCE (Regev 1992). Also in the tomb were five coins of Alexander II Zebinas, human bones and teeth, rings, beads and a large quantity of nails and other metal objects. A compass-drawn rosette was found on one of the kokh blocking stones. Thirteen inscriptions in Greek mentioning names common among the Edomites were discovered. In Inscription No. 4 the date is Year Z = 7, of a Ptolemaic king of the third century BCE. The other inscriptions in the cave are also from the end of the second century BCE: Inscription No. 1 from 118 BCE and Inscription No. 10 from 134 BCE. On Inscription No. 13 the date is year S, i.e. 200 according to the Seleucid era, meaning 112 BCE, a short time before the conquest of John Hyrcanus in 112/111 BCE or slightly after. THE NORTHERN NECROPOLIS The northern necropolis, 500 to 700 m north of the walls of the upper city, includes some twenty kokh tombs; the plans of nine were published by Oren and Rapapport (1984). Four more, mainly to the north, were found later. The tombs contained incised names and graffiti dated to the third to second centuries BCE (Plan 2.9).

These tombs, like the ‘Sidonian’, were almost uniform in design and exceptionally well executed. They consisted of underground burial chambers with kokhim cut in the walls and a long, stepped corridor leading down into the tomb. The kokhim, as a rule, have a gabled top; below, along the walls, runs a long bench. The kokhim in the back wall opposite the entrance are often larger and were probably intended for the burial of heads of the family. In some tombs the kokhim are cut in two rows, one above the other; elsewhere the space between the kokhim is decorated with pilasters in low relief. No coffins were used; the kokh opening was sealed with a stone slab or filled with smaller stones and plastered over with brown mud. The burial epitaphs were usually smeared haphazardly in mud, or else were scratched above and between the kokhim. Occasionally new inscriptions covered older ones, and when the space for an inscription was not carefully calculated, the beginning letters were often more widely spaced than the end ones. The inscriptions usually contain the name of the deceased and sometimes a date and a short formula. The new inscriptions are of the same class as those found in the ‘Sidonian’ tombs. The similarities in paleography and onomastics, and the use of the same dating system, make it abundantly clear that the tombs belonged to families of the Hellenistic settlement at Maresha of an ethnic background similar to the ‘Sidonian’ colony. Judging by the associated grave goods, it appears that these tombs were used for primary burials during the third and second centuries BCE. During excavations in the northern cemetery it became evident that a number of tombs were reused in the first to fourth centuries CE. In these tombs a new feature was observed, that of secondary burial; the bones were collected in stone ossuaries or deposited in ossilegium pits cut in the floor and in niches above and below the kokhim. This custom was unknown in the Hellenistic necropolis of Maresha, but was common in Jewish cemeteries, particularly around Jerusalem, during the first century CE and to a lesser extent elsewhere in the country in the course of the following three centuries (Oren and Rapapport 1984:116–117). Toward the late third to early fourth centuries CE, the residents of nearby Bet Guvrin began using a new cemetery, cut in the slope east of the Ahinoam cave.

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS

29

Plan 2.9. The northern necropolis. General plan.

Tombs 510 (Oren and Rappaport 1984: Nos. N. VIII: 130–132;147) and 520 (Oren and Rappaport 1984: No. N. IX:132–133;147–148) at the northeastern edge of the cemetery were resurveyed and excavated in the 1990s and the remains of three additional burial caves,

Nos. 518, 519 and 526, were mapped. The last three caves were heavily damaged during the quarrying of the bell-shaped caves used as quarries in the Late Byzantine and Early Islamic periods.

30

AMOS KLONER

NOTES 1

Plate numbers in this section refer to Bliss and Macalister’s excavation report of 1902. 2 The renewed survey of the subterranean complexes was undertaken as part of a long-term project at Maresha directed

by A. Kloner on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority with Y. Zoran as the main field surveyor.

R EFERENCES Abel F.M. 1925. Tombeaux récemment découverts à Marissa. RB 34:267–275. Avigad N. 1983. Discovering Jerusalem. Jerusalem. Avi-Yonah M. 1961. Oriental Art in Roman Palestine. Rome. Avi-Yonah M. 1977. Maresha. In M. Avi-Yonah and E. Stern eds. EAEHL 3. Pp. 782–791. Avi-Yonah M. and Kloner A. 1993. Maresha (Marisa). In E. Stern ed. NEAEHL 3. Pp. 948–957. Barag D. 1992/3. New Evidence of John Hyrcanus I. INJ 12:1–12. Barkay R. 1992/3. The Marisa Hoard of Seleucid Tetradrachms Minted in Ascalon. INJ 12:21–26. Bergemann J. 1996. Die Sogennante Lutrophoros: Grabmal für Univerheiratete Tote? Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Athenische Abteilung 111: 149–190. Bliss F.J. and Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine during the Years 1898–1900. London. Brindley H.H. 1919. A Graffito of a Ship at Beit Jibrin. PEFQSt:76–78. Clermont-Ganneau Ch. 1896. Archeological Researches in Palestine II. London. Conder C.K. and Kitchener H.H. 1883. The Survey of Western Palestine III: Judea. London. Gibson S. 1992. The Tell Sandahannah Ship Graffito Reconsidered. PEQ 124:26–30. Gibson S. 1994. Tell Ej-Judeideh (Tel Goded) Excavations: A Re-Appraisal Based on Archival Records in the Palestine Exploration Fund. Tel Aviv 21:194–234. Kloner A. 1981. Maresha 1980. IEJ 31:240–241. Kloner A. 1990. Lead Weights of Bar Kokhba’s Administration. IEJ 40:58–67. Kloner A. 1991. Maresha—1989. ESI 10:38–40. Kloner A. 2000. Hellenistic Painted Tombs at Maresha. Michmanim 14:7–16 (Hebrew).

Kloner A. and Arbel Y. 1996. Maresha—Area 61 (Subterranean Complex). ESI 17:157–162. Kloner A., Finkielsztejn G. and Arbel Y. 1998. Maresha— Area 100. ESI 17:154 –157. Kurtz D.C. and Boardman J. 1971. Greek Burial Customs. London. McKenzie J. 1990. The Architecture of Petra. Oxford. Meyeboom G.P. 1995. The Nile Mosaic of Palestrina (EPRO 121). Leiden. Moulton W.J. 1915. An Inscribed Tomb at Beit Jibrin. AJA 19: 63–70. Oren E. and Rappaport U. 1984. The Necropolis of Maresha—Beth Govrin. IEJ 34:114–153. Peters J.P. and Thiersch H. 1905. Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa. London Rahmani L.Y. 1974. Table-Top of the Late Second Temple Period. ‘Atiqot (HS) 7:65–68 (English summary, p. 9*). Rahmani L.Y. 1976. Table-Top of the Late Second Temple Period. Sefunim 5:67–71 (Hebrew). Rahmani L.Y. 1994. A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries in the Collections of the State of Israel. Jerusalem. Regev D. 1992. Maresha. ESI 10:152–153. Regev D. 1994. The Transitional Phase between the Persian and Hellenistic Periods at Marissa. In S. Drougou ed. 3rd Scholarly Conference on Hellenistic Pottery. Thessalonika. September 1991. Athens. Pp. 272–274. Roll I. 1985. Classicisme et provincialisme dans l’orient Mediterranéen à l’époque hellénistique et romaine. Praktika XII Synedroy Klasikes Archaiologias, Athena 9–10 Septembroi 1983. Athens. Thiersch H. 1908. Die Neueren Ausgraben in Palëstina Tell Sandahannah. JDAI 3: 392–413. Wilkinson J. 1993–1994. Stone Tables in Herodian Jerusalem. BAIAS 13:17–21. Zuckermandel M.S. 1881. Tosephta. Leipzig.

CHAPTER 3

SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 70

In 1980 a subterranean complex was discovered in the lower city, east of the upper tell of Maresha (Kloner 1981). It was assigned the number ‘70’ according to the

Maresha identification system (see Chap. 2 above and Plan 3.1). At least certain parts of the complex had not been entered since the Hellenistic period. An opening

Plan 3.1. General plan of the subterranean complexes at Maresha.

32

AMOS KLONER

in the ground at the northwestern edge of Room 1 caused by heavy rainfalls led to its discovery. In 1984 we returned to this area to examine the entrance to Hall 13 located above Rooms 20 and 21 (Plan 3.2).1 Complex 70 had been first discovered by local boys2 who took home some of the pottery they found. Although we lacked precise information about their original location we managed to recover the majority of the vessels and take them to Jerusalem for study. Most of them came from the surfaces of Rooms 1–13 and some from the sharply sloping accumulations of debris in Rooms 4, 8 and 9 as well as from Rooms 25–31. The complex is spread out over 1200 sq m and consists of over 30 chambers, halls, rooms and cisterns (see Plan 3.2) that constitute four separate systems. These are: System A—Rooms 1–11; System B—

Rooms 12–21; System C—Cisterns 22–24; and System D—Rooms 25–31. During the Hellenistic period each of the four systems functioned independently. SYSTEM A (ROOMS 1–11) Since 1980 the entrance has been through a vertical shaft reaching from the surface through the ceiling of Room 1. A wall had been built along the western rock face to prevent collapse into the corridor during the use of the system. At present Room 1 is filled with an accumulation of soil that covered the original rock floor to a depth of 3.1 m. A broad passage leads from Room 1 to Rooms 5 and 6, all of which seem to have been in use at the same time. Inside the rooms concentrations of soil slope from north to south. A

Plan 3.2. General plan of Complex 70.

CHAPTER 3: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 70

vertical shaft in the rock-cut ceiling of Room 6, sealed since antiquity, indicates that the quarrying work began at that location. A second passage leads from Room 1 to debris-filled Room 2, leaving a space of only 0.5–1.0 m in which to move around. During the quarrying of Room 2 (7 × 7 m) three pillars were carved out as supports for the rock ceiling. Room 3 is a water or liquid reservoir, whose function has been assumed from the plaster on its walls. A conduit for liquids was also found in Room 8. It seems that Pits 10 and 11, today half filled with soil, were cisterns. The staircase to this complex is filled with a stone collapse that fell from buildings on the surface. In the collapse between Rooms 7, 8 and 10 are building stones, including remains of vaults and retaining walls, a phenomenon which occurs in other entryways at Maresha. Room 9 is rectangular and was filled with a large quantity of soil coming from the staircase and from Room 8. An opening leads steeply from Room 9 to Room 12 through the ceiling of the latter.3 The soil in Room 9 filtered through this opening and since the ceiling of Room 12 is lower than the estimated floor of Room 9 by more than 5 m, the result was a sharply sloping accumulation of debris. It is clear that this opening was made after the rooms had gone out of use. System A apparently includes three groups of rooms: Rooms 1–8, which could be subdivided into Rooms 1, 2, 5, 6 vs. 3, 4, 7, 8, and Rooms 9–11. This suggested division is based on differences in shape, function and chronology. However, their condition and the large

33

amount of debris in them make the rooms difficult to study without excavation. Based on comparisons with the physical characteristics of other subterranean complexes and systems at Maresha, it is likely that Rooms 1, 2, 5 and 6 are earlier, perhaps from the very early Hellenistic period or even from the end of the Persian period, and that Rooms 3, 4, 7 and 8 with the staircase were added during the third century BCE. Rooms 9–11 probably also belong to the original phase. SYSTEM B (ROOMS 12–21) Shapes and dimensions of the chambers clearly indicate that this is a separate system with a function different from the rest of the systems included in Complex 70. As noted above, the original entrance to Hall 13 was from the surface over Rooms 20 and 21. From this entrance, a staircase runs northeast–southwest to a 1.5 m wide and 2 m high passage (Plan 3.3; Fig. 3.1). The set of

Plan 3.3. Plan of the entrance to Hall 13.

Fig. 3.1. Complex 70. Blocked original entrance to Hall 13 on right. Narrow, second-stage entrance to Hall 13 on left. Looking northeast. Note crawl space left of meter stick.

34

AMOS KLONER

entrances was modified during the time that all the units were in use. For reasons not clear to us, the passage of the original entrance to Hall 13 was blocked and a new one quarried north of it (see Fig. 3.1). It seems that the second passage was made late in the use of the system, probably in the second century BCE, and that for uncertain reasons, perhaps protection, access was made more difficult. The new entrance had two 90° turns, the first to the north and the second to the southwest. Two small chambers were cut along the new passage (see Plan 3.3). It appears that this passage was blocked at a later stage. A third entrance was made by extracting stones from the fills which blocked the first and second entrances, thereby creating a low and narrow passage with crawl space (see Fig. 3.1) above Cistern 21. Apparently this third entrance dates from the very end of the use of the system, when some of its rooms had already been partially filled, at the end of the second century BCE, during the Hasmonean siege, or even later. Hall 13 (6.0 × 11.5 m) has a barrel-vaulted ceiling (Fig. 3.2), rising about 4 m above the present surface. Its original height was at least 6 m. The barrel-vaulted ceiling diverts the weight equally down the long walls and is a common phenomenon in the rock cutting and roof constructions of Maresha (see Fig. 5.24). A large apse was hewn into the long southeastern wall of Hall 13 (see Plan 3.2:14). A circle of stones placed on the fill on the floor of the apse has been included in the plan, despite the fact that it looks later than the original period of use of System B. A sounding (L13a) measuring 1.5 × 1.5 m was made in the accumulated debris of Hall 13. At a depth of about 2 m we were obliged to stop for safety reasons, before reaching the original rock floor. The debris that penetrated the system, probably already during its use but mainly after its abandonment, contained sherds of Hellenistic pottery of the third and

Fig. 3.2. Barrel-vaulted ceiling of Hall 13 in Complex 70. Looking southwest.

second centuries BCE. The debris was loose and no occupational levels could be identified. Rooms 15–18, north of Hall 13, are large and more than half filled with debris and pottery sherds. Rooms 20–21, situated northeast of Hall 13, are also very large. Access is through a tunnel-like passage below the original entrance corridor leading to Hall 13. At this location there are three stages of entrances and passageways: 1. The original entrance to Hall 13 (see Plan 3.3). 2. A narrow entrance, constructed with a gabled ceiling, which led to Hall 13 in the second stage (see Plan 3.3). 3. A secondary tunnel, built below Stages 1 and 2, probably contemporary with the second entrance, connecting Hall 13 and Room 20. System B appears to consist of three units: Rooms 13, 14 and 12, which was added to the southwestern corner of Room 13; Rooms 15–18; and Rooms 20–21. Obviously Hall 13 and its original entrance are earlier than any other phase in System B; soon after, Rooms 20 and 21 were connected and later on Rooms 15–18 were linked to each other. SYSTEM C (CISTERNS 22–24) System C is made up of three circular or oval cisterns, of which Cistern 23 is the largest with a maximum diameter of 6 m and a minimum diameter of 3.5 m. Its present height, between the ceiling and the debris on its floor, is 1.7 m, while its estimated original height is 5–6 m. On the eastern side of the cistern, stairs descending from the surface are covered with collapsed stones and debris. Cistern 24 is circular, 4 m in diameter and free of silt in its upper 2.4 m; however, a silt accumulation approximately 3 m deep still covers the floor. The ceiling of the cistern is relatively flat. A square opening leads to a passage connecting Cisterns 23 and 24; apparently the two units functioned as one. Cistern 22 is oval and the smallest in System C. On its southern side is an opening, sealed by stone collapse, which may have led to a fourth cistern. Along the eastern side of Cistern 22 is a sloping conduit cut out of the wall. The passage from Cistern 22 to Cistern 23 is through a later opening. It seem that the cisterns of System C worked in pairs, each pair operating separately. Thus Cisterns 23 and 24 constitute one unit, while Cistern 22 and an additional cistern south

CHAPTER 3: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 70

of it functioned as another unit. An opening connecting Cisterns 22 and 23 was made after the system ceased to serve its original purpose. The reason for this opening is unknown. System C was discovered during the survey and excavations carried out in April 1980. We had noticed a crack in the rock ceiling of Room 12, near its southern wall and its connection to Hall 13. We enlarged this crack, which connects the ceiling of Room 12 with the floor of Cistern 22 near its northern side, thereby enabling entry through the narrow passage. It appeared that System C, as well as System D, had not been entered since the Hellenistic period.

35

Plan 3.4. General plan of System D in Complex 70.

SYSTEM D (ROOMS 25–31) This is a small system reached from the surface by a square, central-pillared spiral staircase, today sealed by debris and collapsed stones. Other staircases of this type were found in domestic and commercial areas at Maresha in both surface and subterranean structures (Kloner 1991:39; 1996:484). A drain-like passage cut through from Room 25 into the northern wall of Cistern 24 connected System D with System C (Plan 3.4:34; Figs. 3.3, 3.4). Later we widened this passage to facilitate investigation of these systems. This narrow and low passage was probably intended to drain liquids from basins in System D to Cistern 24, which was likely used as a collection vat. Room 25 is rectangular, 1.5 × 2.0 m, with a floor to ceiling height of approximately 1.9 m (Plan 3.4). In the eastern wall of Room 25, left of the opening leading to Passage 34, a semicircular niche was hewn and on its shelf stood two bowls (Fig. 3.4). Two steps lead westward down to Room 26. Additional intact pottery vessels—juglets and bowls—stood on the floor. The entrance to Room 25 was from Room 26; the passage between the two is decorated with chisel cuts (Fig. 3.5), as are the ceilings of the rooms and many other parts of the system. Two channels for carrying liquid are carved in the southwestern corner of Room 25 (Fig. 3.6). They ran from here to the southwest for an undetermined distance, since the southern wall of Room 26 was destroyed. Room 26 has a rectangular plan, 1.7 × 1.9 m, and a height of 1.9 m. Its floor level is lower in the east than in the west. The two parts are connected by a step (see Plan 3.4). In this room also, the entrances (Fig. 3.7) and ceiling (Figs. 3.8–3.10) had been

Fig. 3.3. Complex 70, entrance from Room 25 to Passage 34 leading to Cistern 24 with pottery in situ. Looking east.

Fig. 3.4. As Fig. 3.3, with circular niche to left of the entrance with two bowls in situ. Looking east.

36

AMOS KLONER

Fig. 3.6. Complex 70, System D. Room 25 with channels cut in the wall of the southwestern corner to carry liquid. Looking southeast.

Fig. 3.5. Complex 70, System D. Entrance from Room 25 to Room 26. Note decorative chisel cuts around doorway and on ceiling.

carefully made and decoratively covered with chisel marks. On the partition wall between Rooms 26 and 25, a gable was carved in relief (Fig. 3.10). About half way up the southern wall a sloping channel had been carved (Fig. 3.11); it juts out of the wall in the southwestern corner of the room. This conduit probably carried precious liquids rather than water (Fig. 3.8). Another channel was found in the northwestern corner. Room 27 is divided in two by a rock partition, 0.51 m high, which was left after the hewing process. The eastern side of the partition is a rectangular trough, at the bottom of which was a drainage hole that was sealed with a thick chalk stopper found near it (Fig. 3.12). On the trough walls are marks of some kind of standing liquid. A bowl containing sheep bones was found on the floor of the room, near the eastern wall

Fig. 3.7. Complex 70, System D. Note careful workmanship, gable and decorative chisel marks in Room 26. Looking east.

CHAPTER 3: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 70

37

Fig. 3.8. Complex 70, System D. Room 26 with conduits to right and left of blocked entrance, gable and cornice in corners. Looking west.

Fig. 3.9. Complex 70, System D. Vaulted ceiling of Room 26. Looking west. Entrance after removal of blockage (cf. Fig. 3.8).

Fig. 3.11. Complex 70, System D. Room 26 with channel cut in southern wall. Looking southwest.

Fig. 3.10. Complex 70, System D. Gable carved in relief and decorative chisel marks in Room 26. Looking east.

Fig. 3.12. Complex 70, System D. Trough with drainage hole and chalk stopper in Room 27.

Fig. 3.13. Complex 70, System D. Bowl with bones in situ at the ► bottom of the eastern trough in Room 27 .

38

AMOS KLONER

(Fig. 3.13; see below, Chap. 6: Nos. 53–55 for similar bowls). Room 28 is at present the access point to System D along a descending central-pillar spiral staircase. This type of staircase, the most common one at Maresha, was used both in surface buildings and in the subterranean complexes where it was cut out of the bedrock (Kloner 1996). From the south stone collapse and debris seal the original opening. It seems that drainage from Room 32 to Room 26 was by means of two narrow channels and two conduits (see Fig. 3.8). Another channel was cut along the southern wall of Room 26 (see Plan 3.4) and along the opposite northern wall. Both channels drained liquid from Room 26 to Room 25 and from there through Passage 34 to Cisterns 23 and 24 of System C. Cisterns 29 and 31 supplied Rooms 27, 26 and 25 with liquids through feeder channels leading into basins in these rooms. A staircase with a banister, typical of Maresha’s water reservoirs, leads into Cistern 29; the stairs descend in a counterclockwise direction. The diameter of Cistern 29 is 2.8 m and its exposed height is 3.5 m. Its bottom is covered with about a meter of silt. The walls were coated with well-prepared gray plaster, indicating the importance of what was stored

in it. Small depressions in the walls were probably intended for oil lamps. Cistern 31 has a staircase and a banister also built counterclockwise. Its diameter is 3.5 m, exposed height 4.4 m and the depth of its debris, 0.5 m. In this cistern, rainwater accumulation is evident to this day, still creating a muddy mass during the winter season. Similarly to Cistern 29, Cistern 31 is also coated with well-made gray plaster. Room 30, between Cisterns 29 and 31, is a small room, which probably served for storage. A rectangular niche was prepared in the northern wall of Room 28 (Plan 3.5; Fig. 3.14). It measures 0.40 × 0.74 m. The front was carved as an arch over a horizontal distylos façade, based on a horizontal threshold. A frieze rests on top of the columns with a semicircular depression above for holding offerings such as statuettes or incense. Niches with reliefs used for cultic purposes are found mainly in oil presses and in large pillaredhalls at Maresha (Kloner and Sagiv 1989:63; 1993: 133–135). It appears to be a phenomenon of the third and second centuries BCE connected with blessing the oil production and calling for success in the activities of the population (see also Chap. 5, below).

Fig. 3.14. Complex 70, System D. Cultic niche in Room 28. Plan 3.5. Complex 70, System D. Cultic niche in Room 28, elevation and sections.

CHAPTER 3: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 70

System D is a typical production system, and the presence of basins and feeder channels leading to Cisterns 23 and 24 points to the use of liquids. It is almost certain that the production did not deal with refining oil, but rather with a process such as leather tanning or yarn dying, during which dirty water had to be replaced. It seems that System C (Cisterns 22–24) was cut and used prior to System D. When the latter was installed the drainage from it flowed into and was dependant upon the already existing cisterns of System C. However, even if liquids from System D drained into System C, there is no certainty that the latter originally functioned as a place for concentrating surpluses from System D. During the excavation and survey of Complex 70, a large quantity of grain seeds, mainly wheat and barley, and many olive pits, were found. An especially large number of olive pits came from Rooms 28–31. Apparently they fell from the surface together with the debris, which filled up the systems’ chambers, and are not evidence of a production process that took place in it. The chambers of the four systems in Complex 70 were carefully hewn and particular attention was paid to the architectural details. This is especially

39

true in System D. Gables over the openings and over the niches were carefully made, forming parallel lines and smoothed registers and friezes. Gabled and vaulted ceilings were marked by incised lines perpendicular to an outlined central axis composed of parallel, straight lines (see Figs. 3.8–3.10). Openings, reliefs, cultic niches and dividing walls all illustrate the meticulous work of the stonemasons. This diligence is found in other subterranean complexes at Maresha, as in the vertical and horizontal bands of Complex 30 (the columbarium—es-Sûk cave), and in the ceiling of the olive presses in Complexes 44, 61 and others. The stonemasons of Maresha were both well trained and skilled, and sprang from a long architectural tradition in their settlement. They carved in a clean and soft chalk that made the cutting easy. Due to the softness of the chalk, perfecting the details did not require an outstanding effort of smoothing and polishing. As in all periods, the stonemasons of Hellenistic Maresha took pride in their profession and carried out their work with attention to the aesthetics of the chambers, even if they were only meant for industrial purposes.

NOTES 1 A thorough survey was carried out by A. Kloner on behalf of the IAA during four days in April 1980. About 15 youths from the Center of Cave Research participated in the survey. T. Mindel-Genosar also took part in the work. A. Frumkin and E. Cohen mapped the complex and T. Krinkin-Fabian drew the plan (Plan 3.2) of the area on behalf of the Center of Cave Research (Kloner 1981). G. Maxor assisted by H. Stark surveyed and drew the entrances of Hall 13 (Plan 3.3) and

System D (Plan 3.4). The cultic niche in Room 28 (Plan 3.5) was drawn by B. Arubas; the photographs were taken by R. David and A. Kloner. 2 The boys, Y. Lev from Kibbutz Galon and A. Shak from Kibbutz Bet Nir, informed D. Lev of their discovery. He visited the complex together with then and then informed the IAA. 3 Room 12, being part of System B, is dealt with here only because of its connection with Room 9.

R EFERENCES Kloner A. 1981. Maresha 1980. IEJ 31:240–241. Kloner A. 1991. Maresha 1989. ESI 10:38–40. Kloner A. 1996. Central Pillar Spiral Staircases in the Hellenistic Period. EI 25:484–489 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 107*). Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1989. Maresha: Olive Oil Production in the Hellenistic Period. NZ 15:17–65 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 185–186).

Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1993. The Olive Presses of Hellenistic Maresha In M.-C. Amouretti and J.-P. Brun eds. Oil and Wine Production in the Mediterranean Area (BCH Supplement 26). Athens. Pp. 119–136.

CHAPTER 4

SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 21

GENERAL DESCRIPTION This subterranean complex on the western side of the lower city (see Plan 3.1) consists of thirteen chambers, halls, cistern and rooms arranged in eight separate systems (A–H), each functioning independently during the Hellenistic period, but connected by new openings made in later stages (Plan 4.1). Parts of this system were originally mapped by Bliss and Macalister (1902). System A (Plan 4.1 and see Plan 4.4). The original entrance staircase leads down to Cistern 4 and Room 3. The large, stepped Cistern 4 opposite the entrance widens to the east and is connected with Room 13 of System H. On the western side, the stonecutters of

Cistern 4 took into consideration the already existing Cistern 10 in System G by not breaking through the wall. At a later stage, the mutual wall of the cisterns was opened wide enough to allow human passage. Room 2 contains an oil press. The opening to the press area is on the western side of the entrance stairs of the system. A second entrance leads down from the surface above Room 7 (No. 53; see below). Access to the crushing section is near the entrance to Cistern 4. Close to the latter is a filter chamber (2b), which drained in the direction of the oil press, passing by the crushing basin (2a). Along the eastern wall of the entrance stairs is the entry to the circular, stepped Cistern 3. This cistern was enlarged toward the south and has an unnumbered, open shaft in the ceiling. Such shafts are generally later additions used to direct water into the cisterns from channels on the surface. System B. This system consists of a single chamber (Room 1) that was used as a columbarium. In its northern section is a bottle-shaped installation. Excavations were conducted in this system during 1972 and 1981 (see below). System C. Cistern 5 is square at the bottom and circular at the top. It is a stepped area reached by an entrance from a so far unnumbered room north of it (Plan 4.2). This entrance was blocked by a collapse of soil and stones. The system is typically Mareshian in its execution—steps and banisters were cut in the rock during construction (Kloner 2000–2001).

Plan 4.1. General plan of Complex 21.

System D. This system also consists of a single unit (Room 6), filled with soil and connected

42

AMOS KLONER

Plan 4.2. Plan of columbarium (System B) and water cistern (System C).

to the columbarium in Room 1 by the bottle-shaped installation. System E. Room 7 is a circular room whose purpose is unknown. It was the only room of the original system but openings made in later periods connected it with Room 1c of System B to the north and with Room 2 of System A to the east. A later passage also connected Room 7 with Cistern 8 of System F. Collapsed soil and stones from a neighboring chamber filled up part of the western section of this room. System F. Two cisterns (8, 9) make up the system to which an orderly stepped corridor (57) entrance descends. This entrance was cut off following the enlargement of the cisterns and the opening of a shaft in the ceiling. Cistern 8 is a small circular and stepped cistern with a blocked shaft in its ceiling, while Cistern 9 is a circular, stepped cistern with an open shaft in the ceiling in addition to the staircase entrance. System G. Cistern 10 is a circular, stepped cistern with a shaft in its ceiling. The original entrance of the cistern was deliberately blocked and an opening through its floor connects it to Cistern 4 of System A. System H. This system consists of two rooms and one cistern. Room 11 was cut first, enlarged southwards by the quarrying of Cistern 12, and expanded to the

west by the hewing of Room 13. Room 11 is a square chamber with several niches in its walls. The original, blocked entrance to the room is in the southern wall, while another, open entrance in the same wall leads to Cistern 12. In the eastern wall is a blocked shaft and on the northern wall, a filtering installation that may have had some purification purpose. The western side of the room contains the entrance to Room 13, a square room that was deepened and widened at some point after its initial hewing. During this enlargement, an opening was hewn into Cistern 4 of System A. The entrance to Room 13, from Room 11, is especially well cut. Cistern 12 is a particularly deep, stepped cistern without erosion fills, but with collapsed plaster. THE COLUMBARIUM (SYSTEM B, ROOM 1) A columbarium, not observed by Bliss and Macalister (1902) was discovered in 1972 (Kloner and Hess 1985) during a sounding made by A. Kloner on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority (Plan 4.2). Originally the entrance was from the surface, without any connection to neighboring complexes cut at approximately the same time. The columbarium is a generally square, somewhat irregular shape, 9 m on a side with an additional square room at the northwestern corner. Four stages of development have been identified.

CHAPTER 4: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 21

43

Plan 4.3. Elevation of the eastern wall of the columbarium showing numbered pigeon niches.

Fig. 4.1. Eastern wall of the columbarium with pigeon niches (see Plan 4.3).

Stage 1. The columbarium was hewn by way of two vertical shafts cut in the upper limestone layer (Plan 4.2: I, II). The chalk underneath the limestone was quarried and discarded through these two openings. In the initial stage approximately 200 small niches were cut (Plan 4.3; Fig. 4:1). Stage 2. A door-like opening was added in the western wall of Room 1 that was reached by hewn stairs running down from the surface (Plan 4.2: III; Fig. 4.2). This entrance was added to give access to the columbarium and was probably cut shortly after the

two original openings. Stage 2 should be regarded as a technical stage rather than a chronological one, based on parallels from other subterranean complexes at Maresha, especially No. 30, the es-Sûk cave. Stage 3. The western door was closed (Plan 4.2: III) with stone blocks and went out of use. In this stage Shafts I and II were sealed and a fourth opening (IV) was cut in the northeastern corner of Room 1, which also connects with nearby Cistern 5. It is likely that at this stage the built wall sections, such as those discovered in Opening IV, were added (Fig. 4.3).

44

AMOS KLONER

Fig. 4.2. Complex 21. Note staircase and railing (banister) cut from bedrock.

Stage 4. One of the columbarium walls was removed and Room 1c was created behind it (see Plan 4.2). During this process, some of the niches were damaged or destroyed, suggesting that the system no longer served its original purpose. The passage to the nearby oil press was cut later than Stage 4, and therefore is not connected to the use of the columbarium in the Hellenistic period. The niches of the columbarium were hewn in all the walls, mainly in their upper halves, but obviously it was possible to install a double number of niches by using the lower wall space. However, the builders left the lower wall plain, probably in an attempt to prevent animals from

killing the pigeons. By calculating the number of units that would fit into a given space, the stonemasons were able to utilize the room to its greatest potential. The niches measure 0.22 × 0.22 m at the opening and their depth is 0.24–0.25 m. Near the southeastern corner of the southern wall, the niches were marked out within a square frame, showing that the cutting was started but never completed. It is obvious that the columbarium niches belong to Stages 1–3 and that, by Stage 4, the columbarium no longer served its original purpose. It is even possible that by Stage 3, the cave was not used for raising pigeons. In 1972 a few pottery vessels were found in niches in the eastern columbarium wall (i.e. the wall separating the columbarium and Cistern 5; Kloner and Hess 1985: Pl. XXI:5). They are similar to vessels found in other parts of the same room. Two probes were made in 1972 (Kloner and Hess 1985:124), one along the eastern wall of Room 1 (Plans 4.2, 4.3) and one along the southwestern corner of the room (Fig. 4.4). Goat, pig and sheep bones were found in the debris along the walls, especially near the eastern wall. Tests of the material heaped together in small bowls within the niches, of the fill in the niches and of the debris in the central hall gave no support to the hypothesis that the columbarium held the ashes of the dead. The lack of teeth and bone remains among the finds also indicates that there were no cremated remains here. Social and historical reasons, as well as comparisons with burial complexes containing kokhim, make it unlikely that the population of Ptolemaic Maresha cremated their dead. At the same time, mineralogical and chemical

Fig. 4.3. Opening IV in the columbarium with built doorpost. Looking east.

CHAPTER 4: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 21

45

Fig. 4.4. Southwestern wall of the columbarium with the pigeon niches.

examinations revealed that the soil samples from the columbarium did not contain any pigeon droppings. However, it should be pointed out that the tested finds came from the last occupation stage of the columbarium and not from its original construction and use. Thus it seems likely that the niches were indeed dovecotes, in the third century BCE, while a completely different use for the niches, one whose nature is not yet fully understood, became widespread during the second century BCE. In the last ten years more than 85 columbaria have been located during surveys at the site. The niches in these columbaria number more than 50,000. At Maresha during the earlier Hellenistic period, raising pigeons seems to have been the most flourishing branch of the local economy. Recent studies of columbaria at Masada (Netzer 1991:370–373, 425–427; Foerster 1995:219–223) and on constructed towers elsewhere (Zissu 1995:56–63) found also them to be installations for raising pigeons. Excavation in the columbarium of Complex 21 was renewed in the second half of 1981, its main target being the removal of soil from Room 1a (see Plan 4.2). Prior to this, unauthorized digging had been done on the weekends in the first half of 1981. Fortunately, the material that had been excavated was recovered and turned over to us as representatives of the Israel Antiquities Authority. Room 1a (2.3 × 4.0 m) was excavated as one unit, and because of working conditions, the soil was moved from Room 1a to Room 1, from which it was poured into Cistern 5. The excavated Room 1a was filled with debris mixed with a few stones, and most of the finds were

discovered in the center of the room. However, the debris also contained objects that had originally been standing on a shelf, or around the bottle-shaped hollow cut in the northeastern corner of the room (see Plan 4.2). In 1981 Opening IV was exposed together with the largest part of the northeastern side of the columbarium. A shelf, varying in width from 0.3 to 0.9 m, ran along three sides of the room at a height of 1.1–1.2 m above floor level. The pottery on the shelf was probably knocked down by soil falling from the surface above Room 1 through the stone blocking Shaft II. This pottery has been dated to the third and second centuries BCE. Since it belongs to Stages 3 and 4 of the columbarium, it is possible to date Stages 1 and 2 to the third century BCE; Stage 1 may even belong to the end of the fourth century BCE. THE OIL PRESS (SYSTEM A, ROOM 2) The oil press was included in Macalister’s Complex 21 (Bliss and Macalister 1902:241) and was identified as the Western Oil Press by Dar (1986:179, Fig. 104) and Frankel (Frankel 1984:27, 127, 267). In the oil press survey of Maresha in 1986 it was labeled Oil Press Number 2 (Kloner and Sagiv 1989:22–24).1 In these publications the traditional working method of Hellenistic Maresha oil presses was described. Two main entrances lead to the oil press: one from the surface in the west, along a staircase (No. 53; Plans 4.1, 4.4); the other from Corridor 60 toward the crushing hall (2a). The latter opening seems secondary. The press includes the following main elements (Plan 4.5):

46

AMOS KLONER

Plan 4.4. Plan of the water cisterns (5), columbarium (1) and oil press (2).

Plan 4.5. Plan of the oil press (System A) in Complex 21 (detail of Plan 4.4).

CHAPTER 4: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 21

47

Fig. 4.5. Oil press showing Pressing Installations G and H1 to the left and Stone Weights F in the center. Looking east-northeast.

H, H1, G. Three pressing installations arranged in an unbroken line of pillars detached from the ceiling (Plan 4.5; see Fig. 4.8).

period (Plan 4.5; see also Chap. 5, Complex 44 ). The beam in this crushing post was shorter than common in the local oil presses.

C. The crushing installation, consisting of a basin (mortarium), a lentil-shaped crushing stone, one vertical and one horizontal wooden beam. The purpose of the latter was to stabilize the vertical wooden pole around which the crushing stone moved. Two shallow niches in the walls at each side of the basin indicate the exact position of the horizontal beam.

G. The third of three aligned presses (with H and H1). Apparently this pressing installation was installed after the abandonment of System D. The location of Chamber K and construction considerations caused the new Pressing Chamber G (Figs. 4.5, 4.6) to be confined to a limited area, so that it is short compared to Pressing Chambers H and H1. In order to get maximum pressure

D. The fourth pressing installation is a chamber that may have gone out of use soon after its completion since the beam niche looks unused. It is possible that Pressing Chamber G was cut in order to replace it. The following elements are later additions to the main installations described above: E. There are two possible explanations for this shallow basin: (1) It was intended for collecting the water or oil overflow that later drained into a central collection pit from which it was carried away in vessels. (2) Vessels were placed in it during the process of collecting oil from the basin between the piers. F. Two of the original three stone weights that are typical of pressing installations of the Hellenistic

Fig. 4.6. The oil press showing the niche, Shelf L and Weights F in situ. Press G to the left.

48

AMOS KLONER

Fig. 4.8. Installations H, H1 and G of the oil press.

Fig. 4.7. Pressing Installation G of the oil press showing the piers at each side of the basket shaft.

Fig. 4.9. The oil press with Shelf K and the ‘temple façade’ in relief to the right.

above the collection pit, it was placed a bit to the north, and the niche of the weights beam is close to it on the south. In this way the weights created a particularly heavy pressure above the collection pit. There is a difference in the diameter of the concave shaft, quarried between the pillars and within which the baskets were placed, and the diameter of the shafts in Pressing Chambers H and H1—in H and H1 the diameter is c. 0.65 m while in G it is only c. 0.55 m (Figs. 4.7, 4.8). The significance of this difference is unclear. If, in spite of what has just been said, the four pressing systems, H, H1, G and D, did function contemporaneously, then it is possible that an additional crushing installation existed here. The Maresha presses, including those described in this chapter, belong to the group of improved level presses (Frankel 1999:76).

A model of a structure with an oversized pointed roof (c. 0.5 m) was carved in relief on the eastern wall, to the right of Shelf K (Figs. 4.9, 4.10). We believe that this model may depict a temple and be connected to the phenomenon of cultic niches found in the majority of oil presses at Maresha (see Chap. 3: System D).

K and L are vaulted niches with shelves that may have been used for holding objects and baskets during the oil-extraction process.

Fig. 4.10. The gabled ‘temple ► façade’.

CHAPTER 4: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 21

49

NOTE 1

The survey cited here was carried out by G. Solar, D. Huli and A. Kloner. Photographs are by S. Segal, D. Huli and A. Kloner. Plan 4.5 was prepared by Y. Zohar and drawn by F.

Pirtanov. The temple façade (Fig. 4:10) was drawn by B. Arubas.

REFERENCES Bliss F.J. and Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine during the Years 1898–1900. London. Dar S. 1986. Landscape and Pattern: An Archaeological Survey of Samaria 800 B.C.E.–636 C.E. (BAR Int S. 308). Oxford. Foerster G. 1995. Masada. The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965. Final Reports V: Art and Architecture. Jerusalem. Frankel R. 1984. The History of the Processing of Wine and Oil in Galilee in the Period of the Bible, the Mishna and the Talmud. Ph.D. diss. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Frankel R. 1999. Wine and Oil Production in Antiquity in Israel and Other Mediteranean Countries. Sheffield. Kloner A. 2000–2001. Water Cisterns in Idumea, Judaea and Nabatea in the Hellenistic and Early Roman Periods. ARAM 13–14: 461–485.

Kloner A. and Hess O. 1985. 2001–2002. A Columbarium in Complex 21 at Maresha ‘Atiqot (ES) 17:122–133. Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1989. Maresha: Olive Oil Production in the Hellenistic Period. NZ 15:17–65 (Hebrew; English summary, pp.185–186). Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1993. The Olive Presses of Hellenistic Maresha. In M.-C. Amouretti and J.-P. Brun eds. Oil and Wine Production in the Mediterranean Area (BCH Supplement 26). Athens. Pp. 119–136. Netzer E. 1991. Masada. The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965. Final Reports III: The Buildings. Stratigraphy and Architecture. Jerusalem. Zissu B. 1995. Two Herodian Dovecotes: Horvat Abu Haf and Horvat Aleq (JRA Supplementary S. 14). Ann Arbor. Pp. 56–69.

CHAPTER 5

SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45 AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

GENERAL DESCRIPTION Subterranean Complexes 44 and 45 are located on the southwestern slope of Tell Maresha (see Plan 3.1). The two together create one very large underground complex. Complex 45 consists of rooms, passages and cisterns, numbered 1–18, while the smaller Complex 44 includes the sections of an oil press numbered 19–23 (Plan 5.1). An opening in the common wall of Cistern 18 (Complex 45) and Room 19 (Complex 44) connects the two complexes. Macalister, who discovered these complexes, did not notice the opening between them and therefore assigned two different numbers. The opening was found during the 1989 excavation of Complex 44, when a stone that blocked it was removed. Both the purpose of the opening and the reason for its blocking have yet to be established. Whereas Complex 44 was excavated, Complex 45 was surveyed only, hence the description of the latter is schematic. The survey of Complex 45 is included here due to its connection with Complex 44 and also to give a general idea of the appearance of a subterranean complex before excavation. SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 45 Room 1 is large and consists of a number of sections and a blocked shaft in the ceiling. Two chambers are located in its northwestern part. One of these has a small cistern cut in the bedrock. This cistern, bottle-shaped with a narrow neck and a wide body, is connected to Cistern 2 on the west. The original entrance to the room is marked as 142D (Plan 5.1). An opening into Passage 6 is located in the higher, northeastern part of the room. To the south, the entrance to Room 4 has an opening to a blocked upper section in its ceiling. Cisterns 2 and 3 each have stairs, typical at Maresha, cut from bedrock, and which spiral downward. Cistern 3 Plan 5.1. Schematic plan of Complexes 44 and 45 after the ► initial survey.

52

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

is entered from the western side of Cistern 2, approximately at the midpoint of the latter’s staircase. Cistern 2 has an opening on its upper eastern side, which leads into the bottle-shaped cistern in Room 1. A small room (4) has a small square opening in the ceiling. Comparison with similar subterranean complexes suggests the existence of a blocked room above. The long, narrow Passage 5 leads off to the southwest from Room 4. In it lamp niches, resembling those of the hiding systems, were hewn in the walls (Kloner 1983:215). The purpose of the passage is not clear, but we cannot rule out the possibility that it was part of a hiding complex cut in the second century CE. A well-quarried corridor (Passage 6) oriented north–south connects Rooms 1 and 7. It takes a sharp turn westward and then again to the north before well-cut steps descend from it to Room 7. Room 7 is a large room with a short passage in its western wall leading to a dead end. Why the hewing process was stopped is unknown, as are the purpose and dating of this aborted passage. In its southern wall is the entrance to Room 8 and in its northern wall a short corridor accessing Room 9. The well-hewn rectangular Room 8 has three narrow openings in the western wall, which lead to Passage 6. These were probably ventilation ducts, since they are too small for human passage. We know from other hiding complexes that such ducts were the only way to bring fresh air into the rooms. Rectangular Room 9 was quarried in two stages with an original entrance on the west. A vaulted passage led to a fine, stepped and plastered cistern (Cistern 12). In the southern wall of Room 9 is an opening to the small and narrow Room 10. In the northern wall of Room 9 is a passage to Room 13 that is itself connected to Room 14 by an opening in its northern wall. In the eastern wall of Room 14 an opening leads to Room 15. The original entrance to this group of rooms (Plan 5.1:11), dated to the Hellenistic period, is not visible from the surface, but only from the passage that connects Room 9 and Cistern 12. This entrance is blocked, possibly intentionally, with debris and soil. In the eastern corner of the ceiling of Room 14 is an opening sealed with a single stone slab and soil. This appears to have been the original entrance, even though Room 15 provides more convenient access to the room. Room 15 consists of three small rooms in a row, oriented north–south. The northern room is the largest. Its eastern wall was cut through to access Hall 16 and

its western wall contained an entryway to Room 14. In the southwestern corner of Room 15 an opening led to Room 13. It is not clear whether this break was intentional. The original entrance to Complex 45 is identified as 140D (Plan 5.1). This entrance runs east–west and descends to a number of rooms, oriented in different directions, of which Room 15 is the southernmost. Hall 16, located opposite Entrance 140D, is deep and has an additional well-hewn entrance. That the cistern was hewn in two stages may be seen by the different chisel marks on the walls. The upper portion of the cistern was carved in the usual pattern of regular 20 cm strips in which one contains diagonal chisel marks and the next has the same regular diagonal marks oriented in the opposite direction. This is the most common appearance left on the walls after the removal of blocks of stone, evidence of the quarrying process at Maresha. The later, lower cutting was made with larger, irregularly spaced chisel marks, not oriented in any kind of pattern. Apparently the purpose of the second, lower stage was to increase its capacity. Since Hall 16 is higher than Cistern 18, the deepening of the former seems to have created a somewhat irregular shape as a consequence of avoiding damage to Cistern 18. A blocked shaft in the ceiling of Hall 16 appears to be of a later date than the cistern. This indicates that the cistern may have, at some point, been converted to a use other than that for which it was originally intended. As in many other shafts at the site the vertical entrance was blocked with large stones, thus making access to the cistern relatively difficult. Cistern 17 is stepped and plastered with two wellhewn entrances. One is from a corridor whose general direction is north–south. In the southern part of the corridor a passage and an opening lead into circular Hall 16. The original entrance to the corridor is through the northern wall of Entrance 140D (Plan 5.1). Today this entrance is almost completely blocked by collapsed material. At the northern part of the north– south corridor is the entrance to Cistern 18. A spiral staircase leads down into the large circular Cistern 18. At Maresha most of the stairways in the subterranean cisterns had a solid parapet (banister) along the outside to protect the user. These parapets usually have grooves worn by ropes used to lower and raise containers of water. Above the staircase, in the ceiling of the cistern, is an opening into Room 19. The fissures in the cistern walls were filled with gray

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

hydraulic plaster, typical of the Hellenistic period. The fissures in the upper part of the cistern were widened in order to better accommodate the cement. SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 44— THE OIL PRESS Excavation of the oil press in Complex 44 began in the summer of 1989 (Plan 5.2; Fig. 5.1).1 R.A.S. Macalister found this press during his survey around the perimeter of Maresha in the summer of 1900. It was described briefly and appears as Complex 44 on the plan of the subterranean assemblages around the tell (Bliss and Macalister 1902:248; see Plan 2.4, above). The 1989 excavation adopted the numbering system created by Macalister and identified the oil press as located in Complex 44 (see above). In an article on oil presses, Kloner and Sagiv (1989:26–28), however, described the installation as Oil Press No. 4 in Subterranean Complex 44. THE SITE PRIOR TO EXCAVATION It soon became clear that Complex 44 had four major stages of use. The first was as an oil press with a

53

crushing installation in the south and a pressing installation in the north (Plans 5.2, 5.3). The second stage was the reuse of the crushing installation in Room 19 for grinding grain. Third was the use of Room 20 as an area for holding animals and in the fourth stage the complex served as a refuse dump (see Plan 5.1). It seems that the press went out of operation following the conquest of John Hyrcanus I in the year 112/111 BCE (Kloner 1991:83); recent studies of the lead weights from Maresha reveal that four or five of them carried a date of Seleucid 205 = 108 BCE (Finkielsztejn 1998; in press). The excellent state of preservation and the absence of wear on the piers and the niches intended for the insertion of the pressing beams indicate that the original use of the installation lasted less than a century. In addition, no maintenance or repair work could be identified. It may be that the western passage of the oil press, including the wall of the entrance, collapsed in an earthquake shortly after construction. In Room 19 the pottery and the modifications of the crushing installation (see below) almost certainly point to its use through the Byzantine and into the Early Islamic period. The grinding installation in Room 19 probably went out of use by the end of the Early Islamic period. Apparently there was an attempt to use Room 20

Fig. 5.1. The oil press. Note the tilted crushing basin. The dark color of the lower walls indicates the depth of the fill excavated from the cave. Looking south.

54

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

Plan 5.2. Plan and sections of Complex 44 (Plan 5.1:19–23) after excavation, showing the oil press.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

55

Plan 5.2. (cont.).

Plan 5.3. Lines indicate the rock surface above Complex 44. At the center the roof is missing after collapsing in an earthquake; note the upper part of the staircase which led from the surface to the oil press there. View from above.

56

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

Fig. 5.2. The main hall, with cornices on each side of the wall, below the vaulted ceiling.

as an animal pen, possibly after Room 19 had been abandoned for the second time. In order to do this the fill that had accumulated in the room was leveled and an artificial fill of soil and hewn chalkstone from surface structures that had been destroyed during the Hyrcanus conquest was brought in. This material covered the floor to a height of 1 m. Collapsed stones and debris that had penetrated from outside were found on top of this, creating a fill up to c. 2 m deep. Animal bones and pottery from the eighteenth to twentieth century were found mixed with this material, indicating that the cave, in its final stage, served the local Arab villagers as a refuse dump. Some of the finds may possibly be attributed to people, who, over the centuries up to the 1940s, traveled the road from Beit Jibrin to el-Qubeibeh (Lachish), which passed just north of Complexes 44 and 45 (Bliss and Macalister 1902: Pl. 92).

5.2). The height from floor to ceiling was c. 3.5 m. This section, as well as other parts of the oil press, was hewn with great care and with regard for an aesthetically pleasing appearance. Two cornices were cut along the wall at a height of 2.80 m above the floor (Fig. 5.2). A band created by long fine incisions, c. 8 cm wide, ran along the central part of the ceiling. This central band was damaged at a later period by vertical Shaft I (Fig. 5.3). The front wall includes the piers of the oil presses, the vaults above the piers and Passage C (see Plan 5.2). The entrance to this passage (Plan 5.4; Figs. 5.4, 5.5) is carved as an

THE EXCAVATION AND ITS R ESULTS The Central Hall of the Oil Press (Plans 5.1: Hall 20; 5.2: L1; Fig. 5.2) The dimensions of the central hall were 4.2–5.0 m in length, 4 m in width, and the floor level was about 1 m lower than the floor of the crushing section (L2; Plan

Fig. 5.3. The shaft in the ceiling and the central band along the vault.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

57

Fig. 5.4. The cultic niche in the northern wall.

Plan 5.4. Plan of the cultic niche with the circular altar and vaulted niche above it.

Attic façade, similar to gate models from Alexandria (McKenzie 1991:192, Pl. 175c). The façades of similar gates from the early Hellenistic period were discovered in burial and other caves at Maresha and in an oil press cave at Horbat Horesh slightly south of Maresha. Between the piers and above Passage C is a pilaster in the form of a circular altar. Above was a dedicatory niche suitable for placing offerings (Plan 5.4; see Fig. 5.12).2 So far more than 20 cult niches and carvings, about half of which are in oil presses, have been found at Maresha.

During some later period, Shaft I, which has a diameter of c. 1 m and a depth of c. 3 m, was cut in the center of the vault (see Fig. 5.3). The western half of Shaft I was covered with hewn chalkstone blocks in order straighten it. This stone covering reaches from the top of the shaft downward for c. 2.8 m (see Plan 5.2: Section 1-1). Although it is not possible to date

The Formation and Performance of the Oil Press In contrast to the efforts to create an aesthetically pleasing oil press as described above, it is a striking fact that the parts of the press were cut in an imprecise manner. Thus, for example Pier E is 0.25 m broader than Pier F (see Plan 5.2; Fig. 5.6). One of the two trenches for the weights (L12; see Plan 5.2; Fig. 5.6) is 0.15 m wider and 0.1 m deeper than the other (L11; Fig. 5.6). Also the eastern vault above Piers F and G is smaller than the western one above Piers E and D (Fig. 5.6). There are also differences in the size of the niches for the beams (L5, L6).

Fig. 5.5. The northern wall of the central hall with the beam piers, the ornamented gate and the cultic niche.

58

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

Fig. 5.6. The two weight trenches, looking north.

the cutting of the shaft, it almost certainly postdates the Byzantine and Early Islamic periods. The Hellenistic pottery from the deliberate fill below the western weights’ trench (L11) indicates the period of use of the oil press. Among the pieces was the base of a Hellenistic amphora from South Italy, dated to the second half of the second century BCE. It appears that the trenches for the weights (L11, L12) were accidentally quarried deeper than required, c. 0.45–0.55 m below floor level (Fig. 5.6). The operators of the oil press then found it necessary to raise the weights by adding a layer of fill. The eastern group of weights (L11) was raised c. 0.35 m and the western group (L12) was raised to a level of 0.30 m upon chalk stone blocks. The fill layer for the weights of the eastern trench (L11) included soil and pottery from the second century BCE, thus allowing us to conclude that the oil press functioned, in its original phase, until the end of that century or somewhat later since the pottery types found do not continue into the first century BCE. Next to Pillar M (see Plan 5.2; Fig. 5.7) fragments of what appeared to be a tabun were recovered at different levels within the debris and fill layer of L1. A few additional fragments were found close to the stairs that led to the crushing section (L2).

Fig. 5.7. Pillar M to the right of the steps, looking south.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

A socket (diameter 0.17–0.2 m) close to the stairs leading down to the central hall (L1) contained remains of carbonized material, including about 35 olive pits, some intact and some fragmentary (see Plan 5.2: Area X). This socket may have served as a heating installation connected to oil production. It appears that during the first phase of the oil-press building, two pressing posts (L5, L6) and Piers D, E, F and G, as well as the weight trenches (L11, L12) and the shallow Pools A and B, were cut in the northern part of the central hall (L1; see Fig. 5.6). That the capacity of the crushing installation (L2) was greater than that of the pressing installations apparently gave rise to the need for an additional unit (L7; see Plan 5.2 and Fig. 5.1), pool (L9; Fig. 5.8) and weight channel (Ll0; see Figs. 5.9 and 5.12). This new installation (L7; Fig. 5.8) clearly differs from the original pressing installations and weights (L5, L6, L11, L12), which form a single unit within the central hall: for example, the beam did not exceed 3 m in length in contrast to 6 m of the first pressing installations. Also, the distance to the stabilizing point (the niche) of the beams and the support point, where pressure was placed on the attached pillar, was shorter—1.30 m compared to 2.10 m (Plan 5.2; Fig. 5.9).

59

Fig. 5.8. The western press and the pool (L9) in the foreground, looking west.

Fig. 5.9. The third pressing post (L7) and weights (L10), looking southwest.

60

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

Fig. 5.10. The western weight trench (L12) facing north.

The short weight trench (L10) was quarried rather carelessly to a shallow depth of 0.10 to 0.35 m (Fig. 5.9) and could accommodate only two weights. Its width is not uniform and seems to have been widened without consideration for the external appearance. Furthermore, it does not exactly follow the line running from the stabilization niche along the space between the piers. In order to have the trench follow this line it was widened at its northeastern end. At this point a rough, shallow and sloping depression was cut into the edges of the trench. Three trapezoidal weights of roughly cut limestone were placed in both trenches, L11 and L12 (see Plan 5.2). Horizontal and vertical perforations together form a cross-shaped hole in the upper surface of the weights (Figs. 5.9–5.12). These stones range in weight from 150 to 500 kg, averaging more than 300 kg. The lightest weight was placed at the greatest distance from the pressing point, and the heaviest closest to it. All together the three weights in each of the two trenches (L11, L12) weighed 915–965 kg, which creates a pressure of c. 1,200 kg on the basket pile. Two limestone weights, each with an unfinished hole in the upper part, were lying near the western wall of the oil press (Figs. 5.10, 5.11). In the southern trench (L10) a trapezoidal weight was found weighing c. 415 kg. A lentil-shaped stone (L10; Figs. 5.10–5.12), which

Fig. 5.11. The eastern wall, looking southeast. To the right, two lentil-shaped stones, used as weights at the western pressing post.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

61

Fig. 5.12. The three pairs of piers and the collecting vat between them. The western wall is in the center; note the stone without an upper hole left of the trench.

originally served as the millstone of the crushing installation, seems in its last use to have served as a weight. A second lentil-shaped stone found close to the weight channel (L12; Figs. 5.11, 5.12) almost certainly served as a weight. The diameter of one of the lentil-shaped crushing stones ranged from 0.77 to 0.88 m, that of the second from 0.81 to 0.85 m. It is almost certain that these two were meant to be crushing stones in the mortarium of L2 before their measurements were altered (Kloner and Sagiv 1993: 125–127). Use as a crushing stone produces uneven wear, resulting in the loss of the circular shape, and thereby rendering its continued use as a crushing stone impossible. The lentil-shaped stones just described may have been bound together and used as a kind of double weight. The Shallow Pools Shallow Pools A and B are basins cut between the piers and the weight trenches (Fig. 5.13). Pool A measures 1.90 in length and 0.3–0.5 m in width. The length of Pool B is 2.10 m and its width, 0.25–0.50 m. The walls of the pools are 0.15–0.2 m thick and their height is c. 0.2 m. The function of these basins has not been determined. Sometimes depressions found at the bottom of the basin suggest that oil accumulated there (Kloner and Sagiv 1989:48, 50 E and E1). These pools

Fig. 5.13. Shallow Pool A, looking north.

62

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

may have served as clean surfaces on which pressing baskets were placed before or after the pressing.3 It is more probable that pottery vessels, presumably jugs, into which the oil from the basins was emptied, were placed here. The suggestion that the overflow from the collection vats between the piers ran into the shallow pools seems less likely. Areas of the pool walls were damaged, apparently by the weight closest to the pool, which was likely to shake in its binding and accidentally hit the pools. The damaged wall was fixed by inserting a wooden plank into a groove, 0.06 m in width and between 0.10 and 0.18 m in depth, cut in the long side of Pool B. Traces of hydraulic plaster were preserved in the northeastern corner of Pool A and in the southwestern corner of Pool B (L9), 0.2–0.6 m above the pool. The Niches in the Western Wall One of the two niches in the western wall of the central hall was used to hold the beam of the oil press during the placing of the pressing baskets and the collection of the oil (L1; see Fig. 5.12). The second is located 1.75 m above the floor level of the oil press. It varies in depth and reaches c. 0.2 m in its southern part. Its purpose is unknown. At this time the beam rested on Piers D and G. Pier E is longer than Pier D and Pier G is about 0.3 m longer than Pier F. It seems likely that this difference is neither accidental nor the result of carelessness, but rather shows how the piers on the sides were used. While the pressing baskets were changed, the beams of L5 and L6 were supported by Piers G and D. The beams were held at an angle of c. 14° and left a circular depression on the edge of the piers when they were placed diagonally to the direction of the long walls. The beam also sloped down during the stage preceding the pressing activity, that is, before the placing of the pressing baskets and the hanging of the weights. A circular wooden plank was placed between the pressing baskets and the beam of the oil press. The western wall is not parallel to the eastern one but slants eastward toward the center of the hall. This required the cutting of Niche J to take in the end of the pressing beam during the switching of the baskets. Niches serving this function were also discovered in Oil Press 15 in Complex 74. The western wall may have been carelessly hewn or quarried in this way in order to create a wall with an equal width, parallel to the passage wall (L13). Other factors, such as the slope of

the beams, indicate that the wall was planned this way from the start. The Collection Vats The collection vats received the liquid that poured out during the pressing process. The upper part of the vats has a narrow opening (diameter c. 0.25 m) upon which a perforated wooden plank appears to have been placed (Fig. 5.14). Some sloping grooves may be identified, which drained liquid from the surrounding area (the surface upon which the pressing baskets were laid), toward the collection vat (Fig. 5.15). Vertical cuts were also discovered on the thresholds (height of thresholds c. 0.2 m) between the piers. The eastern collection vat between Piers G and F had a depth of 0.55 m, a maximum diameter of c. 0.5 m, and a volume of approximately 65 liters. The depth of the collection vat between Piers D and E was c. 0.56 m, the maximum diameter 0.65 m, and its volume about 85 liters. The depth of the western collection vat (L7) was 0.5 m, the upper diameter merely 0.21 m and the maximum diameter 0.5 m. The volume of this collection vat was c. 55 liters. All the vats are shaped like a truncated cone and coated with gray plaster on the interior. Shallow depressions c. 0.1 m in depth and c. 0.15 m in diameter are located in the center of the collection vats. They may have served to collect dirt and sediments that accumulated during the pressing process. The Crushing System (L2) This vaulted, circular room (max. diameter 3.8 m, height 2.2 m) has a stepped depression (0.25 m in depth) at its center intended for the vertical wooden

Fig. 5.14. The upper opening and grooves of the collecting vat between Piers G and F.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

Fig. 5.15. The collection vat in the western wall (L7) with grooves for draining the liquids.

63

pole that rose from the center of the crushing section. The floor is c. 1 m higher than that of the central hall (L1). The entrance was from the west by a seven-step staircase. The steps were narrow at the entrance and wider closer to the floor. The average height of each was about 0.2 m. The crushing basin was found lying on its side on top of local limestone fragments in the center of this stairway (Fig. 5.16). The shallow craters and grooves showed that the basin (diameter 1.6 m) had been used (Figs. 5.16, 5.17). In its present condition however, it does not reflect the shape of crushing basins characteristic of Maresha. The lips (labrum) were lowered 0.15–0.2 m so that the rim is broader, rougher and particularly uneven. Also, the perpendicular cylinder in the center was lowered similarly, and the shape altered to a hemisphere instead of a cylinder. A hole (6–7 cm in diameter) was drilled in the center of the millarium (see Plan 5.2). Since the square depression that characterizes the heads of the millarae at Maresha is missing, the measurements of the crushing basin could not be determined with certainty. The alterations just described almost certainly occurred during the Byzantine or Early Islamic period, as demonstrated by the pottery of these periods found throughout the upper fill in the area of the oil press. While cleaning the neighboring room (L3) a small, thin lentil-shaped stone was found on the floor near the stairs (diameter c. 0.75 m, thickness 0.28 m; see Fig. 5.18). It is smaller and more circular than the

Fig. 5.16. The crushing section (L2) about 1 m higher than the northern part of the oil press. Looking north-northwest.

64

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

lentil-shaped crushing stones in L1. This stone may have been part of the oil press in its latest stage. In an effort to reconstruct the operating method of the press, the basin was repositioned under the upper recess of the roof in the crushing section, and the lentil-shaped stone from nearby L3 was set on it (see Figs. 5.16, 5.17). The lentil-shaped crushing stones may have first been utilized as millstones in the crushing installation. One or both lentil-shaped stones may have been used as weights instead of crushing stones after they became eroded from use (Kloner and Sagiv 1989:36). In this oil press as in others at Maresha, crushing was done with a single lentil-shaped stone and not a pair as in the Roman terpetum. A shallow identation (width 1.35 m, maximum depth c. 0.2 m; see Plan 5.2: N) was cut in the wall of the eastern part of the crushing section at a height of 0.1 m above the floor. It appears to have been a service cell, or it may have been an incompleted extension of the crushing section (L2). The oil press, in its original state, seems to have functioned for only eight or nine decades, since more repairs and replacement of parts of the crushing installation and pressing system would have occurred had it been in use for a longer period of time. The amount of debris in the crushing section was relatively small, 0.2–0.4 m in thickness. No deliberate fill was identified; it seems that the debris came mainly through the opening of the oil press (see above).

mortarium. A small socket in the floor seems to have collected the oil that seeped out during storage. An additional service cell (L4) was located in the western wall of the central hall (see Plan 5.2 and Fig. 5.12). In the inner part of Service Cell H, the floor was broken through and a wide inlet led to a large bell-shaped cistern (Plan 5.1:18) that belongs to Complex 45 (see above). When the opening was made is unclear, but it is reasonable to assume it was after the oil press went out of use.

The Service Cells In the southern wall of the crushing section is a typical service cell (see Plan 5.2: H), used for the preparation of olives fresh from the grove, or after crushing in the

The Storeroom (L3) A second, arched opening (1.7 m high and 1.2 m wide) in the western wall of the crushing section leads to a nearby room (L3), used for storage or also as a service room for the oil press (see Figs. 5.17, 5.18). It was replaced by an opening to the storage room (L3). This southwestern room was probably a storage area (see Plan 5.2; Fig. 5.18) even though, at this point, we do not have examples of such rooms in other oil-press complexes. Eight steps lead to the room (Fig. 5.18). The floor slopes gently to the west and bears marks of the quarrying of blocks used in construction elsewhere. In fact, every subterranean room in the lower city of Maresha was a quarry of sorts at some point in its construction. In this room soil, chalk, rocks which had fallen from the ceiling, limestone scraps, pottery and even animal bones had accumulated naturally over time. The debris covered the stairs and spread out in a layer sloping from the opening in L2 to the western wall of the storeroom. Its maximum thickness was 1.75 m on the western side of the storeroom, whereas in the eastern part of the storeroom the fill reached only

Fig. 5.17. The crushing basin with a lentil-shaped stone, placed on it at the end of the excavation. The opening to the right leads to a storeroom.

Fig. 5.18. The storeroom (L3) with the lentil-shaped stone at the center. In the foreground are the steps leading down to the room.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

65

0.5 m. To the north is a water cistern (L15) that may predate this storeroom, and even the entire oil press. The room’s northern wall is irregular and encloses part of the cistern (see Plan 5.2: L15). A narrow opening in the northern wall connects the cistern and the storeroom. The opening appears to be relatively early in date, although it certainly postdates the oil press; and though small, it is still large enough to allow passage for a person carrying water.4 The Entrance to the Oil Press Access to the oil press was from the north by means of a staircase of about 25 steps, of which only the upper 11 were preserved (see Plan 5.3).5 The stairs lead from the surface through a roofed passage (L13), which connected with the entrance to the oil press. At points along the eastern side of the staircase pieces of limestone building blocks were found, which appear to have been used to block the passage to vertical Shaft I (see Plan 5.2: Section 1-1). Originally, the staircase was built with an open space below it. A vat, measuring c. 1.75 m in depth, 0.9 m in maximum diameter and c. 1,000 liters in volume, was cut in this corridor, 2.5 m from the opening of the oil press (Fig. 5.19). Some of the olive oil from the press was concentrated here. No clear fragments of plaster were found on the walls. The vat is on the eastern edge of the passage. The stonecutters were careful not to work in the direction of the central hall of the oil press, in order to avoid getting too close to its western wall (L1). A layer of organic remains, 0.13 m thick, had accumulated at the bottom of the vat. It appears to be material that sank during the storage of the oil. A 14 C test gave a second-century BCE date, while two additional tests recently conducted indicated a firstcentury BCE dating.6 The vat was sealed with a chalk plug, square in its upper part and circular below. This cover, cracked in places, was found close to the opening of the pit (see Plan 5.2: L14, Plug V; Fig. 5.20). The vat (L14) was hewn within L13, which perhaps served as a passage. The plug was meant to make walking over the top of the vat safe and protect the purity of the oil in it. A small socket (0.2 m long, 0.2 m wide, 0.15 m deep) was located at the southern edge of the vat (Fig. 5.20) and allowed the oil to pass under the cover through a special hole leading to the collection vat. The plug was probably removed only when oil was taken out or for cleaning the vat. The greater part of the vat was filled with soil, pottery and stones,

Fig. 5.19. The oil vat in Passage L13, looking south.

Fig. 5.20. Close-up of the vat (L14) and cover, looking north.

with the organic layer mentioned earlier at the bottom. The passage (L13) led eastward, probably to an open space. There is no certainty that an opening between the passage and this suggested open space existed in the earlier stages of the oil press. The open space may

66

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

be the result of a collapse of roof and walls; no more specific comment may be made until the area has been excavated. The roof over the collection vat (L14) and the internal passage (L13) were weakened, apparently by an earthquake, and caved in. Together with the entrance section, a part of the western wall of the oil press collapsed and its ceiling cracked. It appears that following these occurrences the passage went out of use. Despite the damages, it was still possible to enter the central room. This may have been when the passage (L13) was expanded westward; however, the connection in this direction may have existed before, so that there was double access to the oil press: from the top by the staircase mentioned above and by the passage (L13). A socket (diameter c. 0.40 m, depth 0.15 m) was cut between the stairs, descending from the surface to the hewn passage in its eastern façade (see Plan 5.2: L14, Socket S). The function of the façade is uncertain. The Water Cistern (L15; Plans 5.1:22; 5.2:15) A water cistern (diameter 4.50 m, present depth 8 m) was located next to the narrow passage (L13) and attached to the storeroom (L3). Although excavation has not been completed, its original depth probably

was c. 10 m. A spiral staircase with a parapet (banister), characteristic of Maresha, was hewn counterclockwise from the top to the bottom of the cistern. The many cracks in the walls were widened to three-centimeter channels and plastered. Rope marks can be seen mainly at the top of the cistern, most of them above the entrance opening. The threshold by the entrance area did not survive. The upper part of the parapet collapsed and the upper entrance to the cistern was deliberately blocked at some point, forming a low wall (height 0.5–0.6 m). This water cistern (L15) was hewn prior to the oil press and the installation of the storeroom (L3). The latter was cut taking into consideration the existence of the cistern. The Bathing Room (Plans 5.1:23, 5.2: Y, L8; Fig. 5.21) Between the passage (L13) and the water cistern (L15) is a roofed chamber (see Plan 5.2: L8) with its entrance to the east. Two small basins (c. 0.10 m long, 0.06–0.08 m wide) for collecting liquids (Plan 5.2: Basin Q) were installed on the outer eastern sides of the opening and slanting drainpipes were cut, leading to the inner installation. Feature Y, also situated along the northern wall of the bathtub, may have functioned as a bench. This seems to have been a bathroom. Similar installations were discovered elsewhere at Maresha; some of them,

Fig. 5.21. The opening to the bathing room with channels on both sides.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

small and well-designed, were intended as sitting tubs. Domestic bathtub installations from the Hellenistic period are familiar from, e.g. Gezer (Macalister 1912: 224–228), Bet Zur (Albright 1931:12; Sellers 1968: Pls. 7, 12) and Mt. Gerizim (Magen 1986:98–99; 1990: 85–86; 2000:92–93). The Maresha examples however belong to a group of large units that Macalister termed ‘Filter Chambers’ (Bliss and Macalister 1902: 209). Precisely how these tubs were used has not yet been established; perhaps the bather sat on a chair or wooden bench and the water was poured over him (see discussion, Chap. 2). It is almost certain that this installation, located in the residential quarter, was somehow associated with the oil-production installations as well. A later addition to L8 leads through T1 and along a roofed passage (see Plan 5.2: W) parallel to L13, to an unexcavated open space. Access between the passage (L13) and the bath (L8) was improved by cutting a square space between the two (see Plan 5.2). It is difficult to establish which was hewn first. It seems that buckets of hot water served the tubs of the domestic bath installations (see Plan 5.2: Basins Q, Q1). The entrance to the bath was through an opening 0.50 m wide and 0.93 m high, installed above the 0.25 m high threshold (see Plan 5.2: T). The upper part of the opening was broken and worn (Fig. 5.21). An additional opening

67

of similar measurements was installed in the inner part of the room (L8), also above the threshold. A step (0.3 × 0.4 m) within the room gave access to the threshold. Running under the northern part of the walls, in which the openings T and T1 were installed, was a channel for draining water. A depression (0.46 m wide and 0.15 m deep) was cut between the partitions with the openings T and T1, along the northern wall; the drainage channel passes through the depression. The underground passage cut from Partition T1 runs north-northwest from the bathroom (L8) and opens into a collapsed courtyard-like cave (see Plan 5.2: W). The underground passage postdates the original use of the corridor (L13). THE OIL-PRODUCTION PROCESS The following are the main elements of the oil presses at Maresha, including that of Complex 44: THE CRUSHING COMPONENTS (Fig. 5.22)7 The stone used throughout is local limestone. A. Stone crushing basin (Lat. mortarium). B. Millarium: the upright stone cylinder, projecting from the center of the crushing basin to 0.08 m above

Fig. 5.22. The Maresha crushing system.

68

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

its rim. Signs of heavy wear are generally evident at the base of the millarium—a result of the crushing process. C. Single crushing stone (Heb. memel, Lat. orbis), semi-lenticular in cross section. Weight c. 180 kg (400 lbs). D, E, E1. Square wooden bearings with circular holes in their centers.

THE PRESSING AND THE SEPARATION (Fig. 5.23) A. Anchoring niche cut into the rear wall of the oil press, into which the horizontal pressing beam was inserted. B. Rear service area. Here workmen supervised the correct placement of the pressing beam within its anchoring niche, the stability of the beam, and the condition of the niche.

F. Wooden pole for moving the crushing stone; usually operated by an animal. The pole was possibly longer, reaching the area marked M, where the crushing stone was set.

C. The pressing beam (or lever) of the press. A tree trunk, 0.25–0.30 m in diameter and up to 6 m long, was used for this purpose.

G. Pins connecting the horizontal wooden pole, F, with the vertical wooden pole, H. This type of connection permitted articulated motion, i.e. up-and-down movement of the distal end of the horizontal pole.

The pressing areas between the piers were usually onethird of the distance from the fulcrum (the niche) to the far end of the beam, enabling the application of intense pressure on the baskets of olives.

H. Vertical wooden pole designed to stabilize the crushing stone. One end was fixed in the center of the millarium, the other revolved freely in a socket carved into the ceiling above the crushing installation.

D. Oil-press piers. These are apparently the betulot (‘virgins’) in the Mishna. After the pressing was completed, the beam was raised above the piers and secured, in order to replace the pressing baskets and ladle out from the collecting vat the oil and mohal, the aqueous fluid (watery lees) extracted from the olives along with the oil.

J. Pins or nails used to secure the slip ring. K. Horizontal wooden plank stabilizing the vertical pole, H. The plank was fixed between two matching sockets in the ceiling of the oil press, or in the sidewalls just below the ceiling.

E. Round wooden plank transferring pressure from the beam to the pressing beam to the pressing baskets, distributing it evenly over the top surface.

Fig. 5.23. The Maresha pressing system.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

F. Specially constructed pressing baskets (Heb. ‘aqal, pl. ‘aqalim) containing crushed olives. Each basket is 0.55–0.60 m in diameter and less than 0.10 m high. The baskets, still relatively unchanged in today’s traditional oil presses, were made of vine shoots or date-palm leaves. G. Perforated plank through which the oil and mohal pass into Collecting Vat H. As the gravity of oil is 0.9 gm/ml, it floats on the surface of the watery lees. This physical property was exploited in the collection and separation of the oil. H. Central collecting vat with a capacity of 40 to 90 liters; at the center of the floor is a small depression which serves as a sediment trap. In some cases the entire collecting vat was plastered; in others, only the cracks. Rarely was the vat completely without plaster. Talmudic sources termed the collecting vat, and not the crushing basin, yam. I. A long, narrow, shallow vat or pit, sometimes plastered, measuring 1.5–2.0 m long, approximately 0.50 m wide and 0.10–0.15 m deep. This pit may have existed for the convenience of the press operator so he could ladle out liquid from the central collecting vat, or it may have been an overflow tank, into which oil from the collecting vat could spill if necessary. At Maresha, the estimated capacity of the central collecting vats that could be measured was 40–90 liters. Note that the capacity of large vats in which the oil was stored for an extended period of time (not illustrated) was estimated in the thousands of liters. Such vats held the oil until it was marketed. J. Beam weight. Rectangular at the bottom and trapezoidal in section, these weights range in weight from 250 to 400 kg. They are probably the akhirim (or akhidim) of the Mishna. In a few instances, three weights were found in an orderly row in situ, apparently each lifted by its own winch (Heb. galgal). If the pressing area between the piers was one-third the distance from the fulcrum (the niche) to the far end of the beam, then a set of three weights, each with a mass of 350 kg, could exert more than two tons of pressure on the ‘aqalim. In a few instances the pressure reached three tons.

69

K. Trough in which the weights were kept. Its floor was lower than that of the oil press to facilitate hitching the weights to the winches when the beam was down. L. Horizontal bore cut through the upper part of the weight, joined by a vertical bore, the whole shaped like an inverted Latin ‘T’. The bores were used to hitch the weight to the beam or the winches. The hitching ropes could be tied directly to the weights through the bores, or a rod could be inserted through the horizontal channel, to which the rope was tied via the vertical leg of the ‘T’. M. Winch made from a cylindrical section of tree trunk or branch. N, N1. Wooden rods that could be inserted in a matching hole in the winch. Used as levers to turn the winch cylinder, they were slid through the hole after each half turn to provide additional leverage. Beam C acted as a brake to hold the winch in position, or to stop its revolving if the rod were accidentally released. O, O1, O2. Ropes for suspending the winch and raising the weight. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The history of the oil press in Complex 44 (Figs. 5.24, 5.25) may be summarized as follows: The complex seems to have been quarried at the end of the third or the beginning of the second century BCE. The finds and state of preservation suggest that the press operated for about a century, before the entire establishment went out of use in the violent conquest of the city by John Hyrcanus I. In view of the 14C dates, however, a firstcentury BCE date for the end of the oil press cannot be ruled out, even though no corresponding objects were found. In the Byzantine–Early Islamic periods (sixth–seventh centuries CE) the crushing installation in Room 19 served to grind grains. By the end of the Early Islamic period this modified press went out of use and debris began to build up. The accumulated fill of Hall 20 was leveled and more fill added, possibly to transform the room to a holding area for animals. Over the course of the last hundreds of years animal

70

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

Fig. 5.24. The oil press in use after the latest modifications (drawing by Anna Yamin).

bones and pottery indicate that the complex was used as a dump. Thus far 22 oil presses have been discovered in the subterranean complexes of the lower city of Maresha. The estimated annual production at each of the oil presses at Maresha was 8,000–9,000 liters of oil. The

same amount has been estimated for other sites in the Mediterranean (Mattingly 1988:192–193) and firmly established in later studies on this subject (Mattingly 1993). These studies were conducted on a variety of screw-type presses. We believe a similar quantity of oil would have been obtained using Hellenistic lever

Fig. 5.25. Reconstruction of the use of the oil press in 1991.

CHAPTER 5: SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 44 AND 45

systems and from traditional presses, some of them employed underground, in the Ramallah region in the 1970s. A technological comparison shows a clear connection between the Maresha oil presses and those of classical Greece (Foxhall 1993). The impressive concentration of oil presses so far discovered at

71

Maresha illustrates the importance of this commodity to the economy of the city. It is almost certain that during the Hellenistic period Maresha was an important exporter of oil, particularly to Egypt (Kloner and Sagiv 1989:53).

NOTES 1

The excavation was part of the development program of the Maresha–Bet Guvrin National Park. It was carried out on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authorities, Permit No. 70/1989, under the supervision of A. Kloner, with N. Sagiv as area supervisor. B. Arubas surveyed and prepared the plans. Photographs were taken by R. David, A. Kloner and N. Sagiv. The work was undertaken by a group of volunteers from the USA within the framework of Archaeological Seminars along with hired workers. S. Bartal and Y. Zoran participated in the work. Y. Zoran mapped Complexes 44 and 45 and F. Pirtanow prepared the plan (Plan 5.1). 2 The cult niches at Maresha were discussed in the survey of the oil presses published previously (Kloner and Sagiv 1989: 63; 1993). 3 We are grateful to E. Ayalon and his colleagues from the Eretz-Israel Museum who pointed out this possibility, as well as for the other important suggestions we discussed.

4

The opening was enlarged in 1991 when the site was being prepared for visitors. 5 The lower steps of the staircase were restored in metal during preparation of the site for visitors in 1991. 6 The tests were part of the Maresha series of Carbon 14 tests performed by I. Carmi and D. Segal. The results of the series will be published in a forthcoming volume. 7 The excavation of the olive presses at Maresha has greatly contributed to the knowledge of Hellenistic crushing devices (Frankel 1999:69–72). In the Maresha presses the pits were also crushed and, as has recently been established, this did not affect the taste of the oil (Tyree and Stefanoudaki 1996; 1997:265–266). The production process was studied as the press was being restored in 1991 (see Fig. 5.25).

R EFERENCES Albright W.F. 1931. The First Campaign of Excavations at Beth-Zur. BASOR 43:2–13. Bliss F.J. and Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine during the Years 1898–1900. London. Finkielsztejn G. 1998. More Evidence on John Hyrcanus I’s Conquests: Lead Weights and Rhodian Amphora Stamps. BAIAS 16:33–63. Finkielsztejn G. In press. Lead Weights from Marisa: Administration and Metrology. In A. Kloner. Maresha II: Epigraphy (IAA Reports). Jerusalem. Foxhall L. 1993. Oil Extraction and Processing Equipment in Classical Greece. In M.-C. Amouretti and J.-P. Brun eds. Oil and Wine Production in the Mediterranean Area (BCH Supplement 26). Athens–Paris. Pp. 183–189. Frankel R. 1999. Wine and Oil Production in Antiquity in Israel and Other Mediterranean Countries. Sheffield. Kloner A. 1983. Underground Hiding Complexes from the Bar Kokhba War in the Judean Shephelah. BA 46: 210–221. Kloner A. 1991. Maresha. Qadmoniot 24 (95–96):70–85. Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1989. Maresha: Olive Oil Production in the Hellenistic Period. NZ 15:17–65 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 185–186). Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1991. The Technology of Oil Production in the Hellenistic Period at Maresha, Israel. In M.-C. Amouretti, J.-P. Brun and D. Eitam eds. Oil

and Wine Production in the Mediterranean Area from the Bronze Age to the End of the XVIth Century: Symposium International, Pre-Actes. Aix-en-Provence–Toulon. Pp. 61–68. Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1993. The Olive Presses of Hellenistic Maresha. In M.-C. Amouretti and J.-P. Brun eds. Oil and Wine Production in the Mediterranean Area (BCH Supplement 26). Athens–Paris. Pp. 119–136. Macalister R.A.S. 1912. The Excavation of Gezer 1902–1905 and 1907–1909. London. Magen Y. 1986. A Fortified Town of the Hellenistic Period on Mount Gerisim. Qadmoniot 19 (75–76):91–101 (Hebrew). Magen Y. 1990. Mount Gerizim—A Temple-City. Qadmoniot 23 (91–92):70–96 (Hebrew). Magen Y. 2000. Mt. Gerizim—A Temple City. Qadmoniot 33 (120):74–118 (Hebrew). Mattingly J.D. 1988. Megalithic Madness and Measurement or, How Many Olives Could an Olive Press Press? Oxford Journal of Archaeology 7:177–195. Mattingly J.D. 1993. Maximum Figures and Maximizing Strategies of Oil Production? Further Thoughts on the Processing Capacity of Roman Olive Presses. In M.-C. Amouretti and J.-P. Brun eds. Oil and Wine Production in the Mediterranean Area (BCH Supplement 26). Athens– Paris. Pp. 483–496.

72

AMOS KLONER AND NAHUM SAGIV

McKenzie J. 1991. The Architecture of Petra. Oxford. Sellers O.R. 1968. Beth-Zur (AASOR 38). Cambridge, Mass. Tyree E. L. and Stefanoudaki E. 1996. The Olive Pit and Roman Oil Making. BA 59:171–178. Tyree E. L. and Stefanoudaki E. 1997. There is More Than One Way to Crush an Olive: Does the Pit Affect Flavor?

In C. Gillis., C. Risberg and B. Sjöberg eds. Trade and Production in Premonetary Greece: Production and the Craftsman. Proceedings of the 4th and 5th International Workshops, Athens 1994 and 1995 (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology and Literature). Jonsered. Pp. 257–274.

CHAPTER 6

POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70 TIKVA LEVINE

THE POTTERY NATURE OF THE POTTERY COLLECTION The pottery described here from the lower city of Maresha belongs to a collection of 611 pieces recovered from five locations. Most of the material comes from Complexes 70 (460 examples) and 21 (73 examples; see Chaps. 3 and 4 above).1 During inspection activities by the Israel Antiquities Authority in the 1980s, pottery from Complex 58 (39 examples), Complex 1 (8 examples) and Complex 59 (1 example) was added to the already existing corpus along with 30 pieces whose exact find spots were unknown or which came from the surface. Pottery from all these locations was registered together under IAA Permit No. 930.2 Most of the specimens were taken from thick, unstratified fills of soil, building stones and silt from the subterranean complexes. These fills apparently resulted from the above-ground buildings, along with their contents, having caved in, or perhaps from the deliberate back-filling of the caves. As a result, items from the last stage of use are often mixed together with material from previous periods. The pottery is very well preserved and displays a wide variety of types. There are 194 intact vessels and 192 that preserve the entire profile. The remaining are sherds or vessels that are fragmentary. DATE OF THE COLLECTION In the unstratified fills 85 lamps were found together with stamped amphora handles and related amphora fragments. Given the nature of the fills, the lamps and the amphoras are the main source for dating the collection. However, they can provide only a general time frame. The lamps (below) are common types characteristic of the third and second centuries BCE. The Rhodian amphoras range in date from the beginning of the

second to the last third of the second century BCE (see Chap. 8, below). The pottery also dates mainly to the third–second centuries BCE with the exception of fewer specimens from the Persian period (see summary below) and one amphora fragment discussed by Ariel and Finkielsztejn (below, Chap. 8)—Cy 1 (Cypriot) of the end of the fourth to the beginning of the third centuries BCE. The terminus ante quem of Maresha is 112/111 BCE (Kloner 1991; Barag 1992/3) and (Barkay 1992/3), or slightly later (see Chap. 1:5). Because of the unstratified nature of the material from the underground complexes, it is arranged typologically with comparisons drawn from contemporary stratified sites when possible. CLAY AND PETROGRAPHY OF THE COLLECTION Chunks of leather-hard clay found in Complex 75 at the northern exposure of the lower city (Kloner 1991:40) and kiln wasters from Complex 84 (Rooms 28 and 29) and Complex 44 (Chap. 7:131) at the southern end of the lower city suggest that much of the pottery is local, produced at nearby workshops. The deep underground caves were ideal for pottery workshops since they provided the steady temperature and humidity needed for the vessels to dry leather-hard and remain that way prior to firing. Also, some unfired vessels were discovered in Complex 84. Although no scientific analyses have yet been conducted, we propose, based on the sheer quantity of finds, that several pottery workshops operated simultaneously in different parts of the subterranean city. So far no kilns have been located at Maresha, but it is quite likely that they are somewhere in the vicinity. The presence of pottery workshops was suggested first by G.M. Crowfoot: when discussing the finds from Samaria, she proposed that a kiln site should be looked for at Tell Sandahanna, that is, Maresha (Crowfoot 1957b:250).

74

TIKVA LEVINE

Since petrographic analyses remain to be done, every effort has been made to give as useful a fabric description as possible.3 Observing the suggested local pottery with the naked eye, one identifies, in the clay composition, the grits of the typical soft limestone (kirton) of the area. Good examples are Nos. 30, 35, 75, 107, 109 and 126, showing the grits and their wheel ‘drag marks’. On some pieces it is possible to detect the effects of careless manufacture, a result, no doubt, of mass production. Such carelessness may be observed in the application of the handle of No. 111, overlapped painted bands on No. 94 and dribbled slip on Nos. 46, 56 and 127. No. 139 was meant to be a juglet but the potter changed his mind and made a cup. No. 112 began as a jug, but turned out to be a bowl. These examples covering a variety of forms serving various functions also support the idea that much of the pottery was produced locally.

of the Area 61 material has led us to postpone full classification for the time being in order to present a more comprehensive publication in the future. The ceramic material which follows is representative of the finds from Complexes 21 and 70.4

CATALOGUE IMPORTED BOWLS AND PLATES Our repertoire5 of imported bowls consists of 39 examples divided among several categories: Attic and Related Black-Glazed Wares (Fig. 6.1:1, 2); Bowl with Horizontal ‘Pinched-Bow’ Handles (Fig. 6.1:3, 4); Black-Slipped Predecessor (hereafter BSP, Fig. 6.1:5, 6); Eastern Sigillata A (hereafter ESA, Fig. 6.1:7–15); Campana A Ware bowls (Fig. 6.1:16–19) and Moldmade Bowls with Relief Decoration (Fig. 6.2: 20–26). Attic and Related Black-Glazed Wares (Fig. 6.1:1, 2)

CONNECTIONS AND SOURCES OF INFLUENCE In most cases our collection has parallels at contemporary local sites but comparanda may also be cited from Nimrud, Phoenicia, Tarsus, Antiochon-the-Orontes, Hama and Egypt, as well as Athens, Olynthos, Rhodes and Delos, Paphos in Cyprus and Campana in Italy. In Israel parallels from coastal sites such as Ashdod, Dor, Shiqmona and ‘Akko have been found, as well as inland sites such as Tel Anafa, Samaria, Gezer, Tirat Yehuda and Bet Zur. Further east, parallels come from Pella in Jordan. In addition to actual imports, local copies of well-known foreign fine wares have also been identified (see for example, Nos. 53–56). These local imitations are identical in form to the original import and can be of a high quality in their own right. CLASSIFICATION AND PRESENTATION OF THE COLLECTION Although the nature of the material dictates that it be arranged typologically, this does not mean that a type series specific to Maresha is presented here. Such a type series, based on the material from Upper Area 61, will be presented in a future volume. The pottery from Upper Area 61 is supported by significant stratigraphic evidence, pottery found in situ and an incredible number and variety of types. The character

Attic Black-Glazed Ware was imported into Palestine from the end of the fifth through the fourth century BCE (Stern 1982:139) and on into the early Hellenistic period (Rotroff 1997:143). Attic Black-Glazed bowls and plates were imitated and replaced by other productions of comparatively good, black-glazed bowls in various centers of the eastern Mediterranean. Rouletting came into fashion about the middle of the fourth century BCE (Crowfoot 1957b:244; Sparkes and Talcott 1970:30, 129) and appeared in Athens after the second decade of the fourth century BCE. The following Attic and Related Black-Glazed bowls (Fig. 6.1: 1, 2) represent the early phase of the Hellenistic period among the imported bowls of our assemblage. 1 Complex 70. Inv. No. 302. IAA 97-3195 (Fig. 6.1:1) Description. H 2.5 cm; rim D 15.5; foot D 13 cm. Attic Black-Glazed rolled rim plate preserved from outer edge of floor to rim. Two concentric rouletted bands around interior floor. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4), black glaze (7.5YR 2/0; 2.5YR 2.5/0). Parallels and Dating. Olynthos (Robinson 1950:370, Pls. 226, 230: 861), dated to the first half of the fourth century BCE; Dura Europos (Cox 1949:3, Group I:7, “Black Glazed pottery of non-Attic manufacture”); Dor (Marchese 1995:131, Photo 4.7a, C2 Phase 5), c. 375–350 BCE; Athens (Miller 1974: 205–206,

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Fig. 5:43, Pl. 32) dated between 265 and 261 BCE; Athens (Rotroff 1997:142–145, Fig. 47, Pl. 61:660), 250–225 BCE. 2 Complex 70. Inv. No. 504. IAA 97-3193. (Fig. 6.1:2) Description. PH 2.5 cm; rim D 32 cm. Fragment of an Attic Black-Glazed fishplate with sharply down-turned rim. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4), black glaze (7/5YR 2/0; 2.5YR 2.5/0). Parallels and Dating. Hama (Christensen and Johansen 1971:2–6, Fig. 1:5, Hellenistic, evolved from an Attic plate); Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:68–70, 74, Pl. 128:4), second century BCE, either Attic or imitation of Attic Black Glaze; Samaria (Crowfoot 1957b:264, Fig. 55:4), second century BCE. Bowls with Horizontal ‘Pinched-Bow’ Handles (Fig. 6.1:3, 4) This bowl has an angular wall, with a slightly everted thickened rim; two ‘pinched-bow’ handles below the rim and a relatively small ring foot. Hayes (1991:23–24) considered it an import at Paphos and observed that the ware “felt” close to ESA ware. He did not, however, suggest a special place of origin. Kenrick (1985:119) made the same observation about the ware of this bowl at Sidi Khrebsh (Berenice), where it is also considered to have been an import. He arranged these bowls in two sub-types by form, not by fabric. This bowl is recorded from many sites around the Mediterranean, along with imitations in other wares (Hayes 1991:23–24). Rotroff (1997:117–118) called them ‘Palestinian cups’ because they were common in Hellenistic levels in the Levant, chiefly in Palestine, and believed they originated in the eastern Mediterranean. In Athens, she noted that they belonged in contexts from after 200 BCE (Rotroff 1997:118, Fig. 22:391–394). Maresha examples Nos. 3 and 4 are also considered to be imports. They are made of pink clay (7.5YR 8/4) with a lustrous red slip (10R 4/8) on the interior extending to below the rim on the exterior. Sometimes a lustrous dark gray slip (2.5YR 3/0) covers the upper exterior wall. The same form appears at Maresha in plain ware (see below, Nos. 50–52). 3 Complex 58. Inv. No. 727. 3 examples (Fig. 6.1:3) Description. PH 4.3 cm; rim D 18 cm. Profile preserved

75

from upper body to rim. Pink clay (7.5YR 8/4), very dark gray slip (2.5YR 3/0). Parallels and Dating. Paphos (Hayes 1991:23–25, Fig. XII:1–3), dated c.175–120/100 BCE, with parallels cited; Sidi-Khrebish (Berenice) Type B (Kenrick 1985:119, Fig. 24:186.1,186.2), present from the first half of the second century BCE onwards. 4 Complex 58. Inv. No. 721. 3 examples (Fig. 6.1:4) Description. PH 4.0 cm; foot D 4.3 cm. Profile preserved from center floor to mid-body. Light reddish brown clay (2.5YR 6/4), red slip (10R 4/8). Parallels and Dating. As No. 3 above. Black-Slipped Predecessor (Fig. 6.1:5, 6) and Eastern Sigillata A (Fig. 6.1:7–15) The term ‘Black-Slipped Predecessor’ (BSP) was coined in 1970 at Tel Anafa by Weinberg (Slane 1997:255). Its clay is similar to that of the ESA; the slip color varies from matt black-brown, or a mixture of brown-black to deep red (Slane 1997:270). They most likely share the same production center; the difference between these two groups lies in the firing process (Slane 1997:271). Eastern Sigillata A is so-called because it has temporal and stylistic connections with other terra sigillata industries of the Early Roman period (Kenrick 1985:119). The question of the ESA production centers is still a matter of discussion. Slane has suggested North Syria, the area between Hama and Tel Anafa (Slane 1997:272). The Maresha examples are regarded as imports as well. We have employed the typology of two major recent studies of the subject here. The first is Slane’s typology of the ESA and BSP examples at Tel Anafa (Slane 1997:249–406, Pls. 1–57); and the second is Hayes’ 1985 publication of Eastern Sigillata A (Hayes 1985:9–48, Pls. I–XI). The Eastern Sigillata A (ESA) and the Black-Slipped Predecessor (BSP) bowls are discussed together here, since they are of the same fabric at Maresha. Surprisingly, though both typologies seem to include the many existing variants of BSP and ESA, Maresha still introduces innovations. We have excluded a BSP example (Filter Jug/Juglet No. 142) from our discussion here, preferring to discuss it below (see Fig. 6.13:142). In most cases the clay is reddish yellow (5YR 7/6) and the ESA examples have red slip (10R 4/8).

76

TIKVA LEVINE

Popular imported shapes, such as No. 8 (Fig. 6.1:8), are even locally imitated (No. 56 below). The following catalogue includes ESA bowls/cups and plates, with the exception of an ESA ware krater, No. 60, which is dealt with among the kraters of our assemblage (see below, Fig. 6.4:60). BSP (Fig. 6.1:5, 6) and ESA (Fig. 6.1:9) Hemispherical Bowls Hemispherical vessel with a conical, convex or squat convex base, and a plain pointed lip. According to Thompson (1934:434) “The hemispherical bowl returned to favor as a cheap imitation of the metal vessel of the same shape...the dependence of the terracotta on the metal form is shown beyond doubt by the deep horizontal grooves both inside and outside...”. Two of our illustrated examples, Nos. 5 and 6, are black slipped. No. 9 (Fig. 6.1:9) is a red-slipped ESA bowl. All three have rouletting on various parts of the interior. Although exact parallels for our examples were not found, it seems that the pieces are variants of Slane Type 27b (1997:315–317, Pl. 21: FW 228). At Tel Anafa, however, they occur without decoration only in ESA ware. The closest parallels are at Antioch-on-the-Orontes (hereafter Antioch) (Waagé 1948: 24, Fig. 7:1–4, Shapes 168, 170), dated to the late Hellenistic period, and designated as “rare, unreported elsewhere, uncommon”; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:250, Type 209:C, D), ranging from the mid-second century till the early first century BCE, has similar red- and black-slipped variations. 5 Complex 58. Inv. No. 710. IAA 97-3190. 2 examples (Fig. 6.1:5) Description. PH 3.8 cm; foot D 6.5 cm. Profile of a BSP bowl, Slane Type 4 or 27b, preserved from center floor to upper body. The vessel has a ring foot and an incurved rim. Very pale brown clay (10YR 8/4), black slip (7.5YR 2/0). Two concentric rouletted bands on floor of interior. Parallels and Dating. Tel Anafa (Slane 1997:278–279, Pl. 3: FW17–23), last quarter of the second century BCE; Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:68–70, Pl. 128:1), second century BCE; Tel Mevorakh (Stern 1978:22–25, Fig. 3:10), Stratum III, from the second century BCE.

Fig. 6.1 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

1

302

Attic Black-Glazed plate

2

504

Attic Black-Glazed fishplate

3

727

Bowl with horizontal pinched bow handles

4

721

Bowl with horizontal pinched bow handles

5

710

BSP bowl—Slane Type 4 or 27b

6

666

BSP bowl—Slane Type 27b variant; Atlante Form 19a

7

599

ESA hemispherical Slane Type 28

cup—

8

515

ESA hemispherical Slane Type 25a

cup—

9

30

ESA bowl/cup—Atlante Form 18

10

665

ESA incurved rim bowl— Slane Type 24

11

129

ESA offset rim plate—Slane Type 12

12

212

ESA plate—Atlante Form 6

13

507

ESA plate—Slane Type 13a

14

247

ESA plate—Slane Type 13b

15

132

ESA plate—Slane Type 13b

16

924

Campana A Ware bowl—Morel Type 1400

17

667

Campana A Ware bowl—Morel Type 1400

18

205

19

719

Campana A Ware bowl—Morel Type 2600 Campana A Ware Bowl— Morel Type 2900

6 Complex 21. Inv. No. 666. 2 examples (Fig. 6.1:6) Description. PH 4.5 cm; rim D 10.8 cm. Profile of a BSP hemispherical/conical bowl preserved from lower body to plain rim. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4) and black slip (7.5YR 2/0). Three grooves around interior wall below rim, two rouletted bands around floor. This form appears at Tel Anafa and in Hayes’ typology, however as an ESA piece. We suggest a BSP identification for our example, present before the end of the second century BCE. Parallels and Dating. Atlante Form 19a (Hayes 1985:22, Pl. III:6), c.100–50 BCE (ESA fabric).

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

77

Fig. 6.1. Imported bowls and plates.

ESA Hemispherical Cups (Fig. 6.1:7–9) ESA cups, such as the two hemispherical examples (Nos. 7–9) with a neatly turned base (not preserved on No. 7), are the most common ESA shapes at Maresha.

7 Complex 21. Inv. No. 599 (Fig. 6.1:7) Description. H 5.7 cm; rim D 13.3 cm. Hemispherical cup preserved from lower body to horizontal rim. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 7/6), red slip (10R 4/8). Two

78

TIKVA LEVINE

grooves around upper surface of rim, two concentric grooves around floor. Double-dipping streak. Parallels and Dating. According to Hayes’ typology, the Maresha piece belongs to an “early counterpart or forerunner of Atlante Form 22A (hemispherical cup; Hayes 1985:23–24, Pl. III:11), ranging in date from the late second century BCE to c. 10 CE. At Tel Anafa it belongs to Slane Type 28 (Slane 1997:317–318, Pl. 21: FW 233), though the Tel Anafa example is ovoid. Slane is certain that at Tel Anafa this form was “in production by 100/95 BCE and assumes that it did not continue into the Herodian period” (1997:317). Such a date range conforms to the suggested Maresha time frame as well. 8 Complex 70. Inv. No. 515. IAA 97-3196. 5 examples (Fig. 6.1:8) Description. H 8.5 cm rim; D 15 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Complete ESA hemispherical cup with ring foot and plain pointed lip. Pink clay (5YR 7/4), red slip (10R 4/8). Five finger marks around foot. Parallels and Dating. Tel Anafa Slane Type 25a (Slane 1997:309–314, Pl. 18: FW 186) in use from before 128/125 BCE into the first quarter of the first century BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:128, Pl. 61:8), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. (Compare also No. 56, Fig. 6.3:56, below.) 9 Complex 70. Inv. No. 30. 2 examples (Fig. 6.1:9) Description. H 5.8 cm; est. rim D 13.2 cm. Profile of an ESA hemispherical bowl/cup preserved from convex bottom to upper body. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 7/6), red slip (10R 4/8). Two grooves and rouletting around center floor. Parallels and Dating. Atlante Form 18 (Hayes 1985:22, Pl. III:5), late second to early first century BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:250, Pl. 44:9, Type 209:C, D), late Hellenistic, mid-first century BCE. ESA Incurved Rim Bowl (Fig. 6.1:10) 10 Complex 21. Inv. No. 665 (Fig. 6.1:10) Description. H 5.0 cm; rim D 12 cm; foot D 6.0 cm. Profile of incurved rim bowl preserved from outer edge of floor. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4), weak red slip (2.5YR 4/2). Parallels and Dating. Atlante Form 20 (Hayes 1985: 22–23, Pl. III:8), dated c. 150–100 BCE, with rouletted decoration; Slane Type 24 (Slane 1997:309, Pl.17: FW

176), Hell. 2A–C, 125–75 BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990: 246, Pl. 43B:7, Type 195C), dated to the late Hellenistic, mid-first century BCE; Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:68–70, Pl. 128:9), second century BCE. ESA Plate with Offset Rim (Fig. 6.1:11, 12) Although in our examples, Nos. 11 and 12, only the rims are preserved, they clearly belong to Slane Type 12 (1997:283–285, Pl. 5: FW 50, 51), described as “a plate with a narrow ring foot, a broadly curving floor and a wide offset rim; the outer edge of the rim is usually thickened upward and grooved”. 11 Complex 70. Inv. No.129. IAA 97-3191 (Fig. 6.1:11) Description. PH 2.3 cm; rim D 35.2 cm. Profile preserved from lower body to rim. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 7/6), red slip (2.5YR 4/8). 12 Complex unknown. Inv. No. 212 (Fig. 6.1:12) Description. PH 1.0 cm; rim D 28.6 cm. Rim fragment of plate with offset rim. Light red clay (10R 6/6), red slip (10R 5/6). Parallels and Dating. Atlante Form 6 (Hayes 1985: 17–18, Pl. II:4), late second century to c. 50 BCE; Athens (Thompson 1934:429–438, Fig. 116: D1, Fig. 83: E22), contexts re-dated to the end of the second and beginning of the first centuries BCE (Rotroff 1987: 6); Antioch (Waagé 1948: 26, Pl. IV), dated to the second half of the second century BCE; Paphos (Hayes 1991:35–36, Figs. 17:5; 46:12, unrouletted; 46:13, rouletted), late second century BCE. ESA Plates—Slane Types 13a–b and Atlante Forms 2A, 3 The most common ESA plate form at Maresha. Plate with ring foot, broad floor, a low upturned rim with a rounded or slightly inturned lip (Fig. 6.1:13). Sometimes rouletted decoration on floor. No. 13 is equivalent to Slane Type 13a that no longer existed after 100/95 BCE at Tel Anafa. Slane Type 13b (Fig. 6.1:14, 15) differs from Slane Type 13a by having a 90° angle between the floor and rim. Both of our variants are considered second-century BCE pieces (Slane 1997:286). Atlante Form 2A (Hayes 1985:14, Pl. I:3–5), dated from the second half of the second century BCE and no later than c. 100 BCE. 13 Complex 70. Inv. No. 507. IAA 97-3198 (Fig. 6.1:13) Description. H 4.0 cm; rim D 22.1 cm; foot D 7.0 cm. Plate preserved from near center floor to upturned rim.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6), red slip (10R 4/6). Two concentric grooves around center floor. Flaking interior wall. Parallels and Dating. Slane Type 13a (Slane 1997:285–288, Pl. 6: FW 58), second century BCE; Atlante Form 2A (Hayes 1985:14, Pl. I:3–5), dated from the second half of the second century BCE and no later than c. 100 BCE; Antioch (Waagé 1948: 25, Pl. III: 123k, 124k, 124p), late Hellenistic; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:24, Fig. 6:1), second century BCE. 14 Complex 70. Inv. No. 247. 2 examples (Fig. 6.1:14) Description. PH 2.0 cm; foot D 7.3 cm. Slane Type 13b plate preserving ring foot and floor with five rouletted bands around it. Pink clay (5YR 8/3), red slip (10R 4/8). Four finger marks around foot. Parallels and Dating. Slane Type 13b (Slane 1997: 285–288, Pl. 6: FW 65), second century, 98–75 BCE; Atlante Form 3 (Hayes 1985:14–15, Pl. I:7), dated from the late second century to the last decade of the first century BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:128, Pl. 61:4,13), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. 15 Complex 70?. Inv. No.132. IAA 97-3197 (Fig. 6.1:15) Description. H 3.8 cm; rim D 18.1 cm; foot D 8.0 cm. Slane Type 13b plate complete except for chipping at rim. Light red clay (10R 6/6), red slip (10R 4/6). Incrustation on exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Atlante Form 3 (Hayes 1985:14–15, Pl. I:7), dated from the late second century to the last decade of the first century BCE; Slane Type 13b (1997:285–288, Pl. 6: FW 66), second century BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:128, Pl. 61:14), Seleucid, prior to the end of the second century BCE. Italian Imports: Morel Types 1400, 2600, 2900 Italian Campana A Ware is represented in our assemblage by four bowls, Nos. 16–19, that are classified as Morel Types 1400, 2600 and 2900. Morel Type 1400 follows an already familiar and earlier form in Campana B Ware (Morel 1986:464). Many more examples, mostly of reddish brown–maroon clay of the Campana A Ware class were found at Maresha in subsequent seasons (forthcoming). It seems that the suggested date for this ware at its peak, both at Delos and Paphos of 150 BCE (Hayes 1991:8), is applicable to Maresha as well.

79

Campana A Ware Bowls—Morel Type 1400 16 Complex 70. Inv. No. 924. 2 examples (Fig. 6.1:16) Description. H 4.3 cm; rim D 18.1 cm; foot D 5.8 cm. Entire profile, most of bowl preserved with curved walls, high ring foot and wide down-turned rim. Groove below rim on exterior. Reddish brown clay (5YR 5/4), dark gray slip (7/5YR 4/0). Uneven application of slip has left part of the rim and foot uncovered. This serving plate with a wavy rim is a relatively late form, deriving from a Campana B shape. Parallels and Dating. Delos (Morel 1986:464, Fig. 2:13), rare before the middle of the second century BCE. 17 Complex 21. Inv. No. 667. IAA 89-30 (Fig. 6.1:17) Description. PH 4.4 cm; rim D 36.5 cm. Profile of bowl preserved from lower body to flaring rim. Reddish-brown clay (5YR 5/4), very dark gray slip (2.5Y 3/0). Parallels and Dating. Delos (Morel 1986:463, Fig. 2: 11, 12, 13), rare before the mid-second century BCE; Tel Anafa (Slane 1997:347, Pl. 28: FW 457, FW 458), with parallels cited, second half of the second and early first centuries BCE; Antioch (Waagé 1948:24, Pl. IV: 137f), second half of the second century BCE; Athens (Thompson 1934:394–395, Fig. 83: E22), context redated to c. 110 BCE (Rotroff 1987:6). Campana A Ware Bowl—Morel Type 2600 18 Complex 70. Inv. No. 205. IAA 97-3192 (Fig. 6.1:18) Description. H 4.0 cm; rim D 9.8 cm; foot D 4.5 cm. Entire profile preserved of angular bowl with ring foot and out-turned rim. Yellowish red clay (5YR 6/6), black slip (7.5YR 2/0). Four degenerated palmettes stamped at center floor. The framed palmette, resembling our example, …“becomes usual from the third century BCE onwards” (Crowfoot 1957b:254). Parallels and Dating. Delos (Morel 1986:465, Fig. 5:25), second quarter of the second century BCE; Athens (Thompson 1934: 370, Fig. 117: D5), context re-dated to after the middle of the second century BCE (Rotroff 1987:6); Bet Zur (Sellers 1933:32–51, Pl.13:8), Hellenistic. Campana A Ware Bowl—Morel Type 2900 19 Complex 58. Inv. No. 719. IAA 97-3194 (Fig. 6.1:19) Description. PH 5.3 cm; rim D 12.1 cm. Profile of bowl preserved from lower body to plain vertical rim. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4), black slip (7.5YR 2/0).

80

TIKVA LEVINE

Parallels and Dating. Delos (Morel 1986:466, Fig.7: 30), second half of second century BCE, or slightly after. Moldmade Bowls with Relief Decoration (Fig. 6.2:20–26) These bowls appeared suddenly in Athens early in the last quarter of the third century BCE (Rotroff 1982:6) and became more popular after the middle of the second century BCE (Kenyon 1957b:220). They were then overtaken by Eastern Sigillata A Ware (Crowfoot 1957:273), but continued to be produced until about the middle of the first century BCE (Neuru 1991:13). Our vessels belong to the class with an out-turned, rounded or slightly rolled rim. The clay is pink or pale yellow with slip ranging from red to dark gray. The bowls mostly have vegetal designs and share some similar decorative elements. Common rim patterns are a band of ovolos, beading, and “a line of pendant drops” (Crowfoot 1957b:275) or as Neuru (1991:13) defined it, “a line of dancing girls with joined hands”. Common calyx patterns are pointed or rounded petals with a central rib and acanthus leaves with a central rib. These sometimes alternate with decorative objects such as an amphora, flower or tendrils. In fact, our repertoire has much in common with Antioch and Samaria, as already noted by Crowfoot (1957b:253). Similar decorative patterns are also found in Paphos (Neuru 1991). Based on this material, it seems that the relief decorated bowls found in Israel might have originated from a single production center, for they share much of the same decorative elements. 20 Complex 21. Inv. No. 631. 4 examples (Fig. 6.2:20) Description. PH 4 cm; est. D 14.5 cm. Profile preserving rim and upper wall fragment of bowl. A band of closed flowers runs around body above a band of beading. A line of pendant drops encircles vessel below beading. Calyx—petal leaf. Pale yellow clay (2.5YR 8/4), dark gray slip (2.5YR 4/4). Parallels and Dating. Paphos (Neuru 1991:13–17, Fig. 7:16), second half of the second century BCE with parallels cited; Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996:50, Fig. X.1:30), second century BCE; Samaria (Crowfoot 1957b:277, Fig. 62:9,12), second century BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:251, Pl. 44:16, 213B), late Hellenistic, mid-first century BCE; Ashdod (Dothan

Fig. 6.2a. Incurved rim bowls.

Fig. 6.2 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

20

631

Moldmade relief decorated bowl

21

633

Moldmade relief decorated bowl

22

641

Moldmade relief decorated bowl

23

121

Moldmade relief decorated bowl

24

723

Moldmade relief decorated bowl

25

537

Moldmade relief decorated bowl

26

249

Moldmade relief decorated bowl

27

919

Large bowl

28

502

Saucer/lid

29

636

Saucer/lid

30

198

Saucer/lid

31

668

Incurved rim bowl with disk base

32

7

Incurved rim bowl with disk base

33

93

Incurved rim bowl with disk base

34

271

Incurved rim bowl with ring foot

35

47

Incurved rim bowl with ring foot

36

46

Incurved rim bowl with ring foot

37

932

Incurved rim bowl with ring foot

38

45

Incurved rim bowl with ring foot

39

99

Angular bowl with upturned rim and disk base

40

984

Angular bowl with upturned rim and disk base

41

716

Angular bowl with upturned rim and ring foot

42

43

Angular bowl with upturned rim and ring foot

43

985

Angular bowl with upturned rim and ring foot

44

56

Angular bowl with upturned rim and ring foot

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Fig. 6.2. (20–26) Imported bowls; (27–36) undecorated plain ware bowls; (37–44) decorated plain ware bowls.

81

82

TIKVA LEVINE

and Freedman 1967:24, Fig. 5:11), no later than the mid-first century BCE. 21 Complex 21. Inv. No. 663. 4 examples (Fig. 6.2:21) Description. PH 4.5 cm; PW 2.5 cm. Profile preserving wall of bowl. Band of ovolos, above a line of pendant drops encircles vessel. Calyx—flowers alternating with amphora. Pink clay (7.5YR 8/4), red slip (10R 4/6). Parallels and Dating. As No. 20 above. 22 Complex 21. Inv. No. 641. IAA 97-3257. 4 examples (Fig. 6.2:22) Description. Est. D 9.7 cm; PH 5.2 cm. Rim and lower wall of bowl preserved. Band of ovolos, beading and a line of pendant drops encircles vessel. Calyx—pointed petals with central rib. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4), dark gray slip (2.5YR 4/4). Parallels and Dating. As No. 20 above. 23 Complex 70. Inv. No. 121. IAA 97-3254 (Fig. 6.2:23) Description. PH 6.8 cm; est. D 15.3 cm. Profile of bowl preserved from lower wall to rim. Bands around body of egg-and-dart and beading. Calyx—pointed petals with central rib alternating with tendrils. Pink clay (5YR 7/4), very dark gray slip (5YR 3/1). Parallels and Dating. Antioch (Waagé 1948:29–30, Fig. 12:9), considered among the earlier local bowls; Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996:50, Fig. X.1:30), second century BCE; Samaria (Crowfoot 1957b: 277, Fig. 62:14), second century BCE. 24 Complex 58. Inv. No. 723 (Fig. 6.2:24) Description. W 6.5 cm; H 5.5 cm. Body fragment of bowl with raised pine cone bosses. Pale yellow clay (2.5Y 8/4), dusky red slip (10YR 3/2). Parallels and Dating. Paphos (Neuru 1991:14, Fig. IX.28), dated to the early first century BCE or later; Priene (Wiegand and Schrader 1904:407, Fig. 531:43, 44), Hellenistic. 25 Complex 70. Inv. No. 537. IAA 97-3252. 3 examples (Fig. 6.2:25) Descriptions. W 3.5 cm; H 2.8 cm. Body fragment preserving decorative relief calyx—broad acanthus leaves with rounded edges and central rib. Reddish brown clay (5YR 7/6), yellowish red slip (2.5YR 4/6). Parallels and Dating. Paphos (Neuru 1991:13–17, Pl. 9:2), mid-second century BCE or later.

26 Complex 70, probe. Inv. No. 249. 3 examples (Fig. 6.2:26) Description. W 4 cm; H 4 cm. Body fragment preserving decorative relief of an acanthus leaf. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4), dark gray slip (2.5YR 4/4). Parallels and Dating. As No. 25 above. PLAIN WARE BOWLS AND PLATES The discussion is divided into two major groups— undecorated and decorated. It is generally true at Maresha that almost every plain, undecorated bowl or plate has a matching decorated counterpart. The term ‘decorated’, as used in this section, mainly refers to a slip. Most of the open vessels are slipped over all of the interior, but only partially on the upper exterior wall. Many pieces were carelessly slipped, leaving drip lines on the exterior wall. One example (No. 49) shows clear evidence of brush strokes. In addition to a slip, rouletting may also occur on a vessel’s exterior (No. 48), though it is not common. Undecorated Plain Ware Bowls and Plates (Fig. 6.2:27–36) Large Bowl (Fig. 6.2:27) There is a strong resemblance, in form, to the Persian-period mortarium (Stern 1982:96–98; 1995:53, Fig. 2.2:14–15). The absence at Maresha of typical Hellenistic mortaria, such as those from Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997b:123–132, Pls. 38–41) or those from Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:295, Fig. 6.9), leads us to suggest that the large bowl, No. 27, served as a mortarium. 27 Complex 70. Inv. No. 919 (Fig. 6.2:27). Description. H 9.1 cm; rim D 28.8 cm; base D 10.8 cm. Entire profile preserved with a broad base, slightly rippled flaring walls and rounded rim. Dark gray clay (5YR 4/1), white grits. Vessel warped. Parallels and Dating. Ikaros (Hannestad 1983:57, Pl. 46:462), dated from the second half of the fifth to the first half of fourth century BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:96, Pl. 33:18, Type 229; Pl. 34:12, Type 230), late third to early second centuries, continuing into the mid-second century BCE; Lapp Type 53G (P.W. Lapp 1961:177), dated 175–100 BCE.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Saucers/Lids (Fig. 6.2:28–30) These low plates with ring foot or disk base, straight or flaring sides and thickened or slightly inverted or out-turned rim, seem to follow the ‘fishplate’ tradition, though without a depression on their floor, but they can also be considered saucers/lids (N. Lapp 1978:104). They are common throughout the Hellenistic period. At Tarsus they are considered saucers (Jones 1950: 212–213, Figs. 178–179:25–38) and are found already during the third century BCE; at Nimrud (Oates and Oates 1958:139, Pl. 23:26, 28) they occur during the course of the second century, 180–140 BCE; at the Citadel, Jerusalem (Johns 1950:139, Fig. 14:3, top); and at Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997b:83, Pl. 19: PW174), Stratum ROM IA, they are still common during the first century BCE and the beginning of the first century CE. 28 Complex 70. Inv. No. 502. IAA 97-3180 (Fig. 6.2:28) Description. H 4.0 cm; rim D 15 cm; foot D 5.5 cm. Saucer with disk base, flaring walls and slightly out-turned rim. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/4), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:128, Pl. 61:25), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:68–70, Pl. 128:13), second century BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:94, Pl. 38:18, Type 218), late Hellenistic, mid-second century BCE; Shiqmona (Elgavish 1976: 69, Fig. 3:6), no later than 126/125 BCE. 29 Complex 21. Inv. No. 636. IAA 97-3182 (Fig. 6.2:29) Description. H 3.8 cm; rim D 16.3 cm; base D 5.0 cm. Saucer with disk base, flaring walls and slightly out-turned thickened rim. Brown clay (7.5YR 5/4), white grits. Parallels and Dating. As No. 28 above. 30 Complex 70. Inv. No. 198. IAA 97-3181. 5 examples (Fig. 6.2:30) Description. H 2.0 cm; rim D 12.2 cm; foot D 4.6 cm. Saucer with low walls, ring foot and inward folded rim. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/4), many white grits. Parallels and Dating. Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:68–70, Pl. 128:12), from the second century BCE; Tell el-Ful (N. Lapp 1978:103–104, Pl. 77:19–24), Stratum IVB, late second century, c. 100–63 BCE.

83

Incurved Rim Bowl with Disk Base (Figs. 6.2:31–33; 6.2a) The most common bowl at Maresha, with 191 examples of which 182 were found intact, is made of a variety of local clays. This plain ware vessel still preserves the long tradition stemming from the Attic Black-Glazed Incurved Rim Bowls first introduced in Athens. It is the latest development of the original Greek form, which went through various changes during the Hellenistic period. At Maresha some examples were found in situ, standing on a ledge inside a niche in Complex 70 Room 25 (Kloner 1981: Pl. 40: Photo B and above, Chap. 3: Fig. 3.4). The group of undecorated plain ware bowls shows two forms—with disk base (Fig. 6.2:31–33) or ring foot (Fig. 6.2:34–36)—and has a long life and a very wide distribution. Of the two, the bowl with a disk base is not that common outside Israel, being unknown at Athens or Paphos or even Tarsus. At Nimrud (Oates and Oates 1958:126, Pl. XXIII:29–31), it appears after the mid-second century BCE; at Tell Atrib, it is an “Egyptian product imitating Hellenistic patterns” from the end of the second and beginning of the first century BCE (Mysliwiec 1992:389, Fig. 10). The surprising phenomenon is that this bowl is popular within Israel, found mostly in central and southern Israel as early as the fourth century BCE. Their number seems to decrease the further north one goes; for example, they are absent from the large and diversified plain ware assemblage of Tel Anafa. Among the sites at which they are reported are Tel Michal (Singer-Avitz 1989:132, Fig. 9.10:8), found in Stratum VI, second half of the fourth century BCE; and Shechem (N. Lapp 1964:16, Fig. 1b:35), in the second half of the third century BCE. During the third and second centuries BCE they appear at Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:126–128, Pl. 60:24); Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970:61, Fig. 9:2, 3); Tell Keisan (Briend and Humbert 1980:110); Tel Michal (Fischer 1989: 177–179, Fig. 13.1:1 Stratum V, early Hellenistic; Fig. 13.2:1–5, Stratum IV, late Hellenistic); and Samaria (Kenyon 1957b:223–225, Fig. 38:8), mid-second century BCE. At Dor, Type BL8e (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:290, Fig. 6.1:34–38), they are “a minor group, carelessly made and comprise less than 5% of all the incurved rim bowls”, while at Ashdod (Kee 1971:47, Fig. 10:1, 3) they are reported from before 100 BCE. During the first century BCE, the type is found at Bet Zur (Sellers 1933:32–51, Pl. 13:18–21) and the Citadel, Jerusalem (Johns 1950:139, Fig. 14:3, top);

84

TIKVA LEVINE

and Qumran—Hellenistic period (de Vaux 1954:214, Fig. 1:1; Fig. 2:6–11), from a mixed context of Period I (Hellenistic) and Period II (Early Roman) (de Vaux 1954:216, Fig. 3:10–12). Three such bowls, of which only No. 31 is illustrated, were converted into funnels by piercing a hole in their floor prior to firing.

Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:128, Pl. 61:24), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:24, Fig. 5:4, 5), dated to no later than the middle of the first century BCE; Pella (Smith, McNicoll and Hennessy 1981:12–17, Fig. 14:5), dated to 145–82 BCE.

31 Complex 21. Inv. 668. IAA 97-3178. 3 examples (Fig. 6.2:31) Description. H 3.0 cm; rim D 8 cm; base D 2.5 cm. Profile of bowl preserved from outer edge of disk base to incurved rim. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/4), large white grits. Hole pierced in central floor to improvise a funnel. Parallels and Dating. See discussion above.

36 Complex 70. Inv. No. 46. IAA 97-3179. 9 examples (Fig. 6.2:36) Description. H 6.3 cm; rim D 16 cm; foot D 5.0 cm. Entire profile preserved from ring foot to incurved rim. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/3), a few white grits. Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:128, Pl. 61:23), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:24, Fig. 5:4, 5), dated no later than the middle of the first century BCE; Pella (Smith, McNicoll and Hennessy 1981:12–17, Fig. 14:5), dated to 145–82 BCE.

32 Complex Unknown. Inv. No. 7. IAA 97-3174. 118 examples (Fig. 6.2:32) Description. H 5.3 cm; rim D 10.8 cm; base D 3.5 cm. Entire profile preserved from disk base to incurved rim. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), white grits. Parallels and Dating. See discussion above. 33 Complex 70. Inv. No. 93. 118 examples (Fig. 6.2:33) Description. H 5.2 cm; rim D 12.3 cm; base D 4.0 cm. Entire profile preserved from disk base to incurved rim. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6) with white grits. Parallels and Dating. See discussion above. Incurved Rim Bowl with Ring Foot (Figs. 6.2:34–36; 6.2a). The shape seems to have been Attic in origin and to have first appeared with black glaze in the early fifth century BCE (Vanderpool, McCredie and Steinberg 1962). Our 14 undecorated examples appear in a variety of sizes and fabrics. 34 Complex Unknown. Inv. No. 271 (Fig. 6.2:34) Description. H 12 cm; rim D 36 cm. Profile preserved from lower body to incurved rim. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/3). Parallels and Dating. None found in this rim diameter. 35 Complex 70. Inv. No. 47. 4 examples (Fig. 6.2:35) Description. H 9.8 cm; rim D 20.8 cm; foot D 7.2 cm. Entire profile preserved from ring foot to incurved rim. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/3), white grits and their drag marks.

Decorated Plain Ware Bowls and Plates (Fig. 6.2:37–56) Incurved Rim Bowls with Ring Foot 37 Complex 70. Inv. No. 932. IAA 89–52 (Fig. 6.3:37) Description. H 3.8 cm; rim D 12.7 cm; foot D 7.8 cm. Entire profile of low bowl (resembling the Athenian salt cellar) preserved from ring foot to incurved rim. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), red slip (10R 4/6). Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 151.1: A, D (P.W. Lapp 1961:201), ranging from 200 to 150 BCE; Nimrud (Oates and Oates 1958:126, Pl. XXIII:14, 15), dated 180–145 BCE; Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:68–70, Pl. 128:9), second century BCE; ‘Akko (Dothan 1976: 30–34, Fig. 30:5), late second century BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990: 88, Pl. 43:8, Type 193), late Hellenistic, mid-first century BCE. 38 Complex 70. Inv. No. 45. IAA 97-3176 (Fig. 6.3:38) Description. H 6.0 cm; rim D 14.8 cm; foot D 4.8 cm. Entire profile preserved with ring foot and incurved rim. Light red clay (10R 6/6), red slip (10R 4/6). Parallels and Dating. As No. 37 above. Angular Bowls with Upturned Rim (Fig.6.3:39–44) Angular, thin-walled, upturned rim bowl, red or black slipped; quite common at Maresha in the Hellenistic period. The variation in detail is abundant. They may

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

have a disk base (Nos. 39, 40) or a ring foot (Nos. 41–44); red or black slip; sharp or moderate carination; and be made of different clays. Yet, all have thin walls and were hard fired. Our bowls, although without handles, strongly resemble the ‘Gray Knidian Bowl’, as Kenrick termed them at Sidi Khrebish (Berenice; Kenrick 1985:58–64, Figs. 10, 20), and we consider the Maresha pieces to be imitations of the Knidian vessels. 39 Complex 70. Inv. No. 99 (Fig. 6.3:39) Description. H 3.5 cm; rim D 8.7 cm; base D 3.8 cm. Entire profile preserved from disk base to upturned rim. Brownish yellow clay (10YR 6/6), red slip (10R 4/8). Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Crowfoot 1957b:265, Fig. 56:9–11), in use during the second–first centuries BCE persisting into Roman times; Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:72–75, Pl. 129:5), from the first quarter of the first century BCE (thin walled but unslipped). 40 Complex Unknown. Inv. No. 984. IAA 79-21. 9 examples (Fig. 6.3:40) Description. H 4.3 cm; rim D 10.8 cm; base D 3.2 cm. Entire profile preserved from disk base to upturned rim. Pale yellow clay (2.5Y 7/4), red slip (10Y 5/6). Parallels and Dating. As No. 39 above. 41 Complex 58. Inv. No. 716. IAA 97-3177. 3 examples (Fig. 6.3:41) Description. H 6.3 cm; rim D 13.7 cm; foot D 4.0 cm. Entire profile preserved from small ring foot to upturned rim. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), dark gray slip (2.5Y 4/0). Parallels and Dating. As No. 39 above. 42 Complex 70. Inv. No. 43. IAA 97-3175. 9 examples (Fig. 6.3:42) Description. H 7.7 cm; rim D 16.5 cm; foot D 4.5 cm. Entire profile preserved from ring foot to upturned rim. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), red slip (10R 4/6). Parallels and Dating. Lachish (Aharoni 1975:4, Pl. 51:18), Stratum IA, Hellenistic. 43 Complex Unknown. Inv. No. 985. IAA 79-28. 3 examples (Fig. 6.3:43) Description. H 6.4 cm; rim D 16.8 cm; foot D 5.2 cm. Entire profile preserved from ring foot to upturned rim. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 4/4), red slip (10R 4/6).

85

Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:24, Fig. 5:3), no later than the mid-first century BCE. 44 Complex 70. Inv. No. 56. IAA 97-3184. 3 examples (Fig. 6.3:44) Description. H 5.5 cm; rim D 16.5 cm; foot D 5.0 cm. Entire profile preserved from ring foot to incurved rim. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 4/4), very dark gray slip (7.5YR 3/0). Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:24, Fig. 5:3), no later than the mid-first century BCE. Fishplates Local versions of the traditional fishplate mostly with ring foot; flaring walls and a rim moderately to sharply down-turned were also recovered. Frequently there is a ridge around the sunken well at center floor. The clay is fine with minute kirton inclusions. At Nimrud such vessels are confined to Level 3 beginning after 150 BCE (Oates and Oates 1958:127, Pl. XXIII:2–4). At Tarsus they are dated from the late third to the early second century BCE (Jones 1950: 212, Figs. 120, 178:23A). At Hama (Christensen and Johansen 1971:2, Fig.1:20) they are recorded as continuing until the end of the Hellenistic period. The angle between the rim and the wall is less sharp in the late Hellenistic period and the plate becomes much less flat (Kenyon 1957b:222). In later examples there is the added refinement of a ridge around the sunken well (Crowfoot 1957b:262). The slip on our fishplates is mottled red or mottled black, depending on how they were placed in the kiln. Example No. 48 is decorated with rouletted bands around the exterior wall. This is not common at Maresha, nor elsewhere in the Hellenistic period. Rouletted decoration on the exterior walls of bowls does, however, become more popular in the Roman and Byzantine periods, suggesting a late Hellenistic date for our bowl. 45 Complex 70. Inv. No. 49 (Fig. 6.3:45) Description. H 1.5 cm; rim D 7.7 cm; base D 3.5 cm. Entire profile preserved of small fishplate with flaring walls and solid disk base. Light red clay (2.5R 6/6), white grits, red slip (10R 4/6). Parallels and Dating. None found of this rim diameter.

86

TIKVA LEVINE

46 Complex 70. Inv. No. 506. IAA 97-3188. 3 examples (Fig. 6.3:46) Description. H 3.5 cm; rim D 16 cm; foot D 7.0 cm. Medium-sized fishplate with flaring walls and ring foot. Reddish yellow clay (7.5YR 6/6), red slip (10R 5/6). Incrustation on rim, and dripped slip on exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. ‘Akko (Dothan 1976:30–34, Fig. 30:3), dated to the late second century BCE; Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:72–75, Pl. 129:12), first quarter of the first century BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:94, Pl. 40:6, Type 215), late second century BCE. 47 Complex 21. Inv. No. 637. IAA 97-3171. 2 examples (Fig. 6.3:47) Description. H 4.5 cm; rim D 21.5 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Entire profile preserved of large fishplate with flaring walls and ring foot. Reddish yellow clay (7.5YR 6/6), red slip (10R 5/6). Parallels and Dating. ‘Akko (Dothan 1976:30–34, Fig. 30:2), from late second century BCE. 48 Complex 21. Inv. No. 661. IAA 97-3187 (Fig. 6.3:48) Description. H 6.8 cm; rim D 22 cm; foot D 6.5 cm. Profile preserved from near center floor of large fishplate with flaring walls and ring foot. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4), dark gray slip (7.5R 4/0). Two rouletted bands on upper exterior wall. Incrustation on exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Maresha (Kloner and Hess 1985:125, Fig. 1:5), prior to the late second century BCE; Ashdod (Kee 1971:47, Fig. 9:12) c.100 BCE, the only known parallel outside Maresha. 49 Complex 70. Inv. No. 48. IAA 97-3172. 4 examples (Fig. 6.3:49) Description. H 5.0 cm; rim D 25.8 cm; foot D 7.8 cm. Entire profile preserved of very large fishplate with low flaring walls, ring foot and down-turned rim. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4), white grits, weak red slip (10R 5/4). Brush strokes are clearly visible. Parallels and Dating. ‘Akko (Dothan 1976:30–34, Fig. 30:1), dated to the late second century BCE; Tarsus (Jones 1950: 212, Figs. 120, 178:23A), third century to the beginning of the second century BCE. Bowls with Horizontal ‘Pinched-Bow’ Handles Angular bowl with a thickened, slightly everted rim, two horizontal ‘pinched-bow’ handles below rim, and ring foot of relatively small diameter. At Maresha this bowl

Fig. 6.3 ► Cat. No. Inv. No. Type/Comment 45

49

Fishplate

46

506

Fishplate

47

637

Fishplate

48

661

Fishplate

49

48

Fishplate

50

556

Bowl with horizontal pinched bowhandles

51

920

Bowl with horizontal pinched bowhandles

52

574

Bowl with horizontal pinched bowhandles

53

927

Deep angular bowl with out-turned rim

54

572

Deep angular bowl with out-turned rim

55

921

Deep angular bowl with out-turned rim

56

643

Imitation Slane Type 25a

is found in two fabrics, imported (Nos. 3, 4; see above Fig. 6.1:3, 4), and made of local clay (Nos. 50–52). A total of 25 bowls of this type were found. Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 151.4, A (P.W. Lapp 1961:204) 200–100 BCE; Alexandria (Adriani 1952:142, Fig. 70:24), Hellenistic. Rotroff (1997: 117–118) designated these bowls ‘Palestinian Cups’, because they were so common in Hellenistic levels in the Levant, chiefly in Palestine. In Athens (Rotroff 1997:118; Fig. 22:391–394) they are found in contexts abandoned after 200 BCE. Parallels are also reported from Sidi-Khrebish (Berenice), Type B (Kenrick 1985:119, Fig. 24:186.1, 186.2), present from the first half of the second century BCE onwards; Paphos (Hayes 1991:23–24, Pl. VI:9, OD 2136), dated 150–140/30 BCE with parallels cited; Oboda (Negev 1986:7, Nos. 24, 25)—judging by the quality of the slip described, we suggest that it belongs in the middle of the second century BCE; Tel Michal (Fischer 1989:179, Fig. 13.2:14), Stratum IV, late Hellenistic period; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990: 91, Pl. 35:6, Type 205 A, Pl. 42:8, Type 205 E), early second to mid-first centuries BCE); Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970: 58–66; Fig. 9:22), where the undecorated example is dated to the last phase of the Hellenistic period. 50 Complex 70. Inv. No. 556. IAA 97-3185. 13 examples (Fig. 6.3:50) Description. H 8.0 cm; rim D 15 cm; foot D 5.0 cm.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

87

Fig. 6.3. Decorated plain ware bowls and plates.

Entire profile preserved of bowl with re-curved handles, rounded lip and groove below rim’s exterior. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), red slip (10R 5/6). Parallels and Dating. See discussion above. 51 Complex Unknown. Inv. No. 920. IAA 89-21. 3 examples (Fig. 6.3:51) Description. H 7.7 cm; rim D 25.7 cm; foot D 4.8 cm. Entire profile preserved of bowl with re-curved handles. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), dark gray slip (2.5YR 4/0).

Parallels and Dating. See discussion above. 52 Complex 70. Room 25. Inv. No. 574. IAA 97-3186. 4 examples (Fig. 6.3:52) Description. H 10 cm; rim D 20.5 cm; foot D 6.0 cm. Entire profile preserved of bowl with re-curved handles, rounded rim and ring foot. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6), faded reddish brown slip (2.5YR 4/4). Parallels and Dating. See discussion above.

88

TIKVA LEVINE

Deep Angular Bowls with Out-Turned Rim This vessel is unique to Maresha and was probably manufactured in the area. It may have been inspired by the Attic-Black Glazed bowls with an angular out-turned rim (Thompson 1934:435, Fig. 117: A9, A71, D5, E33) popular in Athens from the end of the fourth century BCE. One of these bowls (not illustrated), containing sheep bones, was found in situ near the eastern wall of Room 27 in Complex 70 (see Chap. 3: Fig. 3.13). Interesting is the close resemblance between our bowl and the later ESA Atlante Form 23 vessel (Hayes 1985:24, Pl. III:14) dated 100–50 BCE. This may suggest a date at the end of the second century BCE for our bowl and indicate its popularity. 53 Complex 70. Room 13. Inv. No. 927. IAA 89-19. 2 examples (Fig. 6.3:53) Description. H 5.8 cm; rim D 10.5 cm; foot D 4.5 cm. Entire profile preserved of deep angular bowl with out-turned rim and ring foot. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/5), white grits, reddish brown slip (2.5YR 5/4). Parallels and Dating. None found. 54 Complex 70. Room 25. Inv. No. 572. IAA 97-3173. 2 examples (Fig. 6.3:54) Description. H 7.0 cm; rim D 12.8 cm; foot D 6.3 cm. Entire profile preserved of deep angular bowl with out-turned walls, rounded rim and ring foot. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), white grits, reddish brown slip (2.5YR 5/4). Parallels and Dating. None found. 55 Complex 70. Inv. No. 921. IAA 89-28. 2 examples (Fig. 6.3:55). Description. H 7.0 cm; rim D 13 cm; foot D 5.0 cm. Entire profile preserved of angular bowl with out-turned rim and ring foot. Light red clay (10R 6/8), white grits, red slip (10R 4/6). Parallels and Dating. None found. Local Imitation of Slane Type 25a (Fig. 6.3:56) This vessel resembles Slane Type 25a, in use from before 128/125 BCE into the first quarter of the first century BCE, as at Tel Anafa (Slane 1997:309–314, Pl. 18: FW 186). See also No. 8, Fig. 6.1:8, above. 56 Complex 21. Inv. No. 643. IAA 97-3183 (Fig. 6.3:56) Description. H 7.8 cm; rim D 14.8 cm; foot D 5.7 cm.

Entire profile preserved of local imitation of ESA cup/bowl with tall ring foot. Light red clay (10R 6/8), white grits, red slip (10R 4/6). Drip marks visible from application of slip. Parallels and Dating. None found. We suggest a date prior to the end of the second century BCE. LEKANAI The lekane, an important Attic shape and the antecedent for Nos. 57–59, extends, with a few gaps, from the early sixth to the late fourth century BCE (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:211). Such vessels occur in Athens in a context of the mid-third century BCE (Thompson 1934: 325, A59, Fig. 122, 343, B40, Figs. 23 and 122; Rotroff 1987:6). The profile of rim and wall may change somewhat but the essential character of the vessel remains unaltered (Talcott 1935:493, Fig. 25). Sparkes and Talcott note this constancy of character along with changes in detail for the Athenian vessels as follows: “By the middle of the 5th century the widely outcurved rim has shrunk to a flattened, perhaps more practical, form and the handles have crept well up on the wall... This process was accelerated in the third and last quarters of the century... the foot has become the simplest possible ring or disk... [in examples from] c. 370 to c. 330 BCE... [t]he method whereby the handles are smeared on to the rim is common in the Hellenistic period; it must certainly have reduced breakage and also provided a solid grip” (Sparkes and Talcott 1970: 213–214, Pl. 87:1835). 57 Complex 70?. Inv. No. 794 (Fig. 6.4:57) Description. PH 9 cm; rim D 32 cm. Profile of lekane preserved from upper wall to ledge rim. Two heavy Fig. 6.4 ►

Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

57

794

Lekane

58

761

Lekane

59

59

Lekane

60

669

61

50

62

800

63

36

Deep krater

64

128

Deep krater

ESA Ware krater/chalice—Slane Type 30b; Atlante Form 15A, B Four-handled krater Pyxis lid

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Fig. 6.4. (57–59) Lekanai; (60) ESA krater/chalice; (61) four-handled krater; (62) pyxis lid; (63, 64) deep kraters.

89

90

TIKVA LEVINE

horizontal coil handles pressed against body. Light reddish brown clay (7.5YR 6/4), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Dor Type KR10 (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:296, Fig. 6.12:4), slipped, dated 275–175 BCE. 58 Complex 70?. Inv. No. 761 (Fig. 6.4:58) Description. PH 10.5 cm; rim D 36.2 cm. Profile of lekane preserved from upper wall to wide ledge rim. Two heavy coil handles horizontally attached below rim. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/4), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Corinth (Edwards 1975:108, Pls. 21, 59:616, Deposit 113), c. 300 BCE; Dor Type KR5 (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:296, Fig. 6.11:5), dated 175–125 BCE; Shiqmona (Elgavish 1974:51, Pl. XIII:225), from a second-century BCE context, with a flat base. 59 Complex 70. Inv. No. 59. 3 examples (Fig. 6.4:59) Description. PH 8 cm; est. base D 14.7 cm. Profile preserving pedestal foot and floor of lekane, or kernosbowl as, for example in Athens (Thompson 1934:340, Fig. 20: B27). Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/3), white grits. ESA WARE KRATER/CHALICE The vertical gouging on the krater-chalice is known from the ‘West Slope’ technique. Two general types in ESA ware are known, classified by their rim form. Atlante Form 15A, prototype from Hama (Hayes 1985:21, Pl.3:1), with carinated neck, is dated to c. 100 BCE. The same form was classified as Slane Type 30b (Slane 1997:321–322, Pl. 23), common during the first quarter of the first century BCE. Atlante Form 15B, prototype from Samaria, chalice with concave neck, is dated to 75–25 BCE (Hayes 1985:21, Pl. 3:2). Since the rim of the Maresha example is not preserved it cannot be attributed specifically to Form 15A or B. 60 Complex 21. Inv. No. 669 (Fig. 6.4:60) Description. PH 8 cm; max. body D 18.2 cm. Profile preserved of ESA krater from just above base to mid-body. Pale yellow clay (5Y 8/3), red slip (2.5YR 4/8). Vertical gouging on part of exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Crowfoot 1957b:239, Fig. 45:11), dated to the third–second centuries BCE, similar in form and fabric. Our example is probably of a later date, before the end of the second century BCE.

FOUR-HANDLED KRATER Multi-handled pithoid-jars, known also as Mycenaean piriform jars (Amiran 1969:184–186), were common in Mycenaean pottery traditions and were widely distributed throughout the southeastern Mediterranean. Three or four functional handles were most likely used on Mycenaean pithoid-jars as loops, to help secure the container in a given place and thereby protect the commodity within (Leonard 1981:94). This general form is also familiar from the Phoenician cultural sphere and also resembles early Iron Age jar-krater and storage-jar traditions; see, for example, the Tell Abu Ruqueish pottery group (Amiran 1969:217, 238; Hestrin and Dayagi-Mendels 1983). The inspiration for four-handled Hellenistic kraters is not precisely known. 61 Complex 70. Inv. No. 50. IAA 97-3225 (Fig. 6.4:61) Description. H 16 cm; rim D 10 cm; int. rim D 7 cm; foot D 6.25 cm. Entire profile preserved of fourhandled krater with ring foot. Wide mouth with two grooves at mid-rim. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), red slip (10R 4/6) on upper exterior wall. Incrustation over all of exterior, foot slightly chipped. Parallels and Dating. A unique Maresha product, rare even at the site. Only four other examples have been found so far (Areas 53 and 100 with four handles, Areas 84 and 61 with three handles). All are unpublished and date to the Hellenistic period, no later than the end of the second century BCE. PYXIS LID 62 Complex 70. Inv. No. 800. IAA 97-3220 (Fig. 6.4:62) Description. PH 4.5 cm; rim D 9.5 cm; int. rim D 6 cm. Profile of lid preserved from lip to lower part of the knob handle. Reddish brown clay (5YR 5/4), weak red band of slip (10YR 4/4) around outer edge of underside. Parallels and Dating. Athens (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:196, Fig. 11:1286), a Black-Glazed prototype for our example from the sixth century BCE. Fig. 6.5 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

65

680

Deep krater

66

201

‘Double-decker’ krater

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

DEEP KRATERS The Attic column-krater (Sparkes and Talcott 1970: 54–58) is the antecedent for No. 63. 63 Complex 70. Inv. No. 36. IAA 97-3223 (Fig. 6.4:63) Description. H 27.8 cm; rim D 23 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Entire profile of a deep krater preserved from center floor to flaring flat rim. Two vertical coil handles attached at mid-neck and shoulder. Red clay (2.5YR 5/6), white grits. Two weak red (10R 4/4) painted bands decorate base of neck and upper wall. Parallels and Dating. No exact parallels found. Similar in form is an example from Corinth (Edwards

91

1975:107–108, Pls. 21, 59:613), dated c. 300 BCE; and Dor Type KR11b (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:297, Fig. 6.14:4, 5), third–second centuries BCE. 64 Complex 70. Inv. No. 128. IAA 97-3219 (Fig. 6.4:64) Description. H 34 cm; rim D 20.7 cm; foot D 10.7 cm. Entire profile preserved from center floor to thickened rim. Two heavy coil handles horizontally attached on shoulder. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), white grits. Parallels and Dating. None found. Similar in shape to No. 63, see discussion above. 65 Complex 70?. Inv. No. 680. 3 examples (Fig. 6.5:65) Description. PH 11.7 cm; rim D 21.5 cm. Profile

Fig. 6.5. Kraters.

92

TIKVA LEVINE

preserved of a deep krater with thickened rim, straight neck and two vertically set flattened coil handles attached at rim and shoulder. Gray clay (5YR 5/1) with white grits. ‘Pie-crust’ design around outer edge of rim. Parallels and Dating. Stern Type 2b (1982:99), from fifth- and fourth-century BCE contexts; Dor Type KR11a (Guz-Zilberstein1995:297, Fig. 6.14:9, 10), third–second centuries BCE, similar form, but undecorated. ‘Double-Decker’ Krater 66 Complex 70. Inv. No. 201. IAA 97-3221 (Fig. 6.5:66) Description. PH 17.7 cm; rim D 9 cm; body D 26 cm. Profile preserved of a globular holemouth krater with an inner opening ending in an outward-folded rim, enclosed by a tall flaring wall with a wide opening. Three pierced holes at the junction of the two walls and two thick horizontally attached coil handles on exterior wall. Reddish brown clay (10YR 7/4), white grits. Parallels and Dating. In Athens, a similar krater type was found (Prof. Stella Drougou, pers. comm.; 1979: 265–282 and parallels cited therein). The use of the vessel as suggested by Drougou was for the preparation of sparkling wine, popular in the Greek symposium. During the preparation process, the foam rises through the inner narrow opening of the vessel against the high upper wall, and drains back into the krater through the pierced holes (Drougou 1979:280). Drougou dates the decorated Athenian ‘Falaieff’ Group krater, together with the other parallels cited, to the mid-fourth century BCE, suggesting that such a vessel must have existed even earlier, in a form that we are unable to detect today (Drougou 1979:270). Our Maresha ‘double-decker’ krater is an exact but undecorated local copy of the decorated pieces in the ‘Falaieff’ group, and probably to be dated slightly later. Similar kraters were found in subsequent seasons of excavation (Complexes 84 and 61), in various states of preservation. These additional finds allow us to state with confidence that the Maresha pieces had a shallow ring foot and that the upper wall ended in a plain thickened rim. An undecorated specimen of similar form and fabric to ours was uncovered in Beirut (Dr. John Hayes, pers. comm.). The only parallel form in Israel comes from Masada (Building 12, L612/74), in a context of the first century CE, associated with the Zealots’ occupation of the site (Rachel Bar-Nathan, pers. comm.). The Masada

‘double-decker’ krater seems to be a local product, of a smaller size, bearing an incised decorative pattern on its upper exterior wall. Very likely our krater served the same purpose as that suggested by Drougou, i.e., for the preparation and serving of wine. The large-scale import of wine to Maresha, from various Mediterranean production centers, certainly supports this suggestion (see Chap. 8, below). COOKING VESSELS Holemouth Cooking Pot 67 Complex 70. Inv. No. 78. IAA 97-3170. 2 examples (Fig. 6.6:67) Description. H 17.8 cm; rim D 14.2 cm; max. D 22.5 cm. Complete profile of a holemouth pot with squared-off rim, thick walls and convex base. Reddish brown clay (10YR 7/4), white grits. Careless manufacture, uneven rim. Parallels and Dating. None found. Cooking Krater 68 Complex 70?. Inv. No. 679. 5 examples (Fig. 6.6:68) Description. PH 11.2 cm; rim D 21.7 cm. Profile of wide, open-mouthed cooking krater preserved from mid-wall to everted rim. Two vertical handles set at rim and shoulder. Yellowish red clay (5YR 4/6), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Stern Type 4 (1982:99, Fig. 126) with vertical handles, sixth–fourth centuries BCE. Fig. 6.6 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

67

78

68

679

Type/Comment Holemouth cooking pot Cooking krater

69

92

70

253

Globular cooking pot Ribbed globular cooking pot— Lapp Type 71G, 71.1E; Kahane Type A

71

569

Ribbed globular cooking pot— Lapp Type 71G, 71.1E; Kahane Type A

72

981

Squat angular cooking pot

73

160

Squat angular cooking pot

74

118

Squat angular cooking pot

75

74

Squat angular cooking pot

76

130

Squat angular cooking pot

77

71

Casserole

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Globular Cooking Pot 69 Complex 70. Inv. No. 92. IAA 97-3212 (Fig. 6.6:69). Description. H 16.2 cm; rim D 11.2 cm; W 20 cm. Entire profile of a wide-shouldered, globular cooking

93

pot preserved from convex base to out-turned rim and flaring neck. Two vertical handles attached at rim and shoulder. Dark reddish brown clay (2.5YR 3/4). Parallels and Dating. Stern Type C (1982:101, Photo 131), fifth and fourth centuries BCE; Tel Michal (Singer-

Fig. 6.6. Cooking vessels.

94

TIKVA LEVINE

Avitz 1989:130, Fig. 9.8:5), Stratum VII, Persian period, locally made; Dor Type CP1 (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:298, Fig. 6.17:4) present from the second half of the fourth century until the second century BCE. Ribbed Globular Cooking Pots Kahane Type A The following ribbed cooking pots, Nos. 70 and 71, belong to Kahane Type A (1952:128–129) and are dated no earlier than the second half of the second century BCE. This form derives from the late Israelite cooking pot. Later the shape developed into the late Hellenistic and Roman cooking pot with a much higher vertical neck and finely ribbed body (Kenyon 1957b: 218 passim). 70 Complex 70. Inv. No. 253 (Fig. 6.6:70) Description. PH 13.7 cm; rim D 13.7 cm; W 29.3 cm. Profile of ribbed, thin-walled globular cooking pot, preserved from the lower body to the wide neck with a plain out-turned rim. Two vertical handles set at rim and shoulder. Weak red clay (10R 5/2). Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 71 G (P. W. Lapp 1961:186), 175–165 BCE and Type 71.1 E (P. W. Lapp 1961:186), 175–100 BCE; Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970:58–66, Fig. 8:4), late Hellenistic; Samaria (Kenyon 1957b:228–232, Fig. 41:1), late Hellenistic/Roman. 71 Complex 70. Inv. No. 569 . 2 examples (Fig. 6.6:71) Description. PH 9.7 cm; rim D 14 cm; W 28 cm. Profile of ribbed, thin-walled, globular cooking pot, preserved from lower wall to wide neck and plain out-turned rim. Two vertical handles set at rim and shoulder. Dark red clay (2.5YR 3/6), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 71 G (P. W. Lapp 1961:186), 175–165 BCE, Type 71.1 E (P. W. Lapp 1961:186), dated between 175 and 100 BCE; Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970:58–66, Fig. 8:4), late Hellenistic; Pella (McNicoll, Smith and Hennessy 1982:75–92, Pl. 127:4), Hellenistic; Samaria (Kenyon 1957:228–232, Fig. 41:1), late Hellenistic/Roman. Small Squat Angular Cooking Pots 72 Complex 21. Inv. No. 981. 3 examples (Fig. 6.6:72) Description. H 11.2 cm; rim D 9.2 cm; W 15 cm. Profile of squat angular cooking pot, preserved from slightly

out-turned neck with plain rim to rounded bottom. One vertical handle carelessly attached at rim and drooping shoulder. Pale yellow clay (5Y 8/3), white grits. Soot on bottom from use. Parallels and Dating. ‘Akko (Dothan 1976:30–34, Fig. 30:11), from the early Hellenistic period; Ashdod (Bachi 1971:118, Fig. 61:12, 13), beginning of the Hellenistic period; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:22, Fig. 4:7, 8), red slipped of the second century BCE; Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970:58–66, Fig. 8:4,6), between 180 and 140 BCE; Jason’s Tomb, Jerusalem, Type C (Rahmani 1967:87, Fig. 16:4), found in the early contexts of the tomb, c. 100 BCE. 73 Complex 70. Inv. No. 160. IAA 97-3167 (Fig. 6.6:73) Description. H 11.8 cm; rim D 7.8 cm; W 15 cm. Profile of squat angular cooking pot preserved from convex bottom to plain rim. Two vertical handles attached at rim and drooping shoulder. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 7/6), white grits. Parallels and Dating. As No. 72 above with the exception of the clay. 74 Complex 70. Inv. No. 118. IAA 97-3168 (Fig. 6.6:74) Description. H 10.8 cm; rim D 9.8 cm; W 15 cm. Complete profile of squat angular cooking pot preserved from convex bottom to plain rim. Two vertical handles set on rim and drooping shoulder. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4), brown grits. Groove around neck on exterior. Parallels and Dating. As No. 72, with the exception of the clay. 75 Complex 70. Inv. No. 74. IAA 97-3167 (Fig. 6.6:75) Description. H 12 cm; rim D 9.0 cm; W 15 cm. Entire profile of squat, angular cooking pot preserved from vertical neck with plain rim to convex bottom. Two vertical handles set on rim and drooping shoulder. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4), white grits. Careless manufacture evident in the uneven handles and drag marks from the grits. Parallels and Dating. As No.72, with the exception of the clay. 76 Complex 70. Inv. No. 130 (Fig. 6.6:76). Description. H 10.5 cm; rim D 8.5 cm; W 12.5 cm. Profile of squat, angular cooking pot preserved from slightly out-turned neck with plain rim to convex

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

bottom. This form has no handles. Red clay (2.5YR 5/8), white grits. Parallels and Dating. As No. 72, with the exception of the clay. Casserole 77 Complex 58. Inv. No. 71 (Fig. 6.6:77). Description. PH 6.25 cm; rim D 22.5 cm. Profile of casserole preserved from out-turned rim to lower wall. Sharp ridge at bottom of rim on interior to hold a lid. Two vertical handles attached on rim and shoulder. Dark reddish brown clay (5YR 3/3) with white grits. Parallels and Dating. Athens (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:227; Thompson 1934:466, D72, E141), this type continues a long tradition starting from the end of the fifth century BCE; Samaria (Kenyon 1957b:230, Fig. 41:19), middle to the end of the second century BCE, with loop handles, most examples are very close to the Athenian more angular types; Dor (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:299, Fig. 6.20:12), the first appearance is mid-fourth century and infrequently through the third century BCE. In the second century BCE at Dor, this type of casserole comprises 6–25% of the cooking pot in Areas A and C. STORAGE JARS Four different local inland forms are present. Generally they seem to have developed with shorter rims at the beginning and longer ones later. The neck tends to get shorter with time, the rounded shoulders (No. 79), become more angular (Nos. 80, 81) and the base loses its point and becomes more convex. No. 79, a form typical of the Persian period, developed into Nos. 80 and 81 in the Hellenistic period and became the most common jar at the site. The quality of the clay and firing temperature improve accordingly. Nos. 82 and 83 illustrate a unique type altogether (parallels were found at Tirat Yehuda only); no doubt, a Maresha product. The sequence identified here is as follows: 1. Rounded shoulders, ovoid body, long neck (No. 78); 2. Rounded shoulders, sack-like body, long neck (No. 79); 3. Angular shoulders, ovoid body, short neck (Nos. 80, 81); 4. Rounded shoulders, upside-down ovoid body, short neck (Nos. 82, 83).

95

Rounded Shoulders, Oval Body, Long Neck— Stern Type C 78 Complex 70. Inv. No. 167. IAA. 97-3245 (Fig. 6.7:78) Description. H 42 cm; rim D 10.3 cm; max. W 28 cm. Rare at Maresha. Complete profile of ovoid jar preserved from convex base with point at center to outward-folded rim. Two vertical loop handles set on the shoulders. Brown clay (7.5YR 5/4), white grits. Incrustation on exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Stern Type C (Stern 1982:104, Photo 140 with parallels cited). Common mainly in the southern part of the province of Judah and continued to be manufactured throughout the Persian period. Rounded Shoulders, Sack-Like Body, Long Neck—Stern Type F1 79 Complex 21. Inv. No. 653. IAA 97-3247 (Fig. 6.7:79) Description. H 62.5 cm; rim D 12 cm; max. W 36 cm. Profile of a jar preserved from bottom of neck to convex bottom. Two vertical triple-ridged handles attached on shoulder. Pale brown clay (10YR 6/3), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Common type in the Persian period continuing into the Hellenistic period. Stern Type F1 (Stern 1982:105 Photo 142), though with a longer neck, fifth–fourth centuries BCE, found in the north, center and Sharon plain; Shiqmona (Elgavish 1968:51, Pl. LIX:142), from Stratum B, last third of the fourth century BCE, the transition from the Persian to Hellenistic period; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:23, Fig. 3:1, 2), large, bag-shaped storage jar, a carry-over from Iron II persisting into Hellenistic Stratum 3. When it was found, M. Dothan considered it rare in the Hellenistic period and found no exact parallels. Angular Shoulders, Ovoid Body, Short Neck 80 Complex 70?. Inv. No. 683. 4 examples (Fig. 6.7:80) Description. PH. 35.7 cm; rim D 11.5 cm. Profile of jar

Fig. 6.7 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

78

167

Storage jar— Stern Type C

79

653

Storage jar— Stern Type F1

80

683

Storage jar

96

TIKVA LEVINE

Fig. 6.7. Storage jars.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Fig. 6.8. (81, 82, 83) Storage jars; (84, 85) pot stands.

97

98

TIKVA LEVINE

◄ Fig. 6.8 Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

81

169

Storage jar

82

79

Storage jar

83

77

Storage jar

84

263

Pot stand

85

750

Pot stand

preserved from lower wall to outward-folded rim. Two vertical triple-ridged handles set at shoulder and upper wall. Light gray clay (2.5Y 7/2), many white grits. Parallels and Dating. Tell el-Ful (N. Lapp 1978:102; Pl. 72:25), Period IVB, dated between c. 135 and 100 BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:81; Pl. 43:22 Type164B), late Hellenistic, mid-first century BCE. The most frequently found jar at Maresha in the Hellenistic period. 81 Complex 70. Inv. No. 169. IAA 97-3246. 4 examples (Fig. 6.8:81) Description. H 57.5 cm; rim D 10.2 cm; max. W 34 cm. Entire profile of jar preserved from convex bottom to a thickened ribbed rim. Two vertical handles set at angular shoulder and upper wall, missing. Reddish brown clay (5YR 5/3), many white grits. Soot stains on exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. As No. 80. Rounded Shoulders, Upside-Down Ovoid Body, Short Neck 82 Complex 70. Inv. No. 79. IAA 97-3244. 3 examples (Fig. 6.8:82) Description. H 51 cm; rim D 10.4 cm; max. W 33 cm. Entire profile of jar preserved from convex bottom to outward-folded rim. Two vertical triple-ridged handles attached from shoulder to upper wall. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4), many white grits. Parallels and Dating. Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970:58–66, Fig. 6:6), late Hellenistic; Maresha (Kloner and Hess 1985:130, Fig. 4:9), first century BCE. 83 Complex 70. Inv. No. 77. 3 examples (Fig. 6.8:83) Description. H 40 cm; rim D 9.7 cm; max. D 27 cm. Entire profile of a jar preserved from convex bottom to thickened rim. Two vertical triple-ridged handles

attached from shoulder to upper wall. Light gray clay (2.5Y 7/2). Parallels and Dating. As No. 82. POT STANDS 84 Complex 70. Inv. No. 263 (Fig. 6.8:84) Description. H 9.5 cm; rim D 17.8 cm; foot D 21 cm. Profile of a pot stand preserved from out-turned foot to rim. Light yellowish brown clay (10YR 6/4). Parallels and Dating. Tell el-Maskhuta (Holladay 1982:55–57; Pl. 27:6), a similar example in a context dated c. 486 BCE; Prof. Andrea Berlin (pers. comm.), one of the excavators of Coptos, Upper Egypt, reports a very similar stand, Middle Hellenistic levels; Athens (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:234–235, Pl. 98:2040), fourth century BCE; Dor (Stern 1995:68, Fig. 2.15:2), Persian period; Samaria (Crowfoot 1957b:183–185, Fig. 28:9, 10, 11), it is not possible to distinguish between types. 85 Complex 70. Inv. No. 750 (Fig. 6.8:85) Description. H 13.5 cm; rim D 23.8 cm; foot D 26.5 cm. Profile of a pot stand preserved from out-turned foot to rim. Brown clay (10YR 7/3). ‘Pie-crust’ decoration around outer edge of rim. Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:23, Fig. 8:7, Pl. IX:5), end of the third and early second centuries BCE, and (Kee 1971:50, Fig. 11:6), from the first half of the first century BCE. TABLE AMPHORAS Phoenician Semi-Fine Ware Table Amphora 86 Complex 70. Inv. No. 818. IAA 97-3213 (Fig. 6.9:86) Description. H 27.2 cm; rim D 14 cm; foot D 10.5 cm.

Fig. 6.9 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

86

818

Phoenician Semi-Fine Ware table amphora

87

549

Local table amphora

88

303

Local table amphora

89

616

Phoenician Semi-Fine Ware amphoriskos

90

210

Flask—Lapp Type 29D

91

684

Flask—Lapp Type 29C

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Entire profile of a table amphora preserved from ring foot to down-turned rim. Two vertical triple-ridged handles, somewhat carelessly applied, attached at mid-neck and shoulder. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6). Parallels and Dating. A single example at Maresha. Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997b:37–39, Pls. 1, 73, PW1), Stratum Hell. 2A, 125–? BCE, the form belongs to the Phoenician sphere, made of a semi-fine fabric whose distribution began in the second half of the second century BCE and continued at least through the beginning of the first century BCE (Berlin 1997a:80); Yoqne‘am (Avissar 1996:57; Fig. X.7:2), of similar date. Local Table Amphoras 87 Complex 70. Inv. No. 549 (Fig. 6.9:87) Description. PH 11.3 cm; rim D 13 cm. Profile of a

99

local table amphora preserved from rounded shoulder to grooved rim. Two vertical coil handles attached on neck flange and shoulder. Reddish yellow clay (7.5YR 6/6). Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:125–126, Pl. 59, 6), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. 88 Complex 1. Inv. No. 303 (Fig. 6.9:88) Description. PH 10 cm; rim D 14.3 cm. Local imitation of West Slope technique table amphora preserving a wide flaring rim, wide neck and shoulder. (For the general type, see, for example Rotroff 1991.) Two vertical triple-ridged handles attached on the flange below rim and shoulder. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4), white grits. Form also common at Maresha.

Fig. 6.9. (86–88) Table amphoras; (89) amphoriskos; (90, 91) flasks.

100

TIKVA LEVINE

Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (see for example, Rotroff 1991, for the general type; Bliss and Macalister 1902:125–126, Pl. 59:5), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Dor (GuzZilberstein 1995:309, Fig. 6.32:4), from the early Hellenistic period to the end of the second century BCE. PHOENICIAN SEMI-FINE WARE AMPHORISKOS Found in many Hellenistic sites during the second and first centuries BCE. The form originated in Phoenicia, made in a semi-fine fabric. Distribution began in the second half of the second century BCE and continued at least through the beginning of the first century BCE (Berlin 1997a:80). 89 Complex 70. Inv. No. 616. IAA 97-3214. 3 examples (Fig. 6.9:89) Description. H 28 cm; base D 2 cm. Profile preserved from pointed bottom to neck plus two vertical coil handles attached at neck and shoulder. Very pale brown clay (10YR 8/3). Careless manufacture, chipped at center of exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Athens (Thompson 1934:417, Fig. 100, E126), context redated c. 110 BCE (Rotroff 1987:6); Tarsus (Jones 1950:239; Figs. 143, 191, 358), Hellenistic–Roman Unit, mid-second to mid-first centuries BCE; Dor Type AK1 (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:308, Fig. 6.29:1), not earlier than the second century BCE; Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997b:56–57; Pls.11, 75 PW 69–76), present by c. 125 BCE; Shiqmona (Elgavish 1974:54; Pl. IX:203), Stratum H, no later than 132/126 BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:87–88; Pl. 34:27, 28), early mid-second century BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:124; Pl. 58:5), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE.

Alexandria (Adriani 1952:142, Fig. 70:3), Hellenistic; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:31; Fig. 11:15), Stratum 2, first century CE, a yellow-washed flask; Tell el-Ful (N. Lapp 1978:103, Pl. 76:1), Period IVA, c. 175–135 BCE, unslipped. 91 Complex 70. Inv. No. 684. 3 examples (Fig. 6.9:91) Description. PH 8.7 cm; est. rim D 4.5 cm. Profile of lentoid flask, preserved from shoulder to long neck. Two twisted handles vertically set on upper neck and shoulder. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), white grits. Handles carelessly applied. Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 29C (P. W. Lapp 1961:161), 175–100 BCE. Handles become twisted in the second century BCE (N. Lapp 1964:24); Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:124, Pl. 58:11), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970:58–66; Fig. 7:21), late Hellenistic; Ramat Rahel (Aharoni 1962:18; Fig. 6:19), Stratum IV, Herodian; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:25, Fig. 8:2), first century BCE. JUGS Large Jugs Included here are large globular jugs with a beveled rim, a long somewhat ribbed neck and a shallow ring foot. A vertical triple-ridged handle is attached from rim to shoulder. Nos. 92 and 93 are undecorated, No. 94 is decorated. Glazed and band-decorated Attic and imported jugs from the Athenian Agora, popular mostly from the end of the fifth and the fourth centuries BCE, as well as the household-ware amphoras and hydriai of the same period, seem the probable prototypes for our vessels (Sparkes and Tatcott 1970:204, Fig. 6.10. Jugs ►

FLASKS

Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

90 Complex 70. Inv. No. 210. 2 examples (Fig. 6.9:90) Description. PH 6.8 cm; rim D 6.3 cm. Profile of a lentoid flask preserved from mid-wall to flaring rim. Two vertical handles set below rim and on shoulder. Light brownish gray clay (10YR 6/2), white grits. Very pale brown flaky wash (10YR 7/3) applied on outer surface in a concentric pattern. Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 29D (P.W. Lapp 1961:161), 175–100 BCE, similar shape, unslipped;

92

567

Jug

93

67

Jug

94

70

Jug

95

166

Jug

96

83

Jug

97

529

Jug

98

573

Jug

99

562

Jug

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

101

102

TIKVA LEVINE

Pl. 73:1613–1618). Stern (1982:93) has already observed that: “Painted decoration in the Persian period is rare and is confined to a number of types of jugs, ...in quite a monotonous technique consisting of several horizontal bands painted in a reddish-brown colour”. The red-band painted examples are common in the Persian period. Based on their similarity to specimens of the Persian period we suggest that our 14 examples date to the early Hellenistic period. Parallels for this group come only from earlier excavations at the site (Bliss and Macalister 1902:124–125; Pl. 58:1, 2). 92 Complex 70. Inv. No. 567. IAA 97-3150. 3 examples (Fig. 6.10:92) Description. H 28 cm; rim D 12.5 cm; max W 25 cm; foot D 8.2 cm. Entire profile of large globular jug preserved from shallow ring foot to beveled rim. Vertical triple-ridged handle extends from rim to shoulder. Light gray clay (5Y 7/2), many white grits. 93 Complex 70. Inv. No. 67. IAA 97-3151. 3 examples (Fig. 6.10:93) Description. H 26 cm; rim D 11.3 cm; max. W 22.7 cm; foot D 8 cm. Entire profile of large globular jug preserved from shallow ring base to beveled rim. Vertical triple-grooved handle extends from rim to shoulder. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/3), many white grits. 94 Complex 70. Inv. No. 70. IAA 97-3154. 3 examples (Fig. 6.10:94) Description. H 24.1 cm; rim D 10.5 cm; max. W 20.2 cm; foot D 8 cm. Entire profile of large globular jug preserved from shallow ring base to beveled rim. Vertical triple-ridged handle extends from rim to shoulder. Light brown clay (2.5YR 6/3), reddish brown band of slip decorates neck and shoulder (2.5YR 4/4), many white grits. The overlapping of the red band indicates it was applied while the vessel was turned on the wheel. Large Jug with Down-Turned Rim 95 Complex 70. Inv. No. 166. IAA 97-3155. 5 examples (Fig. 6.10:95). Description. H 36.1 cm; rim D 13.8 cm; max. W 32.3 cm; foot D 9.2 cm. Profile of large globular jug preserved from shallow ring base to down-turned rim. Vertical

triple-ridged handle extends from rim to shoulder. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), many white grits. Parallels and Dating. None found. Medium-Sized Jugs: Straight Neck, Beveled or Thickened Rim 96 Complex 70. Inv. No. 83. IAA 97-3141. 6 examples (Fig. 6.10:96) Description. H 25.2 cm; rim D 10.7 cm; max. W 19.8 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Profile of medium-sized jug preserved from shallow ring base to beveled rim. Vertical tripleridged handle extends from rim to shoulder. Light reddish brown clay (2.5YR 6/4), many white grits. Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:22, Fig. 2:13), first century BCE. 97 Complex 70. Inv. No. 529. IAA 97-3152. 6 examples (Fig. 6.10:97) Description. H 16.6 cm; rim D 8.8 cm; max. W 14.5 cm; foot D 6 cm. Profile of medium-sized jug preserved from low ring base to beveled rim. Vertical handle extends from rim to shoulder. Light gray clay (5Y 7/1), many white grits. 98 Complex 70. Inv. No. 573. IAA.97-3164. 9 examples (Fig. 6.10:98) Description. H 19.1 cm; rim D 10.5 cm; max. W 18.7 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Profile of a medium-sized jug preserved from ring foot to beveled rim. Vertical triple-ridged handle extends from rim to shoulder. Brown clay (7.5YR 5/4), many white grits. Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:300, Fig. 177:7b), Hellenistic. 99 Complex 70. Inv. No. 562. IAA 97-3149. 6 examples (Fig. 6.10.99) Description. H 17.1 cm; rim D 8.5 cm; max. W 15.4 cm; foot D 5.8 cm. Profile of a medium-sized jug preserved from ring foot to beveled rim. Vertical handle extends from rim to shoulder. Grayish brown clay (10YR 5/2), many white grits. 100 Complex 70. Inv. No. 58. IAA 97-3158. 6 examples (Fig. 6.11:100) Description. H 21 cm; rim D 10.5 cm; max. W 17.2 cm; foot D 6.25 cm. Profile of a medium-sized jug preserved from ring foot to beveled rim. Vertical handle extends

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

from rim to shoulder. Very dark gray clay (2.5YR 3/0). 101 Complex 70. Inv. No. 86. IAA 97-3159. 2 examples (Fig. 6.11:101) Description. H 18.8 cm; rim D 9.2 cm; max. W 16.7 cm; foot D 6 cm. Profile of a medium-sized jug preserved from ring foot to thickened rim. One vertical tripleridged handle extends from rim to shoulder. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4), many white grits, reddish brown band of decoration (2.5YR 4/4) on neck and shoulder. Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:124–125;Pl. 58:1, 2), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. 102 Complex 21. Inv. No. 658. IAA 97-3140 (Fig. 6.11:102) Description. H 19.4 cm; rim D 13.8 cm; max. W 19.9 cm; foot D 8 cm. Entire handleless globular jug with short concave neck ridged at the lower edge. Wide horizontal rim, shallow ring foot with bottom concave inside it. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:124–125; Pl. 58:9), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Shiqmona (Elgavish 1968:24–29; Pl. XXXII:3), red band of decoration, from a disturbed floor dated between the Persian and the Hellenistic periods. 103 Complex 70. Inv. No. 527. IAA 97-3153 (Fig. 6.11:103) Description. H 18.8 cm; rim D 11 cm; max. W 17.4 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Holemouth globular jug, with short concave neck and low ring foot, thickened outward rolled rim. This jug had no handles. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/3), white grits have left drag lines around exterior surface. Parallels and Dating. Shiqmona (Elgavish 1968: 24–29; Pl. XXXII:3) with a red band of decoration, from a disturbed floor dated between the Persian and the Hellenistic periods; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:124–125, Pl. 58:9), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. 104 Complex 70. Inv. No. 35. IAA 97-3145. 3 examples (Fig. 6.11:104) Description. H 22.6 cm; rim D 9.2 cm; max. W 18.1 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Entire profile preserved of a biconical

103

jug from low ring foot to downward folded rim. Lower part of vertical handle attached on rim and shoulder. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4), white grits. Parallels and Dating. None found. 105 Complex 70. Inv. No. 3. IAA 97-3147. 9 examples (Fig. 6.11:105) Description. H 18.5 cm; rim D 4 cm; max. W 15.3 cm; foot D 7 cm. Entire profile preserved of a mediumsized biconical jug with down-turned rim, low concave neck and low ring foot. Vertical handle attached at rim and shoulder. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/3), minute black and white grits. Ribbing on upper exterior wall, an uncommon feature amongst the jugs. Parallels and Dating. Pella (Smith, McNicoll and Hennessy 1981:12–17, Fig. 14:3), 145–82 BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:125–126, Pl. 59:7), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. 106 Complex 70. Inv. No. 162. IAA 97-3148. 9 examples (Fig. 6.11:106) Description. H 24.7 cm; rim D 9.5 cm; max. W 17.4 cm; foot D 6.8 cm. Entire profile preserved of mediumsized jug with flaring squared-off rim, low concave neck and ring foot. Vertical handle attached on rim and shoulder. Brown clay (7.5YR 5/4), white and gray grits. Parallels and Dating. Pella (Smith, McNicoll and Hennessy 1981:12–17, Fig. 14:3), 145–82 BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:125–126, Pl. 59:7), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. 107 Complex 70. Inv. No. 528. IAA 97-3146. 9 examples (Fig. 6.11:107) Description. H 21.7 cm; rim D 8.7 cm; max. W 17.4 cm; foot D 8 cm. Entire profile preserved of a mediumsized biconical jug with a squared rim, low concave neck, shallow ring foot. Vertical handle attached at rim and shoulder. Red clay (2.5YR 5/6), white grits and their drag lines. Parallels and Dating. Pella (Smith, McNicoll and Hennessy 1981:12–17, Fig. 14:3), 145–82 BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:125–126, Pl. 59:7), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. Of this group, one jug (Fig. 6.11a) was found intact with its kirton stopper (see also Small Finds

104

TIKVA LEVINE

No. 9, below) in Complex 70, Room 25 (Kloner 1981:240–241, Pl. 40:A). Another similar jug was found in situ, standing on a ledge, in Complex 70, Room 13. Four similar jug bases were found, deliberately re-cut to serve as a saucer-shaped vessel (see below, No. 112). 108 Complex 70. Inv. No. 1. IAA 97-3162. 9 examples (Fig. 6.11:108) Description. H 18.7 cm; rim D 9.5 cm; max. D 17.2 cm; foot D 6.8 cm. Entire profile of a biconical jug preserved, slightly concave neck with a horizontal rim and ring foot. Vertical triple-ridged handle attached at rim and shoulder. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:300, Fig. 177:7b), Hellenistic. 109 Complex 70. Inv. No. 163. IAA 97-3166. 9 examples (Fig. 6.11:109) Description. H 16.7 cm; rim D 8.8 cm; max. W 15.8 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Entire profile of a globular jug preserved, concave neck with a squared-off grooved rim and ring foot. Vertical triple-ridged handle attached at rim and shoulder. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4), white grits have left drag lines. Incrustation on exterior. Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:300, Fig. 177:7b), Hellenistic. 110 Complex 70. Inv. No. 161. IAA 97-3163. 9 examples (Fig. 6.11:110) Description. H 19.9 cm; rim D 8.8 cm; max. W 16.9 cm; foot D 8 cm. Entire profile of a biconical jug preserved, concave neck, outward folded rim, ring foot. Vertical triple-ridged handle attached at rim and shoulder. Reddish brown clay (5YR 5/3), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:300, Fig. 177:7b), Hellenistic. 111 Complex 70. Inv. No. 548. IAA 97-3165; 9 examples (Fig. 6.11:111) Description. H 17.6 cm; rim D 10 cm; max. W 17.5 cm; foot D 9.3 cm. Entire profile of a biconical jug preserved, concave neck, flaring squared-off rim, ring foot. Vertical triple-ridged handle carelessly attached at rim and shoulder. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4), white grits have left drag lines. Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:300, Fig. 177:7b), Hellenistic.

Fig. 6.11a. Jug with stopper.

Fig. 6.11 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

100

58

Jug

101

86

Jug

102

658

Jug

103

527

Jug

104

35

Jug

105

3

Jug

106

162

Jug

107

528

Jug

108

1

Jug

109

163

Jug

110

161

Jug

111

548

112

89

Jug Jug bottom re-cut as a bowl

Jug Base Transformed to a Shallow Bowl/ Lid 112 Complex 70. Inv. No. 89. 4 examples (Fig. 6.11:112) Description. H 4 cm; max. W 11 cm. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4) with white grits. Parallels and Dating. None found. LEKYTHOS Local version of the classical lekythos that originated in the mid-fifth century BCE. According to Thompson (1934:137): “The old and once very popular lekythos did not survive the fourth century, scarcely the fifth.” Our example’s sole decoration consists of two red-painted bands located on neck and shoulder.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Fig. 6.11. Jugs.

105

106

TIKVA LEVINE

113 Complex 58. Inv. No. 707. IAA 97-3161 (Fig. 6.12:113) Description. PH 15.5 cm; rim D 6.7 cm. Profile preserved from shoulder to rim. Outward beveled rim, narrow concave neck and vertical coil handle attached at mid-neck flange and shoulder. Light yellowish brown clay (10YR 6/4), white grits. Two reddish brown (2.5YR 4/4) painted bands of decoration around upper and lower neck. Parallels and Dating. No close parallels. DECANTERS 114 Complex 70. Inv. No. 75. IAA 97-3156. 2 examples (Fig. 6.12:114) Description. H 28 cm; rim D 5.5 cm; max. W 24.6 cm; foot D 7.7 cm. Entire globular decanter preserved with outward rolled rim, narrow flanged neck and low ring foot. Vertical triple-ridged handle attached at neck flange and shoulder. Light gray clay (2.5Y 7/2), white grits. Parallels and Dating. This type is a carry-over of earlier local traditions. Lapp Type 21.2, B, C (P. W. Lapp 1961:160), dated 50 BCE–70 CE, is probably the later development of this form; Ashdod (Kee 1971:56; Fig. 17:3), first century BCE. 115 Complex 70. Inv. No. 164. IAA 97-3157. 2 examples (Fig. 6.12:115) Description. H 32 cm; rim D 7 cm; max. W 21.2 cm; foot D 7.5 cm. Entire profile preserved of an ovoid decanter with a flaring squared-off rim, narrow flanged neck and shallow ring foot. Vertical triple-ridged handle set at neck flange and shoulder. Reddish brown clay (5YR 5/4), white grits. Rim slightly chipped. Parallels and Dating. As No. 114 above. LAGYNOI Lagynoi first appeared in Group C at the Athenian Agora, deposited in the course of the second quarter of the second century BCE. They were popular during the second and first centuries BCE. 116 Complex 70. Inv. No. 550 (Fig. 6.12:116) Description. PH 12 cm; rim D 3 cm. Lagynos preserving a cylindrical neck with an outward rolled rim, and a vertical twisted coil handle attached at midneck and below. Narrow groove around bottom of

Fig. 6.12 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

113

707

Lekythos

114

75

Decanter

115

164

Decanter

116

550

Imported lagynos

117

87

Local lagynos

118

526

Local lagynos

119

29

Local lagynos

neck at junction with shoulder. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4). Exterior surface both flaking and incrusted in places. Parallels and Dating. Athens (Thompson 1934:405, Fig. 92 E73), from a context re-dated to c. 110 BCE (Rotroff 1987:6); Paphos (Hayes 1991:18–21, Fig. XI:15, Series 6), end of the second century BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:125–126; Pl. 59:4), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:22, Fig. 2:11), second half of the second century BCE. 117 Complex 70. Inv. No. 87. IAA 97-3143. 3 examples (Fig. 6.12:117) Description. H 27.4 cm; rim D 3 cm; max. W 19.8 cm; base D 10 cm. Entire profile preserved of a moderately carinated lagynos with a tall, narrow, cylindrical neck, thickened rim and low ring foot. A flat, centrally ribbed handle, vertically attached from below rim and edge of shoulder. Red clay (2.5YR 5/8), white grits. Rouletted bands around upper exterior body, beginning at point of carination. Parallels and Dating. None found. Rouletting on the exterior walls may indicate a late Hellenistic date, for it is more commonly found during the Roman period. 118 Complex 70. Inv. No. 526. IAA 97-3142. 5 examples (Fig. 6.12:118) Description. PH 12.5 cm; max. W 16.5 cm; foot D 8.2 cm. Profile of a carinated medium-sized local lagynos preserved from low ring foot to base of neck. Lower end of vertical handle attached on shoulder. Very pale brown (10YR 7/3) clay, few white grits. Parallels and Dating. Pella (Smith, McNicoll and Hennessy 1981:12–17, Fig. 14:3), 145–82 BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967: 22, Fig. 2:12; Kee 1971: Fig. 11:3), second century BCE.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

107

Fig. 6.12. (113) Lekythos; (114, 115) decanters; (116–119) lagynoi.

119 Complex 70. Inv. No. 29. IAA 97-3144. 5 examples. (Fig. 6.12:119) Description. PH 10.5 cm; max. W 11.9 cm; foot D 5.5 cm. Profile of a small carinated local lagynos preserved

from ring foot to base of neck. Remains of vertical handle attached on shoulder. Light brown clay (2.5YR 6/3), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Pella (Smith, McNicoll and

108

TIKVA LEVINE

Hennessy 1981:12–17, Fig. 14:3), 145–82 BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:22; Fig. 2:12), second century BCE and (Kee 1971:49, Fig.11:3), first quarter of the first century BCE. JUGLETS The juglets have been divided into five classes. The first class has a convex bottom and occurs in two variants. The first variant (Nos. 120, 121) has a wide neck and the second (No. 122), a cup mouth.The second class consists of cup-mouth juglets with a narrow neck and a disk base. These may have a piriform (Nos. 123–125) or a rounded body (Nos. 126–128). The third class (Nos. 129–132) bears a disk base, pear-shaped body and flaring rim. The fourth class is unique to Maresha and is nicknamed ‘the Maresha Juglet’. It is the most common juglet at the site. Its rim variations may be seen in Nos. 133–138. The fifth class includes special shapes such as plain ware feeders (Nos. 140, 141) and the BSP filter jug/juglet (No. 142). The latter is the only clearly imported piece. Parallels from other sites indicate that these containers existed over a long period of time. The earliest specimens with convex bases, Nos. 120–122, were replaced by juglets with a disk base. The general trend is that the early thick-walled juglets are gradually replaced by thin-walled ones. The ‘mushroom’ rim, on vessel No. 123, develops into the cup-mouth juglet. The cup-mouth juglet undergoes changes as the cup becomes deeper (No. 128). The Maresha phenomenon of locally made vessels of the same form, occurring in both slipped and unslipped examples—No. 124 with No. 125; No. 126 with No. 127—is repeated with the juglets; compare, for example, No. 131 with No. 132; and No. 137 with No. 138. Convex-Based Juglets 120 Complex 70. Inv. No. 41. IAA 97-3160 (Fig. 6.13:120) Description. Rim D 7.7 cm; max. W 13.7 cm. Entire profile of large squat juglet preserved from convex base to thickened out-curving rim. Vertical handle attached at rim and shoulder. Reddish yellow clay (7.5YR 6/6), white grits and their drag lines. Incrustation on exterior. Parallels and Dating. Tell en-Nasbeh (Wampler 1947:158, Pl. 46:969), a similar form, from a context ending in 586 BCE; Vouni, Cyprus (Gjerstad et al.

1937: Tomb 2, 305, Pl. 100: top left; Tomb 8, 320, Pl. 104: the two jugs at left, second row from bottom), dated from the beginning of the Cypro-Classical II Period, 400–325 BCE. 121 Complex 70. Inv. No. 211. IAA 97-3210 (Fig. 6.13:121) Description. H 13.3 cm; rim D 4.3 cm; W 7.5 cm. Entire profile of ovoid juglet preserved from somewhat pointed convex base to outward-rolled rim. Vertical handle attached from rim to shoulder. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4), gray grits. Incrustation on exterior. Parallels and Dating. Vouni, Cyprus (Gjerstad et al. 1937:320, Tomb 8, Pl. 104: eighth juglet from right, second row from the bottom), Cypro-Classical II Period, 400–325 BCE; Salamis, Cyprus (Diederichs 1980:24, Pls. 3, 4:28–30), Hellenistic; Shiqmona (Elgavish 1968:26, Pl. XXXIII:11), flat bottomed, Persian period; ‘En Gedi (Mazar and Dunayevsky 1967:134–142, Pl. 32:2), Stratum IV, fifth–fourth centuries BCE. 122 Complex 70. Inv. No. 27. IAA 97-3201 (Fig. 6.13: 122) Description. H 14.7 cm; rim D 2.7 cm; W 12 cm. Profile of thin-walled cup-mouth globular juglet preserved from convex bottom to outward-folded flaring rim. Vertical handle attached at rim and shoulder. Fine light red clay (2.5YR 6/6). Parallels and Dating. Closest reference, with ovoid body is Stern Type 1 (1982:12, Fig.121: Photo 181), common through the Persian period. Cup-Mouthed Juglets with Disc Base 123 Complex 70. Inv. No. 153. IAA 97-3199 (Fig. 6.13:123) Description. H 13.3 cm; rim D 3.5 cm; base D 4.5 cm; W 8.6 cm. Entire profile of thick-walled ovoid juglet preserved from disk base to mushroom-rim. Vertical handle attached from rim to shoulder. White clay (2.5Y 8/2), small gray grits. Carelessly made. Parallels and Dating. None found. 124 Complex 70. Inv. No. 230 (Fig. 6.13:124) Description. PH 9.3 cm; W 8.3 cm. Profile preserves the piriform body of an undecorated cup-mouth juglet. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), small white grits. Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:25, Fig. 6:9), no later than the mid-first century BCE.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

125 Complex 70. Inv. No. 595 (Fig. 6.13:125) Description. PH 11 cm; W 7 cm; base D 3 cm. Profile preserving a thin-walled decorated cup-mouth juglet— the lower neck, body and disk base. Pink clay (5YR 7/3), small white grits, weak red (10R 4/4) slip over most of exterior body. Parallels and Dating. None found. 126 Complex 70. Inv. No. 19. IAA 97-3203 (Fig. 6.13:126) Description. H 13.3 cm; W 8.9 cm; rim D 3.4; base D 3.5 cm. Entire profile of undecorated cup-mouth globular juglet preserved from small disk base to flaring rim. Vertical handle attached from rim to shoulder. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), many small white grits. Surface abraded. Parallels and Dating. None found. 127 Complex 70. Inv. No. 62. IAA 97-3206. 6 examples (Fig. 6.13:127) Description. H 13.1 cm; W 8.7 cm; rim D 3.5 cm; base D 3 cm. Entire profile of decorated thin-walled cup-mouth juglet preserved from small disk base to narrow neck. Vertical handle attached from rim to shoulder. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6), small white grits, weak red slip (10R 4/4) with drip mark on upper exterior wall. Incrustation on exterior. Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Dothan 1971:46, Fig. 9:7), second century BCE; Lachish (Aharoni 1975:5, Pl. 51:21), from floor of Building 100, contemporaneous with the pottery from the temple, which is dated to the second century and was destroyed c. 150 BCE; Tel Gezer (Gitin 1990:87, Pl. 44:2 Type 187 A), late Hellenistic, mid-first century BCE. 128 Complex 70. Inv. No. 806. IAA 97-3202 (Fig. 6.13:128) Description. H 14.5 cm; W 10.5 cm; rim D 3 cm; base D 5 cm. Entire profile preserved of a cup-mouth globular juglet with narrow convex neck and low ring base. Vertical handle attached at rim and shoulder. Ribbing on exterior body. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4), many white grits. Parallels and Dating. A hybrid-form among the Hellenistic juglets of Maresha. The closest parallel was found at Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:126–129, Pl. 60:18), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Lapp Type 31.1, D-5 (P. W. Lapp 1961:159), globular juglets dated from the

109

first century BCE to the first century CE (though our juglet is flat bottomed, there is a strong resemblance); Jason’s Tomb (Rahmani 1967:81, Fig.11:1–3, Pl. 23A, middle left), late Hellenistic; Tel Michal (Fischer 1989:181, Fig. 13.2:17), Stratum IV, late Hellenistic, a similar type; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:25, Fig. 6:9), no later than the mid-first century BCE; Giv‘at ha-Mivtar (Tzaferis 1970:25, Fig. 6, Pl. 10A), it is noted that the use of this type juglet goes back as far as the second century BCE and that it becomes more popular about the middle of the first century BCE. Kahane (1953:50) in his discussion of the development of the ‘cup mouth’ juglet from the second century BCE makes the following observation: “There are two periods in which closely related types of the oil juglets were evolved: the Iron Age II (with a terminal in the Persian Period) and the Late Hellenistic–Herodian period”. This seems applicable for our juglets as demonstrated above, showing that they also cover a wide range of time. Pear-Shaped Juglets with Out-Turned Rim Fourteen examples were found, of which ten, Nos. 129–131, were undecorated and four, such as No. 132, were decorated. 129 Complex 70. Inv. No. 84. IAA 97-3205. 4 examples (Fig. 6.13:129) Description. H 9.4 cm; W 8.5 cm; rim D 6.0 cm; base D 4.5 cm. Profile of juglet preserved from wide disk base to thickened out-turned rim. Vertical handle set on rim and shoulder. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), small white grits. Parallels and Dating. Oumm el-‘Amed (Dunand and Duru 1962:198, Fig. 79: d–g), Hellenistic; Shiqmona (Elgavish 1974:53, Pl. IX:206, 207), not later than 132/126 BCE; Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970:58–66, Fig. 7:12), late Hellenistic; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:126–129, Pl. 22:15), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. 130 Complex 70. Inv. No. 977. 4 examples (Fig. 6.13: 130) Description. H 10.6 cm; W 7.9 cm; rim D 6 cm; base D 3.5 cm. Entire profile preserved from small disk base to square rim. Groove around bottom of neck. Vertical

110

TIKVA LEVINE

handle set at rim and shoulder. Yellowish red clay (5YR 5/6), tiny white grits. Careless manufacture. Parallels and Dating. As No. 129 above. 131 Complex 21. Inv. No. 615. IAA 97-3207. 4 examples (Fig. 6.13:131) Description. H 11 cm; W 7.7cm; rim D 5 cm; base D 3 cm. Profile preserved from small disk base to out-turned rim. Vertical handle attached at rim and shoulder. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), white and gray grits. Parallels and Dating. As No. 129. 132 Complex 70. Inv. No. 61. IAA 97-3208. 12 examples (Fig. 6.13:132) Description. H 9.1 cm; W 6.3 cm; rim D 4.5 cm; base D 2.8 cm. Entire profile preserved from small disk base to out-turned rim. Vertical handle attached at rim and shoulder. Yellowish red clay (5YR 5/6), small white grits and weak red slip (10R 4/4) on upper exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Shiqmona (Elgavish 1976:66, 71, Fig. 4:11), Level H, mid-second–last quarter of the second century BCE; Tirat Yehuda (Yeivin and Edelstein 1970:58–66, Fig. 7:11), late Hellenistic; Dor Type JT2b (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:307, Fig. 6.28: 9–12), Phases 4a and 3 in Area CO and 2d and 3a in Area C2, second half of the second century BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:126–129, Pl. 60:13,14), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. ‘Maresha Juglets’ Although this juglet is rare in stratified sites, it is the most common juglet at Hellenistic Maresha, apparently a product unique to Maresha. The form resembles the Persian-period juglet (see No. 121, above), suggesting a source of inspiration to which a flat base has been added as a functional feature. This biconical form may be tall (No. 134) or squat (Nos. 133, 135) with a low, pronounced carination (Nos. 134, 135). Juglet No. 133 resembles biconical jugs imitating the biconical jugs with a flat base, for example Dor Type JT 2b (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:307, Fig. 28:9–12) in Area CO, Phases 4a, 3 and in Area C2, Phases 3a, 2d from the second half of the second century BCE. No. 133 seems to be an imitation of a black-glazed juglet found in Athens (Thompson

Fig. 6.13 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

120

41

Convex-based juglet

121

211

Convex-based juglet

122

27

Convex-based juglet

123

153

Cup-mouthed juglet

124

230

Cup-mouthed juglet

125

595

Cup-mouthed juglet

126

19

Cup-mouthed juglet

127

62

Cup-mouthed juglet

128

806

Cup-mouthed juglet

129

84

Pear-shaped juglet

130

977

Pear-shaped juglet

131

615

Pear-shaped juglet

132

61

Pear-shaped juglet

133

531

‘Maresha juglet’

134

155

‘Maresha juglet’

135

119

‘Maresha juglet’

136

134

‘Maresha juglet’

137

979

‘Maresha juglet’

138

229

Decorated ‘Maresha juglet’

139

143

Cup resulting from ‘Maresha juglet’

140

225

Undecorated feeder

141

21

142

709

Decorated feeder BSP filter jug/juglet—Slane Type 36a

1934:73, Fig. 58 D20, with parallels cited), revised date—after the middle of the second century BCE (Rotroff 1987:6). Most popular however, is the form with a convex lower wall, either without decoration (Nos. 136, 137), or slipped (No. 138). All have a vertical handle set at the rim and upper wall and a small string-cut disk base. The tendency may have been towards standardization, with the emphasis more on a size to hold a certain amount of liquid, perhaps serving a specific function. An unslipped juglet identical to No. 135, found in Area 53 at Maresha (Kloner 1991:40), contained a hoard of 25 tetradrachms, the latest dating to the year 113/112 BCE (Barkay 1992/3:26; Pl. 3A; Kloner 1994:218, 270–271). This indicates that the juglets’ use continued into the late second century BCE. Kloner (1994:270) suggests that these juglets served for drawing liquids from collecting vats at Maresha.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Fig. 6.13. (120–139) Juglets; (140 , 141) feeders; (142) filter-jug.

111

112

TIKVA LEVINE

Similar but not identical unslipped examples, which may have inspired the ‘Maresha-juglet’ form, come from Oumm el-’Amed (Dunand and Duru 1962:198, Fig. 79: i, j), Hellenistic, undecorated juglets, similar only in their general form; Alexandria (Pagenstecher 1913:220, Pl. XLV:17), similar form but handle situated at mid-wall; Dura Europos (Dyson 1968: Fig. 12:305), from the last period of the city, before 256 CE, undecorated—the form similar but with a ring foot; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:25, Fig. 6:13), no later than the second century BCE. Parallels and Dating. The only identical examples come from Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:126–129, Pl. 60:3, 5), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE, both plain and slipped examples; Maresha (Kloner and Hess 1985:130, Fig. 3:8, 9), second century BCE. A red-slipped example, like No. 138, was found at Ashqelon (Stager 1991:37, top row, left), second century BCE. Its origin should be sought at Maresha. 133 Complex 70. Inv. No. 531. IAA 97-3204. 4 examples (Fig. 6.13:133) Description. H 9.7 cm; W 7.1 cm; rim D 5.5 cm; base D 3 cm. Entire profile preserved from disk base to beveled rim. Vertical handle set at rim and shoulder. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), small white grits. Parallels and Dating. See the discussion above. 134 Complex 70. Inv. No. 155. IAA 97-3200. 2 examples (Fig. 6.13:134) Description. H 11.7 cm; W 6.6 cm; rim D 3.4 cm; base D 3.2 cm. Entire profile preserved from disk base to rim. Vertical handle set at rim and shoulder. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4), gray grits. Parallels and Dating. See the discussion above. 135 Complex 70. Inv. No.119. IAA 97-3211. 2 examples (Fig. 6.13:135) Description. H 10.9 cm; W 7 cm; rim D 3.2 cm; base D 3 cm. Entire profile of a sharply carinated juglet preserved from disk base to rim. Vertical handle set at rim and shoulder. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/4), a few white grits. Parallels and Dating. See the discussion above. 136 Complex 70?. Inv. No. 134. IAA 97-3209. 21 examples (Fig. 6.13:136) Description. H 13.7 cm; W 7.9 cm; rim D 4 cm; base

D 3.8 cm. Entire profile of a slightly carinated juglet preserved from disk base to rim. Vertical handle set at rim and shoulder. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6), gray grits. Wheel ridged. Parallels and Dating. See the discussion above. 137 Complex 21. Inv. No. 979. 21 examples (Fig. 6.13: 137) Description. H 13.4 cm; W 7.7 cm; rim D 4 cm; base D 3.8 cm. Profile preserved of a tall slightly carinated juglet from disk base to rim. Vertical handle set at rim and shoulder. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), small white grits. Parallels and Dating. See the discussion above. 138 Complex 70. Inv. No. 229 (Fig. 6.13:138) Description. PH 10.3 cm; W 7.1 cm; base D 3 cm. Profile of a thin-walled juglet, preserved from disk base to upper wall. Vertical handle was attached at rim and shoulder. Red clay (2.5YR 6/6), small white grits, red slip (10YR 4/6) on upper exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Ashqelon (Stager 1991:37, top row, left), second century BCE. This is the only exact parallel found outside Maresha. Cup Made of a Maresha Juglet 139 Complex 70?. Inv. No. 143 (Fig. 6.13:139) Description. PH 6.5 cm; max D 5.5 cm. Profile of juglet preserved from string-cut disk base to lower wall. Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), small white grits. This cup was made by cutting the juglet in half and utilizing only the bottom part. Miscellaneous Feeders 140 Complex 70. Inv. No. 225 (Fig. 6.13:140) Description. PH 6 cm; W 6.4 cm; base D 3.2 cm. Profile of a globular feeder preserved from disk base to bottom of neck. Vertical handle was attached at rim and shoulder and a spout situated at mid-body (both now missing). Pale brown clay (10YR 6/3), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:126–129, Pl. 60:22), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Bet Zur (Sellers 1933:43, Pl. XI:14), Hellenistic; Jason’s Tomb (Rahmani 1967:82, Fig.12:9), late Hellenistic.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

141 Complex 70. Inv. No. 21. 2 examples (Fig. 6.13: 141). Description. PH 7.7 cm; W 6.2 cm; base D 3.5 cm. Profile of a globular, decorated feeder preserved from disk base to bottom of neck. Vertical handle set at rim and shoulder and a spout at mid-body (both now missing). Very pale brown clay (10YR 7/3), light red slip (2.5YR 6/6) on upper exterior. Parallels and Dating. Salamis, Cyprus (Diederichs 1980:21, Pls. 2, 3:16), Hellenistic I, 325–150 BCE; Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997b:53–54, Pl. 10 PW 63), Hell. 2C, late Hellenistic. BSP Filter Jug/Juglet–Slane Type 36a 142 Complex 58. Inv. No. 709. IAA 97-3189 (Fig. 6.13:142) Description. PH 6.2 cm; W 9 cm; rim D ext. 8.8 cm; int. 7.5 cm; spout 3.7 cm. Profile of imported, decorated filter jug preserved from mid-body to incurved rim. Five holes in strainer, conical spout at a 60° angle on upper wall. Vertical strap handle from neck to lower body (now missing). Pink clay (7.5YR 8/4), black slip (2.5YR 3/0) on exterior, weak red slip (10R 4/4) on interior. Incrustation covers much of exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. For the general type see Athens ‘perfume pot’ (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:162–164, Fig. 11, Pl. 39:1201–1203, with parallels therein), 375–325 BCE, and (Rotroff 1997:180–182; Fig. 73, Pl. 87:1183–1193), filter-jug, third century BCE; Delos (Bruneau 1970:258, D207), last third of the second–first third of the first century BCE; Tel Anafa, Slane Type 36a (1997:329, FW 287), second century BCE; Ashdod (Kee 1971:45, Fig. 8, 9), typical of the late second century BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:127, Fig. 60:23, gray clay), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. BOTTLE The bottle has a long narrow neck and a solid, relatively short foot. Only one example is represented in our assemblage. It may be considered as the predecessor of the Hellenistic fusiform unguentarium, which tends to have a long neck and foot. 143 Complex 70. Inv. No. 246 (Fig. 6.14:143) Description. PH 5.5 cm; W 6 cm; rim D 3 cm. Profile of a squat bottle with an angular shoulder preserved

113

from the upper wall to the down-turned rim. Pink clay (5YR 7/3), white grits. Parallels and Dating. Stern Type A2 (1982:125–126), fifth–fourth centuries BCE; Tel Michal (Singer-Avitz 1989:137, Fig. 9.15:10), the course of the Persian period; Tel Qiri (Ben-Tor and Portugali 1987:24, Fig. 5:10; Photo 4:4), latter half of the Persian period, second half of the fifth and fourth centuries BCE. FUSIFORM UNGUENTARIA Pemberton (1985:274), while discussing the fusiform unguentaria from graves at Corinth, which ranged in date from the last third of the fourth century until 146 BCE, makes the following observations: 1. Earlier examples have white- and red-painted bands. 2. Maximum diameter in plumper earlier examples is more than half the height, and in later examples less than half. 3. Stemmed foot appears slightly later in date on the bulbous unguentarium; the slimmer the container the later the date. 4. On later examples, the neck is taller, narrower and slightly flaring. The flaring disappears in the latest examples. 5. The rim, normally everted and down-turned, appears under-cut in later examples. However, shape alone is insufficient for establishing typological or uniform chronological development (Anderson-Stojanovic 1987:109). Valid chronological conclusions can be drawn only from fusiform unguentaria isolated by fabric, as for example in the case of Athenian Gray Unguentaria (Rotroff 1984). In view of the observations above, the unguentaria at Maresha are quite diverse. One can find the Athenian import (No. 144) together with its imitation (No. 145), and a variety of local decorated and undecorated bulbous and fusiform specimens (Nos. 146–150). 144 Complex 70?. Inv. No. 243 (Fig. 6.14:144) Description. PH 7.1 cm; W 4.4 cm; base D 3.2 cm. Profile of an Athenian gray fusiform unguentarium preserved from disk base to mid-body. Dark gray clay (10YR 4/1), a faint white-painted band (10YR 8/2) at mid body. Parallels and Dating. This type has a strong concentration in Attica, where it is the most common

114

TIKVA LEVINE

variety (Rotroff 1984). It is also reported from Corinth (Pemberton 1985:284–286, Pl. 80, T2014), dated to the end of the third century BCE. 145 Complex 70. Inv. No. 27. 4 examples (Fig. 6.14:145) Description. PH 12.5 cm; W 4.6 cm; base D 2.7 cm. Profile of imitation Athenian gray fusiform unguentarium, preserved from disk base to upper neck. Dark gray clay (10YR 4/1), a few white grits. Faint white-painted bands (10YR 8/2) around the neck and shoulder. Parallels and Dating. Most common in Attica where it underwent a series of changes in the third and early second centuries BCE (Rotroff 1984). Specifically reported from Athens (Thompson 1934:92, Fig. 78, D78), re-dated to after the middle of the second century BCE (Rotroff 1987:6). 146 Complex 70. Inv. No. 131 (Fig. 6.14:146) Description. PH 8.6 cm; base D 3.7cm; max. W 4.6 cm. Profile of a slip decorated fusiform unguentarium, preserved from a solid disk base distinctively set off from a tall toe to the lower wall. Light reddish brown (5YR 6/3) clay and slip. Careless manufacture. Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Kee 1971:57, Fig. 18:4), after 100 BCE, and (Bahat 1971:176, Fig. 99:23, Pl. XC:2–4), from 150 BCE to the first century CE; Tell Keisan (Briend and Humbert 1980:111, Pl. 14:18), the course of the second century BCE. 147 Complex 70. Inv. No. 120. 3 examples (Fig. 6.14: 147) Description. PH 17.6 cm; W 6.9 cm; base D 3.5 cm. Profile of a fusiform unguentarium preserved from solid disk base to the bottom of the neck. Solid disk base distinctively set off from tall toe. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4). Careless manufacture. Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 91.1. A-S (P.W. Lapp 1961:197), second century BCE; Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:126, Pl. 22:11), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Dor Type UG2c (Guz-Zilberstein 1995:306, Fig. 6.26:29), mid-second century BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:22, Figs. 4:5; 11:10), 150 BCE to first century CE; the Citadel, Jerusalem (Johns 1950:144, Fig. 14:7), first century BCE.

Fig. 6.14 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

143

246

Bottle

144

243

Athenian gray fusiform unguentarium

145

27

146

131

Fusiform unguentarium

147

120

Fusiform unguentarium

148

563

Fusiform unguentarium

149

575

Fusiform unguentarium

150

648

Fusiform unguentarium

Imitation Athenian gray fusiform unguentarium

148 Complex 70. Inv. No. 563. 2 examples (Fig. 6.14:148) Description. PH 14 cm; W 8 cm. Part of body and upper end of foot of a fusiform unguentarium preserved. Reddish brown clay (5YR 5/3). Careless manufacture. Parallels and Dating. Tell el-Ful (N. Lapp 1978:103, Pl. 77:3), 135–100 BCE. 149 Complex 70. Room 25. Inv. No. 575. 6 examples (Fig. 6.14:149) Description. PH 17 cm; W 4.3 cm; rim D 3 cm. Profile of a fusiform unguentarium, preserved from lower body to drooping rim. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/4), white grits. Pronounced wheel ridging on exterior. Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 91.1 A-S (P. W. Lapp 1961:197), 175–165 BCE; Ashdod (Kee 1971:57, Fig. 18:10), mid-second century BCE; Ashdod (Bahat 1971:176, Fig. 99:25; Pl. XC:2–4), 150 BCE to first century CE. 150 Complex 21. Inv. No. 648. 4 examples (Fig. 6.14:150) Description. H 20.9 cm; W 4.1 cm; rim D 3 cm; base D 3 cm. Entire profile of a fusiform unguentarium, preserved from disk base to horizontal rim. Light gray clay (5Y 7/2). Careless manufacture, vessel stands at an angle. Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:126–129, Pl. 60:10), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Ashdod (Bahat 1971:176, Fig. 99:19, Pl. XC:2–4), 150 BCE to first century CE.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

115

Fig. 6.14. (143) Bottle; (144–150) fusiform unguentaria.

LAMPS Wheelmade Lamps Saucer Lamp 151 Complex unknown; Inv. No. 401 (Fig. 6.15:151) Description. L 10 cm; W 10 cm; H 3 cm. Profile of a thin-walled saucer lamp preserved with flat base and pinched nozzle. Light reddish brown clay ( 5YR 6/4), tiny white grits. Groove on rim, blackened wick hole. Parallels and Dating. The simple saucer lamp is typical of earlier local traditions in Palestine (see Rosenthal and Sivan 1978:75–77). We found no parallels for this saucer lamp elsewhere in Israel except at Maresha. ‘Shephelah’ Lamp This is characterized by a globular wheelmade body and a short nozzle (No. 152, below). Found at Maresha in pale brown or brown clay, undecorated. Typical of the early Hellenistic period in the Shephelah region of Israel, including Maresha.6 Rosenthal and Sivan (1978:78, Photo 322–323 and parallels therein) suggest a date running from the end of the fourth to the beginning of the third century BCE. 152 Complex 70. Room 25. Inv. No. 585. IAA 97-3232. 11 examples (Fig. 6.15:152) Description. L 8.2 cm; W 5.5 cm; H 3.2 cm. Complete lamp preserved with a large central filling hole enclosed by a raised ridge, short thick nozzle with small wick hole and a string cut base. Reddish brown clay (2.5YR 5/4). Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:129, Pl. 62:1), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; necropolis of Maresha (Oren and Rappaport 1984:125, Pl. 13:III), third to first centuries BCE.

Variation of ‘Shephelah’ Lamp 153 Complex 70. Inv. No. 812. IAA 97-3231 (Fig. 6.15:153) Description. L 9.1 cm; W 3.4 cm; H 2.7 cm. Complete. Variation of the ‘Shephelah lamp’ (No. 152 above), with a rounded body, flat base, elongated nozzle and a small wick hole. Decorative leaf-like handle with two incised volutes along its sides. Two grooves on top outer edge of nozzle. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/4), small white grits, brown slip (7.5YR 5/2). Careless manufacture, knife paring marks and blackened wick hole. Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Reisner, Fischer and Lyon 1924:321, Fig. 192:I1a), ‘Hellenistic lamp’. Moldmade Lamps Howland Type 25; Broneer Type VII–VIII 154 Complex 70, passage to Room 25. Inv. No. 586 (Fig. 6.15:154) Description. L 9.6 cm; W 6 cm; H 2.5 cm. Entire profile of a low, broad-shouldered lamp with two ridges around sunken central filling hole, solid lug on shoulder, concave base and short nozzle. Reddish brown clay (5YR 5/4), red slip (10R 4/6). Surface abraded. Parallels and Dating. Variant of Howland Type 25 B Prime (1958:74–77, Pls. 11, 38) and Broneer Type VII–VIII (1930:143, Pl. III), typical of the late first and second quarters of the third century BCE. Kite-Shaped with Pointed Lugs 155 Complex 70. Inv. No. 535. IAA 97-3238. 3 examples (Fig. 6.15:155) Description. L 8–8.5 cm, W 6.5–7 cm, H 2.8 cm. Complete. Double convex body with tiny central filling hole; relief decoration hasn’t survived on abraded

116

TIKVA LEVINE

shoulder. Round flat base with a marked groove at the center of the underside marking off the base. Yellowish red clay (5YR 4/6), with sparkling inclusions in fabric. Unidentifiable decoration on nozzle. Parallels and Dating. Hayes cites examples in the collection of the Royal Ontario Museum (Hayes 1980:22–23, Pls. 9:84, 85; 16:161), dated to the end of the third to second centuries BCE and classifies early types of red slipped ware as coming from the Fayyum in Egypt. 156 Complex 21. Inv. No. 997. IAA 79-43. 3 examples (Fig. 6.15:156) Description. L 10 cm; W 7 cm; H 3.2 cm. Almost complete double convex lamp, rounded back, long nozzle with row of chevrons between grooves; two winged Erotes supporting palmette between their heads flank the ridged central filling hole. Transverse groove borders wick hole. Gray clay (10YR 5/1), very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Base missing. Parallels and Dating. Schloessinger Collection, Rosenthal and Sivan (1978:13, Photo 24; 14, Photo 25 and parallels therein) date such lamps to the second half of the second and the beginning of the first centuries BCE. 157 Complex 70. Inv. No. 807. IAA 97-3230. 2 examples (Fig. 6.15:157) Description. L 7.9 cm; W 6.5 cm; H 2.7 cm. Complete double convex lamp with pointed side lugs. Square meanders encircle a ridge around the large central filling hole, two volutes on pointed nozzle. Flat round base with a marked groove. Light brownish gray clay (10YR 6/2), flaky very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Wick hole blackened. Parallels and Dating. Examples in the Schloessinger Collection of Egyptian origin are dated to the first half of the first century BCE (Rosenthal and Sivan 1978:59, Photo 235 with parallels therein); Bailey notes an example in the British Museum (Bailey 1975:272–273, Pl. 112: Q592.EA), with a club-shaped device on the nozzle of a red-slipped lamp, originating in Nubia, probably late second or first century BCE. 158 Complex 21. Inv. No. 999. IAA 79-42. 2 examples (Fig. 6.15:158) Description. L 8.3 cm; W 6.1 cm; H 2.8 cm. Complete double convex lamp with a raised base marked by a groove. Ridge around central filling hole inside the leaf-like band. Two sheaves flank short, centrally

Fig. 6.15 ►

Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

151

401

Wheelmade open saucer lamp

152

585

Wheelmade ‘Shephelah lamp’

153

812

Wheelmade ‘Shephelah lamp’ with handle

154

586

Moldmade lamp

155

535

Moldmade kite-shaped lamp

156

997

Moldmade kite-shaped Erotes lamp

157

807

Moldmade kite-shaped lamp

158

999

Moldmade kite-shaped lamp

159

742

Moldmade kite-shaped lamp

ridged nozzle. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4), red slip (10R 4/6). Blackened wick hole. Incrustation on nozzle. Parallels and Dating. The Maresha lamp closely resembles an example in the Royal Ontario Museum (Hayes 1980:33, Pl. 15:151), dated with no certainty to the first century BCE and suggested as probably being Fayyum ware. 159 Complex 58. Inv. No. 742 (Fig. 6.15:159) Description. L 9.4 cm; W 5.5 cm; H 2.6 cm. Complete double convex lamp with high rounded shoulders. Flat round base marked by a groove. Knot-like design on back of lamp, two S-coils on shoulder, large palmette on nozzle. Ridge around filling hole. Light orange clay, black grits, and red slip.7 Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:129, Pl. 62:12), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE. Delphiniform Lamps The Delphiniform lamp with a knob on its side is the most common Hellenistic lamp at Maresha. Fifty-five of the 85 lamps found are of this general type. The type, very common throughout the Eastern Mediterranean, dates to the second and first centuries BCE (Rosenthal and Sivan 1978:13; Lyon-Caen and Hoff 1986:57). At Maresha, a variety of clays, slip and decorations may be observed. Gray Clay Delphiniform Lamps 160 Complex 70. Inv. No. 140. IAA 97-3237. 24 examples (Fig. 6.16:160) Description. L 8.5 cm; W 5 cm; H 2.2 cm. Complete. Flat round base marked by a groove. Radial egg-and-

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Fig. 6.15. Lamps.

117

118

TIKVA LEVINE

dart? band around large central filling hole enclosed by a ridge. Two transverse lines separate the wick hole. Two branches from the nozzle shaft flank the nozzle. S-coil on the shoulder. Gray clay (10YR 5/1), very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Parallels and Dating. Gezer (Macalister 1912:218, Pl. CLXXXIII:10), late second century BCE. Most popular design on lamps in repertoire. 161 Complex 21. Inv. No. 646. 4 examples (Fig. 6.16:161) Description. L 9.2 cm; W 5.8 cm; H 2.2 cm. Almost complete with radial stripes round central filling hole with a marked ridge. Two branches flank nozzle, large palmette on nozzle. Flat round base marked by a groove. S-coil on shoulder. Gray clay (10YR 5/1), very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Careless manufacture. Broken near central filling hole. Parallels and Dating. Rosenthal and Sivan suggest a date of mid-second to mid-first centuries BCE, possibly extending to the end of the first century (Rosenthal and Sivan 1978:13, Photo 22 with parallels therein). 162 Complex 70. Inv. No. 63. IAA 97-3235. 4 examples (Fig. 6.16:162) Description. L 8.9 cm; W 6 cm; H 2.3 cm. Complete lamp with decoration of radial stripes alternating with branches. Ridged circular central filling hole. Transverse, incised line separates wick hole from nozzle shaft. Flat round base marked by a groove. S-coil on shoulder. Gray clay (10YR 5/1), very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:129, Pl. 62:8), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Delos (Bruneau 1965:81–86, Pl. 20:4003), second half of the second century BCE. 163 Complex 21. Inv. No. 357. IAA 79–37 (Fig. 6.16:163) Description. L 8.4 cm; W 5.3 cm; H 2 cm. Complete lamp with pointed triangular leaves around outside ridge enclosing the central filling hole. Flat round base marked by a groove. Transverse, incised line separates wick hole from nozzle shaft. S-coil on shoulder. Gray clay (10YR 5/1), very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Parallels and Dating. Gezer (Macalister 1912:218, Pl. CLXXXIII:17), late second century BCE; Delos (Bruneau 1965:81–86, Pl. 21:4095, 4097), second half

Fig. 6.16 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

160

140

Gray Delphiniform lamp

161

646

Gray Delphiniform lamp

162

63

Gray Delphiniform lamp

163

357

Gray Delphiniform lamp

164

358

Gray Delphiniform lamp

165

359

Gray Delphiniform lamp

166

534

Gray Delphiniform lamp with handle

of the second and the beginning of the first centuries BCE. 164 Complex 21. Inv. No. 358. IAA 79-32. 3 examples (Fig. 6.16:164) Description. L 8.4 cm; W 5 cm; H 2.3 cm. Complete lamp with decoration of dotted semicircles alternating with radial rays (egg-and-dart?) around central filling hole; ridge around central filling hole, large palmette on nozzle. Flat round base marked by a groove. Transverse, incised line separates wick hole from nozzle. S-coil on shoulder. Gray clay (10YR 5/1), very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Much of the design is worn off. Parallels and Dating. Delos (Bruneau 1965:81–86, Pl. 21:4064, 4081), second half of the second century BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:18, Fig. 1:2), late third century and well into the second century BCE and (Kee 1971:46, Fig. 8:21), late second century BCE; Tel Michal (Fischer 1989:179, Fig. 13.1:13), Stratum V, early Hellenistic (Ptolemaic), third century BCE, a red-slipped example. 165 Complex 21. Inv. No. 359. IAA 79-35. 4 examples (Fig. 6.16:165) Description. L 8.5 cm; W 5.5 cm; H 2.5 cm. Complete lamp undecorated except for ridge around central filling hole, two deep incised lines flank nozzle and S-coil on shoulder. Flat round base marked by a groove. Gray clay (10YR 5/1), very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Parallels and Dating. Delos (Bruneau 1965: 81–86, Pl. 21:4043), second half of the second and the beginning of the first centuries BCE. 166 Complex 70. Inv. No. 534. IAA 97-3233. 2 examples (Fig. 6.16:166) Description. L 12 cm; W 6.5 cm; H 2.2 cm. Almost complete lamp with handle in the form of a large

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

119

Fig. 6.16. Lamps.

palmette knotted with curling volute-like ribbons, ridge around central filling hole with radial rays and sheaves of grain flanking long nozzle; two S-coils on shoulder. Flat round base marked by a groove. Gray clay (10YR 6/1), very dark gray slip (5YR 3/1). Nozzle missing.

Parallels and Dating. Delos (Bruneau 1965:81–86, Pl. 21:4142), second half of the second century BCE; Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:320, I1a), ‘Hellenistic lamp’; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:21, Fig. 8:5), an identical lamp dated to no later than the mid-first century BCE.

120

TIKVA LEVINE

Red Clay Delphiniform Lamps 167 Complex 21. Inv. No. 619. IAA 97-3236 (Fig. 6.17:167) Description. L 8.3 cm; W 6 cm; H 2.3 cm. Complete. Flat round base marked by a groove, projecting rays around central filling hole, two S-coils on shoulder. Ridge around central filling hole. Gray clay (10YR 5/1), very dark gray slip (10YR 3/1). Blackened wick hole. Parallels and Dating. Tell Sandahanna (Bliss and Macalister 1902:129, Pl. 62:13), Seleucid, present before the end of the second century BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:25, Fig. 8:4), second century BCE; Delos (Bruneau 1965:81–86, Pl. 21:4129), second half of the second and the beginning of the first centuries BCE, a similar form in gray clay. 168 Complex 21. Inv. No. 360. IAA 79-29. 7 examples (Fig. 6.17:168) Description. L 8.8 cm; W 5.6 cm; H 2.3 cm. An almost complete lamp with radial branches around central filling hole and S-coil on shoulder. Flat round base marked by a groove. Light reddish brown clay (5YR 6/3), weak red slip (10YR 5/4). Blackened wick hole. Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Kee 1971:47, Fig.10:10), late second century BCE, an identical lamp; Delos (Bruneau 1965:81–86, Pl. 20:4033), second half of the second century BCE. 169 Complex 70. Inv. No. 127. 5 examples (Fig. 6.17:169) Description. L 9.3 cm; W 6.3 cm; H 2.7 cm. Body fragment of a lamp with radial stripes around central filling hole, branches flanking nozzle and S-coil on shoulder. Flat round base marked by a groove. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), red slip (10R 4/6). Parallels and Dating. Lapp Type 83.2.A (P.W. Lapp 1961:194), mid-first century BCE; Ashdod (Kee 1971:59, Fig. 20:11), second half of the second century BCE and (Bahat 1971:177, Fig. 100:6, Pl. XC:8), early first century BCE; the Citadel, Jerusalem (Johns 1950: 144, Fig. 14:b), first century BCE. 170 Complex 70. Inv. No. 32. IAA 97-3239 (Fig. 6.17:170) Description. L 8 cm; W 5.5 cm; H 2.7 cm. Complete lamp decorated with pairs of triangles alternating with branches flanking short nozzle and S-coil on the shoulder. Ridge around central filling hole with groove

Fig. 6.17 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

167

619

Red Delphiniform lamp

168

360

Red Delphiniform lamp

169

127

Red Delphiniform lamp

170

32

Red Delphiniform lamp

171

743

Red Delphiniform lamp with mask

172

823

Egyptian lamp

173

817

Egyptian lamp

on round flat base. Light red clay (2.5YR 6/6), red slip. Parallels and Dating. Delos (Bruneau 1965:81–86, Pl. 21:4095, 4097), second half of the second and the beginning of the first centuries BCE. 171 Complex 58. Inv. No. 743 (Fig. 6.17:171) Description. L 8 cm; W 5 cm; H 2.5 cm. Almost complete lamp with radial stripes and branches projecting from raised ridge around central filling hole; S-coil on shoulder and a head of Isis(?) on nozzle. The flat round base is marked by a groove. Light orange clay, white grits, black slip.8 Parallels and Dating. No identical lamp was found, but examples with heads on the nozzle are known: Samaria (Crowfoot 1957b:370–371, Fig. 87:6), Hellenistic, Delphiniform with radiating lines on body and bearded head on nozzle; Salamis, Cyprus (Oziol 1977:57, Pl. 8:123, 124), Hellenistic; Rosenthal and Sivan (1978:13, Photo 23), mid-second to mid-first centuries BCE classified as a lamp with lug and S-coil; Delos (Bruneau 1965:81–88), second half of the second and the beginning of the first centuries BCE, a variation of the Delphiniform. Miscellaneous Moldmade Lamps 172 Complex 70. Inv. No. 823. IAA 97-3234 (Fig. 6.17:172) Description. L 6.7 cm; W 4.2 cm; H 2.6 cm. Small lamp with two ridges around the small central filling hole and ring base enclosed by two grooves. Decoration of concentric semicircles and nodules between pairs of dotted lines, ‘rope’ motif across top of nozzle. Brown clay (7.5YR 5/4), reddish brown slip (2.5YR 5/4). Blackened wick hole.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

121

Fig. 6.17. Lamps.

Parallels and Dating. This type was manufactured in Alexandria (Mlýnarczyk 1995:204, Pl. 1:3) continuously from the second half of the second century BCE down to the end of the Hellenistic period; Corinth (Howland 1958:165, Pl. 48:648), Howland Type 48E, last quarter of the second into the first century BCE; Rosenthal and Sivan (1978: 14, 28 with parallels therein), second and beginning of the first centuries BCE; British Museum (Bailey 1975:262, Pl. 110: Q565–Q569), second half of the first century BCE into the first century CE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman 1967:31, Fig. 11:21), early Roman. 173 Complex 70. Inv. No. 817 (Fig. 6.17:173) Description. L 6.9 cm; W 4.7 cm; H 2.5 cm. Lamp decorated with rectangular pegs in relief around outer

edge of central filling hole and branches or sheaves of grains on both sides of nozzle. Ridge encloses central filling hole. Very dark gray clay (10YR 3/1), gray slip (10YR 6/1). Parallels and Dating. Karanis (Shier 1978:19–20, Pl. 11:19, Type A4.3), second century BCE. MISCELLANEOUS POTTERY VESSELS Amis 174 Complex 70. Inv. No. 209 (Fig. 6.18:174) Description. H 28 cm; rim D 12.5 cm; W 18 cm. Almost complete profile (flat foot missing) of an amis or urinal, with wheel-ridged walls and inward beveled rim. Thick, double-grooved vertical handle attached at rim and mid-wall. Gray clay (2.5 YN5), white grits. Incrustation on lower exterior wall.

122

TIKVA LEVINE

Parallels and Dating. Athens (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:231, Pl. 96:2012–2013, with parallels therein), present from the mid- and later fifth century BCE. No parallels known in Israel, or perhaps, the vessel has not been identified when found. The Maresha piece is probably early Hellenistic in date, and most likely, a local variation following Greek tradition. Brazier Braziers are common during the second century BCE and become widespread around the Mediterranean coastal Hellenistic settlements, rather than inland, probably because of their weight (Rahmani 1984:231). No. 175 is decorated with a combination of popular motifs, common on braziers of the Hellenistic period, as for example, at Priene (Wiegand and Schrader 1904:459–465) and Delos (Conze 1890:135–141 passim). 175 Complex 1. Inv. No. 1000. IAA 97-3259 (Fig. 6.18:175) Description. PH 6 cm; est. D 48.8 cm; W 12 cm. Profile of a brazier preserving a heavy flaring rim with an incised and punched flower and tendril band design around outer edge of upper surface of rim enclosing a band of ovolos in high relief. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4), large gray/black grits. Parallels and Dating. No exact parallels found. See discussion above. Parthian Glazed Jug 176 Complex 70. Inv. No. 553. IAA 97-3261 (Fig. 6.18:176) Description. PH 11 cm; W 13 cm. Profile of a Parthian glazed jug preserved from shoulder to ring foot. White clay/frit (5Y 7/1), blue-green (5G 6/2) glaze on exterior, three narrow concentric grooves around upper exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Seleucia on the Tigris (Debevoise 1934:93, 259–261), Level IV, ending c. 141 BCE.

SUMMARY The ceramic repertoire of Maresha, as reflected in the material presented here, illustrates that imported pottery came to the site from many places. Also there are a number of forms typical of Maresha

Fig. 6.18 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

174

209

Amis

175

1000

Brazier

176

553

Parthian glazed jug

that are rare or unknown elsewhere, e.g. Bowls Nos. 53–55 and No. 56; Four-Handled Krater No. 61; ‘Double-Decker’Krater No. 66; Globular Cooking Pot No. 67; Storage Jars Nos. 82, 83; ‘Maresha Juglets’ Nos. 136–138; Lamp No. 154 and Amis No. 174. These observations are supported by both the historical background and the geographical location of Maresha. Maresha’s population comprised different ethnic groups. Both Idumeans and Sidonians are known from the epigraphic material (Peters and Thiersch 1905; Eshel and Kloner 1996) and the historical sources (see discussion in Chap. 1, above). Some Phoenician elements were identified in the pottery recovered, namely the Phoenician Semi-Fine Ware vessels such as Table Amphora No. 86 and Amphoriskos No. 89, while North Syrian elements (from the area between Hama and Tel Anafa) were suggested in the BSP Bowls Nos. 5 and 6; BSP Filter Jug/Juglet No. 142; and ESA Bowls and Plates Nos. 7–15, together with the ESA Krater/Chalice No. 60, by Slane (1997:272). Italian products found their way to Maresha as well, and are represented in the Campana A Ware specimens, Plates and Bowls Nos. 16–19 along with the Knidian pottery influence, illustrated by Bowls Nos. 39–44. However, strong Greek influence is clearly indicated, not only by the actual imported examples themselves, but especially by the fact that many vessels were locally produced copies of Greek forms. Ceramic plain wares, typical of the Persian period— for example Deep Kraters Nos. 63, 64; Cooking-Krater No. 68; Storage Jars Nos. 78, 79; Lekythos No. 113 and Juglets Nos. 120, 121, 122—not only preserve, but also follow and develop previously existing local traditions into the Hellenistic period. The presence of Persian-period vessels in our assemblage may point to the possible existence of a small-scale settlement near the subterranean complexes discussed in our volume, from the lower city of Maresha. Bliss and Macalister had already noted the existence of finds prior to the Seleucid period at the tell (acropolis; Bliss and Macalister 1902:58 and see above Chap. 2). Pottery types as, for example Decanters Nos. 114, 115, may

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

123

Fig. 6.18. Miscellaneous pottery vessels.

continue into the Roman period. The terminus ante quem of the site, at the end of the second century BCE, indicates that those vessels were already present at Maresha at an earlier date. We may assume that Egyptian influences affected the pottery, during Ptolemaic control of the region, in the early Hellenistic period (third century BCE), when

some distinct Egyptian forms were introduced such as Lamps Nos. 157 and 172, as well as the Faience Bowl (Small Find No. 1). The recent numismatic study of all the Maresha coins reveals Ptolemaic coins and strengthens our assumption of Egyptian contact. The most dominant group of Ptolemaic coins ranges from Ptolemy I

124

TIKVA LEVINE

(305–283 BCE) to Ptolemy IV (221–205 BCE; Rachel Barkay, pers. comm.). Maresha potters adopted foreign forms and added a local flavor as they adapted them to their customers’ needs. Among these may be included imitations of mostly Greek imported shapes such as the Incurved Rim Bowl (Nos. 31–38); the Fishplate (Nos. 45–49); the classical Angular Bowl (Nos. 53–55); the Lekanai (Nos. 57–59); the Pyxis Lid (No. 62); the Deep Kraters (Nos. 63–65); the ‘DoubleDecker’ Krater (No. 66); the Casserole (No. 77); the Table Amphora (No. 88); the Lekythos (No. 113); the Lagynoi (Nos. 116–119); the Filter Jug (No. 142); the Unguentaria (Nos. 144, 145); the Amis (No. 174); and many others, that were produced on site. In other cases, the potters created a new form altogether such as the Four-Handled Krater (No. 61). Noteworthy is the fact that the Hasmonean/late Hellenistic pinched saucer-lamp and the typical globular spindle-shaped bottles, common in Jerusalem and its surroundings in this period, are totally absent from our assemblage. This may indicate that a Jewish population was not present, at least in these parts of the lower city, following the conquest of Maresha by John Hyrcanus I in 112/111 BCE or slightly later. The pottery from the complexes discussed here represents a Hellenistic ceramic repertoire typical of settlements of non-Jewish populations of the third and second centuries BCE9 (for further discussion on this issue, see Levine 1999:113–122). It may be that some Hellenistic pottery found in nearby settlements was made at Maresha, since mass production of pottery calls for a degree of distribution outside the point of manufacture. One may note, for example, the many parallels at Ashdod noted earlier or the ‘Maresha Juglet’ (No. 138) found in Ashqelon. The publication of the forthcoming pottery assemblages from Area 61 will shed more light on the issues raised here. SMALL FINDS HEMISPHERICAL FAIENCE BOWL 1 Complex 70. Room 8. Inv. No. 206. IAA 97-3260 (Fig. 6.19:1). Description. PH 8.5 cm; est. D 14.8 cm. Profile preserved from plain rim to lower wall. Glazed decoration on

exterior of a pale green (5G 7/2) and dark reddish gray (5YR 4/2) ladder and net design over a white background (5Y 7/1) and stylized leaves. Interior decoration consists of a pale green (5G 7/2) painted branch below rim over a white ground (5Y 7/1). Parallels and Dating. Samaria (Crowfoot 1957b: 389–391, Fig. 91:10), Ptolemaic, third century BCE; Mishmar Ha-‘Emeq (Giveon 1963:29, Fig. 1), late third or early second century BCE. GLASS BOWLS Molded conical and hemispherical olive-green glass bowls, decorated with wheel-cut grooves, are common in the Hellenistic period. They were so classified by Grose (1979:57) at Tel Anafa in his Group A and appeared in contexts of the second and first centuries BCE. Both forms occurred in large numbers at Tel Anafa where they are dated 100–80/75 BCE (Herbert 1994:26, Fig. 2). 2 Complex Unknown. Inv. No. 662 (Fig. 6.19:2) Description. PH 7 cm; est. rim D 21.2 cm. Rim fragment of conical olive green (5G4 7/1) glass bowl with two grooves, one deep, around interior below rim. Parallels and Dating. Ashdod (Barag 1971:203, Fig. 105:7, Pl. XCVIII:2), late second and first centuries BCE; Jewish Quarter, Jerusalem (Avigad 1972:198–199, Fig. 4:1, Pl. 45:B), Site J, L1359, first century BCE; Ashdod (Dothan and Freedman

Fig. 6.19 ► Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type/Comment

1

206

Faience bowl

2

662

Glass bowl

3

655

Glass bowl

4

638

Worked bone

5

639

Worked bone

6

203

Worked bone

7

202

Worked bone

8

208

Iron knife

9

539

Iron chisel

10

627

Stone stopper

11

499

Stone stamp

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Fig. 6.19. Small finds.

125

126

TIKVA LEVINE

1967:36–37, Fig. 16:3), no later than the mid-first century BCE; City of David, Jerusalem (Ariel 1990:154, Fig. 27: GL.12, GL.13), Early Roman. 3 Complex 21. Inv. No. 655 (Fig. 6.19:3) Description. PH 8.2 cm; est. rim D14.1 cm. Fragment of rim and most of olive green (5G4 7/1) wall preserved. Two deep grooves on outside of rim, four more on exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Athens (Thompson 1934: 427, Fig. 113: E159) from a context re-dated to c. 110 BCE (Rotroff 1987:6); Jason’s Tomb, Jerusalem (Rahmani 1967:89, Fig. 18:1), late Hellenistic, thick yellow glass; Ashdod (Barag 1971:203, Fig. 105:4, Pl. XCVIII:3), Stratum 4, second century BCE; the Citadel, Jerusalem (Jones 1950:139, Fig. 10a), second century BCE. BONE Among the worked bones are spatulas of two types. Ariel Type 3, spatula with one shoulder (Ariel 1990:128), is represented here by Nos. 4 and 5 (two non-joining pieces of probably the same tool). Ariel Type 1, spatula with the widest point at the two shoulders (Ariel 1990:128), is illustrated here by Nos. 6 and 7. Ariel suggests an Iron II date for Type 1, which was found to be the most popular spatula type at the City of David; the remainder of types were from strata of the Persian through Roman periods. However, Ariel (1990:128, with parallels therein) notes that these bone implements appear in many periods from at least Neolithic times to the early Roman period. Spatulae 4 Complex 21. Inv. No. 638 (Fig. 6.19:4) Description. L 17 cm. Socket preserved. Possibly joins with No. 5. 5 Complex Unknown. Inv. No. 639 (Fig. 6.19:5) Description. W 3.7 cm; L 9.1 cm. Point preserved. Nonjoining piece with probably the same tool as No. 4. 6 Complex 70. Inv. No. 203 (Fig. 6.19:6) Description. W 2.3 cm; L 8.5 cm. Point preserved. Parallels and Dating. Bet Zur (Sellers 1933:62, Fig. 57–top), Hellenistic; Ashdod (Dothan 1971:67, Fig. 29:17–20), Strata IV–III, Hellenistic; Samaria (Kenyon 1957a:461–463, Fig. 115:4–6).

7 Complex 70. Inv. No. 202 (Fig. 6.19:7) Description. L 13.6 cm; W 2.3 cm. Most of tool preserved. METAL 8 Complex 70, Room 8. Inv. No. 208 (Fig. 6.19:8) Description. L 14.8 cm; W 3.1 cm. Iron knife with the point preserved. 9 Complex 70. Inv. No. 539 (Fig. 6.19:9) Description. L 17 cm. Two joining pieces of iron tool, presumably a chisel, with the socket preserved. Fragments of three more examples (not illustrated) were also found. In view of the fact that chisels were an important quarrying tool and that extensive quarrying went on at Maresha, it is not surprising that this example was found in this excavation. STONE Stopper 10 Complex 70. Inv. No. 918 (Fig. 6.19:10, and see Fig. 6.11a) Description. Th 5.0 cm; D 6.0 cm. Jug stopper carved out of the local kirton. Bread Stamp (?) 11 Complex 70. Inv. No. 499. IAA 97-3262 (Fig. 6.19:11) Description. 15 × 12 cm. A very soft kirton chunk, bearing two carved symbols for decorating baked goods? On the stamp side, in the negative, is a double cornucopia(?) within a square frame (4 × 4 cm). The upper surface bears the negative carving of a fivepointed rosette. This stamp shows a crude representation of the horns of plenty, a well-known Greek symbol throughout the Hellenistic period, which also penetrated into Jewish art where it is often found on coins. A good parallel is a pair of cornucopias carved on a stone table from the Upper City of Jerusalem (Avigad 1980:71, Photo 186) dated to the first century BCE. A similar rosette stamp was noted by Duncan (1931: plate facing p. 141, upper right), described as a local phenomenon and Exilic or post-Exilic, dated 600–400 BCE (Duncan 1931:146).10

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

127

NOTES 1

Items included in Subterranean Complex 70 with a question mark added are probably from that complex (as well as Subterranean Complex 21, although their specific provenance is uncertain [see also Chaps. 3 and 4 above]). 2 An additional 15 examples from Subterranean Complex 21 (Permit No. 347), omitted from Kloner and Hess 1985, are included here and may be keyed to the catalogue of Chap. 6 as follows: seven pieces (five intact and two bases) of plain ware incurved rim bowls like Nos. 31–33; one intact item as bowl No. 37; one complete piece as bowl No. 38; one rim fragment, as bowls Nos. 50–52; three complete specimens of the undecorated ‘Maresha Juglet’ as Nos. 133–137; and one intact Delphiniform lamp with two S-coils as No. 166. One Rhodian stamped amphora handle was found between Subterranean Complexes 29 and 31 and is discussed by G. Finkielstzejn, Chap. 8, below). The first sorting, cataloging and registration was done by A. Kloner and T. Mindel-Genosar from 1980 to 1984.

3 Munsell Soil Color Charts, 1988; prepared by the Munsell Color Co., Baltimore, Md. 4 I am grateful to Michal Ben-Gal, Morris Fine, Tali Krinkin-Fabian, Noah Arad and Mrs. Josephina Jeroshevich for drawings of the material illustrated; to Prof. Andrea Berlin, Mrs. Bracha Guz-Zilberstein, Mrs. Ruth Ovadiah and Prof. Seymour Gitin for their helpful advice and assistance. 5 Explanatory notes: BSP = Black-Slipped Predecessor; cm = centimeter; D = diameter; H = Height; ESA = Eastern Sigillata A; est. = estimated; ext. = exterior; int. = interior; PH = preserved height; Th = thickness. 6 Supportive of this title as well, is Mrs. Varda Sussman, of Bar-Ilan University. 7 No precise clay description possible, object lost. 8 See above, n. 7. 9 Based on the pottery from Area 61 which will be published in a future volume in the Maresha series. 10 I wish to thank Donald T. Ariel, Head of the Coin Department of the Israel Antiquities Authority, for this reference.

REFERENCES Adriani A. 1952. Annuaire du Musée Gréco-Romain III (1940–1950). Alexandria. Aharoni Y. 1962. Excavations at Ramat Rahel I: Seasons 1959 and 1960. Rome. Aharoni Y. 1975. Lachish (Tell ed-Duweir) V: Investigations at Lachish: The Sanctuary and the Residency. Tel Aviv. Amiran R. 1969. Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. Jerusalem. Anderson-Stojanovic V.R. 1987. The Chronology and Function of Ceramic Unguentaria. AJA 91:105–122. Ariel D.T. 1990. Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 II (Qedem 30). Jerusalem. Avigad N. 1972. Excavations in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem 1971: Third Preliminary Report. IEJ 22: 193–200. Avigad M. 1980. The Upper City of Jerusalem. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Avissar M. 1996. The Hellenistic and Early Roman Pottery. In A. Ben-Tor, M. Avissar and Y. Portugali. Yoqne‘am I: The Later Periods (Qedem Reports 3). Jerusalem. Pp. 48–59. Bachi G. 1971. Area D—The Finds. In M. Dothan ed. Ashdod II–III: The Second and Third Seasons of Excavation 1963–1965 (‘Atiqot 9–10). Jerusalem. Pp. 94–119. Bahat D. 1971. Area K. In M. Dothan ed. Ashdod II–III: The Second and Third Seasons of Excavation 1963–1965 (‘Atiqot 9–10). Jerusalem. Pp. 168–180. Bailey D.M. 1975. A Catalogue of the Lamps in the British Museum I: Greek, Hellenistic and Early Roman Pottery Lamps. London. Barag D. 1971.The Glass Vessels. In M. Dothan ed. Ashdod II–III: The Second and Third Seasons of Excavation 1963–1965 (‘Atiqot 9–10). Jerusalem. Pp. 202–205.

Barag D. 1992/3. New Evidence on the Foreign Policy of John Hyrcanus I. INJ 12:1–12. Barkay R. 1992/3. The Marisa Hoard of Seleucid Tetradrachms Minted in Ascalon. INJ 12:21–26. Ben-Tor A. and Portugali Y. 1987. Tell Qiri—A Village in the Jezreel Valley (Qedem 24). Jerusalem. Ben-Tor A., Portugali Y. and Avissar M. 1983. The Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavations at Tel Yoqne‘am, 1979 and 1981. IEJ 33:30–54. Berlin A. 1997a. From Monarchy to Markets: The Phoenicians in Hellenistic Palestine. BASOR 306:75–88. Berlin A. 1997b. The Plain Wares. In S.C. Herbert ed. Tel Anafa II, I: The Hellenistic and Roman Period. Ann Arbor. Pp. 1–212. Bliss F.J. and Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine during the Years 1898–1900. London. Briend J.and Humbert J.-B. 1980. Tell Keisan (1971–1976): Une cité phénicienne en Galilée (OBO 1). Fribourg. Broneer O. 1930. Corinth IV, II: Terracotta Lamps. Cambridge, Mass. Bruneau Ph. 1965. Les lampes (Exploration archéologique de Délos XXVI). Paris. Bruneau Ph. 1970. L’ilot de la maison des comédiens (Exploration archéologique de Délos XXVII). Paris. Christensen A.P. and Johansen C.F. 1971. Hama: Fouilles et recherches 1931–1938 III, 2: Les poteries hellénistiques et les terres sigillées orientales. Copenhagen. Conze A. 1890. Griechische Kohlenbecken. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Instituts 5:118–141. Cox D.H. 1949. The Greek and Roman Pottery. In M. Rostovtzev et al. eds. The Excavations at Dura Europos. Final Report IV, 1.2. New Haven.

128

TIKVA LEVINE

Crowfoot G.M. 1957a. Pottery: Early Bronze and Israelite. In J.W. Crowfoot, G.M. Crowfoot and K.M. Kenyon. Samaria-Sebaste III: The Objects from Samaria. London. Pp. 134–198. Crowfoot G.M. 1957b. Pottery: Hellenistic and Later. In J.W. Crowfoot, G.M. Crowfoot and K.M. Kenyon. SamariaSebaste III: The Objects from Samaria. London. Pp. 235–281. Crowfoot J.W., Crowfoot G.M. and Kenyon K.M. 1957. Samaria-Sebaste III: The Objects from Samaria. London. Debevoise N.C. 1934. Parthian Pottery from Seleucia on the Tigris. Ann Arbor. Diederichs C. 1980. Salamine de Chypre IX: Céramiques hellénistiques, romaines et byzantines. Paris. Dothan M. 1971. Ashdod II–III (‘Atiqot 9–10). Jerusalem. Dothan M. 1976. Akko. Interim Excavation Report, First Season, 1973/4. BASOR 224:1–48. Dothan M. and Freedman D.N. 1967. Ashdod I (‘Atiqot 7). Jerusalem. Drougou S. 1979. Ein Neuer Krater aus Athen. Die Gruppe “Falaieff”. Archäologischer Anzeiger 94: 265–282. Dunand M. and Duru R. 1962. Oumm el-Amed: Une ville de l’époque hellénistique aux échelles de Tyr. Paris. Duncan J.G. 1931. Digging up Biblical History II. London. Dyson S. 1968. The Excavations at Dura Europos. Final Report IV, I. New Haven. Edwards G. R. 1975. Corinth VII, III: Corinthian Hellenistic Pottery. Princeton. Elgavish J. 1968. Archaeological Excavations in Shiqmona. Field Report No. 1: The Levels of the Persian Period, Seasons 1963–1965. Haifa (Hebrew). Elgavish J. 1974. Archaeological Excavations at Shiqmona. Report No. 2: The Level of The Hellenistic Period Stratum H. Haifa (Hebrew). Elgavish J. 1976. Pottery from the Hellenistic Stratum at Shiqmona. IEJ 26:65–76. Enklaar A. 1990. Ariadne’s Thread in the Chronology of the Hellenistic Pottery: The Hadra Vases. 2nd Scholarly Conference on Hellenistic Pottery, Rhodes March 22–25th 1989. Athens. Pp.167–171. Eshel E. and Kloner A. 1996. An Aramaic Ostracon of an Edomite Marriage Contract from Maresha, dated 176 B.C.E. IEJ 46:1–22. Fischer M. 1989. Hellenistic Pottery (Strata V–III). In Z. Herzog, G. Rapp Jr. and O. Negbi eds. Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel (Publications of the Institute of Archaeology 8). Tel Aviv. Pp.177–187. 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. Giveon R. 1963. A Ptolemaic Fayence Bowl. IEJ 13:20–29. Gjerstadt E., Lindros J., Sjöqvist E. and Westholm A. 1937. The Swedish Cyprus Expedition III: Finds and Results of the Excavations in Cyprus 1927–1931. Stockholm. Grose D.F. 1979. The Syro-Palestinian Glass Industry in the Later Hellenistic Period. Muse 13:54–65.

Guz-Zilberstein B. 1995. The Typology of the Hellenistic Coarse Ware and Selected Loci of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods. In E. Stern ed. Excavations at Dor, Final Report IB: Areas A and C: The Finds (Qedem Reports 2). Jerusalem. Pp. 289–433. Hannestad L. 1983. Ikaros. The Hellenistic Settlements II: The Hellenistic Pottery. Copenhagen. Hayes J. W. 1980. Ancient Lamps in the Royal Ontario Museum I: Greek and Roman Clay Lamps. Toronto. Hayes J. W. 1985. Sigillate Orientali. In Enciclopedia dell’ Arte Antica, Classica e Orientale. Rome. Pp. 1–48. Hayes J. 1991. Paphos III: The Hellenistic and Roman Pottery. Nicosia. Herbert S.C. 1994. Tel Anafa, Final Reports I (JRA Supplement 10). Ann Arbor. Herzog Z., Negbi O. and Moshkovitz S. 1978. Excavations at Tell Michal, 1977. Tel Aviv 5:99–130. Herzog Z., Rapp G. Jr. and Negbi O. eds. 1989. Excavations at Tell Michal, Israel (Publications of the Institute of Archaeology 8). Tel Aviv. Hestrin R. and Dayagi-Mendels M. 1983. Another Pottery Group from Abu Ruqeish. IMJ 2:49–57. Holladay J. S. Jr. 1982. Tell el-Maskhuta, Preliminary Report on the Wadi Tumilat Project 1978–1979 Cities of the Delta III (American Research Center in Egypt Reports 6). Malibu. Howland R. H. 1958. The Athenian Agora IV: Greek Lamps and Their Survivals. Princeton. Johns C. N. 1950. The Citadel, Jerusalem. A Summary of Work since 1934. QDAP 14:121–190. Jones F.F. 1950. The Pottery. In H. Goldman, G.M.A. Hanfmann and E. Porada eds. Excavations at Gözlü Küle, Tarsus I: The Hellenistic and Roman Periods. Princeton. Pp.149–296. Kahane P.P. 1952. Pottery Types from the Jewish Ossuary Tombs round Jerusalem. IEJ 2:125–139, 176–182. Kahane P.P. 1953. Pottery Types from the Jewish Ossuary Tombs round Jerusalem. IEJ 3:48–54. Kee H.C. 1971.The Pottery. In M. Dothan ed. Ashdod II–III: The Second and Third Seasons of Excavation 1963–1965 (‘Atiqot 9–10). Jerusalem. Pp. 44–64. Kenrick P.M. 1985. Excavations at Sidi Khrebish Benghazi (Berenice) III. Tripoli. Kenyon K. M. 1957a. Miscellaneous Objects in Metal, Bronze and Stone. In J. W. Crowfoot, G. M. Crowfoot and K. M. Kenyon. Samaria-Sebaste III: The Objects from Samaria. London. Pp. 461–463. Kenyon K. M. 1957b. Pottery: Hellenistic and Later. In J. W. Crowfoot, G. M. Crowfoot and K.M. Kenyon. Samaria Sebaste III: The Objects from Samaria. London. Pp. 217–235. Kloner A. 1981. Maresha 1980. IEJ 31:240–241. Kloner A. 1991. Maresha 1989. ESI 10:38–40. Kloner A. 1994. A Unique Hellenistic Juglet from Maresha (Marissa/Tell Sandahannah). In S. Drougou ed. 3rd Scholarly Conference on Hellenistic Pottery. Thessalonika. September 1991. Athens. Pp. 218, 269–271.

CHAPTER 6: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 21 AND 70

Kloner A. and Asaf E. 1995. Maresha 1992. ESI 14:118–119. Kloner A. and Hess O. 1985. A Columbarium in Complex 21 at Maresha. ‘Atiqot (ES) 17:122–133. Lapp N. 1964. Pottery from Some Hellenistic Loci at Balatah (Shechem). BASOR 175:14–26. Cambridge, Mass. Lapp N. ed. 1978. The Campaign at Tell el-Ful. The Excavations of 1964 (AASOR 45). Cambridge, Mass. Lapp P. W. 1961. Palestinian Ceramic Chronology 200 B.C.–A.D. 70. New Haven. Lapp P. W. 1970. The Pottery of Palestine in the Persian Period. In A. Kuscke and E. Kutsch eds. Archäologie und Altes Testament; Festschrift für Kurt Galling. Tübingen. Pp.179–197. Leonard A. Jr. 1981. Considerations of Morphological Variation in the Mycenaean Pottery from the Southeastern Mediterranean. BASOR 241:87–101. 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). Lyon-Caen Ch. and Hoff V. 1986. Catalogue des lampes en terre cuite grecques et chrétiennes. Musée du Louvre. Paris. Macalister R.A.S. 1912. The Excavations of Gezer III: 1902–1905 and 1907–1909. London. Marchese R.T. 1989. Aegean and Cypriote Imports in the Persian Period (Strata XI–VI). In Z. Herzog, G. Rapp Jr. and O. Negev eds. Excavations at Tell Michal, Israel (Publications of the Institute of Archaeology 8). Tel Aviv. Pp. 145–152. Marchese R.T. 1995. Hellenistic Imports in the Persian Period. In E. Stern ed. Excavations at Dor, Final Report IB: Areas A and C: The Finds (Qedem Reports 2). Jerusalem Pp.127–181. Mazar B. and Dunayevsky I. 1967. En Gedi Fourth and Fifth Seasons of Excavations Preliminary Report. IEJ 17: 133–143. McNicoll A., Smith R.H. and Hennessy J.B. 1982. Pella in Jordan I. Canberra. Miller S.G. 1974. Menon’s Cistern. Hesperia 43:194–245. Mlýnarczyk J. 1995. Alexandria and Paphos: Lamp Producing Centers. In H. Meyza and J. Mlynarczyk eds. Hellenistic and Roman Pottery in the Eastern Mediterranean. The Second Workshop at Nieborow. Pp. 203–238. Morel J.-P. 1986. Céramique à vernis noir d’Italie trouvées à Delos. BCH 110:461–493. My´sliwiec K. 1992. Excavations at Tell Atrib in 1985. Etudes et Travaux 16:383–391. Negev A. 1986. The Late Hellenistic and Early Roman Pottery of Nabatean Oboda. Final Report (Qedem 22). Jerusalem. Neuru L.L. 1991. Megarian Relief Ware. In J. W. Hayes. Paphos III: The Hellenistic and Roman Pottery. Nicosia. Oates D. and Oates J. 1958. Nimrud 1957. The Hellenistic Settlement. Iraq 20:114–157. Oren E. and Rappaport U. 1984. The Necropolis of MareshaBeth Govrin. IEJ 34:114–153.

129

Oziol Th. 1977. Salamine de Chypre VII: Les lampes du Musée de Chypre. Paris. Pagenstecher R. 1913. Ausgrabungen in Alexandria (Die Griechische-Aegyptische Sammlung Ernst von Sieglin II, 3). Leipzig. Pemberton E.G. 1985. Ten Hellenistic Graves in Ancient Corinth. Hesperia 54:271–307. Peters J.P. and Thiersch H. 1905. Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa. London. Rahmani L. 1967. Jason’s Tomb. IEJ 17:61–100. Rahmani L. 1984. Hellenistic Brazier Fragments from Israel. IEJ 34:224–231. Reisner G., Fisher C. and Lyon D. 1924. Harvard Excavations at Samaria. Cambridge, Mass. Robinson D. 1950. Excavations at Olynthus XIII: Vases Found in 1934 and 1938. Baltimore. Rosenthal R. and Sivan R. 1978. Ancient Lamps in the Schloessinger Collection (Qedem 8). Jerusalem. Rotroff S. 1982. The Athenian Agora XXII: Hellenistic Pottery and Imported Mold Made Bowls. Princeton. Rotroff S. 1984. The Origins and Chronology of Hellenistic Gray Unguentaria. AJA 88:258. Rotroff S. 1987. Two Centuries of Hellenistic Pottery. In H.A. Thompson and D. B. Thompson. Hellenistic Pottery and Terracottas. Princeton. Pp. 1–8. Rotroff S. 1991. Attic West Slope Vase Painting. Hesperia 60:59–102. Rotroff S. 1997. The Athenian Agora XXIX: Hellenistic Pottery; Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Table Ware and Related Material I–II. Princeton. Sellers O.R. 1933. The Citadel of Beth Zur. Philadelphia. Shier L. 1978. Terracotta Lamps from Karanis, Egypt. Ann Arbor. Singer-Avitz L. 1989. Local Pottery of the Persian Period (Strata XI–VI). In Z. Herzog, G. Rapp, Jr. and O. Negbi eds. Excavations at Tell Michal, Israel (Publications of the Institute of Archaeology 8). Tel Aviv. Pp. 115–144. Slane K. W. 1997. The Fine Wares. In S.C. Herbert. ed. Tel Anafa II,I: The Hellenistic and Roman Pottery. Ann Arbor. Pp. 247–406. Sparkes B.A. and Talcott L. 1970. The Athenian Agora XII: Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th and 4th Centuries B.C. Princeton. Stager L.E. 1991. Eroticism and Infanticide at Ashkelon. BAR 17:26–53. Stern E. 1978. Excavations at Tell Mevorach 1973–1976. (Qedem 9). Jerusalem. Stern E. 1982. Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period. Warminster. Stern E. ed. 1995. Excavations at Dor, Final Report IB: Areas A and C: The Finds (Qedem Reports 2). Jerusalem. Talcott L. 1935. Attic Black Glazed Stamped Ware and Other Pottery from a Fifth Century Well. Hesperia 4:477–523. Thompson H. A. 1934. Two Centuries of Hellenistic Pottery. The American Excavations in the Athenian Agora. Fifth Report. Hesperia 3:311–480.

130

TIKVA LEVINE

Tzaferis V. 1970. Jewish Tombs at and near Giv‘at ha-Mivtar, Jerusalem. IEJ 20:18–32. Vanderpool E., McCredie J. and Steinberg A. 1962. Koroni, a Ptolemaic Camp on the East Coast of Attica. Hesperia 31:26–61. de Vaux R. 1954. Fouilles de Khirbet Qumran. RB 61:206–236. Vessberg O. and Westholm A. 1956. The Hellenistic and Roman Periods in Cyprus (The Swedish Cyprus Expedition IV, 3). Stockholm.

Waagé F.O. 1948. Hellenistic and Roman Tableware of North Syria. In Antioch on the Orontes IV, I: Ceramics and Islamic Coins. Princeton. Pp. 1–60. Wampler J.C. 1947. Tell en-Nasbeh II: The Pottery. New Haven. Wiegand Th. and Schrader H. 1904. Priene. Berlin. Yeivin Z. and Edelstein G. 1970. Excavations at Tirat Yehuda. ‘Atiqot (HS) 6: 56–67; English summary, p. 6*.

CHAPTER 7 POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 44 TIKVA LEVINE THE POTTERY Little pottery was found in Subterranean Complex 44. A total of 219 Hellenistic pieces together with 24 earlier and later sherds were recovered from the area of the oil press.1 Because the material consists mainly of familiar Hellenistic types, it is discussed here in relation to examples in Chap. 6, except for those in Fig. 7.1, which contains Hellenistic forms not represented there. The oil lamps, which correspond to Chap. 6: Nos. 152, 156, 157, 165 and 169, and the amphora fragments (Finkielstzejn, pers. comm.) suggest a second-century BCE date for the ceramic remains from Complex 44. The fill that accumulated in the oil press after it went out of use contained mostly Hellenistic pottery from its main period of use. Also, a few locally made and imported fragments of pre-Hellenistic date (9 examples), as well as pieces from a later date (11 examples), were found. The only intact vessel recovered was a coarse ware Incurved Rim Bowl with disk base from L7 (see Chap. 6: Nos. 31–33 for discussion and parallels). This is a common bowl of the Hellenistic period, found by the thousands all over Maresha. Another, a complete ‘Maresha juglet’ (see Chap. 6: Nos. 133–137), was restored from several pieces that came from L12. The remainder of the pottery was fragmentary. The suggestion in Chap. 6 that pottery was manufactured at or in the environs of Maresha is reinforced by a kiln-waster from L13 (Basket 74/2).

THE HELLENISTIC POTTERY Bowls A total of 118 fragments were recovered, of which 20 are imports. The distribution by type and quantity is enumerated below.

Imported Bowls 1. Six fragments of the Attic-Black Glazed Rolled Rim Plate (Chap. 6: No. 1; Fig. 6.1:1) were found: two in L3 Baskets 73/3, 75/4; one in L8 Basket 62/4; two in L13 Baskets 60/9, 74/1 and one in L15 Basket 5. 2. One fragment of the Attic Related Black-Glazed Fishplate (Chap. 6: No. 2; Fig. 6.1:2): in L3 Basket 73/2. 3. Three fragments of the Bowl with Horizontal ‘Pinched-Bow’ Handles (Chap. 6: Nos. 3, 4; Fig. 6.1:3, 4): two in L1, and one in L3 Basket 50. 4. One fragment of the BSP Hemispherical Bowl (= Slane Type 27b variant; Chap. 6: No. 6; Fig. 6.1:6): in L14 Basket 69. 5. Four fragments of the ESA Hemispherical Cup (= Slane Type 25a; Chap. 6: No. 8; Fig. 6.1:8): one each in L1 Basket 43/7, L11 Basket 57/3, L12 Basket 83/10 and L14 Basket 69/1. 6. Five fragments of the ESA Plate (= Slane Type 13b, Chap. 6: Nos. 14, 15; Fig. 6.1:14, 15): two in L1 Baskets 5/5, 32/7, one in L3 Basket 70/2 and two in L13 Baskets 61/6, 64/6. Local Bowls 1. One fragment of the Large Plain Ware Bowl (Chap. 6: No. 27; Fig. 6.2:27): in L3 Basket 77/1. 2. One fragment of the Plain Ware Saucer/Lid (Chap. 6: No. 30; Fig. 6.2:30): in L1 Basket 40. 3. In addition to one intact bowl of the Incurved Rim Bowl with Disk Base type (Chap. 6: Nos. 31–33; Fig. 6.2:31–33) in L7 Basket 25, 24 fragments were recovered: eight from L1 Baskets 16/6, 16/7, 18/8, 24/ 1, 24/2, 24/6, 32/5, 32/6; six from L3 Baskets 50, 55/5, 55/6, 63/1, 73/5, 73/6; one from L5 Basket 39/2; two from L7 Baskets 36/2, 36/8; two from L11 Baskets 48/10, 48/11; three from L12 Baskets 56/60, 56/5, 83; one from L13 Basket 60/40 and one from L15 Basket 6. 4. Nineteen fragments of the large Incurved Rim Bowl with Ring Foot (Chap. 6: No. 34; Fig. 6.2:34):

132

TIKVA LEVINE

seven in L1 Baskets 1/2, 16/6, 24/6, 32/4, 43/5, 43/10, 61; six in L3 Baskets 50, 55/3, 73/7, 55/2, 55/3, 55/4; one in L11 Basket 48/7; two in L12 Baskets 83/3, 83/4 and three in L13 Baskets 61/9, 64/2, 64/3. 5. Four fragments of the medium-sized Incurved Rim Bowl (Chap. 6: No. 35; Fig. 6.2:35): one in L1 Basket 43/6; two in L13 Baskets 64/5, 68/2 and one in L15 Basket 7. 6. Seven fragments of the Decorated Incurved Rim Bowl with Ring Foot (Chap. 6: No. 37; Fig. 6.2:37): two in L1 Baskets 1, 4; one in L8 Basket 62/1; one in L11 Basket 48/3; one in L12 Basket 56/4 and two in L13 Baskets 61/4, 64/8. 7. Four fragments of the Angular Bowl with Disk Base (Chap. 6: No. 40; Fig. 6.2:40): three in L1 Baskets 14, 32/8, 43/8 and one in L13 Basket 60/6. 8. Eleven fragments of the Decorated Angular Bowl with Ring Foot (Chap. 6: No. 42; Fig. 6.2:42): four in L1 Baskets 5/2, 24/4, 24/5, 24/14; two in L3 Baskets 55/4, 63; one in L11 Basket 48/6 and four in L15 Baskets 8, 9, 10, 11. 9. Eleven fragments of a Fishplate (Chap. 6: No. 46; Fig. 6.3:46): six in L1 Baskets 9/5, 14, 24/3, 24/7, 24/8, 24/9; two in L3 Baskets 75/2, 75/3; two in L13 Baskets 60/5, 64/9 and one in L15 Basket 12. 10. Six fragments of a Fishplate with painted brush strokes (Chap. 6: No. 49; Fig. 6.3:49): five in L1 Baskets 3/2, 3/3, 11/3, 14, 18/10 and one in L12 Basket 83/2. 11. Four fragments of the Bowl with Horizontal ‘Pinched-Bow’ Handles (Chap. 6: No. 50; Fig. 6.3: 50): one in L1 Basket 24/10; one in L3 Basket 50; one in L7 Basket 36/7 and one in L11 Basket 48/9. 12. Five fragments of the Angular Bowl with Ring Foot (Chap. 6: Nos. 41–44; Fig. 6.2:41–44): two in L1 Baskets 18/5, 24/13); two in L3 Baskets 63/2, 63/3 and one in L13 Basket 68/3. 13. One fragment of the Deep Angular Bowl with OutTurned Rim, (Chap. 6: Nos. 53–55; Fig. 6.3:53–55): in L14 Basket 69/3. Cooking Vessels Of the 17 examples found, one casserole fragment from L3 Basket 55/6 was unidentifiable; six additional pieces are represented below by Fig. 7.1: 178 and 179; ten other examples are distributed by type as follows:

1. Six fragments of the Ribbed Globular Cooking Pot (Chap. 6: No. 70; Fig. 6.6:70): two in L1 Baskets 16/5, 24/19 and four in L13 Baskets 60/20, 61/3, 61/8, 64/4. 2. One fragment of the Squat Angular Cooking Pot (Chap. 6: Nos. 72–75; Fig. 6.6:72–75): in L15 Basket 13. 3. Three fragments of the Casserole (Chap. 6: No. 77; Fig. 6.6:77): all are from L1 Baskets 1/4, 16/1, 24/ 18. Jars Fourteen pieces were found distributed by types as follows: 1. Three fragments of the Storage Jar with Rounded Shoulders, Upside-Down Ovoid Body and Short Neck (Chap. 6: Nos. 82, 83; Fig. 6.8:82, 83): one in L3 Basket 77/2 and two in L11 Baskets 48/5, 57/2. 2. Eleven fragments of the Storage Jar with Angular Shoulders, Ovoid Body and Short Neck (Chap. 6: Nos. 80, 81; Figs. 6.7:80, 6.8:81): seven in L1 Baskets 1, 3/1, 32/3, 5/3, 18/6, 18/7, 24/15; one in L3 Basket 50; two in L13 Baskets 60/1, 68/4; and one in L15 Basket 14. Jugs Twenty-nine fragments were found of which 15 were unidentifiable bases, necks, handles and body sherds: 1. Eleven on the floor of L1 Basket; one in L3 Basket 63; two in L11 Basket 48/8, 48/14; and one in L13 Basket 61/2. Two fragments were recovered from L1 Baskets 44/1 and 61/1; the latter is illustrated in Fig. 7.1:181). The rest were distributed by type as follows: 2. Eleven fragments of the Jug with Down-Turned Rim (Chap. 6: No. 95; Fig. 6.10:95): in L1 Baskets 4, 18/2–11. 3. Three fragments of the Holemouth Jug (Chap. 6: No. 103; Fig. 6.11:103): two in L1 Baskets 9/4, 11/2 and another in L13 Basket 60/70. 4. Two fragments of the Medium-Sized Jug with Concave Base (Chap. 6: No. 104; Fig. 6.11:104): in L1 Baskets 5/1, 9/3. 5. Four fragments of the Medium-Sized Jug with Ring Foot (Chap. 6: No. 110; Fig. 6.11:110): one in L3 Basket 3/79; two in L11 Baskets 48/12, 48/13; and one in L13 Basket 64/7.

CHAPTER 7: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 44

6. One fragment of an imported lagynos (Chap. 6: No. 116; Fig. 6.12:116): in L3 Basket 74. Juglets Seven of the eight specimens found were of the ‘Maresha-Juglet’ type (Chap. 6: No. 136; Fig. 6.13: 136). The seven examples were concentrated in the major production room of the oil press in Loci 1, 12, 13 and 14. One fragment of a wide mouth and rounded base of a juglet like Chap. 6: No. 120 (Fig. 6.13:120) was discovered in L15 Basket 15. Fusiform Unguentaria All six unguentaria fragments belong to the fusiform or spindle type. Two pieces from L3 Baskets 55/2, 55/7 were unidentifiable and the rest were distributed among the loci as follows: 1. One fragment of an Imitation of Athenian Gray Fusiform Unguentarium (Chap. 6: No. 145; Fig. 6.14: 145): in L3 Basket 50. 2. One fragment of a fusiform unguentarium similar to Chap. 6: No. 147 (Fig. 6.14:147): in L8 Basket 62/2. 3. One fragment of a fusiform unguentarium (Chap. 6: No. 148; Fig. 6.14:148): in L1 Basket 14. 4. Two fragments of a fusiform unguentarium (Chap. 6: No. 150; Fig. 6.14:150): one in L1 Basket 16/3 and the other in L5 Basket 39/1. Oil Lamps Eight fragments were found distributed as follows: 1. Two fragments forming the complete profile of a ‘Shefelah Lamp’ (Chap. 6: No. 152; Fig. 6.15:152): in L3 Basket 30. 2. A nozzle fragment of a Kite-Shaped Lamp with Winged Erotes (Chap. 6: No. 156; Fig. 6.15:156): in L1 Basket 43/4. 3. A shoulder fragment of a Kite-Shaped Lamp with Square Meanders (Chap. 6: No. 157; Fig. 6.15:157): in L11 Basket 48/2. 4. A shoulder fragment of a Gray Clay Delphiniform Lamp (Chap. 6: No. 165; Fig. 6.16:165), in L11 Basket 54/2, and another shoulder fragment in L12 Basket 9/23.

133

5. An almost complete Red Clay Delphinifom Lamp (Chap. 6: No. 169; Fig. 6.17:169), in L8 Basket 6/1 and the shoulder fragment of an additional lamp in L11 Basket 54/1.

POTTERY WITHOUT PARALLELS IN CHAPTER 6 (Fig 7.1:177–181) ‘Ring Lamp’ Bowl 177 Complex 44. Inv. No. 1-16-3 (Fig. 7.1:177) Description. PH 5.0 cm; est. rim D 43.0 cm. Profile of a ‘ring lamp’ bowl, preserving infolded tubular rim and flaring upper wall. Two drilled holes measuring 2 cm in diameter survived on the upper somewhat flattened rim. Hard fired. Pink clay (7.5 YR 7/4), small black and white grits. Parallels and Dating. No exact parallels were found. The general form used for illumination (ring-lamp bowl) is known from Athens (Sparkes and Talcott 1970:183, Pl. 44. It belongs to Group B [Thompson 1934:340, Fig. 20 B27], deposited c. 240 BCE [Rotroff 1987:6]). An example with raised tubular nozzles (Vessberg and Westholm 1956:127, Fig. 40: 3) was found in Cyprus. Casserole with Grooved Rim 178 Complex 44. Inv. No. 1-16-1 (Fig. 7.1:178) Description. PH 6.0 cm; Rim D 23.4 cm. Profile of a casserole preserving a wide ledge rim with two narrow grooves around upper surface, sharp transition from neck to body and body to base. Red clay (2.5YR 5/6), many white and black grits. Parallels and Dating. Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997:97, PW 229–233, Pls. 28, 80), Hell. 2A c. 125 BCE. Cooking Krater 179 Complex 44. Inv. No. 1-1-1 (Fig. 7.1:179) Description. PH 9.5 cm; rim D 16.0 cm. Profile of a cooking krater preserved from grooved rim with a ridge on its lower exterior edge; broad concave neck and globular body. Two thin double-coil handles vertically attached at rim and shoulder. Exterior surface fired very dark gray (7.5YR N3/0). Light red clay (2.5YR

134

TIKVA LEVINE

Fig. 7.1. Hellenistic pottery.

Cat. No.

Inv. No.

Type

177

1–16–3

‘Ring lamp’ bowl

178

1–16–1

Casserole

179

1–1–1

Cooking krater

180

1–13–1

Filter jug

181

1–61–1

Lagynos

6/6), tiny black grits and sparkling inclusions. Two more fragments were found in L1. Parallels and Dating. Athens (Thompson 1934:392, Fig. 77: D70), dated after the middle of the second century BCE. Filter Jug 180 Complex 44. Inv. No. 1-13-1 (Fig. 7.1:180) Description. PH 6.0 cm; strainer D 6.0 cm; max. D 10.0 cm. Plain Ware filter-jug, preserving nine-holed broken strainer and upper globular body wall with one vertical loop handle attached on shoulder. Light brown clay (7.5YR 6/4), small black grits. Poorly made. Flaking surfaces. Parallels and Dating. For discussion and parallels, see Chap. 6: No. 142.

Decorated Lagynos 181 Complex 44. Inv. No. 1-61-1 (Fig. 7.1:181) Description. Est. foot D 16.0 cm. Two joining fragments preserve lower wall and most of broad, shallow ring foot of decorated lagynos. Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4) resembles Rhodian amphora fabric. Red (10R 4/8) painted band runs around lower exterior wall. Parallels and Dating. Athens (Thompson 1934:403, Fig. 92: E70, 72), revised date from c. 110 BCE (Rotroff 1987:6); Tel Anafa (Berlin 1997:46, Pls. 6, 74 PW 29), first appears in Hell. 2C (c. 100–80 BCE). Unidentified Hellenistic Pottery Based on their fabrics a total of five fragments (not catalogued) appear to be local Hellenistic vessels.

CHAPTER 7: POTTERY AND SMALL FINDS FROM SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEX 44

THE NON-HELLENISTIC POTTERY

135

SMALL FINDS METALS

A total of 24 fragments were recovered, of which three (L1 Baskets 9/2, 5/4 and L13 Basket 61/5) were unidentifiable. The remaining specimens were distributed among the various periods as follows: Iron Age in L1 Baskets 1/5, 18/9, L3 Baskets 50, 5/7, 73/8 and L8 Basket 62/3; Iron Age/Persian in L15 Basket 1; Persian in L3 Baskets 50, 70/1, 75/1; Roman? in L15 Basket 2; Byzantine in L3 Baskets 55/5, 73/1 and L13 Basket 60/8; Islamic in L13 Basket 64/1; Mamluk in L3 Basket 63/4; Mamluk/Ottoman in L13 Basket 61/1; and Ottoman in L1 Basket 1/3, L3 Basket 63 and L15 Baskets 3, 4.

Locus 1 contained four links of an iron chain (Basket 33), an iron saw (Basket 18) and an iron nail tip (Basket 9/1). In L3, two iron lumps were found (Baskets 34, 38). Locus 11 yielded an iron nail (Basket 48), and L12, two iron lumps (Baskets 28, 61) and an iron nail-cap. GLASS An olive-green body sherd from a grooved hemispherical bowl was discovered on the floor in L1 Basket 63 (see Chap. 6: Fig. 6.21:3).

REFERENCES 1 I am grateful to Tali Krinkin-Fabian, Silvia Kabib and Alina Pikovski for the pottery drawings accompanying this chapter.

NOTE Berlin A. 1997. The Plain Wares. In S.C. Herbert. ed. Tel Anafa II,I: The Hellenistic and Roman Periods. Ann Arbor. Pp. 1–212. Rotroff S. 1987. Two Centuries of Hellenistic Pottery. In H.A. Thompson and D. B. Thompson. Hellenistic Pottery and Terracottas. Princeton. Pp. 1–8. Sparkes B.A. and Talcott L. 1970. The Athenian Agora XII: Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th and 4th Centuries B.C. Princeton.

Thompson H. A. 1934. Two Centuries of Hellenistic Pottery. The American Excavations in the Athenian Agora. Fifth Report. Hesperia 3:311–480. Vessberg O. and Westholm A. 1956. The Hellenistic and Roman Periods in Cyprus (The Swedish Cyprus Expedition IV, 3). Stockholm.

CHAPTER 8

AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS DONALD T. ARIEL AND GERALD FINKIELSZTEJN1

INTRODUCTION Imported amphoras have a special place among the finds at Maresha because of the chronological and historical data they provide. The origins, the contexts and the state of preservation of the types range from complete amphoras, imported from several locales in the Mediterranean and recovered in situ in storerooms, to isolated stamped handles, necks with unstamped handles and other diagnostic sherds found in various fills. Although amphora stamps receive special attention, it should be remembered that they are integral parts of the jars on which they appear. Ideally, typological examination of whole vessels is preferred over comparison of stamped fragments. Fortunately, at Maresha, in addition to the more than 50 complete vessels, large stamped fragments which can be attributed to specific amphora types were also recovered. This is especially important for classes bearing stamps on both handles (mainly Rhodian and Knidian but also Brindisian), in order to record new associations. Most of the whole transport jars from Maresha were discovered during excavations from the early 1970s on and they, along with hundreds of imported fragments from the excavations carried out since 1989, are being studied by G. Finkielsztejn. SOME CHRONOLOGICAL COMMENTS In Complex 21, seven out of the nine items uncovered are well dated (Rh 1, Rh 2, Rh 4, Rh 5, Rh 6, Rh 8 and Ro 1). Except for Rh 6, which is significantly earlier, all fall within the second half of the second century BCE, up to the conquest of Maresha. The complete, although not intact, amphoras, Rh 1 and Ro 1, may point to activity in the complex during that period, although the damaged rim or handle may have provided sufficient reason to discard the amphora. The jars from the subterranean complexes of Maresha seem

to show that the underground installations eventually served as refuse dumps in the second century BCE. In Complex 70, the amphoras cover a longer period, ranging, perhaps, from the beginning of the third century (Cy 1) to the last third of the second century BCE (Rh 3), and they are of little help for a detailed chronological analysis. The final use as a refuse dump is clearly reflected here. The main interest of the finds from these two contexts rests in the variety of types and origins and the chronologically important associations of Rhodian stamps. CATALOGUE The catalogue is presented according to the conventions followed in Ariel and Finkielsztejn 1994, with some refinements for the Rhodian class: (1) amphoras with fabricant/eponym associations are presented before the isolated stamps; (2) in the case of an association of a fabricant with a yearly magistrate (eponym), the fabricant’s name determines the pairs’ alphabetical location in the catalogue. For references to the Dressel classification, see CIL XV: Pl. 2. For the larger fragments, the measurements are given in centimeters and are as follow: HA = height of amphora; DA = maximum diameter of amphora; HN+R = height of neck with rim; DN = diameter of neck (at midpoint of the height); HR = height of rim; DR = outer diameter of rim; HH = height of handle (see Grace 1973:201); SH = section of handle; HT = height of toe, DT = diameter of toe; p = preserved. The colors are according to the Munsell Soil Color Charts, Baltimore, Maryland, 1954. RHODES Form and Fabric of the Amphoras According to Grace’s chronology, the form of the Rhodian jar evolved from about the last quarter of

138

DONALD T. ARIEL AND GERALD FINKIELSZTEJN

the fourth century BCE (early Rhodian) to the second century CE, when it disappeared (see ‘Knidos’ below; Empereur and Tuna 1989:284; Finkielsztejn 2001: 46–51, Pls. A–C). The typical profile, from the middle of the third to the end of the second century BCE, consisted of a long cylindrical neck with an outward rolled rim, an ovoid body with more or less rounded shoulders, and a solid cylindrical toe. The handles are attached under the rim and on the shoulder. The various profiles of the bend of the handle are chronologically relevant. For example, the bend is rounded in the third century BCE, but becomes progressively angular in the second century BCE and finally evolves into a horn-like shape in the first century BCE. This last development continues during the first and second centuries CE. Over time (up to the mid-first century BCE), the horizontal branch of the handle gets narrower and tends to bend out. See Grace 1963:323, Fig. 1 (where the dates for each item should be corrected according to the revisions of Grace 1974 and 1985): 1.1 (last quarter of the fourth century BCE), 1.2–1.5 (c. 273–271 BCE), 1.6 (c. 250 BCE), 1.7 (c. 240 BCE), 1.8 (c. 217 BCE), 1.9 (c. 210–200 BCE). See also Grace 1979a: Fig. 62; Empereur and Hesnard 1987:58–61, Fig. 7–14 and Finkielsztejn 2001:46–51, Pls. A–C (see below for a suggested revision of Grace’s chronology). The early Rhodian amphora has a light red fabric (2.5YR6/8), close to the Knidian one (see below, ‘Knidos’), and a pinkish slip (7.5YR7/4); the typical Rhodian amphora has a reddish yellow fabric (5YR7/8 or 7/6) with a very pale brown slip that ranges from pink to yellow (10YR8/4, 8/6 to 7.5YR7/4, 8/4). The clay is very well levigated and fired, with almost no grits. This class is predominant among the amphoras at Maresha, in Israel and the eastern Mediterranean at large. Stamped Rhodian handles have been found in the past at Tell Sandahannah/Maresha, as well as in its necropolis (Bliss 1900:331; Bliss and Macalister 1902:131–134; Peters and Thiersch 1905:96–97, Pl. XXI; Abel 1925:271, Fig. 3). Macalister published them in 1901, and although it was one of the most precise publications of amphora stamps at the time, it is sometimes impossible to distinguish between homonyms because of the absence of systematic illustrations, especially photos, although the drawings on Pl. 2 (just a sample) are very accurate. Macalister’s specimens stored in the Rockefeller Museum will be republished, in an appendix to the forthcoming catalogue of the material from A. Kloner’s excavations. Since

they were systematically stamped on both handles (rarely on one), it is understandable that stamped Rhodian handles are the most common found. Amphora Stamps For the stamping system of Rhodes, see especially Grace 1934 and Grace and Pétropoulakou 1970. The stamps usually bear the following information: name of the fabricant (owner of the workshop), name of the eponym (yearly priest of the chief god Helios), name of the month and sometimes devices. This information is divided between the two stamps, in various combinations. A secondary stamp can be added, generally below the horizontal branch of the handle. Although this has not been fully clarified, the latter seems to be a potter’s mark applied by the person who actually fashioned the jar (see Finkielsztejn 1993:251, n. 169, 281, n. 256, 286 ff.; 2001:77, 114–117). Chronology. The chronology of the names on stamps was built up by Grace, who arranged them in seven periods (Grace 1985:42). This chronology has undergone some refinement (Empereur and Hesnard 1987:18–19; Empereur 1990). Finkielsztejn has identified a gap of eponym names ascribed to Period IV leading to a preliminary shortening of the period by about 11 years (Finkielsztejn 1993:230–258; 1995a; 1995b:279–282). Consequently, the limits of Periods I to III should also be lowered by the same number of years. Although a detailed analysis of this revision cannot be presented here, the chronologies of Grace and Finkielsztejn are compared in Table 8.1.2 It is important to bear in mind that in order to simplify the commentary in the following catalogue, Finkielsztejn’s dates will be given. References to Grace’s published years are also cited. Rh 1. 930/80.21.B41.604. Circular stamps. A: Main stamp ’AristokleäV C(?) Rose Double frame Secondary stamp O* B: [’Ε]pÍ [P]ausan[Ìa P]anmou Rose Double frame There is one secondary stamp similar to the type on this amphora (but not from the same die). It

139

CHAPTER 8: AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS

Table 8.1. Comparison of Grace/Empereur and Finkielsztejn Chronologies of the Rhodian Class Grace/Empereur1

Finkielsztejn2

Period

Dates (BCE)

Period

Dates (BCE)

Ia

End of 4th c.–c. 280

Ia

c. 304–c. 271

Ib

c. 279–c. 270

Ib

c. 270–c. 247

Ic

c. 269–c. 240

Ic

c. 246–c. 235

IIa

c. 239–c. 225

IIa

c. 234–c.220

IIb

c. 224–c. 206

IIb

c. 219–c.210

IIc

c. 209–c.199

IIIa

c. 205–c. 202

IIIa

c. 198–c. 190

IIIb

c. 201–c. 194

IIIb

c. 189–c. 182

IIIc

c. 193–c. 188

IIIc

c. 181–c. 176/174

IIId

c. 187–c. 182

IIId

c. 175/173–c. 169/167

IIIe

c. 181–c. 175

IIIe

c. 168/166–c. 161

IVa

c. 174–c. 156

IVa

c. 160–c. 153

IVb

c. 155–c. 146

IVb

c. 152–c. 146

V

c. 145–c. 108

Va

c. 145–c. 133

Vb

c. 132–c. 121

Vc

c. 120–c. 108

VI

c. 107– c. 88/86

VI

c. 107–c. 88/86

VII

c. 85–Augustus

VIIa

c. 85–c. 40

VIIb

c. 40–Augustus

1

Grace 1985:42; Empereur and Hesnard 1987:18–19; Empereur 1990.

2

Finkielsztejn 2001:196–197.

Note that Period Vc includes the destruction date of Maresha, Samaria and Scythopolis (Bet She’an) based on both coins and amphora stamps (Barkay 1994; Finkielsztejn1998).

appears on a handle of ’Aristokl^hV 2nd, found in the City of David (Ariel 1990:45, S136). This adds some justification for restoring this fabricant’s name here. The presence of the letter chi is not explained. ’Aristokl^hV 2nd, along with ‘IppokrthV, apparently succeeded DamokrthV 1st in the management of a pottery workshop around 185 BCE, according to Grace’s chronology (the term of the eponym Nikasag×raV 1st: see Grace 1985:9–10), that is c. 171 BCE, according to Finkielsztejn’s chronology (see Finkielsztejn 2001:113 ff., 143–145). The three fabricants mentioned above, along with Tim×xenoV (see below, Rh 2), who seems to have succeeded them around the middle of the second century BCE, are well

known for their use of secondary stamps. Grace (1985: 10) notes at least 25 types for ’Aristokl^hV 2nd and ‘IppokrthV. Secondary stamps combining a letter and an asterisk are known on amphoras of ’Aristokl^hV 2nd [P*, K*: Nilsson 1909:182–183, Nos. 100, 7–17; T*: Calvet 1982:21, under No. 32) and ‘IppokrthV (I*, K*: PAM Nos. 33.2503, 36.718, illustrated in Finkielsztejn 1990 II: 67*, Nos. 212, 213). The eponym PausanÌaV is the latest of three homonyms, and Grace and Pétropoulakou date him to Period IV (1970:304–305, No. E12). The name of this same eponym appears with the secondary stamp K* (Porro 1916:120, No. 162, 8). PausanÌaV 2nd (late Period II, c. 203–199 BCE according to Finkielsztejn’s

140

DONALD T. ARIEL AND GERALD FINKIELSZTEJN

chronology) is an unlikely alternative, considering the date of the practice of placing secondary stamps near the upper attachment of the handle (Grace 1985:8). Note that PausanÌaV 1st dates the amphora in Ariel 1988: 34–35 and not PausanÌaV 2nd who is known with a different type of Helios symbol (Finkielsztejn 1993: 99–101). PausanÌaV 1st was actually in office at the beginning of Period II, c. 225–220 BCE according to Finkielsztejn (see Grace 1963:324, n. 12, 326, n. 16). Also, according to Finkielsztejn, ’Aristokl^hV 2nd seems to have been active c. 171–140 BCE since he is a known associate of eponyms of Period V and PausanÌaV 3rd seems to have been in office c. 152–146 BCE, early in this period. Rh 1 is of prime importance for a shorter Period IV and, consequently, the lower chronology suggested by Finkielsztejn. See Macalister 1901: ’Aristokl^hV 2nd, 32–33, Nos. 50–51; eponym PausanÌaV, 128–129, Nos. 183–184 (with homonyms?). Rh 2. 930/80.21.B14.602. Circular stamps. A: Rose TimoxÁnou Double frame B: Main stamp Rose ’EpÍ TeimoqÁou QesmojorÌou Double frame Secondary stamp K The fabricant Tim×xenoV often employed stamps reading outward and used secondary stamps (Calvet 1972:36, No. 71; Landau 1974:64, No. 356; Finkielsztejn 2001:143–145). Y. Calvet dated him to Period V, while Y. Landau gave a more general date in the second century BCE. The handle from Shiqmona has a rectangular secondary stamp with a plain K. Here, the device (?) may be a poorly impressed K or K* or anchor (?), if turned 90°. Finkielsztejn has seen in Grace’s files a secondary stamp of TimoxÁnoV reading KY, with the psi smaller than the kappa. This may be the case here. However, the appearance of the supposed kappa is more like a pi, turned 90°. According to Grace 1985:10, Tim×xenoV seems to have succeeded ’Aristokl^hV 2nd and `IppokrthV in their practice of using secondary stamps (see above, Rh 1). The dating of the eponym Tim×qeoV has undergone changes. Grace originally dated this eponym to Period

IV but later corrected her dating to Period V (Grace 1950:143, No. 47; 1952: 530). The context at Shiqmona dates the term of this eponym, perhaps to just before c. 132 or most probably before 126 BCE (Elgavish 1976:65–67). A handle bearing his name has been found in Carthage (Ferron and Pinard 1960–61:109, No. 262), a fact which could contradict the evidence of the angular profile of handles and known associations with fabricants, which place the term of Tim×qeoV c.145–132/126 BCE. However, the Carthage piece may be part of the inevitable rare late material brought to the city after its destruction in 146 BCE. This is definitely the case for the stamp with the name of ’Anaxag×raV also found there and who, without doubt, was in office at the beginning of the first century BCE (Ferron and Pinard 1960–61:101, No. 234; Grace and Pétropoulakou 1970:315, E41; both examples from Carthage are restored names). In addition, the relative sequence of eponym names, based on the styles of relevant stamps, seems to confirm the date of c. 132–126 BCE for the office of Tim×qeoV (Ariel and Finkielsztejn 1994: 186, 218–219, SAH 86–88; SAH 87 has the identical secondary stamp). See Macalister 1901:132–133,

CHAPTER 8: AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS

No. 217 (Tim×xenoV; to be corrected). Note that the confused text on ‘subsidiary seals’ in Macalister (1901:27, not clarified by the erratum, p. 142), should be corrected as follows: the secondary stamp on Macalister’s Pl. 2: 58 is associated with his main stamp No. 17 (handle P 715 in the Rockefeller Museum) and that on his Pl. 2:57 most probably belongs to the handle of his No. 217, as this association is already known. As for his Pl. 2:56, it is associated with his No. 198 on a doubled-barreled handle from Kos (handle P 727 in the Rockefeller Museum; see Kos below).

141

Nos. 34–35; see Empereur 1977:210–211, No. 27) and ’Arist×geitoV (amphora found at Maresha). Therefore, he was active at the end of the second quarter and in the third quarter of the second century BCE. This stamp lacks the wreath device added to some specimens of this fabricant, probably at the beginning of his career; examples without it are already known (Nilsson 1909:406, Nos. 146, 22–23). See Macalister 1901:34–35, Nos. 70–72. Rh 5. 930/80.21.B12.608. Rectangular stamp. Diod×tou

Rh 3. 930/80.70.541.167B. Circular stamp. Rose ’Ana[xippÌda] Double frame

The restoration is proposed by Finkielsztejn, who adds that the fabricant used a circular stamp with a rose and the tops of the letters facing inward with a secondary stamp on the side of one of the handles (see Tim×xenoV above, Rh 2). He was active in the last third of the second century BCE, based on his associations with the eponyms ‘EstieÎoV and KallikrthV 3rd (Ariel and Finkielsztejn 1994:190, SAH 5), and because he used another type of large rose without a frame bearing the name of eponyms of the last years of Period V and a secondary stamp QA (Finkielsztejn 1993:304–305). Rh 4. 930/80.21.B11.606. Rectangular stamp. BromÌou

The same stamp was found in the Pergamon deposit (Schuchhardt 1895:458, No. 1001), which makes a Period III date for this handle likely (see Sztetyllo 1976:42, Nos. 83–85: same type). Finkielsztejn noted that an amphora from Maresha associates a stamp of this fabricant (of the same type, but from a different die) with one naming the eponym AåtokrthV 1st. This would indicate that the fabricant was active in Period IV, c. 175–168/166 BCE, according to Étienne 1986. However, AåtokrthV 1st most probably was in office at the very end of the period (c. 146 BCE), according to Finkielsztejn’s analysis of stamps naming him. Di×dotoV may have started his career at the very end of Period III as indicated by the single example from the Pergamon deposit. The same name appears on Rhodian stamps of a different type—in two lines with a grape cluster—typical of the second half of the second century BCE, most probably endorsed by a later homonym fabricant (see Ariel and Finkielsztejn 1994:201, SAH 37–39 and Finkielsztejn 1989:229). Rh 6. 930/80.21.B13.605. Rectangular stamp. ’EpÍ Summcou Qesmoj×rioV

Br×mioV made amphoras dated by eponyms of Period IV, such as G×rgwn, and the beginning of Period V, for example, ’AlexidaV (Börker 1974:43–44,

142

DONALD T. ARIEL AND GERALD FINKIELSZTEJN

This stamp is from the same die as Ariel 1990:59, S264. The eponym SâmmacoV is dated c. 188–186 BCE according to Grace’s chronology (Grace 1985: 8–9, 45, No. 1) and c. 173–171 BCE in Finkielsztejn’s. For an association with the fabricant SwkrthV 2nd, from Israel, see Giveon 1963:20–21, Pl. 8.

Lagynos Stamps Rh 9. 930/80.70.168B.542. Rectangular stamp. G

Rh 7. 930/80.70.166B.540. Rectangular stamp. Fi[l]oklÁ ouV

This is the restoration proposed by Finkielsztejn. A fabricant FiloklhV ^ appears in Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:19, No. 274, 312, No. 81) dated (with a question mark) to Period III by Grace (pers. comm. to G. Finkielsztejn). Both of the present authors agree that the clear angular profile of the Maresha handle suggests a date later in the second century BCE. Rh 8. 930/80.21.B20.607. Rectangular stamp. Filokr teuV Caduceus →

The handle appears similar in fabric color (10YR7/4) and profile to Ariel 1990:79, S 475–476. Those stamps, however, have more than one letter. It is also similar to an unpublished handle from excavations at Caesarea Maritima (Avi-Yonah 1962:137, No. D IV 3/2; now in the collection of the Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University), bearing the letter pi in a square frame.3 Similar stamped handles of small vessels (lagynoi?) come from ‘Akko reading Q.A in a rectangular frame (Reg. No. 295/45/16; unpublished),4 and from an unknown provenience (IAA 52.1342), reading ‘Esti[, in a rectangular frame.5 Rh 10. 930/81.70.221. Toe (HT 4.7 cm, DT 3.9). Not illustrated.

Stamps naming the fabricant FilokrthV 2nd are discussed in Grace and Pétropoulakou 1970:311, No. E32, where variant types with the caduceus are noted. His period of activity is given there as Periods V–VI. This stamp is most likely identical to five from Lindos (Nilsson 1909:495, Nos. 425, 4–9) and definitely from the same die as a stamped handle at Samaria (Crowfoot 1957:384, PAM 33.2289, illustrated in Finkielsztejn 1990 II:103*, No. 381). This last evidence suggests that the Maresha handle belongs in Period V, as stamped amphoras are presumed not to have arrived in Samaria in Period VI. This is consistent with the end date of the settlement in Maresha (see Ariel and Finkielsztejn 1994:221, SAH 96).

Fractional Amphora This group consists of small amphoras similar to those from Rhodes and Knidos (Dray and Du Plat Taylor 1951:107–108, Types 3–5, Fig. 57, Pl. XXII:2, 3; Benoit 1961:29–31, Figs. 28, 29; Grace 1979a: Fig. 66; Hadjisavvas 1980:257, Nos. 2, 3, Pl. XXXVII). Their profiles are like the full-sized jars but they are much smaller. The term ‘amphoriskos’ is not appropriate as it is traditionally used for even smaller vessels that are not transport containers. French and Italian scholars employ the diminutive terms amphorette, anforeta. Although they were certainly fractional vessels, they may not have had the same function as lagynoi which, although they were also fractional containers, could also be used as tableware (see Rh 9, above). As noted above small-sized amphoras were also produced on Rhodes.

CHAPTER 8: AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS

Form. These vessels have various forms adapted from the full-sized jar and usually stand 45–55 cm high (see Cavalier 1985:112, Fig. 128:a, and parallels cited above). Adaptations include a narrower neck, and especially the double-barreled handles, generally considered a Koan characteristic (see ‘Kos’ below). Actually, the handle has only a deep groove that makes it appear to be double-barreled.

143

In Maresha’s corpus this class is Regev’s Form 16 (see below, Appendix 2). CYPRUS Cy 1. 930/84.70.764. Rectangular stamp. D Facing mask

Fabric. It is similar to that of the amphoras and lagynoi. The red paint, often visible on the upper neck and upper attachment of the handles of the full-sized amphora, is also present on the small version. Stamps. One example of double-barreled handles previously found at Maresha is mentioned in Ariel 1990: 79, S 477 (IAA 72.273: round stamp with head of Helios). Other references to the type include a photograph of the parallel cited from Tell Keisan that appears in HalpernZylberstein 1980: Pl. 135:93, showing the imitation double-barreled handle; the drawing in Calvet 1982: 38, No. 110 is correct, despite Calvet’s hesitation). Two similar handles in the ‘Akko Municipal Museum bear a square stamp with the Rhodian rose (Grace 1950:145, No. 83, Fig. 117, 83). Chronology. It is probable that the profile of the handles has the same chronological significance as that of the large amphora. In the Filicudi A wreck, dated to the second half of the second century BCE, the handles have a clear angular profile (Cavalier 1985: 112, Fig. 128; Tchernia 1990:293–294 lowers the date of the Filicudi A wreck to the second half of the second century BCE). The specimens’ context at Maresha does not help in that respect. Rh 11. 930/81.70.216. Complete neck with one complete handle. Form. Relatively narrow neck, with a groove under the rim and under the upper attachment of the handles. The handle has an angular profile similar to that of jars dated to the first half of the second century BCE (HAp 20.5, HN+R 17.3, DN 4.1, HR 0.7, DR 5, HH 19.5, SH 2.5 × 1.8).

Form and Fabric. The fabric is variegated red (2.5YR 4/7, inner surface) to weak purplish red (10R 5/4, handle) with many white and yellowish grits. The surface is covered with a light brown slip (7.5YR 6/6). Finkielsztejn believes that the small thickened rim (DR 10, HR 1.7) and the general shape of the neck (HN+R20) and handle (HH 20, SH 3.4 × 1.7), together with the fabric, indicate a Cypriot origin (Grace 1979b: 178; Calvet 1986:505, 506, Fig. 1a, compare profiles

144

DONALD T. ARIEL AND GERALD FINKIELSZTEJN

of the top). Similar stamps are found in Cyprus and Samos: device plus monogram in a sometimes square stamp but more often “curved at one end square off at the other” (Grace 1979b:182 and n. 6, 183). Although the surface reminds us of the Samian class, the fabric supports the attribution to Cyprus. Such stamps were found in Israel, at Shiqmona (Haifa; Elgavish 1974: 149, No. 148, definitely Samian), Samaria (Reisner, Fisher and Lyon 1924:316, D12; Finkelsztejn 1990 II: 123*–124*, No. 449 = PAM 36.666, both definitely Cypriot), and ‘Akko (Grace 1979b:186, No. 9b). This type of stamps seems to have been in use at the end of the fourth–beginning of the third centuries BCE (Grace 1979b:182–183; Calvet 1986:513). Calvet (pers. comm.) kindly confirmed the Cypriot origin for this vessel, on the basis of photographs, a rubbing and a description of the fabric which is similar to that of the ‘Kition’ amphoras from Bamboula and Larnaca. Our thanks for his contribution.

IMITATION OF WEST SLOPE WARE(?) This specimen is related to West Slope Ware table amphoras with a ring foot; however, we know of no specific parallel with the kind of painted design found on the Maresha example. It is presented here because of its form, yet it does not seem to have been used as a container because its toe is pierced with a narrow hole (not a secondary use). The use to which it was put is not clear; it may have been a funnel or a libation vessel. PWS 1. 930/70.72. Almost complete vessel with one handle and part of shoulder missing.

FRACTIONAL AMPHORA OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN (LOCAL?) SA 1. 930/81.70.200. Complete profile of body with bottom of neck and lower attachment of handles. Form. The body appears roughly Rhodian but the diameter of the neck is too large. The toe is also similar to the Rhodian class but not solid. The handles are not double-barreled, as is the case for the actual small Rhodian amphoras, but roughly round in section (HAp 28, DA 15.5, DN ˜8.2, SH 1.9 × 1.4, HT 1.4, DT 2.5). In Maresha’s corpus this class is Regev’s Form 14A (see below, Appendix 2).

Form. A groove runs around the outer edge of the flaring rim. A relatively low and concave neck ends in an almost horizontal shoulder. The lower body is conical, ending in a short cylindrical toe vertically pierced. The handles are double-barreled, attached under the rim and on the shoulder. The rounded bend of the handle rises well above the rim (HA 25.5, DA 13.6, HR+N 6, HR 0.5, DR 7.4, HH 9.8, SH 2.1 × 1, HT 0.8, DT 2, D hole 0.5). The main features are similar to the small Rhodian amphoras (body and double-barreled handles) but the high bend and the very flaring rim are atypical. The rim may have facilitated holding the vessel with one hand while pouring liquid into it.

Fabric. The fabric is pale brown with fine white grits. The surface is pinkish pale brown. Several small amphoras of this type have been found at Maresha, in various fabrics. Following a suggestion by Tikva Levine and Dalit Regev, who studied the pottery of Maresha, a local origin for these vessels is most likely.

Fabric and Decoration. The fabric is very pale brown with occasional small white grits. The surface is dark brown or red where the jar came into contact with other vessels during firing. There is a pinkish beige painted decoration of bands down both sides of the handle attachments from the rim to the upper part of the lower

CHAPTER 8: AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS

body where their ends are joined by a horizontal band (average width 1.7). Another band runs around under the rim. Additional bands roughly outline the profile of the lower body. On the shoulder, just above the junction with the lower body, are two parallel lines of dots. The fabric does not indicate any particular place of manufacture, such as Rhodes or Kos. No parallel for the specific decoration has been found, but exactly the same decoration does appear on other table amphoras at Maresha.6 Provisionally these objects may be described as Imitation West Slope Ware, possibly local. Chronology. Table amphoras were also found in subterranean complexes at Maresha, a context that is of no help in dating. In Rotroff’s treatment of the Attic West Slope (Rotroff 1991:93–95, 98–101) only her Nos. 98 and 106, dated before 110 BCE, and Nos. 117–119, dated 100–86 BCE, seem the closest parallels to our small jar. See Regev’s Form 14B below, Appendix 2. KOS Several classes of amphoras seem to have been made on the island of Kos and its vicinity (Empereur and Picon 1986:109–112; Hesnard 1986:75–78; Empereur and Hesnard 1987:14; Kantzia 1994). At Maresha we have one small fragment of a Dressel 4, the typical Koan amphora, and probably another of a Nikandros jar. Complete shapes have been found in later excavations at Maresha.7 For a full description of both types, see Grace 1962:107, 118–120; 1965:10–17; 1979a: Fig. 56; Grace and Pétropoulakou 1970:365–367, Pl. 61–62; and Finkielsztejn 2000:209–210. See also Rh 2, above. Dr4 1. 930/80.21.B36.609. Handle. Not Illustrated. Vertical portion of a double-barreled handle (HHp 17, SH 4.5 × 2.6). The fabric is yellowish red with some fine white grits and many fine copper colored mica bits. The surface is greenish white with some mica. Ni 1 930/80.21.672. Toe. Form. The profile of this toe is very well defined, with an upper cylinder and conical button (HT 4, DT 3.8). Fabric. The core is light brown with reddish yellow outer bands. There is some mica and small white

145

grits. The surface is very pale brown to light red and micaceous. This fabric suggests the toe belongs to the Nikandros class (hence ‘Ni’) rather than to Dressel 4, although this is not certain. Chronology. Both Koan fragments are too small to propose a dating. KNIDOS For the form and fabric of amphoras of the Knidian class see Grace and Pétropoulakou 1970:319; Grace 1979a: Fig. 64, 1986; and Empereur and Tuna 1988, 1989. Kn 1. 930/81.70.220. Toe fragment. Not illustrated. Form and Fabric. The toe bears the usual ring around a spike, now broken (DT 6). The fabric is reddish brown with some brown grits and the surface is light yellowish red. Precise dating is impossible. PAMPHYLIA One complete vessel and several fragments were found at Maresha. On the Pamphylian class, see Grace 1962: 126–127, 1973; A.G. Woodhead, pers. comm., 1970: 367–369. Chronology. An example from Nessana gives a date around the end of the second century BCE for the Maresha pieces (Grace 1962:126–127). However, it has been suggested that these jars may not have been stamped “before about the second quarter of the first century BCE; although the possibility [of earlier stamping of the Pamphylian amphoras] is not excluded” (Grace 1973: 192–195). This assumption was based on the fact that the few contexts which produced Pamphylian stamps also included first-century BCE material. This and several other examples in clear contexts from Maresha (including a complete amphora in situ in the lower city and the stamped top of another) confirm the early dating, at least in the penultimate decade of the second century BCE. The appearance of a Pamphylian stamped handle at Gezer does not seem to be of any chronological help. Although the bulk of the Rhodian stamps at Gezer can be dated before c. 125 BCE (Finkielsztejn 1998:40, 46, 53), one may belong to the end of the second century–first quarter of the first century BCE: Macalister 1912:353,

146

DONALD T. ARIEL AND GERALD FINKIELSZTEJN

No. 34 (probably the Rhodian eponym ’Aqanag×raV; Grace 1962:113), 356, No. 175 and 364 (Pamphylian stamp). See Finkielsztejn 2000:212. Pa 1. 930/982. Fragment of neck with one handle.

Form. The neck is short and flaring and the rim is thickened with a ‘tear-drop’ profile. The curve at the bottom of the neck indicates a globular amphora. The handle has been broken just above the lower attachment and the diameter of the rim cannot be measured (HN+R 8, HR 1.3, DR 13, HHp 8, SH 3.4 × 2.9). Fabric. The fabric is banded yellowish white (outer half) and pinkish (inner half). There are fine dark brick red grits. The surface is yellowish pale brown. UNIDENTIFIED GREEK AMPHORA Un 1. 930/80.21.S9.652. Top of an amphora. Form. High neck with wide vertical rim, slightly concave on outer surface. Flat handles with a rounded profile, attached on the neck, under the rim, and at the top of the shoulder. There are two finger prints on the handles, outside the lower attachment. The rounded shoulder points to a globular shape for the body (HAp 30.8, HN+R 19.5, HR 4.3, DR 14.7, HH 16, SH 4 × 2.5). Fabric. The fabric is pale brown with fine white grits, some small brown and many fine yellowish mica bits. Greenish white to very pale reddish brown, slightly micaceous flaking slip over exterior surface. The inner surface is reddish yellow with many fine micaceous inclusions. The fabric is close to Koan, especially Dressel 4 (see above), but the form has not yet been attributed to Kos. Other vessels, some complete, found at Maresha have the same characteristics. There are also jars with profiles similar to Dressel 4 in unusual fabrics. However attribution of this unidentified Greek amphora to the island of Kos or its surroundings is not possible.

BRINDISI The Brindisi amphora is very well represented at Maresha by 42 pieces, including 13 amphoras, but only one fragment is presented here. For a similar complete vessel, see Grace 1979a: Fig. 38, second from right, and Finkielsztejn 2000: Pl. 111:b, c. For the class, see Empereur and Hesnard 1987:34 and Palazzo 1989. (A comprehensive description of these amphoras will appear in the publication of the finds from the 1989–1994 excavations at Maresha.) They are dated to the late second–first centuries BCE. Br 1. 930/983. One complete handle. Not illustrated. Form. The rounded handle rises slightly before turning down to the lower attachment (HH 16, SH 3).

CHAPTER 8: AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS

Fabric. The clay has a reddish core with light brown outer bands. There are many small and medium dark gray and white grits. The surface is a very pale brown. REPUBLICAN OVOID AMPHORA (NORTH AFRICAN?) This term refers to ovoid jars from the Western Mediterranean, not necessarily from Brindisi (Empereur and Hesnard 1987:35–36). They are related to the Dressel 26 and Tripolitanian I Imperial amphoras but were produced in the Hellenistic/ Roman Republican period. The particular form of the example here is repeated in several other jars from Maresha. Ro 1. 930/80.21.B33.603. Intact except for the handles.

147

preserved but the short spike of the toe, shown on the drawing, does not appear in the photograph. The Tel Michal amphora seems smaller than ours (HA 65 on the drawing, 60 on the photograph). Fabric. The fabric is reddish brown with fine white grits. The thinly spread slip is very pale brown in color. Epigraphy. Some faint Greek letters remain from an inscription in black ink on the shoulder. Chava Korzakowa, who will publish the Greek inscriptions from Maresha, suggests the following, very tentative, reading: klaw vacat ka tocw Another rim fragment of the same type bears a faint inscription on the neck, also in black paint.

Form. The thickened flaring rim is concave on its outer face. There is a low neck, an ovoid body and a pointed bottom. The transition from neck to shoulder is very rounded. Traces of the handles show that they were asymmetrically attached under the rim and on the shoulder. The pointed bottom is flat and rough (HA 74, DA 39, HR+N 12.5, HR 3.3, DR 16.5, HH restored 10.5, DT 3.5). Although this form is closely related to Dressel 26, the body is not cylindrical and the transition between shoulder and body and body and bottom is gentle. An identical complete amphora was found at Tel Michal (Singer-Avitz 1989:121, Fig. 9.3:11 and 431, Pl. 60:9). There the asymmetrical handles are

Origin. The fabric is similar to that of amphoras of Punic tradition also found in Maresha. There are several possible areas of production: North Africa (especially Tunisia), Sicily or even mainland Italy, since some fabrics contain fine mica (Cintas 1950: Pl. XXVI, Type 318; Empereur and Hesnard 1987:35). The fabric description of the Tel Michal amphora is confusing: Singer-Avitz 1989:121, Fig. 9.3, 11, “Buff (brown-red), small white grits”, 122, “light greenishwhite fabric”; Goldberg, Singer-Avitz and Horowitz 1989:264 (petrographic analysis), “…pinkish instead of greenish white. It contains a relatively large amount of fine mica and coarse basalt fragments within an originally calcareous matrix...”. The petrographic analysis points to a Greek origin, Greek islands or Cyprus (Goldberg, Singer-Avitz and Horowitz 1989: 266). L. Singer-Avitz kindly allowed Finkielsztejn to examine the vessel. It is actually of a pinkish fabric covered with a greenish slip, explaining the various descriptions. Amphoras in a similar fabric and type have been found at Maresha. Chronology. The mixed context in which jar Ro1 was found does not help to date it, yet the evidence of this class elsewhere at Maresha can. At Tel Michal, the type is said to belong to Stratum IX of the Persian period. It is attributed to Type VI Plain White of Cyprus, dated by Gjerstad to 475–400 BCE (Singer-Avitz 1989:

148

DONALD T. ARIEL AND GERALD FINKIELSZTEJN

122). This latter attribution is not likely, as the profile of the Cypriot vessel is quite different. There, the rim is a narrow band, the handles are flat, symmetrically attached to the vessel with a different profile and the body is clearly pear-shaped with a large flat hollow button at the base. Its obvious similarity with the group of amphoras found in the context of the late second half of the second century BCE at Maresha implies that the date of the vessel from Tel Michal should be revised. At Maresha, only two Republican ovoid amphoras have been retrieved from subterranean complexes; the rest of the complete amphoras were discovered in situ in storerooms of the lower city. They appear to belong to the last phase of occupation of the site, rather late in that period. This amphora may be dated certainly in the second half of the second century BCE, probably even in the last quarter. The almost intact body and neck of our jar may strengthen a date close to the conquest of the site by John Hyrcanus I (Finkielsztejn 1998:47–51, 57). INDICES Bold-face numbers refer to catalogue numbers of names found at Maresha.

G×rgwn Rh. ep. Rh 4 DamokrthV 1st Rh. fab. Rh 1 Di×dotoV 1st Rh. fab. Rh 5 Di×dotoV 2nd Rh. fab. Rh 5 ‘EstieÎoV Rh. ep. Rh 3 ‘Esti[ lag. Rh 9 Qesmoj×rioV Rh. month Rh 2, Rh 6 ‘IppokrthV Rh. fab. Rh 1, Rh 2 KallikrthV 3rd Rh. ep. Rh 3 Nikasag×raV 1st Rh. ep. Rh 1 PnamoV Rh. month Rh 1 PausanÌaV 1st Rh. ep. Rh 1 PausanÌaV 2nd Rh. ep. Rh 1

GREEK NAMES

PausanÌaV 3rd Rh. ep. Rh 1

’Aqanag×raV Rh. ep. Pa 1

SâmmacoV Rh. ep. Rh 6

’AlexidaV Rh. ep. Rh 4

SwkrthV 2nd Rh. fab. Rh 6

’Anaxag×raV Rh. ep. Rh 2

Tim×qeoV Rh. ep. Rh 2

’AnaxippÌdaV Rh. fab. Rh 3

Tim×xenoV Rh. fab. Rh 1, Rh 2

’AntÌpatroV Rh. ep. Note 1

Filokl^hV Rh. fab. Rh 7

’Aristnax 2nd Rh. ep. Note 1

FilokrthV 2nd Rh. fab. Rh 8

’Arist×geitoV Rh. ep. Rh 4

GREEK MONOGRAMS

’Aristokl^hV 2nd Rh. fab. Rh 1, Rh 2

G Rh 9

’ArÌstratoV Rh. ep. Note 1

D Cy 1

AåtokrthV 2nd Rh. ep. Note 1

QA Rh 3

Br×mioV Rh. fab. Rh 4

Q .A Rh 9

CHAPTER 8: AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS

I* Rh 1

DEVICES AND FORMS

K Rh 2

Anchor(?) device Rh 2

K* Rh1, Rh 2

Caduceus device Rh 8

KY Rh 2

Double-barreled handles Rh 2, Rh 11, Dr4 1

K Rh 2

Grape cluster device Rh 5

O* Rh 1

Helios device Rh 1

P Rh 9

Lagynos form, Rh 9

R* Rh 1

Mask device Cy 1

T* Rh 1

Rose device Rh 1, Rh 2, Rh 3, p. 143

149

Wreath device Rh 4

NOTES 1 The amphora stamps excavated at Maresha in the 1970s and early 1980s were originally studied by D.T. Ariel. Some of the readings and the chronology were then revised and updated together with G. Finkielsztejn who completed a Ph.D. dissertation on amphoras imported to Israel in the Hellenistic period (Finkielsztejn 1993). The latter’s detailed study of the chronology of the eponyms named on Rhodian amphora stamps appears in the British Archaeological Reports International Series (Finkielsztejn 2001; see n. 2). Finkielsztejn also added the commentaries on the unstamped amphora fragments (see Finkielsztejn 2000). Some of the comparanda were found during visits of both Ariel (in October 1993) and Finkielsztejn (in August 1995) to the amphora archive of the late Miss Virginia Grace at the American School of Classical Studies in Athens, at the invitation of Carolyn Koehler and Philippa Matheson.

2

The table is based on Finkielsztejn 2001:196–197. As this book appeared before this chapter went to press, the dating suggested for each stamp has been updated. 3 The authors thank G. Hurvitz and A. Negev for permission to mention this item. 4 The authors thank E. Oren for permission to mention this find. 5 The authors thank the Israel Antiquities Authority for permission to mention this find. 6 Prof. Susan Rotroff, an expert on the Hellenistic pottery of Greece who is intimately acquainted with the material from the American School of Classical Studies at Athens excavations at the Athenian Agora, kindly informed G. Finkielsztejn that she knows of no parallel for our vessel. 7 These will be published in a subsequent Maresha volume by G. Finkielsztejn.

REFERENCES Abel F.M. 1925. Chronique. I. Tombeaux récemment découverts à Maresha. RB 34:267–275. Ariel D.T. 1988. Two Rhodian Amphoras. IEJ 38:31–35. Ariel D.T. 1990. Excavations at the City of David Directed by Yigal Shiloh II: Imported Stamped Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory, and Glass (Qedem 30). Jerusalem. Ariel D.T. and Finkielsztejn G. 1994. Stamped Amphora Handles. In S.C. Herbert. Tel Anafa, Final Reports I (JRA Supplement 10). Ann Arbor. Pp. 183–240. Avi-Yonah M. 1962. A List of Priestly Curses from Caesarea. IEJ 12:137–139.

Barag D. 1994. New Evidence for the Foreign Policy of John Hyrcanus I. INJ 12 (1992–93):1–12. Barkay R. 1994. The Marisa Hoard of Seleucid Tetradrachms Minted in Ascalon. INJ 12 (1992–93):21–26. Benoit F. 1961. L’épave du Grand Congloué à Marseille (Gallia, Supplément XIV). Paris. Bliss J. 1900. Report on the Excavations at Tell Sandahannah. PEFQSt 32:319–341. Bliss J. and Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine during the Years 1848–1900. London.

150

DONALD T. ARIEL AND GERALD FINKIELSZTEJN

Börker Ch. 1974. Griechische Amphorenstempel von Tell Halaf bis zum persischen Golf. Baghdader Mitteilungen 7:31–49. Calvet Y. 1972. Salamine de Chypre III: Les timbres amphoriques (1965–1970). Paris. Calvet Y. 1982. Kition-Bamboula I: Les timbres amphoriques. Paris. Calvet Y. 1986. Les amphores chypriotes et leur diffusion en Méditerranée orientale. In J.-Y. Empereur and Y. Garlan eds. Recherches sur les amphores grecques (BCH Supplement 13). Paris. Pp. 505–514. Cavalier M. 1985. Il relitto A (Roghi) del Capo Graziano di Fidiculi. Archeologia Subacquea 2, Bolletino d’Arte (Supplement to No. 29). Pp. 101–127. CIL: Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. Cintas P. 1950. Céramique punique. Paris. Crowfoot J.W. 1957. Potters’ Stamps. In J.W. Crowfoot, G.M. Crowfoot and K. Kenyon 1957. Samaria-Sebaste III: The Objects from Samaria. London. Pp. 379–388. Dray E. and Du Plat Taylor J. 1951. Tsambres and Aphendrika, Two Classical and Hellenistic Cemeteries in Cyprus. RDAC (1937–39):24–123. Elgavish J. 1974. Archaeological Excavations at Shikmona, Report No. 2, the Level of the Hellenistic Period–Stratum H, Season 1963–1970. Haifa (Hebrew). Elgavish J. 1976. Pottery from the Hellenistic Stratum at Shiqmona. IEJ 26:65–76. Empereur J.-Y. 1977. Timbres amphoriques de Crocodilopolis-Arsinoé. BIFAO 77:197–233. Empereur J.-Y. 1990. La chronologie des amphores rhodiennes à l’époque hellénistique. In Second Scientific Conference on Hellenistic Pottery. Rhodes, March 22–25th 1989. Athens. Pp. 199–209 (Greek). Empereur J.-Y. and Hesnard A. 1987. Les amphores hellénistiques. In P. Levêque and J.-P. Morel eds. Céramiques Hellénistiques et Romaines 2. Besançon. Pp. 7–71. Empereur J.-Y. and Picon M. 1986. A la recherche des fours d’amphores. In J.-Y. Empereur and Y. Garlan eds. Recherches sur les amphores grecques (BCH Supplement 13). Paris. Pp. 103–126. Empereur J.-Y. and Tuna N. 1988. Zénon de Caunos et l’épave de Serçe Limani. BCH 112:342–357. Empereur J.-Y. and Tuna N. 1989. Hiérotélès, potier rhodien de la Pérée. BCH 113:277–299. Étienne R. 1986. La date du prêtre éponyme de Rhodes, Autocratès. In J.-Y. Empereur and Y. Garlan eds. Recherches sur les amphores grecques (BCH Supplement 13). Paris. Pp. 45–47. Ferron J. and Pinard M. 1960–61. Les fouilles de Byrsa. Cahiers de Byrsa 9:98–120. Finkielsztejn G. 1989. Chronique archéologique. Tell Abu Hawam: Réecsamen des périodes hellénistique et perse (fouilles 1929 à 1933). RB 96:224–234. Finkielsztejn G. 1990. Amphores et timbres d’amphores importées en Palestine à l’époque hellénistique: Orientations de recherches et premiers résultats (Memoir presented to the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-

Lettres. Ecole Biblique et Archéologique Française de Jérusalem). Jerusalem (unpublished). Finkielsztejn G. 1993. Amphores et timbres d’amphores importées en Palestine à l’époque hellénistique: Etudes de chronologie et d’histoire. Ph.D. diss. Sorbonne University. Paris. Finkielsztejn G. 1995a. Amphoras Imported into EretzIsrael in the Hellenistic Period and the Revision of the Chronology of the Rhodian Stamps. Abstracts of the 21st Congress of Archaeology in Israel (Jerusalem, May 18–19 1995). Jerusalem. Pp. 12–13 (Hebrew). Finkielsztejn G. 1995b. La chronologie basse des timbres amphoriques rhodiens et l’évaluation des exportations d’amphores. Acta Hyperborea 6:279–296. Finkielsztejn G. 1998. More Evidence on John Hyrcanus I’s Conquests: Lead Weights and Rhodian Amphora Stamps. BAIAS 16:33–63. Finkielsztejn G. 2000. Amphores importées au Levant sud à l’époque hellénistique. In Fifth Scientific Conference on Hellenistic Pottery (Chania, Crete, April 1997). Athens. Pp. 207–220. Finkielsztejn G. 2001. Chronologie détaillée et révisée des éponymes amphoriques rhodiens de 270 à 108 av. J.-C. environ. Premier bilan (BAR Int. S. 990). Oxford. Giveon R. 1963. Ptolemaic Faience Bowl. IEJ 13:20–29. Goldberg P., Singer-Avitz L. and Horowitz A. 1989. Petrographic Analysis of Persian Period Pottery. In Z. Herzog, G. Rapp Jr. and O. Negbi eds. Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel (Publications of the Institute of Archaeology 8). Tel Aviv. Pp. 264–267. Grace V. 1934. Stamped Amphora Handles Found in 1931– 1932. Hesperia 3:197–310. Grace V. 1950. The Stamped Amphora Handles. In H. Goldman ed. Tarsus I: Excavations at Gözlü Küle. Princeton. Pp. 135–148. Grace V. 1952. Timbres amphoriques trouvés à Délos. BCH 76:514–540. Grace V. 1962. Stamped Handles of Commercial Amphoras. In H.D. Colt ed. Excavations at Nessana (Auja Hafir, Palestine) I. Princeton. Pp. 106–130. Grace V. 1963. Notes on the Amphoras from the Koroni Peninsula. Hesperia 32:319–334. Grace V. 1965. The Commercial Amphoras from the Antikythera Shipwreck. In G. P. Weinberg, V. R. Grace, G. R. Edwards, H. S. Robinson, P. Throckmorton, E. K. Ralph. The Antikythera Shipwreck Reconsidered. TAPA 55:5–17. Grace V. 1973. Imports from Pamphylia. BCH Supplement 1:183–208. Grace V. 1974. Revisions in Early Hellenistic Chronology. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung 89:193–200. Grace V. 1979a. Amphoras and the Ancient Wine Trade. Excavations of the Athenian Agora (Picture Book No. 6 rev. ed.). Athens. Grace V. 1979b. Kouriaka. In V. Karageorghis. Studies Presented in Memory of Porphyrios Dikaios. Nicosia. Pp. 178–188.

CHAPTER 8: AMPHORA STAMPS AND IMPORTED AMPHORAS

Grace V. 1985. The Middle Stoa Dated by Amphora Stamps. Hesperia 54:1–54. Grace V. 1986. Some Amphoras from a Hellenistic Wreck. In J.-Y. Empereur and Y. Garlan eds. Recherches sur les amphores grecques (BCH Supplement 13). Paris. Pp. 551–565. Grace V. and Pétropoulakou M. 1970. Les timbres amphoriques grecs. In P. Bruneau ed. Exploration Archéologique de Delos 27: L’îlot de la maison des comédiens. Paris. Pp. 277–382. Hadjisavvas S. 1980. Paphos-“Vasiliko”. A Hellenistic Tomb. RDAC:253–259. Halpern Zylberstein M-Ch. 1980. Timbres amphoriques. In J. Briend and J.-B. Humbert eds. Tell Keisan (1971–1976): Une cité phénicienne en Galilée (OBO 1). Fribourg. Pp. 243–255. Hesnard A. 1986. Imitations et raisonnement archéologique: A propos des amphores de Rhodes et de Cos. In J.-Y. Empereur and Y. Garlan eds. Recherches sur les amphores grecques (BCH Supplement 13). Paris. Pp. 69–79. Kantzia C. 1994. A Workshop of Amphoras of the First Half of the Fourth c. BCE in Kos. In Third Scientific Conference on Hellenistic Pottery (Thessalonica, September 1991). Athens. Pp. 323–354. Kloner A. and Hess O. 1985. A Columbarium in Complex 21 at Maresha. ‘Atiqot (ES) 17:121–133. Landau Y. 1974. Seals on Handles. In J. Elgavish. Archaeological Excavations at Shikmona, Report No. 2, the Level of the Hellenistic Period–Stratum H, Season 1963–1970. Haifa. Pp. 62–64 (Hebrew). Macalister R.A.S. 1901. Amphora Handles with Greek Stamps from Tell Sandahannah. PEFQSt 33:25–43, 124–144, 394–397. Macalister R.A.S. 1912. The Excavations of Gezer I: 1902–1905 and 1907–1909. London.

151

Nilsson M.P. 1909. Exploration archéologique de Rhodes V: Timbres amphoriques de Lindos. Copenhagen. Palazzo P. 1989. Le anfore di Apani (Brindisi). In Amphores romaines et histoire économique: Dix ans de recherche (Sienne 22–24 mai 1986) (Collection de l’Ecole Française de Rome 114). Rome. Pp. 548–553. Peters J.P and Thiersch H. 1905. Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa. London. Porro G.G. 1916. Bolli di anfore rodie del museo nazionale romano. ASAA 2:103–124. Reisner G.A., Fisher C.S. and Lyon D.G. 1924. Harvard Excavations at Samaria 1908–1910. Cambridge, Mass. Rotroff S.I. 1991. Attic West Slope Vase Painting. Hesperia 60:59–102. Schuchhardt C. 1895. Amphorenstempel. In M. Frankel ed. Die Inschriften von Pergamon II: Römische Zeit Inschriften auf Thon (Altertum von Pergamon 8). Berlin. Pp. 423–498. Singer-Avitz L. 1989. Local Pottery of the Persian Period (Strata XI–VI). In Z. Herzog, G. Rapp Jr. and O. Negbi eds. Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel (Publications of the Institute of Archaeology 8). Tel Aviv. Pp. 115–144. Sztetyllo S. 1976. Les timbres céramiques (1965–1975). Nea Paphos I. Warsaw. Tchernia A. 1990. Contre les épaves. In A. Duval, J.-P. Morel and Y. Roman eds. Gaule Interne et Gaule Méditerranéenne aux IIe et Ier siècles avant J.-C.: Confrontations chronologiques (Valbonne, 11–13/11/ 1986) (Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise Supplement 21). Pp. 291–301. Woodhead A.G. 1970. Pamphylian. In V. Grace and M. Pétropoulakou. Les timbres amphoriques grecs. In P. Bruneau ed. Exploration archéologique de Delos 27: L’îlot de la maison des comédiens. Paris. Pp. 367–369.

CHAPTER 9

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Maresha was a planned and fortified city during the third and second centuries BCE, consisting of two topographical areas: the central upper mound encompassed by a wall and towers and the lower, partially walled city that surrounded the acropolis in a band 150–350 m wide. Beneath the fortifications of the upper city, Persian and Iron Age strata were revealed. Below most, if not all, of the buildings in the lower city were extensive man-made caves. This volume has presented the results of the excavations carried out in three of these subterranean complexes: Complex 21 located 130 m west of the western wall of the upper city; Complex 70, 210 m east of the same wall; and Complexes 44 and 45, 70 m southwest of the southwestern tower. Together they indicate well the extent of the underground structures at Maresha. These complexes, as well as at least 159 more in the lower city, are representative of the use of man-made caves in the Hellenistic period in the Levant. Each subterranean complex consists of a number of systems. The systems, in all almost one thousand, contain from one to four rooms. The average number of rooms in the complexes discussed in this volume is 16–17 per complex. This figure has enabled us to estimate the total number of subterranean rooms as approximately 2500. It should be kept in mind that there were no connections between the complexes and that originally the rooms were arranged in systems that were hewn and used independently. However, in the complexes described here, later openings connected several previously independent systems. Table 9.1 summarizes the total number of rooms and systems in Complexes 21, 70, 44 and 45. The subterranean complexes of Maresha extend under c. 50% of the total surface area of the city. However, the blank areas between the complexes in the map (Plan 3.1) do not necessarily indicate undisturbed rock but more likely undiscovered caves that future soundings may reveal. Since the area of Maresha above ground was densely built up and as there were

also extensive subterranean structures, we can assume that the underground complexes formed an integral part of almost all the residences, shops and workshops of the lower city. The correlation between the caves and the surface buildings is further supported by the fact that the subterranean complexes were found only inside the walls of the lower city. The walls at the eastern and southern perimeters marked the boundary of the complexes and no caves have been discovered outside these lines. Man-made caves were located below all the excavated surface buildings and streets. This is clearly attested in Area 53 at the southern edge of the upper city (Kloner 1991:39–40) and in Area 61 in the southeastern part of the lower city where the subterranean complex (Kloner and Arbel 1998) is cut below the insula (Kloner et al. 1998). This occurred also in Areas 930 and 940 (Kloner, Erlich and Whetstone 1999). In Area 100, where part of an insula was excavated and its structures were identified as shops and workshops, two underground rock cisterns were uncovered (Kloner, Finkielsztejn and Arbel 1998). The entrances to the subterranean complexes were quarried through courtyards, open spaces and corridors between the dwelling units and in a few cases in the floors of rooms or via staircases leading directly from the streets. Based on the results of the excavated Areas 53, 61, 100, 930 and 940, we can quite confidently draw the conclusion that the same conditions prevailed also in Complexes 21, 70, 44 and 45, even though we did not excavate the surface structures in these areas. The total surface area of the city of Maresha was 320 dunams (80 acres). The town plan consisted of a network of streets oriented more-or-less east–west and north–south. The orthogonal plan was not executed in a precise grid pattern and the streets varied in width from two to six meters. The houses were constructed of soft local limestone blocks and arranged in insulae, each surrounded by four streets or alleys. The residences were built around central

154

AMOS KLONER

courtyards, and the majority of these houses had upper stories. One to three staircases, consisting of a central square pillar encircled by steps, were found in the excavated buildings. In many cases the groundfloor rooms facing the streets were used as shops, workshops or storerooms. The houses’ upper stories functioned as private sleeping and living rooms and storage areas. Evidence of plaster and colorful stucco, as well as architectural decorations, was discovered in these residences and the collapsed debris in the caves below them. The well-organized city planning and spacious homes, as well as the rich variety of objects recovered from them, indicate that the inhabitants enjoyed a fairly high standard of living. Smaller units, one or two rooms each, may have served as residences for a low-income population. During this time, the third and second centuries BCE, the population of the city is estimated to have been 10,000 persons. The economy of Maresha in the Hellenistic period can be divided into two categories on the basis of archaeological finds—that required for the maintenance of the city and that which supported the city. City Maintenance 1. The local limestone (chalk) was quarried and used in the construction of both public and private buildings. 2. Run-off water was collected in cisterns and held in reserve for later use.

Income-Producing Industries 1. An extensive olive-oil processing industry was conducted in the underground complexes. At least 22 factories have been found thus far. 2. Pigeons were raised in underground systems, as demonstrated by the 85 columbaria containing more than 50,000 identified small niches. 3. A textile industry including weaving and dyeing was in operation in the surface buildings and in the underground complexes, evidenced by many iron weights found in the surface construction of L61 and also discerned in the fills of many subterranean complexes. 4. Pottery manufacture on the surface and in the subterranean complexes has also been discerned (see Chap. 6), as attested by wasters recovered from subterranean Complexes 84, 128 and others. Figurine molds were discovered as well. 5. There are also archaeological indications such as ostraca and other finds for fruit growing and drying, the cultivation of grain and crops, and animal husbandry, including horses. In addition, the Zenon papyri (259 BCE) mention boys and girls bought at Maresha and taken as slaves to Egypt. Finally, intensive trade between Maresha and the coastal plain and Egypt was practiced in the Hellenistic period. These subjects will be studied in the following volume on the epigraphy of Maresha.

Table 9.1. Size of Complexes 70, 21, 44 and 45 Complex No.

Number of Systems

Number of Rooms per System

Total Number of Rooms in the Complex

70

4

System A: 11 B:10 C: 3 D: 7

31

21

8

System A: B: C: D: E: F: G: H:

13

44

1

5

45

3

5–7 rooms in each system

3 1 1 1 1 2 1 3

5 18

CHAPTER 9: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

155

REFERENCES Kloner A.1991. Maresha 1989. ESI 10:38–40. Kloner A. and Arbel Y. 1998. Maresha—Area 61 (Subterranean Complex). ESI 17:157–162. Kloner A., Erlich A. and Whetstone S. 1999. Maresha—The Lower City. ESI 20: 118*–119*.

Kloner A., Erlich A., Vitto F. and Shmuel D. 1998. Maresha—Area 61. ESI 17:163–165. Kloner A., Finkielsztjen G. and Arbel Y. 1998. Maresha— Area 100. ESI 17:154–157.

APPENDIX 1

MARESHA: SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY NAOMI SIDI, CHAVA KORZAKOVA AND AMOS KLONER

PREVIOUS EXCAVATIONS AND SURVEYS (1900–1972) Bliss F.J. and Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Excavations in Palestine during the Years 1898–1900. London. Pp. 52–61, 67–68, 107, 123–134, 154–187, 200, 238–254. Kloner A. and Hess O. 1985. A Columbarium in Complex 21 at Maresha. ‘Atiqot (ES) 17:122–133. Macalister R.A.S. 1901. “Es-Suk”–Tell Sandahannah. PEFQSt:11–19. Oren E.D. 1965. The Caves of the Palestinian Shephelah. Archaeology 17:218–224. Oren E. and Rappaport U. 1984. The Necropolis of Maresha–Beth Govrin. IEJ 34:114–153. Peters J.P. and Thiersch H. 1905. Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa. London. CURRENT EXCAVATIONS (1980–1999) Eshel E. and Kloner A. 1996. An Aramaic Ostracon of an Edomite Marriage from Maresha, dated 176 B.C.E. IEJ 46: 1–22. Kloner A. 1987. Maresha. ESI 5:63–64, 118. Kloner A. 1990. Maresha—1987/1988. ESI 7–8:125. Kloner A. 1991. Maresha—1989. ESI 10:38–40. Kloner A. 1993. A Byzantine Church at Maresha (Beit Govrin). In Y. Tzafrir ed. Ancient Churches Revealed. Jerusalem. Pp. 260–264. Kloner A. 1996. Central Pillar Spiral Staircases in the Hellenistic Period. EI 25:484–489 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 107*). Kloner A. 1999a. Maresha. The Hellenistic City. In M. Chatzopoulos ed. Alexander the Great: From Macedonia to the Oikoumene. Veria. Pp. 185–200. Kloner A. and Arbel Y. 1998. Maresha—Area 61 (Subterranean Complex). ESI 17:157–162. Kloner A. and Asaf S. 1995. Maresha 1992. ESI 14:118–119. Kloner A. and Eshel E. 1999. A Seventh-Century BCE List of Names from Maresha. EI 26:147–150 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 233*–234*).

Kloner A., Erlich A., Vitto F. and Shmuel D. 1998. Maresha—Area 61. ESI 17:163–165. Kloner A., Finkielsztejn G. and Arbel Y. 1998. Maresha—Area 100. ESI 17:154–157. Levine T. 1999. The Hellenistic Private House at Maresha. In M. Chatzopoulos ed. Alexander the Great: From Macedonia to the Oikoumene. Veria. Pp. 201–208. COINS, STAMPED AMPHORAS AND MEASURING TABLE Barkay R. 1992/3. The Marisa Hoard of Seleucid Tetradrachms Minted in Ascalon. INJ 12:21–26. Finkielsztejn G. 1998. More Evidence on John Hyrcanus I’s Conquests: Lead Weights and Rhodian Amphora Stamps. BAIAS 16:33–63. Finkielsztejn G. 1999. A Standard of Volumes for Liquids from Hellenistic Maresha. ‘Atiqot 38: 51–64. Macalister R.A.S. 1901. Amphora Handles with Greek Stamps from Tell Sandahannah. PEFQSt 33:25–13, 124–144. Macalister R.A.S. 1902. Further Jar Handles with Rhodian Stamps. PEFQSt:121. Qedar S. 1992/3. The Coins of Marisa: A New Mint. INJ 12:27–33. SURVEYS AND EXCAVATIONS OF SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES Ben-Haim D. and Kloner A. 1989. Maresha— Underground System No. 74. NZ 15:11–16 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 185). Kloner A. 1973. A Columbarium at Marissa. Qadmoniot 6:113–115 (Hebrew). Kloner A. 1981a. The Lower City of Maresha. 8th Archaeological Conference in Israel. Jerusalem. Pp. 7–8. Kloner A. 1981b. Maresha 1980. IEJ 31:240–241.

158

NAOMI SIDI, CHAVA KORZAKOVA AND AMOS KLONER

Kloner A. 1985. Maresha—The Water Cisterns Cave. NZ 11/12:102–107 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 132). Kloner A. 1986. Maresha. IEJ 36:277–279. Kloner A. 1987–1988. Maresha: Subterranean Complex No. 71. Burial Cave. ESI 6:79–81. Kloner A. 1989. Maresha—Underground System No. 71. NZ 15:7–10 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 185). Kloner A. 1989–1990. Maresha, Complex 75 1989– 1990. ESI 9:163–165. Kloner A. 1993a. Maresha—1990. ESI 12:88–89. Kloner A. 1993b. Maresha Network 61. NZ 19:97–110 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 139). Kloner A. 1999b. Maresha, Subterranean Complex 147. HA–ESI 110:77*–78*. Kloner A. and Eshel E. 1993. Aramaic Ostracon ESI 14:119–120. Miron Y. 1985. Maresha—Cave System No. 15. NZ 11–12:108–112 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 132). TOMBS; ART IN TOMBS Abel F.M. 1925. Tombeaux récemment découverts à Marissa. RB 34:267–275. Albright W.F. 1942. Two Cressets from Marisa and the Pillars of Jachim and Boaz. BASOR 85:18–27. Conder C.K. and Kitchener H.H. 1883. The Survey of Western Palestine III: Judea. London. Pp. 267–271, 276, 291. Cook S.A. 1915. A New Painted Tomb in Palestine. PEFQSt 48:93–94. Kloner A. 1985. Maresha 1985. ESI 4:64. Kloner A. 1998. Amphorae with Decorative Motifs on Ossuaries—Sources and Influences. In E. Baruch ed. New Studies of Jerusalem. Ramat-Gan. Pp. 43–54 (Hebrew). Kloner A. 1999c. The Artistic Impact of Hellenistic Kerameikos on Wall Painting and Reliefs from Maresha, Jerusalem and Petra. Athenischen Mitteilungen 114:227–234. Kloner A. 2000. Hellenistic Painted Tombs at Maresha. Michmanim 14:7–16 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 13*–14*). Lagrange M.J. 1902. Deux hypogées macédoniens à Beit Djebrîn (Palestine). Académie des Inscriptions & Belles-Lettres, comptes rendus des séances de l’année 1902. Paris. Pp. 497–505.

Macalister R.A.S. 1906a. Addenda. In J.P. Peters and H. Thiersch eds. Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa (Maresha). (2nd ed.). London. Macalister R.A.S. 1906b. The Erotic Graffito in the Tomb of Apollophanes of Marissa. PEFQSt: 54–62. Macalister R.A.S. 1906c. Notes and Quests 3: The Apollophanes Inscription. PEFQSt:158–159. McCown Ch. C. 1923. A Tomb at Marissa-Beit-Jibrin. AASOR 2–3:111–112. Meyeboom G.P. 1995. The Nile Mosaic of Palestrina (EPRO 121). Leiden. Moulton W.J. 1914. Art and Archeology 1:62–71. Moulton W.J. 1915. An Inscribed Tomb at Beit Jibrin. AJA 19:63–70. Oren E. and Rappaport U. 1984. The Necropolis of Maresha–Beth Govrin. IEJ 34:114–153. Peters J.P. and Thiersch H. 1905. Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa. London. Petrie W.F. 1890. Journal of Mr. Flinders Petrie. PEFQSt:219–246, especially pp. 243–244. Regev D. 1991. Maresha. ESI 10:152–153. Roll I. 1983. Classicisme et provincialisme dans l’Orient méditerranéen à l’époque hellénistique et romaine. Praktika XII Synedroy Klasikes Archaiologias, Athena 9–10 Septembroi 1983. Athens. Pp. 262–268. Thiersch H. and Peters J.P. 1902. Neue entdeckte Gräber beit Dschibrin. MNDPV:40–42. Vincent H. 1902. Les hypogées peints de Marésa. RB 11:598–599. Vincent H. 1906. Recensions: Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa, par M. le Dr. J.P. Peters et M. le Dr. Thiersch. RB 3 (N.S.): 317–320 (on Peters and Thiersch 1905). Watzinger K. 1935. Denkmäler Palästinas II. Leipzig. Pp. 12–20. OLIVE-OIL PRESSES Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1987. The Technology of Oil Production in the Hellenistic Period. Studies on the Crushing Process at Maresha. In D. Eitam and M. Heltzer eds. Olive Oil in Antiquity. Haifa. Pp. 133–138. Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1987–1988. Survey of Oil Presses. ESI 6:81.

APPENDIX 1: MARESHA: SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1989. Maresha: Olive Oil Production in the Hellenistic Period. NZ 15: 17–65 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 185–186). Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1993a. The Olive Presses of Hellenistic Maresha. In M.-C. Amouretti and J.-P. Brun eds. Oil and Wine Production in the Mediterranean Area (BCH Supplement 26). Athens–Paris. Pp. 119–136. Kloner A. and Sagiv N. 1993b. The Technology of Oil Production in the Hellenistic Period at Maresha, Israel. In M.-C. Amouretti, J-P. Brun and D. Eitam eds. Oil and Wine Production in the Mediterranean Area from the Bronze Age to the End of the XVIth Century: Symposium International, Pre-Actes. Aixen-Provence–Toulon. Pp. 61–68. Sagiv N. and Kloner A. 1996. Underground Olive-Oil Production in the Hellenistic Period. In D. Eitam and M. Heltzer eds. Olive Oil in Antiquity (History of the Ancient Near-East 7). Padova. Pp. 255–292. Tepper Y. 1987. The Oil-Presses at Maresha Region. In M. Heltzer and D. Eitam eds. Olive Oil in Antiquity. Haifa Pp. 25*–42* (Hebrew). GENERAL STUDIES AND HISTORY; PRELIMINARY REPORTS; VARIA Abel F.M. 1924a. Marisa dans le Papyrus 76 de Zénon et la traite des esclaves en Idumée. RB 33: 566–574. Abel F.M. 1924b. Topographie des campagnes machabéennes. RB 33:201–217, especially pp. 204–206. Avi-Yonah M. 1951. Samaria and Marissa of Antiquities XIII, 275. BIES 16:29–31 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. V–VI). Avi-Yonah M. 1967. A Reappraisal of the Tel Sandahannah Statuette. PEQ 99:42–44. Avi-Yonah M. and Kloner A. 1993. Mareshah (Marisa). In E. Stern ed. NEAEHL 3. Pp. 948–957. Barag D. 1992/3. New Evidence on the Foreign Policy of Hyrcanus I. INJ 12:1–12. Begin B.Z. and Grushka A. 1999. Where Was Ostracon Lachish-4 Written? EI 26:13–24 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 226*–227*). Bliss F.J. 1900. Report on the Excavations at Tell Sandahanna. PEFQSt:319–341. Bliss F.J. 1906. The Development of Palestine Exploration. London. Pp. 100, 246–246, 281, 291–292, 294.

159

Brindley H.H. 1919. A Graffito of a Ship at Beit Jibrin. PEFQSt:76–78. Clermont-Ganneau Ch. 1896. Archeological Researches in Palestine II. London. Pp. 440–451. Clermont-Ganneau Ch. 1901a. Notes épigraphiques et archéologiques. RB 10:88–92. Clermont-Ganneau Ch. 1901b. Royal Ptolemaic Greek Inscriptions and Magic Lead Figures from Tell Sandahannah. PEFQSt:54–58. Cook S. A. 1930. The Religion of Ancient Palestine in the Light of Archaeology (Schweich Lectures of the British Academy). London. Pp. 200–206. Crönert W. and Wünisch R. 1909. Das Lied von Marisa. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 64: 433–448. Crusius O. 1914. Anonymus Marissaeus. Herondae Mimiambi novis fragmentis adiectis. (5t h ed.) Leipzig (Teubneri). P. 129. Dagan Y. 1983. Shephelah of Judah, Survey. ESI 2:92–94. Dahood M. 1961. To Pawn One’s Cloak. Biblica 42:359–366. Finkielsztejn G. 1995. Maresha, la citée immaculée. MB 92:42–47. Finkielsztejn G. 1998. More Evidence on John Hyrcanus I’s Conquests: Lead Weights and Rhodian Amphora Stamps. BAIAS 16:33–63. Fuks G. 1983. Scythopolis—a Greek City in EretzIsrael. In The Hellenization of Coele Syria—301– 200 B.C.E. Jerusalem. Pp. 20–35 (Hebrew). Ganszyniec R. 1924. Sur deux tablettes de Tell Sandahannah. BCH 48:516–521. Gibson S. 1992. The Tell Sandahannah Ship Graffito Reconsidered. PEQ 124:26–30. Goodenough E.R. 1953. The Archaeological Evidence from Palestine. Jewish Symbols in the GrecoRoman Period I. New York Pp. 65–74. Guérin V. 1868. Description géographique, historique et archéologique de la Palestine II: Judée. Paris. Pp. 323–329. Harrison R. 1994. Hellenization in Syria-Palestine: The Case of Judea in the Third Century B.C.E. BA 57:98–108. Hengel M. 1974. Judaism and Hellenism II. London. Holscher. 1937. Maris(s)a. PWRE I 28. Stuttgart. Pp. 1808–1809. Horowitz G. 1980. Town Planning of Hellenistic Marisa. A Reappraisal of the Excavations after 80 Years. PEQ 112:93–111.

160

NAOMI SIDI, CHAVA KORZAKOVA AND AMOS KLONER

Kloner A. 1987. The Judean Shephelah—Geology. In A. Kloner and Y. Tepper. The Hiding Complexes in the Judean Shephelah. Tel Aviv. Pp. 23–29 (Hebrew). Kloner A. 1991. Maresha. Qadmoniot 24 (95–96): 70–85 (Hebrew). Kloner A. 1994. A Unique Hellenistic Juglet from Maresha (Marissa/Tell Sandahannah). In S. Drougou ed. 3rd Scholarly Conference on Hellenistic Pottery. Thessalonika. September 1991. Athens. Pp. 269–271. Kloner 1996. Maresha. Archaeological Guide. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Kloner A. 1997a. Maresha. In M. Meyers ed. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East 31. New York–Oxford. Pp. 412–413. Kloner A. 1997b. Underground Metropolis—The Subterranean World of Maresha. BAR 23: 24–35, 67. Kloner A. 1999d. The Economic Organization and Social Structure of Hellenistic Maresha According to the Town Planning and Archaeological Finds. In A. Faust and A. Maeir eds. Material Culture, Society and Ideology, New Directions in the Archaeology of the Land of Israel. Ramat-Gan. Pp. 103–118 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. XII–XIII). Kloner A. 2000–2001. Water Cisterns in Idumea, Judaea and Nabatea in the Hellenistic and Early Roman Periods. ARAM 13–14:461–485. Kloner A. 2001. The Economy of Hellenistic Maresha. In Z. H. Archibald, J. Davis, V. Gabrielsen and G.J. Oliver eds. Hellenistic Economies. London–New York. Pp. 103–131. Lagrange M.J. 1902. Séances du 26 septembre. Académie des Inscriptions & Belles-Lettres, comptes rendus des séances de l’année 1902. Paris. Pp. 495–496. Lamer H. 1931. Der Kalypso-Graffito in Marissa (Palästina). ZDPV 54:59–67. Macalister R.A.S. 1900. Preliminary Observations on the Rock-Cuttings of Tell Sandahannah. PEFQSt: 338–341. Macalister R.A.S. 1903. Illicit Excavations at BeitJibrin. PEFQSt:172–173. Macalister R.A.S. 1912. A History of Civilization in Palestine. Cambridge. Pp. 24–25. Macalister R.A.S. 1922. Thirty Years of Palestine Exploration. PEFQSt 55: 79–86, esp. 82–83.

Macalister R.A.S. 1925. A Century of Excavations in Palestine. London. Pp. 60–63, 319–325. Masterman E.W.G. 1959. Beit Jibrin and Tell Sandahannah. PEFQSt 59:176–185. Murray A.S., Conder C.R. and Rouse W.H.D. 1901. Notes on Greek Inscription from Marissa. Arsinoë the Great. Berenice. PEFQSt:59–60. Offord J. 1915. Archaeological Notes I. A New Inscription from Marissa. PEFQSt:198–199. Oren E.D. 1965. The Caves of the Palestinian Shephelah. Archaeology 17:218–224. Oren E.D. 1968. The ‘Herodian Doves’ in the Light of Recent Archaeological Discoveries. PEQ 100: 56–61. Peters J.P. and Thiersch H. 1902. The Necropolis of Marissa, Preliminary Notice. PEFQSt: 393–397. Pirot J. 1938. Fouilles en Palestine: Beit-Djebrin (Eleuteropolis) et Tell Sandahannah (Marésa). In F. Vigouroux ed. Dictionnaire de la Bible (Suppl. 3). Paris. Pp. 336–340. Powel J.U. 1925. Marisaeum Melos. Collectanea Alexandrina. Oxford. P. 184. Regev D. 1994. The Transitional Phase between the Persian and Hellenistic Periods at Marissa. In S. Drougou ed. 3rd Scholarly Conference on Hellenistic Pottery, Thessalonika, September 1991. Athens. Pp. 272–274. Robinson E. 1841. Biblical Researches in Palestine, Mount Sinai and Arabia Petra II. London. P. 37. Roll I. 1985. Classicisme et provincialisme dans l’orient mediterranéen à l’époque hellénistique et romaine. Praktika XII Synedroy Klasikes Archaiologias, Athena 9–10 Septembroi 1983. Athens. Ronen I. 1988. Formation of Jewish Nationalism among the Idumaeans. In A. Kasher ed. Jews, Idumeans and Ancient Arabs. Tübingen. Pp. 214–239. Schürer E. 1979. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ II. (Revised by G. Vermes and F. Millar). Edinburgh. Schwabe M. 1945. Jewish Life in the Talmudic Period in the Light of Epigraphy. Qobes ha-hebrah ha‘Ibrith la’Haqirath Erets-Yisra’el we-‘Attiqoteha IV (Wizmann Book). Jerusalem. Pp. 80–87 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. XXIV–XXV). SEG 1937. Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum 7. No. 244:37. Shalit A. 1962. Über die Herkunft der Familie des Herodes. Annual of the Swedish Theological

APPENDIX 1: MARESHA: SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Institute 1. Leiden. Pp. 109–160, especially pp. 114, 146–147. Tepper Y. 1983. Columbaria in Israel and the Raising of Pigeons during the Second Temple Period. NZ 8: 40–53 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 75). Tepper Y. and Shachar Y. 1989. Underground Stables in the Judean Shephelah. NZ 15:75–94 (Hebrew; English summary, p. 184). Thiersch H. 1908. Die Neueren Ausgraben in Palëstina Tell Sandahannah. JDAI:392–413.

161

Tobler T. 1859. Dritte Wanderung nach Palästina im Jahre 1857. Gotha. Vincent H. 1900. Chronique: Les fouilles anglaises. RB 9:114–117. Vincent H. 1901. Chronique: Les fouilles anglaises. RB 10:104–106. Weippert H. 1988. Palästina vorhellenistische Zeit. Handbuch der Archäologie-Vorderasien II, 1. Munich. Pp. 607, 613–614, 625, 717. Wilamowitz-Möllendorf U. 1921. Griechische Verkunst. Berlin. Pp. 344–345.

APPENDIX 2

TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA— SUBTERRANEAN COMPLEXES 70, 21, 581 DALIT REGEV This discussion deals only with the 641 vessels found in Subterranean Complexes 70, 21 and 58 (Permit No. 930). These items, many of them complete shapes, are hereafter referred to as ‘The Corpus’, since they form the foundation of my typology of Persian and Hellenistic pottery at Maresha.2 No statistical analysis was attempted, because the vessels were random finds from subterranean complexes not fully explored and were collected over a long period of time; yet, one cannot ignore the dominance of bowls (c. 45%). This corpus is catalogued by form (Jars to Lamps), origin (Local or Imported) and chronology (Persian: fifth to mid-fourth centuries; Persian–Hellenistic transitional phase: mid-fourth–early third centuries; and Hellenistic: early third to the last decade of the second century BCE, when Maresha was conquered and destroyed).3 The criteria for this classification are not dealt with here. Each form discussion includes a full description, notes and item numbers. Forms within typological categories that are based on chronology and origin of the forms are presented in descending order of frequency. Jugs are the only exception to this rule, where form receives precedence (see below). Illustrations are presented at a scale of 1:5. Those forms marked with an asterisk (*) have not been illustrated.

20 cm in height and c. 22 cm in diameter. It is made of very pale brown clay (10YR 7/4).5 Form 2: Item 653. Characterized by a baggy body, convex knobbed base, tall rounded handles and a short

Form 1

JARS The Corpus includes 18 local jars: one late Iron II holemouth jar (Item 533),4 a Persian holemouth jar (Form 1) which continues the local Judean Iron II tradition and a Persian jar of different type, another of the Persian–Hellenistic period, and 14 Hellenistic containers of two types. In contrast to other shapes, the variety of jar types and sub-types of the Hellenistic period is rather limited, mostly following local ‘Judean’ or ‘inland’ traditions. Local Persian Jars Form 1: Item 78. Characterized by a baggy body, rounded base and a holemouth rim. The jar measures

Form 2

164

DALIT REGEV

Form 4

Form 3

neck with simple or everted rim. Its height is usually 55–60 cm, the same as its Hellenistic successor (Form 3). The clay is green-gray (2.5Y 7/2). The jar is commonly warped and of inferior quality. This is one of the most common jar forms of the Persian period at Maresha. Local Persian–Hellenistic Jars Form 3: Item 167. Characterized by an ovoid body, convex knobbed base, rounded handles and an everted rim. It stands 42 cm high. The clay is very pale brown (10YR 7/3). This type is uncommon and seems to be the taller successor of a local Persian type that continues the local Iron II tradition. Local Hellenistic Jars Form 4: Items 169, 683, 240, 856, 855, 659, 241, 168. Characterized by a baggy body, convex base and slightly carinated shoulder. The upper handle attachment is at the shoulder carination. The neck is vertical and the rim is either outward folded or simple. Its height is 55–60 cm. The clay is usually brown (5YR 6/4). This is by far the most common type of jar at Maresha in the Hellenistic period. Form 5: Items 77, 79, 80, 654, 244, 259. Characterized by an ovoid body, with convex base and shoulder. The neck is vertical, the rim is either outward folded or simple. Its height is 40–50 cm. The clay is usually brown (5YR 6/4).

Form 5

TABLE AMPHORAS The corpus includes five table amphoras of the Hellenistic period. Although assigned to five different types, three share almost the same characteristics and imitate the Attic West Slope table amphora. Only two are locally made: one is slipped and decorated (Form 8), the other is not. Another type (Form 6) follows the local tradition of the Persian period, while the fifth type is a Phoenician vessel (Form 9), rare at Maresha. As will be demonstrated below, this variety of types and origins is typical of Maresha.

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

Local Hellenistic Table Amphoras Form 6: Item 549. Ovoid body, ring base, two handles from the ridge of the wide cylindrical neck to the rounded shoulders, and an outward folded flaring rim. The fine quality of the reddish yellow clay (5YR 6/6) places the form in the Hellenistic period, though its profile can be found in the Persian period as well. Form 7: Item 303. This shape is an undecorated local imitation of the Attic West Slope table amphora, with an ovoid body, flaring ring base, strap handles from the neck below the rim to the shoulder and wide flaring rim. Its clay is white (2.5Y 8/2) and its shape is identical to Form 8. Form 8: * Item: Body Fragment and Handle, Unnumbered. Local imitation of the Attic West Slope table amphora, with an ovoid body, flaring ring base, strap handles from the neck below the rim to the shoulder and wide flaring rim. The entire vessel is red slipped6 and vertically ribbed from shoulder to base. Floral motifs in white paint decorate the shoulder. Occasionally the form has a black slip instead of red, and the floral motifs are incised rather than painted.

items emphasize the strength of the old local traditions present in this Corpus. Form 13 is a little puzzling, as it is probably made of non-local clay in a local form. Local Hellenistic Flasks Form 11: Items 684, 260. Characterized by a globular body, convex base, wide neck, handles from neck to shoulder and a flaring rim.

Form 6

Form 7

Imported Hellenistic Table Amphora Form 9: Item 818. Phoenician table amphora, with a narrow ovoid body, high flaring ring base, handles from the middle of the wide neck to the pronounced shoulders, and usually a sharp-edged drooping rim. The vessel is horizontally ribbed from shoulder to base. It stands 26.8 cm tall and is 18.3 cm in diameter. The clay is reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). This is clearly Phoenician ware, popular in the northern and coastal areas of Israel. Form 9

Form 10: Item 669. An imported imitation of the Attic West Slope table amphora, probably the prototype for the local imitations (see Forms 7 and 8). It has an ovoid body, flaring ring base, strap handles from the neck below the rim to the shoulder and wide flaring rim. The entire vessel is red slipped and vertically ribbed from shoulder to base.

Form 10

FLASKS The Corpus includes five flasks of three types; all seem to be Hellenistic. The shape is an ancient Levantine one known since the Late Bronze Age. Although it is not very popular at Hellenistic Maresha these few

165

Form 11

166

DALIT REGEV

Form 12: * Item 717. Characterized by a carinated lentoid body, convex base, wide neck, handles from neck to shoulder and a flaring rim.7 Pink clay (7.5YR 7/4).

outfolded. It is 25–27 cm tall and c. 8 cm in diameter. The clay is coarse and sandy pale brown (10YR 8/3) in color. This is the most common type of amphoriskos at Maresha.

Imported Hellenistic Flasks Form 13: Items 210, 552. Characterized by a lentoid body, convex base, wide neck, handles from neck to shoulder and a flaring rim. The ware is gray (10YR 6/2) with light brown slip (10YR 8/3) painted in circles on the body.

Form 13

Form 14A

AMPHORISKOI The Corpus includes six Hellenistic amphoriskoi. Although two are local, the shape itself is an import to this region, as is the decorative style of Form 14B. While three of the four types relate in shape to the Greek world, the most common one is Phoenician by form and ware (Form 15), popular not only in the east but throughout the Hellenistic world.8 Local Hellenistic Amphoriskoi Form 14A: Item 200. Characterized by an ovoid body, pointed toe, high loop handles from below the rim to the shoulder and an everted rim. It is 25–30 cm tall and c. 16 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (7.5YR 6/4). Undecorated. See above Chap. 8: SA 1.

Form 14B

Form 14B: Item 72. Characterized by an ovoid body, pointed toe, high loop handles from below the rim to the shoulder and an everted rim. It is 25–30 cm tall and c. 14 cm in diameter. The clay is pink (7.5R 3/0) with gray slip and white painted decoration, perhaps in imitation of the Attic West Slope decorative style. See above, Chap. 8: PWS 1. Imported Hellenistic Amphoriskoi Form 15: Items 616, 670, 222. The Phoenician amphoriskos is a thick-walled vessel with an elongated body, short toe, twisted handles attached on the vertical neck and moderately rounded shoulders. The rim is

Form 15

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

Form 16: Item 216. Characterized by an ovoid body, pointed toe, long double handles and simple rim. The clay is very pale brown (10YR 8/3). Both clay and form indicate that this is a Rhodian amphoriskos or ‘amphorette’, which occasionally has a stamped handle.9 See above, Chap. 8: Rh 11.

This type is decorated with red-painted bands around the base of the neck and the mouth.

JUGS The Corpus includes 77 jugs, 69 of which are local: 24 of six different types from the Persian period (Forms 17–22), 10 of two types from the Persian–Hellenistic period (Forms 23–24) and 35 of four types of the Hellenistic period (Forms 25–28). Eight Hellenistic jugs are imported and belong to five types (Forms 29–33). During the Persian and Persian–Hellenistic periods the types belong to the local Judean tradition, which is sometimes the Iron II tradition. In the Hellenistic period, however, new jug shapes are introduced, mainly the lagynos and variants of the lagynos shape. Still, nearly all of the jugs are locally made. During the Persian period the most common jugs at Maresha belong to Forms 17 and 18; in the Hellenistic period, the very similar Forms 25 and 26 are prevalent. This continuity clearly reveals the local nature of the group. Local Persian Jugs Form 17A: Items 567, 67, 4, 763, 560, 58, 529, 562, 503. Characterized by an ovoid body, disc base, tall wide neck, handle from rim to shoulder and a flat everted rim. This is a simple, large jug, 16.6–28.7 cm tall and 14.5–25.0 cm in diameter, made of light gray clay (5Y 7/2). Form 17B: Items 70, 242, 86, 39, and One Unnumbered. Characterized by an ovoid body, disk base, tall wide neck, handle from rim to shoulder and a flat everted rim. It is 18.8–24.1 cm tall and 16.5–20.8 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (10YR 7/3). Decoration consists of red-painted bands (sometimes white as well) around the shoulder and the base of the neck. The quality of both manufacture and decoration is rather poor. Form 18: Item 707. Characterized by an ovoid body, tall narrow neck, handle from mid-neck to shoulder and a cup-mouth. The clay is light gray (10YR 7/2).

167

Form 16

Form 17A

Form 17B

Form 18

168

DALIT REGEV

Form 19: Item 41. This form is characterized by a squat globular body, convex base, handle from rim to shoulder and a flaring rim. This jug is 13.6 cm tall and 13.7 cm in diameter. The clay is reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6). Form 20: Items 658, 527. Characterized by a globular body, concave base, no handles, low neck, very wide mouth, and a flat everted rim. Occasionally it is decorated with red-painted bands around the base of the neck and on the shoulder. It is 18.8–19.4 cm tall and 17.4–19.9 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (5YR 6/6). Form 21: Items 75, 164, 215, 906. A decanter, characterized by a globular body, concave base, narrow ridged neck, handle from neck-ridge to shoulder and an everted rim. It is 28–32 cm tall and 21.2–24.6 cm in diameter.

Form 22: * Item 267. Characterized by a globular body, concave base, narrow neck, handle from neck to shoulder and a pinched rim. Local Persian–Hellenistic Jugs Form 23: Items 166, 681, 214, 600, 900, Two Unnumbered Rims. Characterized by a large globular body, concave base, short wide neck, handle from rim to shoulder and outward folded rim. It is 34.2–36.1 cm tall and 30.3–32.3 cm in diameter. The clay is either light brown or greenish (10YR 7/3). Form 24: Items 35, 918, 766. Characterized by an ovoid body, concave base, wide neck, handle from rim to above the shoulder and drooping rim. It is 21.1–23.0 cm tall and 17.3–18.1 cm in diameter. The clay is greengray (2.5Y 7/2). Local Hellenistic Jugs Form 25: Items 765, 601, 37, 165, 83, 912, One Unnumbered Item. Characterized by an ovoid body,

Form 19

Form 20

Form 23

Form 21

Form 24

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

ring base, wide vertical neck, handle from rim to shoulder and flaring rim. It is 25.2–28.9 cm tall and 19.8–21.6 cm in diameter. The clay is brown (5YR 6/4). Form 26: Items 528, 85, 162, 3, 561, 559, 768, 117, 673, Three Unnumbered Items. Characterized by an ovoid body, ring base, short concave neck, handle from rim to shoulder and flaring rim. It is 18.5–24.7 cm tall and 15.3–18.3 cm in diameter. The clay is red (2.5YR 5/6). Form 25

Form 27: Items 526, 262, 29, 656, 311, Two Unnumbered Items. A local imitation of the lagynos, with a squat angular body, ring base, tall narrow neck, angular handle from mid-neck to shoulder and simple rounded rim. It is c. 12.5 cm tall and 16.5 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (10YR 7/3). This form is occasionally plain, while some are black or white slipped, usually on the upper part only. Form 28: Items 163, 548, 573, 1, 161, 530, 769, 250, 258. Globular body, wide ring base, short neck, handle from rim to shoulder and a drooping rim. The handle is loosely twisted. It is 16–20 cm tall and 15.8–18.7 cm in diameter. The clay is brown (5YR 6/4).

Form 26

Imported Hellenistic Jugs Form 29: * Item 996. A jug, characterized by an ovoid body, concave or ring base, handle from rim to shoulder and either a straight neck and cup-mouth or a funnel-shaped neck with flaring rim. The upper part of the vessel is red slipped.

Form 27

Form 30: Item 709. A baby feeder, characterized by a globular body, concave base and a spout and a small rounded handle placed at 90° to each other on the shoulder. The neck and rim are shaped either as an incurved rim bowl, or as a funnel-shaped neck with flaring drooping rim. In both cases a strainer divides the body from the neck. Pink clay (7.5YR 8/4). The vessel is always slipped all over in red and black. Form 31: Item 550. A lagynos, characterized by a squat, angular, body, a very wide and low ring base, angular handle from mid-neck to shoulder, tall narrow neck and simple rounded rim. The handle is often twisted and the vessel is usually white painted with orange bands of decoration above and below the shoulder, as well as above the base.

Form 28

Form 30

Form 31

169

170

DALIT REGEV

Form 32: Item 542. A lagynos, characterized by an angular body, wide ring base, angular handle from mid-neck to shoulder, tall narrow neck and simple rounded rim. The clay is very pale brown (10YR8/4). Both clay and form resemble those of the popular Rhodian amphoras of this period; occasionally it has a stamped handle. See Chap. 8: Rh 9. Form 33: Items 87, 217, 2. A large lagynos, characterized by an ovoid body, ring base, angular handle from mid-neck to shoulder, tall narrow neck and simple rounded rim. It is often decorated, but not in a standard pattern like that of the squat lagynos (Form 31); red clay (2.5YR 5/8), sometimes red-slipped, and/or bearing rouletted decoration just below the carination. The origin of this type is clearly different from the Form 31 lagynos.

Form 32

Form 33

JUGLETS The Corpus includes 59 local juglets: five of two types date to the Persian period, 2 juglets of one type belong to the Persian–Hellenistic period, and 52 juglets of four types are Hellenistic. A continuation in local traditions can be seen in the cup-mouth juglet, from the Persian Form 34, through the Persian–Hellenistic Form 36 (usually a Persian shape in Hellenistic clay), to the red-slipped Hellenistic Form 38. The most popular juglet at Maresha during the Hellenistic period—Form 37—though not widespread elsewhere, is also in line with the local elongated juglet that has a very long history in the region, as demonstrated in the Persian

Form 35. This is strictly a local Levantine shape; there are no imported examples. Local Persian Juglets Form 34A: Items 27, 218, 614. Characterized by a globular body, convex base, handle from rim to shoulder, very narrow neck and a cup-mouth rim. It is 13–15 cm tall and 8.6–12.0 cm in diameter. The clay is light red (2.5YR 6/6). Form 34B: Item 153. Characterized by a globular body, disk base, handle from rim to shoulder, very narrow neck and a cup-mouth rim. It is 13–15 cm tall and 8.6–12.0 cm in diameter. The clay is light red (2.5YR 6/6). Form 35: Item 211. Characterized by a long pear-like body with convex (and sometimes slightly pointed) base, no neck, handle from rim to shoulder, and simple everted rim. It is c. 13 cm tall. The clay is brown (2.5YR 5/4). This type continues the local tradition of juglets that extends, without a break, back to the Bronze Age. Local Persian–Hellenistic Juglets Form 36: Items 19, 806. Characterized by a globular body, either rounded or disk base, handle from rim to shoulder, very narrow neck and a cup-mouth rim. It is 13–15 cm tall and 9.0–10.5 cm in diameter. The clay is brown (5YR 6/4). Local Hellenistic Juglets Form 37A: Items 134, 610, 611, 612, 680, 51, 52, 779, 979, 910, 905, 772, 907, 796, 226, 850, 268, 269, 781, 911, 551. Characterized by an angular, pear-shaped body, disk base, handle from rim to shoulder and a holemouth with a simple rim.

Form 34A

Form 34B

Form 35

Form 36

Form 37A

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

It is 13–14 cm tall and c. 8 cm in diameter. The clay is reddish yellow (5YR 6/6). Form 37B: Items 804, 805, 154, 531. Characterized by an angular, pear-shaped body, disk base, handle from rim to shoulder and a holemouth with a flat rim. It is 9–10 cm tall and 6 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (2.5YR 6/4). Form 37C: Items 155, 119. Characterized by a sharply angular, narrow pear-shaped body, disk base, handle from rim to shoulder and a holemouth simple rim. It is 10–11 cm tall and 7 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (5YR 6/4). Form 37D: Item 229. Characterized by an angular pear-shaped body, disk base, handle from rim to shoulder, a holemouth rim and thin walls. It is 10–12 cm tall and c. 7 cm in diameter. The clay is light red (2.5YR 6/6) with red or black slip on the upper part of the body. Form 38: Items 62, 40, 613, 650, 310, 20, 595, 230. Characterized by a globular body, small disk base, handle from rim to shoulder, very narrow neck and a cup-mouth rim. It is 11–13 cm tall and 7–9 cm in diameter. The clay is pink (5YR 7/4), usually with red slip on the upper part of the body. Form 39A: Items 977, 84, 615. Characterized by an ovoid body, small disk base, handle from rim to shoulder, wide neck, flaring rim and thick walls. It is 9–11 cm tall and 8 cm in diameter. The clay is white (2.5Y 8/2). Form 39B: Items 61, 22, 538, 156, 791, 798, 657, 815, 816, 157, 122. Characterized by an ovoid body, small disk base, handle from rim to shoulder,

Form 37B

171

wide neck, flaring rim and thick walls. It is 9–11 cm tall and 8 cm in diameter. The clay is light red (2.5YR 6/6) and there is a red slip on the upper part of the body. Form 40: Items 225, 21. The filler is characterized by a small globular body, small disk base, handle from rim to shoulder Form 40 and a wide neck. A small spout is set on the shoulder at 90° to the handle. It is 9–11 cm tall and 6.4 cm in diameter. The clay is white (2.5YR 8/2). BOTTLES

Form 37C

Form 37D

Form 38

Form 39A

Form 39B

The Corpus includes 22 bottles, local except for one imported example. All but one are Hellenistic unguentaria. Form 41 is not the only Persian-period bottle found at Maresha; several types were recovered at the site and in tombs around it. The six types of local Hellenistic unguentaria in this Corpus do not reflect the entire range found at Maresha. Mainly missing are the earliest types, on which the characteristic toe is lacking, or is very short. Those early types usually vary in size—either very small, in line with the Persian-period tradition, or much larger and taller then later types which are from 15 to 20 cm high. Though not present in this Corpus, several types of Hellenistic imported unguentaria were found at Maresha. Local Persian Bottles Form 41: Item 246. A small bottle, with an ovoid body, disk base, pronounced shoulders, wide neck, thick walls and drooping mushroom-like rim. The clay is light gray (2.5YR 7/2). Local Hellenistic Bottles (Unguentaria) Form 42A: Items 120, 239, 223. Characterized by an ovoid body, flaring disk base, solid toe, vertical neck and drooping rim. It is 17.6 cm tall and 6.9 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (10YR 7/3). Form 42B: Item 131. Characterized by an ovoid body, flaring disk base, solid toe, vertical neck and drooping rim. Brown clay (5YR 6/3) with red slip (10R 5/4) over all of the exterior.

Form 41

Form 42A

Form 42B

172

DALIT REGEV

Form 43: Items 914, 563. Characterized by a thick-walled ovoid body, flaring disk base, solid toe, vertical neck and drooping rim. Carelessly made in brown clay (7.5YR 5/4). Form 44: Item 618. Characterized by a bulbous body, disk base, solid toe, vertical neck and drooping rim. It is 14 cm tall and 5 cm in diameter. The coarse clay is brown (5YR 6/4). Form 45: Items 28, 858, 671. Characterized by a bulbous body, disk base, solid toe, vertical neck and drooping rim. Gray ware with white banded decoration. It is a local imitation of an imported gray ware, thin-walled unguentarium. Form 46: Items 801, 575, 566, 159, 594, 244. Characterized by a narrow bulbous body, flaring disk base, solid toe, vertical neck and drooping rim. It is 16.7–17.0 cm tall and 4.0–4.3 cm in diameter. The clay is brown (5YR 5/4). Form 47: Items 648, 859, 617, 793. Characterized by a narrow bulbous body, flaring disk base, solid toe, vertical neck and drooping rim. It is 15.2–20.9 cm tall and 3.8–4.1 cm in diameter. The clay is brown (5YR 6/4). Imported Hellenistic Bottles Form 48: Item 243. Characterized by a thin-walled ovoid body, flat base, hollow toe, vertical neck and drooping rim. Gray clay (10YR 4/1) with white-painted bands around the neck, shoulder and body.

KRATERS

Form 43

Form 44

Form 45

The Corpus includes 13 local kraters and 1 krater lid; 8 kraters of three types belong to the Persian period, and 5 kraters of three types are Hellenistic. This is an arbitrary picture since many Hellenistic kraters, both local and imported, were found at Maresha in locations not included in this report. Though by name this form seems related to the Greek world, it is already a wellestablished shape in the Syro-Palestinian area by Iron Age I. Persian Form 51 is clearly local, though different in shape from the other kraters, designed for some special application and may not deserve this form name. Local Persian Kraters Form 49: Item 36. Characterized by an ovoid body, wide disk base, wide vertical neck, two handles from neck to shoulder and a flat flaring rim. It is 28.5 cm tall and 24.2 cm in diameter. The clay is reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) and decorative red-painted bands run around the base of the neck and the shoulder. Form 50A: Items 679, 973, 974, 975. Characterized by an ovoid body, wide disk base, two handles from rim to shoulder, wide mouth and everted rim.

Form 46

Form 49

Form 47

Form 48

Form 50A

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

173

Form 50B: * Item 264. Characterized by an ovoid body, wide disk base, two handles from rim to shoulder, wide mouth and everted rim. Red clay (10R 5/6), red-painted decorative bands (10R 4/4) below the rim.

Form 53: Items 680, 651, 138. Characterized by an ovoid body, wide disk base, vertical wide neck, two vertical handles from rim to shoulder. The clay is brown (5YR 6/4). The type is distinguished by pie-crust decoration around the rim.

Form 51: Items 201, 308. This vessel has a biconical body, wide disk base, two horizontal handles on the shoulder and a thickened, holemouth rim. However, at the shoulder above the handles, the walls continue in two different directions: one wall turns inward and ends in a thickened rim, and the other turns out and upward to form the upper part of the vessel. At the point where the walls separate, there are three straining holes, pierced before firing.

Form 54: Item 50. Characterized by an ovoid body, ring base, wide mouth, four handles from rim to shoulder and a rim with an internal ledge for a lid (see Form 55). It is 16.2 cm tall and 15.3 cm in diameter. The clay is light red (2.5YR 6/6). Red slip (10R 4/6) extends from the rim to midbody.

Local Hellenistic Kraters Form 52: Item 128. Characterized by an ovoid body, wide disk base, vertical wide neck, two horizontal handles on the shoulder and a drooping rim. It is c. 34 cm tall and 27.8 cm in diameter. The clay is light red (2.5YR 6/6).

Form 55: Item 800. This round lid measures 8.9 cm in diameter. The clay is reddish brown (5YR 5/4) with a red-painted band (10R 4/4). It is probably suitable for a Form 54 krater.

Form 53

Form 51

Form 54

Form 52

Form 55

174

DALIT REGEV

COOKING POTS The Corpus includes 13 cooking pots: four local pots of two types belonging to the Persian period, 8 local pots of four types and an imported pot of the Hellenistic period. With the exception of the single Form 60 pot, all local vessels are descendants of the Iron Age Judean closed cooking pot. Other types of different origins were found at Maresha as well, but were not included here.

Imported Hellenistic Cooking Pots Form 61: Item 92. Characterized by a thin-walled globular body, convex bottom, everted slightly low wide neck, two handles from rim to shoulder and a simple rim. It is 17.3 cm tall and 21.8 cm in diameter. Reddish brown cooking-pot clay (2.5YR 3/4).9

Local Persian Cooking Pots Form 56: Items 981, 916, 802. Characterized by a small globular body, convex bottom, everted neck and a simple rim. Most often there is one handle from rim to shoulder. The vessel stands 9.7–11.3 cm tall and has a diameter of 12.7–15.3 cm. The clay is pale green (5Y 8/3). Form 57: * Item 976. Characterized by a small globular body, convex bottom, low concave neck and one or two handles from rim to shoulder. It is thin walled and occasionally red or black slipped. Its shape associates the type with cooking pots, but the thin walls and slip argue against its use for cooking. Local Hellenistic Cooking Pots Form 58A: Item 253. Characterized by a thin-walled globular body, convex bottom, low everted wide neck, two handles from rim to shoulder and a flat rim. It is 17–20 cm tall and 21–24 cm in diameter. Reddish brown cooking-pot clay (5YR 5/3). Form 58B: Items 160, 917, 118, 130. Characterized by a small globular body, convex bottom, short everted neck, one or two handles from rim to shoulder and a simple rim. It is 11.0–13.5 cm tall and 14.5–16.5 cm in diameter. The clay is reddish yellow (5YR 7/6).

Form 56

Form 58A

Form 58B

Form 60

Form 59: * Items 980, 569. Characterized by a globular body, convex bottom, tall vertical neck, two handles from rim to shoulder and rounded rim. It is 18–24 cm tall and 20–24 cm in diameter. Reddish brown cookingpot clay (5YR 4/3). Form 60: Item 718. Characterized by a globular body, convex bottom, two handles from rim to shoulder and a flaring rim. The clay is brown (2.5YR 4/4).

Form 61

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

LEKANAI The Corpus includes 11 local lekanai: one of the Persian period, and 10 Hellenistic, all of the same type. The Persian example is in the local tradition and the most popular type of the period. The Hellenistic type is very common not only at Maresha but around the Hellenistic world. Local Persian Lekane Form 62: Item 970. Typified by flaring body walls and a drooping rim. It is 26–32 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (5YR 7/3). Local Hellenistic Lekane Form 63: Items 915, 59, 199, 649, 761, 722, 266, 794, 971, 972. Typified by a convex body wall and a flaring ‘trumpet’ or wide disk base, two pinched horizontal handles and a wide everted rim. It is c. 34 cm in diameter. The clay is usually pink-brown (7.5YR 7/4).

Form 62

175

imported specimens are of various shapes and origins. Though assigned to the Persian period on the basis of clay and paint, Forms 66 and 67 could be of the Hellenistic period as well. Of the various terra sigillata plate and bowl types, Form 70 is the most common at Maresha. Worth mentioning also is Form 65D, with its multiple-band rouletted decoration on the upper exterior wall of a local fishplate. Such decoration is usually diagnostic of the early Roman period and is not found on plates. This form may thus be dated to the transitional Hellenistic– Roman period. Local Persian Plate Form 64: Item 919. Typified by everted walls, a low ring base and a simple rounded rim. It is 29.5 cm in diameter. The clay is reddish brown (5YR 6/4) with a dark gray core. It is slightly warped. Local Hellenistic Plates Form 65A: Items 502, 925, 198, 591, 926, 81, 636. Local imitation of the fishplate, typified by its flaring walls, ring or disk base and drooping rim. Sometimes the rim is inward folded. A small shallow depression is occasionally found at the floor center. It appears in a variety of sizes from 7.7 to 30.0 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (7.5YR 6/4). Form 65B: Items 637, 133, 700, 506, 309, 49. Local imitation of the fishplate typified by flaring walls, ring base and a drooping rim. Sometimes the rim is inward folded. A small shallow depression is occasionally found at the floor center. The vessel ranges from 6 to 25 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (7.5YR 6/6). This form is coated with a red slip on both interior and exterior.

Form 63

PLATES Form 64

The Corpus includes 33 plates: one is a local type of the Persian period, 18 belong to a single local Hellenistic shape, 4 belong to three imported Persian forms and 10 belong to four imported types of the Hellenistic period. There are several other types of both Persian and Hellenistic plates at Maresha, yet this group presents a fair idea of the plate collection at the site. The local vessels imitate the fishplate, while the

Form 65A

Form 65B

176

DALIT REGEV

Form 65C: Items 48, 233, 705, 728. Local painted imitation of a fishplate typified by its flaring walls, ring base and a drooping rim. Sometimes the rim is inward folded. A small shallow depression is occasionally found at the floor center. The vessel ranges in diameter from 25 to 30 cm. This form has red and brown paint applied with a brush on interior and exterior. The clay is light brown (5YR 6/4).

Form 72: Item 667. Characterized by flaring walls, ring base and wide drooping rim. Reddish brown clay (5YR 5/4) with metallic black glaze (2.5Y 3/0).

Form 65C

Form 65D: Item 661. Local imitation of the fishplate typified by flaring walls, ring base and a drooping rim. Sometimes the rim is inward folded. A small shallow depression is occasionally found at the floor center. The vessel ranges in diameter from 15 to 20 cm. There is red slip on the interior and exterior. Decoration consisting of a multiple-part rouletted band runs around on the upper exterior wall. The clay is pink brown (7.5YR 7/4).

Form 65D

Imported Plates of the Persian Period Form 66: Item 302. Attic Black-Glazed Plate characterized by a horizontal wall, very wide ring base and rounded thickened rim. The vessel is c. 15 cm in diameter. The clay is pink (7.5YR 7/4) with black glaze on interior and exterior. Rouletted band around the floor.

Form 66

Form 67: Items 924, 265. Characterized by convex flaring walls, ring base and a wide drooping rim. The clay is brown ware (2.5YR 5/4) with a metallic black glaze. Form 68: Item 504. Characterized by flaring walls, wide ring base and drooping rim. This large plate is of pink (7.5YR 7/4) clay with a black glaze. Reserve lines in the glaze are located on the rim and base. Imported Hellenistic Plates Form 69: Items 129, 212 (lost). Eastern Sigillata A, Hayes’ Form 6,10 broad plate with wide horizontal rim, ring base. Reddish yellow clay (5YR 7/6) with red gloss. Form 70: Items 760, 247, Unnumbered Base, 507, 132. Eastern Sigillata A, Hayes’ Form 2A. Broad plate with ring base and simple rim. It is 20–40 cm in diameter. Pale brown clay (10YR 8/6) with red gloss. Occasionally rouletted band runs around the floor. Form 71: * Items 674, 305. Eastern Sigillata A, Hayes’ Form 1. A fishplate with drooping rim, ring base and red gloss.

Form 67

Form 68

Form 69

Form 70

Form 72

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

177

to 25 cm in diameter. The clay is yellowish (5YR 8/3) with red or black slip.

BOWLS The Corpus includes 290 bowls: 259 bowls are distributed among five local Hellenistic types, 3 bowls belong to two Persian–Hellenistic types and 28 bowls represent five imported types of the Hellenistic period. Form 73, by far the most common bowl at Maresha in the Hellenistic period, is a local version of imported Forms 78 and 84, as is the local Form 74; local Form 75, which is quite common here as well, relates to Form 83, and local Form 76 relates to the Persian–Hellenisticperiod Form 79, as well as to a similar type in terra sigillata technique. Local Form 77 appears also in a terra sigillata type (Form 80). Although this corpus does not include local or imported bowls of the Persian period, such types do exist at Maresha. Local Hellenistic Bowls Form 73: Items 271, 46, 857, 833, 44, 830, 831, 570, 403, 47, 557, 532, 525, 91, 93, 668, 98, 522, 7,115, 196, 14, 991 and 168 More Bowls.11 Characterized by an incurved rim, flaring walls, usually a disk base and a simple rim. It can measure 10–30 cm in diameter but is most often c. 15 cm. The clay is light brown (2.5YR 6/4, 7.5YR 6/4). Form 74: Items 99, 984, 194, 590, 192, 193, 306, 740, 726, 737, 932, 17, 45, 518, 547, 908, 711, 25, 514, 733, 716, 43, 513, 18, 524, 904, 783, 901, 937, 923, 922, 56, 985, 512, 953, 195. Characterized by an incurved rim, flaring walls, a ring base and a simple rim. It measures 6–20 cm in diameter, but is most often 10–15 cm. The clay is light brown (2.5YR 7/4, 5YR 6/6), red or black slipped. Form 75: Items 556, 197, 38, 505, 909, 701, 630, 669, 903, 902, 731, 732, 739, Four Unnumbered Rims, 920, 803, 508, 574, 714, 713, 741, 724, 307, 725 and Two Unnumbered Bases. Characterized by a carinated upper body, ring base, two pinched horizontal handles and a groove below the simple rim. It ranges from 15

Form 74

Form 73

Form 75

Form 76: Items 576, 921, 572, 405, 927, 675. Characterized by a carinated lower body, ring base and everted rim. This deep bowl has thick walls. It ranges from 10 to 35 cm in diameter, but averages around 15 cm. The clay is pink (7.5YR 7/4) with red Form 76 or black slip. Form 77: Item 643. Characterized by its hemispherical shape, high flaring base and rounded simple rim. It is c. 15 cm in diameter. The clay is pink (7.5YR 7/4) with a red slip. Imported Persian–Hellenistic Bowls Form 78: Items 710, 719. A deep form, typified by a simple incurved rim and a ring base. The clay is pale brown (10YR 8/4) with a red and black glaze. Usually the bowl is black glazed with a red-glazed circle on the floor, but sometimes the lower exterior is red as well. Occasionally the type is also decorated with a rouletted band around the floor. Form 79: Item 205. Deep bowl with a carinated lower body, ring base and everted rim. The clay is reddish yellow (5YR 6/6) with a red and black glaze. Usually the bowl is black glazed with a red-glazed circle on the floor. Occasionally there is a rouletted band and/or impressed palmettes on the floor. Imported Hellenistic Bowls Form 80A: Items 515, 629, 682, 962, 730, and Four Unnumbered Rims. Eastern Sigillata A, Hayes’ Form 22A. Hemispherical footed bowl, high flaring ring base and a simple rounded rim. The clay is pink (5YR 7/4) and red glazed. Occasionally the type is decorated with a rouletted band around the floor.

Form 77

Form 78

Form 79

Form 80A

178

DALIT REGEV

Form 80B: Item 599. Eastern Sigillata A, Hayes’ Form 22A. Hemispherical footed bowl, high flaring ring base and a flat grooved rim. The clay is pink (5YR 7/4) with a red gloss. Occasionally the type is decorated with a rouletted band around the floor.

springing from the base, with ornaments above and between the leaves.

Form 81: Items 30, 47. Eastern Sigillata A, Hayes’ Form 17B. Hemispherical body with a convex or slightly pointed base. There are grooves around the interior of the simple rim. It is red glazed and occasionally decorated with a rouletted band on the floor.

Form 80B

Form 82: Items 310, 666. Characterized by a hemispherical body, with either a convex or slightly pointed base. Sometimes there are grooves on the inner part of the simple rim. It is black glazed and occasionally decorated with concentric rouletted bands around the floor.

Form 81

Form 82

Form 84

Form 83

Form 83: Items 727, 729, 721. Characterized by a carinated upper body, ring base, two pinched horizontal handles and rounded simple rim. The clay is pink (7.5YR 8/4) with a red and black glaze. Form 84: Item 665. Eastern Sigillata A, Hayes’ Form 22B. Characterized by a small in-turned body and a ring base. The clay is pink (7.5YR 8/4) and the surfaces are red glossed.

Form 85

MOLDMADE BOWLS Characterized by a hemispherical body, convex base and simple everted rim. The clay is pink (7.5YR 7/4) with red or black gloss. The types found at Maresha are of two decorative styles: pine cone and floral; the latter is more common

Form 86A

Form 85: Item 723. Pine-cone decoration in relief. Form 86A: Items 641, 663, 631, 406. Floral decoration in relief. Upper band of ovolos above a band of buds and petal decoration on the body. Form 86B

Form 86B: Item 121. Floral decoration in relief. Upper band of ovolos above pointed petals with plant motifs between them. Form 86C: Items 537, 249, 664. Floral decoration in relief. Upper band of ovolos above stylized leaves

Form 86C

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

LAMPS The corpus includes 87 lamps: one local Persian and 3 Egyptian imports of the Hellenistic period; all the rest are considered local, on the basis of petrographic analysis.12 The most common type at the site is Form 88, which includes about half of the local Hellenistic lamps.13

Form 88C: Items 63, 142, 144, 146, 619. Moldmade Delphiniform type, decorated in relief with radial bands of sheaves. Item 619 has two knobs, one on each side of the lamp. Form 88D: Item 357. Moldmade Delphiniform type, decorated in relief with sheaves inside triangles.

Local Persian Oil Lamps Form 87: Item 401. Characterized by an open, wheelmade saucer, flat base and pinched rim. The clay is brown (5YR 6/4). This is the common local oil lamp of the Persian period.

Form 88A

Form 88B Form 87

Local Hellenistic Oil Lamps Form 88: This moldmade Delphiniform lamp is characterized by a rounded body, disk base, long narrow nozzle and a knob at one side. It is 8.0–9.5 cm long and 5.2–6.4 cm wide, but the most common size is 9 × 6 cm. The clay is gray (10YR 5/1) with a black slip. Form 88C

Form 88A: Items 140, 580, 584, 581, 598, 68, 620, 141, 568, 562, 123, 143, 811, 583, 126, 623, 350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 582 (lost). Moldmade Delphiniform type, decorated in relief with radial beads and sheaves of grain. Form 88B: Items 646, 647, 644, 145. Moldmade Delphiniform type, decorated in relief with radial bands and sheaves on both sides of the nozzle, and with a palmette on the nozzle.

179

Form 88D

180

DALIT REGEV

Form 88E: Items 358, 622, 82. Moldmade Delphiniform type, decorated in relief with circles on the body and a palmette on the nozzle. Form 88F: Items 359, 625, 822, 23. Moldmade Delphiniform type, plain, with two lines incised at each side of the nozzle which separate it from the body.

Form 89A

Form 88E

Form 89B

Form 88F

Form 89: Moldmade Delphiniform type, characterized by a rounded body, disk base, long narrow nozzle and a knob at one side. It is 8.0–9.5 cm long and 5.2–6.4 cm wide, but the most common size is 9 × 6 cm. The clay is red (2.5YR 6/6) with a red slip.

Form 89C

Form 89A: Items 360, 913, 149, 624, 150, 147, 564. Moldmade Delphiniform type, decorated in relief with radial bands of sheaves. Form 89B: Items 127, 33, 148, 824, 361. Moldmade Delphiniform type, decorated in relief with radial bands and sheaves on each side of the nozzle. Form 89C: Item 32. Moldmade Delphiniform type, decorated in relief with sheaves inside triangles. Form 90A: Items 997, 621, 626. Moldmade kiteshaped lamp, characterized by a rounded, diamondshaped body, disk base, long narrow nozzle and a knob

Form 90A

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

at one side. It is about 10 cm long and 7 cm in diameter. The clay is gray (10YR 5/1) with black slip. The type is decorated with two Erotes, one on each side of the body, and sometimes a floral decoration between their heads. Sheaf on the nozzle. Form 90B: Items 807, 998. Moldmade kite-shaped lamp, characterized by a rounded diamond-shaped body, disk base, long narrow nozzle and a knob at one side. It is about 10 cm long and 7 cm in diameter. The clay is gray (10YR 5/1) with black slip. Decorated with meander pattern.

Form 91

Form 92A Form 90B

Form 91: Items 999, 645. Moldmade kite-shaped lamp, characterized by a rounded diamond-shaped body, disk base, long narrow nozzle and a knob at one side. It is about 10 cm long and 7 cm in diameter and made in pink clay (7.5YR 7/4) with red slip. The type is decorated with triangles and sheaves on both sides of the nozzle. Form 92A: Items 585, 152, 596, 400, 706, 593, 300, 592, 568, 402, 151. Wheelmade lamp, characterized by a rounded body, disk base and a long thick nozzle. It is 8–9 cm long and 5–6 cm in diameter. The clay is brown to very pale brown (2.5YR 5/4). Usually undecorated.

Form 92B

Form 92B: Item 586. Wheelmade lamp, characterized by a rounded body, disk base, long thick nozzle and occasionally a knob that is sometimes perforated. It is 8–9 cm long and 5–6 cm in diameter. The clay is brown (5YR 5/4), sometimes with red slip. Form 93A: Items 534, 348 (or 248?). Moldmade form, characterized by an elongated body, disk base, long narrow nozzle, leaf-shaped handle and a slight knob at

Form 93A

181

182

DALIT REGEV

one side. It is 9–10 cm long and 3.5–5.5 cm in diameter. The clay is gray (7.5YR 3/1) with black slip. The type is decorated with sheaves inside triangles, radial bands or other patterns. This is probably a local imitation of the Ephesian lamps of the Hellenistic period.14 Form 93B: Item 812. Moldmade form, characterized by an elongated body, disk base, long narrow nozzle, leaf-shaped handle and a slight knob at one side. It is 9–10 cm long and 3.5–5.5 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (7.5YR6/4) with reddish slip. This is probably a local imitation of an Ephesian lamp of the Hellenistic period.

Form 93B

Form 94A

Form 94A: Item 817. Moldmade form, characterized by a rounded body, disk base and a long narrow nozzle. It is 6.5–7.7 cm long and 4.3–4.7 cm in diameter. The clay is gray (10YR 6/1) with black slip. The type is decorated with radial squares and sheaves. Form 94B: Item 823. Moldmade form, characterized by a rounded body, disk base and a long narrow nozzle. It is 6.5–7.7 cm long and 4.3–4.7 cm in diameter. The clay is brown (7.5YR 5/4) with reddish slip. The type is decorated with concentric semicircles and projecting dots within and between the circles. This decoration is the most popular for this form and seems to originate from Syria. Imported Hellenistic Oil Lamps Form 95: Items 535, 808, 304. Moldmade kite-shaped lamp, characterized by a rounded diamond-shaped body, disk base, long narrow nozzle and a knob at one side. It is 8.0–8.5 cm long and 6.5–7.0 cm in diameter. It is made of yellowish red Nilotic clay (5YR 4/6). According to petrographic analysis, this type was made in Egypt, where the kite form is the most common.

Form 94B

Form 95

APPENDIX 2: TYPOLOGY OF THE PERSIAN AND HELLENISTIC POTTERY FORMS AT MARESHA

183

STANDS The Corpus includes two stands for jars and jugs, of two types. Form 96

Local Hellenistic Stands Form 96: Item 263. Characterized by a convex body, flaring base and rim. It is c. 9 cm tall and 18 cm in diameter. The clay is light brown (10YR 6/4). Form 97: Item 750. Characterized by a convex body, flaring base and rim. It is 13.4 cm tall and 21 cm in diameter. The clay is pale brown (10YR 7/3). Decorated with piecrust band on rim and base.

Form 97

NOTES 1 Written in 1992, this paper would not have been possible without the support and guidance of Prof. Susan Rotroff and Mr. Ron Samorai; I am grateful to both of them. I also wish to thank Prof. Ya’ir Zakovitz and Prof. Daniel Schwartz for their moral support. 2 Later, the volume of my work expanded and I included in this typology pottery from the 1989, 1990 and 1991 seasons at the site: pottery found on the mound and the northwestern fortification tower (Area 100), in the Hellenistic town around it and the accompanying subterranean complexes (Areas 53, 29, 44, 30, 31), in Trench 600 and in Tomb 500; it also includes pottery from Permit No. 1386, which includes material from 15 locations in the lower city. 3 Based on recent research by G. Finkielsztjen on the lead weights found at Marisa, it seems that this town was conquered in 108 BCE or soon after. 4 As this paper deals with pottery of the Persian and Hellenistic Periods, Item 533 of Iron II is not described. 5 Color codes follow the Munsell Soil Color Charts. 6 This paper employs the terms ‘slip’, ‘glaze’, ‘gloss’ and ‘paint’ for different decoration techniques: Slip = dull paint coating the vessels; Glaze = thick shiny paint coating the vessels; Gloss = thick paint coating the vase; Paint = added drawn decoration. 7 Only a fragment of this vessel was found; it was not drawn or photographed.

8 This, however, does not indicate the presence of Phoenician pottery at Maresha, as this amphoriskos is the only widespread Phoenician pottery type of the Hellenistic period, and thus does not indicate Phoenician presence at Maresha. None of the types known only in Phoenician sites of the period, like the unique amphora, was found at Maresha. 9 According to Dr. Marcia Okun (pers. comm), who conducted a petrographic analysis of this corpus in 1992. 10 For all references to Hayes’ forms see J.W. Hayes, 1985, Sigillata Orientali A, in Enciclopedia dell’ Arte Antica, Classica e Orientale: Atlanta della forma ceramiche, II. Rome, Pp. 9–48, Pls. I–X. 11 The items mentioned by number are all drawn and photographed. The remainder of the 168 complete bowls have been photographed. In addition there are four unnumbered complete bowls, three bases and three rims (together at least seven items), and four numbered bases and rims. There are a total of 191 bowls of this type. 12 See n. 9 above. 13 Five lamps were lost, and therefore were sorted according to photographs alone; they are not included within the items listed for each form. 14 According to petrographic analysis (see n. 9 above) the type is local.

IAA REPORTS No. 1 G. Avni and Z. Greenhut, The Akeldama Tombs: Three Burial Caves in the Kidron Valley, Jerusalem, 1996, 129 pp. No. 2 E. Braun, Yiftah’el: Salvage and Rescue Excavations at a Prehistoric Village in Lower Galilee, Israel, 1997, 249 pp. + plans. 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 ‫ התקופה‬:‫ ההתיישבות הקדומה בהר הנגב‬,‫ר' כה‬ ‫ תקופת הברונזה הקדומה ותקופת הברונזה‬,‫הכלקוליתית‬ .'‫ עמ‬396 .‫ תש"ס‬,'‫התיכונה א‬ R. Cohen, Ancient Settlement of the Central Negev: The Chalcolithic Period, the Early Bronze Age and the Middle Bronze Age I (Hebrew, English Summary), 1999, 396 pp.

No. 10 ,1964–1962 ‫ חפירות בשני‬:‫ בית הכנסת בכורזי‬,‫ז' ייבי‬ .'‫ עמ‬216 .‫ תשס"א‬,1987–1980 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, 154 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, 232 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, 198 pp. (including color distribution maps) + foldout map. No. 15 M. Dayagi-Mendels, The Akhziv Cemeteries: The BenDor Excavations, 1941–1944, 2002, 182 pp.

No. 7 R. Hachlili and A. Killebrew, Jericho: The Jewish Cemetery of the Second Temple Period, 1999, 202 pp.

No. 16 Y. Goren and P. Fabian, Kissufim Road: A Chalcolithic Mortuary Site, 2002, 107 pp.

No. 8 Z. Gal and Y. Alexandre, Horbat Rosh Zayit: An Iron Age Storage Fort and Village, 2000, 247 pp.

No. 17 A. Kloner, Maresha Excavations Final Report I: Subterranean Complexes 21, 44, 70, 2003, 183 pp.

No. 9 U. Dahari, Monastic Settlements in South Sinai in the Byzantine Period: The Archaeological Remains, 2000, 250 pp. + map.

Forthcoming : A. Golani, Salvage Excavations at the Early Bronze Age Site of Qiryat ‘Ata.