Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Founding Editor
M.H.E. Weippert
Editor-in-Chief
Thomas Schneider
Editors
Eckart Frahm
W. Randall Garr
B. Halpern
Theo P.J. van den Hout
Irene J. Winter
VOLUME 72
By
Shay Bar
LEIDEN t BOSTON
2014
This publication has been typeset in the multilingual “Brill” typeface. With over 5,100 characters
covering Latin, IPA, Greek, and Cyrillic, this typeface is especially suitable for use in the
humanities. For more information, please see www.brill.com/brill-typeface.
ISSN 1566-2055
ISBN 978-90-04-26563-9 (hardback)
ISBN 978-90-04-26564-6 (e-book)
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV
provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.
Brill has made all reasonable effforts to trace all rights holders to any copyrighted
material used in this work. In cases where these effforts have not been successful the
publisher welcomes communications from copyright holders, so that the appropriate
acknowledgements can be made in future editions, and to settle other permission
matters.
Preface ........................................................................................................... 1
Chapter One
General Introduction .................................................................................. 3
Chapter Two
Geographical and Environmental Data .................................................... 7
Chapter Three
History of Archaeological Research of the Chalcolithic and Early
Bronze I Periods in the Study Area ......................................................... 35
Chapter Four
Methodology .............................................................................................. 42
Chapter Five
Settlement Patterns in the Southern Jordan Valley and the Desert
Fringes of Samaria in the Chalcolithic Period ....................................... 53
Chapter Six
Settlement Patterns in the Southern Jordan Valley and the Desert
Fringes of Samaria in the Early Bronze I Period ................................... 96
Chapter Seven
Comparison of the Settlement Pattern with the Settlement in the
Eastern Jordan Valley and the Slopes of the Jordanian Mountain
Ridge in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze I Periods ........................ 134
Chapter Eight
The Pottery of the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze I Periods in the
Jordan Valley and Southern Desert Fringes of Samaria ..................... 142
Chapter Nine
'Ein Hilu: A Chalcolithic Site on the Desert Fringes of Samaria ....... 195
VI contents
Chapter Ten
One of the Latest Chalcolithic sites of the Jordan Valley? Fazael 2:
Preliminary Report of the 2007–2008 Excavation Seasons ............... 272
Chapter Eleven
The Excavations at Fazael 7 – One of the Largest Dwelling
Complexes from the Chalcolithic Period in the Southern Levant .... 322
Chapter Twelve
Sheikh Diab 2 – An Early Bronze Age I Period Hamlet in the
Jordan Valley ............................................................................................ 346
Chapter Thirteen
Fazael 4: The Excavations at the Early Bronze Age I Site ................... 409
Chapter Fourteen
General Conclusions ............................................................................... 442
Chapter Fifteen
Site Catalogue .......................................................................................... 458
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
The second half of the 5th millennium and the 4th millennium BCE
– the Chalcolithic period and the EB I – have recently become a signifi-
cant and important, and sometimes controversial, topic in the archae-
ology of Israel and the southern Levant.
Numerous fundamental questions confront researchers who deal
with these periods, and we will present just a few:
– What was the nature of these periods? What settlement pattern
was unique to each of them? What was the sociological character of the
inhabitants? What was the inhabitants’ economy based on? What sets
the periods apart?
– Until now the transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze
Age (EB) has been a gap in archaeological research. Can any new data
be presented regarding the nature of this transition? Was there cultural-
settlement continuity? Was there material continuity?
– How did the urbanization process that characterizes the EB II
begin? Had it already begun in the EB I, or was it a product of the EB II?
This book will address these questions and others, and will propose
a number of characteristics and new ideas which will aid researchers in
formulating a more firmly based view with regard to the time and the
region of the study.
The aim of the study is to examine the settlement pattern and its
characteristics from standpoints of both chronology (Chalcolithic and
EB I) and geography (the western Jordan Valley and the desert fringes
of Samaria).1
Two parameters make this study unique:
The first involves geography: this is the first study conducted in the
field over an extensive area in the western Jordan Valley and desert
fringes of Samaria. This area has rarely been investigated in the past,
giving an opportunity to introduce a new, wide-reaching, and so far un-
known collection of data. The idea that in the Jordan Valley there was
an important centre and a main transit route in the southern Levant,
1
This region, covering an area of about 750 km2, stretches from Nahal Bezeq in the
north to Wadi 'Aujjeh in the south, and from the Jordan River in the east to the lower
part of the scarp of the eastern hills of Samaria in the west.
4 chapter one
from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period (and probably earlier) to the end
of the Bronze Age, is not new. Our study emphasizes the importance of
the region, and from this, makes possible inferences about processes,
and draws conclusions about the entire southern Levant.
The second parameter is defined by the methodology. Two meth-
ods were combined to ensure reliable results. Firstly, it employed the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey, a high-resolution archaeological survey
of the region that encompassed an exceptionally large area. No surveys
of this scale have been carried out elsewhere in the southern Levant,
and therefore it had the advantage of providing a complete picture of the
sites from these periods over the whole area of the study. Secondly, the
results of the five excavations the author conducted at sites dated to the
sub-phases of the periods discussed in this book significantly expanded
the database, and allowed a more accurate picture of the phases of these
periods. The survey and excavations produced data that supplemented
each other, allowing us to analyze a variety of components related to the
structure of the society, its economy, etc.
In order to answer the fundamental questions, a number of steps
were taken.
Firstly, the survey results of 93 relevant published sites and 30 un-
published sites were analyzed.2 In addition, the results of a number of
small excavations were checked.3 In the next stage all the boxes of arti-
facts from the different surveys were examined and reprocessed, apart
from about 10% which could not be located. At the same time the exist-
2
The surveys used were: the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (Zertal 2005; 2008),
the Emergency Survey (Gophna and Porath 1972; Bar-Adon 1972), the Samaria Survey
II (Porath 1968 – not yet published, but the data from it was examined within the
framework of this study), the surveys of Tzori in the southern Beth Shean Valley (1962;
1977b), the Survey of Ephraim (Finkelstein et al. 1997), the Mittmann survey in the
southern Beth Shean Valley (Mittmann 1970), the Glueck survey in western Jordan
(Glueck 1951), and surveys by researchers of the Archaeological Staff Officer of the
Judea and Samaria (not yet published).
3
The excavations checked were: a salvage excavation conducted by Porath in a
building from the Chalcolithic period in the settlement at Fazael (Porath 1985); a sal-
vage excavation by Peleg in a building from the Chalcolithic period in the same settle-
ment (Peleg 2000); a salvage excavation by Hizmi in the settlement of Yitav (Hizmi
2003); a salvage excavation by Sadeh and Gophna in a Chalcolithic site north of Mehula
(Sadeh and Gophna 1991); cleaning of a section containing material from the Chalco-
lithic period in Wadi Far'ah by Mellaart (Leonard 1992); excavations conducted at Tell
Tsaf by Gophna and Sadeh (Gophna and Sadeh 1988–89) and Garfinkel (Garfinkel
et al. 2007), which proved that the tell was settled in the earlier, rather than the later,
phases of the Chalcolithic period (for this reason it is not dealt with in the regional
analysis); and a salvage excavation conducted by Eisenberg at a fortified EB Ib settle-
ment near Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996).
general introduction 5
Notes:
1. The reader will notice some inconsistency in the place-names: e.g.
'En Esur - 'Ein Assawir; 'Ein Hilu - Ein Hilu; Beth Yerah - Bet
Yerah. These different spellings were used in the cited publica-
tions, and it was felt that it would be easier to retain them to assist
literature searches.
2. Sites are referred to by Site number, which appears in the Site Cat-
alogue, Chapter 15. Note that site numbers quoted from Zertal’s
list are written with lower case ‘s’ to avoid confusion.
CHAPTER TWO
Zebabdeh
River J
Mehula
195 195
Wa d i M a lih
o rdan
'Ein Hilu
Tubas
190
Fass 190
ej-Jamal
Tell Far'ah
(North) frin
Wa d i Ku
ji
185 185
180 180
qa
175 175
Z er
Wa
z
ie
d
W
iF
d
Wa
r 'a
a
ad
i Ah Tell
ma
h
r um
170 170
Hammed
Majdal
Beni Sartaba
Fadil
165 165
Fazael 2
ael
Wa d i Faz Fazael 4
River J
Sheikh Diab 2
160 Fazael 7 160
or
dan
155 155
'Aujjeh
150 150
h
jje 0 40 k m
'Au
i
W ad
N im r i n
145 Wa d i 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
tom of the eastern slopes of the following ridges (from north to south):
Har Bezeq, Har Gadir, Har Kabir, Neby Noon, Majdal Beni Fadil; Zahr
el-Qabah, and Qubbet en-Najmeh.
The total study area was 750 km2.
The Ghor and Zor are two geological levels that make up the foun-
dation of the Jordan Valley. The Ghor is the high level formed by the
Lisan sediments (Lisan marl) deposited on the ancient Lisan Lake (Dan
and Alperovitch 1971: 6). The Zor, however, is the Jordan flood plain,
formed by the action of the river’s erosion of the Ghor.
The Zor extends from Lake Kinneret to the Dead Sea, and is lower
than the Ghor by an average of 25 m in the north and 35 m in the south.
The slopes separating the Ghor from the Zor are sub-vertical to vertical
(Nir and Ben-Arie 1993: 73), and form long terraces on both sides of
the valley to the Jordan riverbed, with an intermediate terrace between
the two levels.
Based on an analysis of the morphology and drainage network, Be-
litzky (1999: 441) suggested identifying young folding and fracturing
structures that were active after the retreat of the Lisan Lake, some of
which also affected the course of the Jordan.
The main fault in the valley consists of three major sections: the
northern section from Lake Kinneret to Wadi Yabis; the central section,
from Wadi Yabis to the Valley of Succoth; and the southern section,
from the Valley of Succoth to the Dead Sea.
The faults in the two end sections run in a north-south direction,
and long depressions were formed in them (the Jericho depression in
the south and Kinneret depression in the north), leading to the ac-
cumulation of thick sediments over the course of millions of years. A
bottleneck about 4 km wide was formed in the vicinity of Fass ej-Jamal.
This section, between Wadi Malih in the north and Wadi Far'ah in the
south, is about 30 km long, and is the narrowest section in the Jordan
Valley.
The section between Wadi Far'ah and the Jordan estuary in the Dead
Sea is called the Plain of Jericho, and is 38 km long. In this section the
river descends at a fairly moderate gradient. The section is 16 to 20 km
wide, and is confined between steep slopes on both sides. Several fault
slopes are located in the east, at the feet of which are broad alluvial fans.
In the west, however, the border of the hills is irregular, and conforms
to the tectonic structure of the hills of eastern Samaria and the Judean
Desert monocline. In the north this section penetrates into the broad
and fertile Far'ah Valley in the Jordan Valley.
The geological structure of the desert fringes of Samaria, west of the
southern Jordan Valley, is connected to the Wadi Far'ah anticline, which
runs from north-east to south-west. Its boundaries are the southern
Beth Shean Valley in the north, and the region of Wadi 'Aujjeh in the
geographical and environmental data 11
south. In the west, it borders on the Nablus and Jenin synclines, and
in the east on the Sartaba syncline and the slopes of the Jordan Val-
ley. The escarpments of the monocline in the middle of the anticline
form slopes inclined as much as 40° to the east, toward the valley. The
anticline is dissected by a row of faults running mostly from southeast
to northwest (Spanier 1992: 122–124), forming a series of horsts and
grabens. The most prominent of the horsts in eastern Samaria and the
desert fringes are Jebel Kebir, Jebel Tammun, and Ras Jadir. The Sarbata
ridge, which is also prominent, is a block of soft Eocene rock that was
uplifted by a series of parallel geological fractures. The eastern slopes
of the horsts of eastern Samaria constitute the boundary of the study
region. The prominent grabens of eastern Samaria are Wadi 'Aujjeh,
Wadi Fazael, Wadi Ahmar, Wadi Far'ah, the Buqei'ah, and Wadi Malih.
ing the course of this process the badlands erode, and are constantly
being reshaped, and the great load the river transports affects its course
and behaviour. This natural dynamism is probably the reason why no
archaeological sites have been found on the terrace badlands.
An important phenomenon in the geomorphology of the River Jor-
dan is its shift westward. The drainage area between Lake Kinneret and
the Dead Sea, east and west of the Jordan, is 13,500 km2, of which the
western part comprises only about 2,000 km2 (a ratio of 1: 6.8 between
its two parts). This asymmetry is mainly due to the enormous amount
of water drained from the major perennial streams coming from the
east, while the western side is in the rain shadow and its streams have
a much lower rate of flow than those to the east, or are seasonal. Most
of the alluvial fans are on the east, and some reach as far as the bank of
the Jordan.
The multitude of streams in the eastern part shifts the Jordan west-
ward, enlarging the eastern side of the valley at the expense of the
western side (Nir 1989: 305). Evidence of this is apparent in the area
between Wadi Far'ah and Wadi Nu'eimeh. In this region there are no
large streams on the eastern side between Nahal Yabbok and Wadi
Nimrin, and the Jordan flows approximately in the centre of the valley.
In some places the western bank is even larger than the eastern (Ilan
1973: 23–25).
Additional explanations regarding the shift of the River Jordan west-
ward were proposed by Schattner (1962) and Ben-Arieh (1965: 33). The
first contends that the presence of hard infrastructure rocks between
the layers of the rift also causes the river to be shifted westward, and the
other suggests that the river’s gradient to the west in the central Jordan
Valley is also related to the fact that the valley slopes from east to west.
According to Ben-Arie, the alluvial delta of the River Yarmuk caused
the flat area of the Jordan Valley south of the Kinneret to slope from
east to west. This resulted in the Jordan flowing in the lower area on the
western side of the valley. All the large deltas of the major streams give
the Plain of Jordan an inclination from east to west, thus causing the
Jordan to flow on the western side of the valley.
Soil
Some of the different types of soil in the Jordan Valley and desert fringes
of Samaria were created from the erosion of brown clay alluvium or
geographical and environmental data 13
limit, and sometimes even prevent, their use for farming (Dan and Alp-
erovitch 1971: 30–31). This is due to their main characteristics, namely
the amount of chalk and high degree of stoniness, shallowness, poor
drainage, and salinity. This conclusion has major archaeological rami-
fications when attempting to reconstruct the interrelationship between
man and the environment in antiquity.
The most common soils in the desert fringes are:
1. Terra rossa – fertile soil, mainly typical of the Far'ah anticline, and
also found in the southern desert fringes in Wadi Far'ah and the
Buqei'ah.
2. Rendzina – soil of mediocre fertility (dependent upon rainfall),
mainly characteristic of the desert fringes and Wadi Malih.
3. Brown Mediterranean forest soil, mainly characteristic of the
areas north of Wadi Far'ah. According to Ravikovitch (1981: 76)
this soil is formed in rainy climates, and its presence in regions
where the climate is that of a steppe-desert fringe might suggest
pluvial conditions and a different floral covering in the past.
4. Alluvial erosion (grumusol) – this kind of soil is quite fertile, and
is mostly used for field crops. It is typical of the eastern valleys of
Tubas and Zebabdeh, the Buqei'ah, and parts of Wadi Far'ah.
5. Colluvium-alluvium – the fertility of this soil depends upon its
origin and the amount of organic material it contains. It is found
in the ravines and at the foot of hills where there are terra rossa or
rendzina soils.
6. Stony-desert soils – shallow, containing a high percentage of
stone, and therefore not fertile. They are commonly found in the
seam between the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes, and in the
flood plains of the major streams (Far'ah, Malih, Fazael etc.).
Climate
In terms of both heat and cold, the most extreme climate in the region
occurs in the Zor.
In the winter (January) the average maximum and minimum tem-
peratures are about 19°C and 9°C respectively. In the summer (July) the
average maximum daily temperature is 37–38°C (Gat and Karni 1995:
17). The relative humidity in the Jordan Valley decreases from north to
south. The lowest values are measured in the spring, and the highest
in the winter. The average maximum relative humidity in the winter in
the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria ranges between 75%
and 85% (Rubin et al. 1992). The average maximum relative humidity
in the summer is about 70% (Gat and Karni 1995: 17–18).
The wind regime is determined by the general synoptic system and
local factors. In the summer, from the early morning to midday, the
winds blow from the east and south-east. From midday to shortly be-
fore sunrise the winds blow from the north-west and west, originating
with the breezes from the Mediterranean. In the winter the wind regime
is determined by the barometric pressure systems that pass through the
region. The combination of these with the harsh topography of the Sa-
marian hills causes strong gusts from the west and south-west that can
reach more than 100 km/hour (Gat and Karni 1995: 18). The strongest
winds usually occur in the region of Wadi Far'ah, which is open in the
east-west direction, thereby allowing the wind to blow directly into the
wadi.
more humid. For example, a study in Lake Zeribar in Iran showed that
the humidity there reached today’s level 6,200 YBP (Bottema and van
Zeist 1981).
The analysis by Sanlaville (1996: fig. 4) also shows that the Dead Sea
reached its current level around 6,800 YBP (in the Chalcolithic), and
that current climatic conditions were reached around 5,730 YBP (about
the time of the transition from the Chalcolithic to the EB I). A study
dealing with sedimentary stratigraphy on the coastal plain (Gvirtzman
and Wieder 2001) showed that in the Middle Holocene the sedimenta-
tion was characterized by sand dunes and kurkar, which indicates a
relatively dry period. Other studies dealing with sediment cores north
of the Red Sea (Arz et al. 2003), and the variation rates of stable isotope
values of coral from the Gulf of Eilat (Moustafa et al. 2000), present
data that support the end of the humid phase of the Holocene during
the course of the 5th millennium BCE.
Several attempts have been made to check the archaeological re-
cord in order to corroborate or challenge views regarding the climate
in ancient times. For example, a study of the Beer Sheva region and
the northern Negev in the Chalcolithic concluded that the climate was
wetter, based on the archaeological evidence (Alon and Levy 1996).
The study was based on three key facts: the intensity of the agricultural
settlement in regions where today’s climate is marginal, the use of flood
agriculture, which is typical of regions with stable and greater rainfall
regimes than today, and the presence of pig bones in the faunal assem-
blages in the Negev sites, which is indicative of a wetter habitat suitable
for raising such animals (Grigson 1995b). Nonetheless, it should be
remembered that the archaeological record cannot be relied upon as
evidence of climate changes.
In conclusion, the data are insufficient to make a firm determina-
tion regarding the climate in the study region during the Chalcolithic
and EB I. The data allow us to assume with a certain degree of cau-
tion, a climate which was somewhat wetter, but not significantly dif-
ferent, from today’s. It is important to note that no ‘climate crisis’ in the
Chalcolithic–EB I transition has been identified, which could explain
the change in interpretation that presented the climate as a key factor
in the collapse of the Chalcolithic settlement system in the southern
Levant.
However, the desert fringes are affected more by climate change
than the central regions, and sometimes a few years of drought or the
slightest change is sufficient to compel populations to migrate to wet-
18 chapter two
Sources Of Water
Two kinds of water sources exist in the study region: perennial streams
that flow east toward the study region (e.g. Wadi Far'ah) or within it
(Wadi Malih and Wadi Fazael), and springs located inside the study
region.
There is a distinct difference between the sources of water in the
fertile, southern Beth Shean Valley, and those of the relative arid Jordan
Valley.
In the southern Beth Shean Valley there are numerous contact
springs, for example, Mehazzim, Ibrahim, Malqoah, Buleibil, Shemsi-
yeh, Safafa and Sakut (Zertal 2005: 25, 27). Most of the springs flow
in the eastern part of the Beth Shean Valley, close to the Jordan, while
those flowing in the west include Qa'un, Bardaleh, and Hammah. Their
source is in the ‘topographical contact zone’ between the hills in the
west and the erosion plain of the Jordan Valley on a filtering aquifer.
A cluster of settlements developed in the Chalcolithic period near the
springs of the southern Beth Shean Valley (the sites of Qa'un, Mukehaz,
'Ain ed-Deir, 'Ain Buleibil, etc., Sites 2, 4–5, and 10–11 in the Site Cata-
logue). Zertal (2005: 25, 27) argues that irrigated farming might have
already developed in the Chalcolithic period.
There are almost no sources of water in the narrowest part of the
Jordan Valley. There are three small contact springs along the fringes
of the Ghor: 'Ain Juneidiyeh, 'Ain Saleh and 'Ain Abu Sidra, yet no sites
were discovered near them from the periods that this study addresses.
A number of streams flow across the Jordan Valley, the most im-
portant being Bezeq, Malih, Far'ah, Ahmar and 'Aujjeh. Some of these
geographical and environmental data 19
streams are fed by springs that have a high flow rate ('Uyun Beidan,
Dilb and Far'ah feed Wadi Far'ah, and Meiyiteh, Malih and Hilu feed
Wadi Malih). The streams in Wadis Malih, Far'ah, Ahmar and 'Aujjeh
are perennial, and it seems that they provided water for the permanent
inhabitants who also depended on them in the Chalcolithic and EB I.
Different kinds of springs are typical of the southern Jordan Valley
and the desert fringes of Samaria. They can be categorized according
to flow rate. Spanier (1993: 269) divided them into three main groups:
the first group includes springs that have a high flow rate (hundreds of
cubic metres per hour), such as 'Ain 'Aujjeh and 'Enot Fazael. There is
considerable evidence of human activity that took place around them
from prehistoric periods until the present, and in the past aqueducts
conveyed water from them for irrigated farming. The second group
comprises springs that have a medium flow rate (more than 100 litres
per hour), such as 'Ain Juheir, 'Ain Rashash, 'Ain es-Sukhun, etc. There
was less evidence of human activity around them. The third group
includes springs with a low flow rate (less than 100 litres per hour),
Figure 2.2. 'Ain 'Aujjeh spring. Photographed by the author in Wadi 'Aujjeh.
20 chapter two
such as Hafireh, Jerusaliliyeh, etc. Human activity did not always occur
around these springs. The spring flow rate can change over the years,
and a spring can also dry up. An example of this is the spring near the
large site of 'Ain Mta'a (Site 54) which is presently dry, but we learned
from the local Bedouin that it was flowing until about 50 years ago.
Vegetation
ert fringe itself there are areas with Irano-Turanian 'Arava vegetation.
It lacks trees and is typically herbaceous (Sabbah 1992: 50). The only
tree species found in this region is the jujube (Ziziphus spina-christi,
Fig. 2.3),1 which usually looks like a large shrub. The vegetation on the
slopes of the monocline is affected by the acute topographical relief and
the exposed limestone. Wall pellitory (Parietaria officinalis), forming a
continuous shrub cover, is prominent among the groups growing in the
rocks. White broom (Retama raetam) and mountain germander (Teu-
crium montanum) appear between Ma'ale Ephraim and Gitit. Asphaltic
sea-blite (Suaeda asphaltica) stands out on the northern and western
slopes. White willow (Salix alba) is the characteristic tree species east of
this region, and salsola (Salsola vermiculata) is the typical shrub.
Wadi Far'ah itself is characterized by Sudano-Deccanian vegetation
(Zohary 1980), with the Jericho balsam (Balanites aegyptiaca), jujube
and Sodom apple (Calotropis procera) being the most prevalent woody
species.
The Jordan Valley itself is cultivated by man, hence the difficulty in
identifying the natural plant life there. There are four secondary land-
scape units in the valley: the marl plain, the river alluvial fans, the salt-
water marshes, and the desert oases. On the marl plain where the runoff
flows, the salt concentrations increase, while the amount of water in its
lower horizons is meagre. The plants growing here are mainly shrubs
that are resistant to the salinity of the soil, among which salsola is the
dominant species. The silty soil in the alluvial fans of the streams is
covered with river pebbles. Jujube shrubs grow here and there in these
areas. In the desert oases of 'Aujjeh and Wadi Far'ah there is the Sodom
apple and Jericho balsam, in addition to the jujube. The only plants that
exist in the salt marshes are those that can cope with the high salinity
of the water and soil. Most of the area is covered with woody shrubs up
to 2 m tall, such as species of orache (Atriplex), sea-blite and glaucous
glasswort (Arthrocnemum macrostachyum). There are also some Jordan
tamarisk (Tamarix jordanis) and desert tamarisk (Tamarix tetragyna)
trees.
East of Fazael there is a grove of mustard trees (Salvadora persica).
This is a large shrub, and the Jordan Valley is the northernmost point
1
The jujube is the most common woody vegetation growing in the Jordan Valley.
When mature the bush actually looks like a tree with a thick trunk. The tree has deep
roots that firmly hold the soil. In the vicinity of water it remains in bloom for more than
half the year, with several fruit-bearing cycles. The jujube fruit is edible, but its pits are
fairly large relative to its pulp.
22 chapter two
Figure 2.3. Jujube (right) and Sodom apple (left) Photographed by the author
in Wadi 'Aujjeh.
settlement sites deals with domesticated species, and there is very little
known about natural vegetation. The results below were processed by
the author, based on these reports, and are presented according to the
different periods.2
Chalcolithic
The data are based on the following reports: Fazael (Porath 1985),
Teleilat Ghassul (Bourke et al. 2000), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10), Nahal
Qane (Liphschitz 2008), Cave of the Treasure (Bar-Adon 1962), Tell
Abu Hamid (Dollfus and Kafafi 1986), and Pella (Bourke et al. 1998).
Most of the data are from Teleilat Ghassul.
Domesticated Vegetation3
Common grain and legume crops: wheat (Triticum spp, 2 rows and 6
rows), English wheat (emmer – Triticum dicoccum), legumes (lentils
- Lens culinaris), peas (Pisum sativum), beans (Phaseolus vulgaris),
chickpea (Cicer arietinum), vetch (Vicia ervilia), onion (Allium cepa),
garlic (Allium sativum), pistachio (Pistacia vera), and barley (Hordeum
vulgare).
Common orchard and fruit crops: domesticated olive (Olea euro-
paea), date palm (Phoenix dactylifera), and almond (Prunus dulcis).4
Natural vegetation
Common species: tamarisk (Tamarix), wild olive, and wild herbs.
Infrequent species: spiny dock (Emex spinosa) and Palestine pistachio
(Pistacia palaestina).
In general, the diversity of the vegetation in the period is remarkable.
The main field crops were wheat and barley, and the domesticated olive
was already at its peak (Meadows 1998; Neef 1990). Legumes were also
common, and fruit trees started to appear. The tamarisk was the most
prevalent tree.5
2
The number and quality of the reports affects the amount of information in a par-
ticular period, and does not indicate the lack of a specific item in that period or another
period. Thus for example, the detailed report of Tuleilat Ghassul contains almost all of
the plant species that exist in the other reports of Chalcolithic period, and also adds a
significant number of species that were not known from other excavations.
3
Regarding some of the species added to the agriculture section, such as almonds,
etc., it is unclear if they were domesticated or were gathered wild.
4
It is not known if the date palm and almond were fruit that was gathered, or in-
tentionally grown.
5
This is based on carbon samples submitted for analysis from Fazael 2 (Nili Liph-
schitz, chapter Ten).
24 chapter two
EB I
The data are based on the following reports and articles: Cave of the
Warrior (Werker 1998), Jericho (Hopf 1983), Pella (Bourke et al. 1998),
Tell esh-Shuna (Neef 1990), Bab edh-Dhra' (McCreery 1981; 2003),
and Fazael (which was published as Fatzael 3 – Goring-Morris 1980).6
Most of the data are from Jericho and Bab edh-Dhra'.
Domesticated vegetation
Common species: European olive (Olea europea), English wheat
(emmer – Triticum dicoccum), wheat (Triticum spp, 2 rows and 6 rows),
tamarisk (Tamarix sp.), barley (Hordeum vulgare), legumes, vetch
(Vicia ervilia), and grapes (Vitis sp.).
Infrequent species: flax (Linum usitatissimum).
Natural vegetation
Infrequent species: Tabor oak (Qyercus ithaburensis), Jerusalem pine
(Pinus halepensis), willow, pennycress (Sinapis sp.), hackberry (Prunus
avium), jujube, almond, and spiny burnet (Poterium spinosum).
Not surprisingly, the variety of vegetation in the Chalcolithic period
was similar to that of the EB I in the study region. A significant dif-
ference was the farming techniques that did not change the variety,
but did change the economy of the period. According to Philip (2001:
184) the following techniques were introduced or were utilized more
intensely: flood agricultural (Mabry et al. 1996, and a different opin-
ion – Milevski 2011: Chapter 7), using animals to cultivate fields, an
increase in processing olives and grapes, using donkeys as a beasts of
burden, and increased agricultural output by using metal tools at the
expense of flint implements (and especially replacing the bifacial flint
tools, such as the adze, which disappear from the EB I tool assemblage,
by metal implements).
Most significant of all was the penetration of settlements into the
hilly regions of Samaria, which was almost unknown in the Chalco-
lithic. This change drastically expanded the growing of fruit, especially
olives and grapes (which seem to have become widespread in the EB
Ia).
The absence of the jujube from the assemblage of EB I sites is inter-
esting. The reason for this is probably the small sample of sites from this
period that were excavated and in which wooden finds were treated.
6
The site Fazael 4 (called Fatzael 3 by the excavator Goring-Morris) is actually an
EB I settlement site, and does not date to the Chalcolithic period as the excavator of the
site incorrectly believed.
geographical and environmental data 25
up like a lion from the thickets of the Jordan against the strong habita-
tion” (Jeremiah 49: 19; 50: 44); “there is a sound of the wailing of the
shepherds; for their glory is in ruins: a sound of the roaring of young
lions; for the pride of the Jordan is in ruins. “ (Zechariah 11: 3).
Lieutenant Lynch, who headed an American expedition, sailed on
the Jordan in 1848. According to his notes they saw along the way: “We
frequently saw fish in the transparent water; while ducks, storks, and a
multitude of other birds, rose from the reeds and osiers…At one place
we saw the fresh track of a tiger…At another time a wild boar started
with a savage grunt and dashed into the thicket” (Lynch 1855: 107, 137).
In 1883 an American traveller and archaeologist named Merrill re-
ported his findings, including the disappearance of leopards from the
Jordan Valley: “Boars, jackals, hyenas, ichneumons, otters, and other
wild animals frequent these jungles, and birds also are found here in
great numbers and variety. We have already over one hundred speci-
mens in our natural history collection…. But these creatures (leopards)
are destined soon to become extinct….Large amounts have been of-
fered for their skins…” (Merrill 1883: 204–205).
Chalcolithic
Based on the following reports: Fazael (Porath 1985), Tell Abu Hamid
(Dollfus and Kafafi 1993), Teleilat Ghassul (Bourke et al. 2000), 'Ein
Hilu (Chapter 9), Pella (Bourke et al. 1998), and Fazael 2 (Chapter 10).
Domesticated animals
Common animals: sheep/goat (Ovis/Capra about 70% of the domesti-
cated animals, and there are usually a greater number of sheep – Bourke
2001: 118), pig (Sus domesticus), cattle (Bus taurus), and equines (Equi-
dae, donkey/horse).
Wild animals
Common animals: gazelle (Gazella gazella).
Rarer animals include: fish, birds, fox, dog, ram, cat (probably wild),
geographical and environmental data 27
Capra/Ovis 52.1%
Crustacea (Crab) 3%
Small predator 1.6%
Felis 3%
Lepus capensis 6.2%
Bos taurus 6.2%
Capra/Ovis 80%
Capra hircus 4%
products, while pigs provided meat (and this also seems to be the case
from the age analysis at 'Ein Hilu – Chapter 9). The number of pigs at
the sites increases northwards along the Jordan Valley (Bourke 2001:
118; this is also supported by data derived from the 'Ein Hilu and Fazael
2 excavations). This is explained by the marshy regions around the
northern sites close to the Jordan (Tell Abu Hamid, Tell esh-Shuna, etc)
which are habitats preferred by this species. It is still unclear if the pig
was completely domesticated in the Chalcolithic period, but the finds
from 'Ein Hilu contribute to this supposition.8
Surprisingly there is a fairly significant presence of wild animals (deer
are especially prominent) in the faunal assemblages of the Chalcolithic,
mainly in western Jordan. Despite the almost complete disappearance
of arrowheads from the tool assemblages, the inhabitants still managed
to hunt these animals (they might have used wooden arrows, which
usually do not survive in the archaeological record – e.g., the arrow-
heads found in the Cave of the Warrior south of the study area – Schick
1998).
Analysis of the archaeological finds at the Chalcolithic sites exca-
vated in the framework of this research project corroborates some of
the data (Figs. 2.4–2.6):
Goats and sheep are the most prominent species amongst the do-
8
Therefore pigs are ascribed to the group of domesticated animals in this section.
geographical and environmental data 29
EB I 9
Based on the following reports: Beth Yerah (Cope 2006), Pella (Bourke
et al. 1998), Tell esh-Shuna (Croft 1994), Jericho (Clutton-Brock 1983:
802–803) and Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12; Fig. 2.7).
Domesticated animals
Common animals: goat/sheep (Capra/Ovis about 60%), cattle (Bus tau-
rus), pig (Sus domesticus) and donkey (Equus asinus).
Wild animals
Rare animals: gazelle (Gazella gazella).
The most common animals among the EB I livestock are goats/sheep
followed by cattle. There is an interesting trend showing an increase
in the amount of cattle and a decrease in the number of pig as the EB
I progresses (Philip 2001: table 5.4). This change might imply a rise
in the importance of cattle as work animals in the EB Ib, or their re-
placement of pigs as the source of meat. The significant decline in the
percentage of wild animals in the assemblages is apparently indicative
of a transition to raising animals primarily for supplying meat (a trend
9
There are fewer reports from the EB I sites than from the Chalcolithic period, and
therefore the results should be taken with some degree of skepticism until additional
reports are released that will either substantiate or invalidate the conclusions stemming
from the data presented.
30 chapter two
Equidae 6%
Bos taurus 9%
Capra/Ovis 53%
can be identified:
1. The high proportion of sheep/goat (grazing and milk and dairy
products) in the assemblages of the two periods.
2. Fluctuations in the utilization of pig in the EB I (for meat).
3. Appearance of animals used for work and trade in the EB I.
Transit Routes
There is no evidence indicating the use of clearly defined roads during
the ancient periods of the study. It is therefore likely that people mainly
moved between different settlements regions via the easiest routes,
where the valley meets the hills. It is also possible that movement across
the region took place near or by way of the large river valleys (Fig. 2.9).
Furthermore, it seems that the Jordan could only be crossed at fords (as
in later periods). We think it is possible to address the topic of move-
ment/transit routes in this study in the absence of archaeological or
historical data that identify a specific axis as a route that was used in
these periods.
Such routes are identified by encampment sites along them, locating
settlement regions in the hill country or north and south of the study
region to which these routes logically lead (as shown by Esse 1991: 27).
There is one long possible north-south route between Nahal Bezeq
and Wadi 'Aujjeh that parallels the River Jordan channel and the ridge-
line of the desert fringes, together with six possible lateral routes (Nahal
Bezeq – Zebabdeh Valley; Wadi Malih – Tubas Valley; Wadi Far'ah –
Nablus; Fazael – Upper Wadi Ahmar; Fazael – 'Ain Rashash; Wadi 'Au-
jjeh). The Jordan blocks all routes from the east, and it was necessary to
cross it at the fords.
North – South
The Jordan Valley route runs from the Beth Shean Valley in the north
to the Jericho Valley in the south. It crosses the entire area from Nahal
Bezeq to Wadi 'Aujjeh, probably in the region where the valley meets
the slopes of the desert fringes of Samaria. In later periods a road passed
through the region from Beth Shean to Jericho.
Analyses of the geography and site distribution show that in the early
periods this was the only route that could link the settlement clusters
of the southern Beth Shean Valley with those of Wadi Far'ah, Fazael
Valley, Wadi 'Aujjeh and the Jericho Valley.
32 chapter two
East – West
Wadi 'Aujjeh
This is a lateral route along Wadi 'Aujjeh from where it flows into the
Jordan to the vicinity of the spring at 'Ain 'Aujjeh. Many sites were lo-
cated in the Wadi 'Aujjeh flood plain, which is 6 km long. The route is
a steep trail that is more difficult to traverse the further west from 'Ain
'Aujjeh, and it is there that the ancient settlements also stop.
Conclusions
The Jordan Valley is characterized by a network of ‘natural’ transit
routes that relied on the topography of the region, especially along the
large streams. When examining the distribution of the Chalcolithic and
EB I sites relative to these routes, it clearly becomes apparent that most
were built taking the transit routes into account. This is not surprising,
because of the direct relationship between the routes and the streams
that were the sources of water for the sites.
The main lateral routes used in the Chalcolithic were: Nahal Bezeq –
Zebabdeh Valley, Wadi Malih – Tubas Valley, and Fazael Valley – Upper
Wadi Ahmar. It is surprising there is no evidence of a Chalcolithic
settlement in the western valley of Wadi Far'ah.
The main lateral routes used in the EB I were: Wadi Far'ah – the
Nablus syncline, Fazael Valley – Wadi Ahmar, and Fazael Valley – 'Ain
Rashash. Another possible route in this period, although its precise
course is unclear, might have run along the slopes of the hill country
between the groups of sites in Wadi Far'ah, south to the spring sites
around 'Ain Juraish and 'Ain Rashash (This route is actually manifested
by the distribution of Um-Hammad pottery in the EB Ib at these spring
sites, and not in the contemporary sites located east of the Jordan Valley
itself).
The north-south longitudinal movement seems to have been based
on the seam where the hill slopes meet the valley.
The Zor was not suitable as a river crossing or for grazing, and the
Jordan could probably only be crossed at the fords along the river.
34 chapter two
Nahal B
e zeq
(Wad
i Sh u b a sh)
s
Zebabdeh i Ya b i
200 W ad 200
Zebabdeh
and
River J
Mehula
Tubas
195 Valleys 195
Wad i Malih
o rdan
Tubas 'Ein Hilu
190
Fass 190
ej-Jamal
Tell Far'ah
(North) in
ufr j
Wadi K
i
185 W 185
ad
iF
ar
'ah
W
ad
iF
180 180
r'
a
a
h
W
ad
175 175
iF
r qa
ar
Ze
'ah
e z
di
Wa
Wa Tell
d um
170 i Ah 170
m Hammed
ar
Majdal
Beni Sartaba
Fadil
165 165
Fazael
Valley Boundary of the study
Fazael 4 Ancient site
Fazael 2
River J
Wadi
or
an d
155 155
'Aujjeh
h
150
Wadi 'Aujje 150
h
jje
'Au
i
W ad
n
i Nim r i
145 W ad 145
0 5 Jericho
km
Introduction
Until recently fewer archaeological studies had been conducted in the
southern Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria,1 than the more
developed research in other regions in the southern Levant (the Beer
Sheva valley, Golan, etc.). It is true that surveys and excavations were
carried out here, beginning in the second half of the 20th century, but
these were mostly of short duration. A fundamental change occurred
with the start of the Manasseh Hill Country Survey in the Jordan Val-
ley in the 1980s. This survey is presently continuing, and constitutes a
cornerstone of our accumulated archaeological knowledge of the whole
region.
Mallon, Neuville and Koeppel were the first researchers who identi-
fied and defined the Chalcolithic culture at Teleilat Ghassul, slightly
south of the study region (Mallon et al. 1934). Albright (1926) was
the first to deal with the Early Bronze Age in the Jordan Valley. But
it was only in the works of Engberg and Shipton (1934) at Megiddo,
and Fitzgerald (1935) at Beth Shean that the EB was chronologically
subdivided, and the finds were ascribed to the EB I. The topic was first
summarized in works by Wright (1937; 1958). It was only in the 1930s
that the necessary knowledge was acquired to identify sites from the
Chalcolithic and the EB I.2
We will not present all of the archaeological research carried out in
the southern Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria; rather
1
The paucity of research apparently stems from a number of reasons: peripheral
– in the 20th century both Israel and Jordan considered the western Jordan Valley a
periphery and therefore it was not a centre for research; religious – the three mono-
theistic religions viewed the centre in Jerusalem, and not on the fringes of Samaria;
and political – no research was done because of political considerations, the essence of
which revolved around the question of who had the right to study this region.
2
Such an important survey as that of Conder and Kitchener (1882) did not iden-
tify any sites in the region dating to the periods addressed in this study, and so is not
included.
36 chapter three
3
The author has been an active participant in this survey since 2004.
38 chapter three
2002; Eisenberg 2002; Abeles 2002; Khalaily 2002), Cave of the War-
rior (Schick 1998), the Ein Gedi temple (Ussishkin 1980), Tell el Maf-
jar (Mellart 1962), and caves surveyed and excavated in the wadis of
the Judean Desert (Avigad 1993; Aharoni 1993; Bar-Adon 1962, 1993;
Yadin 1993; Patrich 1993).
– The following EB I sites are notable: Jericho (Tell es-Sultan)4, which
was fortified in the EB I, and where a cemetery of the period was also
exposed (Kenyon and Holland 1982, 1983; and a general summary in
Kenyon 1979), Tell el Mafjar (Mellart 1962) and Herodian Jericho in
the mouth of Wadi Qelt (Pritchard 1958).
The excavation project in the city and cemetery at Bab edh-Dhra'
(Rast and Schaub 2003), which is located in the southeastern part of
the Dead Sea, should also be mentioned. It constitutes an example of
a unique regional culture (particularly in the early phase of the EB I).
West of the study area, in the eastern hills of Samaria, an impor-
tant site was excavated dating to the periods this study deals with. Tell
Far'ah (North), located in the western part of Wadi Far'ah north-east
of Nablus, was excavated by de Vaux beginning in 1946. Although
the excavation is still not fully published, preliminary reports make it
possible to follow the finds from the excavation at the tell itself and
in the large cemetery nearby (summary in Miroschedji 1971 based on
de Vaux 1949, 1951, 1955, 1957, 1962; de Vaux and Steve 1947, 1948,
1969). The terminology in the reports is confusing. The stratum that
the excavators refer to as ‘Eneol. Moyen’ is actually Chalcolithic.5 The
‘Eneol. Recent’ is the EB I, as apparently is the first phase of the period
referred to as ‘Bronze Ancien’. The Chalcolithic remains are meagre and
belong to the early phases of the period (de Vaux 1957: fig. 4 includes
a strap handle and a bow-rim jar), and so are the remains from the EB
Ia, which were mostly discovered in tombs (Louhivuori 1988: 46). The
beginning of the important settlement is on the tell itself, and most of
the funerary artifacts probably belong to the EB Ib (de Vaux 1993).6
4
Jericho itself is a topic that requires numerous studies. It is not the author’s inten-
tion to discuss the many finds discovered at the tell and in the cemeteries, or their
significance. The reference to Jericho is only made in the context of the research of the
settlement pattern in the region on the one hand and parallels of the finds from the
survey and excavations that were conducted within the framework of the research on
the other.
5
Here mainly meaning the Early/Middle Chalcolithic, as manifested in Cave U (de
Vaux 1957).
6
Although the mere existence of many tombs dating to the EB Ia suggests that a
significant site located there has not yet been exposed in the areas excavated on the tell
itself or nearby.
40 chapter three
In the Samaria hills west of Tell Far'ah (North) Zertal (Zertal and
Mirkam 2000: 42–43; Zertal 2004; 2008) and Finkelstein and others
(Finkelstein et al. 1997) surveyed a number of Chalcolithic and EB I
sites that indicate the central hill country was inhabited in these peri-
ods (including large EB I settlements at a number of sites such as 'Ai
and Tell Balata – Finkelstein and Gophna 1993).
Numerous Chalcolithic and EB I sites were surveyed and excavated
east of the study region, in the eastern Jordan Valley (in Jordan).
– Some of the prominent Chalcolithic sites are: Teleilat Ghassul
(Mallon et al. 1934; North 1961; Hennessy 1969, 1982; Bourke 1997;
Bourke and Lovell 2004; Bourke et al. 2000, 2001; Seaton 2008), Pella
(Lovell 2000), Kataret es-Samra (Leonard 1989)7 and Tell Abu Hamid
(Dollfus and Kafafi 1986, 1993; Dollfus et al. 1988).
– The important EB I sites are: Tell esh-Shuna (Contenson 1960;
Gustavson-Gaube 1987; Baird and Philip 1994), Tell Abu al-Kharaz
(Fischer 1997, 2006, 2008), Tell Um-Hammad esh Sherqi (Helms et al.
1992) and Tell Abu Habil (Contenson 1960). Also relevant to our study
is the survey that was performed in Wadi Hasa (Papalas et al. 1997)
that concentrated on the Chalcolithic and EB, among other things, and
other surveys carried out in the region.
Of all of the sites geographically adjacent to the study region, from
the Beth Shean Valley in the north to the northern bank of the Dead
Sea in the south, complete scientific reports have been published for
only four large sites (the Chalcolithic period at Teleilat Ghassul and
the EB I at Tell Um-Hammad, Tell Abu al-Kharaz, and Jericho). The
rest of the excavations were of limited scope, and were only partially
published, or not published at all. This is a very significant fact for un-
derstanding the necessity for research in this region. In fact, despite the
‘well-researched’ image that has been created for the region between
the south of the Kinneret and north of the Dead Sea, this area has al-
most not been studied at all.8
All the Chalcolithic and EB I sites in the southern Jordan Valley and
desert fringes of Samaria are described in Chapter 15.
This work is built on a large number of different and diverse studies,
as well as on different degrees of depth and professional knowledge. In
order to reach the most accurate and highest common denominator in
7
Remains dating to the Middle Chalcolithic and EB I were found at the site.
8
Only in the last generation has a new integrated work concerning this region in
the Chalcolithic period been published (Blackham 2002), but it is based on the meagre
data available to the researchers prior to this work, and is therefore somewhat limited.
history of the archaeological research 41
Conclusions
In summary, so far no in-depth research has examined the data from
the various surveys and proposed some sort of spatial synthesis. Small-
scale salvage excavations were primarily conducted in the study region,
most of which were not completely, or even partially, published.
The information we have about the outskirts of our region is also
incomplete, and relies heavily on old surveys. The essential difference
between our region and the adjacent areas is the excavation of the
large tells (Beth Shean, Far'ah [North], Jericho). It is true that most of
them were not published in full, but they do provide a data base for
comparison. Because of the lack of very reliable comprehensive data
it was decided to excavate additional sites as part of the research proj-
ect. These were meant to provide a chronological anchor and source of
comparison, if only partial, for the data collected in the surveys. Thus
the sites at 'Ein Hilu (second half of the 5th millennium BCE), Fazael
2 and 7 (first quarter of the 4th millennium BCE), and Sheikh Diab 2
and Fazael 4 (second half of the 4th millennium BCE) were excavated.
These excavations, with the data published from the excavations of
neighbouring sites, made it possible to determine the chronological re-
liability of each site, and form a more accurate picture of the settlement
in the Chalcolithic and EB I.
9
For example, the material collected by Mittman in the survey of Gilead and Tzori
in his surveys of the southern Beth Shean Valley was not available. But these are the
exception rather than the rule, and the author has succeeded in accessing the published
material from more than 90% of the sites.
CHAPTER FOUR
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to examine and present the pattern and
nature of settlement in the Chalcolithic and EB I in the southern Jordan
Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria. To this end a methodology
was decided upon that combined the two accepted research methods in
archaeology – excavation and survey.
The archaeological survey draws a map of the settlement in a specific
period and region. There are advantages and disadvantages to the sur-
vey (see below), but there is no disputing that this method is the only
one that makes it possible to obtain comprehensive spatial information.
The excavation draws a much more precise picture, but in an area that
is limited both chronologically and geographically. The combination of
the two methods produces a more reliable picture of the settlement in
the study region during the two periods we are addressing.
Completion of the initial processing of the survey data from all of
the sites in the study region gave a starting basis. An examination of
the data revealed a number of problems, the most basic of which was
the disparity in the quality of the surveys, and hence the lack of correct
identification of the settlement periods in the different sites.1 Conse-
quently, we decided to re-examine all 123 sites that were identified in
the various surveys as Chalcolithic or EB I.
For this purpose the following measures were taken:
1. All the existing publications of the sites were examined.
2. All the boxes of artifacts from the different surveys were physi-
cally examined. About 10% of the material was lost or is not in the
country.
3. All the existing sites were re-surveyed, and material was collected,
except at those sites that were already destroyed, or were inac-
cessible. The sites were analyzed in the field, and many of their
physical-environmental characteristics were defined for the pur-
pose of spatial analyses (the parameters are presented below).
1
Esse (1991) also identified a similar problem in his work on the surveys of the
Jezreel Valley.
methodology 43
2
A reliable dating that is significantly later was only received from the Cave of
the Treasure in Nahal Mishmar and the Cave of the Warrior in Katef Jericho. These
were not habitation sites, but burial sites or places where artifacts were concealed. Later
settlement sites were in the Golan Heights (Carmi et al. 1995), the Beer Sheva Valley,
and probably also at 'Ain Assawir (Yannai 2006) and Modi'in (van den Brink 2011), but
no relevant radiometric information was collected from the two latter sites.
44 chapter four
phases of the Chalcolithic period, and the transition from the Chalco-
lithic to the EB I. These disagreements mainly deal with names used in
the terminology and culture, rather than chronological problems.
The publication of a relatively large number of radiometric dates in
recent years makes it possible to determine borders (if only partial) bet-
ween these periods and those preceding and succeeding them.
It is not our intention to discuss the Chalcolithic terminology
of those scholars who disagree (a partial list of the proposals in the
past two decades is: Banning 2002a; Bourke et al. 2001; Braun 1989;
Garfinkel 1999; Joffe and Dessel 1995; Gilead 1990; 1994; 2007; Lovell
et al. 2007).
Most researchers agree that the major phase of the Chalcolithic began
around 4500 BCE, and ended in the first half of the 4th millennium
BCE (agreed upon and verified radiometric dates from settlement sites
are as late as 3900–3800 BCE only, excluding the Golan sites).3
EB I researchers differ about the beginning of the period. Some
think it started around 3600 BCE (for example Yekutieli 2007; Philip
2001; Milevski 2011). Others push the date back to the third quarter of
the 4th millennium (Joffe and Dessel 1995), while still others bring it
forward to the first quarter of the 4th millennium (Golani 2004; and an
opposing view in Braun and Gophna 2004). There is consensus among
scholars that the period ends in the last century of the 4th millennium
BCE4.
Thus the research boundaries can be defined as between 4500 BCE
and 3050–3000 BCE (the transition from the EB I to EB II). The terms
we use are ‘Chalcolithic’ (4500–3800 BCE) and ‘EB I’ (3600–3000 BCE).
We should point out the problematic chronological gap between the
end of the Chalcolithic (during the first quarter of the 4th millennium
BCE) and the beginning of the EB I (about the middle of the 4th mille-
nnium BCE). The author is convinced that this gap will be reduced as
research progresses (the most recent discovery that makes it possible
to reduce this gap significantly is the stratigraphic sequence from the
Chalcolithic to the EB I discovered in salvage excavations at Modi'in –
van den Brink 2011).
3
For example Gilead 1994; 2007; Banning 2007: fig. 7; Lee 1973, as opposed to
completely different dates in Burton and Levy 2001. A new set of dates and analysis
that support such an early end date for the Chalcolithic period was suggested when this
book was in press (Braun et al. 2013).
4
For a slightly longer transition between EB I and EB II, from 3200-2900 indepen-
dently in each site, see Regev et al. 2012.
methodology 45
Table 4.1. Terms and dates for the period 4500–3500 BCE in the southern
Levant (selected examples).
Excavation Methodology
The Jordan Valley project began in 2006. From the outset, it was de-
signed as a long-term project, with the intention of excavating several
sites spanning the 5th and 4th millennia BCE. It was therefore decided
to pursue a strategy of a measured continuing research programme,
with limited excavation areas each season. The excavation methodol-
ogy was similar in all sites, with slight modifications depending on the
nature of the site and the local preservation conditions.
Each season lasted up to three weeks (18 working days). The exca-
vators were either archaeological students or experienced volunteers,
comprising not more 15 persons each season. We worked in the field
for nine hours every day, and then returned to our base in Moshav
Fazael, where we washed and sorted the finds.
Each area of excavation had a supervisor who was in charge of all the
field work and registration activities. The excavated areas were divided
into 5 x 5 m squares, usually separated by 50 cm-wide baulks used for
stratigraphic control. With the exception of topsoil and disturbed areas,
the excavations for the most part were carried out using relatively fine
tools (hand picks and small trowels). Ten to twenty percent of the exca-
vated accumulations from fills was sifted through a 5 mm mesh, while
66-80% of the recognized living surface deposits was similarly sifted.
Only very high-quality loci were wet-sieved. The development of the
excavation was recorded daily by the area supervisors, who later wrote
a season summary. Further documentation included photography and
dimensioned drawings of architectural plans and baulk sections. All
data were later computerized into the project database. The material
culture remains (ceramics, lithics, animal bones, groundstone artifacts,
metals, etc.) were labelled and washed, and then sorted. Usually, all
finds were kept, except for non-diagnostic sherds, which were reburied
at each site.
CHAPTER FIVE
Introduction
This chapter presents the settlement patterns of the region in this pe-
riod. It comprises the following sections:
– Types of sites, and what can be learned about them.
– Dwelling units.
– Areas of the sites (according to types).
– Proximity to sources of water.
– Spatial distribution and location of sites.
– Topography and preferred orientations for settlement sites.
– The question of settlement continuity.
In addition, the subsistence economy and transition periods are ex-
amined, and a spatial synthesis of the settlement pattern and hypotheti-
cal explanations for the nature of the changes are presented.1
The study includes two fundamental assumptions:
– The accuracy of the chronological segmentation in the basic sur-
vey is limited, and therefore the following steps were taken at each
site: the boxes of artifacts were re-examined, the site was revisited,
and additional finds and information were gathered (assuming
the site still existed or was accessible), and a specific level of prob-
ability was defined.
– A statistical analysis was made only for those sites that had a me-
dium or higher level of probability.
Some of the data presented here were statistically processed accord-
ing to questions relevant to each datum.
We based our examination of the proximity of sites to sources of
water on the following statistical question: Is the average distance of
all the sites from a source of water significantly less than the average
1
Two other questions were asked in this study: – is there a preference for a particu-
lar kind of soil and – is there a preference for a particular kind of rock? In view of the
negative results we can say there was no preference for either in selecting settlement
sites in the periods discussed in this study.
54 chapter five
Where ID = 1 – random
ID > 1 – clustered
ID < 1 – uniform
2
Other advanced methods for checking the dispersion of the sites in a given area
were presented by Fletcher (2008), with regard to Chalcolithic period in the southern
Levant.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 55
Settlement Sites
This is the most common type of site (66% of all the sites that were
checked, and 79.5% of the sites with a medium or higher probability).
A settlement site is one that was inhabited and used for dwelling (due
to the geophysical and initial conditions of the study, in most of the
cases building remains were found on the surface). The settlement is
not surrounded by a fortification line or an enclosure wall (as opposed
to fortified sites or enclosure sites), and is not in a cave.
There are four types of settlement sites in the study region: large –
covering an area of about 10 ha, with numerous buildings (see below);
56 chapter five
Zebabdeh 11 12
15
River J
Mehula 16
195 195
Wad i Malih 18
o rdan
Tubas 19
20
190 190
22 23 in
ufr j
Wadi K
i
185 185
25
180
39 45 180
44
46
55 53 52
175 56 175
r qa
57
60
Ze
61 62
W
65
e
ad
di
Fa
Wa
i
66
r'
ah
170
67 68 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
Fadil 73 72
75
165 76 79 165
7478 80
85 83 81
el
88 91 Wad
86 8987 92 90
za iA
Wa d i Fa
hm
River J
93 a
100 99
r
160 160
119
101
102
or
an d
155
104 155
n
i Nim r i
145 W ad 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
he saw the region prior to the modern construction of the Fazael settlement and of the
agricultural and water systems that accompany it, which destroyed parts of the ancient
site. In the Site Catalogue they are presented separately according to the methodology
that states that if no settlement continuum is visible in a specific area then we are deal-
ing with separate sites.
5
Estimated area only.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 59
To Beth Shean
205 205
Na h zeq
al Be
(Wa ash)
d i S h ub
4 6 W ab i s
200 98 10 ad i Y 200
Zebabdeh 12
15
River J
Mehula
195 195
Wad i Malih
o rdan
Tubas 19
20
190 190
23
in
ufr j
Wadi K
i
185 185
25
45
44
180 180
46
55 53 52
56
175 175
r qa
60 57
Ze
61 62
W
65
e
ad
di
iF
Wa
r'
a
a
66
h
170
67 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
Fadil 73
76
165 165
81
az
ael
89 88 91
Wa d i F
87 92 93 90 Wadi
River J
A hm
160 ar 160
100
or
and
jj e
h 113 Settlement site
'Au Open site
Wa di
Enclosure
Caves
Working
Nim r in
site
145 a di
WBoundary 145
of the study
Modern village
Road
0 5 Wadi
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 5.3. Satellite photograph of the Fazael region. The dwelling units
identified are marked with circles. The minimum estimated area of the
settlement is marked with a solid line and the estimated additional area is
marked with a dotted line.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 61
'Ein Hilu
Fazael 1
'Ain Juraish
Figure 5.4. Plans of medium-sized unfortified sites in the
study region. 'Ein Hilu (Bar et al. 2008); Fazael 1 and 'Ain
Juraish (Manasseh Hill Country Survey – unpublished).
62 chapter five
Enclosures
The main characteristics of the enclosures are:
– Located in regions that are remote from settlement sites (average
distance 2.67 km).
– Far from sources of water (average distance 1.87 km).
– Construction consisting of only a single course of large fieldstones
(boulders). This probably served as a foundation for vegetation or
mud bricks that formed an enclosure wall.
– 20–35 m diameter.
– Paucity of small finds.
– Topography – typically situated on a slope or a low spur.
Enclosures are quite common in the outlying regions and studies in
our region and researchers (e.g. Spanier 1994a: note 2; Hirschfeld 1985:
11; Ben-Yosef 2007: ch. 6) ascribe to them the function of animal pens.
Bar-Adon (1972; 1980) actually attributed cultic significance to them.
In the author’s opinion this assertion is illogical, because there are a
multitude of enclosures (e.g. in the Judean Desert, where Bar-Adon
worked, there are more than 35 enclosures – Davidovich 2008), and
they are simple and yield few finds. Surveys and excavations conducted
in recent years in the caves and enclosures in the Judean Desert show
there is no archaeological basis for dating these enclosures to the Chal-
colithic, or for ascribing a ritual function to them (Davidovich 2008).
The paucity of finds in the enclosure sites in the Jordan Valley is also a
characteristic common to the eastern part of the valley where research-
ers (Papalas et al. 1997: 434) had great difficulty in dating enclosure
sites, and assumed they belonged to the Chalcolithic–EB I chronologi-
cal horizon based on the scant finds. An examination of the findings of
the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (Zertal 2005; 2008) showed that the
dating was largely based on non-diagnostic body sherds.
Only six enclosures from these periods have been found in the Jor-
dan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria (Fig. 5.5) – a relatively
small number compared to the Judean Desert. These were located in
distant regions, mainly in the Masu'a Valley, and also in Wadi Ahmar
and in the Buqei'ah.
The only site in this category that has a medium level of probability
is Ro'i 1 (Site 25). Repeated surveys at the site have shown that it was
indeed mostly used in the Chalcolithic period, but finds from later pe-
riods were also discovered that were not found in the original survey.
Thus for example, a number of Iron Age sherds were found, from a
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 63
Wadi Ahmar 3
Ro'i 1
'Urqan er-Rub
Figure 5.5. Plans of enclosure sites in the study region. Wadi Ahmar 3
(Zertal 2005: fig. 383); Ro'i 1 (Zertal 2008: fig. 260); 'Urqan er-Rub
(Zertal 2005: fig. 406).
time when the enclosures were most common in the Jordan Valley (de-
tails in Ben-Yosef 2007). Hence it is possible that the enclosure at Ro'i
1 is late, and it covers an earlier site from the Chalcolithic period. This
hypothesis cannot be verified other than by an archaeological excava-
tion at the site.
The excavations at 'Ein Hilu and Fazael 2 demonstrate the impor-
tance of grazing in the subsistence economy of the region’s inhabitants
in the Chalcolithic period. It therefore seems that the built enclosure,
despite the ethnographic parallels to modern Bedouin life and the Jor-
64 chapter five
dan Valley inhabitants in the Iron Age, was not a significant compo-
nent in ancient pastoralism. The customary nature of grazing in the
region did not consist of long-term foraging between remote areas, but
perhaps a day’s journey – setting out and returning in one day from
where the animals were kept inside a dwelling complex6 (see below
regarding the importance of the courtyard in the animal husbandry of
this period).7 The absence of enclosure sites from the period in higher
and more remote regions on the slopes of the Samarian hills supports
this view. There is of course a possibility that the movements of these
shepherds were not identified in the archaeological finds (e.g. the use
of caves instead of enclosures for corralling sheep/goat. There are also
ethnographic parallels to this in modern Bedouin life).8 Many stud-
ies, mainly in the outlying regions (southern Israel – e.g. Haiman 1992;
Banning and Kohler-Rollefson 1992; Avni 1992; Eldar et al. 1992)
have attempted to identify nomadism in the archaeological finds. Oth-
ers (e.g. Khazanov 1984, and in his footsteps Rosen 2002 and van der
Steen 2007 in the southern Levant; Szuchman 2009) dealt with models,
usually based on ethnographic studies, for characterizing the relations
between the nomads and the sedentary inhabitants of the peripheral
areas. What these studies all have in common is the real difficulty in
identifying nomadism in the archaeological finds, and in determining
that the essence of the connection between the nomad and sedentary
settler exists in the border of the outlying region.
The Jordan Valley, during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods, was a
centre and not a periphery.9 The area becomes an outlying region only
6
For an ethnographic parallel of Bedouin life in the Dimona region, which oper-
ates in a similar fashion, see Eldar et al. 1992.
7
And see similar ideas regarding encampment sites used by shepherds that prob-
ably belonged to the inhabitants of permanent sites in the Beer Sheva Valley (Gilead
1992). For the northern Jordan Valley, Esse (1991: 161) has suggested the term 'distant
pastures husbandry' (based on Khazanov 1984: 22), in which the majority of the popu-
lation leads a settled life based on agriculture, and a portion of the villagers lives for part
of the year on pasture far from the settlement.
8
Today daily foraging is widely accepted among the Bedouin tribes of the Jordan
Valley (personal observation over the years), and during the hot months herds are often
seen taking shelter in the shade of natural caves. Long-term movement, due to seasonal
changes and the need to change grazing regions, exists year-round among some of the
residents. In these instances the Bedouin exchange their dwelling site with another
absolutely identical site on the Samarian slopes (They do not exchange dwellings in
enclosures or other alternatives; rather they migrate and set up residential buildings
that are identical in nature in the new settlement region).
9
Unlike the peripheral characteristics of the Jordan Valley today, in the pre- and
proto-historic periods, the valley was one of the major centres in the southern Levant.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 65
Open Sites
This type of site is divided into two groups: sherd scatters and encamp-
ment sites. The first are characterized by a scatter of material finds in a
small area, without any preserved architecture. The encampment sites,
on the other hand, are sherd scatters and have some of the attributes
listed below that are based on numerous ethno-archaeological studies
of modern encampment sites, mainly in the Negev and Jordan (e.g.
Banning and Kohler-Rollefson 1992; Avni 1992; Eldar et al. 1992), and
possible ancient encampment sites in the region of Nahal Sekher in the
northern Negev (Gilead and Goren 1986).
A total of 12 open sites were found with a level of probability that is
greater than low, which were ascribed to the Chalcolithic period. Four
of these have a medium or higher level of probability.10
The main characteristics of the encampment sites are:
– Located in regions far from the main settlement clusters.
– Far from sources of water (average distance 2 km).
– Located in areas with limited accessibility, mostly in hilly regions.
– Far from arable regions.
– No architecture was identified on the surface level (it probably did
not exist).
– Small sites (average area 0.24 ha per site).
– Paucity of finds.
– Typical topography – elevated above a wadi (ridge, saddle or
slope) or a hidden ravine.
Its centrality is reflected in the development of advanced Neolithic cultures (in Jericho
– Kenyon 1957, and in Sha'ar Ha-Golan – Garfinkel 1993a, 1996), and the beginning of
urbanization during the Early Bronze Age.
10
Because of the sparse archaeological evidence in these sites, and in order to learn
about them, an analysis was performed from a low-medium level of probability and
higher.
66 chapter five
– Mostly multi-period.
The presumed encampment sites are located in the western part of
Wadi Malih (Site 20), the desert fringes (Sites 23, 46, 53, 61), the west-
ern part of Wadi Ahmar (Site 67), and in Wadi Baker (Site 104).
Sherd scatters were found in the south-western part of the Beth
Shean Valley (Site 2), the desert fringes (Site 60), the eastern part of
Wadi Ahmar (Site 76), and the western part of Wadi Fazael (Site 85).
11
It should be borne in mind that we know very little about the funerary and cultic
practices in the earlier phases of the Chalcolithic, and the picture will probably change
with advances in research.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 67
veys and excavations in the study region. Despite the systematic and
methodical survey done on foot in every area, no open burial sites like
those in Adamiya and Mezad Aluf were identified.
The large cemeteries discovered in Wadi Qa'un and in Wadi Far'ah
only contained finds from the EB I and later. In the few caves with finds
from the Chalcolithic (e.g. the cave in Wadi Baker 1 – Site 104, Peleg
and Hameiri 2002, and in Zbeidat Cave – Site 52 near Argaman) no
burial remains were discovered. Nor were any cultic buildings or figu-
rines found in the excavations that the author and others conducted in
Chalcolithic sites.
The only such finds are the two burials of an infant and foetus below
the floors of the Chalcolithic building excavated by the author at Fazael
2 (Chapter 10). In addition to enriching this type of funerary corpus,
we can reconstruct some of the unknown parts of the burial process.12
This was the first time that finds were analysed using computed tomog-
raphy technology (CT), which avoided the need of actually excavating
the jar and its contents. The data concerning the preparation of the
burial process are:
– The two burials were primary.
– Both were deliberately placed beneath the floors of the building.
– Both were placed exactly in the corners of the building (Figs
5.6–5.7).13
– The burial jar was in secondary use, and dedicated-type contain-
ers such as ossuaries were not used.
– The jar rim was intentionally broken so that the vessel would be
stable when buried upside down in the ground (Fig. 5.8).
– The base of the jar was also deliberately broken to allow the inser-
tion of the infant into the burial container (Fig. 5.9).
– The mouth of the vessel was sealed with a clay stopper. This is the
only evidence of the use of clay as a stopper in jar burials (Fig.
5.10, upper right picture).
– The infant in the burial vessel was placed in a foetal position, rest-
ing on the stopper and the sides of the jar (Fig. 5.10, lower right
picture).
– No funerary offerings were detected in the CT imaging, apart
from a copper object less than 1 cm diameter (a bead?) on the
infant’s skull.
12
For a detailed analysis of this burial see Eshed and Bar 2012.
13
The other two corners of the room were destroyed, and it was impossible to as-
certain if there were also burials beneath the floor there.
68 chapter five
Figure 5.6. Plan of Fazael 2. The burials were located in the northern
corners of the southern room (Loci 42, 75).
Figure 5.10. CT of the burial jar. Note the stopper made of light-coloured clay
on which the infant was placed.
– An upper lid for the burial vessel was prepared from the base of
another jar. The lid was retouched so that it fitted exactly when
placed on the two ledge handles of the burial jar (Fig. 5.11).
– The burial vessel was found filled with soil. It is still unclear if this
was intentional fill or if soil slowly penetrated through the cracks
in the jar from the time of the burial until it was exposed.
– At the time of burial stones and potsherds were intentionally
placed beneath the bottom of the jar (where the rim was origi-
nally) so as to stabilize it in the ground (Fig. 5.12).
– It is impossible to determine whether the jar was buried when the
building was constructed (a foundation offering?), or during its
use.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 71
Figure 5.11. Jar burial. The lid and the jar as found at
the time of the excavation. Note the location of the lid
on the ledge handles.
Although we are still in the initial stages of the research we can identify
several interesting characteristics:
– The burial was primary, unlike burials in caves and ossuaries,
which were always secondary.
– The burial was not in a container specifically designed for this
purpose, or was without a container at all (as opposed to the os-
suaries and burial jars in which adults were interred).
– Although the container was not specifically made for burial, it is
obvious that it was carefully prepared for use as a burial vessel,
especially the retouching of the rim and the upper lid.
– Great care is evident in the manner in which the container was
placed in the ground.
– The vessel was intentionally placed upside-down (perhaps sym-
bolizing the connection to the earth or an image of a foetus in its
mother’s womb before birth).
– The vessel was sealed with a stopper to prevent its contents from
leaking.
– The vessel was carefully positioned by arranging stones and pot-
sherds around the rim and shoulder.
– The location of the burial is not random, but planned – precisely
in the corners of the building.
Cave sites
In the Chalcolithic period caves were commonly used for a variety of
purposes such as dwelling (e.g. Umm Qatafa and Umm Qala'a in the
Judean Desert – Perrot 1992), burial (e.g. Peqi'in Cave in the Galilee
– Gal et al. 1997), or for concealment (e.g. in the Judean Desert, the
southern Jordan Valley – Davidovich 2008).
In the vicinity of Jericho, in the south of the study region, a number
of caves used in the Chalcolithic were discovered (e.g. Cave V49 –
Eisenberg 2002; Katef Yericho Cave – Patrich 1993; Upper Wadi el-
Makkuk Caves – Hirschfeld and Riklin 2002). Unlike the widespread
use of the caves in a number of regions in the southern Levant, only
one cave was found in the study region (Zbeidat – Site 52) that was used
in the Chalcolithic period, and it also has just a low-medium level of
probability. No Chalcolithic finds were discovered in a number of caves
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 73
Work Sites
These are defined according to the activity associated with a particular
kind of work performed in them (e.g. workshop, quarry, agriculture,
etc). In the Chalcolithic period such sites were located at 'Iraq Hamam
(lower) (Site 9), which was probably used for processing wood, and
'Iraq e-Hamrah (Site 44), where flint tools probably used by a farming
community were discovered. Another work region was identified in a
field near Tell ed-Deir (Site 12), where concentrations of flint tools were
found, indicative of (agricultural?) activity conducted there.
Openings
The inside openings, when located, were always in the centre of the
large broad room of the dwelling unit, facing the courtyard or the outer
open space of the site. There was sometimes an opening in the centre
of the side of the courtyard opposite the entrance to the dwelling unit.
The socket stones were always located on the inside of the door, to the
right and left of the entrance, which indicates that the door opened
inward. The average width of the openings was 80 cm and they were
paved with stone.
In some of the sites (e.g. Fazael-Porath’s excavation) there was a step
14
Hearths were found in these units at Fazael 2.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 75
Walls
There was, quite surprisingly, a fairly uniform standard for how the
walls were built. Most of the foundations that were excavated or sur-
veyed were built of two rows of medium-sized fieldstones with in-fill
consisting of smaller stones and mud. The walls ranged from 65 to 85
cm thick, which indicates that the building was probably just one storey
high. The thickness of the walls might have served as an effective insu-
lation against the effects of weather.
In rare instances there were thinner walls – almost always for in-
ternal partition, outside benches, or later phases and additions to the
initial construction phase.
These walls were usually built to a maximum height of three courses,
and the construction above them was completed with mud bricks. The
large building at Fazael 7 is unique in the characteristics of its walls:
their thickness ranged between 80 and 100 cm, and their height sur-
vived to 1 m, indicating that most of the structure was built of stones
and not of mud bricks. The thickness of the walls supports the possibil-
ity of an upper story in this building.
Floors
The level of the floors, which were made of tamped earth, sometimes
combined with crushed chalk, was always below the level of the mud
bricks (usually at top of the first stone course). It is important to note
that stone construction was characteristic of those parts of the Jordan
Valley near the hill slopes. In the regions near the River Jordan and
far from the raw material – the stone – the construction was almost
entirely of mud brick (e.g. Tel Tsaf, which is located near the Jordan –
Garfinkel et al. 2007). In some regions stone pavements were evidently
used as storage surfaces (these appeared mostly in the small cells adja-
cent to the broad houses, or in certain parts of the courtyard that were
probably work or food processing surfaces).
Roofs
It is obvious that at least some of the dwelling units in the excavated
buildings had roofs. Nevertheless, no remains of the organic mate-
rial used as roofing were found, and apart from one stone base ('Ein
Hilu, Area E) and the wall construction at Fazael 7, no architectural
76 chapter five
remains of roof supports were discovered. The fact that the width of
the rectangular residential rooms was almost uniform (4.0–4.5 m) may
suggest roofing beams made of organic material (presumably wood)
cut to a specific length.15 This is not the case for the large building at
Fazael 7, where a very wide room, almost 8 m wide, was excavated. The
room had an inner partition formed by two walls crossing to make four
smaller broad rooms (Chapter 11). These inner walls were a unique
method of roofing this wide structure, discovered for the first time in
the Chalcolithic period.
Area of
Area of
Unit roofed Total area
Site courtyards
structures
m2 m2 m2
E 92 ? ?
'Ein Hilu
B 70 ? ?
Fazael (Porath) 70 180 250
Fazael 2 90 620 710
Fazael (Peleg) 60 ?
Unit 3 100 320 420
Fazael 5
Unit 4 165 700 865
Fazael 7 120 1100 1220
Yitav 110 430 540
Table 5.1. Area of the dwelling units from the Chalcolithic period
in the study region.
Table 5.1 shows the large variation in the area of the dwelling units.
15
See an analysis of similarly sized units from the EB I at 'En Shadud and Yiftah'el
(Braun 1985; 1997).
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 77
The areas of the rooms with roofs can be divided into two groups, one
of 60–100 m2, and the other of about 160 m2. Both groups were subdi-
vided into secondary rooms. The data of the dimensions of the covered
rooms in the large group were taken from survey plans, and not from
an excavation, and therefore there were probably inaccuracies in de-
fining the area. The dwelling units indicate that the typical complex
probably included one nuclear family.16
The area of the courtyard varied greatly, between 180 and 700 m2.
The considerable difference in the area of the courtyards (even at the
same site, assuming that all of the Fazael sites were probably one large
site) is indicative of home owners with greater means, or who had a
social or economic position that necessitated the use of a larger area.
Comparing the data from this study with that of EB II Arad (Ilan
2001) reveals a significant difference in the size of the dwelling com-
plexes: the average area of the dwelling complex at Arad was about 84
m2, as opposed to more than 520 m2 in this study. The dwelling units at
Arad were also smaller, averaging about 27 m2, compared to about 100
m2 in this study, and similar differences also existed in the area of the
courtyard. It seems that these differences were so large because of the
different nature of the sites – a dense, fortified settlement of the EB II,
as opposed to a spread out, rural settlement of the Chalcolithic period.
Another comparison was made between the Chalcolithic dwelling
units of the Fazael sites and Teleilat Ghassul, and those of the EB I at
Sheikh Diab 2 (Table 5.2). The comparison is more relevant because
in the case of the Fazael and Sheikh Diab 2 sites we are dealing with
the same area (the Fazael Valley – less than 1 km apart), and because
of their similar economies (a sedentary population mainly engaged in
grazing and farming).
The comparison shows a striking difference between the sites, both
within the Chalcolithic period, and between that period and the EB I.
The comparison between the sites at Fatael and 'Ein Hilu and the site
at Teleilat Ghassul reveal the following facts:
1. In both instances the excavators (this study; Bourke 2001) claim
they are dealing with a unit belonging to a nuclear family. In the
cases of Fazael and Teleilat Ghassul the site was situated in a simi-
lar ecosystem (arable land, sources of water, etc.).
2. The dwelling unit area in the study sites (Fazael and 'Ein Hilu)
was substantially larger (at least twice as large) than a similar unit
16
For the purpose of this study a nuclear family is defined as three generations with
direct blood relations.
78 chapter five
Table 5.2. Comparison of the dwelling unit areas of the Chalcolithic sites at
'Ein Hilu, Fazael 2, and Teleilat Ghassul, and the EB I site at Sheikh Diab 2.
at Teleilat Ghassul.
3. The area of the courtyards in the study sites was considerably
larger than in similar units at Teleilat Ghassul.
4. The overall area of the dwelling units at Fazael was at least twice as
large (and as much as seven times) as the parallel units at Teleilat
Ghassul.
Here we should check a number of assumptions and basic questions:
– Were the sites of a similar nature (the same type of site)?
– Did the sites have similar economies?
– Did the residents have a similar social status?
We can suggest the following answers:
1. Different types of sites – Teleilat Ghassul was crowded and large,
'Ein Hilu was crowded and small, and Fazael was dispersed and
large. This is of great significance at a time when there was no
proper settlement planning. A large site like Teleilat Ghassul (a
regional centre?), which attracted many residents, grew in an un-
restrained manner, and the areas of the dwelling complexes in it
were relatively small and lost some of their flexibility for change.
On the other hand an extensive site like Fazael, which had ample
land reserves and a slow rate of growth, provided sufficient area
for the construction of larger residential complexes (A modern
model of the same phenomenon is – construction in an urban
area = high density and costs that allow construction over a lim-
ited area; or construction in an open area/farmland = relatively
low density and costs that allow construction over a larger area).
2. The sites’ economies were dissimilar – it seems that the economy
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 79
3
1
'Ein Hilu E
Yitav
Fazael Porath
4 5
Fazael 5
6
0 10
m
Figure 5.13. Dwelling units from the Chalcolithic sites excavated and surveyed
in the framework of this study (1–2 – Bar et al. 2008; 3–6 – Manasseh Hill
Country Survey, not yet published; 4 – Porath 1985; 5 – Hizmi 2003).
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 81
To Beth Shean
205 205
2 Na h
al Be
zeq
(Wa ash)
d i S h ub
8 4 67 W ab i s
200 9 5 10 ad i Y 200
Zebabdeh 11 12
15
River J
Mehula
195 195
Wad i Malih
o rdan
Tubas 19
20
190 190
23
in
ufr j
Wadi K
i
185 185
25
180
44 45 180
55
175
56 175
r qa
57 62
Ze
W
65
e z
ad
di
Wa
i
ar
F
'a
66
170
67 170
h
Majdal
Beni
Fadil
76
165
78 165
81
ael
87 91
Wa d i F
az 89 Wad
88
River J
i
92 90
A hm
160 ar 160
100
or
an d
155 155
larger sites – all the sizes are concentrated on the flood plains of
the major wadis and in the southern Beth Shean Valley, and the
medium sites are concentrated on the flood plains, or near the
major springs of the study region.
– The small sites are scattered in the area regardless of the sources
of water. This corroborates the hypothesis that they were probably
encampment sites.
– More than 90% of the Chalcolithic population inhabited large and
medium sites in the Jordan Valley, with no significant penetration
into the desert fringes and the higher regions of Samaria.
– In the Chalcolithic period the total built-up area of settlement
sites with a medium or higher level of probability was about 69 ha.
Topography
An examination of the topographical location showed a clear prefer-
ence for two locations:
– Sites on the edge of a valley and slope: 36% of all the sites and 44%
of the settlement sites were located on the edge of a valley or on
slopes.
– Plateau sites: 33% of all the sites and 40% of the settlement sites
were located on flat ground. This type of topography is common
primarily in the level Beth Shean Valley and on the flood plains
of the major wadis.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 89
Orientation
An analysis of the orientation was only made when it was possible to
identify it clearly, and sites that were located on plateaus were not taken
into account for this test. An examination of the topographical orien-
tation showed a clear preference: 76% of all the sites and 88% of the
settlement sites faced south or east. These figures indicate a conscious
decision that was made at the time the site was being constructed. The
reasonable ecological reason for this stems from the movement of the
sun and its effect on plant life in a period that was probably wetter than
at present. In this region a southern orientation is hotter than a north-
ern one, as it receives more direct and uninterrupted sunshine, and the
vegetation in it is sparser. The people who established the sites in the
Chalcolithic period preferred to keep the areas with a northern orienta-
tion free for agriculture (grazing or crops).
20
Personal observation of the author.
21
Continuity is the existence of the two periods at a specific site. Without exca-
vating it is impossible to prove there was absolute succession between the different
periods.
90 chapter five
67, 86, 108–109, and 113) were identified during the course of the work
in the study region. In addition to these are four sites of this type from
previous studies: Tel Tsaf22 and Al-Mas'udi 2, ascribed to the Wadi
Rabah phase (Zertal 2008), the Bezeq Channel (Site 6) and Tell Far'ah
(North), which according to the ceramic description (Miroschedji 1993)
can be ascribed to the Early Chalcolithic (or Pottery Neolithic – Wadi
Rabah). There are probably other early sites in the study area that will
be discovered from amongst the sites that have a relatively low level of
probability. Without excavations this hypothesis cannot be confirmed.
Of these ten early sites, seven also existed in the subsequent period.
Most of the sites – 27 in number (79.5%) – were established in the Chal-
colithic. Hence it is clear that in the Chalcolithic there was an increase
in settlement compared with the previous period.
Of the Chalcolithic sites with a medium or higher level of probabil-
ity, only seven (20.5%) existed with a medium or higher level of prob-
ability in the EB I.23
It is difficult to subdivide the EB I just by means of a survey, and the
number is probably lower. This is in cases where the transition was not
continuous, but passed for example from some phase in the Chalco-
lithic to the late EB I. This phenomenon apparently occurred at 'Ain
'Aujjeh – Site 108, and was common at many sites, such as Tell Far'ah
(North) (Miroschedji 1993), Tell es-Shuna (North) (Gustavson-Gauba
1987), and in Hittin on the edge of the Arbel Valley (Getzov 2007).
Thirteen of the Chalcolithic sites with a medium or higher level
of probability are single-period sites. To further emphasize the point,
no sites were found in the study where there is stratigraphic proof of
settlement continuity between the early phases of the Chalcolithic, or
between the Chalcolithic and the EB I. One of the big disadvantages of
the archaeological survey is reflected here – a fairly low resolution in its
ability for precise chronological segmentation.
22
The recent work of Garfinkel at Tel Tsaf supports a later date for the site between
the wadi Rabah stage and the Ghassulian Chalcolithic (Garfinkels 'Middle Chalcolithic'
– Garfinkel 1999; Garfinkel et al. 2007).
23
Similar figures where noted by Esse (1991) and Joffe (1993) in their work on the
evolution of social complexity in the EBA of the southern Levant.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 91
Agricultural Crops
The sickle blades found in the excavated and surveyed sites are indica-
tive of grain farming. Evidence supporting this is the tools that were
used for crushing and grinding in processing food. Cattle were prob-
24
The use of data from surveys is fairly problematic because of the difficulty in
ascribing surface finds to a specific period with the proper probability.
25
As opposed to Levy (1995), who claimed that the sherd scatters in the Jordan
Valley are evidence of shepherd camps.
92 chapter five
ably used as work animals (Grigson 1995a), as the bull figurine carry-
ing a churn from 'En Gedi seems to suggest (Ussishkin 1980). The com-
mon grain and legume crops26 were: wheat (Triticum spp, 2 and 6 rows),
English wheat (emmer - Triticum dicoccum), legumes (lentils - Lens
culinaris), peas (Pisum sativum), beans (Phaseolus Vulgaris), chickpea
(Cicer arietinum), vetch (Vicia ervilia), onion (Allium cepa), garlic (Al-
lium sativum), pistachio (Pistacia vera), and barley (Hordeum vulgare).
The only fruit tree identified was the olive (Olea europaea, at the same
time also in the Golan and Jordan – Epstein 1993; Lovell 2002). Date
palm (Phoenix dactylifera) and almond (Prunus dulcis) were found, but
it is unclear if they were planted or were collected at random.
It is not known if irrigated farming was practised in the region, but
the perennial streams suggest such a possibility.
The most common wild tree was the tamarisk (Tamarix, according
to a botanical analysis of finds from Fazael 2), probably mainly used as
fuel for heating and cooking (it was always found in hearths). The small
number of bifacial tools discovered in the excavated sites is surprising,
and the number of adzes increases towards the north and west. This
indicates that wood was processed mainly in the higher regions on the
Samarian slopes (e.g. at 'Iraq Hammam (lower) – Site 9), as well as else-
where in parts of the southern Beth Shean Valley, where the climate was
more favorable for the growth of trees.
Trade
Only scant evidence was found of items originating outside the study
region (e.g. the haematite mace head and pendant discovered at Fazael
2, or the shell from the Mediterranean Sea found at 'Ein Hilu). These
were probably brought in the framework of inter-regional trade. The
basalt tools from the two sites, which were brought as part of the in-
tra-regional trade, are additional evidence.27 These indicate there was
some sort of transfer of objects from remote regions to this region.
26
Based on the following reports: Fazael (Porath 1985), Teleilat Ghassul (Bourke
et al. 2000), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10), Nahal Qana (Liphschitz 2008), Cave of the Trea-
sure (Bar-Adon 1962), Tell Abu Hamid (Dollfus and Kafafi 1986), and Pella (Bourke
et al.1998).
27
Research (Philip and Williams-Thorpe 1993) conducted on the sources of basalt
from Chalcolithic sites in Jordan proved that the trade in basalt was a local-regional
phenomenon, and not interregional as researchers thought, regarding the basalt from
the Chalcolithic sites of the Negev (Rosen 1983). Basalt might have been brought to the
Jordan Valley sites from areas that are fairly close by – the wadis of eastern Samaria in
the study regions, or the wadis in Jordan close by to the east.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 93
28
90% of the V-shaped bowls examined at Tell Abu Hamid came from the Negev
(Dollfus and Kafafi 2001).
94 chapter five
of the 4th millennium BCE. Studies over the past 20 years, especially in
the south of Israel (e.g. the Tell Halif terrace, Afridar G, the quarry at
Palmahim 3, Tel Erani, and other sites [Braun and Gophna 2004; Braun
2000; Alon and Yekutieli 1995; Yekutieli 2000; 2007, etc.]) bring the be-
ginning of the EB forward to at least the middle of the 4th millennium
BCE. This joins the end of the Chalcolithic settlement in the Jordan
Valley and Beer Sheva Valley in the first 200 years of the 4th millen-
nium BCE (Gilead 1994; 2007; Lovell 2002; Braun et al. 2013; and for
an opposing view, later dates from Shiqmim – Burton and Levy 2001).
Based on these studies, the Chalcolithic presumably ended at the
first quarter of the 4th millennium BCE, and the next period began to-
ward the middle of that millennium. The 200–300 year hiatus that was
created has been given several names: Joffe and Dessel (1995) ascribed
this period to the Chalcolithic and called it ‘Terminal Chalcolithic’, and
Braun (1989) did not attribute it to any period, and dubbed it a ‘Miss-
ing Link’. The Chalcolithic sites of the Golan, such as Rasm Harbush
(Carmi et al. 1995), were mostly ascribed to this period, and also Ash-
kelon Afridar, which the excavator considered to be an EB I site (Golani
2004, and an opposing view presented in Braun and Gophna 2004).
Other possible later sites in the same group are Shiqmim (despite the
disagreement about the interpretation of the radiometric dates) and
Hujeirat al-Ghiuzlan north of 'Aqaba (Kerner 2008). There are also
sites where there is possible continuity from the Chalcolithic to the EB
I without 14C dating (e.g. 'En Esur – Yannai 2006; Modi'in – van den
Brink 2011).
It has been postulated that the nature of the transition, especially
in the south, was sharp; that is, the Chalcolithic was abandoned, for
a variety of possible reasons, and (after a chronological break of un-
known duration) an entirely new population without any connection
to the Chalcolithic population entered the region (see the summary
of opinions in Hanbuty-Tenison 1986; Gonen 1989). Others have sug-
gested an overlap between the Chalcolithic and EB I (e.g. Miroschedji
1971; Helms 1992, summarized in the table in Yekutieli 2001).29 A more
moderate view was later proposed; which maintains there was some
continuity (particularly in pottery characteristics), combined with a
penetration of new elements into the region (e.g. Amiran 1985; Braun
1989; Joffe 1993; Kerner 1997).
29
This is mainly due to the erroneous attribution of grey burnished pottery to the
Chalcolithic period.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 95
Both the periods were found in 20% of the sites in our region.30 How-
ever, in none of them is it possible to prove settlement succession, but
only that the sites were inhabited in the two periods. Most of these sites
are located in regions that have continual settlement potential, given
the proximity to abundant sources of water and arable land. The ce-
ramic finds from both of the periods (Conclusions in Chapter 8) show
that a number of types continued from the Chalcolithic to the EB I (EB
types: H1a, H2, B1, J2a, J4a, J4b), but there are also many new types.
In this study we propose a contribution that might reduce the gap in
our knowledge about the transition: The Fazael 2 site, which we exca-
vated (Chapter 10), is one of the latest Chalcolithic sites known today
in the Jordan Valley (radiometric dates place it in the first quarter of
the 4th millennium BCE), and it probably constitutes a possible initial
phase in the transition between the Chalcolithic and EB I. An impor-
tant attribute of the site – the Cananean blades – could be interpreted
as signifying the beginning of the ‘transition’, at a relatively early stage
of the 4th millennium BCE. The combination of the radiometric dates
and the flint artifacts denote Fazael 2 as a site at the end phase of the
Chalcolithic period, when a long transition between the Chalcolithic to
EB I might have begun.
30
In the northern valleys Joffe (1993) found there was continuity from the Chalco-
lithic to the EB I in an almost identical percentage of the sites (21%).
CHAPTER SIX
Types of Sites
Seven types of sites from the EB I were discovered in the study area: un-
fortified, open, burial, enclosures, fortified, caves, and a unique cultic
site.
Of the total number of 82 sites, the most common (without taking
level of probability into account) is the unfortified site – 37 sites (45.5%),
which is divided into four secondary categories of area. There are also
27 open sites (33%), seven burial sites (9%), six enclosures (7%), two
fortified sites, two cave sites, and one cultic site.
Of the 45 sites with a medium or higher level of probability, the most
common type is the unfortified site, constituting 31 sites (69%). The
following types of sites discovered have a medium or higher level of
probability: seven burial sites (16%), four open sites (9%), two fortified
sites (4.5%), and one cultic site. All the cave and enclosure sites found
in the surveys have a less than medium level of probability.
Unfortified Sites
This is the most common type in the period.1 Four types of unfortified
settlements were identified: a large village with an area of about 10 ha,
with numerous buildings; a medium-sized village with an area of 1–3
ha; a very small village or extended household with an area up to 1 ha;
a single structure – a farmhouse or a house of a nuclear family (usually
1
This kind of settlement reached the height of its development throughout the
country in the EB I, except in the Hula Valley, but have hardly been investigated (Get-
zov et al. 2001: 39).
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period 97
Zebabdeh 13 11
117 14
River J
Mehula 16
195
17
195
Wadi Malih
o rdan
Tubas
190 21 190
22
in
ufr j
262724 25 Wadi K
i
185 185
29 28
30 32 31 34 35
41 33 40 36
3839 37
43
42 44
180 180
47
48
50
54 49 51 53 52
55
175
58 56 175
r qa
57
59
Ze
62 63
W
64 60
e
ad
di
65
Wa
i Fa
r'
a h
170
68 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
Fadil 73 72
75
165 77 78 165
74 80
82
96 azael 8584 8381
Wa di F 89 Wadi
94 95 92
River J
97 Ah
160 98 99
mar
160
or
103
an d
155
104 155
105
108 107106 'Aujjeh
150 111 150
h
jj e
'Au
Wa di
i Nim r in
145 W ad 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
To Beth Shean
205 205
4 1 Na h
a l Bez
eq
(Wa ash)
di Shu b
3
200
7 W
ad i Y
ab i s
200
13 11
Zebabdeh 14
River J
Mehula
195
17
195
Wadi Malih
o rdan
Tubas
190 190
in
ufr j
24 25 Wadi K
i
185 26 27 185
29 28
32 34 35
30
41 33 40
3839 43
180
42 44 47
180
48
50 53 52
54 49 51
55
175 58 56 175
r qa
57
59
Ze
62 63
W
64 60
e
ad
di
iF
Wa
65 'a
ar
h
170 68 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
7573 72
Fadil
165 77 78 165
82 84 81
96 azael 85 83
Wa d i F 89 Wadi
97 94 95 92
River J
Ah
160 98 mar
160
99
103
or
and
Modern village
Road
0 5
km Jericho Wadi
-162
-16 4
-16 6
-1 68
-1 7
-1
0
72
(OHFWULF3ROH
-17
-1 75
d
Roa
halt
(OHFWULF3ROH
Asp
Wadi
Rashash
Fazael 4
0 15
m
38
0
430
420
-6
-4
-2
12
0
2
10
4
8
410
Pit 400
390
Pit 0 50
0 10 380
m Cupmark m
Fortified Settlements
In the past it was customary to associate the first appearance of forti-
fications in Canaan with the start of urbanization, a phenomenon that
was deemed a characteristic of the EB II (for example Amiran 1970,
Joffe 1993, Esse 1991). However, in recent decades, with the excavation
of fortified sites from the EB Ib, such as Tel Aphek (Kochavi 1975),
Tell es-Sa'idiyeh (Tubb, et al. 1997), Jericho (Parr 2000), Tell es-Sakan
(Miroschedji 2001), and Tell Abū al-Kharaz (Fischer 2006), this view
has changed, and today it seems that the beginning of fortifications and
the start of urbanization commenced earlier – in the EB Ib. To the sites
presented above we should also add others whose fortification is uncer-
tain, or the time of the fortification is in dispute. The sites attributed to
this type include Tel Erani (Kempinski and Gilead 1991), the Samarian
‘enclosures’ (Zertal 1993), Tell Esh-Shuna (North) (Baird and Philip
1994), Megiddo (Finkelstein et al. 2000), Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006),
and Tell el-Far'ah (North) (in the opinion of de Vaux, Hout and Amiran
on one hand, and of Miroschedji and Kempinski on the other – Ami-
ran 1970; de Vaux 1962; Hout 1967; Kempinski 1978, and Miroschedji
1989; 1993 respectively).
It is important to note that most of the ancient fortified sites are lo-
cated in the Jordan Valley, between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead
Sea. Albright (1926) was the first to notice this. He contended that the
peak period of settlement here was in the first half of the 3rd millen-
nium BCE, although most of the major settlements already existed
there earlier. Recently, this issue was addressed by Paz (2000; 2002),
who analyzed fortified sites of the EB Ib in Israel and Jordan, and by
Getzov et al. (2001), who investigated the pattern of urban settlement
throughout the entire period, and they are in agreement that this region
was the centre of the beginning of urbanization in the southern Levant.
Alternative views regarding the beginning of urbanization in the
southern Levant have appeared in the last few years (e.g. Chesson and
Philip 2003). These scholars see the fortifications that appeared in the
southern Levant at the beginning of the EB II not as a pure urbanism
model, but rather a more complex end of a continuum of village sites,
and that the separation between urban and rural communities had not
yet occurred (for a different view based on the same data, that sees the
EB II walled sites as cities, see Paz 2010). In accordance with some of
this new data I do not refer to the fortified sites that appear in the region
at the end of EB I as 'cities' and retain the term 'fortified settlements'.
102 chapter six
discovered.
– Tell Za'anuni (Site 42; Zertal 2008: site 183). Tell Za'anuni is a
fortified mound on a high terrace on the Jebel Kebir ridge, south
of Wadi Far'ah. The site consists of an acropolis of area about 1.5
ha, and a lower build-up area of similar size. A wall with an aver-
age thickness of 3 m survived. The pottery collected includes Um
Hammad type holemouth jars, jars and kraters, hemispherical
bowls and body sherds with band slip painting – all dating to the
EB Ib. The pottery from the EB II indicates a continued presence
there, but without excavating the date of the fortifications remains
unknown.
– Khirbet Juraish (Site 64; Porath 1968; Finkelstein et al. 1997).
This is a fortified site covering an area of 2 ha on a high knoll
along the slope of a spur surrounded by precipitous wadis. Wadi
el-Mashkara, where there is a spring, runs east of the tel, which is
surrounded on the west and south by Wadi Juheir, where there is
also a spring –'Ain Juheir. At the top of the knoll is a large building
from which a wall descends along a steep slope and encloses the
entire eastern part of the site. The wall is about 4 m thick, and is
built of extremely large stones. The ceramic finds recovered from
the various surveys include holemouth jars, a krater with rope or-
namentation, and hemispherical bowls from the EB I. Most of the
finds actually date to the EB II; consequently it is less likely that
the site was fortified in the EB I.
– Khirbet Rahiyeh (Site 96; Finkelstein et al. 1997). This is a large
fortified site (about 5 ha) on a steep slope north of and above
Wadi Rashash. It is located about 1 km south of Duma, and 400 m
east of 'Ain Duma. On the upper part of the site are the remains
the surrounding wall that probably dates to the EB. It is about 5
m thick, and is built of boulders. The pottery finds include Um
Hammad type holemouth jars, jars, a krater, and body fragments
with rope ornamentation that date to the EB Ib. Most of the finds
at the site are ascribed to the EB II. However, it can be assumed
that the settlement was founded, and possibly also fortified, in the
latter part of the EB I.
These sites, together with the sites at Beth Yerah, Tell el Far'ah (North),
and Jericho, form a geographical sequence of fortified settlements
west of the River Jordan, between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea.
A similar phenomenon also exists east of the Jordan, where Abū al-
104 chapter six
Kharaz, Pella, and es-Sa'idiyeh are among the sites that are part of that
sequence. The phenomenon, both west and east of the River Jordan,
dates to the second part of the EB I, while during its first part the settle-
ment includes small open sites (for example Gophna 1995a).
The distribution of the fortified settlements and the presence of
open settlements around them implies the existence of at least a two-
tier hierarchy. The question of the positions of these fortified sites in
the settlement array awaits further research and excavations before
clearer views can be expressed. The available data enable us to make a
theoretical reconstruction of the possible borders between these units.
The analysis is based on the topography and diffusion of the sites.
The principal site in the southern Beth Shean Valley was Tel Shalem.
Its area probably extended from the River Jordan in the east to the Gil-
boa ridge in the west, and from ‘Peqaq ha-Shomron’ (the region where
the valley is exceptionally narrow west of the Jordan River, near the
Fass ej-Jamal ridge) in the south to an uncertain boundary in the north
(possibly the area of the site at Tel Beth Shean).
The main site in the middle part of Wadi Far'ah was er-Rjjum. Its
region was dictated by the topography – the River Jordan in the east,
‘Peqaq ha-Shomron’ in the north, and the Sartaba ridge with Wadi
Ahmar in the south. The western boundary lies between the areas of
er-Rjjum and Tell el-Far'ah (North). If both of them existed at the same
period it would mean that the area of Tell el-Far'ah (North) was quite
small, consisting only of a group of sites in the hill country of Samaria
(Zertal 1993) and some of those in the east of Wadi Far'ah. Therefore,
in the author’s opinion, there are two possibilities:
1. The two sites were not independent units; rather they were part
of the Wadi Far'ah settlement complex (the fortified site at Tell
Za'anuni may have been added to it). It is difficult to determine
which is the more important of the two sites, since their areas
are similar: er-Rjjum was not excavated, and the information we
possess about Tell el-Far'ah (North) is incomplete. In view of the
fact that the former was abandoned during the EB II, and Tell
el-Far'ah (North) became a principal city in the same period, the
latter was probably the more important of the two.
2. The two sites were not contemporary, and the fortified city at Tell
el-Far'ah (North) replaced er-Rjjum at the beginning of the EB II.
It should also be noted that the locations of the sites are different: er-
Rjjum controls the narrow defile of Wadi Far'ah, in passing from the
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period 105
er-Rjjum
Tel Shalem
Figure. 6.4. Plans and pictures of the fortified sites in the study area.
Tel Za'anuni and er-Rjjum, from Zertal (2008).
106 chapter six
centre of the valley, where there are few sites, to the densely populated
western part: Tell el-Far'ah (North) is located in the western part of the
wadi, at the end of the main settlement concentration. The location of
Tell el-Far'ah (North) may possibly indicate it was a link in the connec-
tion between the valley sites and the hill country sites.
The paucity of EB I sites in Wadi 'Aujjeh and the absence of Um
Hammad ware, which is the regional pottery characteristic of the EB Ib
in the Jordan Valley (Bar 2010; Chapter 8) and characterizes the Wadi
Far'ah sites, demonstrate that this stream may have been the boundary
between the Wadi Far'ah area and that of Jericho to its south.
In fact two groups of sites, whose locations were influenced by geo-
graphical conditions and economic considerations, were identified in
the study: the settlement centres in the Beth Shean valleys and in Wadi
Far'ah, and isolated sites in the Samarian foothills. Around each of the
fortified sites (a possible central settlement) were seven to 15 open sites
(secondary settlements), while some of the sites had an open settlement
adjacent to them (for example, at Tel Shalem; 'Ain Juraish – next to
Khirbet Juraish, at 'Ain Duma – next to Khirbet Rahiyeh, and also at
remote sites such as Megiddo). These may have become ‘lower cities’,
some of which were also fortified (e.g. Tell Za'anuni).
The social framework of these groups is not clear, and at this point
we should, in the author’s opinion, avoid defining the fortified sites as
‘cities’, and certainly not as ‘city states’, in agreement with Paz (2000),
who sees limited political units here, with just the beginning of bureau-
cratic mechanisms. This is in accordance with ideas expressed by other
scholars (e.g. Chesson and Philip 2003, Paz 2010).
Enclosures
The main characteristics of the enclosures are:2
– Located in regions far from settlement sites (average distance 2.85
km from a settlement site).
– Far from sources of water (average distance 2.1 km from a source
of water).
– Construction consists of a single course of large fieldstones (boul-
ders). This probably served as a foundation for plant material or
mud bricks that formed an enclosure wall.
2
These are very simple constructions, not to be confused with the EBA fortified
enclosures in the Golan (Paz 2002), Samaria (Zertal 1993) or other regions of the
southern Levant (Esse 1991: 158).
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period 107
– 20–35 m diameter.
– Meagre amount of small finds.
– Topography – typically on a slope or on a low spur.
The enclosures are fairly common in the desert fringes, and studies
in our region and researchers (e.g. Spanier 1994a: note 2; Hirschfeld
1985: 111; Ben-Yosef 2007: chapter 6) ascribed to them the function of
animal pens. It was very difficult to date them in the eastern part of the
Jordan Valley (Papalas et al. 1997: 434), where researchers supposed
they belonged to the Chalcolithic-EB I chronological horizon, based on
the paucity of finds. A check of the survey finds in the region (Zertal
2005; 2008) has also showed that the dates are mainly based on non-
diagnostic body sherds.
Only six enclosures were found dating to the study periods in the Jor-
dan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria, all with a low-medium level of
probability.3 They are located in regions far from the settlement sites, in
the Masu'a Valley, Wadi Ahmar, and the Buqei'ah. The enclosures were
dated to the Chalcolithic by the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (Zertal
2005; 2008). They are included in this study even though no ascription
to the Chalcolithic was determined after they were revisited, and they
possibly also date to the EBA.
To clarify this issue it was decided to excavate a site with buildings
and courtyards similar to those of the region’s enclosures. This was
done in light of the lack of successfully dated isolated enclosures in
the areas of other excavations (Davidovich 2008). We decided to ex-
cavate the site at Elevation Point 167 (Zertal 2005: site 195) in Wadi
Ahmar, which includes courtyards and buildings. The courtyards at
the site are similar in shape to the isolated enclosures in our region
(e.g. the enclosures of Wadi Ahmar 3 and 'Urqan er-Rub, which are
located in the same wadi), and they are different from the courtyards
excavated by the author in the Chalcolithic and EB I settlement sites in
the same region. The excavation showed that this is a single-period site,
and the courtyards and buildings are part of the same functional unit.
The paucity of pottery and flint finds at the site was consistent with the
Chalcolithic/EB enclosures, and the only radiometric dating obtained
was a terminus ante quem of 2300 BCE. Hence, we were unsuccessful
in our attempt to establish a chronological link between the site and
the study period. Nevertheless, we substantiated the possibility that the
enclosures belonged to the EBA chronological horizon, and not to the
3
This region was not an outlying region during the periods the study addresses.
108 chapter six
Chalcolithic.
The excavations at Sheikh Diab 2 showed that the courtyards were
an integral part of the architecture in the EB I. Because of the impor-
tant role grazing played in the inhabitants’ economy, it seems that the
isolated enclosure, despite parallels to modern Bedouin life and the
population of the Jordan Valley in the Iron Age, was not a significant
component in the methods of ancient grazing. Like the situation in
the Chalcolithic, it seems that the nature of grazing in the region was
not one of long-term nomadism between distant regions; rather it was
done on a daily basis of going out from and returning to the dwell-
ing complexes.4 The movement of shepherds is also difficult to iden-
tify amongst the finds (e.g. caves instead of enclosures for corralling
the herds – this too has ethnographic parallels amongst the Bedouin
today5). Numerous studies, especially in the southern outlying regions
of Israel (detailed in Chapter 5), have tried to identify nomadism
amongst the archaeological finds, and dealt with models, mostly based
on ethnographic studies, in order to characterize the relations between
the nomadic and sedentary inhabitants in the periphery. All reached
the same conclusion regarding the difficulty in identifying nomadic
elements amongst the archaeological finds, and the distinction that the
relationship between nomad and sedentary was essentially the bound-
ary of the outlying region. The Jordan Valley, in the periods this study
deals with, was a centre and not a periphery,6 and only south of Jericho
did the area become an outlying region. This was also the situation in
regions in the southern part of Jordan (Henry 1992).
Open Sites
A total of 27 open sites that are ascribed to the period were found: only
four of these have a medium or higher level of probability. They are
4
An ethnographic parallel to this are the Bedouin living in the Dimona region,
who operate in a similar fashion (Eldar et al. 1992).
5
Today daily foraging is widely accepted among the Bedouin tribes of the Jordan
Valley (personal observation over the years), and during the hot months herds are often
seen taking shelter in the shade of natural caves. Long-term movement, due to seasonal
changes and the need to change grazing regions, exists year-round among some of
the residents. In these instances the Bedouin exchange one dwelling site with another
absolutely identical site on the Samarian slopes (They do not exchange dwellings in
enclosures or other alternatives: rather they migrate and build identical dwellings in
the new settlement region).
6
A similar picture emerges from analyses by Gilead (1992) in the Beer Sheva
Valley.
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period 109
divided into two groups: sherd scatters and encampment sites. The for-
mer was defined in this study as a dispersion of finds in a small area,
with no architectural remains. In this study encampment sites are scat-
ters of sherds with some of the following characteristics: far from settle-
ment centres; located along possible transit routes; far from sources of
water; multi-period encampment sites, etc.
Characteristics of open sites:
– Usually located far from the major settlement clusters and from
easily cultivated regions.
– Located in regions that are hard to reach, usually on a spur, saddle
or slope above wadis.
– No architecture.
– Very small sites (averaging 1,700 m2 in area).
– Paucity of finds.
Most of the encampment sites were multi-period, and the sherd scat-
ters single-period.
length of the northern bank of the wadi (Sites 26–29). While revisiting
the region (2008) hundreds of newly plundered caves were noted along
the Jebel Tammun cliff between 'Ain Shibli and north-east to Aqrabani-
yeh.
The northern bank of Wadi Far'ah (more than 5 km wide between
'Ain Shibli and Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh8) was probably one of the larg-
est cemeteries in the southern Levant in the EB, as well as afterwards.9
Another burial complex was discovered in Wadi Far'ah at Jelamet el-
Ahmar (A) (Site 38; Zertal 2008; site 178). Apart from the many tombs,
a special processional route was discovered that was in all likelihood
connected to the burial complex. It is difficult to link the processional
route to the EB I tombs, because numerous tombs dating to the IB were
found at the site, and it is likely that the complex actually belongs to that
period. The possible connection between these burial complexes and
the site at el-Khellaiyel (below), which overlooks them from the top of
Jebel Tammun is interesting.
Another remarkable architectural complex that resembles the
circular-built burial complexes of Bab edh-Dhra' (Harrison 2001) was
discovered at 'Iraq el-Hamrah (Site 44; Zertal 2008: site 189), but after
re-examining the site it seems that it was used as a dwelling, and not
for burial.
A plundered burial cave from the EB I (Tana Cave – Site 59) was
discovered on the slopes of the Samarian hills, near the sites of 'Ain
et-Tahtah and 'Ain Mta'a (Sites 54 and 58). We do not know if this is an
isolated cave, or part of a more extensive burial complex that belonged
to the large settlement at 'Ain Mta'a.
The main characteristics of the burial sites are:
– Multi-chamber shaft tombs with a vertical entrance (similar to
the burial style of the EB I at the Jericho10 and Bab edh-Dhra' sites
(Harrison 2001).
– Most are located on a gentle slope.
– Special finds that are absent from the surveys of settlement sites.
For example, grey burnished bowls that were found in most of
the funerary assemblages and at only one settlement site; red
burnished or trefoil amphoriskoi with a tall handle rising above
8
To this we must add the cemeteries discovered in the region of Tell Far'ah (North)
that were also part of the large burial complexes in the wadi.
9
The burial complex extended as far as the region of Tell Far'ah (North), where
three large cemeteries spread out around the tell were identified (Miroschedji 1993).
10
Most of the tombs at Jericho had only one chamber (Harrison 2001).
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period 111
the rim, which are present in most funerary assemblages, and are
rare at the other sites, etc. The absence of Um Hammad style pot-
tery from the funerary assemblages is surprising, since it was very
common at the settlement sites.
El-Khellaiyel (Site 24; Zertal 2008: site 148) is a rare example of a (prob-
able) cultic location, and possibly also for burial in the EB I. It is located
on a high peak, in the middle of the Jebel Tammun ridge, looking out
over the Wadi Far'ah valley and the settlement and burial complexes
there. At the site, which was mainly occupied in the EB I (but there
are also finds from the IB, MB IIb, and LB), is a prominent pyramid-
shaped hillock 6 m high and 25 m in diameter, above the cliff on the
southern slope of Jebel Tammun. Remains of ash and burnt bones were
identified on the hillock, which is a unique phenomenon not found
elsewhere in the southern Levant. Approximately 100 m west of the
hillock is a broad house (5 x 25 m) made of very large stones. The struc-
ture is probably related to the hillock located to the east, and is part of
the complex. The remote location, far from sources of water on one
hand, and the breathtaking view and ritual/funerary features on the
other, suggest that this is no ordinary settlement site, and it seems to
be a funerary structure, or of a cultic nature. The ceramic finds indicate
an EB I presence with a high level of probability, mainly because of the
decorated Um Hammad style ware dating from the later part of this
period.
The uniqueness of the site stems from its extraordinary architectural
characteristics, its location, and the presence of ashes and remains of
animal bones on the pyramidal hillock. Most of the finds from the EB
I were collected near the large building and the hillock; hence the con-
clusion that site was founded and used mainly in this period.
the dwelling complexes and their units, the economy, and society, etc.
(studies of the construction in general during this period were pub-
lished by Braun 1989 and Golani 1999, and a study of the EB II was
published by Ilan 2001).
Surprisingly enough in all of the ‘large and complex’ excavations that
were conducted on the tells in the region and its surroundings it was
difficult to put together an overall settlement picture, or even a whole
picture of a complete dwelling unit – as was the case at the excavations
of Bab edh-Dhra', Tell Far'ah (North), Tell Um Hammad, Tell esh-
Shuna (North), Tel Beth Yerah, etc.11
The settlement planning on the one hand, and the basic dwelling
unit: its design, size, construction style and contents on the other, re-
flect the society and economy of the indigenous population.
11
Parts of a large building ascribed to the EB Ib were discovered in the excava-
tions of Hebrew University expedition at Beth Shean (Mazar and Rotem 2009). In this
instance it is probably not a regular residential complex, rather a commercial-industrial
complex; thus it is not relevant to this discussion.
114 chapter six
Floors
The floors in the covered rooms were made of tamped earth, some-
times combined with crushed limestone. Some sections, which were
paved with stone, were apparently used as storage surfaces or for cook-
ing/working. There were no floors per se in the courtyard other than
the natural bedrock.
Roofs
The dwelling units were covered, but no organic material remains used
as a covering or means to support the roof were found. The uniform
width of the dwelling rooms (4 m) is intentional, and it was apparently
roofed with organic material, probably wood.
Area of Area of
Total area
Site Unit rooms courtyards
m2
m2 m2
Sheikh Diab 2 G 12 130 142
Sheikh Diab 2 I ? 200
Tell Um-Hammad Phase 13/3 EB Ib 20 ?
Bronze Ancien I (the
Tell el-Far'ah (North) very beginning of EB 20 ?
II)
Table 6.1. The areas of the EB I and EB II dwelling units in the study region and
the immediate vicinity.
Table 6.2. Comparison of the dwelling unit areas from the excavations of the
Chalcolithic site at Fazael, the EB I site at Sheikh Diab 2, and the EB II site at
Arad.
the adjoining rooms at Sheikh Diab 2 indicates some sort of change in
large rooms at the EB II sites were intended for maintaining and feed-
117
ing livestock in the winter. If this supposition is correct, then the lack of
open ones. Ilan (2001) argued that some of the small rooms near the
D E F G H I J K L M N O P
19 19
A
-133.41
# L309
W -133.76
L3
31 -133.81 COM 5
0
08
-134.55 -133.95
18 # 18
-134.66
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period
-135.53
L307
W
31
-135.04
1
-134.38
W31
-138.25 -137
16 -140.04
-138.64
.29
#
-136.68
-135.63 16
L325 -138.70 -137.13
-136.16
S lope
L305
6
-140.56 -141.03
-141.08 -136.83
W3
-137.16
L324 # -137.35
-137.83 L317 L319
-138.05 -136.60
-141.00 -138.00
L304
06
-136.73
-139.56 -138.00 -138.30 -137.25
-136.94
-136.75 Stone
ky
W326 -136.88
Slides
oc
W
W32
R
30
1
0
COM 3 COM 6
15 15
13
-137.34
-140.56 -139.04
W3
-139.95
-139.45
L314
L312 -137.86 -139.54
-140.11 -140.27 -139.00 -138.53 -137.90
-139.68
W -139.83
-139.93
32 -139.26
-140.69
0 -138.00
-140.29
14 L315 14
-139.14
-138.47
L149
B'
-141.63 -140.85
-139.90 -137.07 # -139.12
-140.75
-139.72 L130
#
-139.90 # L138 L144
-139.28
#
W
-139.55 -139.55
W146
-139.27 14
W128
-139.45
L171 -139.73 7
L127 L148 -138.96 COM 7
13 -139.25 -139.30 -139.75 13
0s
#
-140.08
12 L139
-139.35 -139.75
-140.34 -139.32
W
W L129 U11 L145
146n
# -140.25
-139.91 L157
-140.20 -140.14
W122 L137
L152
W120s
L101 L133
-140.27
L163 -140.50
-140.51 -140.56 #
-141.21
L153 L161 -141.76
L119
L172 -141.20
#
U12 L126 W170 -141.13
-140.28
12 L125 -141.23
-141.20 COM 1 -140.75 L169 L150 -140.74 12
W187
-140.75 -140.48
-141.25 -141.29
L103a -140.89 L140
-141.06 -140.45
W
L104 L118 L165
12 1
# -140.83 -141.10
U10 L136 -141.24 L168
L162
W159
L162#-141.92 L155
B
L107 L160 -141.68 L113 -141.20 -140.84
L115 W103 -141.49 L112
-141.18
-141.42
L156 L164
-141.80 # -141.22 #
L123 L141 -140.98 L166
8 0e L151
10
-140.97
12 -141.27
-141.18
11 W -141.25
L100 -141.26 -141.35 -141.22
-141.48
W 11
-141.27
L105 -141.25 -141.51 -141.11
-141.53 Unexcavated -141.87
-141.26
-141.87
2
13
-141.88
L106 L102 W L116
-141.57
-141.55
W L154
W
W110
#
1 L134
15
L117 20s
-141.77
-141.88 -142.32
8
-142.04
L131 -141.18 L33 -142.70
-141.83 Unexcavated
32 L37
Surface
-142.40
Unexcavated -141.83 -141.85 W Fossil L34
32 L135 L44
W1
-141.37
-142.54 -142.81
-141.62
-141.87
COM 2 W4 -142.49
5m
10 -142.10 -142.75
3 L41 -142.85 10
L143 L35
# L161 -142.85 L45
-142.44
-143.27
L40
W38
#
L142 L39 -142.44
-142.50 -142.09
-142.93
2
W4
9 9
0
A'
D E F G H I J K L M N O P
118 chapter six
To Beth Shean
205 205
1 Na h
a l Bez
eq
4 (Wa ash)
3 di Shu b
W ab i s
200
ad i Y 200
13 7
Zebabdeh 14
River J
Mehula
195
17
195
Wadi Malih
o rdan
Tubas
190 190
in
ufr j
24 Wadi K
i
185 2627 185
29 28
32 34 35
30
41 33 40
43
38 39
180
42 180
48
51 55
54 49 56
175
58 175
r qa
57 62
Ze
59
z
64
W
e
di
ad
65
Wa
iF
ar
'a
h
170 170
Majdal
Beni
Fadil
165 77 165
96 za
Fa e l
Wa
di 89 Wadi
River J
97 94 95 92 Ah
mar
160 98 160
or
an d
155 155
108 'Aujjeh
107
150 Unknown size 150
h
Up to 0.3 ha
jj e
'Au 0.3-1 ha
Wa di
1-3 ha
Larger than 10 ha
Nim r in
145 adi
WBoundary of the study 145
Modern village
Road
0 5 Wadi
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 6.8. Distribution of the EB I sites in the western part of Wadi Far'ah.
Note that most of the sites were located on the seam between the spurs and
the valley, so that all of the farmland remained available for cultivation (as is
the case today). The burial and cultic sites are located on the southern slopes
of Jebel Tammun.
region between the social units with their centre in Wadi Far'ah
and those in Jericho.
The main conclusions regarding spatial distribution are:
– The EB I sites had a tendency to group in settlement clusters.
– Water and land were the key factors in the selection of settlement
sites in this period.
– Three major settlement clusters were identified in the study re-
gion (the southern Beth Shean Valley, Wadi Far'ah, and Wadi
Fazael); whereas in each one of them there is a single site or block
of sites that was the focus of settlement in that cluster. Tel Shalem
was identified in the southern Beth Shean Valley; er-Rjjum and
Tell Far'ah (North) in Wadi Far'ah; and Khirbet Rahiyeh in Wadi
Fazael. There are usually several smaller settlements around them.
The settlement clusters are located anywhere between 20 and 40
km apart. This pattern, which seems to be a type of settlement
with tribal characteristics, was probably one of the causes of the
establishment of the fortified settlement in the EB Ib and EB II.
– The slopes of the Samarian hills were relatively densely populated
for ancient periods. Large sites were established near springs ('Ain
Mta'a, Khirbet Juraish, 'Ain Juraish, Sheikh Mazar, Khirbet Rahi-
yeh, 'Ain Duma, and 'Ain Rashash). Some became fortified at the
end of the period, or at the beginning of the next period (Khirbet
Juraish, Khirbet Rahiyeh), and others were abandoned during the
transition to the EB II, or at the start of that period ('Ain Mta'a,
'Ain Juraish, 'Ain Duma, and 'Ain Rashash). It is unclear whether
these sites were independent entities, or whether there was a con-
nection between them and the settlement clusters in Wadi Far'ah
(presumably), or in Wadi Fazael.
Topography
We noted a preference for location on the slopes and edges of the valley
(62.5% of all the sites and 55% of the settlement sites were established
on edge of the valley or on its slopes). The sites on level ground, which
the settlers preferred in the Chalcolithic period, were abandoned (only
4% of the sites were located on a plateau). The first tells were appar-
ently founded in this period (18% of the settlement sites were located
on multi-period tells).
Locations on spurs, in ravines, and on hilltops constitute just 21% of
all the sites and 21% of the settlement sites. Fortified sites were founded
with no obvious dependence upon topography (Tel Shalem is on a pla-
teau, er-Rjjum on a hilltop, and Tel Za'anuni is a tell on a spur).
Orientation
Orientation (the direction of the slope) was only defined when it could
be clearly identified, and sites that were located on level ground and
tells were not taken into account for this test. The results showed a
preference for southern and eastern directions: 69% of all the sites face
south or east, while 63% of the settlement sites did so. This figure is not
accidental, and is indicative of a conscious decision that was taken at
the time the site was established (see Chapter 5).
Conclusions
– Considerations concerning topography and orientation were
taken into account in establishing the sites.
– A location on the slopes and edges of the valley in the wadi flood
plains and along the wadis was preferred (e.g. Wadi Far'ah – Fig.
6.8). Possible reasons for this might be a desire to leave area avail-
able for cultivation, to keep a safe distance from the wadi channel
which was subject to flooding, the building material available on
the slopes, and the natural cleaning and drainage of the slopes.
There is a striking similarity between the location and that of the
Bedouin encampments in the Jordan Valley today.
– The sites situated on the plain were abandoned during this pe-
riod, and in their place the inhabitants began relocating to higher
regions that controlled the wadis, or to the first tells.13
13
The author disagrees with Schaub’s contention (1982) that the inhabitants’ move
to higher ground was due to security reasons. True, the EB I sites relocated to higher
126 chapter six
areas, but a thorough understanding of the sites clearly shows that the change in eleva-
tion was not enough to provide protection against an enemy, so there must have been
other considerations for this. The fortified sites of the EB II (some of which might have
been already fortified in the EB I) were located at a significantly higher elevation, hence
the considerations concerning defence and topographic exploitation were presumably
key factors.
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period 127
14
The use of data from surveys is fairly limited because of the difficulty in ascrib-
ing surface finds to a specific period with a proper degree of probability.
15
Some researchers bring forward the decrease in the consumption of pig meat to
the end of the Chalcolithic period (Conclusion in Rowan 1998: 55).
128 chapter six
Agricultural Crops
The main evidence is the sickle blades and silos, most of which were
discovered in the excavated sites and surveys. These indicate a change
in the EB I economy, and an increase in the importance of grain farm-
ing as opposed to grazing. Further evidence of this is the crushing and
grinding tools that were used in processing food, which were discov-
ered in the excavated sites and surveys alike. Presumably cattle were
used as work animals on the farms.
The prevalent agricultural crops were English wheat (emmer – Triti-
cum dicoccum), wheat (Triticum spp, 2 and 6 rows), barley (Hordeum
vulgare), legumes (lentils – Lens culinaris), flax (Linum usitatissimum),
and vetch (Vicia ervilia). The most common orchard crops were olives
(Olea europea) and vineyards (Vitis). The wild vegetation that was uti-
lized included tamarisk (Tamarix sp.), oak (Quercus sp.), pine (Pinus
halepensis), pennycress (Sinapis), hackberry (Prunus avium), jujube
(Ziziphus spina-christi), almonds (Prunus dulcis), and spiny burnet
(Poterium spinosum).
The plant varieties of the Chalcolithic and the EB I were extremely
similar. The difference between them is apparent in the widespread use
of several agricultural techniques that did not alter the biodiversity, but
did change the economy of the period. According to Philip (2001: 184)
the following techniques were either introduced or were more intensely
used: flood agriculture (also Mabry et al. 1996, and an opposing view
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period 129
Trade
Although no items of foreign provenance were found at Sheikh Diab 2
or Fazael 4, the period is known for active trading, and the Jordan Val-
ley has been referred to as “the backbone of exchange between northern
and southern Canaan” (Milevski 2011). According to Milevski the trade
relations of the Jordan Valley with the north of Israel were stronger
than the ties with the southern region, and Jericho was the regional
centre of control. Our study neither adds to nor detracts significantly
from this assertion.
Horwitz and Tchernov (1989) state that in every EB I site that was
excavated equine remains were discovered, particularly those of don-
keys. These were used, among other things, in the transportation of
goods (Ovadia 1992). Evidence of such trade is the Egyptian colonies
in Canaan, and the secondary administrative centres that were estab-
lished, mainly in relatively late phases of the EB I (e.g. Tell es-Sakhan,
which was an Egyptian administrative centre in Canaan, 'En Basor, Tel
Erani, the Tel Halif terrace [Miroschedji 2001; Gophna 1990; 1995b;
Amiran and van den Brink 2001; Amiran 1993; Kempinski 1992; Levy
et al. 1997; Alon and Yekutieli 1995; and additional information in
Braun 2005; Brandl 1992; Yekutieli 2007]).17 Further proof of trade is
the Egyptian serakhs that were found on storage vessels, mainly in the
south of Israel (van den Brink and Braun 2002; Schulman 1976; 1980,
16
The author disagrees with Philip on this issue because almost no metal tools
were found at the sites of the period (despite the fact they are easily recycled, it would
still be expected to find more such tools if they were used in the household).
17
It seems that the close ties with Egypt started at the beginning of the EB I, as
evidenced at the site of Taur Ikhbeineh (Oren and Yekutieli 1992).
130 chapter six
1989; Yeivin 1960; Amiran 1974; etc.). Canaanite finds from sites in
Egypt are also indicative of trade between the two regions. In all likeli-
hood the Canaanite exports to Egypt included mostly foodstuffs (Yeku-
tieli 1998), such as vineyard and olive products. It seems that bitumen
from the Dead Sea, close to the study region, was also traded (Connan
et al. 1992), as well as metal from the 'Arava. The produce was trans-
ported in sacks or EB I jars that were found at several Egyptian sites,
for example at Maadi (Rizkana and Seeher 1987), Minshat Abu Omar
(Kroeper 1988) etc., and Kroeper (1989) for more details. Imports from
Egypt to this region probably included mostly luxury items (e.g. Nile
shells and carnelian beads18 discovered in tombs at Tell Far'ah [North]
– de Vaux and Steve 1949 and at Jericho – Kenyon 1981: fig. 55: 1E).
Egyptian items were found in the Jordan Valley at Tel Beth Yerah in
the north (Brandl 1992) and Abu al-Kharaz and the tombs at Bab edh-
Dhra' in Jordan (Yekutieli 2007).
Copper and bronze were exported from the Sinai and the 'Arava,
where they were mined and cast, and from there marketed throughout
the southern Levant. The fundamental change in the metal trade from
the Chalcolithic period, is the standardization in the production and
extensive marketing to the entire southern Levant (Ilan and Sebbane
1989; Shalev 1994).
There is also some evidence of trade with Anatolia and the Orontes
Valley region; for example, 'En Esur (Yannai and Braun 2001). However,
it is surprising that there is almost no evidence of trade with Mesopota-
mia (despite the possibility of indirect influence in the field of glyptics).
No evidence of inter-regional commercial ties has been found so
far in surveys and excavations in this region. It seems that these ties
existed, but have still not been identified in the meagre archaeological
finds from this region.
in Egypt, possibly during the reign of Aha and Djer (a discussion of the
chronology and history of the period is in Braun 1996). Some scholars
have reconstructed (similarly to our reconstruction) a limited settle-
ment process at the beginning of the period, significant growth in the
EB Ib, and a decline in the process at the beginning of the EB II (e.g.
Joffe 1993). Others have also discerned population migrations inside
and outside the region (e.g. Portugali and Gophna 1993). Joffe (1991)
assumed that the source of the development in the EB Ib was the trade
with the Egyptian market, and that the decline at the end of the pe-
riod stemmed from a diminished Egyptian interest in the Canaanite
economy, and the transfer of the commercial focus to Tyre. However,
there is no evidence of intensive trade between Egypt and Canaan in
the EB I, and therefore this supposition is hardly plausible. Greenberg
(2003) has suggested that the change was not uniform throughout the
southern Levant, and that each region should be examined separately.
For example, he viewed the abandonment of Megiddo and Beth Shean
to be a result of socio-political changes that stemmed from a change
in the nature of the settlement in the transition to the EB II, and their
geographic location on the margins of the main centre of power of the
EB II that was situated in the northern Jordan Valley (as manifested by
the sites at Dan, Hazor and Beth Yerah).
In the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria about a third
(31.5%) of the EB I settlements continued into the next period. In
contrast, the other two-thirds (68.5%) were abandoned. In the EB II a
major crisis occurred in the scope of settlement, declining from 82 sites
in the EB I to just 24 sites in the EB II.
A destruction layer dating to the end of the EB I was identified in
a number of excavated sites close to the study region; for example, at
Tel Kitan (Eisenberg 1993), Bab edh-Dhra' IV (Rast and Schaub 2003),
and Tel Yaqush (Esse 1993). The fortified settlement at Tel Shalem was
deserted during the transition to the EB II, or in its initial phases, and
the importance of Tell Um Hammad diminished in the late EB I. The
evidence regarding Jericho is inconclusive: Rast and Schaub (2003)
contend that there is a destruction layer in Phase L (EB Ib), which the
excavators did not identify. It seems that the settlement at Tell el-Far'ah
(North) continued, as did that at Beth Yerah.
Major changes occurred in the southern Jordan Valley at the end of
the EB I and the beginning of the EB II. Almost all the main settlements
were deserted or destroyed, and the importance of others diminished
significantly. The process that transpired to the west was just the op-
132 chapter six
Zebabdeh 13
117 14
River J
Mehula
195 195
Wadi Malih
o rdan
Tubas
190 190
frin
Wadi Ku
ji
185 185
34
36
42 38 43
180
39 180
47
54 49 51
175 175
r qa
Ze
62
W
64
ad
e
di
iF
Wa
ar
ah
'
170 170
Majdal
Beni
Fadil
165 77 165
96 az
ael
Wa d i F Wad
River J
iA
160 98 h ma
r 160
or
dan
155 155
'Aujjeh
150 150
h
jj e
'Au
Wa di
i Nim r in
145 W ad 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
posite – the settlements of the desert fringes and the eastern foothills
of Samaria continued to exist, and Tell el-Far'ah (North), Tell Za'anuni,
Khirbet Juraish, and Khirbet Rahiyeh reached the height of their power
during this period. This is in keeping with the research of Portugali and
Gophna (1993), who argue that during the transition from the EB I to
the EB II there was a decline in the population of the entire country,
except in the hill country, where the number of settlements and size
of the population were on the increase (there are signs of local migra-
tion from the valleys, the Shephelah and the coastal plain to the central
ridge).
An analysis of the reasons for this is difficult, in the absence of his-
torical sources. It was not proved, for example, that the destruction
levels at the end of the period were man-made, and were not caused by
a natural disaster of wide-ranging impact such as an earthquake. Most
of the data support the first conclusion: not all the settlements were
destroyed simultaneously (some prior to the transition to the EB II, and
some at the beginning of that period), and some settlements near the
destroyed sites were not affected at all.
The social structure in which the new EB II centres of power were
established and based, would seem to suggest that there was a struggle
amongst them during the transition between the periods. For example,
in the northern part of the study region the importance of the site at Tel
Shalem diminished and it was abandoned, and the hegemony appar-
ently passed to Beth Yerah. In the central Jordan Valley the focus was
apparently at Tell el-Far'ah (North), perhaps because er-Rjjum became
weaker. In the eastern Jordan Valley the importance of the site at Tell
Um Hammad decreased, and the local hegemony passed to the nearby
fortified settlement at Tell Abu Zigan (Helms et al. 1992).
The abandonment of the Jordan Valley started at the beginning of
the EB II, and the regional hegemony passed to the foothills of Samaria
and the hill country, which became the main centres of power.
CHAPTER SEVEN
Introduction
This chapter compares the settlement pattern in the two periods on the
two sides of the Jordan. The area in the east, corresponding with the
western Jordan Valley, was examined: from the southern Beth Shean
Valley in the north (the Wadi Yabis drainage basin in the east), to the
regions corresponding to Jericho in the south (the vicinity of Teleilat
Ghassul north of the Dead Sea), and in the east to the slopes of the hills
of Gilead and the Jordanian mountain ridge.
Despite the topographical similarity between the two regions, they
differ in two respects geographically: the area of the eastern valley is
approximately six times greater than its neighbour to the west, with
considerably more land available for cultivation; and the eastern valley
is also richer in sources of water that are fed by the precipitation that
falls on the mountain ridge in Jordan.
Seemingly one would think this would indicate a much richer settle-
ment in the east, but there are two elements that Man is responsible for
which prevent the comparison:
1. Unlike the western Jordan Valley, where the same researchers
have surveyed the area for close to 20 years, only regional surveys
have been conducted in the eastern part. Most of the data were
gathered from old and new excavations and surveys, the resolu-
tion of which is not always known.1
2. Numerous sites from these periods were excavated in the east-
1
See for example the large differences in the number of sites that were discovered
in the Jordan Valley between Glueck’s surveys in the 1940s, those performed in the
same region in the 1970s (Joint Survey Project), and those that have been conducted
in recent decades (a partial list appears in Chapter 3, History of the Archaeological
Research). See also Philip’s attitude (2001: 189) regarding the quality of the surveys in
Jordan, and as a result of this the difficulty in understanding the settlement pattern in
the region, and Schaub’s attitude (1982) about the conclusions that can be drawn from
the meagre information in Jordan.
comparison of the settlement pattern 135
ern valley. This stems from its centrality and the importance of
the valley in the Kingdom of Jordan, whereas the western Jordan
Valley has almost always been considered a marginal region in
modern history (from both settlement and research standpoints).
Hence the Jordanian side of the valley is rich in excavations and poor
in comprehensive surveys, and the situation on the western side of the
valley is just the opposite. Because of the importance of surveys for our
purposes, the information from the other side of the Jordan should be
considered as incomplete, and this has implications on the results.
survey was conducted in the eastern Jordan Valley – the Joint Survey
Project (Ibrahim et al. 1976; Yassine et al. 1988). This survey doubled
the number of known sites, and for the first time clearly identified the
settlement pattern characteristic of the Chalcolithic – locations situated
along the wadis descending from the mountains to the River Jordan.
Following the Joint Survey Project, researchers began conducting other
high-resolution surveys in the 1980s along some of the wadis. A partial
list of the principal publications from the relevant surveys carried out
in Jordan is: Wadi el-Arab (Kerestes 1977/78), Wadi Ziglab (Banning
et al. 1989), Wadi Yabis (Mabry and Palumbo 1988), Wadi Kufrinji
(Greene 1986), Wadi ez-Zarqa (Gordon and Villiers 1986; Kerestes
1977/78), Wadi Hasa (Papalas et al. 1997), and the vicinity of Deir Ala
(van der Steen 2004). Two of these wadis currently being surveyed or
awaiting final publication are a comprehensive survey in the Wadi ez-
Zarqa (Kaptij, pers. comm.), and a sample survey of caves along some
of wadis descending from the Jordanian plateau to the Jordan Valley
(Lovell, pers. comm.).
In the past two decades numerous excavations have been carried out
in this region; the most important of them from the Chalcolithic period
being Tell Abu Hamid (Dollfus and Kafafi 1993; Dollfus et al. 1988),
Pella and Jabel Sartaba (Bourke et al. 1998; Lovell 2000), al-Khawarij
(Lovell et al. 2006), and the renewed excavation at Teleilat Ghassul
(Bourke and Lovell 2004; Bourke 2002; Bourke et al. 2000, 2001; Lovell
2001; Seaton 2008).
The important excavations from the EB I are Tell Um Hammad
(Helms et al. 1992), Tell esh-Shuna north of the study region (Gus-
tavson-Gaube 1985; 1987; Baird and Philip 1994), Tell el-Handaquq
(North) (Mabry 1989; Mabry et al. 1996), Tell el-Handaquq (South)
(Chesson 1998), Kataret es-Samra (Leonard 1989), Jebel Abu Thawwab
(Douglas and Kafafi 2000), Tell es-Sa'idiyeh (Tubb et al. 1997), and Tell
Abu al-Kharaz (Fischer 1997; 2006).
The major problem with this impressive collection of excavations is
that only a few of them are complete scientific publications, and most
of the information has been conveyed verbally or in short articles and
synopses that do not provide an entire picture of the site.
The site data from the surveys and archaeological excavations in Jor-
dan are compiled in the Jordan Antiquities Database and Information
System (JADIS). Palumbo (1994) published data that provide us with
a general picture of the locations of the various sites in the region, and
allow comparison with the data from the western Jordan Valley.
comparison of the settlement pattern 137
Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to present the characteristics of the ceramic
finds from the surveys and excavations. Although most of the study
deals with the spatial settlement pattern, there is significance to the
many pottery finds that are also connected to the settlement pattern
and what we determine from it.
In this chapter we will make a preliminary attempt at offering a re-
gional ceramic typology based primarily on surveys, including general
remarks about the pottery of the study region in the different periods.
Um Hammad ware, which is a regional group unique to the study area
in the EB I, will also be discussed.
level of probability were also included, on the condition that they are known from other
regions, and are chronologically well-classified.
2
The two typologies have been separated because of the difference between the
pottery data from the survey and the excavations, and because the excavations at the
Fazael valley sites are still going on, and the final typology has not been completed for
each site.
144 chapter eight
sul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.31: 6), Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002: fig. 4.1:
4) and Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz 2004: fig. 3.2: 3).
Type B1b (Fig. 8.1: 3–4): a deep bowl with straight sides everted near
the rim. The rim is plain or sharp. It is usually not slipped, yet some-
times a slip appears in the form of a red stripe on the inside or outside
of the rim. The bowl occurs in various diameters ranging from 10 to 20
cm. This type of bowl is uncommon in the southern Jordan Valley, but
it appears at other Chalcolithic sites throughout the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.18: 24, 34), Shoham
(North) (Commenge 2005: fig. 6.10: 1–5), Gerer (Gilead and Goren
1995: fig. 4.3: 1), Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz 2004: fig. 3.2: 12) and
Tel Te'o (Eisenberg et al. 2001: fig. 6.1: 9).
Type B1c (Fig. 8.1: 5): a deep bowl with straight sides. The rim is
plain, or sharp, usually with a red slipped stripe on the inside or out-
side of the rim, and the outside of the vessel is occasionally slipped
red. The bowl occurs in different diameters ranging from 7 to 15 cm
(the larger type, which is common in Chalcolithic assemblages in other
regions of the country, was not found). This bowl is quite prevalent in
the southern Jordan Valley and at many Chalcolithic sites throughout
the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.19: 8, 10–11), Teleilat
Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.31: 1, 5), Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002:
fig. 4.1: 2) and Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 6: 23–25).
Type B2 (Fig. 8.1: 6–7): a flat bowl with straight sides and a plain or
sharp rim. It frequently occurs with a red stripe on the inside of the rim
and less frequently on the outside. This is a large bowl with an average
diameter of 25 cm. This type of bowl is uncommon in the southern
Jordan Valley, but it appears at many Chalcolithic sites throughout the
country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.19: 17–18), Teleilat Ghas-
sul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.31: 3), Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig.
6.12: 2), and Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 7: 11).
Type B3 (Fig. 8.1: 8): a very flat bowl with straight sides (platter-
like) and a rim that is usually plain. It is usually undecorated, and has
an average diameter of 30 cm. This type of bowl is uncommon in the
southern Jordan Valley, but appears at Chalcolithic sites throughout the
country.
Parallels: 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 12), Beer Sheva (Conten-
son 1956: fig. 7: 5) and additional parallels in Garfinkel 1998.
Type B4 (Fig. 8.1: 9): a small curved bowl/cup with incurved sides
the pottery 145
Figure 8.1. Types of Chalcolithic period bowls – southern Jordan Valley and
desert fringes of Samaria.
the pottery 147
Figure 8.2. Types of large Chalcolithic bowls, kraters and basins – southern
Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
148 chapter eight
Figure 8.5. Other common types from the Chalcolithic period – southern
Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
154 chapter eight
of the Chalcolithic, and are not just a phenomenon specific to the EB.
Ledge handles, usually on holemouth jars, were discovered in the sur-
vey and excavations (particularly at Fazael 2). The ledge handles of the
Chalcolithic are small, compared to the large and intricate handles of
the following period.
Chalices/pedestalled bowls (Fig. 8.5: 10–12): These occur in ceramic
and basalt alike. The most common type is the fenestrated chalice
which is often adorned with a rope ornamentation where the bowl is
connected to the pedestal.
Churns (Fig. 8.5: 13): Quite surprisingly, very few churns were dis-
covered during the course of the survey and excavations.
Type B1b (Fig. 8.6: 3–4): a flat bowl with straight sides and sharp
or plain rim. It is usually slipped red on the inside and outside, and
has an average diameter of 10 cm. This vessel appears in EB I funerary
assemblages in the study region, and is also found at other EB I sites in
the southern Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.32: 19; 4.66: 1) EB Ia,
Ashkelon Afridar (Golani 2004: fig. 22: 3); (Braun and Gophna 2004:
fig.17: 4) EB Ia.
Type B2a (Fig. 8.6: 5): a deep curved bowl with a plain, flat or bev-
elled rim that is sometimes thickened. It is usually undecorated, and
has an average diameter of 25 cm. The bowl is quite common in the
study region, as well as at other EB I sites in the southern Levant.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 212: 17) EB Ib,
Jericho (Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig. 34: 7, 21–22) and at Bab edh-
Dhra' (Rast and Schaub 2003: fig. 7.3: 1, 5) EB Ib.
Type B2b (Fig. 8.6: 6–7): a deep bowl with upright, somewhat curved
sides, and a plain, flat or bevelled rim that is sometimes thickened. It is
usually undecorated, but sometimes there is a slightly raised decoration
(reminiscent of a lug handle) on the body. It has an average diameter
of 20 cm, and is common in the study region and at other EB I sites in
the Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.34: 15; 4.55: 1, 7) EB
Ia-b, Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 12) EB Ib, and Nizzanim (Yeku-
tieli 2000: fig. 8.3: 11) EB Ia.
Type B2c (Fig. 8.6: 8): a deep curved bowl with slightly inverted sides
and a folded-in rim. It is usually undecorated, and has an average di-
ameter of 30 cm. The bowl is common in the study region, and is also
found at other EB I sites in the southern Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai 2006: fig. 4.35: 8, 22) EB Ia, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.2: 27–28) EB Ib, and Jericho (Kenyon and Holland
1982: fig. 35: 16).
Type B3 (Fig. 8.6: 9): a flat bowl with curved sides, a ledge rim, and
an average diameter of 12 cm. It is uncommon in the study region, but
is present at other EB I sites in the Southern Levant.
Parallels: Jebel Abu Thawwab (Douglas and Kafafi 2000: fig. 6.5:
6), Nizzanim (Yekutieli 2000: fig. 8.2: 2) EB Ia, and Khirbat Ilin Tahtit
(Braun 1996: fig. v.c.11: 5).
Type B4 (Fig. 8.6: 10): the most common type of bowl, curved with a
sharp or plain rim. It is usually undecorated, and has an average diam-
eter of 14 cm. It is also fairly common at other EB I sites in the southern
Figure 8.6. Types of EB I bowls – southern Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
the pottery 157
Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.33: 11–15; 4.52: 10–11)
EB Ia-b, Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 1) EB Ib, and Ashkelon Afri-
dar (Khalaily 2004: fig. 6: 4) EB Ia.
Type B5 (Fig. 8.6: 11–12): a bowl belonging to the Um Hammad fam-
ily. It is very common, especially in Wadi Far'ah. The vessel is curved
with a straight, ledge-like or bevelled rim. There are usually rope orna-
mentations on the body of the bowl. It has an average diameter of 22
cm.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 223: 11) EB Ib.
Type B6 (Fig. 8.6: 13–14): a knobbed bowl/chalice, grey-burnished.
It is rare, and appears primarily in funerary assemblages (the cemeter-
ies of Wadi Far'ah). The bowl is curved and the rim is folded out. It is
slipped grey, and decorated with knobs around the middle of the ves-
sel’s circumference. It is very common at numerous sites in the south-
ern Levant, and especially in the northern valleys (usually in the EB Ia).
A bowl identical to this does appear infrequently in the study region,
but instead of a grey slip it is slipped red.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.49: 3–10) EB Ia, Tell Um
Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 216: 5, 8) and Tell esh-Shuna (Con-
tenson 1960: fig. 9: 2).
and a generally round outline. The rim is thickened, flat and bevelled
and ledge-like, usually protruding diagonally from the outline of the
body. Rope ornamentations appear on the body of the vessel, and oc-
casionally on the rim itself. It ranges from 25 to 60 cm in diameter. It
sometimes occurs in a plain form, which does not belong to the Um
Hammad family (with no rope decoration, and the texture of the clay is
different). It is fairly common in the study region, particularly in Wadi
Far'ah.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.71: 11) EB Ia, does not
belong to the Um Hammad family.
Type K1d (Fig. 8.7: 8–9): an Um Hammad krater with upright sides
and a generally vertical outline. The rim is plain, flat or bevelled, and
sometimes ledge-like. Rope ornamentations appear on the body of the
vessel. It ranges from 25 to 55 cm in diameter. Sometimes this krater
appears in a plain form which does not belong to the Um Hammad
family (the texture of the clay is different). It is rare in the study region,
and appears mainly in Wadi Far'ah, but exists (not in the Um Hammad
form) at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.36: 6) EB Ia, not in the
Um Hammad form, and Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.15: 18) EB Ib,
not in the Um Hammad form.
Type K2 (Fig. 8.7: 10): a deep krater with relatively upright sides,
and a plain or everted rim that forms a step, which usually does not
extend beyond the line of the body of the vessel. This krater is usually
undecorated, and has an average diameter of 35 cm. It is rare in the
study region, but does appear at other EB I sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.53: 2) EB Ib, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 17) EB Ib, and 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 16:
9).
Type K3 (Fig. 8.7: 11): a deep krater with diagonal sides and a folded-
out rim that extends from the line of the body. It is usually undecorated,
and has an average diameter of 20 cm. It is uncommon in the study
region, but does appear at other EB I sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.35: 7) EB Ia, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.4: 13) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004: fig.
6: 8) EB Ia, and 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 16: 10) EB Ia.
Type K4 (Fig. 8.7: 12): a deep holemouth krater with a round outline
and thickened rim. It is usually decorated with a rope-like ornamenta-
tion near the rim and has an average diameter of 30 cm. It is fairly
common in the study region, and also appears at other EB I sites in the
160 chapter eight
country.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 254: 2), Yiftah'el
(Braun 1996: fig. v.c.1.c:7 – Type 56) EB Ia, and Jericho (Kenyon and
Holland 1982: fig. 39: 25).
Type K5 (Fig. 8.7: 13): a large shallow krater with slightly curved
diagonal sides. The rim is hammer-like, folded-in, and extends inward
from the body of the vessel. It is usually undecorated, and has an aver-
age diameter of 45 cm. The krater is rare in the study region, but does
appear at other EB I sites in the country. This type already appears in
Chalcolithic assemblages in the study region and also continues into
the EB II.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.35: 6, 23) EB Ia, Beth
Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.12: 20) EB Ib, and Tell Far'ah (North) (de
Vaux and Steve 1948: fig. 6: 21) EB Ib.
4.2: 4) EB Ia.
Type H1c (Fig. 8.8: 3–4): a holemouth jar with a barrel-like form and
a sharp and inverted rim with an average diameter of 25 cm. It usually
has an incised decoration of short stripes on or below the rim. It is
common in the study region, and appears at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.48: 1; 4.55: 8) EB Ia-b,
without the incised decoration, 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 22: 8) EB
Ia, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 146: 1) EB Ia.
Type H2a (Fig. 8.8: 5): a holemouth jar with a barrel-like form and a
plain thickened, bevelled or round rim with an average diameter of 25
cm. It is common in the study region, and also appears at other sites in
the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.56: 1–3; 4.69: 2) EB Ia-b,
Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.7: 5) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Braun
and Gophna 2004: fig. 20: 5) EB Ia, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al.
1992: figs. 143: 5, 6; 169: 2, 6) EB Ia, and Bab edh-Dhra' (Schaub and
Rast 2000: fig. 4.5: 13–14) EB Ib.
Type H2b (Fig. 8.8: 6): a holemouth jar with a narrow form and a
sharp thickened or plain rim with an average diameter of 25 cm. It
is common in the study region, and also appears at other sites in the
country.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 141: 2) EB Ia, and
Tell esh-Shuna (Contenson 1960: fig. 11: 1) EB Ia.
Type H2c (Fig. 8.8: 7): a very narrow holemouth jar with a thickened
bevelled rim and an average diameter of 20 cm. It is rare in the study
region, but does appear at other EB I sites in the country.
Parallels: Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.7: 12) EB Ib, Beth Yerah
(Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 14) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004:
fig. 7: 11) EB Ia, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 155: 12)
EB Ib.
Type H3 (Fig. 8.8: 8): a small narrow holemouth jar with a flat, bev-
elled inverted rim with an average diameter of 16 cm. The vessel is rare
in the study region, but does appear at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.43: 10) EB Ia, Tell Um
Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: figs. 143: 5–6; 170: 6–7) and Jericho (Ke-
nyon and Holland 1982: fig. 39: 9).
Type H4 (Fig. 8.8: 9–13): various size holemouth jars belonging to
the Um Hammad family (rim diameter 15–40 cm). Most have a barrel-
like form and bevelled rims. The Um Hammad type of rope decoration
usually appears on the rim and body. These are common only in the
162 chapter eight
study region, and are not found elsewhere in the southern Levant.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms 1987: fig. 9: 2; Helms et al. 1992:
figs. 162; 234: 1–3) EB Ib.
Type H5 (Fig. 8.8: 14–16): a holemouth jar with a barrel-like form
and a thickened and rounded rim with a thin ridge. It has an average
rim diameter of 28 cm. It is very common in the study region, and also
appears at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.44: 27; 4.54: 8) EB Ia-b,
Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 13) EB Ib, 'En Shadud (Braun 1985:
fig. 22: 3–6) EB Ia, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 158:
2–5) EB Ib.
Type H6 (Fig. 8.8: 17): a small holemouth jar with a barrel-like form
and a flat ridged rim with an average diameter of 14 cm. There is usu-
ally an incised decoration or rope ornamentation on the rim. The vessel
is rare in the study region, but does appear at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.44: 13; 4.46: 2) EB Ia,
Tell esh-Shuna (Contenson 1960: fig. 11: 4) EB Ia, Jericho (Kenyon and
Holland 1982: fig. 40: 5) and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig.
148: 1).
Type H7 (Fig. 8.8: 18): a holemouth jar with a channelled rim with an
average diameter of 28 cm. It forms a kind of thin ridge at the top of the
vessel’s rim. The type is common in the study region, and also appears
at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.44: 2) EB Ia, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.7: 9) EB Ib, and Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004:
fig. 7: 10) EB Ia.
Type H8 (Fig. 8.8: 19): a barrel-like holemouth jar with an inverted
rim with an average diameter of 20 cm. It is rare in the study region,
but does appear at other sites in the country. This type also appears in
Chalcolithic assemblages in the study region (Type H3b of the Chalco-
lithic, Fig. 8.3).
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.42: 15–17) EB Ia, Qiryat
Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.6: 2–3) EB Ib, Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig.
2.13: 20) EB Ib, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 153: 1–8)
EB Ia.
Type H9 (Fig. 8.8: 20): a barrel-like holemouth jar with a very thick
flat rim. It has an average diameter of 16 cm and forms a kind of thick-
ened neck for the vessel. It is rare in the study region, but does appear
at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.46: 9, 12; 4.58: 14) EB Ia,
Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 23) EB Ib, Tell Um Hammad (Helms
the pottery 165
et al. 1992: fig. 147: 3, 8) and Beth Shean (Braun 2004: fig. 3.11: 8).
vessels.
Chalices/pedestalled bowls (Figure 8.10: 11): these were found only in
ceramic. The most popular type was the fenestrated chalice.
Chalcolithic
The holemouth jars are the most common vessels, of which the hole-
mouth jar with a narrow body and plain rim is common (Type H1, Fig.
8.3). This vessel constitutes approximately half of the vessels identified
in the surveys and excavations.
1. Other frequent vessels are bowls with straight sides and a red
slipped stripe on the rim (Types B1, B2, Fig. 8.1), kraters with a
straight or diagonal ledge rim (Types K1–K3, Fig. 8.2) and jars
with a small flaring rim (Type J2, Fig. 8.4).
2. The following types are almost completely absent from the assem-
blages:
a. Cornet (except for a single item from the Fazael 2 excavations,
and items discovered at Tell Sheikh Diab and in Mellaart’s ex-
cavation at Jiftlik). In addition, the use of this vessel diminishes
north of Teleilat Ghassul (where the cornet is very common).
b. Figurines – although an area of about 400 m2 was excavated,
and dozens of Chalcolithic sites were surveyed, no figurines
of any kind were found. It is difficult to assume that these are
almost completely absent from the study region, and they are
probably concentrated in cultic complexes that have not yet
been discovered, reinforcing the idea of public practice rather
than a household one.
3. Lug handles and loop handles are extremely common, but ledge
handles, which were previously considered a hallmark of just
the EBA, already begin appearing in the Chalcolithic. The ledge
handles of the Chalcolithic period that appear on large storage
vessels are small and horizontal, and are sometimes decorated
with thumb impressions. These are reminisent of the PN and
early Chalcolithic pottery traditions.
4. Slip and Decoration – contrary to popular opinion only a very
small minority of the vessels are decorated or slipped (the slip ap-
pears on about 2% of the assemblage that was examined, and there
172 chapter eight
4
By Y. Goren, Tel Aviv University.
the pottery 173
EB I
1. The most common type is the holemouth jar, constituting more
than half of the vessels in the surveys and excavations. Especially
common are the holemouth jars with an oblate/barrel-like body
(Types H1, H2a, Fig. 8.8) and those with a ridge (Type H5, Fig.
8.8).
2. Also common are curved bowls (Types B2, B4, Fig. 8.6), kraters
with a straight rim, especially in the Um Hammad style (Types
K1a–K1c, Fig. 8.7), jars with a tall neck and flaring rim (Type J2b,
Fig. 8.9) and jars with an everted rim (Types J2a, J4a, Fig. 8.9).
3. The region is especially characterized by Um Hammad pottery
ware (see below).
4. Unlike other parts of the southern Levant, and contrary to the
belief that the EB I assemblage is poor, there are relative many
varieties of types. The number of types is greater than that of the
Chalcolithic period, which is thought to have a more diverse ma-
terial culture. This was checked in the totality of surveyed sites
and in the number of types at each site. The difference in the va-
riety of bowls and kraters is particularly conspicuous.
5. The following types are almost completely absent from the survey
and excavation assemblages:
a. Line Grouped Painted Ware: only two such items were found:
one in a survey at Tana Cave, and the other in the excavation at
Sheikh Diab 2. These vessels, mainly characteristic of the south
of the country (Amiran 1969: 49), appear in small numbers
in Jordan at Tell esh-Shuna (Leonard 1992: pl. 12: 7), in large
numbers at Jericho (Kenyon and Holland 1983: figs. passim),
and at 'Ai in the EB II (Callaway 1980). The latter are close to
our study region.
b. Only a few red burnished vessels appear, mainly in the funer-
ary assemblages.
c. Grey Burnished Ware/Esdraelon Ware, characteristic of the EB
I in the north of the country, appears in the study region almost
exclusively in the burial assemblages in Wadi Far'ah. We should
mention that these vessels were discovered in the Hasmonean
palaces in Jericho (Pritchard 1958: pl. 37), which is not a burial
site and is located to the south, as well as at Tell Far'ah (North)
(de Vaux and Steve 1947: fig. 2: 12). Such vessels were also dis-
covered in Jordan, for example at Tell Um Hammad (Leonard
174 chapter eight
1992: pl. 24: 1–5) and at Tell esh-Shuna (Leonard 1992: pl. 8:
1–2). The infrequency of these vessels seems to indicate that
the study region is the southern edge of their distribution. Pe-
trographic analyses of two of the knobby grey burnished bowls
discovered in the Manasseh Hill Country Survey in the cem-
eteries of Wadi Far'ah at el-Maqbarah (Site 27) and Maqbarat
en-Nuseriyyeh (Site 26), showed that the raw material is in-
digenous. It was collected at the Lower Cretaceous outcrops
that also exist in Wadi Far'ah itself. Therefore, despite its being
the southern distribution boundary, the vessels were produced
in local workshops in eastern Samaria (see similar results of
tests conducted by Goren on vessels from Tell Far'ah (North)
and from the site at Aqrabaniyeh – Goren 1990). The vessel
was primarily made as a funerary offering, but it is also found
in small numbers in domestic assemblages at Tell Um Ham-
mad and Tell Far'ah (North). The only type of grey burnished
bowl whose only provenance is the cemeteries of Tell Far'ah
(North) and Aqrabaniyeh is called ‘Wright’s Type 2’,5 and it was
not found in other funerary assemblages in the region (other
burial sites in Wadi Far'ah and Qa'un). Hence this is appar-
ently a micro-localized phenomenon that is rare in the study
region in particular, and in the country in general (as opposed
to parallel studies that attribute importance to this type, despite
its being found at just two sites: e.g. Louhivuori 1988: 309, and
Milevski 2011: chapter 3). This phenomenon substantiates the
possibility of local production of grey burnished bowls in Wadi
Far'ah.
d. Egyptian style vessels characteristic of the south of the country.
e. Unique vessels that were found at Bab edh-Dhra' that are char-
acteristic east of the Dead Sea and in the northern 'Arava.
f. Folded ledge handles of the EB I in the south of the country
(although such vessels were found in Herodian Jericho, south
of the study region: Pritchard 1958: pl. 29: 4–5).
g. Bow rim pithoi of the EB I in the north of the country.
h. Bowls with an omphalos base were discovered only in the
burial assemblages in Wadi Far'ah. Their major concentration
was found at Tell Far'ah (North). Their presence in burial as-
5
Two types of this vessel are known: a bowl with a flattened base and a fenestrated
chalice (both are slipped but not burnished, unlike the other types of this family). Ac-
cording to Wright (1958) this type is characteristic of EB Ia.
the pottery 175
treated.
2. At 'Ein Hilu red slip (5.2% of the finds – mainly as a line on bowl
rims) was much more common than the plastic decoration (0.4%).
3. At Sheikh Diab 2 the frequencies of plastic decorations and slip
were similar (2.1% and 1.9% respectively). The most decorated
vessel was the holemouth jar, which in the Chalcolithic sites was
usually not decorated.
4. The rope ornamentation was the common plastic decoration at
the Chalcolithic sites; whereas in the EB I incised diagonal stripes
on or near the rim, which did not exist in the Chalcolithic, was the
prevalent decoration.
5. A red slipped stripe on the rim that was common at 'Ein Hilu,
and to a lesser extent at Fazael 2, does not occur at Sheikh Diab 2,
where the complete slip of the vessel was prevalent.
These data show great changes in decorative styles between the periods.
A check of the typological continuity raises the following points:
1. The ‘V-shaped’ bowl occurred at the three sites, but was signifi-
cantly more frequent in the Chalcolithic sites.
2. The curved or hemispherical bowls occurred at the three sites, but
increased in frequency as the Chalcolithic progressed.
3. Jars with flared rims occurred at the three sites, but were more
common at Fazael 2 and Sheikh Diab 2.
4. A wide variety of holemouth jars characterized the three sites.
The most unusual phenomenon was the relatively narrow body at
'Ein Hilu and the widening of the upper part of the vessel as the
Chalcolithic progressed.
These data show that the main types in the different period assem-
blages also continued in the subsequent periods, and presumably there
was morphological continuity between the periods on a macro level,
and on a micro level changes were adopted and consumer priorities
changed in each period.
In addition, it is important to mention that almost no complete ves-
sels were found at the Chalcolithic sites, and that the preservation is
better at Sheikh Diab 2 and vessels were found in situ.
Analysis of the data shows the ceramic assemblage from 'Ein Hilu to
be typical of the Ghassulian Chalcolithic (the frequency of ‘V-shaped’
bowls, narrow body holemouth jars, churns, spoons, a slipped red
stripe [‘lipstick’] on the rim, rope-like plastic ornamentation, etc.), that
of Sheikh Diab 2 as characteristic of the EB I (the frequency of bowls
the pottery 179
Introduction6
The most common type of pottery associated with advanced phases of
EB I in the region of the southern Jordan valley and the desert fringes of
Samaria is a highly distinctive family or group known as Um Hammad
Ware, or Proto-Urban D (PUD) Ware (de Miroschedji 1971: 34–37).
To date, this kind of pottery was thought to be concentrated mostly
around the eponymous site of Tell Um Hammad in the eastern Jordan
valley (de Miroschedji 1971; Braun 1996). This study presents new evi-
dence which suggests that this ware was dispersed over a considerably
larger region than previously thought.
History of Research
Decorated vessels of this class of pottery were first identified in a sur-
vey by Glueck (1951), and in surveys and excavations conducted by de
Contenson (1960) and Mellaart (1962) at Tell Um Hammad esh-Sherqi
in the Jordan Valley east of the river. It was Mellaart (1966) who intro-
duced the term ‘Um Hamad esh-Sherqi Ware’, which eventually came to
be known as Um Hammad Ware. De Miroschedji (1971), followed by
Hanbury-Tenison (1986), referred to the style as PUD, supplementing
6
This chapter is based on a paper published by the author in the Palestine Explora-
tion Quarterly 142(2) (Bar 2010). An on-line version of this journal can be viewed
in www.maneypublishing.com/journals/peg and www.ingentaconnect.com/content/
maney/peg.
180 chapter eight
205 205
1 Wadi Shubash
3
2
200 4 200
34
Riv e r J o rda n
5
195 195
di Mali h
Wa
190 190
35
TELL
EL-FAR'AH
185
(NORTH) 6
185
7 8
9 10
15 11
12
14
16 13
180 180
17
18
19
20
175 175
22 21
a
rq
e
W 23 iZ
ad 24
d
Wa
25 i Fa
26 r'a
Wa h
170 di 170
A hmar TELL
UM HAMMAD
165 165
28 27
Ri v
29
e r Jor
155 155
150 150
Wadi 'Auj
jeh
145 145
0 5
km JERICHO 0 50
km
While re-analysing the finds from the latest surveys in the region,
the author noticed the dominance of this ware in recovered assem-
blages, especially at sites in the Wadi Far'ah catchment area. This class
of pottery was absent from several large, known cemetery sites in the
region, suggesting that it was probably a local commonly used (i.e. non-
luxury) ware.
The following are descriptions of the major morphological types of
Um Hammad Ware. These descriptions are based on a sample of pot-
tery sherds recovered from surveys.
Bowls
Bowls in this class (Fig. 8.12: 1–2) tend to be somewhat squat, with gen-
tly curving walls and widened, flattened or slightly bevelled rims with
mean diameters of about 22 cm. Most examples are ornamented with
rope-like decoration. At Tell Um Hammad, these are best represented
in Helms’ Genre 51 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 223: 11).
very steep wall that is slightly incurving at the rim. The rim is either
pinched or folded outward to thicken it. This type has not been previ-
ously published in assemblages of Um Hammad Ware.
Holemouth jars
There is considerable variation in holemouth rims within this group
(Fig. 8.12: 12–16). Some are bevelled and slope inward, while others
are guttered. Most are thickened, and some have a small, external ridge.
Rope ornamentation, characteristic of Um Hammad Ware, appears
mostly on their rims, or as a ridge affixed to their bodies. Parallels are
found in Genre 12 (Helms 1987: fig. 9: 2; Helms et al. 1992: figs. 162;
234: 1–3) at Tell Um Hammad and at Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux
and Steve 1948: fig. 6: 7; 1969: 294, fig. 5: 18, 20, 22, and 29).
Jars
Several jar types of this ware have been described.
Type J1 (Fig. 8.12: 17, 19) has a long neck and a flat everted rim with
a diameter of about 18 cm. Extant fragments of such vessels suggest
that they were tall and narrow, with relatively thick walls and everted
rims that extend well beyond the thickness of their walls. Rope orna-
mentation appears in varying densities on these jars. Parallels are found
at Tell Um Hammad in Genre 17 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 187) and at
Beth Shean in Stratum XVI (Braun 2004: pl. I: 3).
Type J2 (Fig. 8.12: 18) has a narrow neck and a flat, everted rim with
a diameter of about 20 cm. Rope ornamentation was usually applied
to the rims and necks of these jars. Parallels are known from Tell Um
Hammad in Genre 27 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 203: 5–6).
Type J3 (Fig. 8.12: 20) has a mean diameter of 15 cm, with a long neck
and a flat rim that protrudes both externally and internally. Character-
istic rope ornamentation is found mostly on rims and necks. Parallels
are found at Tell Um Hammad in Genre 17 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 189:
1, 4) and at Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux and Steve 1947: fig. 2: 2).
Type J4 (Fig. 8.12: 21) has a long, narrow upper body and a promi-
nent everted rim with a mean diameter of 16 cm. Rope ornamentation
is found just below the rim. Parallels are found at Tell Um Hammad in
Genre 18 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 190) and at Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de
Vaux and Steve 1948: fig. 5: 9).
Kraters were the most common type of vessel in the assemblage,
constituting 43 % of the recovered pottery. Most of these are Types
K1 and K3, each of which comprised 20.5 % of the assemblage. Jars,
the pottery 185
pl. I: 3), 'Affula (Gal and Covello-Paran 1996: fig. 5: 8), 'Ai (Callaway
1972: fig. 34: 7) and Tell es-Sultan/Jericho (examples from Garstang’s
excavation are stored in the Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem).
This ware is not found at all sites within this region. It was notably
absent from Tel Shalem in the southern Beth Shean Valley (dated to
the end of the EB Ib [Eisenberg 1996]), and from Sheikh Diab 2 in the
Fazael valley, 20 km north of Jericho (Chapter 13 — also dated to EB
Ib). This pottery has not been found at any site in Samaria west of the
Tell el-Far'ah (North)–'Ai line.
Reported finds of Um Hammad Ware from Jordan are mostly from
sites near Tell Um Hammad (e.g. Mafluq and Ruweiha — Helms et al.
1992: 394; fig. 257: 1–3) or slightly to the north (e.g. at Kataret es-Samra
— Leonard 1989; Tell el-Handaquq — Mabry 1989). Charloux (2009)
claims that this ware has also been found at Tell es-Shuna, Tell Ikatanu,
188 chapter eight
Petrographic Analyses7
A small sample, including ten sherds of Um Hammad ware from dif-
ferent sites in the southern Jordan valley and desert fringes of Samaria,
was selected for petrographic analysis.8 All sherds belonged to one cat-
egory of fabric composed of diversified shales or shale-rich clay with
ferruginous ooliths9, quartz and calcite crystals. Their matrices were
rather silty (about 2–5% or more by volume). Some samples exhibited
a dark colour, probably resulting from reducing firing conditions, and
an abundance of iron oxides in the clays. Tempers in this group di-
versified shales, whose colours in thin section, ranged from black to
light yellow. Quartz, usually badly-sorted, angular to sub-rounded,
and reaching a coarse grain size of up to 1 mm, was widespread in all
samples. Also common were calcareous rock fragments, both calcite
crystals and limestone. In some cases, several types of fossil, including
Orbitolina sp., occurred within the limestone fragments. This is typical
of the Lower Cretaceous marine formations of Samaria and Galilee. In
Jordan, these formations outcrop along the Rift valley from Wadi Zerqa
to the Wadi Feinan area. A typical attribute of this fabric group was the
appearance of many opaque ooliths, identified under reflected light as
7
By Y. Goren, Tel Aviv University.
8
These were taken from sites 3, 6–9, 13, 14, 22, 23 and 27; see map in Figure 8.11.
9
Ooliths are spherical to elliptical bodies, 0.25 to 2 mm in diameter, which may
or may not have a nucleus, and have concentric or radial structures. In this case, some
ooliths are developed around quartz grains, while others have no internal structure.
the pottery 189
being formed of haematite and limonite. All these fabric attributes sug-
gest that the probable provenance for the clay used in this ware was in
Lower Cretaceous formations, most likely those in eastern Samaria in
the area of Wadi Far'ah.
the vicinity of Jelamet Ahmar (Sites 39, 44), the western area of Wadi
Far'ah was practically uninhabited. The EB Ia settlement in this area
is sparse, and includes mainly the sites of Tell el-Far'ah (North) and
a group of cemeteries located on the southern slope of Jebel Tamun
(Sites 26–28). During EB Ib, the western reaches of Wadi Far'ah became
the centre of settlement in the southern Jordan valley north of Jericho.
Such a growth in population, from one site in Chalcolithic to 16 sites
in EB Ib, would be virtually impossible were it based only on natural
birth increase. The most likely explanation for this huge augmentation
is migration. The Um Hammad Ware is so similar to Golan Chalco-
lithic pottery that it suggests the possibility of some immigrants com-
ing from the Golan and bringing their ceramic traditions with them,
especially since no other source or inspiration for this very distinctive
typology has been identified (Helms et al. 1992: 108). This explana-
tion is supported by ethnographic studies which show that population
movements between regions are frequently accompanied by a transfer
of ceramic traditions (Wood 1990).
In light of the above evidence, we hypothesize that toward the middle
of the 4th millennium BCE some part of the Golan Chalcolithic pottery
traditions reached the Wadi Far'ah region, and were adopted by the
later EB I inhabitants, for whom the Um Hammad Ware later became
the predominant pottery tradition.
However, there are some difficulties with this hypothesis. For one,
it does not explain how the tradition survived through the long early
phases of EB I, particularly as there is no record of its manifestation
anywhere, even at sites of that period in the Golan. It is found neither
at Tell Um Hammad nor at Tell el-Far'ah (North), where it appears in
great quantities in the succeeding period. As noted above, there are
anomalies in the radiometric dates for the Golan Chalcolithic culture,
which appear to suggest that this tradition lasted for an inordinately
long span of time. These dates are not supported by evidence of strati-
fied deposits at any of the sites. This hypothesis also fails to explain
the lack of additional fossiles directeurs of the Chalcolithic culture of
the Golan (such as basalt pillar figurines) in the same contexts as Um
Hammad Ware. These arguments certainly weaken the hypothesis of a
Chalcolithic inspiration for this ware. At this stage of research, its ori-
gins remain something of a mystery. Possibly further investigations and
additional data, perhaps from the Golan region, or from the environs of
Wadi Far'ah, will elucidate this matter.
192 chapter eight
Figure 8.13. Examples of Chalcolithic pottery from the Golan (1–4) and the
southern Beth Shean Valley (5–7).
the pottery 193
Figure 8.14. Calibrated 14C dates from sites in the Golan Heights.
194 chapter eight
14
C age ± 1σ Calibrated date BCE Calibrated date BCE
Material
year BP ± 1σ ± 2σ
4320– 4300 (1.6%)
RT 525 Charcoal 5270 ± 140 4400–3750 (95.4%)
4260–3960 ( 66.6%)
RT 1862 Charcoal 4945 ± 65 3790–3650 (68.2%) 3950–3630 (95.4%)
4040–4020 (2%)
RT 1863 Charcoal 5130 ± 70 3990–3910 (34%) 4150–3700 (95.4%)
3880–3800 (32.2%)
3700–3510 (64.9%)
RT 1866 Charcoal 4810 ± 90 3780–3360 (95.45)
3400–3380 (3.3%)
Table 8.3. Calibrated 14C dates from sites in the Golan Heights.
Conclusions
Um Hammad Ware is a distinctive type of pottery that was popular
in the middle of the southern Jordan valley, and at sites on the desert
fringes of Samaria in the EB Ib. Petrographic analysis shows that this
ware was produced locally, perhaps in the Wadi Far'ah region. This
ware is so distinctive in its fabric and typology, and so different from
other EB I wares and types, that its inspiration remains obscure. Its
overall appearance suggests that its roots are probably in the pottery
traditions associated with the Chalcolithic culture of the Golan.
The distribution of the Um Hammad ware is characterized by a dense
centre in the western part of Wadi Far'ah, between the sites of Jelamet
Ahmar and Tell el-Far'ah (North), where this ware was probably manu-
factured. The absence of K1 and K4 type kraters at Tell Um Hammad
also reinforce this supposition as these would have been expected to
appear at the site if the main production centre was on site or nearby.
The central location in Wadi Far'ah of the Um Hammad Ware sug-
gests possible boundaries of a unified cultural region in the EB Ib. Its
northern boundaries did not extend beyond Wadi Far'ah, and to the
south it was bounded by Wadi Fazael. To the west, it reached the east-
ern slopes of the Samaria hill country. Less is known about the extent of
its distribution east of the River Jordan, where archaeological surveying
has been less intensive.
The many vessels of this ware found at Tell Um Hammad and its
vicinity point to the possibility of a specialty workshop located east of
Wadi Far'ah. This suggests that this ware was well established on both
sides of the Jordan, but may not have spread in significant quantities
into the highlands above and beyond its major tributaries.
CHAPTER NINE
Introduction1
During February-June 2006, an excavation was conducted at the site of
'Ein Hilu. The site (Israel Old Grid Map ref. 1981/1922, 40 m below sea
level) was discovered during the survey of the Manasseh Hill Country
in 1988, and was recorded in Volume II of the survey report (Zertal
2008: 557–561). The site’s size was estimated to be 1.2 ha, and traces of
walls were visible on the ground. In October 1988, a small trial excava-
tion was conducted at the site under the direction of Zertal. The partial
remains of a broad house were exposed, and indicative finds that were
dated to the Chalcolithic period were retrieved. A decision was made to
continue the excavation as part of the author’s PhD thesis.
Environmental Background
The site is located on a hill slope overlooking the Wadi Malih fault,
east of the modern Tubas-Mehula-Beqa'ot Junction, and west of the
convergence of the desert fringes of Samaria and the Jordan Valley
(Figs. 9.1–9.2). The spring of 'Ein el-Hilu, from which the site receives
its name, is located some 500 m north-east of the site. This is the only
fresh water source in the vicinity.
The site is situated in a semi-arid region with present-day average
annual rainfall of about 250 mm (Shachar 1995: 28). The site is domi-
nated by Irano-Turanian vegetation; the flora consisting mostly of an-
nual garigue with a few, mainly small, bushes. No trees are found here
(Sabah 1992), and the only tall shrub is the Ziziphus spina-christi.
The dominant geomorphological formation in the area is the Far'ah
Anticline, which borders the Shechem Syncline to the east. This anti-
cline is the northern continuation of the Judah and Ephraim chain of
anticlines. It is defined by a broad, subterranean axis and a relatively
1
This chapter is based on a paper published by the author and others in the Journal
of the Israel Prehistoric Society (Bar et al. 2008).
196 chapter nine
narrow upper axis. The slanted blocks of the Far'ah Anticline slope
moderately west, while the eastern branch drops sharply towards the
Jordan Valley. The anticline is intersected by faults, forming river val-
leys and wide ravines. The longest of these faults underlies the valley of
Wadi Far'ah. The site of 'Ein Hilu is situated about 20 km to the north
of Wadi Far'ah in the valley of Wadi Malih. Thus, the site is set within
a hilly terrain incised by deep wadis running from the Samaria hills
in the west to the Jordan Valley in the east. South of the site, there is
a small valley of 30 ha. North-east of the site, along the banks of Wadi
Malih, more terrain is available for dry farming.
The area to the west of the northern part of the Far'ah Anticline
and the desert fringes of Samaria is conspicuously devoid of Chalco-
lithic sites, and there are none in Wadi Malih. The nearest Chalcolithic
settlements are Sites 76 and 99: the first is a small site 4,500 m2 in area,
situated in esh-Shaqq valley, 3 km north of 'Ein Hilu; while Site 99 is a
scattering of sherds 6.5 km to the west.
Two clusters of Chalcolithic sites are found north and west of the site:
the first in the southern Beth Shean Valley (many sites were found in
the region south of Tirat Zvi by Zori [1962] and Zertal [2005]), and the
second in the Zababdeh-Tubas valleys in the Samarian hills, discovered
by Zertal (2008). It can be assumed that one of the routes connecting
the Beth Shean Valley and the Jordan Valley to the Zababdeh-Tubas
valleys passed through Wadi Malih and the site of 'Ein Hilu.2
2
Another possible route was via Wadi Shubash, about 9 km north of Wadi Malih.
198 chapter nine
Stratigraphy
Three strata, dated to the Chalcolithic period, were discovered in Areas
B and C. These are described briefly below:
Stratum 3
The earliest stratum of the site. The sparse data gathered only in Area
C do not allow greater precision. A single radiocarbon sample which
provides a terminus post quem was dated to the third quarter of the 5th
millennium BCE (see below). A paved stone floor partly excavated in
Area C was found below the brick wall and the floor of Stratum 2.
Stratum 2
A later stratum, still in the earlier phases of the Chalcolithic period:
the limited data gathered in Areas B and C do not allow greater preci-
sion. In Area B, two floors, a wall and three installations were found
within a small 2×3.5 m area (Fig. 9.4). These were found below the
main structure of Stratum 1 (Figs. 9.5–9.6). In Area C, a brick wall and
what appears to be an adjacent floor were found in a 2.5×3.5 m area
below the open courtyard adjacent to the main structure of Stratum 1.
Stratum 1
The main stratum excaveted at the site, dated to the second half of
the 5th millennium BCE. The dating was based upon ceramic typol-
ogy and a single radiocarbon sample from Area B which provides a
terminus post quem for the early construction phase of Stratum 1 (see
below). The large building in Area B incorporated at least two phases
of construction. Area C was probably a courtyard exterior to the large
building. Area E is possibly from the same chronological horizon, since
it exhibits a similarity in wall construction methods and ceramic typol-
ogy.
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 199
Figure 9.4. Areas B and C, Stratum 2. Light grey indicates later strata.
Unexcavated
Area C
9 Unexcavated 9
-62.86
L468
chapter nine
A'
L143
-62.85 F143b
-63.05
-63.08
L143a
0
W14
F143b
#
A
B
-62.96
#
10 L45
2 10
B'
W4
-62.85 35 L105
# L453
L463
F467
Unexcavated Area B t Unexcavated
11 11
0 4
m
200
H I J K L
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 201
Area B
Area B is situated in the centre of the site, and work consisted of clean-
ing, probing, and expanding the 1988 excavation area. The method
used here differed from that of the other areas. Firstly, accumulation
and debris from the 1988 operations had to be cleared (collapsed baulks
and material washed into the area). Next, the first layer of potentially
ancient sediment (considered as surface material) was removed. Only
after probably late intrusive material had been removed did we begin to
both excavate the remains of the baulks and deepen the lower limit of
LEGEND
Comp Brown Fill
NW Loose Brown Fill SE
0 50
-61.5 cm
L426
-62.0
L409 W423
W418
-62.5 L427
L429
U N E X C AVAT E D
L452a L452 L452b L452b
-63.0
Figure 9.6. Area B, Section B–B`, Strata 1 and 2. Location shown in Fig. 9.8.
202 chapter nine
Stratum 2
Stratum 2 (Fig. 9.4) was exposed in a very limited area in Square K10.
Wall 435 consisted of a stone foundation supporting bricks (average
width 50 cm). A tamped earth floor (L467) abuts the wall from the
west. On the surface identified to the east (L452, Fig. 9.5) the remains
of three stone-built installations (one of them lined with pottery frag-
ments) were found. Stratigraphically, these installations are located
below the foundation of Wall 418 ascribed to Stratum 1 (Fig. 9.6).
The finds from Stratum 2 in Area B are scant, including two hole-
mouth jar rims, a krater rim, a lug handle, and a number of flat bases
that are consistent with the known material culture of the Chalcolithic
period.
Stratum 1
The main element in this stratum is a large building 7×12 m, delim-
ited by Walls 422, 423, 432 (Figs. 9.7–9.8), its northern boundary is
unknown. It is divided into three longitudinal rooms separated by
double walls (W418, 420). The western room was probably a closed
rectangular courtyard (delimited by Walls 418, 423, 432, and 434). The
middle room (between Walls 418 and 420, Fig. 9.9) and the eastern one
(between Walls 420 and 422, Fig. 9.10) were divided by partitions into
a number of smaller secondary rooms/cells. Some of these cells were
paved with stone (Loci 407, 415), and may have been used for storage.
The main entrance into the building was not identified. Such an
entrance was probably in the southern part of Wall 432, in the centre
of the longitudinal line of the rectangular building, in an unexcavated
3
The main Loci of the primary deposition in Area B are: 19, 414, 429, 431, 433,
452, 467, 470.
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 203
area. Another possibility for the location of the entrance may be in the
vicinity of Locus 413, which postdates the first construction phase of
the building. An interior entrance (Locus 464, Fig. 9.11) identified in
Wall 420, is paved with small and medium stones. These were set in
place at a slight incline to overcome a 20 cm difference in elevation
between Rooms 470 and 427.
The walls of the building were preserved to a height of three stone
courses. In a few places the remains of clay bricks were preserved on the
stone courses. In most cases the floors that were definitely identified
are located at the elevation of the upper part of the first stone course.
Thus one can assume that the lower part of the wall was built of stone,
and its upper part was made of bricks (the stone construction contin-
ued to a height of about 50 cm above the level of the identified floors).
The exterior walls range between 80 and 100 cm in thickness. There are
considerable differences in the interior walls, which range between 40
and 110 cm thick. The method of construction employed is identical
in most cases, with two rows of large and medium stones, and a fill of
small stones and soil deposited between them. Large monoliths (up to
1 m high) were incorporated in the stone construction of the walls (e.g.
Walls 3 and 420, Fig. 9.9). In most cases floors were made of packed
earth. In some of the smaller rooms the floors were made of flat slabs
whose underlying niches were probably used for storage.
While later alterations were identified in the structure, their order of
construction was impossible to determine (see plan of the developed
stage of Stratum 1 in Fig. 9.12).4 They include Wall 416, which parti-
tions the large paved room into two smaller paved spaces, and Wall
417, which partitions the area between Wall 418 and Wall 420 into two
smaller spaces: a stone paved installation (Locus 413), and the room
adjacent to it (Locus 441).
A small, irregularly-shaped courtyard (Locus 443), accessed by an
alley/corridor (Locus 456), was identified north of the main building.
4
These later alterations were distinguished from the original building construction
phase because:
1. W416 is built from small stones in a manner completely different from the other
walls of the building. When its eastern part was excavated we found that floor
407 continued below it.
2. W417 is a late alteration, because its base is higher than the living surface of
adjacent L410 and 427.
3. L413 is a late alteration, because its base is higher than the living surface of the
loci around it.
4. L441 is a late alteration, because it overlaps earlier W432.
204 chapter nine
Near the surface south of the corridor are paved areas, the nature of
which is unclear (Locus 442): they are separated from Corridor 456 by
a thin wall (Wall 4). Three rooms/cells were also unearthed north of
this alley: Room 9, a paved rectangular room probably used for stor-
age, and Rooms 457 and 459 (only the southern part of the latter was
excavated).
The finds from Stratum 1 in Area B are typical of the Chalcolithic
period. Noteworthy among the ceramic assemblage are the holemouth
jars, shallow and V-shaped bowls, churns, and lug handles. Few finds
were discovered outside the main building, in the area of the corridor
and the rooms/paved surfaces next to it. This is mainly due to erosion
stemming from the proximity of the stratum to the surface level, and
the fact that most of this part of Area B had been excavated in 1988.
A radiocarbon date (RTT 5442, see discussion below) from the
sealed Locus 468 (below stone paved Floor 407), gives a terminus post
quem for the foundation phase of the structure between 4530 and 4230
BCE calibrated (95.4% probability).5
5
This is quite problematic due to its long span of years, and falls around the transi-
tion from the middle phases (D–E) to the late phases (C–A+) of Teleilat Ghassul, and is
205
H I J K L
#
W448
L445
47
-62.19 -62.32
W4
L403 -62.08
-62.42
-62.09 -62.47 L402
21
L407
-62.14
W4
W42 L112
L438 2 -62.50 -62.14
-62.28 -62.55
L127
-62.47
L455 #
-62.64 -62.00
-62.70 -62.38
L459 L124
W420
-62.67 #
-62.35 -62.64 L121
W
51
-62.65 45 L414 A'
W4
8 L437
0
W42 L470 L106
46
L443 -6 2.85 0 -62.55
W
-62.35
-62.74 -62.70
L412
-62.41 L128
L18
5
W3 -62.71 -62.80 L135
W42
L457 -62.72 L410
W2
-62.83
-62.32 W41 -62.67
-62.51 8 B .M.
L131
-62.78 -62.67 -62.26 -62.08
-62.48 L464 L134
L9 L409 L135
-62.72
A
B
W41 L427
4
W43
-62.80 8
-62.69 L6 -62.70 #
10 10
3
W42
L456 L442 #
-62.49
-62.69 -62.64 # L408 -62.72 -62.60
L433 L426 B' L105 L118
-62.49
L429 L129 L114 L130
-62.68
-62.32
-62.67 -62.55 Area C
W4
-62.57
W
46 -62.48
1 -62.61 L125
W4
32 L431
-62.72
Area B t
Unexcavated
23
W4
-62.34
11 11
0 4
m
H I J K L
Figure 9.9. Area B, central part of building, Figure 9.10. Area B, eastern part of building,
looking north. looking north.
H I J K L
W448
L445
47
-62.19 -62.32
W4
-62.42
21
L407
-62.14
W4
6
L459 L124
W41
W420
-62.67 #
-62.35 -62.64 L121
W
51
-62.65 -62.27 L414
45 A'
W4
8 L437 -62.76
0
W42 L470 L106
46
L443 -6 2.85 0 -62.55
# -62.50
W
-62.35
L413
L412 9
-62.74 -62.70
W41
-62.41 L128
L18
5
W3 -62.71 -62.80 L135
W42
-62.39
L457 -62.63 -62.37 -62.72 L410
W2
-62.83
46 -62.32 W41 -62.67
7
8 B .M.
W4
-62.51 L131
W41
-62.78 -62.67 -62.26 -62.08
W418 L134
L466 -62.48 L464
L9 # -62.80 L409 L135 Area C
9
-62.83
43
-62.72
A
-62.70 B
W41 L427
4
-62.35
W43
L436 -62.75 Rocks in 8
-62.37 Disorder
-62.69 L6 -62.76 L441
10 10
3
-62.64
W42
L456 -62.81 L426 #
-62.49
-62.69 -62.64 L408 L429
-62.60
L433 B' L105 L118
-62.49 L114
W4 L129 L130
-62.68 32a -62.32
L444 -62.67 -62.55
W4
23
-62.29
50
-62.59
W4
-62.59
W4
L125
W4
-62.34 32 L431
-62.58
Area B t
Unexcavated
-62.34
11 11
0 4
m
H I J K L
208 chapter nine
Area C
A probe (about 25 m2, Squares L9, L10) was opened here in order to
understand the local stratigraphy, and to compare it to the finds from
Area B. After reaching the possible ‘living surfaces’ of Stratum 1, we
decided to narrow the excavated area and dug further only within a
2.5×3.5 m deep section. Sterile sediment was reached after excavating
through 2 m of archaeological deposits (see Section A`–A in Fig. 9.13).
Stratum 3
This stratum was reached only in this area. The remains of a stone pave-
ment (Floor 145, Figs. 9.14–9.15) with average accumulation of about
15 cm of habitation level and organic material can be ascribed to the
stratum. The finds mostly include burnt pottery sherds, among them a
bowl rim, a holemouth jar rim, a ceramic weight, and two flat bases. In
light of the preliminary data this small assemblage can be ascribed to
the Chalcolithic period.
A radiocarbon date (RTT 5443) from Locus 144a (accumulation of
organic material found on Floor 145), gives a date for a late use of Floor
145. This date, 4540–4240 BCE calibrated (95.4% probability), falls in
the same time span as the date from Area B. The excavation continued
below Floor 145 (Locus 146) to a further depth of about 30 cm in the
natural deposits devoid of any archaeological artifacts.6
Stratum 2
The meagre architectural remains of a mudbrick wall (Wall 140, Fig.
9.16) and remains of a tamped earth floor mixed with mudbrick mate-
rial can be ascribed to this stratum. This material probably collapsed
from Wall 140 (Locus 143b). The artifacts recovered from the floor
include five bowls, a jar, a lug handle, and a rim with rope ornament, all
consistent with the material culture of the Chalcolithic period.
Stratum 1
The most striking element of this stratum is the outer face of Wall 423,
belonging to the main building in Area B, Stratum 1. This wall survived
to a maximum height of three courses (about 50 cm). Another element
in the stratum is the fragmentary remnant of a large stone pavement
in the general time-scale of the sites of Abu Hamid (again between the middle and late
phases), Beer Sheva, Shiqmim and the Golan (Lovell 2001: 45, 219).
6
Apart from three small non-diagnostic body sherds.
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 209
that has survived in the eastern part of the probe (Loci 128, 135, Fig.
9.17). This pavement abuts Wall 423 at the elevation of the lower part
of its second course (similarly to the pavements of Stratum 1 inside the
main building in Area B). Considering the limited area exposed, the
artifacts in Area C are numerous, diagnostic, and some of them were
found in situ. Noteworthy among them are the bowls (11 items), jars,
and holemouth jars. A ceramic spoon was also found.
A'
-63.93
L144
F145
# Area C
L144a
F145
A
B
10 10
B'
L105
Unexcavated Unexcavated
11 11
0 4
m
210
H I J K L
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 211
Area E
The excavation of Area E, about 120 m south of Areas B and C, and
outside the known boundaries of the ancient settlement (Fig. 9.3), was
conducted using a 5×5 m quadrant system. A single building attrib-
uted to the Chalcolithic was exposed here (Figs. 9.18–9.19). From an
architectural standpoint this structure is quite unique, and includes a
combination of known Chalcolithic elements. Due to the proximity of
the living surfaces to the bedrock (we reached bedrock at an average
depth of 20 cm), all the material recovered and the sediments were
treated as surface finds, and sieved only in a few selected loci where in
situ material was found.7
The building includes a spacious rectangular broad room (5.5×12 m,
Fig. 9.20) whose southeastern part was eroded away (its known bound-
aries are delimited by Walls 303, 304, 309). The room is divided into
an open rectangular area where an installation was unearthed (Locus
319a), and a possible diagonal opening (Locus 325). The installation,
made of small slabs arranged in a circle, and adjacent loci in the north-
ern part of the broad room, were the only places in Area E where in situ
material was found. The opening is paved with large stones arranged
along a diagonal axis. The door socket (Fig. 9.21) indicates a door in-
stalled inside the wall, apparently opening inwards. Three stones ar-
ranged as a small bench (Locus 327) were discovered near the entrance,
adjacent to the wall.
The walls in the broad room, as in all of Area E, are almost identical.
They are constructed of two rows of stones one course high. This sug-
gests that they may have been a stone foundation, probably intended for
mud-brick walls. These did not survive because of their proximity to
the surface. The walls are 70 to 100 cm thick, having identical masonry:
two rows of large and medium stones with a fill of small stones and soil
(the same style as employed in Area B, Stratum 1). Exceptions to this
are Walls 304, 306C and 312, which were thickened for some unclear
reason (it cannot be determined if this occurred when the building’s
foundations were laid, or as a later alteration).
In the north-western part of the broad room is a rectangular room (4
x 5 m.), divided by a partition (Wall 328) into two secondary cells (Loci
302 and 307). A number of square rooms are built up against this room
(Fig. 9.22). One (Locus 310) built against it to the south has been se-
verely damaged by erosion. All that survived of this room are two walls
7
These were Loci 316, 319, and 322.
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 213
(309 and 321) and a paved surface of small stones (Locus 315) that
probably served as a foundation for an upper pavement or as a floor.
North-west of the cell in the broad room another rectangular room
(Locus 305, 4×5 m.) is identical to the cell in the broad room. A wall
(330) extends from the northern wall of this room to the north. The
remains of a pavement made of small stones were unearthed where the
walls meet. Identical pavement remains were also discovered north of
Locus 307, probably a courtyard partly delimited by Walls 330 and 303.
Another room (Locus 300), partially eroded and irregular in shape,
is east of Room 305. This room is apparently paved with small- and
medium-sized stones, with a large flat stone at its centre, presumably
supporting a column for a roof. In the north-eastern part of this room
Walls 306a and 306c seem to reflect a different phase, due to their dif-
ferent orientation.
The ceramic finds from Area E are characteristic of the Chalcolithic
period. Outstanding among them are various kinds of holemouth
vessels and shallow bowls, some red-slipped. Other diagnostic items
include the handle of a churn and a ceramic spoon. A flat oval ceramic
weight and a shallow stone bowl were also found.
It seems that the building in Area E is equivalent to Stratum 1 in
Areas B and C. The reasons for this conclusion are:
1. The wall building material and masonry in Area E and in Stratum
1, Areas B and C are identical. Both are completely different from
that of Stratum 2 of Areas B and C.
2. The similarity in ceramic finds points to the same conclusion.
Most of the ceramic sub-types found in Area E also appear in
Areas B and C, Stratum 1. At the same time, 50% of the sub-types
found in Stratum 2 do not appear in Area E (Table 9.3).
AA AB AC AD
L301
-63.40
W3
06C -63.17
-63.28
-63.12
-63.30
1 L300 1
6A
L332 L300
W30
W306B
-63.34 # -63.15
W330 -63.32
-63.10 -63.01
-63.00
-63.25 Unexcavated
-62.98
W304 L316
-63.01 -62.93
L316
L302 L302 L319A
L316A L320
-62.90 -62.89 L311
-63.16 L319 -63.03
W328
Unexcavated L322
-62.88
Unexcavated L316
-63.14 Unexcavated
W308
-62.80 -62.80
-63.03
L324 -62.90
L307
W309
-62.72
W309
3 L310 3
W321
L314
-62.93
L310
-62.66
L315
-62.83 0 4
-62.76 -62.83
m
214
AA AB AC AD
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 215
Total Applied
Perfo-
Stratum Area Total deco- % Painted % ornamen- % %
rated
rated tations
1 B 1572 57 3.6 50 3.2 6 0.4 1 0.06
C 1087 94 8.7 88 8.1 4 0.4 2 0.02
2 B 144 7 4.9 6 4.2 0 0 1 0.7
C 290 26 9.0 22 7.6 2 0.7 2 0.7
3 C 67 7 10.5 7 10.5 0 0 0 0
E 618 44 7.1 43 7.0 1 0.2 0 0
1 2659 151 5.7 138 5.2 10 0.4 3 0.1
2 434 33 7.6 28 6.5 2 0. 5 3 0.7
3 67 7 10.5 7 10.5 0 0 0 0
8
This section was written by O. Cohen and S. Bar, University of Haifa.
218 chapter nine
TYPE S1 S2 S3 E TYPE S1 S2 S3 E
B1a 2 1 2 H1 9 6
B1b 4 2 H2 7 1
B1c 3 2 1 1 H3 10 1 4
B2 17 1 H4 1
B3 3 1 H5 3 2 1
B4a 5 JR1 1
B4b 1 JR2a 7
B4c 16 3 JR2b 3
B5 1 JR3a 19 2 2
B6 3 2 JR3b 3 1 1
B7 1 JR4 1
B8 1
Type S1 % All %
B1a 2 4 5 7
B1b 4 7 6 8
B1c 3 5 7 10
B2 17 31 18 25
B3 3 5 4 6
B4a 5 9 5 7
B4b 0 0 1 1
B4c 16 30 19 26
B5 0 0 1 1
B6 3 5 5 7
B7 1 2 1 1
B8 1 2 1 1
Typology
9
The XRF tests were conducted by S. Shalev and S. Shiltein at the Weizmann In-
stitute of Science in Rehovot.
222 chapter nine
Holemouth jars
This is the second most common group of vessels at the site. Forty-five
holemouth jar rims were found, which constitute 27% of all of the iden-
tified sherds. Most of the fragments (29 sherds) came from Stratum 1,
yet in Area E this type of vessel is the most common (57%).
Type H1 (Fig. 9.24: 1–4). This is the commonest type of holemouth
jar at the site (along with type H3). The holemouth jar has a thickened
rim whose upper part is sometimes cut. Two sub-types of this vessel
were found: one 10–15 cm in diameter, and a larger type 18–25 cm in
diameter. The holemouth jars are never decorated or slipped. Fifteen
sherds of this type were found, 9 in Stratum 1 and the rest in Area E.
Parallels to this type are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig.
4.36: 2, 6), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10: Fig. 10.14: 6), Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig.
11.9: 4) and 'En Esur IV(Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 21).
Type H2 (Fig. 9.24: 5–7) A holemouth jar with an inverted wall and
a cut rim, 22 cm in diameter. A number of examples were found with
an intricate rope decoration on the rim and body of the vessel. Eight
sherds of this type were found, 7 in Stratum 1. Examples of this type
already appear in the Early Chalcolithic period (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.
4.6: 15, 16). Parallels to this type are known from 'En Esur Va, IV (Yan-
nai et al. 2006: figs. 4.24: 19; 4.30: 22), Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz
and Oren 2004: fig. 3.10: 8), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10: fig. 10.14: 2) and
Gilat I–IIA (Commenge 2006: pl. 10.12: 1–2).
Type H3 (Fig. 9.24: 8–9).This is the commonest type of holemouth
jar at the site (with Type H1). It has a slightly inverted wall and a ta-
pered rim. Some examples exhibit a ridge below the rim. The average
diameter is 25 cm. These vessels are not slipped or decorated. Fifteen
sherds of this type were found, 10 of them in Stratum 1. Parallels to this
type were found in Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002: fig. 4.3: 4) and
Fazael (Porat 1985: fig. 6: 4).
Type H4 (Fig. 9.24: 10) A holemouth pithos with an inverted wall
and a folded-out rim. The rim has a rope decoration (pie crust). The
vessel is 38 cm in diameter. One sherd of this type was found in Area E
at the site. Parallels to this type were found in Tel 'Ali Stratum 1A: Item
13 (Sussman 1990).
Type H5 (Fig. 9.24: 11–12) A holemouth jar with an inverted wall
and tapered rim, 10–22 cm in diameter. Five sherds of this type were
found. Parallels to this type are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell
2001: fig. 4.40: 2), Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 3: 11) and 'En Esur
IV (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 18).
226 chapter nine
Jars
This is the third most common class at the site, following closely be-
hind the holemouth jars. Forty jar rims were found, constituting 24%
of all of the ceramic finds that were identified. Most of the jar fragments
(34 sherds) were found in Stratum 1.
Type Jr1 (Fig. 9.25: 1) An intact, elongated biconical jar with a flat
base and tapered everted rim. A pair of large lug handles is affixed to
the body. Traces of vertical combing appear on the upper part of the
vessel. It is 62 cm high and its rim diameter is 12 cm. A single example
of this type of vessel was discovered in Stratum 1 at the site. No parallels
to this type were found, although the body of the jar is very similar to
the Gilat torpedo-shaped jars (Commenge 2006: pls. 10.35: 1; 10.34: 3).
Type Jr2a (Fig. 9.25: 2–4) A jar with an upright wall and tapered,
cut or thickened rim, and average diameter of 10–22 cm. The jar is
sometimes treated with a red slip on the interior and exterior, but is not
slipped in most cases. Seven sherds of this type were found, all of them
in Stratum 1. Parallels to this sub-type are known from Teleilat Ghassul
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4.40: 1, 5) and Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz and
Oren 2004: fig. 3.13: 5).
Type Jr2b (Fig. 9.25: 5–6) Jars with a slightly inverted wall and a ta-
pered or rounded rim, 13 cm in diameter. One example (Fig. 9.25: 6)
of this type of vessel is slipped on the upper portion of the interior and
exterior. Three sherds of this type were found, all in Stratum 1. Parallels
to this sub-type are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.41:
2), 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 14) and Cave 49/V (Eisenberg
2002: fig. 8: 24).
Type Jr3a (Fig. 9.25: 7–9) A jar with an inverted wall and tapered,
diagonal or everted rim. Its diameter ranges from 15 to 28 cm. In most
cases, it is not slipped, although a red slip rarely appears on the exte-
rior. Twenty-three sherds of this type jar were found, 19 in Stratum 1.
Parallels are known from Shoham (North) Cave 4 (van den Brink and
Gophna 2005: fig 6.27: 11), Tel Te'o VII–VI (Eisenberg 2001: fig. 6.4:
11), Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.14: 8), Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell
2001: fig. 4.41: 5), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10: Fig. 10.15: 14) and 'En Gedi
(Ussishkin 1980: fig. 10: 6).
Type Jr3b (Fig. 9.25: 10–12) A small jar (amphoriskos/cup) with an
inverted wall and a pointed, diagonal or everted rim, and an average
diameter of 8 cm. The jar is sometimes slipped red and in one case (Fig.
9.25: 10) it is decorated with a reticulated pattern. Five sherds of this
type were found. Parallels to this sub-type are known from 'En Esur IV
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 229
(Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 15), Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002: fig.
4.1: 10) and Cave V/49 (Eisenberg 2002: fig. 8: 22).
Type Jr4 (Fig. 9.25: 13) A jar with a convex wall and an everted rim,
12 cm in diameter, and exterior treated with a red slip. One example
of this type was found in Stratum 1. Parallels are known from Grar
(Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.15: 1), Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz
and Oren 2004: figs. 3.12: 6; 3.13: 7) and Umm Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill.
3: 10).
Churns
Seven fragments of churns were discovered (Fig. 9.26), six in Stratum 1.
All the fragments are similar, representing churns with curved bodies
and large lug handles attached at the ends. One of the churns (Fig. 9.26:
2) is decorated with an abstract red painting. Another smaller churn
has an incised lug handle (Fig. 9.26: 3). The neck of an upright churn,
with a tapered rim, was also found. The outer wall is slipped red and
there is a red stripe on the interior of the rim (Fig. 9.26: 7). Parallels are
known from many sites, e.g. Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 9: 7–8).
Spoons
Parts of two ceramic spoons (Fig. 9.27: 3–4) were found. The spoons
are round, with a plain rim, and are slightly more than 5 cm long. Paral-
lels to this type are known from Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz and
Oren 2004: fig. 3.16: 10) and Umm Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill. 4: 4).
Ceramic weights
Four ceramic weights of two distinct types were found. Two of the
weights are possibly biconical loom weights (Fig. 9.27: 1–2), perforated
from both sides. They are 3–4 cm wide and 2.5–4.0 cm long. Parallels
to this type are known from Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz and Oren
2004: fig. 6.2: 1–3).
Two are spindle weights (Fig. 9.27: 7–8) shaped like flat discs with a
round hole in the centre. They are 4–5 cm in diameter and are 1–2 cm
thick. Parallels to this type are known from Giv'at HaOranim (Scheft-
elowitz and Oren 2004: fig. 6.2: 5–7).
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 233
Petrographic Analysis10
A small selection of sherds from Stratum 1 of Areas B and C was sub-
mitted for petrographic analysis. The results of the analysis revealed
two separate groups:
10
The petrographic analysis was made by Y. Goren, Tel Aviv University.
236 chapter nine
Decoration
Three kinds of decorations were identified on the ceramics from 'Ein
Hilu: paint (slip), plastic decoration, and perforation (Table 9.1).
Painted decorations, were applied after firing, either painted with a
brush, or by immersing the vessel in the paint. Red and brown are the
only colours that were identified on the sherds from 'Ein Hilu. Painting
with a brush was used mostly on open vessels (bowls), or on the exte-
riors of closed vessels (primarily holemouth jars). The ‘lipstick’ design
painted on the rims of the vessels, also characteristic of the Chalcolithic
period, is the most common painted decoration on the ceramics from
the site. A very large number of sherds (216) decorated with paint were
found, 138 of which were recovered from Stratum 1, and 43 from Area
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 237
W422
L106
W449
W451
# L470
L414
W421
#
# L415 L128
W416
L407
L438
W420
L427
W417
L410
L412 W425
W419
W423
#
L129
Rocks in
W418 Disorder L125
W434
L429
L19
39
L441
W4
L433
W423
# L431
W432
W432a
L444
W450
Area B
0 2
Jar Churn Holemouth Bowl/Krater Spoon m
410, 412, and paved Locus 413) contained small amounts of ceramic
material (fragments of two vessels each), that were not in situ. Paved
Rooms 407 and 415 (in the eastern part of the building) contained no
in situ material, but the unpaved Room 414 and 470 (actually two parts
of the same room) contained in situ crushed vessels. These include one
churn, one holemouth jar, one jar and one bowl. The rooms and alley
north-west of Walls 421 and 439 were excavated in 1988: our excava-
tion only cleaned them, and therefore we are unable to use this part of
Area B in our analysis.
The outer courtyard, south of Wall 423 in Area C, contained an in-
teresting distribution of vessels similar to that of the inner courtyard.
Most of the vessels were found alongside Wall 423 (11 bowls, 7 jars,
and 3 holemouth jars). Further from the wall (moving southwards) the
density of vessels declined rapidly.
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 239
11
No traces of roofing (such as burnt wood or bases for columns) were found in the
excavation, although the author believes that at least all the small rooms were roofed. A
possible exception is the horizontal slab found in the middle of a room in Area E – L300
(see Figs. 9.18, 9.22).
12
This section was written by H. Winter, University of Haifa. For a full report of the
lithic assemblage see Bar et al. 2008.
240 chapter nine
The Assemblage
The groups are defined here according to our methodology (Winter in
Bar et al. 2008: 191–208).
1. Waste – pieces unusable for further use;
2. Debitage (prefabricated blanks) – artifacts fit for use without fur-
ther modification, or as blanks for secondary shaping of tools;
3. Specific tools shaped by secondary modification (flaking, retouch,
or polish).
As most small artifacts, such as chips and chunks, were not picked up
during the different surface collections, only finds from the excavation
were included in Table 9.5, providing a clear picture of the deviation
between Group A – waste and Group B – debitage.
Area B C E Total
Group N N N N %
A. Waste 277 298 41 616 68.8
B. Debitage 117 99 64 280 31.2
Total 394 397 105 896 100.0
Tools
This group includes all artifacts which were shaped by secondary treat-
ment (flaking, retouch, or polish) in order to prepare a specific tool
type. These artifacts are usually larger and easier to detect; hence the
artifacts of this group from the different surface collections were also
included.
The group is divided into sub-categories according to the function
they were possibly intended for, thus providing indications for the life-
style and economy of the community.
As the surface assemblage yielded only relatively few items collected
at random, the summary figures of tools (Group C) were affected only
marginally. In these collections there were somewhat fewer handicraft
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 241
Table 9.6. Summary of 'Ein Hilu tool collections, including all excavation areas and surface
collections.
'Ein Hilu 1. Tel Te'o 2. Giv'at
Site 3. Grar 4. Shiqmim 5. Gilat Total
B, C, E VI-VII HaOranim
Number/
N % N % N % N % N % N % N %
percentage
Category
a. Hammering
Hammer-stone 4
Total a. 4 3.5 4 0.1
b. Heavy tools
Axe 7 71 14 54 133
Adze 3 10 27 38 ++
Chisel 2 ++ 3 4
Total b. 5 4.4 17 11.6 71 6.7 44 6.3 96 5.7 133 3.4 366 4.8
c. Carving and
shaping
Burin 14 26 4
Notch 23 2 363 144 718 50
Denticulate 6 4 ++ 23 97 26
Total c. 43 37.7 6 4.1 389 37.0 171 24.6 815 48.3 76 1.9 1500 19.7
d. Perforating
Borer 6 5 45 37 177 385
Awl 1 ++ ++ ++
Needle awl /
21
micro borer
Total d. 7 6.1 5 3.4 45 4.3 37 5.3 177 10.5 406 10.4 677 8.9
e. Scraping
Endscraper 5 4 37 43 255 183
Sidescraper 1 12 29
Rounded scraper 1
Fan scraper 2 3 7 8 108
Micro endscraper 30 237
Total e. 9 7.9 7 4.8 37 3.5 92 13.2 263 15.6 557 14.2 965 12.7
f. Tilling
Pick 1
Total f. 1 0.9
g. Reaping
Sickle segment +
10 20 99 166 39 581
fragments
Reaping knife 1
Total g. 11 9.6 20 13.6 99 9.4 166 23.9 39 2.3 581 14.8 916 12.0
h. Cutting
'Ein Hilu 1. Tel Te'o 2. Giv'at
Site 3. Grar 4. Shiqmim 5. Gilat Total
B, C, E VI-VII HaOranim
Number/
N % N % N % N % N % N % N %
percentage
Retouched (or
8 16 46 42 260 159
backed) blade
Retouched (or
9 29 244 1459
backed) flake
Retouched
1 84 76
fragment
Backed knife 2 14
Total h. 20 17.5 59 40.1 374 35.6 118 17.0 260 15.4 1618 41.3 2449 32.2
i. Food preparing
Chopper 1 12 61
Total i. 1 0.9 12 0.7 61 1.6 74 1.0
j. Undefined
function
Microliths 3 28 40 24 108
Truncation 8 1 13
Ad hoc+
multiple+ 2 32 9 14 377
trimmed
Total j. 13 11.4 33 22.4 37 3.5 67 9.6 24 1.4 485 12.4 659 8.7
3917
Total 114 100.0 147 100.0 1052 100.0 695 100.0 1686 100.0 100.0 7611 100.0
+++
% of total
1.5 1.9 13.8 9.1 22.2 51.5 100.0
assemblage
Table 9.7. Inter-assemblage comparison of tools, including all sites and levels.
246 chapter nine
tions at the site. Furthermore, it seems that this assemblage also bears
some affinities to the stone industry of the Golan (Epstein 1998).
Selection of raw materials suggests the predominant use of locally
available stone, although stone from greater distances is also present.
Grinding dominates the assemblage, and evidence for pounding is rare.
Within the grinding paraphernalia a distinction should be made be-
tween large (probably food-processing) grinding tools made of basalt
Lower Upper
Perforated Flaked Various
Locus grinding grinding Vessels Total
items pieces items
stones stones
1 2 2
14 2 2
19 1 1 2
24 1 1
104 1 1 2
128 2 2
129 1 1
135 1 1
142 1 1
199 1 1
300 1 1
305 1 1 2
306 2 2
307 1 1
311 1 1
314 1 1
316 1 1 2
329 1 1
429 2 2 4
431 2 2
433 2 1 3
438 1 1 2
443 1 2 3
447 1 1
455 1 1
457 1 1
460 1 1
468 1 1
470 1 1 2
4007 1 1
Total 18 14 4 2 2 8 48
% 37.4 29.6 8.4 4.1 4.1 16.4 100
Capra/Ovis 52.1%
Conclusions
The faunal sample from the excavations at the Chalcolithic site of 'Ein-
Hilu is small, but significant, as it provides new data from a well-strat-
ified site. The bone assemblage includes the remains of both livestock
and wild game species, indicating that the Chalcolithic economy was
based on both hunting and husbandry. The almost exclusively hunted
species in the assemblage is the mountain gazelle.
The small percentage of young individuals of sheep and goat, and
the fact that the few cattle remains derive only from adult individuals,
suggest that livestock animals were raised and exploited primarily for
their secondary products (i.e. dairy products and wool for sheep and
goat; milk and labour for the cattle). Similar data are known from addi-
tional Chalcolithic sites in the Negev (e.g. Grigson 1995a; 1995b; 2007).
The fact that dairying was a major component of the 'Ein Hilu Chal-
colithic economy is supported by the presence of ceramic churns that
were found across the site. On the other hand, it seems that the culling
strategy of pigs was different. As they lack any secondary products, they
were raised solely for their meat and, therefore, were slaughtered at a
young age.
The economic strategy attested from the analysis of the 'Ein Hilu
Chalcolithic assemblage combines both hunting activities and raising of
livestock, including pigs. The latter result may be a consequence of the
fact that it was feasible to raise pigs in addition to herding sheep, goats,
and cattle. Therefore, it seems that the site was a permanent settlement.
Significantly, raising of pigs attests to the presence of water sources in
the vicinity of the site (see discussion in Hesse 1990). In addition, the
abundance of gazelle remains demonstrates the role of hunting among
the inhabitants.
Bos Ovis Capra Capra/ Gazella Sus Lepus
taurus aries hircus Ovis gazella scrofa capensis
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
Head
Horn 4 2 1 1
Occipital 1 1
Mandible Ramus 1 1 4 3
Mandible teeth 6 3 1 1 3 1
Maxilla teeth 8 2 1 1
Body
Atlas 1 1 2 2
Axis 2 2
Ver: Cervical 1 1 1 1
Ver: Thoracic 2 1
Ver: Lumbar 3 1
Forelimb
Scapula 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1
Humerus
1 1 1 1
proximal
Humerus distal 2 1 4 3
Radius proximal 1 1
Radius distal 1 1
Ulna 1 1 1 1
Metacarpus distal 1 1 1 1 1 1
Metacarpus
1 1
proximal III
Hindlimb
Pelvic 3 2 1 1
Femur 1 1
Tibia shaft 1 1
Tibia distal 2 2
Astragalus 1 1
Calcaneus 3 1
Metatarsus
3 2 2 1
proximal
Toes
Phalanx 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1
Phalanx 2 2 1 2 1 1 1
Phalanx 3 1 1
Metapod cond. 2 2
NISP 5 2 5 50 26 6 1 95
NISP – % 5.3 2.1 5.3 52.6 27.4 6.3 1.1 100.0
MNI 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 11
Table 9.13. Number of identified specimens (NISP), minimum number of element (MNE) and
minimum number of individuals (MNI) of each taxon represented in Stratum 1.
Capra hircus Capra/Ovis Sus scrofa
NISP MNE NISP MNE NISP MNE
Head
Horn 1 1
Occipital 1 1
Mandible ramus 1 1
Mandible teeth 2 1 1 1
Forelimb
Humerus distal 1 1
Femur distal 1 1
Hindlimb
Pelvic acetabulum 1 1
Femur distal 1 1
Toes
Phalanx 1 1 1
Metapod cond. 1 1
NISP 2 6 4 12
NISP – % 16.7 50.0 33.3 100
MNI 1 1 1 3
Table 9.14. Number of identified specimens (NISP), minimum number of element (MNE)
and minimum number of individuals (MNI) of each taxon represented in Stratum 2.
N Range Average
L L L
'Ein Hilu 1 33.27 33.27
Modern wild boar 19 34.29–45.38 39.83
Table 9.15. Measurements of the single swine tooth compared to modern wild
boar from northern Israel (5 females and 14 males). Tooth measurements (in
mm) taken by Haber (2001).
Table 9.16. Number of unfused bone and the total identified bones of each
species represented in Stratum 1.
266 chapter nine
Radiocarbon Dates16
Two wood samples were collected from two different excavation areas,
and submitted for radiocarbon dating. Sample RTT 5442 was collected
from a sealed locus (L468) below a floor (L407) in Area B. Sample RTT
5443 was collected from the primary deposition of organic remains on
Floor 145 in Area C.
The samples, both charred wood, were pretreated to remove possible
environmental contamination represented by inorganic carbon and
humid substances, according to the procedure presented in Yizhaq et
al. (2005). After pre-treatment the loss of material was quite high, with
16
This section was written by E. Boaretto, Radiocarbon and Cosmogenic Isotopes
Laboratory, Kimmel center for Archaeological science, Weizmann Institute.
268 chapter nine
only 28% and 14% (by weight) material left from RTT 5442 and RTT
5443 respectively. Such low sample recovery indicates that the charcoal
had undergone severe diagenesis. The cleaned material was oxidized
in vacuum to CO2. The content of carbon in the pre-treated material,
determined after the oxidation step, was about 70% carbon by weight.
Due to the small size the samples were prepared as graphite for the
measurement using the accelerator mass spectrometry technique.
The information about the sample type, collection position, radio-
carbon age, calibrated age, and stable carbon isotopes ratio is given in
Table 9.18. Radiocarbon ages in the third column are expressed in 14C
year BP (Before Present) according to convention (Stuiver and Polach
1977) with the standard deviation (± 1σ). Calibrated ages are deter-
mined for ± 1σ (68.2% probability that the correct age is included in
that interval), and for ± 2σ (95.4% probability that the correct age is in-
cluded in that interval). The calibrated intervals were determined using
the OxCal v. 3.10 of Bronk-Ramsey (Bronk-Ramsey 1995; 2001), and
the calibration data in Reimer et al. (2004). The probability distribu-
tions of the calibrated ages are presented in Figure 9.39.
Based on the radiocarbon age and the standard deviation, the two
samples are the same age, and the calibrated age ranges include the third
quarter of the 5th millennium for the ±2σ. Because only two samples
were dated, it is not possible to determine a chronological sequence
of the strata. Both samples are wood charcoal, and therefore because
of the ‘old wood effect’ the dates can be treated only as terminus post
quem. The time effect due to the nature of the samples can be different
in the two cases. A possible conclusion that can be based on the two
radiocarbon dates is that the site was most probably occupied during
the second half of the 5th millennium BCE.
14
C age ± 1σ Collection δ13C
# TYPE Calibrated date BCE
year BP site ‰ PDB
68.2% probability:
'Ein Hilu.
4450– 4320 (63.3%)
Area B,
RTT 5442 Charcoal 5515 ± 75 4290–4260 ( 4.9%) -24.2
L468,
95.4% probability:
B 4066
4530–4230
68.2% probability: 'Ein Hilu.
4460–4330 Area C,
RTT 5443 Charcoal 5535 ± 75 -26.2
95.4% probability: L144a,
4540– 4240 B 1051
Figure 9.39. Probability distribution of calibrated ages for samples RTT 5442
and RTT 5443.
270 chapter nine
General Conclusions
The excavation of 'Ein Hilu uncovered the remains of a Chalcolithic
settlement in the northern desert fringes of Samaria. As this is the only
site to have been excavated in this area, this study sheds new light on
the lifestyle and subsistence economy of the Chalcolithic people who
inhabited this virtually unexplored region.
The site includes at least three distinct habitation strata dating to
the Chalcolithic period. Stratum 1, the main habitation strata, dates to
the third quarter of the 5th millennium BCE. Lower phases excavated
probably date a little earlier in the same chronological horizon.
The inhabitants of 'Ein Hilu were permanent settlers employed in
a subsistence economy based on herding mixed with agriculture, and
possibly hunting and pastoral nomadism. This conclusion is based
upon the following evidence and analyses:
1. 'Ein Hilu is distinguished by its massive, planned architecture. The
fact that pigs were raised at the site further supports this conclusion, as
does the prevalence of handicraft flint tools, used for the production of
household utensils.
2. The bone assemblage includes both livestock and wild game spe-
cies. This indicates a possible combination of both hunting (mountain
gazelle – although the absence of arrowheads in the flint assemblage
remains an enigma) and livestock husbandry economy. Herding seems
to have been an important activity, as indicated by the high propor-
tion of cutting and butchering tools in the flint assemblage. The small
percentage of young sheep and goats, and the few remains of cattle de-
rived only from adult individuals, suggest that livestock were raised and
exploited primarily for secondary uses. These include dairy and wool
production for sheep and goats, and labour and milk production for
the cattle. This is further supported by the churns and weights in the
ceramic assemblage. In contrast, the culling strategy of pigs leads to the
conclusion that they were raised probably for their meat only.
3. Cereals, either wild or cultivated, were exploited to some extent.
This emerges from the modest number of flint sickle segments. Since
the waters of Wadi Malih are saline, the most suitable land for agri-
culture was located within the 30 ha valley to the south of the site. We
presume that only seasonal annual varieties were exploited, due to the
limited availability of fresh water and fertile soil.
'Ein Hilu’s location differs from the pattern explored by the author in
other Chalcolithic sites in the lower Jordan Valley and the desert fringes
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 271
Introduction1
The first two seasons of excavations at Fazael 2 (map ref. old Israel Grid
1913/1618) were conducted during February–May 2007 and February
2008.2 The site was selected for excavation for the following reasons:
1. It is located in the centre of a large group of Chalcolithic sites
in Wadi Fazael, one of the main settlement regions in the Jordan
Valley during that period.3
2. Preliminary survey data indicated that this is a very late Chal-
colithic site, dating from close to the elusive transitional phase
between the Chalcolithic and EB I periods.
3. Modern destruction, caused to parts of the site by bulldozers, has
rendered some elements especially vulnerable to degradation,
making excavation a priority.
The site is situated along the edge of the valley in Wadi Fazael, and
extends west from the Fazael settlement along both sides of the old
road to Ma'ale Ephraim (Figs. 10.1–10.2). The size of the ancient site is
presumed to be about 20 ha, and includes a number of non-contiguous
secondary sites spread along the northern bank of the ancient river
channel in Wadi Fazael (Fig. 10.2).4 The segment that was excavated
(Fazael 2) is located on the south-eastern slope of a rocky spur that
1
This chapter is based on a report accepted for publication by the Journal of the
Israel Prehistoric Society - Bar et al. in press.
2
The excavation was directed by the author, with assistance from Ziv Leiba and
Ari Levi (administration), Haim Winter (flint), Dror Ben-Yosef (stone), Nili Liphshitz
(dendrochronology), Sapir Haad (illustrations), Elisabetta Boaretto (14C analysis), Mi-
chael Eisenberg and the Zinman Institute of Archaeology of the University of Haifa
(scientific and logistic support), the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (scientific and
logistic support), and the Jordan Valley Regional Council (logistic support).
3
Two of the sites were partly excavated and have been published: Porath (1985)
and Peleg (2000).
4
In the absence of architectural contiguity between the small mounds it was de-
cided to define them for the time being as separate sites. One of the aims of future
research at the site will be to ascertain if the different sites are in fact one large site.
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 273
was damaged by earthmoving work between the end of the 1960s and
during the 1970s.
The site was first described briefly by Porath (1985), and in 2006, an
in-depth survey was conducted at the site within the framework of the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey. Small mounds with building remains
are scattered throughout the area, apparently randomly. Some of these
Sartaba
Ma'ale
Ephraim
Wa d
Yafit
i A
hm
ar
a el
Wa d i F a z
Fazael 2
160 Fazael 160
R
i v
e r
J o r a n
'Aujjeh
d
150 150
W a d i ' Au j j e
h
0 50
km
0 5
km Jericho
140 140
180 190 200
Figure 10.2. The Fazael Valley. Satellite photograph of the various Chalcolithic
sites that have been identified, and the presumed area of ancient settlement.
Source: Google Earth.
Stratum 3
Stratum 3 (plan in Fig. 10.4 and Section A–A’ in Fig. 10.5) was only ex-
posed in a limited area in Squares C 1 and C 2. The remains of two pits
which had been dug in the ancient raised conglomerate surface were
exposed (L68, L79; Fig. 10.7). The pits averaged 45 cm in diameter and
40 cm deep. The meagre remains of two hearths with an average diam-
eter of 24 cm were found near the pits. Scant finds were collected near
1 2 3
A -201.38
A'
L79 L54 L68
-200.89 L61
F78 -200.92
L48
-201.42 F63
F63
Hearth L66
C C
L120
-201.09
0 5m
1 2 3
A
-200.6
A'
L31 L38 W9
-200.8 L17
W10 W14 W12
-201.0 W74 W10
W9
-201.2 L61 L48
L48 L45
L61 L68
-200.4 L66
Section A-A
B
-200.0
W15 B'
-200.2 L5 L5 W9
-200.4
L18 L25
L36 W41
-200.6 L30 L37
Section B-B
Legend
C Conglometate
-200.0 C' Dark brown
-200.2 L6 L5
-200.4
L19 W15 L18 Light brown
L26 L30
-200.6 F35
0 2m
Section C-C
the pits and hearths, primarily from the raised conglomerate surface.
These finds included pottery characteristic of the Chalcolithic culture
(Fig. 10.17).
Stratum 2
The main element of Area A was exposed in this stratum: a broad house
of area 62 m2. The structure is divided into two rooms (a southern
room – Unit 1 and a northern room – Unit 2) and includes a courtyard
(Unit 3) of unknown size (Fig. 10.8).
The southern room (Unit 1, Fig. 10.6), delimited by Walls 74, 12, 11,
10 and 9, is 7 m long and ca. 4 m wide, and covers an area of 28 m2. Its
north-eastern corner had been destroyed by earthmoving equipment.
In the centre of the western wall are the remains of a wall stump (W14)
which postdates the first construction phase of the building. Its func-
tion is unclear.
The walls of the room were preserved to a height of three stone
0 5m
L108
L118
W64
-200.43 -200.00
A A
L101
L100
-200.11
B
#
L104
-200.41 L105
L19
L26 L18
L30
F35 # Unit 3
-200.57 L18
B L25 B
L22 F51 L36
-200.40 -200.56 L37
L44 L50+F51
L55 # L52
-200.48
L5 L115
-200.72 L56 -200.47
L117
-200.63 #
-200.28
L24 L67
-200.93 # -200.86
-200.75 -200.45
W41 -200.48 L65
W10
A
W9 W9 W9 -200.45
W14
-200.68
L49 -200.40 -200.33 A'
-200.62 L58
W64
-200.38
W74
L45
L3 L42
-201.07 L71 L109 L46 L106
-200.96 L17 L109 L112
L29 L16 L114 -200.39
L23 -200.69
-200.90
C Unit 1 L27 Unit 2 C
-200.80 L2 L32 -200.54 L39 L102
L4 L21 L103
-200.80 L62 L110 L107
W12
L8 L28
-200.84 L106
L111 L112
-201.09 L34 L33 L123
L57 L47 L75
L72 -200.66
-200.93
-200.82 -201.00 -200.51
L39
W11
W11
D -200.76 -200.89 D
1 2 3 4 5
Figure 10.9. Stratum 2: Unit 2 during the excavation, looking north-east. Note
the building entrance.
5
This Chapter presents the results of the first two seasons only. By the time that
this book was in press, additional excavations at the site had exposed parts of a very
large 620 m2 courtyard house (Bar in press a, b).
280 chapter ten
Figure 10.10. Wall (W15) from Stratum 1 above the paved levels of the court-
yard in Stratum 2 (Loci 26, 35).
two phases of activity in the courtyard (see Section C-C’ in Fig. 10.5).
Wall 64 continued from the north-western corner of Unit 2 in a
westerly direction for at least 14 m. It is 85 cm thick, and constructed
using the same masonry technique as the rest of the building. Wall
64 enclosed part of a large courtyard whose walls are partly exposed
on the surface. This courtyard extends to the north and east of the
building(Bar in press a, b).
The finds from Stratum 2 are characteristic of the later phases of
the Chalcolithic period (see below). Four 14C dates from the occupa-
tion level of this stratum (see below) coincide with the onset of the first
quarter of the 4th millennium BCE. This site is therefore one of the
latest Chalcolithic period settlement sites in the Jordan Valley.
Stratum 1
All that remained in this stratum was a wall (W15, plan in Fig. 10.11,
picture in Fig. 10.10, and sections in Fig. 10.5) excavated in Square B2.
Its remains continued beyond the limits of the excavation area. This
wall was 100–120 cm thick, and survived to a height of one course
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 281
1 2 3 4 5
Y Y
Z Z
-200.08
L122
L121
L113 A
A -200.24
-200.00
6
11
W
-200.11 C
B
15
-199.99
W
-200.22
C
'
B B
-200.26
-200.41
0 5m
C C
1 2 3 4 5
only. A possible extension to this wall (Wall 116) was found abutting its
north-eastern face. These walls, preserved up to the surface, postdate
the other elements in the excavation, and were recorded about 30 cm
higher than the latest floor in the courtyard of Stratum 2 (see Section
C–C’ in Fig. 10.5). No datable material was found abutting these walls,
and it is not known when they were constructed, though no post-Chal-
colithic artifacts have thus far been found at the site.
Two features (Loci 121, 122) which were excavated in Square A 4
share the same approximate base height as walls 15 and 116, and are
definitely later than Stratum 2 living surfaces. Therefore, I chose to
relate these features to Stratum 1. They seem to be rectangular instal-
lations, one of which (L121) is paved with small pebbles. No datable
material was found near these features.
282 chapter ten
Stratum 2
6
Parallels for all of the types appear in the tables attached to the figures.
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 283
Carinated bowls with S-shaped profiles (Fig. 10.12: 13–19) were also
common in the assemblage. Most were undecorated. This bowl-type
is usually considered a late type in the Chalcolithic repertoire, and is
common in late assemblages, such as Soham (North) or Modi'in.
Not common in Chalcolithic assemblages, flat shallow bowls (else-
where referred to as platters – Garfinkel 1998) were also found in this
stratum. Specimens of this type were mostly undecorated, and occurred
in different sizes (with diameters of 18–28 cm).
Hemispherical bowls were also found at the site (Fig. 10.13: 1–7). In
most cases these were undecorated and of varying size (with diameters
of 7–18 cm). While this form is common in Early Bronze Age sites, it is
also found in many Chalcolithic assemblages.
Deep and narrow cup-like bowls were also found (Fig. 10.13: 8–11),
including a number of types that are morphologically similar (with an
everted rim) but with different decorative styles. For the most part, they
were not slipped, though a few specimens were slipped on the inside
and outside of the vessel (Fig. 10.13: 11). Incised herringbone patterns
were a fairly common bowl decoration in this group (Fig. 10.13: 9).
Wide, deep basins and very large bowls (28–74 cm in diameter; Fig.
10.13: 12–20) were common, appearing in many different varieties, and
were very rarely slipped or decorated.
Holemouth jars
The six rims from Stratum 3 are of different types, and some do not
appear in Stratum 2. These include holemouth jars with a plain or cut
rim (Fig. 10.17: 10–12); a cut and thickened rim that is inverted (Fig.
10.17: 13); a thickened rim that is bevelled and inverted (Fig. 10.17: 15)
and a holemouth with a gutter on the rim (Fig. 10.17: 14).
Jars
Noteworthy among the jars: a jar with an everted diagonal rim (Fig.
10.17: 18) and two amphoriskoi, one with a slightly everted neck (Fig.
10.17: 17) and the other with a rim that is folded out (Fig. 10.17: 16).
The latter two are known from Stratum 2. The large jars from Stratum
2 do not appear in the Stratum 3 assemblage.
Discussion of Pottery
A general typological similarity exists between the two strata, despite
the small sample from Stratum 3. In Stratum 3 the absence of the large
jars, cups and the hemispherical bowls, which are characteristic of
Stratum 2, stands out. Another exception is the unique holemouth jars
which appear only in Stratum 3. Types, such as the churn, which are
well known in many assemblages of the Chalcolithic period, are com-
pletely absent here.
There is some similarity between Fazael 2 and the other Chalcolithic
assemblages from the Jordan Valley (particularly Teleilat Ghassul Strata
I–IV, 'Ein Hilu and 'Ein Gedi – see the attached tables), but there are also
differences. For example, at Fazael 2 there is a relatively large number
of hemispherical bowls and large jars with wavy rim decorations, and
a very low frequency of slips and plastic ornamentation. This possibly
stems from the fact that the site is later than the three aforementioned
sites.
It should be noted that the handles and the decorations that were
found at Fazael 2 and Shoham (North) are almost identical. The matter
should be re-examined in the future when the catalogue of types from
Fazael 2 is expanded in the coming excavation seasons.
286 chapter ten
types. The figures for the Canaanean types conform to those summa-
rized by Rosen (1989: 208) for Early Bronze Age sites.
Additional attributes to be considered are backing and truncations.
All Chalcolithic types were backed and had at least one truncation (Fig.
10.19: 1–2). A feature quite rare in the Canaanean technology, present
in six of the Canaanean sickles (14%), is the backing in the traditional
Chalcolithic mode (described in Rosen 1997: 48): four of these (9.3%)
had at least one truncation (Fig. 10.19: 3–4, 6–7).
The typical Chalcolithic sickle segments were produced from flint of
different qualities and colours, but in a few cases typically Chalcolithic
backed pieces were produced from the same light brown, high quality
flint as the Canaanean pieces (Fig. 10.19: 3–4, 6–7, 9).
A Canaanean blade core (Fig. 10.20) was found on the surface
adjacent to the excavation area. According to its shape and composi-
tion it is part of the Canaanean industry, produced from fine-grained,
light brown tabular flint, with a single striking platform. Tabular flint
seems relatively rare for the production of Canaanean blade cores in
Israel (Rosen 1997: 46), but it is reported from Titriş Höyük in Tur-
key (Hartenberger et al. 2000: 55). At both Fazael and Titriş Höyük
the single striking platform was carefully prepared by the removal of
flakes across both the width and length of the edge. The end opposite
the striking platform was prepared by carefully detaching flakes from
both cortex-covered surfaces in order to create a sharp ridge. This kind
of preparation was also observed at Har Haruvim (Rosen 1997: figs.
10.3.5.8–1; 10.3.6.8–1, 2; Shimelmitz et al. 2000: figs. 3a, 4).
The presence of Canaanean technology, linked with the fact that no
celt tools were present in the assemblage, could lead to a possible con-
clusion that the assemblage should be attributed to the Early Bronze
Age. This thesis is contradicted by the fact that typical backed Chalco-
lithic sickles were also present. For this dilemma there could be three
reasonable answers: 1) The assemblage originates from a local tradi-
tion. 2) The site should be located in a time of transition from the Chal-
colithic to the EBA. 3) The Canaanean technology had already been
introduced in the latest phases of the Chalcolithic period of the Jordan
Valley. In view of the excavation data the author believes that the third
option is the most probable.
In a recent paper, Milevski, Fabian and Marder (2011) claimed that
the presence of the Canaanean technology at the site might be the result
of an EB I flint workshop being located in open spaces between the
Chalcolithic houses. They based their hypothesis merely on the pres-
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 305
Table 10.1. Lithic assemblage. The data presented in this table are based only on
the clearly defined loci. Artifacts from disturbed or mixed loci were excluded
from the statistics.
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 307
at 'En Esur (Rowan 2006: fig. 6.6: 2). The shallow mortars are made of
hard limestone pebbles, 3.0–3.5 cm in diameter and ca. 1 cm deep. It
seems that they were used for delicate crushing. Parallels were found in
the Golan (Epstein 1998: pl. XXXVIII: 7, 9).
Querns
Two broken items were found: an upper stone made of basalt, and a
lower stone made of Nubian sandstone. Both are in a poor state of pres-
ervation, and it is difficult to reconstruct their original shapes.
Socket
One socket made of hard limestone was found in situ (L39, Fig. 10.8),
for use in a door hinge. The cupmark in it is 6.5 cm in diameter and 3
cm deep.
9
See Milevski’s proposal in this matter (Edelstein et al. 1998: 72, fig. 5.16: 2–4).
312 chapter ten
Shiqmim (Levy 1987: figs. 6.12: 1–2; 14.14: 2, 5), Cave of the Treasure
(Bar-Adon 1980: 152), Abu Matar (Perrot 1955: fig. 20) and Kissufim
Road (Bar-Yosef 2002: fig. 7.1: 6, 9, 11).
The 28 stone artifacts that were found in the excavation date to the lat-
est phases of the Chalcolithic period, and attest to work done at the site.
The finds point in the following directions:
– The predominant raw material from which the objects are
made is limestone (14 items) followed by basalt (8 items), Nu-
bian sandstone (2 items and haematite (1 item). Limestone and
basalt are found near the site (e.g. basalt from the region of
Wadi Far'ah): however, the closest source of Nubian sandstone
is east of the River Jordan in the vicinity of the city es-Salt, east
of the Dead Sea. The presence of this type of stone at Fazael is
indicative of ties between the two sides of the Jordan, as is the
haematite, which also comes from afar (Egypt/Jordan?).
– The stone objects show that much of the food was processed by
crushing, and a smaller amount was ground.
– Two loom weights were used in weaving, and attest to the exis-
tence of this craft at the site.
Metal Tools
Three metal objects were found during the excavation: a broken copper
chisel; a broken copper piece identified as a possible base of a crown;
and a copper axe (Fig. 10.22).10 Although not yet fully studied, these
items are typical Chalcolithic craftsmanship, and therefore support the
idea that this site is well within the Chalcolithic continuum.
10
The metal assemblage has not yet been studied. The tools and material were pre-
liminarily analyzed by S. Shalev, University of Haifa. The copper axe was found in the
2009 season, and is briefly presented here because of its similarity to the axes from the
Nahal Mishmar hoard.
314 chapter ten
11
The section was written by G. Bar-Oz and N. Raban-Gerstal, University of Haifa.
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 315
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Head
Horn 2 1
Mandible ramus 1 1 1 1
Mandible teeth 4 4 2 2 1 1
Maxilla teeth 3 3
Body
Atlas 1 1
Axis 1 1
Ver: Cervical 2 1
Ver: Thoracic 1 1
Ver: Lumbar 1 1
Rib 1 1 1 1
Forelimb
Scapula glenoid fossa 2 2 1 1
Humerus distal 1 1 1 1
Radius proximal 4 3 1 1
Ulna proximal 1 1
Ulna distal 1 1
Metacarpus proximal 1 1 1 1
Hindlimb
Pelvic 5 2
Tibia distal 1 1 1 1
Astragalus 1 1 2 2
Calcaneus 2 1
Metatarsus proximal 1 1
Toes
Phalanx 2 5 4
316 chapter ten
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Metapos condyle 1 1 3 3 1 1
NISP 4 1 46 3 5 2 61
NISP – % 7 2 75 5 8 3 100.0
MNI 1 1 2 1 1 1 7
Burials
Two burials were discovered in the corners beneath the floor of the
building (Stratum 2), one in a jar, and the other lacking a burial con-
tainer. Apart from its enhancing the general mortuary corpus, this is
a contribution of rare preservation, which makes it possible to recon-
struct important aspects of the burial process.12 From the standpoint
of methodology and technology of the analysis, the CT developed by
the Philips Company,13 was used here for the first time, and thereby
precluded the need for actually excavating the jar and its contents.
The jar burial contained an infant no more than six months old, and
the second burial contained a foetus. Both were primary burials inten-
tionally placed beneath the floors in the northern corners of unit 1.14
The burial jar was in secondary use, and the rim was intentionally
retouched so that it could be buried immovably upside down, beneath
the floor. The base of the jar was also retouched so as to insert the in-
fant. The rim was sealed with a clay stopper. This is the only evidence
of clay used as a stopper in jar burials (Fig. 10.23).
The infant that was inserted inside the burial container was placed
in a foetal position, bent over on the stopper and the side of the vessel
(Figs. 10.23-10.24). The CT examinations did not reveal any funerary
offerings, except for a tiny copper object less than a centimetre in size,
12
The analysis of this burial is still in progress. For a preliminary report see Eshed
and Bar 2012. For additional photographs of the burial see Chapter 5.
13
The author wishes to thank the Philips Company for the assistance they provided
in the examinations.
14
The southern corners of the building were destroyed, and it was impossible to
ascertain whether there were also burials beneath the floor.
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 317
Figure 10.23. CT of the infant burial. Note the light-coloured clay stopper
on which the infant is resting, and the intentional retouching of the rim
and the base.
probably a bead (?). This object was observed on the skull of the infant.
An upper lid for the burial vessel was prepared from the base of another
jar. The lid was retouched so that it would fit exactly when placed on
the two small ledge handles of the burial jar.
The burial container was found filled with earth.15 It is still unclear
whether the vessel was intentionally filled, or if soil had slowly pen-
etrated in through cracks in the jar from the time of the interment until
it was exposed in the excavation. At the time of interment stones and
pottery sherds were intentionally placed beneath the bottom of the jar
(where the original rim was) in order to stabilize it on the ground.
15
It is not possible to determine if the jar was buried when the building was con-
structed (a construction offering?), or during the course of its use.
318 chapter ten
Radiometric Dates
Four charcoal samples were sent to the Weizmann Institute in Rehovot,
Israel, for radiometric analysis16. They were taken from loci in Stratum
2 (Table 10.2).
The results of the samples from Stratum 2 are very similar, giving
an average calibrated terminus post quem date of about 4000 BCE (Fig.
10.25). The date is probably later (toward the middle of the first quarter
of the 4th millennium BCE), in light of the double curve of the graph of
the carbon emitted in the cases that were checked.
These are among the latest published dates for the Chalcolithic
period in the Jordan Valley, and are similar to the reliable dates from
Teleilat Ghassul and Tel Abu Hamid. Later dates, from settlement sites,
have only been received from the Golan sites (Carmi et al. 1995) and
from Shiqmim (Burton and Levy 2001), but these are in dispute (Gilead
1994).
14
C age ± 1σ δ13C
RTT TYPE Calibrated date BCE Sample ID
year BP ‰ PDB
68.2% probability:
4230–4190 (13.8%)
L72, B188,
5629 Charcoal 5285 +/-45 4170–4040(54.4%) -26.5
Hearth
95.4 % probability:
4240–3980 (95.4%)
68.2% probability:
4045–3965 (68.2%)
95.4% probability:
5630 Charcoal 5205+/-45 L47, B152 -25.3
4230–4190 ( 4.2%)
4170–4090( 9.4%)
4080– 3940 (81.8%)
68.2% probability:
4040–4010 (22.2%)
4005–3950 (46.0%)
5631 Charcoal 5175+/-5 95.4% probability: L32, B145 -24.9
4160–4130 (1.6%)
4060–3920 (83.7%)
3880–3800 (10.1%)
68.2% probability:
4040–4010 (22.2%)
4005–3950 (46.0%)
5632 Charcoal 5175+/-45 95.4% probability: L23, B123 -26.7
4160–4130 (1.6%)
4060–3920.(83.7%)
3880–3800 (10.1%)
16
The analysis was made by E. Boaretto, Radiocarbon and Cosmogenic Isotopes
laboratory, Kimmel center for archaeological science, Weizmann Institute.
320 chapter ten
Dendrochronology17
During the course of the excavation 11 samples of charred wood were
treated and examined in the Botany Laboratory in the Institute of Ar-
chaeology of Tel Aviv University. The identification of the species of
the tree was based on the three–dimensional structure of the lignin as
examined by a microscope in these sections, comparing them with sec-
tions that were prepared from modern trees and shrubs.
Ten of the samples were tamarisk, and one was a shrub that belongs
to the beet family, which was not possible to identify more precisely.
The tamarisk was the main fuel used by the residents of the site, and it is
possible that it was also incorporated in the building masonry (perhaps
as part of the roof: however, no beams were found and it is not possible
to prove this supposition).
17
The dendochronology finds were analyzed by Nili Liphschitz of the Botanical
Laboratories of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 321
General Conclusions
Fazael 2 is a key site to understanding the latest phases of the Chalco-
lithic period in the Jordan Valley.
Its main characteristics are:
– The radiometric dates place it among the latest settlements in the
Jordan Valley, and it was contemporary with the end of the settlement
in the Beer Sheva Valley.
– The site is spread across the northern ancient bank of Wadi Fazael
(a location that is similar to the sites of Wadi Far'ah, Grar, etc.). Its
original area is estimated at 20 ha.
– The spatial and residential architecture is different from that of
the excavated Chalcolithic sites in the region. The distribution of the
residential complexes is more extensive, unlike that at Teleilat Ghassul,
and the buildings include large spacious units that are not characteristic
of other sites in the region. Comparing this site to the nearby Fazael 7
site (Chapter 11) and to the surveyed Fazael 5 site, verifies the notion
that a new type of building is attested in the Fazael valley – the large
multi-courtyard building, where each complex size is about 1,000 m2
(Bar in press a, b).
– The flint artifacts attest to the beginning of the use of Canaa-
nean blades at the end of the Chalcolithic period, which is contrary
to accepted opinion that ascribed their appearance to the EB I. This
Canaanean blade technology was employed coevally with traditional
Chalcolithic modes of flint knapping, suggesting a transitional phase in
the development of lithic technology.
Since Stratum 2 at Fazael 2 exemplifies both Chalcolithic and EBA
lithic traditions, it is tempting to propose that this lithic co-existence
represents a cultural transition of wider scope – an intermediate phase
between the two periods. The ceramic material, while overwhelmingly
Chalcolithic, does feature some EB I traits that might support such a
conclusion. Even so, nothing in the pottery necessarily belongs to the
EB I. The radiocarbon dates, although few, place this stratum squarely
in the latest known phases of the Chalcolithic.
Thus, based on current evidence, Stratum 2 at Fazael 2 should be re-
garded as a very late Chalcolithic site – one of the latest in the southern
Levant. It may signify the end of a Chalcolithic/EB I transitional phase,
stretching from about 3900 to 3600 BCE, the latter date being the earli-
est widely accepted for the EB Ia.
CHAPTER ELEVEN
Introduction
In February 2009 an excavation was conducted at Fazael 7 (map ref.
Old Israel Grid 1914/1615), a Chalcolithic site located in the Jordan
Valley, about 20 km north of Jericho (Fig. 11.1).1 The site was selected
for excavation within the framework of a regional study dealing with
a large group of Chalcolithic and EB I sites located in the Wadi Fazael
flood plain. This was one of the principal areas of settlement in the
Jordan Valley during these periods.
The vast Chalcolithic settlement, which the site was part of, extends
from the modern-day settlement of Fazael to the west, along both sides
of the old road toward Ma‘ale Ephraim. It covers an area of about 20
ha, and is divided into non-contiguous secondary sites: Fazael 1, Fazael
2, Fazael 5, Fazael 7 (named by the Manasseh Hill Country Survey),
and the salvage excavations of Porath (1985) and Peleg (2000) within
the precincts of the modern village. These sites were located on the
northern bank of the ancient riverbed of Wadi Fazael (Fig. 11.2). The
site that was excavated and is discussed here is located on level ground
north of the riverbed, near the village’s western fence.
In the centre of the site is a prominent mound. Remains of an ex-
tremely wide broad house were visible at the time the site was discov-
ered during the survey. Three courtyards of different shapes adjoined
the building – a square one that extended to the east, and two rect-
angular ones to the north and north-west. Another, smaller, mound
was identified on the security road of the modern village east of the
main mound. The ceramic finds recovered from the survey of the two
mounds were ascribed to the Chalcolithic period. Meagre wall remains
1
The excavation was directed by Shay Bar and Uri Davidovitch, with assistance
from Ronny Zuckerman (drafting and fauna), Ari Levy (administration), Haim Winter
(flint), Sapir Haad (figures: plans, sections and finds), Michael Eisenberg, and the Zin-
man Institute of Archaeology (scientific support), the Manasseh Hill Country Survey
(scientific and logistical support) and the Jordan Valley Regional Council (logistical
support).
the excavations at fazael 7 323
were also ‘floating’ on the surface level on top of the main mound, and a
few body sherds of vessels dating to the Late Roman period were found
around them. It seems that a temporary agricultural structure stood
there at this time. That building was not excavated in the 2009 season,
and is not discussed in the current report.
Sartaba
Ma'ale
Ephraim
Yafit
Wa d
iA
h m
ar
a el
Wa d i F a z Fazael 7
Fazael
160 160
R
i v
e r
J o r a n
'Aujjeh
d
150 150
W a d i ' Au j j e
h
0 50
km
0 5
km Jericho
140 140
180 190 200
Figure 11.2. The northern Fazael Valley. Aerial photograph showing the
Chalcolithic sites identified in the region. The presumed area of the ancient
settlement, correct as of 2008, is shown by the solid line.
the habitation level in L34, and above the fill were remains of the stone
collapse (L32) from the building (Fig. 11.6). These layers were overlain
with a layer of disturbed fill that had a coarse-grained texture. From
this point on an unknown period of time elapsed after the house was
abandoned, during which a dusty-grained layer about 15 cm thick ac-
cumulated. Above this layer came more stone collapse, followed by the
stones of the walls that fell in somewhat diagonal horizons near the
walls. It seems that these were part of a rapid process, because of the
horizontal stratification that was noted. Disturbed, irregular fill ap-
peared above the collapse phase during a period when the building’s
remains slowly disintegrated, and the later construction occurred on
the surface level.
Other Courtyards
Two other courtyards that have a rectangular outline were identified on
the surface, located to the north and north-east of the square courtyard.
The first one extends north-east of the meeting of Walls 23 and 46 of
the square courtyard. After a distance of about 10 m it turns west and
parallel to Wall 23 of the square courtyard, for a distance of about 25 m
(until adjoining Wall 24, which constitutes the continuation of Wall 27
in Squares G12, H12). In this way another space covering a presumed
area of about 400 m2 was enclosed. The second courtyard is a continu-
M L K J I H
L11
-211.35 L15 L32 -211.00
L34 W1 L5 L31
-210.90
W1
L29
10
L6 L41 -210.89 -210.88
10
-211.31 -211.54
L9
#
-211.42 L11 L34 W7 L8
W33
W2
W4 -210.00
L28
L37
-211.60 -210.80 -211.46
L14 W27
-211.17 L38
W24
-211.70 -210.86 -211.40
W23
-211.87
-211.15
L26
L25
W3
-211.16
12 12
-211.63
13 13
14 14
15 15
W46
16 16
0 5m
M L K J I H
Figure 11.3. Survey plan before excavation (top right) and general plan of the 2009 season.
328 chapter eleven
ation of the first courtyard to the west, and its eastern wall is W24. At
present the area of this courtyard is still unclear.
These two courtyards were built of the same masonry as that of the
square courtyard. So far no openings have been identified in the array
of courtyards.
The presumed area of this complex, including the main broad house
and the three adjacent courtyards, is approximately 1,500 m2. It is sig-
nificantly larger than any domestic or other complexes known to us
until now in the Chalcolithic period of the southern Levant2. However,
it is still unclear how we should interpret the irregularity of its size and
massiveness.
2
Banning noted a few large dwelling units in Tell 3 at Teleilat Ghassul (Banning
2011: 72), but these are based on the Pontifical Biblical Institute excavations at the site
(Mallon et al. 1934; Koeppel 1940), and are not conclusive.
the excavations at fazael 7 329
(15 cm). The small ones are especially common and both are typical of
the Fazael sites during this period.
Nine of these diagnostic items (eight bowls and one jar, 11.5% of the
finds) were slipped and have a red stripe on the rim. Plastic ornamenta-
tion is infrequent: a single body sherd adorned with rope ornamenta-
tion, a knob ornamentation and a sherd decorated with incised stripes
were found.
Methodology
The material was initially sorted into three main groups:
A. Cores and debitage.
B. ‘Half-finished’ items. Items that are lacking secondary treatment,
such as flakes, blades and bladelets. Tools can be prepared from
these by means of retouching (secondary knapping), or they can
be used for various tasks without further knapping.
C. Retouched tools: items from Group B that underwent secondary
knapping (retouching) in order to render them a suitable shape
for their intended function. They are classified according to a ty-
pological list based on morphology and possible functions.
In our opinion, the group of tools (C) should be further sorted if
possible. This is based on the specific tasks that are indicative of the
economy and lifestyle: field-work, wood-working, butchery, etc. The
principles of the method are described elsewhere (Bar 2008: Section
5.5.7). The percentages of the main groups (A, B, C) were calculated
based on their relative part of the total assemblage. The percentages of
the different categories in the main groups were based on their part of
the entire group.
The origin of the raw material was not studied; however, the flint
was brown or grey, of poor or mediocre quality, and many of the faces
of the products were irregular. Items made of fine-grained, light brown
flint were rare. A Munsell colour test of the flint was not done.
flakes (72.6% of Group B), most of which were small, about 3 cm long.
The average measurement along the knapping axis of ninety flakes
that were selected at random from Locus 11 was 3.05 cm. Only three
items were 6 cm long and two were 5 cm long were measured amongst
this group. The cores from which these items were knapped were not
found. The few blades (7.5%) in the assemblage were short, and many
were broken. The quantity of bladelets was relatively high, constituting
20.6% of Group B. These were usually short, and some were broken.
Even though several short fragments with a trapezoidal cross-section
(with two ridges on the back of the item) or a triangular cross-section
(with one ridge on the back of the item) were found, it is not possible
to determine if these were produced using Canaanean technology. No
blades were found that were clearly produced employing this technol-
ogy in the 2009 season.
Group C – tools (0.8%). The number of tools is extremely small. Most
were produced from small flint items, involving a minimal investment
of secondary treatment (retouching), probably in order to perform an
immediate task. Due to their small number it was not possible to sort
them further according to tasks. The two sickle blades indicate grain-
harvesting but the scope of this particular activity is unclear. One of the
sickle blades had a retouched back, truncation and sickle sheen – clearly
a Chalcolithic type. The second was knapped on a thin bladelet of fine
quality light brown flint; it has a trapezoidal cross-section, truncation
and sickle sheen.
Discussion
The total number of items (N = 3,176) is relatively large and shows that
flint was used as a raw material to produce items for everyday use. The
presence of knapped flint products from the three main groups (A –
debitage, B – ‘half-finished’ products, C – retouched tools) shows the
existence of a flint industry. The nature of the finds is that of a not very
advanced industry from the standpoint of production technology and
the selection of raw material. The almost complete absence of pounders
suggests that these may have been kept elsewhere, in places that have
not yet been located.
The small number of cores is remarkable. Judging by the quantities
of items from Groups A and B it seems that not all of the cores were dis-
covered in the excavation. In the loci where the material was wet-sifted
the large quantity of chips altered the proportions between the groups
338 chapter eleven
of items compared with those in which the material was only collected
or dry-sifted. For this reason the loci cannot be compared with respect
to the nature and scope of the activity connected to the treatment and
use of the flint.
The amount of half-finished products, particularly flakes and a few
blades, which were not retouched (N = 509, 16.0%) is rather consider-
able. Due to the small number of retouched tools it seems that at least
some of the flakes were an end-product and were used for various pur-
poses. No analysis was done of the use-marks on them.
Such a small number of tools (N = 27, 0.8%) is unusual for an exca-
vated site. Except for a single fragment of a fan scraper and two sickle
blades, there are no diagnostic tools. The few other tools that were
produced are of poor quality, and were knapped from inferior brown
or grey flint that is unsuitable for preparing large items. The industry
produced mostly small flakes and a relatively large amount of debitage.
All of the tools, apart from the broken fan scraper and the sickle blades,
are ascribed to a group that is produced with a minimum amount of ef-
fort, and have been defined as ad hoc tools (Rosen 1997: 34, 158–159).
Based on the ceramic finds, the site is ascribed to the Chalcolithic
period, but in the absence of core tools – axes, adzes and picks – it is
anomalous. In addition, the small number of sickle blades and tools in
general makes one wonder. These tools were probably kept in areas that
have not yet been excavated, or it may be related to an orderly abandon-
ment of the site, whereby all of the valuable tools were taken away.
It should be mentioned that no signs of a Canaanean blade industry
were found at Fazael 7 in the first season of excavations described here,
but in the final phases of preparation of this book they were found in
the 2011 season of excavation at the site. The Canaanean blade indus-
try first appeared in the region in the latest phases of the Chalcolithic
period (Bar and Winter 2010: 33–47), and this site is an addition to the
previously published blades from Fazael 2.
The small assemblage does not allow for a functional analysis of the
tools and for studying the life-style of the population. The only sickle
blade with sickle sheen is indeed a Chalcolithic type, but conclusions
cannot be drawn from just a single item.
the excavations at fazael 7 339
Methods
Bones were collected during the excavation from a 5 mm mesh used to
sift 10% of the excavated sediment. The bones were cleaned in water.
When further cleaning was necessary, 5% acetic acid was used.
The anatomical and taxonomical identification was performed at the
lowest possible taxonomic level according to the indicative parts and
regions. Bones not identified at a taxonomic level were documented ac-
cording to the following body size groups: small, representing animals
such as rabbits; medium, representing animals such as goats, sheep and
gazelle; large, representing animals such as cattle and equids. Differ-
entiating domestic sheep and goat was not possible, therefore, these
remains were pooled and referred to as sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis). In
one case, differentiation was possible according to Zeder and Lapham
(2010). For cattle, at the present stage of research, it is not possible to
determine whether the cattle bones represent domesticated animals
or not. Remains of Bos taurus - a domesticated species of this family,
were documented at neighbouring sites in the Jordan Valley in the later
phases of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period (Grigson 1995a); therefore,
we cannot rule out the presence of this species at Fazael 7.
The total number of identified bones (NISP) is given as counts and
as percentage of the assemblage as a whole. The minimum number of
elements (MNE) is given for each species and group size.
Aging of all species was based on long bone fusion and dental wear
stages, following Silver (1969) and Grant (1982).
All bones were examined for surface modifications resulting from
human activities (e.g. cutting, burning and breaking), animal activities
(e.g. gnawing, predation and digestion) and other factors (e.g. weather,
vegetation and pathologies). The recording of the surface modifications
was conducted following Binford (1981) for cut-mark descriptions,
Stiner et al. (1995) for stages of burning, and Behrensmeyer (1978) for
weathering stages of damage.
4
This section was written by R. Zuckerman, University of Haifa.
342 chapter eleven
Description of finds
A total of 88 bones and bone fragments were identified and recorded
(Table 11.2). The prevalence of the undifferentiated caprine category
of sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis) and mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella) is
high, constituting about 60% and about 30% respectively of the total as-
semblage. Cattle (Bos sp.) and equids (Equus sp.) were considerably less
represented at about 3% and 5% respectively of the total assemblage.
Sheep/goat remains exhibited a slight predominance of meat-rich
body elements (e.g. long bones, scapula, pelvis). A similar proportion
of meat-rich to meat-poor elements indicates that complete carcasses
were butchered/consumed on the site. For gazelle, mostly meat-rich
body elements were present, probably indicating that these animals
were killed and butchered at a distance from the site.
Only 14 sheep and goat bones were complete enough to assess age;
therefore, reliable mortality data could not be obtained. Based on bone
fusion stages and tooth-wear patterns, all caprine were killed at an age
of 0.5 years and consumed on the site. For gazelle, there was a radius
bone of one older individual, approximately 3 years old. Slaughter of
animals at a young age suggests that animals were raised and exploited
for meat. Breakage and fracture patterns of the long bones suggest that
most of the bones (about 73%) were broken close to the time of the
animal’s death, perhaps due to human activity, rather than a result of
long-term external processes.
Evidence for butchery was found on two bones (on gazelle’s p. radius
and on caprine’s d. humerus). According to Binford (1981) this butch-
ery damage is a result of dismemberment of the carcass (Table 11.3).
Burned bones were recorded according to six stages, as described by
Stiner et al. (1995). Table 11.3 shows that about 25% of the identified
bones were burnt, about 90% of these being extensively burned. The
main concentrations of burnt bones were identified in the vicinity of
the two hearths discovered in Square L/11.
Only a few bones (about 10% of the total assemblage) presented a
slight surface modification caused by weathering. Surface modifica-
tions resulting from animal activities (e.g. gnawing) were found on only
two humerus bones. Based on these results and the weather marks, it
seems that the bones were buried within a relatively short time, which
prevented their extensive exposure to animal activity.
In summary, the preliminary conclusions presented here suggest a
mixed economy of domestic animal husbandry (sheep/goat and prob-
the excavations at fazael 7 343
ably cattle) and wild animal hunting (mountain gazelle). This combi-
nation is known from other Chalcolithic sites in the northern Jordan
Valley (Chapter 9; Bar et al. 2008).
Slaughter of sheep/goat at a young age suggests that the animals were
raised and exploited for meat. The mountain gazelle, the only animal
that was hunted, played an important role in the economy of the site.
The paucity of cattle and equid bones hampers our understanding of
their role and contribution to the Fazael 7 population during the Chal-
colithic period.
Further excavations will expand the data base and shed light on the
components and nature of the economic basis of the site, as reflected by
the faunal assemblage.
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Head
Horn 1 1
Mandible 2 1 1 1
Mandible teeth 1 1 2 2
Maxilla teeth 3 1 1 1
Body
Atlas 1 1
Axis 1 1
Ver: Cervical 1 1
Ver: Thoracic 1 1
Ver: Lumbar 3 3
Rib 2 2
Forelimb
Scapula 2 2 2 2 2 2
Humerus 1 1 6 4 4 4 1 1
Radius 5 3 1 1
Ulna 1 1 1 1
Metacarpus 4 2 4 3 1 1
Hindlimb
Pelvic 4 3 2 2
Femur 4 3 1 1
344 chapter eleven
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Tibia 5 4 4 4
Astragalus 1 1
Metatarsus 1 1
Toes
Phalanx 1 5 5 1 1
Phalanx 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
Phalanx 3 1 1 1 1
NISP 2 1 52 25 4 4 88
% NISP 2.27% 1.14% 59.09% 28.41% 4.55% 4.55% 100.00%
MNI 1 1 3 3 1 1 10
No. of % of
% Total
damaged damaged Total %
NISP
bones bones
Cut-marked* Dismemberment 2 100.00 2.27 2 2.27
Gnawed 2 100.00 2.27 2 2.27
Slightly burned (1) 1 4.55 1.14
Lightly burned (2) 1 4.55 1.14
Burned** Fully carbonized (3) 9 40.91 10.23 22 25.00
Localized (4) 6 27.27 6.82
>half calcined (5) 5 22.73 5.68
Stage 2 7 77.78 7.95
Weathered*** 9 10.23
Stage 3 2 22.22 2.27
Fresh 11 73.33 11.36
12 13.64
Fracture Dry 1 6.67 1.14
New 4 100.00 4.55 4 4.55
General Summary
In Fazael 7 a new and unknown settlement model that dates to the later
phases of the Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant was found.
Parts of a residential complex were excavated, including a building and
courtyards, whose size and manner of construction are unknown in
this period. The built and covered area totals 120 m2, and it is one of the
largest roofed structure of the period discovered to date. Splitting the
unit into two rectangular spaces by means of a wall in order to cover an
8 m span is also an innovation. At this point in the research it is already
apparent that three different courtyards adjoin the main building. In
addition, such a number of courtyards covering an area in excess of
1,000 m2 is unprecedented.
There are several characteristic types that are missing from the typi-
cal ceramic assemblage, such as the churn, cup, and cornet. The flint
assemblage, which is surprising in its paucity and lack of bi-facial tools,
is atypical of the Chalcolithic period. The reason for these phenomena
probably stems from the limited scope of the excavation.
The characteristics of the site make it unique, but for now it essen-
tially appears to be domestic. The economic data indicate a combina-
tion of growing field-crops, grazing sheep/goats, and hunting (which is
uncommon in the period). In this way Fazael 7 is analogous with the
Chalcolithic site of 'Ein Hilu in Wadi Malih, which was excavated by
the author (Chapter 9), and there too the economy was composed of
these three factors.
The great similarity in the architecture and the proximity to other
sites in the Fazael Valley (e.g. Fazael 2 and Porath’s salvage excavation)
indicate a large village spread across the flood plain of the wadi, cover-
ing a presumed area of about 20 ha. However, the minor differences be-
tween Fazael 2 and 7 may possibly indicate that the latter site is slightly
earlier than the former one. These questions may possibly be answered
in future excavation seasons.
CHAPTER TWELVE
Introduction1
During February, March and September 2007 and April 2008 excava-
tions were conducted at the site of Sheikh Diab 22 (Old Israel Grid ref.
1904/1616), located in the Jordan Valley, on a spur along the edge of
Wadi Fazael, about 20 km north of Jericho (Fig. 12.1), and 1 km west of
the settlement of Fazael.
The site was discovered in 2000, within the framework of the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey, and has not yet been published. The
site’s name derives from the nearby Tell es-Sheikh Diab.
This chapter presents the results of the excavation, and analyses the
main archaeological finds, putting them into the broader geographical
and cultural framework of the period.
The ancient remains cover a presumed area of 1.5 ha. The buildings
are spread across the middle of the site and on the slopes of a steeply
sloping spur (see Section A-A’ below), formed of limestone chalky rock
belonging to the Mount Scopus group, and desert travertine soil. The
hilltop at trig. point E.P. -86 overlooks the site from the south-west, as
does the top of the spur on which the site is located (Fig. 12.2). Wadi
Fazael flows by the northern slope of the site, and Fazael Springs are
located about 2 km to the west. The EB I site of Fazael 4 (Chapter 13) is
located across the wadi channel to the north. A large area on both sides
of the wadi channel east of the site is flat, which allows agriculture and
grazing.
1
This Chapter is based on a paper published by the author and others in the Jour-
nal of the Israel Prehistoric Society (Bar et al. 2011).
2
The excavation was directed by Shay Bar, with assistance from Ziv Leiba,
Hagar Ben-Bassat, Barak Verker and Eyal Dan (area supervision), Ophir Dror-Katz
(administration), Yonatan Liberzon (surveying), Haim Winter (flint), Guy Bar Oz
and Noa Raban-Gerstel (fauna), Dror Ben-Yosef (ground stone tools), Sapir Haad and
Inbal Bar (plans, sections and illustration of artifacts), Michael Eisenberg and the Zin-
man Institute of Archaeology (scientific support), the Manasseh Hill Country Survey
(scientific and logistic support), the Kinneret College on the Sea of Galilee, and the
Jordan Valley Regional Council (volunteers and logistical support).
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 347
Sartaba
Ma'ale
Ephraim
Wa d
Yafit
i A
hm
ar
a el
Wa d i F a z Sheikh
Diab 2
160 Fazael 160
R
i v
e r
J o r a n
'Aujjeh
d
150 150
W a d i ' Au j j e
h
0 50
km
0 5
km Jericho
140 140
180 190 200
Figure 12.2. Photograph of the site looking south. Note the gradient of the slope,
the topographical difference, and the locations of the different excavation areas.
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 349
Figure 12.3. Survey plan of the site, overlaid with a schematic of the excavation
areas. Based on the Manasseh Hill Country Survey unpublished map.
A'
Figure 12.4. Plan of the excavation areas and the secondary units in the centre of the site
D E F G H I J K L M N O P
19 19
A
-133.41
# L309
W -133.76
L3
31 -133.81 COM 5
0
08
-134.55 -133.95
18 # 18
-134.66
-135.53
L307
W
31
-135.04
1
-134.38
COM 4
-138.25 -137
16 -140.04
-138.64
.29
#
-136.68
-135.63 16
L325 -138.70 -137.13
-136.16
S lope
L305
6
-140.56 -141.03
-141.08 -136.83
W3
-137.16
L324 # -137.35
-137.83 L317 L319
-138.05 -136.60
-141.00 -138.00
L304
06
-136.73
-139.56 -138.00 -138.30 -137.25
-136.94
-136.75 Stone
ky
W326 -136.88
Slides
oc
W
W32
R
30
1
0
COM 3 COM 6
15 15
13
-137.34
-140.56 -139.04 W132
W3
-139.95
-139.45
L314
L312 -137.86 -139.54
-140.11 -140.27 -139.00 -138.53 -137.90
-139.68
W -139.93
(Areas G, I).
-139.83
32 -139.26 W120
-140.69
0 -138.00
-140.29
14 L315 14 W103
-139.14
-138.47
L149
B'
-141.63 -140.85
-137.07
W121
-139.90 # -139.12
-140.75
-139.72 L130
#
-139.90 # L138 L144 W122
-139.28
#
W
-139.55 -139.55
W146
-139.27 14
W128
-139.45
L171 -139.73 7
L127 L148 -138.96 COM 7
13 -139.25 -139.30 -139.75 13 W122
0s
#
-140.08
12 L139
-139.35 -139.75
-140.34 -139.32
W
W L129 U11 L145
146n
# -140.25
-139.91 L157 W120
-140.20 -140.14
W122 L137
L152
W120s
L101 L133
-140.27
L163
-140.51 -140.56 #
-141.21
L153 L161 -141.76
-140.50
L119
L172 -141.20
#
U12 L126 W170 -141.13
-140.28
W128
12 L125 -141.23
-141.20 COM 1 -140.75 L169 L150 -140.74 12
W187
-140.75 -140.48
-141.25 -141.29
L103a -140.89 L140
-141.06 -140.45
W
L104 L118 L165
12 1
# -140.83 -141.10
U10 L136 -141.24 L168
L162
W159
L162 #
-141.92
L155
B
L107 L160 -141.68 L113 -141.20 -140.84
L115 -141.80 W103 -141.49 L112 #L156 #
-141.18
-141.42 L164
L123 L141 -140.98 -141.22
L166
8 2 0e L151
10
-140.97
1
-141.18
11 W L100 -141.26 -141.35 -141.22
-141.25
-141.48
W
-141.27
11
-141.27
L105 -141.25 -141.51 -141.11
-141.53 Unexcavated -141.87
-141.26
-141.87
2
13
-141.88
L106 L102 W L116
-141.57
-141.55
W L154 W300
W
W110
#
1 L134
15
L117 20s
-141.77
-141.88 -142.32
8
-142.04
L131 -141.18 L33 -142.70
-141.83 Unexcavated
32 L37
Surface
-142.40
Unexcavated -141.83 -141.85 W L34
32 L135 Fossil L44
W1
-141.37
-142.54 -142.81
-141.62
-141.87
COM 2 W -142.49
5m
10 -142.10 -142.75
43 L41 -142.85 10
L143 L35
# L161 -142.85 L45 W310
-142.44
-143.27
L40
W38
#
L142 L39 -142.44
-142.50 -142.09
5m
-142.93
2
W4
9 9 W310
0
A'
W311
0
D E F G H I J K L M N O P
A
-133
-135
-145
-140
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 351
The site was settled during the first part of the EB Ib. Even so, other
architectural phases were identified within this period:
1. In Area G (Complex 1) it seems that an elliptical, sausage-shaped
structure (more characteristic of the EB Ia in the north of the
country [Braun 1997]) predated the construction of the residen-
tial complex that dates to the EB Ib.
2. In Area I layers of fill were found below the first course of the
interior walls inside Complex 3.
3. In several other places, particularly in Area G, it seems that there
were additions and changes that belonged to the last habitation
phase of the site.
It is important to note that all indicative finds within these architec-
tural phases were dated to within the span of the EB I, and no in situ
material predating the onset of the EB Ib period was found.
Area G
An area of 250 m2 was excavated in the main excavation area at the site
(Plan in Fig. 12.6, Sections in Figs. 12.5 and 12.7). This area is located
in the centre of the site, where the slope is moderate and numerous wall
remains are visible at the surface level. A residential complex (Complex
1) consisting of four built units (Units 10–13) was entirely excavated.
The western part of another building (Complex 2) was also excavated,
as were an alley that links them, and sections of alleys between Com-
plex 1, Complex 3 and Complex 6. All of the ceramic artifacts recovered
from Area G date to EB I (see below).
The following is a description of the various architectural units.
H I J K
B'
A
-139.90 # -137.07 L149 -139.12
-139.72 #
L130 -139.90
L138 W
# L144 147
-139.55 #
-139.28 -139.55
-139.27 -138.96
W128 -139.45 L171 -139.25
-139.73
13 L127 13
L148
W146 #
-139.35
0s
-140.08
-140.34
12 L139 -139.32
W
-139.75
W L129
14
U11 L145
6n
-139.91 -140.14 L157 -140.25
-140.20 #
U12
W122 L137 L152
# -140.
-140.56 -140.50
C'
L161
L133 -140.51 L163
-141.21 -141.76
#
L119 L101 -141.13 W170
L153 L126
L125
12 -141.20 -141.20 L172 -141.23 L150 -140.28 12
-140.74
-140.75 -140.48 COM 1 -140.75
L169
C
-141.25 -141.29
-141.06 -140.45 W187
-140.89
L140 L165
W
W120s
#
121
-140.83 -141.10
L118
L162 U10 -141.24 L168
9
L136
15
L164
W
L103a #
-141.92 L166 L155
B
L104 -140.84
-141.18
L117 -141.83
L131
-141.83 -141.85
Surface
32
Unexcavated W1
-141.37 L135
-141.87
10 -142.10
COM 2 10
L143-141.62
32 L161
W1
#
-142.44
#
L142
-142.50
0 5m
A'
H I J K
-139.50 L138
W146
-140.00
L139 Balk
-140.50 L161
B'
-141.00 L140
Balk
-141.50 Stone/Rock
Brown Soil
-142.00
0 3m
of Israel. W103 is bonded into the wall of the complex (W120s), and
it seems that they are contemporary. Three different occupation levels
were found in this unit:
1. In the late phase the habitation level in the room consisted of
tamped earth, and a large holemouth jar and animal bones were
found on it in situ.
2. In an earlier occupation phase of the building the southern part
was paved with flagstones (L162 in Fig. 12.9). No distinct habita-
tion level of this phase was discerned in the northern part of the
building.
3. In the earliest phase of the building a few pottery sherds and flint
items were found on the level of the natural bedrock (this phase is
possibly contemporary with the early phase [2]).
This is the only place in Complex 1 where different habitation levels
were identified within the same unit. This unit, which was probably
roofed, may have functioned as a sleeping and storage room in the
complex.
Figure 12.8. Area G: General view from the west (Winter of 2007, between the
two excavation seasons).
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 355
Figure 12.9. Area G: General view of the southern part of the excavation area,
including Units 10 and 12 and part of the area between them.
356 chapter twelve
Figure 12.10. Area G: Unit 11. Note the differences in elevation between the
alley (L138) and the habitation level (L139), and the preservation of the walls
to a height of approximately 1 m.
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 357
Figure 12.11. Area G: Unit 12 – entrance to the silo during and after
excavation.
C
-140.40
C'
W122
L101
-141.00
W122
Black Ash
Red Soil
-141.60 L153 Dark-Brown Soil
0 1m
Figure 12.12. Area G: Section C-C’ – inside the silo in Unit 12.
Figure 12.13. Area G: Note the organic material on the bottom of the silo (to
the left) and the shallow cup-marks in the chalk bedrock (to the right).
358 chapter twelve
squares and open spaces) from the individual holdings (private spaces
and property) of the residents of Complex 1. The wall was built iden-
tically to the walls of the site: two rows of medium-sized fieldstones,
and fill consisting of smaller stones with mud between them. The wall
was 70–90 cm thick, and was preserved to a maximum height of seven
courses. The original height of the wall is not known, but it presumably
stood to a height of at least 1 m above the level of the alleys (This sup-
position stems from the extent of the stone collapse in the vicinity of
the walls, and from a comparison with the height of animal corrals in
the Bedouin camps in the vicinity of the site today).3 Its general outline
was curved, and it had one perpendicular corner for which there is no
structural explanation. The wall was not built as a single homogeneous
unit; rather it was a collection of segments that are described below.
1. W120s. The southern and south-western section of the wall was
well preserved. Its western part abutted W146. W108, which was
later than the first construction phase of the complex, abutted it
on the outside.
2. W146 and W146n. The western and north-western section of the
wall was also well-preserved. This segment was part of Unit 11
(see above), a relatively early phase in the site. In Square J13 the
wall had collapsed from its foundation trench, which was hewn
into the chalk bedrock, and had toppled into Unit 11.
3. W120e. The north-eastern section of the wall was rather poorly
preserved, and most of it did not survive above the height of a
single course. In the area of L134 (the alley separating Complex 1
from Complex 2) the main part of the wall had collapsed into the
alley. This wall apparently abutted W146n from the east. It was in
this part of the wall that the outer opening to Complex 1 and the
stone socket were located.
3
This height prevents the sheep or cattle escaping from the animal pen.
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 359
Area I
An area in the centre of the site, where the incline of the slope begins
(Location in Figs. 12.2–12.3, general plan in Fig. 12.17 and a general
section which shows the gradient of the slope in Fig. 12.5). So far only
90 m2 of this large area have been excavated in trial squares along the
eastern part of the site’s slope. The remains of five residential complexes
(Complexes 3–7) were found in various states of preservation. The ce-
ramic artifacts from Area I date to EB Ib (see below).
The various architectural units of Area I are described below.
-133.41
# L309
W -133.76
L3
31 -133.81 COM 5
0
08
-133.95
18 -134.55 # 18
-134.66
-135.53
W
L307
31
-135.04 1
-134.38
COM 4
17 17
-135.19
W31
-140.04 -138.25 -13 -136.68
16 7.2 -135.63 16
-138.64 9
L325 # -137.13 -136.16
Rock
-138.70
-141.08 L305
6
-141.03 -136.83
-137.16
# -137.35
W3
L324 L317 L319
y
-137.83 -136.60
-141.00 -138.00 -136.73
L304
06
-139.56 -138.00 -136.94 Stone
-138.30 -136.75
W326 -137.25 -136.88
-138.05 Slides
Sl
W pe
W
30
o
0
321
COM 3 COM 6
15 15
13
-139.95
L314
L312 -137.8 -139.54
-140.11 -140.27 -139.68 -137.90
W -139.83 -139.00 -138.53 -139.93
-140.69
32 -139.26
0 -138.00
-140.29
14 L315 14
-139.72 -139.14
-139.90 -138.47
-141.63 -139.90 L149 -140.85
B'
-137.07 # -139.12
-140.75 L130 L144
# # L138
-139.28 #
-139.27 W
-139.55 -139.45 -139.55 W146 14
L171 -139.73 7
W128 L127 COM 7
13 L148 -138.96 -139.30 -139.75 13
0s
#
-140.08 -139.25
0 5m 12 -139.35 L139
-139.32
W
W L129
-140.34
U11 L145 -139.75
146n
#
-139.91 L157
-140.20 -140.14 -140.25
D E F G H W122 I
L137 J L152
K L M N O P
20s
L101 L133
-140.27
L163
-140.51 -140.56 #
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 363
A few pottery sherds were found in situ on the surface of the bedrock;
noteworthy among them being a large clay stopper (Fig. 12.27: 12).
Portions of square (F16) were excavated south of this point in order
to understand the outline of the wall of the complex (W300). The wall
was exposed here, and occupation levels were revealed in an alley
(L322) and inside Complex 3 (L323).
South of this point another quarter square (D16) was excavated in
order to understand the course of the courtyard wall. This was identi-
fied in the western corner of the square, but its continuation from this
point on still remains unclear (particularly the connection with W320
– the eastern wall of the courtyard). In this section two complete hole-
mouth jars were found in situ, one of which was inside a hewn recess in
the chalk bedrock (L325; Fig. 12.24: 1–2). Another wall stump (W326)
was discovered, and near it was an in situ stone door socket.
Another trial square (F14, F15) was excavated in the south-eastern
part of Complex 3. Remains of a wall (W313) discovered here may have
been part of a large covered unit (together with an unnamed wall which
was located on the surface level to the north). The wall survived to a
height of one course only, which was higher than the level of the chalk
Figure 12.18. Area I, south – alley (L302) between Complex 3 and Complex 4.
364 chapter twelve
bedrock. Hence the artifacts on the bedrock level at this point predate
the construction phase of the wall: however, no changes were discerned
in the ceramic artifacts between these levels. In this region the wall of
the courtyard (W320) collapsed to the south, in the direction of the
natural slope.
well as three surfaces on the bedrock level between them. One surface
(L317) is a square located between this unit and Complexes 3 and 4, and
the other two (L318, L319) are habitation levels on the chalk bedrock,
whose function and location inside the complex are not understood.
This complex has only undergone preliminary study, and it requires
further investigation.
Area H
This area extends over a single excavation square in the eastern part of
the site, towards the end of the spur, and above the Wadi Fazael escarp-
ment. It is possible that this area is part of Complex 7, but this supposi-
tion requires further study. In the flat area on the site in the eastern
part of the spur there were probably four adjacent complexes (the three
Complexes, 1, 2, 7, are discussed above, and another one remains unin-
vestigated, east of Complex 7 and north of Complex 2 – compare with
the plan in Fig. 12.4).
Four wall sections were found in Area H (Figs. 12.19–12.20): W42 –
a courtyard wall almost 1 m thick that extends along a north-south axis,
and continues in a straight line for a further 10 m south of the excava-
tion square; W38 – a curved wall preserved to a height of two courses
above the habitation level to its south; W32 – a partial inner wall that
disappears in the southern part of the excavated area; and W43 – a
short section of wall in the centre of the square. The nature of this wall
is unclear, and it is not stratigraphically connected to the other known
walls.
Three other elements were discovered in the excavation (Figs.
12.19–12.20): a rock-hewn installation in the north-eastern corner of
the square (L41); a 30 cm-deep refuse pit located between W42 and
W43 with a plethora of ceramic material, and a few Canaanean sickle
blades within; and habitation Level L44, apparently an inner courtyard
in the centre of the square, which includes a tamped soil surface that
abuts the surrounding walls. A large ammonite fossil was found sunken
366 chapter twelve
Area F
This area was excavated because a building was preserved on the surface
level, at the highest point of the site. In the excavation an oval building
(Figs. 12.21–12.22) 10 m2 in area was discovered. It was built of several
small and medium-sized stones in an entirely different manner from
the rest of the buildings and walls discovered at the site. No datable
diagnostic material was found.
The building was partitioned into two equal parts. The remains of
another wall (W8), the nature of which is unclear, were located to its
north.
No distinct habitation levels were identified in the building: these
were probably eroded away because of their proximity to the surface
L3
W8
L22
-130.00
-130.30
-130.50 L2
L12
L19 -130.54
L4
L14
W
W21
6
16
W
-130.70
L18 L1
-130.52
-130.64
W
17
L15 W20 W5
-130.36 -130.57
-130.58 -130.67
0 2
m
level (the depth of the excavation inside the structure to the base of the
stone course of the walls did not exceed 12 cm).
This structure is different from the rest of the structures at the site,
and it apparently does not belong to the EB I settlement; instead it
should be ascribed to another short episode apparently later than the
main settlement phase at the site.
ary alleys branch off between the courtyards, runs through the centre
of the spur. The floor of the alley is the natural chalk bedrock, which is
pervious to water, and very effective in draining rainwater and sewage.
A similar phenomenon of erecting complexes with squares and alleys
between them dating to the EB Ib was found in the salvage excavations
conducted by the Israel Antiquities Authority in Stratum III at Ash-
kelon Barnea (Golani 2008).
It is difficult to know at this point in the research whether the settle-
ment was planned in advance, or whether the complexes were built one
after the other, and the alleys and squares were a result of the few vacant
areas that remained between them.
One of the interesting aspects of the site is that the occupation levels
were for the most part situated on the chalk bedrock that makes up the
spur. Some vessels were found in situ on that level, and it seems that
it was customary for the inhabitants of the site to clear the earlier oc-
cupation levels down to the bedrock. The artifacts found are therefore
mostly attributed to the latest habitation phase at the site – EB Ib.
The basic residential complex at Sheikh Diab 2 includes some typi-
cal principal elements: a roofed room or rooms: square rooms with
rounded corners, which are characteristic of EB Ib in the north of Israel
and earlier phases in the EB I of the Jordan Valley (e.g., at Tell Um
Hammad in EB Ia, Helms et al. 1992: figs. 38–39). In an earlier phase
at the site, one unit was elliptical, similar to units found at sites such
as Yiftah'el (Braun 1997) which typify northern Israel during the EB
Ia. The rooms have an average width of about 4 m and are 5–6 m long.
No internal partitions were identified inside the rooms. The room was
probably reserved for sleeping and storage, and occasionally for food
preparation, while most of the other household activities were con-
ducted outside in the courtyard.
The courtyards range in size between 115 m2 and 350 m2, and are
a very important component of the residential complex. In Area G,
the ratio between the areas of the roofed unit and the courtyard is 1:9,
which underscores the centrality of the courtyard in household activity.
Although only a small group of vessels were found in situ on the
rocky surface of the courtyards, the large size of the courtyards leads
us to conclude that they were host to many activities, including animal
shelter. The courtyards were floored with the natural chalk bedrock.
They contained silos, as well as large ceramic containers (pithoi, kraters
and jars) that were probably used by the household for storage. The dif-
ferent sizes of the courtyards at the site and their storage space indicate
370 chapter twelve
Plas-
Hol- Other
Amph- Pit- Ledge tic
Area No. emouth Jar Bowl Krater han- Slip
oriskos hos handle deco-
jar dles
ration
G 4777 103 56 7 12 51 4 79 16
I 1490 35 23 3 3 17 3 40 14
H 923 14 12 7 3 7 13 8
Total 7190 152 91 17 18 75 7 132 38 136 149
Typology
diameter of 10 cm, and the handles are not much higher than the rim.
Another type (Fig. 12.26: 5) found whole in Area G, is barrel-shaped,
with a long neck tapering toward the rim. Most of the rims were found
broken, but it seems that it belongs to the type that is bent outward
(presumed diameter 12 cm). The jar is decorated with a delicate plastic
ornamentation and diagonal incisions resembling rope. There are di-
agonal incisions on the inside of the rim, and there are also two handles
located close together. They are of a type that is unknown in the EB,
and even though they were found broken, it is clear that they were bent
upward similarly to the basket handles of later periods. The vessel’s
uniqueness is also evidenced in the quality of its firing and the excellent
levigation of the clay, unlike the relatively coarse vessels of the site. No
whole parallels of this jar were found, except for a rim with a similar
profile that was discovered at Tell Um Hammad.
Amphoriskoi (Fig. 12.25: 7–8) are not particularly common at the
site. The types that were found are characterized by a red slip on the
outside and an S-shaped profile. They range in size from 5 to 8 cm.
Two kinds of pithoi were found. The most common one has a thick-
ened rim that resembles a circumferential ring (Fig. 12.26: 1–4), and
an average diameter of 25 cm. A complete pithos was found in Area
G (Fig. 12.26: 1) whose dimensions are: rim and base diameter 26 cm,
height 70 cm and maximum body diameter 55 cm. Most of the pithoi
are undecorated, with the exception of one item (Fig. 12.26: 2), red-
slipped on the outside (at least on the upper part which was preserved).
No whole parallels were found for this type in the Jordan Valley, and a
few similar rims were found at Tel Beth Yerah in the EB Ia.
Another pithos (Fig. 12.25: 13) with a long slightly everted neck and
an everted rim was also discovered at the site. It has an average rim
diameter of 25 cm, and on one of the items there is a plastic rope-like
decoration in the vicinity of the neck where it connects to the body
of the vessel. This type of pithos is common in the Jordan Valley sites
throughout the EB I.
A round ceramic object 22 cm in diameter was also found, probably
used as a stopper for a jar (Fig. 12.27: 12). This object was in second-
ary use, and it seems that it was originally the base of a pithos, and its
edges were rounded and smoothed when it was adapted as a stopper.
No other stoppers were found, and it can reasonably be assumed that
vessels were sealed using other kinds of stoppers made of organic mate-
rial (e.g. wood).
382 chapter twelve
slipped vessels. To this we should add the extensive use of incised diag-
onal lines that decorated the holemouth jars in both of the assemblages.
The multitude of large storage vessels, the smaller number of small
vessels and the absence of special finds, may possibly indicate that the
site was abandoned in an orderly manner.
Background
Only a portion of the site has been excavated so far, and the overall
number of flint artifacts, 982, is very small. This analysis is based on
combined figures of Areas G, H, and I, including Complex 1 in Area
G which was excavated completely. At this stage possible conclusions
should be considered as preliminary. Future excavations, analyses and
experiments could change proportions, perhaps leading to different
understandings.
The method introduced by the authors is not conventional, thus
challenging the reader to some extent, but it aims to shed new light on
important aspects of the community, such as mobility and economy.
5
This section was written by H. Winter, University of Haifa.
390 chapter twelve
Total all
The flint Area G Area H Area I
areas Functional Group
assemblage
n % n % n % Total %
Group A – Waste
Core 14 2 7 23
Primary flake 43 6 20 69
C.t.e. 1 1 Waste to be discarded
Chunk 99 14 41 154 68.3%
Chip 374 9 41 424
Total group A 531 72.4 31 45.6 109 60.2 671 68.3
Group B – Debitage
Flake 104 18 53 175
Blade 29 8 5 42 Potential blanks for
modified tools
Bladelet 7 4 11 23.2%
Total group B 140 19.1 30 44.1 58 32.0 228 23.1
Group C – Tools
392 chapter twelve
Total all
The flint Area G Area H Area I
areas Functional Group
assemblage
n % n % n % Total %
Axe 1 1 Heavy woodwork:
Subtotal heavy felling, tilling
1 7.1 1 1.2 1.2%
woodwork
Burin 1 1 2
Notch 12 1 3 16 Handicrafts:
Denticulate 8 8 Preparation of artifacts
of perishable materials
Borer 1 1 such as wood, bone,
Awl 1 1 2 hides, and stone.
34.9%
Subtotal
23 37.1 2 28.6 4 28.6 29 34.9
handicraft
End scraper 2 2
Scraping:
Side scraper 4 1 5 Cleaning of hides, food
Fan scraper 1 1 preparation, cutting
9.6%
Subtotal scraping 7 11.3 1 7.1 8 9.6
Sickle segment 17 3 6 26
Reaping
Reaping knife 1 1
32.5%
Subtotal reaping 18 29.0 3 42.9 6 42.6 27 32.5
Retouched (or
2 2
backed) blade
Retouched (or
2 2
backed) flake
Retouched
3 3
fragment Cutting.
Backed knife 1 1 butchering,
dismembering, food
Subtotal cutting 7 11.3 1 14.3 8 9.6 preparation, carving
Truncation 2 1 3 9.6%
Undefined,
multiple, 5 1 1 7
trimmed
Subtotal general
7 11.3 1 14.3 2 14.3 10 12.0
purpose
Total group C 62 8.4 7 10.3 14 7.7 83 8.5 Total of tools
Total 733 100 68 100 181 99.9 982 100 8.5%
Discussion
Table 12.2 presents the characteristics of the assemblage and provides
important indications for the economy of the society. Some important
points are listed below:
1. Cores and waste from the production of flakes, blades and tools
(except sickles) were present in all areas. The cores are poor, and
core-trimming elements are almost completely missing.
2. Most tools, except sickles, were prepared rather carelessly, indi-
cating the decline of flint technology with the onset of the Metal
Ages. Besides the decline in flint technology for general purposes,
the presence of the advanced Canaanean technology for sickle
and blade production is well attested.
3. Hunting implements and other tool types attributed to the Stone
Age, and celt tools such as axes (one exception, see Area I above)
abundant during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods, were not
found.
4. All sickle elements were on Canaanean blades, but to date no
cores for the production of these blades have been found on the
site.
394 chapter twelve
Grinding Tools
The vast majority of the tools found at the site were grinding tools
(26.5% of the assemblage). These were divided according to their gen-
eral morphology:
Grinding slabs
Six broken items were found, made of hard limestone (Fig. 12.31: 1–
2). It is apparent that all sides of the slabs were worked, and it seems
that they were discarded after they broke. Three of the objects have a
slightly concave working surface, and the three others have a slightly
convex working surface. These dissimilarities are apparently related to
the differences in the kinds and directions of grinding. Parallels were
found at Arad (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 79: 1, 2), Beth Yerah (Getzov
2006: fig. 3.59: 5) and Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.1: 3–4).
were found at Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 3.58: 14) and at Qiryat Ata
(Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 5).
Basins
Eight basins were found at the site (23.5% of the assemblage). These
were divided according to their depth.
Deep basins
Three limestone basins were found. A very large one with a depres-
sion 30–35 cm in diameter and 16 cm deep was found in Area H (Fig.
12.20). This was a stationary vessel used for crushing and grinding. The
second basin is portable, and has a depression 16 cm in diameter and 13
cm deep. This was used for crushing together with a pestle. A parallel
was found at Arad (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 78: 7, 10), dated to EB II. The
third basin, of similar size, was well-worked on all of its sides. A close
parallel was found at Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 3.58: 7).
Shallow basins
Five basins of this kind were found in the excavation, all made of lime-
stone. Two are medium-sized (Fig. 12.31: 4–5), with the basin 7–8 cm
in diameter and 3–4 cm deep. It is possible that they were used as small
mortars. Parallels were discovered at Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig.
3.58: 12), Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 11) and Arad (Amiran et al.
1978: pl. 78: 5–6). The other three stones are shallower basins 4–5 cm
in diameter and 1.0–1.5 cm deep. These may be very small stone bowls.
Parallels were found at Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 4).
Pounders
Three limestone and two sandstone artifacts used for crushing and
pounding, probably in the preparation of food, were found. One of the
limestone tools is spherical, and the two others are elliptical. Parallels
were found at Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 1–3) and Ashkelon-
Afridar (Khalaily 2004: 152). The sandstone hand tools were found
broken. One is rectangular and made of light brown coloured sand-
stone; the other is elliptical and made of reddish sandstone.
Stone rings
Four items were found, three of basalt and one of limestone. The rings
are relatively uniform in size, and it is apparent that they were perfo-
400 chapter twelve
Various items
One limestone nether stone of a tournette (Fig. 12.31: 6) was found in
Area G. The object consists of two well-worked basins; one opposite
the other. The upper basin is deep, and the lower one is shallow. The
rim of the upper basin was made extremely smooth so as to allow the
upper stone of a tournette to spin in it. A parallel was found at 'En Esur
(Rowan 2006: fig. 6.5: 8), where the item is dated to the Chalcolithic
period, and is defined as a pivot or socket. Contemporary tournettes for
ceramic production were found at Arad: however, these have a single
depression.
A worked elliptical stone with a notch along its length was made
of limestone (Fig. 12.31: 7), and has a long slightly curved artificial
groove on one side. It may have been used as a female fertility figurine
(in the Neolithic period style), for straightening reeds, or some other
unknown function. A contemporary parallel was found at 'En Shadud
(Braun 1985: pl. XI: C. fig. 37: 7).
Conclusions
The following generalizations can be drawn from the 34 stone tools
found in the excavation:
The principal raw material from which the items were produced is
limestone (25 objects, 73%), followed by basalt (7 objects, 21%,) and
Nubian sandstone (2 objects, 6%). The limestone and basalt are obtain-
able from sources close to the site (the Wadi Far'ah region). The closest
source of Nubian sandstone, on the other hand, is across the Jordan, in
402 chapter twelve
the vicinity of the city of Salt and east of the Dead Sea. The presence of
this kind of stone at the site might be indicative of relations that existed
between the two banks of the Jordan during the EB I.
The stone artifacts that were identified were mainly used for crush-
ing and grinding, probably of cereal, which was one of the principal
types of work conducted at the site.
With the exception of four items, most of the artifacts are simple and
do not reflect a high level of stone craftsmanship. Finding a tournette
indicates that ceramic production was probably part of the activities at
the site.
most likely that the remains are of an ass, the most common animal in
the southern Levant during the EBA. Only two bones (proximal radius
and distal metacarpus) of the sheep and goat category were definitely
identified as a sheep (Ovis aries). Other species found in Sheikh Diab 2
include a single bone fragment of a Mesopotamian fallow deer (Dama
mesopotamica). A single example of a freshwater mollusc (Unio sp.) was
found.
Bone surface modifications appear only on three specimens. These
are two specimens with butchering marks (a filleting mark on the prox-
imal radius of fallow deer and an unidentified mark on a femur shaft
of a sheep/goat), and a single sheep/goat metacarpal shaft which bore
the remains of carnivore tooth-marks. The shape and structure of the
tooth-marks suggest that they were made by a dog/wolf-sized animal.
This indicates that some of the remains were discarded soon after their
abandonment. The rare occurrence of bone surface modifications does
not allow further analysis on the meat consumption behaviour of the
site’s occupants. In addition, none of the bones was found to have been
burnt.
The bone assemblage is too small to allow detailed analysis of
anatomical representation or age structure. However, given their im-
portance, the elements were combined into meat refuse (long bones,
scapula and pelvis) and butchery waste (hooves/toes, lower limbs,
heads and neck). It appears that the occurrence of skeletal elements
of sheep, goats and pigs represents a mixture of both types of refuse,
and there is no distinction between gourmet portions (upper limbs and
axial skeleton) or less meaty elements (skull, lower limbs and hoof).
The anatomical representation at EB I Sheikh Diab 2 is therefore inter-
preted as reflecting the disposal of butchered carcasses.
The sparse faunal assemblages did not allow the reconstruction of
a mortality profile. However, bone epiphysis fusion reveals that most
long bones of sheep and goat and cattle derived from adult individu-
als. These patterns suggest that these animals were raised and exploited
primarily for their secondary products. A different trend appears for
the pig remains. Of the five identified long bones, one belonged to a
young individual under the age of 12 months. It seems reasonable to
assume that pigs were culled differently from sheep and goats, and were
slaughtered young. Thus, it appears that pig-raising was oriented to-
ward meat, while sheep and goats seem to be more related to a second-
ary product-based economy (Grigson 1995a).
To conclude, the faunal sample from Sheikh Diab 2 is small but sig-
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 405
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Head
Mandible teeth 1 1
Maxilla teeth 2 2 1 1
Body
Ver: Lumbar 1 1
Rib 5 3
Forelimb
Scapula Glenoid fossa 1 1 1 1 1 1
Humerus distal 1 1 2 1
Radius proximal 1 1 1 1
Radius distal 1 1
Metacarpus proximal
Metacarpus distal 3 2 2 2
Hindlimb 2 1
Pelvic acetabulum 2 2
Tibia proximal 1 1
Metatarsus proximal 1 1 1 1
Metatarsus distal 1 1
Toes 1 1
Phalanx 1 1 1
Phalanx 2
NISP 3 17 1 2 11 34
NISP – % 9 50 3 6 32 100.0
MNI 1 2 1 1 1 6
nificant. The assemblage adds new faunal data to the limited database
of EBA subsistence strategies in the Jordan Valley. The results of the
zooarchaeological study enable the drawing of several broad conclu-
sions regarding the subsistence economy and butchery practices that
were carried out at the site:
1. The economy was based primarily on sheep and goats, and in-
cluded certain exploitation of pigs. The dominance of sheep and
goats indicates their economic importance. It shows that mixed
groups of sheep and goats were herded in the vicinity of the site.
2. The presence of pigs suggests that it was a permanent settlement.
It also attests to the lush environment that existed in the vicinity
of the site.
3. Presence of freshwater molluscs shows that the ecological land-
scape of the site included freshwater sources in the vicinity. This
provided the inhabitants with the optimal conditions for raising
cattle and pigs nearby.
4. The diversity of the surrounding landscape is further attested to
by the presence of fallow deer, and the nearby existence of a some-
what wet environment with a forest or woodland habitat.
5. Age profiles and the representation of bone refuse debris indicate
that meat was consumed on the site. The high occurrence of adult
sheep and goat individuals indicates that secondary products
such as milk and wool were exploited, as well as meat (Grigson
1995a: 257).
6. Tooth-marks on one bone suggest that scavenging carnivores
(most probably dogs) had some access to refuse.
7. Hunting was practiced by the site’s inhabitants, but not on an in-
tensive scale.
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 407
General Conclusions
Sheikh Diab 2 is an example of a well-preserved single-period site that
dates to the middle of EB I, probably early in the EB Ib. The small vil-
lage or hamlet includes residential complexes densely spread across a
spur next to a perennial stream.
The excavations have disclosed the following characteristics of the
site:
1. The hamlet is built of irregular elliptical residential complexes,
separated by alleys and squares. Even though it is still not possible
to determine if the complexes were constructed at the same time,
or if they were added as the site developed, their architectural
outline has been preserved, as were the spaces used by people and
animals to move between the different units. This is one of the
best preserved EB I rural settlements in the southern Levant, and
a unique example of such a settlement type in the Jordan Valley.
2. There were ten to twelve residential complexes in the site, in each
of which may have lived a nuclear family. Therefore it can be sug-
gested that the settlement numbered about 100 people.
3. The plan of the residential complexes is in the style of a courtyard
house, architectural units and different functions, for living and
storage, inside a courtyard surrounded by a wall. The outlines
of the courtyards are irregular, with a tendency to be elliptical.
Closing off the unit by means of walls and doors may attest to a
desire for maintaining privacy. The varying sizes of the different
complexes may possibly reflect the family size, status or assets.
4. Based on the architecture and ceramics, it seems that the site dates
to the first part of EB Ib.
5. The economy was mainly based on growing grain, as well as the
grazing of animals.
6. The site was built on the natural chalk bedrock of the spur. Such
construction made it possible to exploit the natural drainage of
the slope, freeing many areas near the wadi for growing grain. The
construction was also located on the spur probably to distance
the residential complexes from the floods and the damp flatlands
along the banks of the wadi.
7. The ceramic and ground stone assemblages attest to some kind
of connection between the two banks of the River Jordan in the
period under discussion.
8. The multitude of large storage vessels, the paucity of small vessels,
408 chapter twelve
the absence of special finds, and the absence of any signs of de-
struction, may possibly bear witness to an orderly abandonment
of the site during the EB Ib. This is consistent with a significant
decrease in the scope of settlement which was identified in the
Jordan Valley during the transition from EB Ib to EB II, together
with intensified settlement along the slopes of the central hill
country (Bar 2008).
Further research at the site and its surroundings will provide a clearer
picture of the rural life in the EB I within the Jordan Valley.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
Introduction
During May 2010 an excavation was conducted at Fazael 4 (map ref.
Old Israel Grid 1907/1618; Site 89 in the Catalogue)1, an EB I site lo-
cated in the Jordan Valley, about 20 km north of Jericho (Fig. 13.1).2
The EB I settlement in Wadi Fazael is situated along the fringes of
the wadi, in an area where the stream emerges from the narrow gorge
into the flood plain. The first site excavated was Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar
2008; Bar et al. 2011; Chapter 12), on a narrow spur above the southern
bank of the wadi. The second site, Fazael 4, which covers an area of 3
ha, is located on level ground on the wadi’s northern bank, opposite
Sheikh Diab 2.
The first research at the site was done by Goring-Morris (1980)
who excavated Kebaran and Geometric Kebaran remains to the east
of the excavated area described here. The site was later surveyed by the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey, when it was dated to the EB I.
The Fazael Valley project began in 2007, and the researchers in-
tend to work there for many more seasons. It was therefore decided to
pursue a strategy of slow and continuing research. At Fazael 4 it was
decided to excavate just a limited area in a spot where the ancient re-
mains were beginning to be swept into the wadi. The key questions of
this season focused on examining the round buildings observed on the
surface level by the Manasseh Hill Country Survey, and determining
the chronology of the site based on a comparison of the finds with the
adjacent EB I site of Sheikh Diab 2. For this reason it was decided to
excavate about 100 m2 in the area of the round buildings in the location
of the probable collapse of archaeological material into the wadi floor.
1
This chapter is based on a paper published in the Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society (Bar et al. 2012).
2
The excavation was directed by Shay Bar, with assistance from Haim Winter
(flint), Sapir Haad (drawing of figures: plans, sections and finds), Ronny Zuckerman
(fauna), Michael Eisenberg and the Zinman Institute of Archaeology (scientific sup-
port), and the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (scientific and logistical support).
410 chapter thirteen
Sartaba
Ma'ale
Ephraim
Wa d
Yafit
i A
hm
ar
a el
Wa d i F a z
Fazael 4
160 Fazael 160
R
i v
e r
J o r a n
'Aujjeh
d
150 150
W a d i ' Au j j e
h
0 50
km
0 5
km Jericho
140 140
180 190 200
building (W20). We will not deal with this special find, which will be
published later, after it has been restored.
The habitation levels of the EB I settlement were located very close
to the surface level, at a depth of 20–70 cm. Hence, organic material was
not preserved at the site.
The remains of a number of different dwelling complexes were vis-
ible at this initial stage of the research. These complexes are part of
courtyard houses that have curved outlines whose characteristics are
similar to those discovered at the neighbouring site of Sheikh Diab 2.
The main difference between the sites is that so far no alleys have been
positively identified between the different complexes at Fazael 4.
Peripheral wall
The wall (thickness 80 cm) was built of two rows of medium-sized
fieldstones and a core of small stones between them. It was preserved
in several noncontiguous segments. A western section of the wall (W1)
was exposed for a distance of 9 m. The southern part of Wall 1 had
eroded away along the slope of the wadi, and its north-eastern part had
collapsed to the south, possibly also because of the slope. A northern
segment (W30) of this wall was exposed for a distance of 2.5 m. In the
west it abutted the region where Wall 1 had collapsed, and in the north-
east it adjoined W29, which forms part of another unexcavated unit
to the north. Wall 30 post-dates the initial construction phase of the
structure, and it is possible that it was intended to repair the collapse
of Wall 1. At least 2 m of the north-eastern section of Wall 29 seems to
have been a common wall shared by the two adjacent units.
North-western building
Wall 28, which abuts Walls 1 and 29 and forms an irregularly shaped
room, seems to be another latter construction. The wall of the room was
constructed in the same manner as the peripheral wall, but was not as
well preserved. There may be an opening (width 70 cm, Square C11) in
the middle of the wall. The excavation inside the room reached a depth
of about 80 cm, and the habitation level has still not been exposed.
412 chapter thirteen
10 11
L38
L33
L23
W29
18 L21 L21
D W L41 D
L19
0 L27
W2
L22 1 0
W W3
W28
W24
L26
L32
L25
L39
L26
L26 L31
C C
W28
U n e x c a v a t e d
W1
L16
W36
W2
L4
L10 W35
W
14
L5 L11
L11
L40
L9 L15
B
B
L7 L13
L8
W3 L37
L17
W12
L34
A A
P
10 11
Figure 13.4. Dwelling structure in the western complex and round buildings
(silos?) in the north-western complex.
Figure 13.5. Habitation level and the bases of the round buildings in the
north-western complex.
fazael 4: the excavations at the early bronze age i site 415
23.2% of the finds), and other kinds (7 items, 9.6% of the finds).
The prevalent type of handle in the assemblage is the ledge handle
(16 items, 72.7% of the finds). In addition, 3 lug handles, 2 loop handles,
and one knob handle were found.
As for the treatment of the vessel surfaces, 34 items (1.8% of the
finds) are decorated. The most common decorations are grooved,
particularly on the holemouth jar rims (11 items, 32.4% of the finds),
plastic strips around the body of jars (9 items, 26.5% of the finds), a
plastic rope ornamentation around the body of closed vessels (8 items,
23.5% of the finds), and red slip, often burnished, on bowls (6 items,
17.6% of the finds).
Bowls
Open bowls
The bowl in Fig. 13.6: 1 is very wide, and has a plain rounded rim.
The soot-marks on the outside of the vessel indicate that it was used
for cooking. Parallels dated to the beginning of the EB I were found at
Ashqelon-Afridar (Golani 2004: fig. 22: 8, 13; Bowl Types I–II).
Bowls with straight sides (‘V-shaped’) and a plain rim (Fig. 13.6: 3),
or a flattened rim rounded on top (Fig. 13.6: 2). have a flat base, and
are frequently red-slipped. The soot-marks on them indicate that some
were used as lamps. Parallels dated to the EB I were found at Ashqelon-
Afridar (Baumgarten 2004: fig. 10: 1–2; Golani 2004: fig. 22: 3).
Bowl 6: 4 is hand-made from especially coarse clay, with a plain
rounded rim. This is another straight-sided (‘V-shaped’) bowl. A paral-
lel was found at Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12, Fig. 12.23: 16).
Bowl 6: 6 belongs to a group of bowls/open kraters that have a thick-
ened folded rim, the outer part of which has a rope decoration (thumb-
indented or incised), and are red-slipped and not burnished. Parallels
were found at 'En Esur III (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.36: 2–3) dating
from the beginning of EB I.
Round Bowls
Bowl 6: 5 is a hemispherical bowl with a plain rounded rim with in-
dented rope decoration. Similar red burnished bowls were found at
Ashqelon-Afridar (Golani 2004: fig. 23: 8, 11; Bowl Type VI). An un-
burnished parallel was found at Azor (Golani and van den Brink 1999:
fig. 4: 12). The parallels date to the EB Ia.
The hemispherical bowls with tapered rims (Fig. 13.6: 10–11) are the
fazael 4: the excavations at the early bronze age i site 417
most prevalent type of bowl at the site. They are shallow or deep, and
have a rounded base and a hemispherical body. Hemispherical bowls
are common in the EB I of the Jordan Valley (chapter 8). They are usu-
ally red-slipped inside and out, and are often fired at such a high tem-
perature as to render them a metallic-like texture. The soot-marks on
their rims suggest that some were used as lamps (Getzov 2006: 14; Go-
lani 2003: 121). However, the bowls from Fazael 4 are not red-slipped,
and in most instances they were fired at a low temperature. The soot
marks on some of them indicate they were used for lighting.
It is interesting to note that the bowls of this type found at Sheikh
Diab 2, south of the site, were red-slipped and extremely well fired.
Hemispherical bowls appeared throughout the EBA, and parallels
abound. Parallels dated to the EB I were found at Beth Yerah V (Getzov
2006, fig. 2.12: 25–29), 'En Esur III-II (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.43: 2–5;
4.52: 3–4, 10–12), Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar 2008: fig. 34.3.7: 1, 3, 7–8, 10;
Chapter 12: fig. 12.23: 4, 11) and the cemetery at Jericho (Kenyon and
Holland 1982: fig. 43: 1–3, 5).
Shallow round bowls with straight or slightly in-curved sides and
a plain upright (Fig. 13.6: 7, 9) or tapered rim (Fig. 13.6: 8). Their fir-
ing ranges from mediocre to good. The bowls are red-slipped and even
burnished (No. 9) and exhibit traces of soot (No. 8), evidence of their
use as lamps. Similar example dated to the EB Ia was found at Bab edh-
Dhra', Tomb C2 (Schaub and Rast 1989: fig. 118: 12).
Bowl 6: 12 has a thickened rim that is acutely inverted. It is painted
red inside and outside. Parallels dating to the EB Ib were found at Arad
IV (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 7: 4, 8).
Bowl 6: 13 is a deep bowl with an inverted rim. Parallels dated to the
EB Ib were found at Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.12: 7, 9).
Bowl 6: 14 belongs to a group of deep bowls that have an upright or
slightly in-curved side and a flat base. They are sometimes hand-made
and finished on a slow wheel or tournette. Some are painted red on the
outside. Parallels dating to the EB I were found at Bab edh-Dhra', Tomb
A43 (Schaub and Rast 1989: fig. 137: 4–7) and at Tell Abu al-Kharaz
(Jordan), Phases B-IA (Fischer 2008: fig. 170: 4).
Pithoi
The pithos with a thickened rim that resembles a circumferential band
(Figs. 13.7: 10–12; 13.8: 12) is the most prevalent kind at the site. This
is also the case at Sheikh Diab 2, on the southern bank of Wadi Fazael.
418 chapter thirteen
Jars
The most prominent type of jar found at the site has a tapered and
flared rim (Fig. 13.7: 6). Both painted and unpainted examples of this
type were found. Of the painted jars, most are painted on the outside,
and occasionally on the inside of the rim. One of the characteristics of
this kind of jar at the site is the decoration incised on the inside of the
rim. This type is also common at Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar 2008: 439, fig.
36.3.7: 1, 3, 6; Chapter 12; Fig. 12.25: 3, 6). The jar is identical with the
group of jars designated Genre 22–23 at Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al.
1992: 62–63, figs. 86: a, d; 87–88; 198–200). Genre 22 comprises three
kinds of jars: spherical with a broad shoulder, elongated with a ridged
fazael 4: the excavations at the early bronze age i site 419
shoulder, and narrow at the base with a broad shoulder. It seems that
most had flat bases; however, the jars with the broad shoulder probably
also had rounded bases. The jars do not have handles, are red-slipped
and burnished, and sometimes have a patterned burnish. The jars be-
longing to Genre 23 are similar in form to those of Genre 22, but are
characterized by an incised decoration located on the inside of the rim
(similar to the jar in Fig. 13.7: 6). Helms ascribes Genre 22 to EB Ia
(Helms et al. 1992: fig. 262 [Repertoire R2], table 14 [pp. 118, 119]) and
Genre 23 to the EB Ia-b (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 263 [Repertoire R3],
table 14 [pp. 118–119]). The tapered and flared rim is prevalent in the
Jordan Valley throughout the EB I, and also continues into the EB II
(Bar 2008: 439).
Parallels date to the EB I: 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 20: 9, 11),
Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar 2008: fig. 36.3.7: 1, 3, 6) and Ashqelon-Afridar (Kh-
alaily 2004: fig. 9: 7).
A single parallel of the jar with a thickened and everted rim (Fig.
13.7: 4) was found in Strata III-II at Abu edh-Dhahab in the Western
Galilee (Getzov 2004: fig. 13.8: 6), dated to EB Ib.
We can learn about the shape of Jar 7: 7 from a complete example
that was found at Qiryat Ata III-II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.12: 6; storage jar
type SJ IIIb), which has a flat base, globular body, short upright neck
and a tapered rim. A pair of handles is affixed to its body, which is
decorated on the outside with band slip painting. The rim is painted
dark-brown on the inside and outside. Most of the parallels date to EB
Ib: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.15: 3), 'En Shadud (Braun 1985:
fig. 20: 10), 'En Esur III (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.37: 14) and Arad III
(Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 15: 10).
Cooking Jars
These jars were defined as such due to the large amount of calcite in
the clay used to make them and the traces of soot that appear on most
of them.
Parallel of Jar 7: 2 dated to the EB I was found at Kabri 9 (Scheftelow-
itz 2002: fig. 5.5: 7).
Parallels of Jar 7: 3 dated to EB Ib: Abu edh-Dhahab III–II (Getzov
2004: fig. 8: 1), Qiryat Ata III–II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.12: 5; Storage Jar
Type SJ IIIa). The parallels of this vessel are painted red on the outside,
and occasionally also on the inside of the rim.
No exact parallels were found for Jar 7: 5.
420 chapter thirteen
Holemouth jars
At Fazael 4 two types of holemouth jars stand out prominently: those
that have a thickened rim (Fig. 13.8: 3, 11), and those with a gutter rim
(Fig. 13.8: 5, 7–9).
The group of holemouth jars with a thickened rim is characterized
by an incised rope decoration on the outside of the neck. On most of
the holemouth jars the rim edge is actually a thickening of the side
(Fig. 13.8: 3): however, there are those where the thickening resembles
a band round the mouth of the vessel (Fig. 13.8: 11).
At Tell Um Hammad the holemouth jars with a thickened rim be-
long mainly to Genre 2 (Helms et al. 1992: 47, 48, figs. 56–57; 143–146).
This group includes tall and short holemouth jars, with a flat base and
an ovoid body. They are sometimes equipped with a number of perpen-
dicular lug handles that are situated below the rim. The bottom of the
rim is sometimes also decorated with perforated, incised or indented
rope decoration, an element which is also found on the edges of the
handles. Traces of soot indicate that the holemouth jars were used for
cooking. Helms ascribes this group of vessels to the EB Ia (Helms et
al. 1992: fig. 262 [Repertoire R2], table 14 [pp. 118–119]). The hole-
mouth jars with a thickened rim are sometimes also decorated with red
or reddish-brown paint on the outside of the vessel and the inside of the
rim (see parallels).
The following parallels date to EB Ib: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006:
fig. 2.13: 1–4), Qashish XVB (Zuckerman 2003: fig. 19: 3; Type H IIa),
'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 21: 10), 'En Esur II (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.
4.56: 1–8, 17–18), Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: Fig. 12.24: 10–11) and
Arad IV (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 8: 14).
The holemouth jar in Fig. 13.8: 13 should probably also be added
to this type, even though its rim is more horizontal. A similar rim was
found at Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: Fig. 12.24: 11).
The group of holemouth jars with the gutter rim is characterized
by a rim that has a prominent (Fig. 13.8: 8–9) or vestigial (Fig. 13.8: 5,
7) depression cut along it. The rim is sometimes wavy (Fig. 13.8: 9) or
incised (Fig. 13.8: 7–8). There is some similarity between its shape and
that of the holemouth jar rims in Genres 4, 10, 14 at Tell Um Hammad.
The holemouth jars in Genre 4 (Helms et al. 1992: 48–49, figs. 58: b;
60; 148–150) are slightly squat on top and have a flat base. Incised rope
decorations appear mainly on the outside, below the rim. The rim is
sometimes wavy. The holemouth jars in Genre 10 (Helms et al. 1992:
fazael 4: the excavations at the early bronze age i site 421
50–51, figs. 62: e, f; 68; 155–157) appear as variants that are low and
open (e) or tall and somewhat more closed (f). The base is flat, and the
upper part of the body is enlarged. The jars from this group usually do
not have handles and are undecorated. They are common in the EB
Ib sites on both sides of the Jordan. The holemouth jars of Genre 14
(Helms et al. 1992: 53–54, figs. 72: b, c; 74; 164–166) are similar to those
of Genre 10, but their upper part is not as large. They too are usually
not decorated, but incised lines that may be potter’s marks were found
below the rim on some of them. Helms ascribes Genre 10 and 14 to
EB Ib–II (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 267 [Repertoire R9], table 14 [pp. 118,
119]). It should be mentioned that on many of the parallels that were
found (below) the holemouth jars were painted at least on their outside.
EB I parallels that have a prominent gutter (Fig. 13.8: 8–9) were found
at Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 15, 21), Tel Te'o V (Eisenberg
2001: fig. 7.5: 3), Kabri 9 (Scheftelowitz 2002: fig. 5.5: 7), Qiryat Ata III-
II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.7: 12; Holemouth type H V), 'En Esur III (Yannai
et al. 2006: fig. 4.43: 13–14, 18–19), et-Tell ('Ai) Phase III (Callaway
1972: fig. 30: 6–9; 1980, fig. 65: 13), Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: Fig.
12.24: 6–8) and Arad IV (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 8: 12).
The parallels of Jar 8: 7 date mostly to the EB I: Tel Te'o V (Eisenberg
2001: fig. 7.5: 11), Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996: fig. 14: 11) and Jawa
(Helms 1991: fig. 117: 88).
No exact parallel for Jar 8: 5 was found.
EB I parallels of the holemouth jar with the wavy cut rim (Fig. 13.7:
8) were found at Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 16), Moza IX
(Greenhut and de Groot 2009: fig. 3.1: 6) and Tell Um Hammad (Helms
et al. 1992: fig. 161: 10; Genre 11[EB I-II]).
Parallels of the holemouth jar with a high wavy rim (Fig. 13.7: 9)
were from the EB I: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.15: 9), 'En Esur
III (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.48: 5) and et-Tell ('Ai) Phase III (Callaway
1980: fig. 65: 19). The vessel from Beth Yerah is red-slipped, and the
rim of the vessel from 'En Esur is painted red on the inside.
The holemouth jar in Fig. 13.8: 1 has a tapered rim with grooves on
its inner and outer parts. Parallels dating to EB Ib were found at Qiryat
Ata III-II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.6: 5; Holemouth jar type H IIb), et-Tell
('Ai) Phase II (Callaway 1972: fig. 20: 2). The example from Qiryat Ata
is painted red on the outside of the vessel and on the inside of the rim.
The rim of Holemouth jar 8: 2 has a triangular cross-section and an
incised rope decoration on its upper part. Most of the parallels date to
EB Ib: Qiryat Ata III-I (Golani 2003: figs. 4.5: 1, Holemouth jar type H
422 chapter thirteen
Ia; 4.28: 16), 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 22: 8), 'En Esur II (Yannai et
al. 2006: fig. 4.56: 10–11) and Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: Fig. 12.24: 2).
The rim of Holemouth jar 8: 6 is folded and has a ‘thumb-impressed’
rope decoration. The parallels date to the EB I: 'En Esur III (Yannai et
al. 2006: fig. 4.44: 21, 24) and Jericho (Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig.
40: 6).
The holemouth jars in Fig. 13.8: 4, 10 have a tapered and folded
rim. The rim of the holemouth is folded outward and its end has a
‘thumb-impressed’ rope decoration. This shape of rim is common on
holemouth jars at Ashqelon-Afridar from the beginning of the EB I
(Baumgarten 2004: figs. 9: 14; 11: 16–17, 19). A complete holemouth
jar found at the site has a flat base and a slightly squat upper body.
Other parallels were found at 'En Esur III (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.44:
7, 13) dating to the same period.
Miscellaneous
Four kinds of handles were found at Fazael 4: ledge, lug (Fig. 13.9: 8),
knob and loop (Fig. 13.9: 3, 6). The prevalent type at the site is the wavy
ledge handle (Fig. 13.9: 5, 6). The potter decorated them with thumb
strokes that run their whole length, which give the handles their undu-
lating form. Traces of soot on the handles and the calcite clay indicate
they belonged to cooking vessels. It seems that the thumb marks were
on the lower part of the handle and the gable-like part was the top. This
at least is how the type is defined at Tell Um Hammad, where it is classi-
fied as Genre 70 (Helms et al. 1992: 89–90, fig. 239: 5–8). Parallels date
to the EB I: Shoham (North) (Gophna and van den Brink 2005: fig.7.5:
5), Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar 2008: fig. 38.3.7: 2) and Tell Umm Hamad Esh-
Sherqi (Leonard 1992: pls. 25: 5, 11; 26: 13).
The short knob handle (Fig. 13.9: 7) appears mostly on hemispheri-
cal bowls; it is also found on a holemouth vessel at Beth Yerah (below).
The following parallels date to the EB I: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006:
figs. 2.12: 10; 2.13: 10), Qiryat Ata III–II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 11),
Ashqelon-Afridar (Khalaily 2004: fig. 17: 10) and Tell Umm Hamad
Esh-Sherqi (Leonard 1992: pl. 23: 21–23, 25).
The high loop handle (Fig. 13.9: 6) apparently belongs to the red-
slipped burnished juglets, a type prevalent in the EB I (Getzov 2006: fig.
2.14: 3; Golani 2003: fig. 4.8: 1, 3).
The spout in Fig. 13.9: 9 probably belongs to a holemouth or hole-
mouth krater. The following parallels date mostly to the EB Ib: Tel
fazael 4: the excavations at the early bronze age i site 423
Qashish “Post-Stratum XIII” (Zuckerman 2003: fig. 15: 4), 'En Shadud
(Braun 1985: figs. 14: 6; 26: 3–4) and Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996: fig.
13: 11–13).
The vessel bases found at the site (Fig. 13.9: 2) are flat, and several
are painted or red-slipped. The paint runs that appear on the base
presented here indicate that at least the upper part of the vessel was
painted. The ascription of the bases is unclear; some belonged to jars,
large bowls or kraters.
The ceramic disc that is perforated at its centre (Fig. 13.9: 10) was
apparently used as a spinning weight. It was not made from a pottery
sherd that was worked round (as is usually the case with loom weights
and ceramic lids), rather it was produced at its inception in the shape
of a perforated disc. It is probably an imitation of similar stone loom
weights (see for example Eisenberg 1996: fig. 18: 8).
Two body sherds with incised decoration were found at the site: one
is decorated with four vertical lines and a horizontal line crossing them
(Fig. 13.9: 11); the other is a perforated body sherd decorated on one
side with short incised strokes (Fig. 13.9: 12).
Summary
The pottery assemblage from Fazael 4 is composed mostly of bowls
and jars (including holemouth jars). The absence of kraters, jugs and
juglets is striking. In contrast, the small bowls that were used for light-
ing stand out prominently. In most instances the vessels were fired at
a low or medium temperature, and the red slip is not prevalent in the
assemblage. Most parallels found at Beth Yerah V, Qiryat Ata III-II, 'En
Esur III, Ashqelon-Afridar and 'En Shadud, date the assemblage to the
entire time span of the EB I.
From the standpoint of form there are many similarities between the
Fazael 4 assemblage and that from at Sheikh Diab 2, on the southern
bank of Wadi Fazael. The latter dates to the middle of EB I (Chapter 12;
Bar et al. 2011). At that site too, the use of large storage jars is remark-
able, as is the paucity of small vessels and slipped vessels. To this we
should add the extensive use of incised diagonal lines that decorated
the holemouth jars in both of the assemblages. We must add to the
similarity in the vessel forms the architectural similarity: at both sites
similar circular structures were found and interpreted as silos. It seems
that the main activity at Fazael 4 was connected to storing (as testified
by the pithoi and the jars), most likely grain from the nearby cultivated
424 chapter thirteen
fields. The bowls were mainly used as oil lamps (or cooking), and the
holemouth jars were used both for storing and cooking.
Based on the proximity of the site to Sheikh Diab 2, the similarity of
form between the two assemblages, and the similarity in architecture,
it is conceivable that the sites existed simultaneously, at least during the
later phases of Fazael 4, and constituted a single settlement.
2 3
4 5
7 8
9
10
12
11
13
14
0 10 cm
3
0 10 cm
4 5
10
11
12
0 10 cm
10
11
12
13
0 10 cm
0 20 cm 2
1
5
3
4
6 7 8 9
11
12
10
0 10 cm
excluding the sickle blades (17.6% of Group C) and the single fragment
of a fan scraper, there were no diagnostic tools. Most of the tools were
small, and only a minimum of work was invested in their preparation.
Notches and denticulates comprised 25.5% of the group; whereas 17.6%
were retouched flakes and blades. Apparently these ad hoc tools were
improvised for the purpose of performing an immediate task.
Discussion
The total quantity of flint items (N = 781) is indeed small; however,
the presence of flint items belonging to the three groups (A – waste,
B – semi-finished products, C – retouched tools) proves the existence
of a flint industry at the site. Flint was utilized as a raw material in the
production of items for everyday use. However, based on the nature of
the finds, most of the industry was not particularly sophisticated, both
from the standpoint of production-technology and the selection of
raw material. Despite the presence of the three groups of flint products
which indicate the existence of a local flint industry, no hammer stones,
which are essential for the knapping process, were found.
The quantity of semi-finished products at the site (flakes, blades, bl-
adelets and Canaanean blades) which were not shaped by a secondary
treatment or retouched is considerable (N = 378, 49.6%). Retouched
tools were relatively scarce, and it can therefore be assumed that at least
some of the flakes or blades were the end-product used for various
purposes. The Canaanean blades (5.2%) were probably blanks for the
preparation of sickle blades.
Most tools of group C (N = 6.6%) should be classified as ad hoc tools
(Rosen 1997: 34, 158–159). A minimum of work was invested in the
secondary treatment (retouching) of most of these. They were prepared
from brown and grey flint of poor and mediocre quality. The cores were
not suitable for the production of large artifacts, similar to the situation
in other sites in the region (e.g. Fazael 7, Chapter 11). Exceptions to
this rule are the Canaanean sickle blade, which were skillfully knapped
434 chapter thirteen
from fine quality light-brown raw material, which was apparently also
the case with the fan scraper. The cores used to produce these were
not found, and they probably came from specialized workshops whose
location has not yet been found.
Based on the ceramic finds the site is ascribed to EB I, which is cor-
Double snap
natural back
Canaanean
Truncation
Truncation
Reaping
Double
Lustre
Locus
knife
sides
Snap
8 + + + +
+
8 + + +
natural
16 + + +
22 + + + +
25 + + + + +
25 + + + +
31 + +
31 + Short fragments
+
31 + +
Grind Stones
Six items were found. A large whole basin (maximum width 35 cm,
length 60 cm) made of limestone was discovered near the round build-
ings (silos) in the southern part of the excavation region (Figs. 13.3;
13.11: 1). The inside of the basin (width 35 cm, length 48 cm, depth 10
cm) is elliptical. The other stone objects include a fragment of a lower
grind stone made of limestone; two complete upper grinding stones
made of limestone (maximum width 15 cm, length 24 cm and 29 cm;
Fig. 13.11: 3–4) and two small grind stones, one round (diameter 6.5
cm) made of limestone, and the other square (width 3.5 cm, length 4.5
cm, height 2.5 cm), made of basalt. It seems that at least two of the sides
of the square stone were used. The number of items attests to the inten-
sity of food preparation activities involving grain at the site. Parallels of
these items were found at nearby Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12) and other
EBA sites in the region.
Conclusions
The 11 stone items that were found in the excavation reveal interesting
characteristics. The principal raw material was indigenous limestone
that was readily available to the residents of the site. The basalt was
also available to the residents of the site from the Lower Cretaceous
outcrops in Wadi Far'ah. No stones were found that came from a source
farther away. The amount of food preparation tools attests that food
preparation was a significant activity at the site.
The spatial distribution of the stone artifacts is also worth noting.
The stone mortar was found together with two small stone bowls and
the two small grind stones in the vicinity of the two adjacent circu-
lar buildings in the southern part of the excavation. Two upper grind
stones, a small stone bowl and the stone with the biconical perforation
were found between the two circular buildings and Wall 1, in the north-
ern part of the excavation. An upper grind stone and a small stone bowl
were found in the area where there was probably a building (between
Walls 1 and 28). The main conclusion we can draw from the distribu-
tion is that all of the stone items were found outside the circular build-
ings (in an area that was apparently used as two inner courtyards and a
room): hence these structures were not used for work, but most likely
for storage. Most of the items were discovered in a courtyard, and only
two were found inside the room.
Methods
To examine surface modifications and carnivore and cut-marks, the
bones were cleaned in water and when necessary, a 5% acetic acid solu-
tion was used. Bones not identified at a taxonomic level were docu-
mented according to body size. Differentiating between domestic sheep
and goat was not possible; therefore, these remains were pooled and
referred to as sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis). The total number of identified
bones (NISP) is given as counts and as percentage of the assemblage as
a whole. The minimum number of elements (MNE) is given for each
species and group size.
5
This section was written by R. Zuckerman, University of Haifa.
440 chapter thirteen
Description of finds
Seventeen bones and bone fragments were identified and recorded
(Table 13.3). Mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella) and the undifferenti-
ated caprine category of sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis) were present in equal
proportions (29% of the assemblage); whereas pig (Sus sp.) and cattle
(Bos sp.) appear less often (18% and 6%, respectively). At the present
stage of research it is not possible to determine whether the cattle and
pig bones at the site represent domesticated animals. Bones and bone
fragments not identified at a taxonomic level and attributed to the
group of medium sized animals (e.g. mountain gazelle, goat, sheep, pig
or dog) constitute 18% of the assemblage.
Only a few bones were complete enough to assess age, therefore, reli-
able mortality data could not be obtained. On the basis of bone fusion
stages (Silver 1969), all caprine, mountain gazelle and pig remains were
identified as those of young animals. Slaughter of animals at a young
age suggests that animals were raised and exploited for meat. Break-
age and fracture patterns suggest that the bones were broken close to
the time of the animal’s death. Due to the small size of the assemblage
statistical analysis was not possible.
Evidence of butchery was found on one bone – cattle first phalange.
Carnivore damage, in the form of dog-gnawing, was observed on the
same phalange. Both carnivore and cut marks suggest that after the
bones were used by man, some were discarded at the site and exploited
by predators or domestic dogs.
In summary, the preliminary conclusions presented here suggest
a mixed economy of domestic animal husbandry (sheep/goat, cattle,
and probably pigs) and wild animal hunting (mountain gazelle and
perhaps pigs). The gnawing marks suggest the presence of predators,
or alternatively, the presence of
domestic dogs in the vicinity Species NISP (%NISP) MNE
of the residential area. Further Capra/Ovis 5 (29) 4
excavations at the site, leading Bos sp. 1 (6) 1
to a larger faunal assemblage Sus sp. 3 (18) 3
will make it possible to conduct Gazella gazella 5 (29) 4
a representative and in-depth Medium size 3 (18) 3
analysis. Total 17 (100)
General Conclusions
Fazael 4 is an example of an EB I rural settlement in the southern Jor-
dan Valley in the second half of the 4th millennium BCE. The dating of
the site is based primarily on the ceramic typology that is characteristic
of this region in the EB I. Its proximity to the Sheikh Diab 2 site located
just to the south, the close similarity of the various architectural units
at the two sites, and the typological kinship of the ceramic, lithic and
stone finds, shows the two settlements are chronologically very close,
and might even be contemporary. There is also the possibility that the
two sites were part of one large settlement that extended across the
western portion of the Fazael Valley.
The area of the site is about 3 ha, and the survey on the surface of
the site discovered distinct architectural remains that indicate the pos-
sible existence of dwelling complexes, including courtyards, rooms and
round structures. From our experience at Sheikh Diab 2 we assume
that we are dealing with about 10 family units, that together with data
collected from Sheikh Diab 2, suggests a large village of more than 20
family units that existed in the western part of the Fazael Valley during
EB I.
One of the most intriguing phenomena at the site is the round build-
ings, which we presume functioned as storage installations and silos,
although no evidence was found of the contents of these structures
(possibly because of their proximity to the surface, which resulted in
the disintegration of organic matter). Such buildings have been discov-
ered nearby at Sheikh Diab 2 and a few other sites in the EB I in the
southern Levant. All the openings of the buildings face in a general
north-north-west to north-north-east direction. The silo opening at
Sheikh Diab 2 also faced in this direction.
In light of the preliminary data collected at the excavation, which
is similar to other sites in the Fazael Valley in the Chalcolithic period
and EB I, it seems that the site’s economy was based on a combination
of grazing and agriculture, with a limited amount of hunting. This is
indicated by the sickle blades, animal bones and stone objects that were
discovered in the excavation.
The data collected in the 2010 season only provide a preliminary
picture of the activity in the Fazael Valley during the EB I. Further re-
search at Fazael 4 and other sites nearby should aid in formulating a
broader picture of the fabric of life in the region.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
This study presents an analysis of the settlement patterns in the Chal-
colithic and EB I periods in the southern Jordan Valley and the desert
fringes of Samaria. The data from 102 survey sites were reviewed, and
those of 30 new sites were analyzed. Five sites were excavated in order
to answer specific questions concerning this subject.
This chapter summarizes the surveys and excavation data to give a
general picture of the settlement pattern, according to trends and key
processes.
direction of the sun’s movement in the sky and its effect on the
vegetation in a period that was more humid than the present. The
southern orientation in this region is warmer than the northern
orientation, it receives more direct and uninterrupted sunshine,
and the plant life is sparser. Hence the founders of the sites pre-
ferred to leave the northern orientation available for agricultural
purposes (grazing or field crops).
Six types of sites were discovered in the EB I: the most common being
the unfortified site, of which 37 were discovered (44.5% of all of the
sites of the period). This type is divided into four categories according
to area. There are also 27 open sites (33%), seven burial sites (8.5%), six
enclosure sites (7%), two fortified sites, two caves, and one cultic site.
Of the sites with a medium or higher level of probability the unforti-
fied site is also the most prevalent, with 31 sites of this kind (69% of
all the sites). Of the sites with a medium or higher level of probability,
seven burial sites (15.5%), four open sites (9%), two fortified sites, and
one cultic site (2%) were also discovered. The cave sites and enclosures
that were found in the surveys have a lower than medium level of prob-
ability.
Here too, as in the case of the Chalcolithic sites, the unfortified sites
stand out. These are divided into four area-related categories: large vil-
lages about 10 ha in area with numerous houses; medium-sized villages
between 1 and 3 ha; small villages up to 1 ha in area; and single build-
ings – a farmhouse or a house of a nuclear family (usually in an area of
less than 3,000 m2).
The characteristics of the large unfortified sites were identical to the
Chalcolithic (see above). Four sites of this kind were discovered (Shu-
net el-Masna'ah, Kaziyet el-Ratrut, Mantaket Wadi Zeit and Far'at ej-
Jiftlik – Sites 55–57, 62) – all in Wadi Far'ah. In the medium-sized sites,
which were more prevalent than the large sites, there was relatively
dense construction, and they were typically located on a shoulder or
spur above the source of water. They were distributed in all of the major
wadis, except Wadi Malih and Bezeq, but were mainly concentrated
in the western part of Wadi Far'ah and near the springs of the desert
fringes of Samaria. Sheikh Diab 2 and Fazael 4 are examples of such
settlements. The small unfortified settlements, characterized by their
limited area (2,000–3,000 m2), were located near a source of water, and
usually near arable land.
Of particular importance were the fortified sites from this period
446 chapter fourteen
concentrated in the Jordan Valley between the Kinneret and the Dead
Sea. In this region two sites were discovered for which there is a high
and a medium level of probability that they were probably already forti-
fied in the EB Ib (Tel Shalem and er-Rjjum). Three other sites, all in
the desert fringes, might already have been fortified in the EB Ib: Tel
Za'anuni (Site 42; Zertal 2008), Khirbet Juraish (Site 64; Porath 1968;
Finkelstein et al. 1997) and Khirbet Rahiyeh (Site 96; Finkelstein et al.
1997). All of these also existed in the EB II, and without excavating it is
not possible to determine the dates of their fortification. The five sites,
together with the major sites at Beth Yerah, Tell Far'ah (North), and
Jericho, form a sequence of fortified settlements between the Kinneret
and the Dead Sea on the western side of the Jordan. A similar phenom-
enon was also noted on the eastern side of the Jordan, particularly at
Tell Abu al-Kharaz and Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. In both regions, west and east
of the Jordan River, the sequence is dated to the EB Ib and EB II.
The distribution of the fortified sites suggests ‘independent’ centres
with unfortified settlements around them, that constituted an eco-
nomic, and possibly also a cultural, periphery. In the southern Beth
Shean Valley this was the fortified settlement of Tel Shalem; in the east
and middle of Wadi Far'ah er-Rjjum was the key site. The proximity of
er-Rjjum to Tell Far'ah (North), if they were both fortified at the same
time, is difficult to understand, and the data at this stage are insufficient
to determine which of the two was more important (they are similar in
area: er-Rjjum was not excavated, and the information from Tell Far'ah
[North] has not been consolidated).
The absence of Um Hammad ware and the paucity of sites south
of Wadi Far'ah suggest that this wadi was the southernmost bound-
ary of the area affected by these settlements, and south of it is Jericho’s
settlement region. An environmental analysis of the desert fringe sites
suggests that they did not have an economic/cultural periphery. Their
location there is possibly related to economic activity, such as the grow-
ing of olives and vines that required centres where the activity could be
organized and the produce processed.
From this analysis we learn that the fortified sites were not real
‘cities’, and were certainly not ‘city-states’. The author agrees with Paz
(2002) who proposed the existence of limited socio-political units with
the beginnings of a bureaucratic mechanism, and not more than two
settlement hierarchies.
These sites have other important characteristics: an area of 2–5 ha in-
side the fortification; a location on slopes or precipitous hilltops above
general conclusions 447
wadis (except Tel Shalem which is on level ground); and between seven
and 15 unfortified sites (settlements in a secondary hierarchy) around
each of them. In each settlement cluster, which was in the centre of one
or two fortified sites, was a large regional cemetery; and an unfortified
settlement existed near some of the fortified settlements (Tel Shalem,
'Ain Juraish – next to Khirbet Juraish; 'Ain Duma – next to Khirbet
Rahiyeh).
Seven burial sites were also identified in the EB I (16% of the sites
with a medium or higher level of probability), and one site that was
evidently used for cultic purposes – el-Khellaiyel (Site 24). Burial sites
are also known in the southern Beth Shean Valley – Qa'un (Site 4),
on the slopes of the Samarian hills – Tana Cave (Site 59), and in Wadi
Far'ah – Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh, el-Maqbarah, el-Maqaber, Aqraban-
iyeh and Jelamet el-Ahmar (A) (Sites 26–29, 38). The northern bank
of Wadi Far'ah (for a distance of more than 5 km between 'Ain Shibli
and Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh) was one of the largest cemeteries in the
southern Levant in the EBA.
The main features of the burial sites are: multi-chamber shaft tombs
with a vertical entrance, usually located on a gentle slope, and contain-
ing special finds that are absent from settlement sites (e.g. grey bur-
nished bowls that were found in most of the funerary assemblages and
at only one settlement site, red burnished or trefoil amphoriskoi with
a tall handle rising above the rim, etc). The absence of Um Hammad
ware from the funerary assemblages is surprising, because it was a very
common type of pottery in the settlement sites.
The el-Khellaiyel site is an example of a cultic site, and possibly
also a burial site in the EB I. It is located on a high peak in the centre
of the Jebel Tammun ridge, and looks out over the Wadi Far'ah val-
ley and its settlements. There are two key elements in it that stand out
prominently: a tall pyramid-shaped hill on which remains of ashes and
burnt bones were identified, and a broad house 25 m long by 5 m wide.
The desolate location, remote from sources of water and agricultural
land, on the one hand, and the breathtaking view and cultic/funerary
features on the other, suggests that this was no ordinary site, and was
apparently a unit with special ritualistic importance, or a magnificent
burial structure.
The following are the main conclusions drawn from the geographi-
cal data of the EB I:
– The sources of water and potential farmland were a key element
in the location of the sites. Unlike in the Chalcolithic, even the
448 chapter fourteen
(e.g. Wadi Malih and Wadi 'Aujjeh) suggest that the population of
the Jordan Valley did not exhaust the potential for its expansion
until the end of the period.
istic of those parts of the Jordan Valley close to the slopes of the hills.
In regions near the Jordan River and far from sources of stone, the con-
struction utilized mud bricks (e.g. at Tel Tsaf, located near the Jordan
River – Garfinkel et al. 2007). In some areas stone pavements were used
for storage or as a working/cooking surface.
At least some of the dwelling units were covered, but with the excep-
tion of one stone base ('Ein Hilu, Area E) and the unique crossed wall
pattern from the large unit in Fazael 7, no other roof supports were
found. The fact that the width of the living rooms was practically uni-
form (4.0–4.5 m) suggests that the roofing usually used organic ele-
ments (probably wood) of this length.
within a wall, and had an average area of 165 m2. The ratio between the
areas of dwelling unit and the courtyard was 1:9; hence its centrality
in the household activity (animals were probably also kept in it). The
courtyards were based on the natural chalk bedrock, and silos and the
household’s large storage vessels were located in it.
The walls were built similarly to those in the Chalcolithic sites: two
rows of medium-sized fieldstones with a fill of smaller stones and mud
between them. The walls were up to 85 cm thick. The main difference
between the two periods was that the EB I settlers had a tendency to
build curved rather than straight walls (particularly the outer wall of
the courtyard). The walls were preserved to a maximum height of seven
stone courses, and it seems they were stone-built to most of their height.
The thickness of the walls shows that the buildings were probably only
of one storey. Some of the wall foundation trenches were rock-hewn.
The floors in the covered rooms were made of tamped earth, some-
times combined with crushed chalk. Some parts were paved with stone
that might have been used as storage surfaces or as working/cooking
surfaces. No pavements were laid in the courtyards, where the natural
bedrock served as the floor.
The dwelling units were roofed, but no organic remains used for
covering or as a means of supporting a roof were found. The width of
the living rooms was standard (4 m), probably because of the organic
roof covering, which was most probably wood.
The area of the dwelling units indicates that the typical complex was
intended for a nuclear family. The variation in area of the courtyards
seems to indicate that the owners of the larger courtyards had more
property than the others (or at least a social or economic function that
necessitated the use of a larger area).
A comparison between the Chalcolithic sites at Fazael and Sheikh
Diab 2 is important because they are very close to one another geo-
graphically. The comparison shows that the dwelling unit at the Fazael
sites was significantly (approximately four times) larger than that
at Sheikh Diab 2; the average area of the courtyards at the two sites
was similar; and the total area of the dwelling complexes at Fazael was
greater than its counterpart at Sheikh Diab 2.
In conclusion: the difference in the area of the dwelling units might
be indicative of a transfer of some of the household activities from the
covered units to the open areas. Ilan (2001) contended that some of
the small rooms at the EB II sites were intended for the maintenance
and feeding of animals. If this is true, then the lack of adjacent rooms
general conclusions 453
tachio were also found, but it is unclear if they were intentionally grown
or randomly gathered. It is also unknown if irrigated farming was used
in the region: however, the presence of perennial streams would seem
to suggest that it was. The most common wild tree was the tamarisk,
which was used as fuel for heating and cooking (it was mainly found
in hearths at Fazael 2). The small number of bifacial tools from the ex-
cavated sites is surprising, and the adzes increased in number towards
the north and west. This indicates that wood was mostly processed in
the higher regions in the foothills of Samaria and in the southern Beth
Shean Valley, where the climate was more favorable to the growth of
trees.
Trade
Little evidence was found of inter-regional trade (some metal tools, a
haematite mace head, and a pendant in Fazael 2, and a Mediterranean
seashell in 'Ein Hilu). The basalt tools from both sites were evidence of
regional trade. These finds indicate there was some transfer of goods
from more distant regions to this region. The meagre evidence would
seem to indicate the weakness of regional and inter-regional trade in
the Chalcolithic, but this is probably due to the lack of archaeological
research in the region. In Jordan, for example, much more evidence of
trade was found (bowls from the Negev, mace heads and shells from
Egypt, metal from the Caucasus, etc. –Bourke 2001).
work animals in the second half of the period. The significant decrease
in the amount of hunted wildlife relative to previous periods indicates
a transition to raising more animals for meat (the most suitable being
pig). No evidence was found to indicate a population of nomadic shep-
herds (again bearing in mind the difficulty of identifying such evidence
among the archaeological finds), and it seems that the sedentary set-
tlers were also engaged in grazing as part of their subsistence economy
(a model similar to the daily foraging that characterizes the grazing
model of the Chalcolithic sites).
The comparison of the Fazael 2 and Sheikh Diab 2 sites is interest-
ing: the primary animal at both sites was goat/sheep, but their number
at Fazael 2 was significantly greater. Cattle were raised at both sites. At
Fazael 2 there were wild animals (fox, wild cat) which were absent from
Sheikh Diab 2. Pigs, which were absent from Fazael 2, were dominant at
Sheikh Diab 2. Members of the equine family (probably donkeys) have
only been found at Sheikh Diab 2.
The main evidence of field crops is sickle blades and silos, many of
which were discovered at the excavated and surveyed sites. This indi-
cates a change in the EB I economy, and an increase in the importance
of cereal farming as opposed to grazing. There is further evidence of
this in the crushing and grinding tools used to process food, discovered
at excavated and surveyed sites alike. Presumably cattle were also used
as work animals in farming. The prevalent field crops were wheat, bar-
ley, legumes, and vetch. The common orchard crops were the European
olive and grapes. Natural plant life in use included the tamarisk, as well
as Tabor oak, Jerusalem pine, willow, mustard, hackberry, jujube, al-
mond, and spiny burnet. Not surprisingly, the varieties of vegetation in
the Chalcolithic and the EB I were similar. The difference is apparent in
the presumed introduction or intensified use of agricultural technolo-
gies that altered the economy of the period (Philip 2001; Rowan 1998):
flood agriculture, cultivation of fields using work animals, a growth
in processing olives and grapes, and the use of donkeys as work/pack
animals. In addition, agricultural productivity was increased through
the use of metal implements (at the expense of flint tools), and the in-
troduction of the plough.
Also important was the penetration of settlements into the hilly re-
gions of Samaria, which was sparsely inhabited in the Chalcolithic pe-
riod. This change was possibly due to the increased growing of orchard
crops, especially olives and grapes in the Samarian hills and along their
slopes.
456 chapter fourteen
Trade
No imported traded items were found at Sheikh Diab 2 or Fazael 4,
save a few sandstone grinding stones that probably originated in Jor-
dan. However, trade is known to have been lively during the period
(Chapter 6), and the Jordan Valley has been described as “the backbone
of exchange between northern and southern Canaan” (Milevski 2011).
According to Milevski the commercial ties of the Jordan Valley with the
north of the country were stronger than those with the southern region,
and Jericho was the regional centre of control.
These hypotheses have not been corroborated in this study.
General Conclusions
The survey and excavation data of the two periods draw a picture of
an array of agricultural settlements (probably permanent sites) based
on cereal farming and grazing. They were distributed near the sources
of water and arable land on the banks of the wadis in the southern Jor-
dan Valley. The social structure was apparently tribal, and united the
different villages into defined settlement clusters. At the beginning of
the Chalcolithic there was a significant increase in the number of sites
and the population in the valley. This growth was probably due to the
introduction of certain agricultural technologies. After the boom of
the Chalcolithic period a change occurred, during which most of the
Chalcolithic sites were abandoned. After an unknown time, at the be-
ginning of the next period, new sites were established, often close to the
previous sites. The difference in the architectural style, and also (but to
a lesser extent) the material finds, suggests a penetration from outside,
and integration, the scope of which is still unclear, with the inhabit-
ants who remained after the settlements collapsed in the Chalcolithic.
In the later phases of the EB I, another change took place: an increase
in the number of inhabitants, a penetration into new regions (western
Wadi Far'ah and the slopes of Samaria), an economic change, transi-
tion to more intensive cereal farming at the expense of raising livestock,
and the appearance of the first fortified sites. The tribal social system
underwent change, and toward the end of the period two settlement
hierarchies appeared – fortified settlements, surrounded by an array of
unfortified settlements (a hinterland?). At the end of the period there
was a crisis, and a fundamental change resulted in the almost com-
plete abandonment of the Jordan Valley and relocation to the hills. This
impacted the sites in the valley whose subsistence was based on cereal
farming, and moved the settlement hub to the sites on the Samarian
slopes, which were apparently based on growing fruit trees, particularly
olive and vines.
CHAPTER FIFTEEN
SITE CATALOGUE
2 1 Na h
a l Bez
eq
ash)
9 43
(Wa
di Shu b
5 67 W
ad i Y
ab i s
200
8 10 200
Zebabdeh 13 11 12
117 14
15
River J
123 Mehula 16
195
17 195
Wadi Malih
122 18
o rdan
Tubas 20 19
190 21 190
23
22
in
ufr j
2627 24 Wadi K
i
185 185
29 28 25
30 32 31 34 35
41 33 40 36
3839 37 43
180
42 44 45 180
47 46 120
48
50
54 49 51 53 52
55
175
58 56 175
r qa
57
59
Ze
61 62 63
W
64 60
ad
e
di
65
iF
118
Wa
ar
ah
66
'
170
67 68 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
Fadil 121 73 72
75
165 77 76 79 165
7478
82 85 83 80
96 azael 84 87 818891
Wa d i F 86 89 90 Wadi A
97 9495 92 93
River J
160 98 100 99
h ma
r 160
119
101
102
or
103
dan
155
104 155
105
108 109 107 106 'Aujjeh
110 114 115
150 111 112 150
i Nim r in
145 W ad 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Description: A low tell on the northern bank of Wadi Qa'un, 200 m dis-
tant from Qa'un springs. Traces of ancient building activity are visible
on the ground. A few Byzantine graves are located in the middle of the
site. Adjacent are 20 rectangular hewn installations, including a few cup
marks. There is an abundant sherd scatter from the EB I.
Pottery finds: 65 sherds from the EB I, including: 4 holemouth rims
(Types: H1b, H2a, H4), 1 jar rim (Type J1a), 1 krater rim (Type K2), 2
Um Hammad body sherds, 1 ledge handle, and many flat bases.
Flint finds: 177 flint artifacts, including non-diagnostic tools, such as 5
burins, 3 awls and a scraper.
Other finds: 13 frag-
ments of basalt stone
tools including 2 lower
grinding stones and a
rectangular basin.
Summary: The ceramic
assemblage attests to
a medium-high prob-
ability presence during
the EB I. The presence
of Um-Hammad sherds
suggests an occupa-
tion during EB Ib. The
flint and stone tools are
not diagnostic, and the
absence of Canaanean
blades is noteworthy. Figure 15.2. Plan of Khirbet Qa'un (1)
(Zertal 2005: 112).
site catalogue 461
•
Site 3: Qa'un Cemetery
Israel grid: 1942/2013 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -40 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic? EB, IB, MB II, Iron I–II,
Site type: cemetery Persian
Area: 1 ha (the area of the site Visibility of other sites: 3
during the Chalcolithic and Number of visits: 4
EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 15
Topography: slope Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: Qa'un 2005: site 4
springs, 300 m distant
462 chapter fifteen
Description: A small tell in the southern Beth Shean valley near 'Ain
Malqoah springs and the modern Beth Shean–Jericho road. Most of
the sherds were collected in the fields bordering the tell and the spring.
Pottery finds: 12 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including a krater
rim, a flat base, and 3 body sherds with rope ornamentation.
Flint finds: 12 flint artifacts, including a Chalcolithic backed sickle
blade.
Other finds: 5 fragments of basalt objects, including 2 hemispherical
bowls, a lower grinding stone, and a pestle.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages, together with the
descriptions of finds by Tzori (1962), attest to a medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic period. This was probably a small
settlement by the spring, belonging to the cluster of the southern Beth
Shean valley. The finds are not abundant, due to the dense occupation
remains dating to later periods.
466 chapter fifteen
adzes, an axe, 4 chisels, and 2 backed sickle blades. Cores and debitage
together with non-diagnostic tools were also found.
Summary: The lithic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the Chalcolithic period. The sparse amount of pottery is
unique, and might indicate a work place rather than a dwelling. The
topographic location, situated on a narrow ridge high above the wadi,
and the high frequency of bifacial tools (mainly adzes) might indicate
a connection to tree-processing industry. The lesser probability of it
being a flint quarry cannot be ruled out.
•
Site 10: 'Ain Buleibil
Israel grid: 1998/2000 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -200 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Roman
Site type: sherd scatter (settle- Visibility of other sites: 3
ment?) Number of visits: 3
Area: 1 ha Number of sherds: 114
Topography: plateau Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: 'Ain 2005: site 24
Buleibil spring, 30 m distant
dan Valley pithoi, 20 body sherds with rope ornamentation, and 12 flat
bases.
Flint finds: 107 flint artifacts, including diagnostic tools, such as 2 adzes,
a typical Chalcolithic backed and truncated sickle blade, a borer, 2 den-
ticulates, 4 notches, an end scraper. A few cores and many debitage
pieces were also found, indicating that flint was processed at the site.
Other finds: 7 fragments of basalt bowls and food processing tools, 3
limestone perforated weights, and a copper axe (Fig. 15.11).
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a high probabil-
ity presence during the Chalcolithic period. The copper axe resembles
the axes of the EB I period, but this is the only artifact in the assemblage
from this period. The relative wealth of finds might attest to a small
settlement situated by the spring. This is another site from the Chalco-
lithic period cluster of the southern Beth Shean valley.
Description: a low tell rising above flat agricultural areas in the southern
Beth Shean valley, 1.5 km north-east of Shemsiyeh village. On the tell’s
summit are a few building remains from the Middle Ages. Chalcolithic
finds were sherds from the tell, and flint tools from a field on the north
side.
Pottery finds: 12 small body sherds, possibly from the Chalcolithic pe-
riod, including a lug handle and rope ornamentation on body sherds.
Figure 15.13. General view of Tell ed-Deir, facing south. The field with the
flint remains is in the middle of the picture.
site catalogue 477
•
Site 13: Tell el-Beidha-Shemsiyeh
Israel grid: 1978/1986 Period of occupation: EB
Elevation: -120 m.a.s.l.; 10 Visibility of other sites: 2
m.a.s.a. Number of visits: 1
Site type: tell Number of sherds: 35
Area: 1.2 ha Previous publications: Mittmann
Topography: plateau 1970: 263; Tzori 1977b: site 54;
Nearest water source: 'Ain Shem- Zertal 2005: site 26
siyeh spring, 30 m distant
Description: a large tell towering high above and to the west of the Jor-
dan. In its vicinity are two fords across the river. Most of the site is
completely destroyed, and large parts are covered with minefields. In
the middle of the site a section was made by earthmoving work. In the
lower parts of the section EB strata are visible.
Pottery finds: 65 sherds from the EB I, including: 7 holemouth rims
(Types H1a, H2a, H7, H8), a krater rim (Type K1d), 3 ledge handles,
and 5 body sherds decorated in the band slip style.
Flint finds: 36 flint items in a blade-oriented assemblage. 2 Canaanean
sickle blades and 5 Canaanean blades were found.
Other finds: 3 basalt tools were observed in the bottom strata of the
section: a hemispherical bowl and 2 lower grinding tools.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a medium prob-
ability presence during the EB I. Contrary to previous surveys nothing
diagnostic to the Chalcolithic period was found, and it seems that the
site was established during the EB I. The massive destruction at the site
and later settlement activity prevent a discussion of its size during the
EB I.
•
Site 15: ej-Jobeh
Israel grid: 2007/1979 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -200 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic
Site type: settlement Visibility of other sites: 4
Area: 9 ha Number of visits: 4
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: 270
Nearest water source: 'Ain es- Previous publications: Zertal
Sakut spring, 1 km distant 2005: site 31
Description: a large site situated on a low hill rising above flat agricul-
tural areas in the southern Beth Shean Valley, 1.8 km south-east of
Shemsiyeh village. The site is located in the middle of large fields, and
in its presumed centre there is a modern channel 30 m wide allowing
a view of the two deep sections on both sides. In the eastern section,
at the depth of 80 cm, a paved living stratum is visible (Fig. 15.15).
The remains of a wall and a burial are also visible in this section. In
the western section, 3 pits, between 60 and 150 cm deep, are visible.
One of the pits has collapsed into the channel, and many Chalcolithic
sherds, including a churn, were observed. In the fields surrounding the
channel many pottery, flint and basalt tools were collected. The section
in the middle of the site gives two important indications: the pattern of
480 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.16. Pottery, stone tools and flint items from ej-Jobeh.
•
Site 16: Khirbet es-Sakut
Israel grid: 1968/2018 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -216 m.a.s.l.; 10 lithic? EB? MB II, LB, Iron
m.a.s.a. I–II, Persian, Hellenistic,
Site type: tell Roman–Byzantine, Early
Area: 4 ha (the area of the site Muslim, Middle Ages
during the Chalcolithic/EB I is Visibility of other sites: 2
not known) Number of visits: 3
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: 18
Nearest water source: 'Ain es- Previous publications: Zertal
Sakut spring, 30 m distant 2005: site 32
Description: a large tell in the southern Beth Shean valley, 2.5 km east
of the modern village of Mehula, and adjacent to 'Ain es-Sakut spring.
Most of the early pottery was found on the outskirts of the tell in a pit
in a field near the spring. There is therefore no way to assess the size of
the site in the periods under study.
Pottery finds: 18 sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, including 2
482 chapter fifteen
•
Site 17: Khirbet Wadi edh-Dhb'ah
Israel grid: 1977/1949 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -120 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB I, Iron III, Persian,
Site type: settlement Hellenistic, Roman
Area: 4,000 m2 Visibility of other sites: 0
Topography: slope and valley Number of visits: 2
fringe Number of sherds: 55
Nearest water source: 'Ain esh- Previous publications: Zertal
Shaqq spring, 300 m distant 2008: site 76
•
Site 19: 'Ein Hilu
See a detailed description and excavation report in Chapter 9.
•
Site 20: Qta'at el-Khalifeh
Israel grid: 1912/1913 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: 210 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Roman
Site type: sherd scatter Visibility of other sites: 0
Area: 3,000 m2 Number of visits: 2
Topography: ravine Number of sherds: 41
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Previous publications: Zertal
Mayatteh spring, 3 km distant 2008: site 99
484 chapter fifteen
Description: A site in a small ravine, in the ridges east of Ras Jadir, and
about 700 m north of Kh. Yarzah (Zertal 2008: site 104). Next to it is a
well named Bir Abu Tayib. Concentrations of sherds were found on the
site surface, with no building remains.
Pottery finds: 41 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 3 pithos
rims with rope ornamentation (Type H3a), and 2 holemouth jars (Type
H1).
Flint finds: 4 flint items, including a diagnostic Chalcolithic backed and
truncated sickle blade.
Other finds: a leg of a basalt incense burner.
Summary: The assemblages attest to a medium probability presence
during the Chalcolithic period. The site is located far from any other
Chalcolithic site or any water source. The absence of building material
is worth noting. All these support the idea that this is an encampment
site on a possible route between the Jordan Valley to northern Samaria,
especially to the fertile Zebabdeh and Tubas Valleys where Zertal de-
scribed some Chalcolithic sites (Zertal 2008: sites 8, 16, 46, 145 and
151).
•
Site 21: Khirbet Hamamat
See a short description of this low probability EB I site in Table 15.1.
•
Site 22: Khirbet Yusef
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
site catalogue 485
•
Site 24: el-Khellaiyel
Israel grid: 1893/1849 Periods of occupation: EB I, IB,
Elevation: 540 m.a.s.l.; 250 MB II, LB
m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 13
Site type: ritual Number of visits: 4
Area: 5,000 m2 Number of sherds: 87
Topography: high summit Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: Wadi 2008: site 148
Far'ah, 3 km distant
Figure 15.17. Plan of el-Khellaiyel. Note the hillock (no. 1) and the
elongated broad room (no. 2) (Zertal 2008: fig. 326).
488 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.18. View of el-Khellaiyel. Note the unique location towering high
above Wadi Far'ah (Zertal 2008: fig. 325).
Figure 15.19. View of the hillock at el-Khellaiyel (Zertal 2008, fig. 327).
site catalogue 489
enclosures discovered in the region by Zertal – Zertal 2005: 66) and the
Chalcolithic site (and possibly an EB site) is buried beneath the Iron
Age structure.
•
Site 26: Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh
Israel grid: 1870/1843 Periods of occupation: EB I, MB
Elevation: 100 m.a.s.l.; 15 m.a.s.a. II, LB
Site type: cemetery Visibility of other sites: 4
Area: 3,000 m2 Number of visits: 1
Topography: slope and valley Number of sherds: 25
fringe Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: Wadi 2008: site 161
Far'ah, 1.5 km distant
in modern times. Because of danger of collapse the caves were not en-
tered, and the pottery was collected from the surface where the looters
left the incomplete vessels.
Pottery finds: 25 sherds from the EB I, including 2 fragments of grey
burnished carinated bowls (‘PUC’ in Kenyon’s terminology, Type B6),
6 red burnished juglets (Types J6a, J6b), 2 incense burner red-slipped
and burnished bases, red-slipped bowl (Type B1b), 2 holemouth jars,
and a ledge handle.
Other finds: rim of a basalt bowl.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the EB I period. This cemetery is part of the large cemetery
on the southern slopes of Jebel Tammun that served the large commu-
nity that inhabited Wadi Far'ah during the EB I. The morphology of the
carinated bowls and the absence of Um Hammad style pottery attest to
the use of this cemetery also during the EB Ia.
Description: A burial area on the northern edge of the Wadi Far'ah val-
ley in the low, southern edge of Jebel Tammun. The cemetery, exten-
sively looted, extends over the lower ridges of southern Jebel Tammun.
There are more than 100 holes of shaft and tunnel caves, in various
stages of illegal excavation. Many sherds, including large fragments of
vessels, are scattered outside the graves. Because of danger of collapse
no entry to the caves was made, and the pottery was collected from the
surface where the looters left the incomplete vessels. Similar cemeteries
extend eastwards, along the foothills of Jebel Tammun.
Pottery finds: 29 sherds from the EB I, including 2 fragments of grey
burnished carinated bowls (PUC, Type B6), 2 incense burner red-
slipped and burnished bases, 8 red and black slipped bowls (Types B1b,
B4), 2 jar rims (Types J2a, J5), and a ledge handle.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the EB I. This cemetery is another occurrence of the large
cemetery on the southern slopes of Jebel Tammun serving the large
community that inhabited Wadi Far'ah during the EB I. The morphol-
ogy of the carinated bowls and the absence of Um Hammad style pot-
tery attest to the use of this cemetery during the EB Ia as well.
site catalogue 493
•
Site 30: Khirbet 'Ain Farr
Israel grid: 1855/1829 Periods of occupation: EB I,
Elevation: 90 m.a.s.l.; 70 m.a.s.a. Iron I
Site type: settlement Visibility of other sites: 7
Area: 1.8 ha Number of visits: 2
Topography: valley fringe and Number of sherds: 95
slope Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: 'Ain Farr 2008: site 169
spring, 800 m distant
Description: A large site on a low, broad ridge south of the Wadi Far'ah
valley. North-east of the site is a spring, 'Ain Farr, with a road (Aqra-
baniyeh to Bet Farr) to the west. East of it is a small, deep ravine, and to
its south is a low cliff.
The site extends along the axis of the ridge, in a north-east–south-
west direction. On the ridge are a number of low terraces with consid-
erable sherd scatter. On the top of the ridge there is a low acropolis,
3,000 m2 in area; no structural remains were found.
Pottery finds: 95 sherds from the EB I. The most prominent feature is
the large quantity of the Um Hammad style, almost half of the retrieved
assemblage. These include 7 large kraters (Types K1a, K1b, K1c), 4 jars
(Type J1c), 5 holemouth jars with rope ornamentation (Type H4), and
2 bowls with rope ornamentation (Type B5). Other diagnostic types in-
clude 6 holemouth jars (Types H1c, H2a, H2b, H5, H8), 4 bowls (Types
site catalogue 495
B2a, B2c, B4), a krater, 2 jar rim (Type J2a), and 10 ledge handles.
Flint finds: 29 items, including 5 Canaanean sickle blades and 2 Canaa-
nean blades.
Other finds: a basalt bowl rim.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a high prob-
ability presence during the EB I. Most of the assemblage belongs to the
Um Hammad style, and therefore dates to the EB Ib. This is one of the
largest sites from the EB I in the Wadi Far'ah region.
Figure 15.22. View of Khirbet 'Ain Farr (Zertal 2008: fig. 360).
496 chapter fifteen
•
Site 32: Tel Miski
Israel grid: 1873/1824 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -30 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. lithic? EB I, LB, Iron I–II,
Site type: tell Persian, Roman–Byzantine
Area: 1.5 ha (the area of occupa- Visibility of other sites: 9
tion during the Chalcolithic/ Number of visits: 2
EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 19
Topography: valley Previous publications: Glueck
Nearest water source: 'Ain Miski 1951: 422; Kappus 1966:
spring, 30 m distant 81–82; Porath 1968: site 76;
Kallai 1972: site 3; Zertal 2008:
site 171
Description: a small tell in the centre of the valley of Wadi Far'ah near
a spring bearing the same name. This is a multi-period site, and the
Chalcolithic presence was noted by Glueck and Zertal, while EB I pres-
ence was noted in all the surveys.
Pottery finds: 19 sherds from the EB I with the most prominent feature
of the Um Hammad style, more than half of the retrieved sherds. These
include 3 large kraters (Types K1a, K1c), a holemouth jar with rope
ornamentation (Type H4), and 8 body fragments bearing rope orna-
mentation.
Flint finds: 8 non-indicative items.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a medium-high probabil-
ity presence during the EB Ib. There is no evidence of a Chalcolithic
presence at the site. The site was one of the villages that flourished in
the western Wadi Far'ah region during the EB Ib.
site catalogue 497
•
Site 36: Ras Bilam ez-Zef (A)
See a short description of this low probability EB I site in Table 15.1.
500 chapter fifteen
•
Site 38: Jelamet el-Ahmar (A)
Israel grid: 1898/1814 Periods of occupation: Neolithic?
Elevation: -30 m.a.s.l.; 20 m.a.s.a. EB I–II, IB
Site type: sherd scatter and Visibility of other sites: 12
cemetery Number of visits: 3
Area: 5 ha Number of sherds: 112
Topography: ridge Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: Wadi 2008: site 178
Far'ah, 500 m distant
calls a ‘procession road’) was probably used for burial ceremonies dur-
ing the EBA, although, without excavations, one cannot link the differ-
ent features of the site necessarily to the EB I, and not to the IB period.
Pottery finds: 112 sherds from the EB I. The most prominent feature is
the large quantity of Um Hammad style items, almost half of the indica-
tive items from the assemblage. The assemblage includes 15 holemouth
jars (Types H1a, H1b, H2a, H4, H7, H9), 6 jars (Types J1b, J1d, J2a, J2b,
J4a, J4b), 5 bowls (Types B2b, B2c, B5), 2 large kraters (Type K1a), 12
Um Hammad body fragments with rope ornamentation, 2 body frag-
ments bearing band slip decoration, 6 ledge handles, and 18 flat bases.
Flint finds: 39 items, including 3 Canaanean sickle blades, 2 Canaanean
blades, and a backed sickle blade.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the EB I. The presence of Um Hammad style decorations
suggests burial during the EB Ib. The burial site continued to the EB II,
and was also used during the IBA. The presence of EB II pottery in a
burial context is rare in the Wadi Far'ah area, and might be connected
to the nearby er-Rjjum site.
Figure 15.24. Plan of Jelamet el-Ahmar (A) (Zertal 2008: fig. 377).
site catalogue 503
Description: A site on a low hilltop, on the middle step south and above
the valley of Wadi Far'ah. South of the site rise the cliffs of Tell el-
Fukhar. From the cliff to the site there is a well-built pass (naqb) with
hewn steps. There is a fine view of the river valley. Remains of walls
and building remains are scattered on the slope. In the ravine to the
northeast is 'Ain Mughur 'Id spring, the water source of the site.
Pottery finds: 58 sherds from the EB I. The most prominent feature is
the large quantity of Um Hammad EB Ib style items. These include a
krater with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Type K1c), and 18
body fragments with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation. Other
indicative sherds include 2 holemouth jars (Type H2c), 2 jars (Types
J1b, J2b), 3 bowls (Type B2b), and a lug handle.
Flint finds: 20 items, including 2 Canaanean sickle blades, and a backed
Canaanean sickle blade.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a high prob-
ability presence during the EB I. The plentiful Um Hammad style deco-
ration suggests significant occupation during the EB Ib. Here stood a
small settlement that might have been connected to the large nearby
site of Tell Za'anuni. It is also possible that here was one of the ascents
from Wadi Far'ah to the mountains to the south.
506 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.25. View of the lower city of Tell Za'anuni. In the background the
view to the Wadi Far'ah valley (Zertal 2008: fig. 392).
508 chapter fifteen
platter’ carinated bowls, 7 flat bases, and 4 ledge handles. Other indica-
tive finds include a large group of Um Hammad style vessels bearing
rope ornamentation. These include a holemouth jar (Type H4), a bowl
(Type B5), and 5 body fragments with rope ornamentation.
•
Site 44: 'Iraq el-Hamrah
Israel grid: 1902/1800 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: 25 m.a.s.l.; 30 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB, MB II, Iron I,
Site type: sherd scatter Byzantine
Area: 1.5 ha (the area of occupa- Visibility of other sites: 4
tion during the Chalcolithic/ Number of visits: 3
EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 18
Topography: hilltop on valley Previous publications: Zertal
fringe 2008: site 189
Nearest water source: Wadi
Far'ah, 500 m distant
•
Site 45: Khirbet edh-Dhra'
Israel grid: 2018/1793 Period of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -275 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic
Site type: settlement Visibility of other sites: 0
Area: 2,000 m2 Number of visits: 4
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: 87
Nearest water source: 'Ain Salah Previous publications: Zertal
spring, 1 km distant 2005: site 42
•
Site 46: Wadi 'Abd el-'Al
Israel grid: 1960/1783 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: 60 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. lithic, Iron I, Hellenistic,
Site type: sherd scatter Roman–Byzantine, Middle
Area: 1,000 m2 Ages
Topography: valley fringe Visibility of other sites: 0
Nearest water source: Wadi Number of visits: 1
Far'ah, 3 km distant Number of sherds: 3
Previous publications: Zertal
2008: site 211
•
Site 49: Bab ed-Dayyq
Israel grid: 1936/1759 Periods of occupation: EB, Iron
Elevation: -170 m.a.s.l.; 50 I–III
m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 3
Site type: sherd scatter Number of visits: 2
Area: 3,000 m2 Number of sherds: 14
Topography: hilltop Previous publications: Porath
Nearest water source: Wadi 1968: site 110; Zertal 2008: site
Far'ah, 100 m distant 197
•
Site 50: el-'Alam
Israel grid: 1951/1755 Periods of occupation: EB I,
Elevation: -50 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. Iron II
Site type: settlement Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 2,000 m2 Number of visits: 1
Topography: slope Number of sherds: 22
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: Zertal
Far'ah, 1.5 km distant 2008: site 225
Description: a large ruin at the northern end of the delta of Wadi Far'ah
on the fringe of the Ras Kharube ridge. The upper part of the site is
situated on a narrow spur descending south from the Ras Kharube
ridge to Wadi Far'ah above Wadi umm-Wated. Here Zertal reports that
most of the sherds were found along a few traces of walls. These were
not found in a return visit to the site. The lower part of the site is situ-
ated in a small valley to the south of the spur. Here a small scatter of
sherds was found between the houses of modern farmers.
Pottery finds: 96 sherds from the EB I, including a grey burnished cari-
nated bowl (this is the only example of grey burnished pottery found in
the region not in a burial context), 4 Um Hammad style holemouth jars
(Type H4), 4 Um Hammad style kraters (Type K1c), 3 jars, 2 of them
in the Um Hammad style (Types J1a, J1d, J2b), a holemouth jar (Type
H2c), 2 bowls, one of them in the Um Hammad style (Types B2c, B5),
24 body sherds bearing Um Hammad style rope ornamentation, 18 flat
bases, and 15 ledge handles.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the EB I. The plentiful Um Hammad style decorations
suggest significant occupation during the EB Ib. This site was also one
of the villages that flourished in the Wadi Far'ah delta region during
the EB Ib. No remains from the Chalcolithic period reported by earlier
surveys were traced in the assemblage.
518 chapter fifteen
Description: The site is a 25-m-long cave (called Abu Zineh) near a ter-
raced slope and rock shelter. The site is situated below a rocky mountain
slope, south-west of the village of Zbeidat. It is located approximately 3
km from the nearest perennial water source (River Jordan). Scattered
pottery collected from the terrace below the cave indicates human pres-
ence during several periods. Noteworthy is a sherd bearing the typical
Yarmukian herringbone incision.
Pottery finds: 28 sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, including 3
small bowl rims, 2 lug handles, a pierced knob handle, and a flat base.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a low-medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic period. This is the only site in the re-
gion where traces of the Pottery Neolithic Yarmukian culture have been
found (Bar and Rosenberg 2011).
•
Site 53: Ras el-Kharubeh 5
See a short description of this low probability EB I site in Table 15.1.
site catalogue 519
Description: a large site on the Rujum el-Osher ridge, high above Wadi
el-Qrud. The site is situated on a moderate slope built in two terraces
guarding Wadi el-Qrud from the east. Terrace walls divide the ancient
settlement into sub-areas. In the south there are two large piles of
stones, up to 6 m high, possibly covering ancient structures. Walls of
structures are scattered over the entire area, as well as hewn installa-
tions and a water cistern. The remains of a dry spring, 'Ain Mta'a, were
found 500 m to the south-east. According to local Bedouin it was used
as a water source for shepherds until 30 years ago, when it dried up. In
a return visit to the site we observed the almost complete destruction of
the site due to modern agricultural activity sponsored by the U.N. This
is another example of good intentions without proper inspection that
causes destruction of antiquities in this region.
Pottery finds: 210 sherds from the EB I. The most prominent feature
is the Um Hammad EB Ib style. The finds include 18 holemouth jars
(Types H1a, H1c, H2a, H2b, H4, H5, H7, H10), 16 kraters, some with
Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Types K1a, K1b, K1c, K4, K5),
12 jars (Types J1c, J2a, J2b, J4a), 10 bowls (Types B1a, B1b, B2b, B2c,
B4), 34 body fragments with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation,
32 flat bases, 4 body sherds with band slip decoration, and 50 ledge
handles.
Flint finds: 124 items including diagnostic tools, such as 14 Canaanean
sickle blades.
Other finds: many limestone and basalt stone tools, including 3 bowl
rims, a lug handle, and the base of an incense burner.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a high probabil-
ity presence during the EB I. The plentiful Um Hammad style decora-
tions suggest significant occupation during the EB Ib, that continued
520 chapter fifteen
to some extent to the EB II. This seems to be one of the largest and
most heavily settled sites from the EB I in the region, and it might have
served as a regional centre. No signs of fortifications were found. Most
of the site has been completely destroyed by modern agricultural activ-
ity.
Description: a large site in the western edge of the Wadi Far'ah delta,
between Wadi Zeit and Wadi Far'ah. The site is spread along a narrow
terrace 400 m long, rising about 2 m above the wadi floor. This ter-
race is intersected by small gullies descending south to Wadi Zeit. In
these gullies the remains of walls and floors were found. It seems that
considerable post-depositional activity occurred here, and the site was
covered by the alluvial fan of the wadi.
Pottery finds: 42 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, and 116 sherds
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 6 jars (Types J1a, J2),
5 holemouth jars (Types H1, H2, H3a), 5 kraters (Types K2, K3, K5), 12
bowls (Types B1b, B1c, B3), 17 body sherds with rope ornamentation, 8
red burnished body sherds, and a lug handle. The EB I pottery includes
8 holemouth jars (Types H1a, H1b, H1c, H2a, H4, H5, H6, H8), 3 krat-
ers with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Types K1a, K1c), 3
jars with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Types J1a, J1b), 3
bowls (Type B1a, B5), and 4 ledge handles.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods. No EB II pottery was
recognized. It seems that a large unfortified settlement stood here in
both periods. It is one of a small group of sites that was inhabited in
both periods of this study. The site is completely covered with modern
dwellings, and it is difficult to trace its boundaries. This site forms part
of the large group of sites dating to both periods in the eastern section
of Wadi Far'ah, together with sites such as Kaziyet el-Ratrut and Man-
taket Wadi Zeit.
522 chapter fifteen
Description: a very large site in the northern part of the delta of Wadi
adi Far'ah along the southern cliffs of the Ras el-Kharube ridge. It
seems that the site spread from the border of the cliff area in the north
to the Wadi Far'ah channel itself. The exact size of the site is not known
because it is almost totally covered by a modern village and its fields.
Thus we have to rely on the data given by the Emergency Survey (Bar-
Adon 1972) that reported that the site stretched along the cliffs and the
wadi for 1800 m. Building remains described by Bar-Adon have been
destroyed.
Pottery finds: 75 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, and 40 sherds
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 2 jars, 2 kraters (Types
K2, K5), 2 bowls (Type B3), and 7 body sherds with rope ornamenta-
tion. The EB I pottery includes 5 holemouth jars (Types H1a, H4, H6),
and 2 ledge handles.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods. No EB II pottery was
recognized. In a photo taken by Bar-Adon (1972) at least two examples
of Um Hammad style sherds are visible (mistaken for Chalcolithic pot-
tery), indicating a presence at the site during the EB Ib. It seems that
a large unfortified settlement stood here in both periods. It is one of
a small group of sites that was inhabited in both periods of this study.
The site is completely covered with modern dwellings, and it is difficult
to trace its boundaries. This site forms part of the large group of sites
dating to both periods in the eastern section of Wadi Far'ah, together
with sites such as Shunet el-Masna'ah and Mantaket Wadi Zeit.
site catalogue 523
Description: a large site on the northern section of the Wadi Zeit delta.
The modern village of Mantaket abu-Zeit is built atop the ancient site,
making size estimation problematic, and necessitating reliance on
earlier surveys. In the southern part of the village, in gullies cutting
through the alluvial fan, traces of building remains and pottery are
found. Porath suggested that 3 different sites stood here, while Zertal
suggested that they are part of one large site. The modern coverage of
the site prevents a new study, and the finds are presented here as one
large site.
Pottery finds: 75 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, and 50 sherds
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 2 jars (Types J1a, J1b),
3 kraters (Types K2, K3), a holemouth jar (Type H2), 2 bowls (Type
B1a), a leg of a fenestrated incense burner, 20 body sherds with rope
ornamentation and a lug handle. The EB I pottery includes 5 hole-
mouth jars (Types H1a, H1c, H2b), a holemouth jar with Um Hammad
style rope ornamentation (Type H4), 3 kraters with Um Hammad style
rope ornamentation (Types K1a, K1b, K1c), 2 bowls with Um Ham-
mad style rope ornamentation (Type B5), 2 bowls (Types B2b, B2c), 13
body sherds with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation, and 7 ledge
handles.
Other finds: 6 fragments of basalt tools, including a bowl rim.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods. No EB II pottery was
recognized. The examples of Um Hammad style sherds indicate a
presence at the site during the EB Ib. It seems that a large unfortified
settlement stood here in both periods. It is one of a small group of sites
that was inhabited in both periods of this study. The site is completely
524 chapter fifteen
•
Site 58: el 'Ain et-Tahta
Israel grid: 1878/1737 Periods of occupation: EB I, MB
Elevation: 250 m.a.s.l.; -30 II, Iron I–II, Roman–Byzan-
m.a.s.a. tine, Middle Ages
Site type: sherd scatter Visibility of other sites: 1
Area: 2,000 m2 Number of visits: 2
Topography: slope Number of sherds: 45
Nearest water source: 'Ain et- Previous publications: Finkelstein
Tahta spring, 10 m distant et al. 1997: 849
Description: a small site by the built pool of 'Ain et-Tahta spring. Sherds
were found scattered on the moderate slope by the spring. No traces
of architecture were visible, and it seems that it was an open site con-
nected to the nearby spring.
Pottery finds: 45 sherds from the EB I, including 9 holemouth jars
(Types H1b, H2b, H5, H10), 4 jars (Types J2a, J2b, J4b), an Um Ham-
mad style krater (Type K1c), 4 Um Hammad style body sherds bearing
rope ornamentation, 6 flat bases, and 5 ledge handles.
Flint finds: 2 indicative items: a Canaanean sickle blade, and a fan
scraper on tabular flint.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a medium-high
probability presence during the EB I. It seems that a small site con-
nected to the spring stood here.
site catalogue 525
Description: a looted burial cave in the wadi descending from 'Ain et-
Tahta spring to Wadi el-Qabi. The pottery was collected from looted
remains at the openings of the cave.
Pottery finds: 45 sherds from the EB I, including material presented in
the publication (Finkelstein et al. 1997: 848): 2 jars (Types J1d, J2a),
a holemouth jar (Type H1a), a bowl (Type B4), and a ledge handle.
A thorough inspection of the original survey additional unpublished
indicative pottery revealed 13 holemouth jars (Types H1a, H1b, H2a,
H5, H7, H8), a jar (Type J2b), a krater (Type K5), and a PUB-style bowl.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the EB I. This might have been a burial cave connected to
the large EB I site of 'Ain Mta'a, 1.7 km distant.
•
Site 60: 'Iraq ez-Zah
Israel grid: 1881/1726 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: 230 m.a.s.l.; 40 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? MB II, Iron,
Site type: sherd scatter Roman
Area: 3 ha (the area of occupation Visibility of other sites: 1
during the Chalcolithic/EB I is Number of visits: 2
not known) Number of sherds: 8
Topography: saddle and slope Previous publications: none
Nearest water source: 'Ain et-
Tahta spring, 1 km distant
526 chapter fifteen
•
Site 61: 'Iraq er-Resifeh 3
Israel grid: 1933/1723 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: 110 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Iron II, Roman–Byzan-
Site type: sherd scatter tine
Area: 3,000 m2 Visibility of other sites: 0
Topography: high plateau Number of visits: 1
Nearest water source: Wadi Number of sherds: 13
Far'ah, 2 km distant Previous publications: Zertal
2005: site 128
•
Site 63: el-Makhruq
Israel grid: 1984/1710 Nearest water source: Wadi
Elevation: -200 m.a.s.l.; 40 Far'ah, 500 m distant
m.a.s.a. Periods of occupation: EB, Iron,
Site type: sherd scatter (site from Byzantine, Middle Ages
the EB II) Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 3 ha (the area of occupation Number of visits: 3
during the EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 6
Topography: ridge Previous publications: Eisenberg
1992: 926; Zertal 2005: site 72
and ledge handles found at the site were attributed to the EB II, al-
though some might be EB I.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage and the description by Eisenberg
attest to a medium probability presence during the EB I, before the
erection of the fortified site in the EB II.
•
Site 64: Khirbet Juraish
Israel grid: 1854/1711 Periods of occupation: EB, Iron II
Elevation: 420 m.a.s.l.; 100 Visibility of other sites: 1
m.a.s.a. Number of visits: 2
Site type: fortified tell Number of sherds: 80
Area: 2 ha (the area of occupation Previous publications: Porath
during the EB I is not known) 1968: site 142; Finkelstein et al.
Topography: hilltop and ridge 1997: 832
Nearest water source: 'Ain Juheir
spring, 200 m distant
ability presence during the EB I. Earlier surveys did not recognize the
EB I pottery, and attributed all the early finds to the EB II. It is possible
that the site here is contemporary with the adjacent site 'Ain Juraish,
and they might even be one large site. During the EB II the site became
an important fortified centre, probably connected to the cultivation of
vineyards and olive groves. The site is topographically very similar to
other fortified settlements in the fringes of Samaria, such as Khirbet
Rahiyeh and Tell Za'anuni (see Discussion in Chapter 6).
Description: a large site in the Wadi Mashqara ravine, to the east of Kh-
irbet Juraish (Fig. 15.30). The site is situated on a natural terrace 250 m
long and 70 m wide. Remains of walls are visible on the surface, as well
as a large sherd and flint scatter.
Pottery finds: 70 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, and 60 sherds
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 4 large kraters (Types
K1, K3, K4), 3 jars (Types J1b, J2), 2 bowls (Type B1c), 21 body sherds
with rope ornamentation, and a lug handle. The EB I pottery includes 7
holemouth jars (Types H1a, H1b, H5), 2 kraters (Types K2, K5), a bowl
(Type B2a), 20 ledge handles, and 25 flat bases.
Flint finds: 45 items, including an axe and 3 Chalcolithic backed sickle
blades, and 10 Canaanean blades from the EB I.
Other finds: 18 fragments of basalt tools, including a lug handle, 4 bowl
rims, and 2 legs of fenestrated incense burners. All these fit well with
basalt tools of the Chalcolithic period.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a high prob-
ability presence during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods. This is one
of the few sites in the fringes of Samaria where a possible continuum
between the periods is shown. In the Chalcolithic period the fringes of
Samaria were almost empty of sites, and the presence of sites from this
period in the Wadi Ahmar area has some significance. Perhaps this was
the main path between the Jordan Valley clusters of sites and the scat-
tered sites situated high in the Samaria hills. Another possibility is that
the Chalcolithic sites in the upper part of the fringes of Samaria were
connected to olive- and possibly grape-growing. At the end of the EB I
the site was abandoned, and the settlement shifted to the nearby site of
Khirbet Juraish.
532 chapter fifteen
•
Site 69: Masu'a 1
Israel grid: 1963/1676 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -300 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I?
Site type: enclosure Visibility of other sites: 0
Area: 1,000 m2 Number of visits: 2
Topography: ravine Number of sherds: 45
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: Zertal
Far'ah, 2.5 km distant 2005: site 89
•
Site 70: Masu'a 2
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
•
Site 71: Masu'a 8
Israel grid: 1963/1669 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -210 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I?
Site type: enclosure Visibility of other sites: 1
Area: 1,000 m2 Number of visits: 2
Topography: slope and valley Number of sherds: 70
fringe Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: Wadi 2005: site 94
Far'ah, 3 km distant
•
Site 73: Wadi Ahmar 3
Israel grid: 1922/1659 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -60 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Iron II, Late
Site type: enclosures Roman, Middle Ages
Area: 4,000 m2 Visibility of other sites: 1
Topography: valley fringe Number of visits: 2
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Number of sherds: 18
Mana spring, 700 m distant Previous publications: Zertal
2005: site 183
•
Site 74: Wadi Ahmar 2
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
•
Site 75: Naqb Harabah 2
Israel grid: 1915/1649 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -105 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Iron, Roman,
Site type: sherd scatter Ottoman
Area:.6,000 m2 Visibility of other sites: 3
Topography: valley fringe Number of visits: 3
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Number of sherds: 22
Mana spring, 600 m distant Previous publications: Zertal
2005: site 180
•
Site 76: Wadi Sadi 3
Israel grid: 1913/1649 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -140 m.a.s.l.; 10 lithic, Roman
m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 1
Site type: sherd scatter, enclo- Number of visits: 2
sures? Number of sherds: 20
Area: 1,000 m2 Previous publications: Zertal
Topography: ravine 2005: site 188
Nearest water source: 'Ain el-
Mana spring, 1.2 km distant
Description: a small site on a flat area near the exit of narrow Wadi Sadi
in the valley of Wadi Ahmar. Zertal describes the meagre remains of
two enclosures, but these were not found in a return visit to the site, and
were probably dismantled by local Bedouin who live in this location
today.
Pottery finds: 20 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including a hole-
mouth jar (Type H3b), and 4 flat bases.
Flint finds: 9 items, including diagnostic Chalcolithic tools: an adze and
a fan scraper.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a medium prob-
ability presence during the Chalcolithic period. It is possible that this
was another enclosure site typical of the Wadi Ahmar-Masu'a area.
540 chapter fifteen
Description: a small site in the Wadi Ahmar valley adjacent to the dirt
road that climbs to the Sartaba ridge from the south-west, and 200
m east of the Wadi Ahmar channel. At the western section of the site
are the remains of a large pile of stones covering a structure, 15 m in
diameter. There is an elliptical enclosure measuring 15 by 25 m at the
northern part of the site. Inside this structure the remains of a square
cell are visible. Remains of additional smaller structures and walls are
visible on the surface of the site.
Pottery finds: 35 sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, including
a bowl.
Flint finds: 65 items, including 2 scrapers, a notch, and 2 borers.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a low-medium
probability presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. This
site is a fine example of the cluster of sites discovered in Wadi Ahmar,
which share common traits: visible architectural remains on one hand,
and meagre finds that make their dating very difficult, on the other.
•
Site 79: EP-167
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
542 chapter fifteen
•
Site 81: 'Urqan er-Rub
Israel grid: 1917/1635 Periods of occupation: Epipaleo-
Elevation: -190 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Chalcolithic, EB I?, IB,
Site type: caves and enclosures Roman–Byzantine, Middle
Area: 1.5 ha Ages
Topography: valley fringe Visibility of other sites: 5
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Number of visits: 3
Mana spring, 1.5 km distant Number of sherds: 45
Previous publications: Hovers
1993; Zertal 2005: site 195
A group of nine elliptical enclosures in the western part of the site. This
area is poor in finds.
Pottery finds: 45 sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, including 2
fragments of a fenestrated incense burner, a holemouth jar (Type H5),
2 lug handles, and 2 flat bases.
Flint finds: Excavation by Hovers exposed an Epipalaeolithic Kebaran
site.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic period and a low probability presence
during the EB I. The meagre finds make the dating of architectural ele-
ments impossible.
•
Site 82: Mughur el-Hable
Israel grid: 1885/1627 Periods of occupation: EB I
Elevation: -40 m.a.s.l.; 30 m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 0
Site type: sherd scatter Number of visits: 2
Area: 1,000 m2 Number of sherds: 40
Topography: slope Previous publications: none
Nearest water source: Fazael
springs, 1 km distant
•
Site 85: EP 55
Israel grid: 1885/1624 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: 50 m.a.s.l.; 50 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Late Roman,
Site type: sherd scatter Middle Ages
Area: 3,000 m2 Visibility of other sites: 0
Topography: slope Number of visits: 2
Nearest water source: Fazael Number of sherds: 30
springs, 400 m distant Previous publications: none
548 chapter fifteen
•
Site 87: Fazael 1
Israel grid: 1912/1620 Period of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -160 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic
Site type: settlement Visibility of other sites: 4
Area: 1.5 ha Number of visits: 3
Topography: valley fringe Number of sherds: 140
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: Glueck
Fazael, 500 m distant 1951: 416
550 chapter fifteen
Description: a large site on the valley fringes of the Wadi Fazael fan, 200
m south-east of the water tank of the modern village of Fazael. The site
spreads over moderate slopes descending to the south to Wadi Fazael.
Most of the area of the site has been damaged by modern earth-moving
activities and by looters. A few wall remains are visible on the surface
at the eastern section of the site. Amongst the remains is a building 2.5
m wide and 10 m long. A large scatter of sherds and flints is found on
the surface. This might be part of the site that Glueck notes in this area
(although he also describes EB pottery and states the meagre amount
of finds).
Pottery finds: 140 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 8
holemouth jars (Types H1, H2, H5), one with a red stripe around the
rim, a fragment of a chalice with rope ornamentation, 5 jars (Types J1b,
J2), 3 bowls (Types B1a, B1b, B1c), a krater (Type K1), 2 lug handles, 8
body sherds with rope ornamentation, 10 red-slipped body sherds, and
14 flat bases.
Flint finds: 64 items, including diagnostic tools, such as 3 adzes, an axe,
and a backed and truncated sickle blade.
•
Site 89: Fazael 4
See a detailed description and excavation report in Chapter 13.
•
Site 90: Fazael (Porath’s Excavation)
Israel grid: 1915/1616 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -220 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic
Site type: building (part of settle- Visibility of other sites: 5
ment) Number of visits: The site was
Area: unknown destroyed in the 70’s
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: unknown
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: Porath
Fazael, 50 m distant 1985
preparation tools.
Summary: The assemblages attest to a high probability presence during
the Chalcolithic period. This building was part of the large Chalcolithic
cluster of sites situated on the northern bank of Wadi Fazael. The pres-
ence of the Canaanean technology at the site is not surprising, and is
typical of the Fazael cluster in the latest phases of the Chalcolithic pe-
riod (see also Chapter 2).
ally part of a transitional phase between the two periods, and not an
EB I stratum at the site. This could be proven only by an excavation of
all the different units at the site. This site was part of the large Chalco-
lithic cluster of sites situated in the northern bank of Wadi Fazael. If
future research locates a clear EB I stratum here, it will be the only and
earliest EB complex in the middle of the plateau of the fan of Wadi
Fazael (other EB I sites are located at the western fringes of the valley).
•
Site 93: Fazael 7
See a detailed description and excavation report in Chapter 11.
•
Site 94: Sheikh Diab 2
See a detailed description and excavation report in Chapter 12.
•
Site 95: Tell Sheikh Diab
Israel grid: 1909/1625 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -190 m.a.s.l.; 10 lithic/EB? MB II, LB, Iron I–II,
m.a.s.a. Persian, Hellenistic, Roman
Site type: sherd scatter, tell Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 3,000 m2 (the area of the site Number of visits: 5
during the EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 14
Topography: valley fringe Previous publications: Glueck
Nearest water source: Wadi 1951: 415; Bar-Adon 1972: site
Fazael, 50 m distant 13
•
Site 96: Khirbet Rahiyeh
Israel grid: 1852/1614 Periods of occupation: EB I–II,
Elevation: 570 m.a.s.l.; 100 MB II, Iron I, Persian, Hel-
m.a.s.a. lenistic, Roman
Site type: fortified tell Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 5 ha Number of visits: 3
Topography: slope Number of sherds: 75
Nearest water source: 'Ain Duma Previous publications: Finkelstein
spring, 400 m distant et al. 1997: 791
•
Site 98: 'Ain Rashash
Israel grid: 1853/1608 Periods of occupation: EB I–II,
Elevation: 570 m.a.s.l.; 20 m.a.s.a. MB II, Iron, Byzantine
Site type: settlement Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 2 ha Number of visits: 3
Topography: slope Number of sherds: 112
Nearest water source: 'Ain Previous publications: Finkelstein
Rashash spring, 200 m distant et al. 1997: 789
site catalogue 561
•
Site 99: Umm Sueid
Israel grid: 1908/1610 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -190 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Iron II, Byzantine
Site type: sherd scatter Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 3,000 m2 Number of visits: 3
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: 8
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: none
Fazael, 800 m distant
holemouth jar with rope ornamentation, and a body sherd with rope
ornamentation.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a low-medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. It is possible that
this site is connected to the nearby Chalcolithic site EP -30.
•
Site 100: EP -30
Israel grid: 1907/1606 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -150 m.a.s.l.; 60 lithic, Iron I
m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 3
Site type: settlement Number of visits: 3
Area: 2,000 m2 Number of sherds: 33
Topography: ridge Previous publications: none
Nearest water source: Wadi
Fazael, 1 km distant
•
Site 101: Wadi Butam 1
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
564 chapter fifteen
•
Site 103: The Well Site
Israel grid: 1893/1568 Periods of occupation: EB, MB II,
Elevation: -30 m.a.s.l.; -50 Iron I–II, Hellenistic, Roman–
m.a.s.a. Byzantine
Site type: sherd scatter Visibility of other sites: 0
Area: 2,000 m2 Number of visits: 3
Topography: ridge Number of sherds: 7
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: none
Fazael, 4.5 km distant
•
Site 105: Wadi Baker
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
•
Site 106: Wadi Khaiat 1
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
566 chapter fifteen
•
Site 108: 'Ain 'Aujjeh 1
Israel grid: 1871/1513 Periods of occupation: Early
Elevation: 0 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. Chalcolithic, Chalcolithic,
Site type: settlement EB I, Iron, Roman–Byzantine,
Area: 1.5 ha Middle Ages
Topography: slope Visibility of other sites: 0
Nearest water source: Wadi Number of visits: 4
'Aujjeh, 50 m distant Number of sherds: 135
Previous publications: none
lithic (Wadi Raba culture). The remains of a wall that survived to the
height of 80 cm were noted 35 cm below the surface. Meagre finds date
this stratum to the EB I. Another stratum, which contained most of the
Early Chalcolithic pottery, was noted approximately 1.2 m below the
surface. Here a clear living surface is visible in the section, including
mud brick material and ash. The surface finds comprised mostly EB I
pottery.
Pottery finds: 135 sherds from the Early Chalcolithic, Chalcolithic and
•
Site 109: 'Iraq el-Awarna
Israel grid: 1878/1512 Periods of occupation: Early
Elevation: -10 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. Chalcolithic, Chalcolithic, MB
Site type: sherd scatter II, Iron, Persian, Byzantine,
Area: 1.5 ha Middle Ages
Topography: valley fringe Visibility of other sites: 2
Nearest water source: Wadi Number of visits: 3
'Aujjeh, 100 m distant Number of sherds: 23
Previous publications: none
•
Site 110: Yitav (Hizmi’s Excavation)
Israel grid: 1902/1516 Period of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -110 m.a.s.l.; 20 lithic
m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 0
Site type: building Number of visits: 3
Area: 1,500 m2 Number of sherds: not collected
Topography: slope (summary based on published
Nearest water source: Wadi finds)
'Aujjeh, 500 m distant Previous publications: Hizmi
2003
remoteness from other settlement sites of this period (e.g. EP -30). The
general architectural idea: large rooms and adjacent large courtyards,
is typical of the Fazael valley sites at the end of the Chalcolithic period.
The meagre finds here make the comparison with the rich Fazael sites
somewhat problematic.
•
Site 111: Khirbet 'Aujjeh et-Tahta
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
•
Site 112: 'Aujjeh 2
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
site catalogue 571
Description: a site on the plateau of the Wadi 'Aujjeh fan, 700 m north
of today’s wadi channel. A vast sherd scatter was noted on the bank of a
ravine flowing to Wadi 'Aujjeh, but no architectural remains were noted
on the surface.
Pottery finds: 230 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 3
churns, 30 holemouth jars (Types H1, H2, H3a, H3b, H5), 5 jars (Types
J1a, J1b, J2), 10 bowls (Types B1a, B1c, B2), 10 lug handles, 22 flat bases,
3 body sherds with rope ornamentation, and 16 slipped body sherds.
Flint finds: 65 items, including 3 backed sickle blades and a chisel.
Other finds: 3 basalt grinding stones and a limestone basin.
Summary: The assemblages attest to a high probability presence during
the Chalcolithic period. This is one of the richest sites from the Chalco-
lithic period in the region, and the absence of remains of structures is
an enigma. These were possibly covered by the alluvial fan of the wadis,
and only excavations can resolve this question (a similar situation oc-
curs in the rich site of ej-Jobeh (Site 15) where only a deep cut trench
through the alluvial cover resulted in the exposure of architectural ele-
ments at the site)
•
Site 115: Malkahat el-Wadian
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic site in Table
15.1.
site catalogue 573
•
Site 117: Tell el-Hama
See a short description of this low probability EB site in Table 15.1.
•
Site 118: El-Makhruq
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic site in Table
15.1.
•
Site 119: El-Fazil
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic site in Table
15.1.
•
Site 120: Ras umm-Khubeza
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic site in Table
15.1.
•
Site 121: Es-Shlat
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic site in Table
15.1.
574 chapter fifteen
•
Site 123: Khirbet Mhallal
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic and EB site
in Table 15.1.
site catalogue 575
Site
Name Publications Comments
No.
Khirbet Only one body sherd with rope orna-
21 Zertal 2008: site 115
Hamamat mentation found in survey
Only 9 body sherds were attributed to
22 Khirbet Yusef Zertal 2008: site 117
Chalcolithic or EB I – none diagnostic
Khirbet Porath 1968: site 79; Both surveys reported only body frag-
31
Bet Hassan Zertal 2008: site 173 ments
Only 9 sherds retrieved in survey.
Ras Bilam
36 Zertal 2008: site 201 These include EB II platters and
ez-Zef (A)
nothing diagnostic of EB I
Ras Bilam Only 2 sherds, possibly EB I, retrieved
37 Zertal 2008: site 202
ez-Zef (B) in survey, but are not diagnostic
Ras Zertal 2008: site Only 9 body sherds attributed to the
53
el-Kharubeh 5 267/5 Chalcolithic or EB I – none diagnostic
15 body sherds and 85 flint items
70 Masu'a 2 Zertal 2005: site 91 attributed to the Chalcolithic – none
diagnostic
Only body sherds attributed to the
74 Wadi Ahmar 2 Zertal 2005: site 194
Chalcolithic or EB I – none diagnostic
Excavation at the site by the author
79 EP -167 Zertal 2005: site 192 (Bar 2008) dated the site to the IB,
with no traces of earlier occupation
Only 4 body sherds attributed to
80 EP -145 Zertal 2005: site 196
Chalcolithic or EB I – none diagnostic
Unpublished site
discovered in the 25 body sherds attributed to Chalco-
101 Wadi Butam 1
Manasseh Hill lithic– none diagnostic
Country Survey
Unpublished site
excavated by the 10 body sherds attributed to Chalco-
102 Tomer 3
Samaria Staff Officer lithic– none diagnostic
of Archaeology
Unpublished site
discovered in the Only 4 body sherds attributed to EB
105 Wadi Baker
Manasseh Hill I – none diagnostic
Country Survey
Unpublished site
discovered in the Only 10 body sherds attributed to
106 Wadi Khaiat 1
Manasseh Hill Chalcolithic/EB I – none diagnostic
Country Survey
Khirbet 'Aujjeh Bar-Adon 1972: Only 5 body sherds attributed to
111
et-Tahta site 26 Chalcolithic/EB I – none diagnostic
576 chapter fifteen
Site
Name Publications Comments
No.
Unpublished site
discovered in the Only 8 body sherds attributed to
112 'Aujjeh 2
Manasseh Hill Chalcolithic – none diagnostic
Country Survey
Malkahat Bar-Adon 1972: Only 4 body sherds attributed to
115
el-Wadian site 34 Chalcolithic – none diagnostic
Emergency Bar-Adon 1972: The site or the pottery boxes were not
116
Survey, site 30 site 30 traced
Only Mittmann suggested the slight
Mittmann 1970,
possibility that the site might have
263; Bar-Adon 1972:
117 Tell el-Hama been settled during the EB I. All other
site 30; Zertal 2005:
surveys and excavations at the site
site 30
rejected this option
Only Bar-Adon suggested the slight
possibility that the site might have
Bar-Adon 1972:
118 El-Makhruq been settled during the Chalcolithic.
site 4
All other surveys and excavations at
the site rejected this option
Only Bar-Adon suggested the slight
possibility that the site might have
Bar-Adon 1972:
119 El-Fazil been settled during the Chalcolithic.
site 15
Other surveys and a new check of the
survey’s pottery rejected this option
Our new survey at the site and a new
check of the survey’s pottery rejected
the possibility that the site might have
Ras umm- been settled during the Chalcolithic.
120 Zertal 2008: site 219
Khubeza The few flint items (a polished axe
and a sickle blade) attributed to the
Chalcolithic period could also be at-
tributed to the Neolithic period
Our new survey at the site and a new
check of the survey’s pottery rejected
121 Es-Shlat Zertal 2005: site 176
the possibility that the site might have
been settled during the Chalcolithic
Only Mittmann suggested the slight
possibility that the site might have
122 Tell el-Hilu Mittmann 1970: 263 been settled during the EB I. All other
surveys, including our new survey,
rejected this option
Our new survey at the site and a new
check of the surveys pottery rejected
123 Khirbet Mhallal Zertal 2008: site 78
the possibility that the site might have
been settled during the Chalcolithic
List of Abbreviations
Abeles, Z.
2002 Survey and Excavations of Caves along the Eastern Escarpment of Jebel Qurun-
tul. 'Atiqot 41: 109–116.
Adams, R. M.
1981 Heartland of Cities: Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central
Floodplain of the Euphrates. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Aharoni, Y.
1993 The Nahal Hever Caves. Pp. 827–829 in NEAEHL 3.
Albright, W. F.
1926 The Jordan Valley in the Bronze Age. AASOR, Vols. VI (For 1924–1925). New
Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.
1932 The Chalcolithic Age in Palestine. BASOR 48: 10–13.
Alon, D. and Levy, T.
1996 Demographic and Climate Problems during the Chalcolithic Period in the
Northern Negev: Case Studies from Gilat and Shiqmim. Eretz Israel 25: 41–44.
Alon, D. and Yekutieli, Y.
1995 The Tel Halif Terrace: “Silo Site” and its Implications for the Early Bronze Age I.
'Atiqot 27: 149–191.
578 reference list
Amiran, R.
1969 Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. New Brunswick: Rutgerts University Press.
1970 The Beginning of Urbanization in Canaan. Pp. 83–100 in Near Eastern Archae-
ology in the Twentieth Century. Essays in Honor of Nelson Glueck. Sanders, J. A.
(ed.). New York: Garden City.
1974 An Egyptian Jar Fragment with the Name of Narmer from Arad. IEJ 24: 4–12.
1985 The Transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze Age. Pp. 108–112 in
Biblical Archaeology Today: Proceedings of the International Congress on Biblical
Archaeology, Jerusalem, April 1984. Amitai, J. (ed.). Jerusalem: Israel Explora-
tion Society; Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
1993 Ma'ahaz, Tel. Pp. 919–920 in NEAEHL 3.
Amiran, R. and Porat, N.
1984 The Basalt Vessels of the Chalcolithic Period and Early Bronze Age I. Tel Aviv
11: 11–19.
Amiran, R. and van den Brink, E. C. M.
2001 A Comparative Study of the Egyptian Pottery from Tel Ma’ahaz, Stratum I. Pp.
29–58 in Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory
of Douglas L. Esse. Chicago and Atlanta (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civiliza-
tion No. 59 ASOR Books, No. 5).
Amiran, R., Paran, U., Shiloh, Y., Brown, R., Tsafrir, Y. and Ben-Tor, A.
1978 Early Arad: The Chalcolithic Settlement and Early Bronze Age City. First-Fifth
Seasons of Excavations, 1962–1966. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.
Arz, H. W., Lamy, F., Pätzold, J., Müller, P. J. and Prins, M.
2003 Mediterranean Moisture Source for an Early-Holocene Humid Period in the
Northern Red Sea. Science 300: 118–121.
Avigad, N.
1993 The Nahal David Caves. Pp. 832–833 in NEAEHL 3.
Avni, G.
1992 Survey of Deserted Bedouin Campsites in the Negev Highlands and its Impli-
cation for Archaeological Research. Pp. 241–254 in Pastoralism in the Levant:
Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives. Bar-Yosef, O. and Kha-
zanov, A. (eds.). Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press (Monographs in World
Archaeology 10).
Baird, D. and Philip, G.
1994 Preliminary Report on the Third (1993) Season of Excavation at Tell Esh-Shuna
(North). Levant 26: 111–133.
Banning, E. B.
2002a Consensus and Debate on the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic of the Southern
Levant. Paléorient 28 (2): 143–156.
2002b Archaeological Survey. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
2007 Time and Tradition in the Transition from Late Neolithic to Chalcolithic: Sum-
mary and Conclusions. Paléorient 33: 137–142.
2011 Houses, Households, and Changing Society in the Late Neolithic and Chalco-
lithic of the Southern Levant. Paléorient 36 (1): 49-87.
reference list 579
Bar-Adon, P.
1962 Expedition C – “Cave of the Treasure”. Yediot 26: 159–173. (Hebrew)
1972 The Judean Desert and Plain of Jericho. Pp. 92–152 in Judea, Samaria and the
Golan, Archaeological Survey 1967–1968. Kochavi, M. (ed.). Jerusalem: Carta.
(Hebrew)
1980 The Cave of the Treasure: The Finds from the Caves in Nahal Mishmar. Judean
Desert Studies. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.
1993 The Nahal Mishmar Caves. Pp. 822–827 in NEAEHL 3.
Bar-Matthews, M., Ayalon, A. and Kaufman, A.
1997 Late Quaternary Paleoclimate in the Eastern Mediterranean Region from Stable
Isotope Analysis of Speleothems at Soreq Cave, Israel. Quaternary Research 47:
155–168.
1998 Middle to Late Holocene (6500 years period) Paleoclimate in the Eastern Medi-
terranean Region from Stable Isotopic Composition of Speleothems from Soreq
Cave, Israel. Pp. 203–214 in Water, Environment and Society in Times of Climatic
Change. Issar, A. S. and Brown, N. (eds.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Bar-Yosef Mayer, D. E.
1995 The Molluscs from Grar. Pp. 453–462 in Grar: Chalcolithic Site in the Northern
Negev. Gilead, I. (ed.). Beer Sheva: Ben Gurion University Press.
2002 The Shell Pendants. Pp. 49–52 in Kissufim Road: A Chalcolithic Mortuary Site
(IAA Reports 16). Goren, Y. and Fabian, P. (eds.). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities
Authority.
2006 Marine and Riverine Shells at Gilat. Pp. 320–326 in Archaeology, Anthropology
and Cult - The Sanctuary at Gilat, Israel. Levy, T. E. (ed.). London: Equinox.
Barshad, D. and Shaked, I.
2002 Survey and Excavations of Caves in Lower Wadi el-Makkuk. 'Atiqot 41: 35–42.
Baumgarten, Y.
2004 An Excavation at Ashqelon, Afridar – Area J. 'Atiqot 45: 161–184.
Barkai, R.
2004 The Chalcolithic Lithic Assemblage. Pp. 87–109 in Giv'at HaOranim: A Chal-
colithic Site near Nahal Beit Arif. Scheftelowitz, N. and Oren, O. (eds.). Tel Aviv:
Emery and Claire Yass.
Behrensmeyer, A. K.
1978 Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering. Paleobiology 4
(2): 150–162.
Ben-Arieh, Y.
1965 The Central Jordan Valley. Merhavia: Hakibbutz Hameuchad. (Hebrew)
Ben-Tor, A.
1985 At the Dawn of History: The Chalcolithic Period and the Early Bronze Age.
Pp. 17–23 in Recent Archaeology in the Land of Israel. Shanks, H. and Mazar, B.
(eds.). Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society; Israel Exploration Society.
1989 Byblos and Early Bronze I Palestine. Pp. 41–52 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine
à l’age du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du
colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR Inter-
national Series 527. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
reference list 581
Ben-Yosef, D.
2007 The Jordan Valley during Iron Age I, Aspects of its History and the Archaeo-
logical Evidence for its Settlement. PhD dissertation. Haifa: University of Haifa.
(Hebrew)
Ben-Yosef, S.
1979 The Judean Desert and the Jordan Valley. Israel Guide Volume 4. Jerusalem:
Keter and Ministry of Defense. (Hebrew)
Betts, A. V. G. (ed.)
1991 Excavations at Jawa 1972–1986. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Belitzky, S.
1999 Recent Faulting and Folding in the Jordan Valley. Pp. 439–450 in Judea and
Samaria Research Studies, Volume 9. Eshel, Y. (ed.). Ariel: College of Judea and
Samaria –Research Institute. (Hebrew)
Binford, L. R.
1981 Bones, Ancient Men and Modern Myths. New York: Academic Press.
Blackham, M.
2002 Modeling Time and Transition in Prehistory: The Jordan Valley Chalcolithic
(5500–3500 BC). BAR International Series 1027. Oxford: British Archaeological
Reports.
Boessneck, J.
1969 Osteological Differences between Sheep (Ovis aries) and Goat (Capra hircus).
Pp. 331–358 in Science in Archaeology. Brothewell, D. R. and Higgs, E. (eds.).
London: Thames and Hudson.
Bottema, S. and van Zeist, W.
1981 Palynological Evidence for the Climatic History of the Near East. Pp. 111–113 in
Prehistoire du Levant. Sanlaville, P. and Cauvin, J. (eds.). Paris: Centre national
de la recherche scientifique.
Bourke, S.
1997 The “Pre-Ghassulian” Sequence at Teleilat Ghassul: Sydney University Excava-
tions 1975–1995. Pp. 395–415 in The Prehistory of Jordan 2. Prespectives from
1997. Gebel, H. G. K., Kafafi, Z. and Rollefson, G. O. (eds.). Berlin: Ex Oriente.
2001 Chapter 4: The Chalcolithic Period. Pp. 107–162 in The Archaeology of Jordan.
MacDonald, B., Adams, R. and Bienkowski, P. (eds.). Sheffield: Sheffield Aca-
demic Press.
2002 The Origins of Social Complexity in the Southern Levant: New Evidence from
Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan. PEQ 134 (1): 2–27.
Bourke, S. and Lovell, J. L.
2004 Ghassul, Chronology and Cultural Sequencing. Paléorient 30 (1): 179–182.
Bourke, S., Sparks, R. and Sowada, K. N.
1998 Preliminary Report on the University of Sydney‘s Eighteenth and Nineteenth
Seasons of Excavations at Pella (Tabqat Fahl) in 1996/1997. ADAJ 42: 179–211.
Bourke, S., Lovell, J., Sparks, R., Seaton, P., Mairs, L. and Meadows, J.
2000 A Second and Third Season of Renewed Excavations by the University of Syd-
ney at Tulaylat Al-Ghassul (1995–1997). ADAJ 19: 37–87.
582 reference list
Bourke, S., Lawson, E., Lovell, J., Hua, Q., Zoppi, U. and Barbetti, M.
2001 The Chronology of the Ghassulian Chalcolithic Period in the Southern Levant:
New 14C Determinations from Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan. Radiocarbon 43 (3):
1217–1222.
Brandl, B.
1992 Evidence for Egyptian Colonization of the Southern Israel Coastal Plain and
Lowlands during the Early Bronze I Period. Pp. 441–476 in The Nile Delta in
Transition: 4th–3rd Millennium B. C. van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.). Proceedings
of the Seminar Held in Cairo, 21–24, October, 1990, at the Netherlands Institute
of Archaeology and Arabic Studies. Tel Aviv: E. C. M. van den Brink.
Braun, E.
1985 En Shadud: Salvage Excavations at a Farming Community in the Jezreel Valley,
Israel. BAR International Series 249. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
1989 The Transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze Age I in Northern
Israel and Transjordan: Is There a Missing Link? Pp. 7–27 in L’urbanisation de
la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles,
Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR
International Series 527. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
1990 Basalt Bowls of the EB 1 Horizon in the Southern Levant. Paléorient 16: 87-96.
1996 Cultural Diversity and Change in the Early Bronze I of Israel and Jordan:
Towards an Understanding of the Chronological Progression and Patterns of
Regionalism in Early Bronze I Society. PhD dissertation, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv Uni-
versity.
1997 Yiftah'el: Salvage and Rescue Excavations at a Prehistoric Village in Lower Gali-
lee, Israel. (IAA Reports 2). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
2000 Area G at Afridar, Palmahim Quarry 3 and the Earliest Pottery of Early Bronze
Age I: Part of the ‘Missing Link’. Pp. 113–128 in Ceramics and Change in the
Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird, D. (eds.). Levan-
tine Archaeology, no. 2. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
2004 Early Beth Shan (strata XIX-XIII): G.M. Fitzgerald’s Deep Cut on the Tell. Phila-
delphia: University of Pennsylvania, Museum of Archaeology and Anthropol-
ogy.
2005 Identifying Ethnicity from Prehistoric Pottery in Ancient Egypt and the South-
ern Levant. in Archaeological Perspectives on the Transmission and Transforma-
tion of Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean. Clarke, J. (ed.) (Levant Supplemen-
tary Series, Vol. 2). Oxford: Oxbow.
Braun, E. and Gophna, R.
2004 Excavations at Ashqelon, Afridar - Area G. 'Atiqot 45: 185–242.
Braun, E., van den Brink, E. C. M., Bar, S., Regev, J. and Boaretto, E.
2013 Aspects of Radiocarbon Determinations and the Dating of the Transition from
the Chalcolithic Period to Early Bronze Age I in the Southern Levant. Paléorient
39 (1).
Brink, E. C. M. van den
2011 Continuity and Change – Cultural Transition in the Late Chalcolithic – Early
Bronze Age I: A View from Early Modi'in, a Late Prehistoric Site in Central
Israel. Pp. 61–70 in Culture, Chronology and the Chalcolithic, Theory and Transi-
reference list 583
Clutton-Brock, J.
1983 The Animal Remains: A Summary. Pp. 802–803 in Excavations at Jericho, Vol-
ume Five. Kenyon, K. M. and Holland, T. A. (eds.). Jerusalem: British School of
Archaeology in Jerusalem.
Commenge, C.
2005 The Late Chalcolithic Pottery. Pp. 51–98 in Shoham (North): Late Chalcolithic
Burial Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel (IAA Reports 27). Van den Brink, E. C. M.
and Gophna, R. (eds.). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
2006 Gilat’s Ceramics: Cognitive Dimensions of Pottery Production. Pp. 394–506
Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult, The Sanctuary at Gilat, Israel. Levi, T. E.
(ed.). London: Equinox.
Conder, C. R. and Kitchener, H. H.
1882 The Survey of Western Palestine, Vol. 2 – Samaria. London: Palestine Explora-
tion Fund.
Connan, J., Nissenbaum, A. and Dessort, D.
1992 Molecular Archaeology: Export of Dead Sea Asphalt to Canaan and Egypt in
the Chalcolithic-Early Bronze Age (4th-3rd Millennium BC). Geochimica et Cos-
mochimica Acta 56 (7): 2743–2759.
Contenson, H. de.
1956 La céramique chalcolithique de Beersheba: étude typologique. IEJ 6: 163–238.
1960 Three soundings in the Jordan Valley. ADAJ 4–5: 12–98.
Cope, C. R.
2006 The Fauna: Preliminary Results. Pp. 169–174 in The Tel Bet Yerah Excavations
1994–1995. Getzov, N. (ed.). (IAA Reports 28). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities
Authority.
Corbeletto, A.
1989 Degagement, enlèvement et restauration d’une grande jar-silo. P. 3 in Abu
Hamid: Village 4e millénaire de la Vallee du Jourdain. Dollfus, G. et al. (eds.).
Amman: Centre Culturel Français.
Covello-Paran, K.
1995 Gesher-Karantina. Hadashot Archaeologiot 104: 49–51. (Hebrew)
Croft, P.
1994 Preliminary Report on the Third (1993) Season of Excavations at Tell esh-Shuna
(North): Some Preliminary Comments on the Animal Remains from the First
Three Seasons at Shuna. Levant 26: 130–131.
Dagan, Y.
2000 The Settlement in the Judean Shephela in the Second and First Millennium B.C.
A Test-Case of Settlement Processes in a Geographic Region. Unpublished PhD
dissertation, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.
Damati, E.
1993 Makhruq, Khirbet el-. Pp. 929–930 in NEAEHL 3.
Dan, J.
1988 The Soils of the Land of Israel. The Zoogeography of Israel. Yom-Tov, Y. and
Tchernov, E. (eds.). Dordrecht: W. Junk.
reference list 585
2001 Pottery of Strata VII-VI, The Chalcolithic Period. Pp. 105–116 in Tel Te'o – A
Neolithic, Chalcolithic, and Early Bronze Age Site in the Hula Valley. Eisenberg,
E., Gopher, A. and Greenberg, R. (eds.). (IAA Reports 13). Jerusalem: Israel
Antiquities Authority.
2002 The Excavation at Cave V/49. 'Atiqot 41: 105–123. (Hebrew)
Eisenberg, E., Gopher, A. and Greenberg, R.
2001 Tel Te'o – A Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Site in the Hula Valley
(IAA Reports 13). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Eldar, I., Nir, Y. and Nahlieli, D.
1992 Bedouins and their Campsites in the Dimona Region of the Negev: A Compara-
tive Model for the Study of Ancient Desert Settlements. Pp. 205–216 in Pasto-
ralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives.
Bar-Yosef, O. and Khazanov, A. (eds.). (Monographs in World Archaeology 10).
Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press.
Engberg, R. M. and Shipton, G.
1934 Notes on the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Pottery of Megiddo. Studies in
Ancient Oriental Civilization, no. 10. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the Univer-
sity of Chicago.
Enzel, Y., Amit, R., Dayan, U., Crouvi, O., Kahana, R., Ziv, B. and Sharon, D.
2008 The climatic and physiographic controls of the Eastern Mediterranean over the
Late Pleistocene in the Southern Levant and its neighboring deserts. Global and
Planetary Change 60: 165–192.
Epstein, C.
1993 Oil Production in the Golan Heights during the Chalcolithic Period. Tel Aviv 20:
133–146.
1998 The Chalcolithic Culture of the Golan. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Eshed, V. and Bar, S.
2012 An Innovative Analysis of Infant Burials from the Chalcolithic Site Fazael 2,
Israel. IEJ: 62: 129–140.
Eshel, H. and Zissu, B.
2002 The Excavation of Cave VIII/9. 'Atiqot 41: 151–165. (Hebrew)
Esse, D. L.
1989 Secondary State Formation and Collapse in Early Bronze Age Palestine. Pp.
81–96 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et pers-
pectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre
1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford: British
Archaeological Reports.
1991 Subsistence, Trade, and Social Change in Early Bronze Age Palestine. (Studies
in Ancient Oriental Civilization 50). Chicago. Illinois: Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago.
1993 Yaqush. NEAEHL 4: 1502–1504
Finkelstein, I.
1992 Pastoralism in the Highlands of Canaan in the Third and Second Millennia
B.C.E. Pp. 133–142 in Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in An-
reference list 587
Garfinkel, Y.
1993a The Yarmukian Culture in Israel. Paléorient 19: 115–134.
1993b Tel 'Ali. Pp. 53–55 in NEAEHL 1.
1996 The Yarmukian Culture – A Reappraisal. Qadmoniot 112: 66–77. (Hebrew)
1998 The Platter: A New Ceramic Type of the Chalcolithic Period. Levant 30: 191–
194.
1999 Neolithic and Chalcolithic Pottery of the Southern Levant. Qedem 39. Jerusa-
lem: Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Garfinkel, Y., Ben-Shlomo, D., Freikman, M. and Vered, A.
2007 Tel Tzaf: The 2004–2006 Excavation Seasons. IEJ 57 (1): 1–33.
Garfunkel, Z.
1981 Internal Structure of the Dead Sea Leaky Transform (Rift) in Relation to Plate
Kinematics. Tectonophysics 80: 81–108.
Genz, H.
2000 Grain Wash Decoration in Early Bronze Age III? The Evidence from Khirbet
ez-Zearqon. Pp. 279–286 in Ceramics and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the
Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird, D. (eds.). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press.
Getzov, N.
2004 Notes on the Material Culture of Western Galilee in the Early Bronze Age IB in
Light of the Abu edh-Dhahab Excavations. 'Atiqot 48: 35–50.
2006 The Tel Bet Yerah Excavations 1994–1995. (IAA Reports 28). Jerusalem: Israel
Antiquities Authority.
2007 Protohistoric Settlement Remains at Hittin, on the Fringes of the Arbel Valley.
'Atiqot 56: 14–20. (Hebrew)
Getzov, N., Paz, I. and Gophna, R.
2001 Shifting Urban Landscapes during the Early Bronze Age in the Land of Israel. Tel
Aviv: Ramot.
Gilead, I.
1988 The Chalcolithic Period in the Levant. Journal of World Prehistory 2 (4): 397–
443.
1990 The Neolithic-Chalcolithic Transition and the Qatifian of the Northern Negev
and Sinai. Levant 22: 47–64.
1992 Farmers and Herders in Southern Israel during the Chalcolithic Period. Pp.
29–41 in Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in Anthropologi-
cal Perspectives. Bar-Yosef, O. and Khazanov, A. (eds.). (Monographs in World
Archaeology 10). Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press.
1994 The History of the Chalcolithic Settlement in the Nahal Beer Sheva Area: The
Radiocarbon Aspect. BASOR 296: 1–13.
2007 The Besorian: A Pre-Ghassulian Cultural Entity. Paléorient 33: 33–49.
2009 The Neolithic-Chalcolithic Transition in the Southern Levant: Late Sixth-Fifth
Millennium Culture History. Pp. 335-355 in Transitions in Prehistory: Essays in
Honor of Ofer Bar-Yosef. Shea, J. J. and Lieberman, D. E. (eds.). Oxford: Oxbow
Books.
reference list 589
2001 Early Bronze Social Organization as Reflected in Burial Pattern from the South-
ern Levant. Pp. 215- 236 in Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring
Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse. Wolff, S. R. (ed.). (The Oriental Institute of
the University of Chicago Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization No. 59/ The
American Schools of Oriental Research ASOR Books No. 5). Chicago: Oriental
Institute and Atlanta: American Schools of Oriental Research.
Hartenberger, B., Rosen, S. and Matney, Y.
2000 The Early Bronze Age Blade Workshop at Titriş Höyük: Lithic Specialization in
an Urban Context. Near Eastern Archaeology 63: 51–58.
Helms, S. W.
1987 Jawa, Tell Um Hammad and the EBI/Late Chalcolithic Landscape. Le-
vant 19: 49–81.
1991 The Pottery. Pp. 55–109 in Excavations at Jawa, 1972–1986: Stratigraphy, pottery
and other finds. Betts, A. V. G. (ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
1992 The “Zarqa Triangle”: A Preliminary Appraisal of Protohistorical Settlement
Patterns and Demographic Episodes. Pp. 129–136 in SHAJ IV. Amr, K., Zaya-
dine, F., Zaghloul, M., Nabeel, R. and Tawfiq, N. R. (eds.). Amman: Department
of Antiquities.
Helms, S. W., Betts, A. and O‘Tool, N.
1992 Excavations at Tell Um Hammad 1982–1984: The Early Assemblages. Betts,
A. V. G. (ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Hennessy, J. B.
1969 Preliminary Report on a First Season of Excavation at Teleilat Ghassul. Levant
1: 1–25.
1982 Teleilat Ghassul: Its Place in the Archaeology of Jordan. Pp. 55–58 in SHAJ I.
Henry, D. O.
1992 Seasonal Movements of Fourth Millennium Pastoral Nomads in Wadi Hisma.
Pp. 137- 141 in SHAJ IV.
Hesse, B.
1990 Pig Lovers and Pig Haters: Patterns of Palestinian Pork Production. Journal of
Ethnobiology 10: 195–225.
Hirschfeld, Y.
1985 Map of Herodium (108/2) 17–11. Jerusalem: Department of Antiquities and
Archaeological Survey of Israel. (Hebrew)
Hirschfeld, Y. and Riklin, S.
2002 Survey and Excavations in the Upper Wadi el-Makkuk Caves. 'Atiqot 41: 5–20.
Hizmi, H.
2003 Yitav. Hadashot Arkheologiot 115: 41–42.
Hongo, H. and Meadow, R. H.
1998 Pig Exploitation at Neolithic Cayono-Tepesi (Southern Iran). MASCA Research
Papers in Science and Archaeology 15: 77–98.
Hopf, M.
1983 Jericho Plant Remains. Pp. 577–621 in Excavations at Jericho: Volume Five. Ke-
nyon, K. M. and Holland, T. A. (eds.). Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology
in Jerusalem.
reference list 593
Horwitz, A.
2001 The Jordan Rift Valley. Lisse, Abingdon, Exton, Tokyo: A. A. Balkema Publish-
ers.
Horwitz, L. K.
2003 Temporal and Spatial Variation in Neolithic Caprine Exploitation Strategies: A
Case Study of Fauna from the Site of Yiftah'el (Israel). Paléorient 29: 19–58.
Horwitz, L. K. and Tchernov, E.
1989 Animal Exploitation in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant: An Over-
view. Pp. 279–296, in L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien:
Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24
Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford:
British Archaeological Reports.
Horwitz, L. K., Tchernov, E., Ducos, P., Becker, C., Driesch, A. v.d., Martin, L. and
Garrard, A.
1999 Animal Domestication in the Southern Levant. Paléorient 25: 63–80.
Hout, J. L.
1967 Typologie et Chronologie Relative de la Céramique du Bronze Ancien à Tell
El-Farah. RB 74: 516–554.
Hovers, E.
1993 Samaria (Region) The Prehistoric Periods. Pp. 1310–1311 in NEAEHL 4.
Ibrahim, M., Sauer, J. and Yassine, K.
1976 The East Jordan Valley Survey. BASOR 222: 41–66.
Ilan, O.
2001 Household Archaeology at Arad and Ai in the Early Bronze Age II. Pp. 317-
354 in Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory of
Douglas L. Esse. Wolff, S. R. (ed.). (The Oriental Institute of the University of
Chicago Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization No. 59/ American Schools of
Oriental Research ASOR Books No. 5). Chicago: Oriental Institute and Atlanta:
American Schools of Oriental Research.
Ilan, O. and Sebbane, M.
1989 Copper Metallurgy, Trade and the Urbanization of Southern Canaan in the
Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age. Pp. 139–162 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine
à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du
colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR Inter-
national Series 527. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Ilan, Z.
1973 The Jordan Valley and the Desert of Samaria. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. (Hebrew)
Joffe, A. H.
1991 Early Bronze I and the Evolution of Social Complexity in the Southern Levant.
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 4 (1): 3–58.
1993 Settlement and Society in the Early Bronze Age I and II, Southern Levant. (Mono-
graphs in Mediterranean Archaeology 4). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Joffe, A. H. and Dessel, J.
1995 Redefining Chronology and Terminology for the Chalcolithic of the Southern
Levant. Current Anthropology 36 (3): 507–518.
594 reference list
Kafafi, Z. A.
2001 Jebel Abu Thawwab (Er-Rumman), Central Jordan. Berlin: Ex Oriente.
Kallai, Z.
1972 The Land of Benjamin and Mt. Ephraim. Pp. 153–195 in Judea, Samaria and the
Golan, Archaeological Survey 1967–1968. Kochavi, M. (ed.). Jerusalem: Carta.
(Hebrew)
Keller, D. R. and Rupp, D. W.
1983 Archaeological Survey: Definitions. Pp. 17–30 in Archaeological Survey in the
Mediterranean Area. Keller, D. R. and Rupp, D. W. (eds.). BAR International
Series 155. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Kempinski, A.
1978 The Rise of an Urban Culture: The Urbanization of Palestine in the Early Bronze
Age, 3000–2150 B.C. Jerusalem: Israel Ethnographic Society.
1992 Reflections on the Role of the Egyptians in the Shefelah of Palestine in the Light
of Recent Soundings at Tel Erani. Pp. 419–426 in The Nile Delta in Transition:
4th-3rd Millennium B.C. van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.). Proceedings of the
Seminar Held in Cairo, 21–24, October, 1990, at the Netherlands Institute of
Archaeology and Arabic Studies. Tel Aviv: E. C. M. van den Brink.
Kempinski, A. and Gilead, I.
1991 New Excavations at Tel Erani: A Preliminary Report of the 1985–1988 Season.
Tel Aviv 18: 164–191.
Kenyon, K. M.
1957 Digging Up Jericho. London: Benn.
1979 Archaeology of the Holy Land. London: Benn.
1981 Excavations at Jericho, Volume Three. Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology
in Jerusalem.
Kenyon, K. M. and Holland, T. A.
1982 Excavations at Jericho, Volume Four. Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology
in Jerusalem.
1983 Excavations at Jericho, Volume Five. Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology in
Jerusalem.
Kerestes, T. M.
1977/78 An Archaeological Survey of the Three Reservoir Areas in Northern Jordan.
ADAJ 22: 108–135.
Kerner, S.
1997 Status, Perspectives and Future Goals in Jordanian Chalcolithic Research. Pp.
465–472 in The Prehistory of Jordan 2. Perspectives from 1997. Gebel, H. G. K.,
Kafafi, Z. and Rollefson, G. O. (eds.). Berlin: Ex Oriente.
2008 The Transition between the Late Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age in the
Southern Levant. Offprint from the Proceedings of the Fourth International
Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East: Social and Cultural
Transformation: The Archaeology of Transitional Periods and Dark Ages Excava-
tion Reports. Kuhne, H., Czichon, R. M. and Kreppner, F. J. (eds.). Weisbaden:
Harrassowitz Verlag.
2010 Craft Specialization and its Relations with Social Organization in the Late 6th to
the Early 4th Millennium BCE of the Southern Levant. Paléorient 36: 179-198.
reference list 595
Khalaily, H.
2002 Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Pottery and Other Finds from Caves VIII/9
and VIII/28. 'Atiqot XLI: 129–141.
2004 An Early Bronze Age Site at Ashqelon, Afridar - Area F. 'Atiqot 45: 121–160.
Khazanov, A. M.
1984 Nomads and the Outside World. Madison, Wisc.: University of Wisconsin Press.
Kline, M.
1988 The Geomorphology of Israel. The Zoogeography of Israel. Yom-Tov, Y. and Tch-
ernov, E. (eds.). Dordrecht: W. Junk.
Kochavi, M.
1972 Judea, Samaria and the Golan, Archaeological Survey 1967–1968. Jerusalem:
Carta. (Hebrew)
1975 The First Two Seasons of Excavations at Aphek-Antipatris, Preliminary Report.
Tel Aviv 2: 17–44.
Koeppel, R.
1940 Teleilat Ghassul II: compte rendu des fouilles de l’Institut biblique pontifical,
1932-1936. Rome : Institut Biblique Pontifical.
Kolodny, Y., Stein, M. and Machlus, M.
2005 Sea–rain–lake relation in the Last Glacial East Mediterranean revealed by δ18O/
δ13C in Lake Lisan aragonites. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 69: 4045–4060.
Kroeper, K.
1988 The Excavations of the Munich East-Delta Expedition in Minshat Abu Omar.
Pp. 11–48 in The Archaeology of the Nile Delta, Egypt: Problems and Priorities. E.
C. M. van den Brink (ed.). Amsterdam: Netherlands Foundation for Archaeo-
logical Research in Egypt.
1989 Palestinian Ceramic Imports in Pre- and Protohistoric Egypt. Pp. 407–422 in
L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des
recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre 1986). de Mi-
roschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford: British Archaeological
Reports.
Lee, J. R.
1973 Chalcolithic Ghassul: New Aspects and Master Typology. Unpublished PhD
dissertation, Jerusalem: Hebrew University.
Leonard, A.
1989 A Chalcolithic “Fine Ware” from Kataret Es-Samra in the Jordan Valley. BASOR
276: 3–13.
1992 The Jordan Valley Survey, 1953: Some Unpublished Soundings Conducted by
James Mellaart. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.
Lev-Tov, J.
2000 Late Prehistoric Faunal Remains from New Excavations at Tel Ali (Northern
Israel). Pp. 208–216 in Archaeozoology of the Near East IVa. Mashkour, M.,
Choyke, A., Buitenhuis, H. and Poplin, F. (eds.). Groningen: Groningen Insti-
tute of Archaeology.
Levy, T. E.
1986 The Chalcolithic Period. Biblical Archaeologist 49 (2): 82–108.
596 reference list
1995 Cult, Metallurgy and Rank Societies - Chalcolithic Period (ca. 4500–3500 BCE).
Pp. 226–243 in The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. Levy. T. E. (ed.).
London: Leicester University Press.
2006 Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult: The Sanctuary at Gilat, Israel. London:
Equinox.
Levy, T. E. (ed.)
1987 Shiqmim I (Studies concerning Chalcolithic societies in the Northern Negev Des-
ert, Israel (1982–1984)). BAR International Series 256. Oxford: British Archaeo-
logical Reports.
Levy, T. E. and Alon, D.
1982 The Chalcolithic Mortuary Sites near Mezad Aluf, Northern Negev Desert: A
Preliminary Study. BASOR 248: 37–59.
Levy, T. E. and Rosen, S. A.
1987 The Chipped Stone Industry at Shiqmim: Typological Considerations. Pp.
289–294 in Shiqmim I (Studies Concerning Chalcolithic Societies in the Northern
Negev Desert, Israel (1982–1984)). Levy, T. E. (ed.). Oxford: BAR International
Series 256.
Levy, T. E., Smith, P. and Alon, D.
1997 Egyptian-Canaanite Interactions at Nahal Tillah, Israel (ca. 4500–3000 BCE).
An Interim Report on the 1994–1995 Excavations. BASOR 307: 1–49.
Liphschitz, N.
2008 Reconstruction of the Arboreal Vegetation of the Judean and Samarian Moun-
tains during Antiquity as Evident from Archaeological Wood Remains. Pp. 48*-
55* in In the Hill-Country, and in the Shephelah, and in the Arabah. Bar, S. (ed.).
Jerusalem: Ariel.
Louhivuori, M.
1988 Continuity and Change in Pottery in the Early Bronze I Period in Israel. PhD
dissertation, Hebrew University. Jerusalem.
Lovell, J. L.
2000 Pella in Jordan in the Chalcolithic Period. Pp. 59–71 in Ceramics and Change
in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird, D. (eds.).
(Levantine Archaeology, no. 2). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
2001 The Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods in the Southern Levant: New Data
from the Site of Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan. BAR International Series 974. Oxford:
British Archaeological Reports.
2002 Shifting Subsistence Patterns: Some Ideas about the End of the Chalcolithic in
the Southern Levant. Paléorient 28 (1): 89–102.
Lovell, J. L., Meadows, J., Adams, T. J., Thomas, D. C., Richter, T., Miller, H., Elias, C.,
McRae, I. K. and al Balwaneh, M.
2006 The Second Preliminary Report of the Wadi ar-Rayyan Archaeological Project:
The First Season of Excavations at al-Khawarij. ADAJ 50: 33–59.
Lovell, J. L., Dollfus, G. and Kafafi, Z.
2007 The Ceramics of the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic: Abu Hamid and the Bur-
nished Tradition. Paléorient 33: 51–76.
reference list 597
Lynch, W. F.
1855 Narrative of the Expedition to the River Jordan and the Dead Sea. London: James
Blackwood, Paternoster Row.
Mabry, J.
1989 Investigations at Tell El-Handaquq, Jordan (1987–1988). ADAJ 33: 59–86.
Mabry, J. and Palumbo, G.
1988 The 1987 Wadi el-Yabis Survey. ADAJ 32: 275–305.
Mabry, J. B., Donaldson, M. L., Gruspier, K., Mullen, G., Palumbo, G., Rawlings, M. N.
and Woodburn, M. A.
1996 Early Town Development and Water Management in the Jordan Valley: Investi-
gations at Tell El-Handaquq North. AASOR 53: 115–154.
MacDonald, B.
2001 Climatic Changes in Jordan through Time. Pp. 595–600 in The Archaeology of
Jordan. MacDonald, B., Adams, R. and Bienkowski, P. (eds.). Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press.
Mallon, A., Koeppel, R. and Neuville, R.
1934 Teleilat Ghassul. Rome: L‘Institut biblique pontifical.
Mazar, A. and Rotem, Y.
2009 Tel Beth Shean during the EB IB Period: Evidence for Social Complicity in the
Late 4th millennium BC. Levant 41 (2): 131–153.
McCreery, D. W.
1981 Flotation of the Bab edh-Dhra' and Numeira Plant Remains. Pp. 165–170 in The
Southern Dead Sea Plain Expedition: An Interim Report of the 1977 Season. Rast,
W. E. and Schaub, R. T. (eds.). (AASOR 46). Cambridge, MA: American Schools
of Oriental Research.
2003 The Paleoethnobotany of Bab edh-Dhra. Pp. 449–463 in Bab edh-Dhra: Excava-
tions at the Town Site (1975–1981). Rast, W. E. and Schaub, R. T. (eds.). Winona
Lake. Indiana: Eisenbrauns.
Meadows, J.
1998 Ghassul Archaeobotany Report; 1997 Season. Unpublished Manuscript.
Mellaart, J.
1962 Preliminary Report of the Archaeological Survey in the Yarmuk and Jordan Val-
ley. ADAJ 6–7: 126–132.
1966 The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Ages in the Near East and Anatolia. Beirut:
Khayats.
Merrill, S.
1883 East of the Jordan. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Mienis, H. K.
2005 Mollusc Remains. Pp.155–157 in Shoham (North) - Late Chalcolithic Burial
Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel. van den Brink, E. C. M. and Gophna, R. (eds.).
(IAA Reports No 27). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Milevski, I.
2005 Local Exchange in Early Bronze Age Canaan. PhD dissertation Tel Aviv: Tel
Aviv University.
598 reference list
2011 Early Bronze Age Goods Exchange in the Southern Levant: A Marxist Perspective.
London and Oakville: Equinox.
Milevski, I., Fabian, P. and Marder, O.
2011 Canaanean Blades in Chalcolithic Contexts of the Southern Levant? Pp. 149-
159 in Culture, Chronology and the Chalcolithic, Theory and Transition. Lovell, J.
L. and Rowen, Y. M. (eds.). Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow.
Milevski, I., Braun, E., Varga, D. and Israel, Y.
2012 A Newly-discovered Early Bronze Age Settlement and Silo Complex at Amaziya,
Israel. Antiquity 85 Issue 331: http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/milevski331/; Ac-
cessed 12/24/2012.
Miller, J. M.
1991 Archaeological Survey of the Kerak Plateau. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Mimran, Y. and Bilitzky, S.
1995 The Uplift of Zahrat el-Qurein and its Effect on the Jordan Valley in Fazael
Area. Pp. 257–268 in Judea and Samaria Research Studies, Volume 9. Eshel, Y.
(ed.). Ariel: College of Judea and Samaria – Research Institute. (Hebrew)
Miroschedji, P. de.
1971 L‘époque Pre-Urbaine en Palestine. Paris: Gabalda.
1989 Le Processus d`urbanisation en Palestine au Bronze Ancien: Chronologie et
Rythmes. Pp. 63–80 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien:
Bilan et Perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24
Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford:
British Archaeological Reports.
1993 Far`ah, Tell el- (North): Neolithic Period to the Middle Bronze Age. Pp. 433–438
in NEAEHL 2.
2001 Gaza et l’Égypte de l’époque prédynastique à l’ancien empire: premiers résultats
des fouilles de Tell es-Sakan. Bulletin del la Société Française d’Égyptologie 152:
28–52.
Mittmann, S.
1970 Beitraege zur Siedlungs- und Territorialgeschichte des Noerdlichen Ostjordan-
landes. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Moustafa, Y. A., Pätzold, J., Loya, Y. and Wefer, G.
2000 Mid-Holocene Stable Isotope Record of Corals from the Northern Red Sea.
International Journal of Earth Sciences 88: 742–751.
Neef, R.
1990 Introduction, Development and Environmental Implications of Olive Culture.
Pp. 295–306 in Man`s Role in the Shaping of the Middle Eastern Landscape. Bot-
tema, S., Entjes-Nieborg, G. and van Zeist, W. (eds.). Rotterdam: Balkema.
Netser, M. and Gvirtzman, G.
1996 Settlement Changes in Menashe Mountains (Shechem Syncline) in the Scope
of Climatic Changes in Eretz-Israel during the Last 6000 Years. Pp. 293–300 in
Judea and Samaria Research Studies, Volume 9. Eshel, Y. (ed.). Ariel: College of
Judea and Samaria – Research Institute. (Hebrew)
reference list 599
Parr, P. J.
2000 Proto-Urban Jericho: The Need for Reappraisal. Pp. 389–398 in The Archae-
ology of Jordan and Beyond: Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer. Stager, L. E.,
Greene, J. A. and Coogan, M. D. (eds.). Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbraun.
Patrich, J.
1993 The Ketef Jericho Cave. P. 837 in NEAEHL 3.
Paz, Y.
2000 Early Bronze Age I Fortified Settlements in Palestine. Unpublished MA thesis,
Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv.
2002 Fortified Settlements of the EB IB and the Emergence of the First Urban System.
Tel Aviv 29 (2): 238–261.
Paz, S.
2010 Life in the City: The Birth of an Urban Habitus in the Early Bronze Age of Israel.
PhD dissertation, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.
Peleg, Y.
2000 Fasa'el (north). Hadashot Archaeologiot 112: 67–68. (Hebrew)
Peleg, Y. and Hameiri, N.
2002 Survey and Excavations of Caves along Wadi el-Makkuk and Wadi ed-Daliya.
Atiqot 41: 1–5.
Perrot, J.
1955 The Excavations at Tell Abu Matar, near Beersheba. IEJ 5: 17–40, 73–84, 167–
189.
1992 Umm Qatafa and Umm Qala'a: Two “Ghassulian” Caves in the Judean Desert.
Eretz-Israel 23: 100–111.
Philip, G.
2001 Chapter 5: The Early Bronze I-III Ages. Pp 163–232 in The Archaeology of Jor-
dan. MacDonald, B., Adams, R. and Bienkowski, P. (eds.). Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press.
Philip, G. and Williams-Thorpe, O.
1993 A Provenance Study of Jordanian Basalt Vessels of the Chalcolithic and Early
Bronze Age I Periods. Paléorient 19 (2): 51–63.
Porath, Y.
1968 The Samaria Survey (b). Unpublished manuscript. (Hebrew)
1985 A Chalcolithic Building at Fasa‘el. 'Atiqot 17: 1–19.
1992 Domestic Architecture of the Chalcolithic Period. Pp. 40–48 in The Architecture
of Ancient Israel from the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods. Kempinski, A. and
Reich, R. (eds.). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.
Portugali, J. and Gophna, R.
1993 Crisis, Progress and Urbanization: The Transition from Early Bronze I to Early
Bronze II in Palestine. Tel Aviv 20: 164–185.
Prag, K.
2000 Tell Iktanu, South Jordan Valley: Early Bronze Age I Ceramics. Pp. 91–99 in
Ceramics and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Philip,
G. and Baird, D. (eds.). Levantine Archaeology, no. 2. Sheffield: Sheffield Aca-
demic Press.
reference list 601
2001 The Third Millennium in Jordan: A Perspective, Past and Future. SHAJ VII:
179–190.
Pritchard, J. B.
1958 The Excavation at Herodian Jericho, 1951. AASOR, Vol. XXXII-XXXIII (For
1952–1954). New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.
Raban-Gerstel, N., Bar-Oz, G., Zohar, I., Sharon, I. and Gilboa, A.
2008 Early Iron Age Dor (Israel): A Faunal Perspective. BASOR 349: 25–59.
Rast, E. W. and Schaub, R. T.
2003 Bab edh-Dhra: Excavations at the Town Site (1975–1981). Winona Lake. Indi-
ana: Eisenbrauns.
Ravikovitch, S.
1981 The Soils of Israel, Formation, Nature and Properties. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz
Hameuchad. (Hebrew)
Reimer, P. J., Baillie, M. G. L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J. W., Bertrand, C., Blackwell,
P. G., Buck, C. E., Burr, G., Cutler, K. B., Damon, P. E., Edwards, R. L., Fairbanks,
R. G., Friedrich, M., Guilderson, T. P., Hughen, K. A., Kromer, B., McCormac,
F. G., Manning, S., Bronk-Ramsey, C., Reimer, R. W., Remmele, S., Southon,
J. R., Stuiver, M., Talamo, S., Taylor, F. W., van der Plicht, J. and Weyhenmeyer,
C. E.
2004 IntCal04: Calibration Issue. Radiocarbon 46: 1029–1058.
Reimer P. J., Baillie M. G. L., Bard E., Bayliss A., Beck J. W., Blackwell P. G., Bronk
Ramsey C. E., Buck C. E., Burr G., Edwards R. L., Friedrich M., Guilderson T. P.,
Hajdas I., Heaton T. J., Hogg A. G., Hughen K. A., Kaiser K. F., Kromer B., Mc-
Cormac F. G., Manning S., Reimer R. W., Richards D. A., Southon J. R., Talamo
S., Turney J., van der Plicht J. and Weyhenmeyer C. E.
2009 IntCal09 and Marine09 Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves, 0-50,000 Years
Cal BP. Radiocarbon 51 (4): 1111–1150.
Regev, J., Miroschedji, P. de, Greenberg, R., Braun, E., Greenhut, Z. and Boaretto, E.
2012 Chronology of the Early bronze Age in the Southern Levant: New Analysis for a
High Chronology. Radiocarbon 54 (3-4): 525-566.
Rice, P.
1987 Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rizkana, I. and Seeher, J.
1987 Maadi I: The Pottery of the Predynastic Settlement. Archäologische Veröffentli-
chungen, no. 64. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern.
Rosen, A. M.
1986 Quaternary Stratigraphy and Paleoenvironments of the Shephela, Israel. Geologi-
cal Survey of Israel, Reports 25/86. Jerusalem: Geological Survey of Israel.
1995 The Social Response to Environmental Change in Early Bronze Age Canaan.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 14: 26–44.
Rosen, S. A.
1983 The Canaanean Blade and the Early Bronze Age. IEJ 33: 15–29.
1986 The Analysis of Trade and Craft Specialization in the Chalcolithic Period: Com-
parisons from Different Realms of Material Culture. Michmanim 3: 21–32.
602 reference list
1989 The Analysis of Early Bronze Age Chipped Stone Industries: A Summary State-
ment. Pp. 199–223 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien:
Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24
Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford:
British Archaeological Reports.
1997 Lithics After the Stone Age. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press.
2002 The Evolution of Pastoral Nomadic Systems in the Southern Levantine Periph-
ery. Pp. 23–44 in In Quest of Ancient Settlements and Landscapes : Archaeological
Studies in Honour of Ram Gophna. van den Brink, E. C. M. and Yannai, E. (eds.).
Tel Aviv: Ramot.
Rowan, Y. M.
1998 Ancient Distribution and Deposition of Prestige Objects: Basalt Vessels during
Late Prehistory in the Southern Levant. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Univer-
sity of Texas.
2003 The Groundstone Assemblage. Pp. 183–202 in Salvage Excavations at the Early
Bronze Age Site of Qiryat Ata. Golani, A. (ed.). (IAA Reports 18). Jerusalem:
Israel Antiquities Authority.
2005 The Groundstone Assemblages. Pp.113–140 in Shoham (North)- Late Chalco-
lithic Burial Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel. van den Brink, E.C.M. and Gophna,
R. (eds.). (IAA Reports No. 27). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
2006 The Groundstone Assemblage. Pp. 211–250 in 'En Esur ('Ein Asawir) I: Excava-
tions at a Protohistoric Site In the Coastal Plain of Israel. Yannai, E. (ed.). (IAA
Reports 31). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Rowan, Y. M. and Golden, J.
2009 The Chalcolithic Period of the Southern Levant: A Synthetic Review. Journal of
World Prehistory 22 (1): 1-92.
Rubin, S., Israeli, A., Gat, Z., Klebaner, L., Mishaeli J. and Lev Ami, U. (eds.)
1992 Israel Geoclimatic Regions Map. Bet Dagan: Ministry of Transport and Israel
Meteorological Service.
Sabah, O.
1992 The Vegetation of the Jordan Valley and Eastern Samaria. Pp. 48–55 in The
Jordan Valley and Eastern Samaria. Markus, M. (ed.). Israel Nature and Parks
Authority and Jordan Valley Regional Council. (Hebrew)
Sadeh, S. and Gophna, R.
1991 Observation on the Chalcolithic Ceramic Sequence in the Middle Jordan Valley.
JISP 24: 135–148.
Sanlaville, P.
1996 Changements Climatiques dans la Region Levantine à la Fin du Pleistocene
Superieur et au Debut de l’Holocène. Leurs relations avec L’Évolution des Socié-
tés Humaines. Paléorient 22 (1): 7–30.
Schattner, I.
1959 The Load of the Lower Jordan. Yediot 23: 157–175. (Hebrew)
1962 The Lower Jordan Valley. Scripta Hierosolymitana 11: 1–120.
Schaub, R. T.
1982 The Origins of the Early Bronze Age Walled Town Culture of Jordan. Pp. 67–75
in SHAJ I.
reference list 603
Silver, I. A.
1969 The Ageing of Domestic Animals. Pp. 283–302 in Brothwell, D. and Higgs, E. S.
(eds.). Science in Archaeology. London: Thames and Hudson.
Sion, O.
2002 Survey and Excavations of Caves along the Jebel Abu Saraj Cliff. 'Atiqot 41:
43–70.
Spanier, Y.
1992 The Geographical and Archaeological Aspects of East Samaria. Pp. 122–136 in
Judea and Samaria Research Studies, Volume 1. Erlich, Z. H. and Eshel, Y. (eds.).
Kedumim-Ariel: College of Judea and Samaria. (Hebrew)
1993 The Water Sources of East Samaria – Past and Present Use. Pp. 267–282 in Judea
and Samaria Research Studies, Volume 2. Erlich, Z. H. and Eshel, Y. (eds.). Kedu-
mim Ariel: College of Judea and Samaria. (Hebrew)
1994a The Relationship Between Nomads and Permanent Settlements in East Samaria
– Past and Present. Pp. 379–388 in Judea and Samaria Research Studies, Volume
2. Erlich, Z. H. and Eshel, Y. (eds.). Kedumim-Ariel: College of Judea and Sa-
maria. (Hebrew)
1994b Survey of el-Mughair Map. Hadashot Arkheologiot 102: 68–69. (Hebrew)
Steen, E. van der
2004 Tribes and Territories in Transition. Orientalia Lovaniesia Analecta 130. Leuven:
Peeters.
2007 Town and the Countryside of the Kerak Plateau. Pp. 93-98 in On the Fringe
of Society: Archaeological and Ethnoarchaeological Perspectives on Pastoral
and Agricultural Societies. Saidel, B. A. and van der Steen, E. (eds.). BAR Inter-
national Series 1657. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Stekelis, M.
1935 Les Monuments Megalithiques de la Palestine. Thèse pour le doctorat
d`université de Paris, Paris: Mousson.
Stiner, M. C., Kuhn, S. L., Weiner, S. and Bar-Yosef, O.
1995 Differential Burning, Recrystallization, and Fragmentation of Archaeological
Bone. Journal of Archaeological Science 22 (2): 223–237.
Stuiver, M. and Polach, H. A.
1977 Discussing Reporting 14C Data. Radiocarbon 19: 355–363.
Sussman, V.
1990 Sheikh Ali 1959 – The Section in Area C. JIPS 23: 113–141.
Szuchman, J. (ed.)
2009 Nomads, Tribes, and the State in the Ancient Near East. Chicago, Ill: Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago.
Tubb, J. N., Dorell, P. J. and Cobbing, F. J.
1997 Interim Report on the Ninth Season (1996) of Excavations at Tell es-Saidiyeh,
Jordan. PEQ 129: 54–77.
Tzori, N.
1958 Neolithic and Chalcolithic Sites in the Valley of Beth-Shan. PEQ 90: 44–51.
1962 An Archaeological Survey in the Bet-Shean Valley. Pp. 135–198 in The Bet-
Shean Valley - The 17th Archaeological Conférence, Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
reference list 605
1977a Bet Shean in the Chalcolithic Period. Eretz-Israel 13: 76–81. (Hebrew)
1977b The Land of Issachar Archaeological Survey. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Soci-
ety. (Hebrew)
Underwood, A. J.
1997 Experiments in Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ussishkin, D.
1980 The Ghassulian Shrine at En-Gedi. Tel Aviv 7: 1–44.
Vaillant, N.
1989 La vie domestique. Pp. 31–32 in Abu Hamid: Village du 4e millénaire de la vallée
du Jourdain. Dollfus, G. and Kafafi, Z. Amman: Centre Culturel Français.
Vaux, de. R.
1949 La Deuxieme Campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 56:
102–138.
1951 La troisième campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 58: 393–
430, 566–590.
1955 La Cinquième campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 62:
541–589.
1957 La Sixième campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 64: 552–580.
1962 Le fouilles de Tell el-Far'ah. RB 69: 212–253.
1993 Far'ah, Tell el- (North). p. 433 in NEAEHL 2.
Vaux, de. R. and Steve, A. M.
1947 La Première Campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 54: 394–
433, 573–589.
1948 La Seconde Campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 55: 544–
580.
1969 Les fouilles de Tell el-Far'ah. Tel Aviv: Internal Print of the Ancient Middle East-
ern Department of Tel Aviv University.
Werker, E.
1998 Plant Identification of the Wooden Objects. Pp. 92–97 in The Cave of the War-
rior. Schick, T. (ed.). (IAA Reports 5). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Winter, H.
2006 Reaping with Flint Sickles: From Prehistory to Early Historic Ages. JIPS 36:
231–244.
2008 Appendix A – The Flint Finds. Pp. 659–738. in The Manasseh Hill Country Sur-
vey, vol. II – The Eastern Valleys and the Fringes of the Desert. A. Zertal (ed.).
Leiden and Boston: Brill.
Wood, B. G.
1990 The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine. (Journal of the Study of the Old
Testament Supplement Series 103). Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Wright, G. E.
1937 The Pottery of Palestine from the Earliest Times to the End of the Early Bronze
Age. New Haven, Conn: American Schools of Oriental Research.
1958 The Problem of the Transition between the Chalcolithic and the Bronze Ages.
Eretz Israel 5: 37–45.
606 reference list
Yadin, Y.
1993 Cave of the Letters. Pp. 829–832 in NEAEHL 3.
Yannai, E.
2006 'En Esur (Ein Asawir) I: Excavations at a Protohistoric Site in the Coastal Plain of
Israel. (IAA Reports 31). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Yannai, E. and Braun, E.
2001 Anatolian and Egyptian Imports from Late EB I at Ain Assawir, Israel. BASOR
321: 41–56.
Yannai, E., Lazar-Shorer, D. and Grosinger, Z.
2006 The Pottery Assemblages. Pp. 63–178 in 'En Esur ('Ein Asawir) I: Excavations
at a Protohistoric site in the coastal plain of Israel. Yannai, E. (ed.). (IAA Reports
31). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Yassine, K., Sauer, J. and Ibrahim, M.
1988 The East Jordan Valley Survey, 1976: Part 2. Pp. 189–207 in Archaeology of Jor-
dan: Essays and Reports. Yassine, K. (ed.). Amman: Department of Archaeology,
University of Jordan.
Yeivin, S.
1960 Early Contacts between Canaan and Egypt. IEJ 10: 193–203.
Yekutieli, Y.
1998 The Early Bronze Age I of North Sinai: Social, Economic and Spatial Aspects.
Unpublished PhD dissertation, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. (Hebrew)
2000 Early Bronze Age I Pottery in Southwestern Canaan. Pp. 129–152 in Ceramics
and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird,
D. (eds.). (Levantine Archaeology, no. 2). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
2001 The Early Bronze Age IA of Southwestern Canaan. Pp. 659–682 in Studies in
the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse.
Wolff, S. R. (ed.). (The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago Studies in
Ancient Oriental Civilization No. 59/ American Schools of Oriental Research
ASOR Books No. 5). Chicago: Oriental Institute and Atlanta: American Schools
of Oriental Research.
2007 The Relationship Between Egypt and Canaan during the Early Bronze Age I as
Viewed from South-West Canaan. Qadmoniot 134: 66–74. (Hebrew)
Yizhaq, M., Mintz, G. I. C., Khalaily, H., Weiner, S. and Boaretto, E.
2005 Quality Controlled Radiocarbon Dating of Bones and Charcoal from the Early
Pre Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) of Motza (Israel). Radiocarbon 47: 193–206.
Zeder, M. A. and H. A. Lapham
2010 Assessing the reliability of criteria used to identify postcranial bones in sheep,
Ovis, and goats, Capra. Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (11): 2887–2905.
Zertal, A.
1993 Fortified Enclosures of the Early Bronze Age in the Samaria Region and the
beginning of Urbanization. Levant 25: 113–124.
2004 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. I – The Shechem Syncline. Leiden and
Boston: Brill.
2005 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. IV – From Nahal Bezeq to the Sartaba.
Tel Aviv: Ministry of Defense and University of Haifa. (Hebrew)
reference list 607
2008 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. II – The Eastern Valleys and the Fringes
of the Desert. Leiden and Boston: Brill.
2012 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. V, The Middle Jordan Valley (From Wadi
Ahmar to Wadi 'Aujeh (Nahal Yitav)). Haifa: Seker, University of Haifa. (He-
brew)
Zertal, A. and Mirkam, N.
2000 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. III – From Nahal 'Iron to Nahal Shechem.
Tel Aviv: Ministry of Defense and University of Haifa. (Hebrew)
Zohary, M.
1959 Geobotany. Merhavia: Hakibbutz Ha’artzi. (Hebrew)
1962 Plant Life of Palestine Israel and Jordan. New York: Ronald.
1980 Vegetal Landscapes of Israel. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. (Hebrew)
Zuckerman, S.
2003 The Early Bronze Age I Pottery. Pp. 35–49 in Tel Qashish: A village in the Jezreel
Valley. Ben-Tor, A., Bonfil, R. and Zuckerman, S. (eds.). (Qedem 5). Jerusalem:
Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.