egyptian taskmasters and heavy burdens: highland exploitation and the collared-rim pithos of the...

DAVID WENGROW

EGYPTIAN TASKMASTERS AND HEAVY BURDENS:

PITHOS OF THE BRONZE/IRON AGE LEVANT HIGHLAND EXPLOITATION AND THE COLLARED-RIM

Summary In considering the most controversial ceramic artefact of the Levant in the late 2nd millennium BC, the collared-rim pithos, this paper breaks down the artificial chronological and cultural boundary that in many studies isolates the central highlands of modern Israel-Palestine from the rest of the region. A large transport vessel, the collared-rim pithos has been inappropriately used as an ‘ethnic marker’ for the settlement and expansion of the Ancient Israelites and as a chronological indicator of the Iron I Period (1200-1000 BC). Here a new socio-economic model is proposed which accounts for the spatio-temporal distribution of the collared-rim pithos and integrates highland settlements into a regional system of exploitation which characterises the last phase of Ramesside hegemony in the Levant.

INTRODUCTION

The collared-rim pithos (Figure 1) is one of the most controversial artifacts in the eastern Mediterranean, its notoriety stemming from its appropriation by scholars as a distinctively ‘Israelite’ vessel. There is, in fact, nothing in the basic form of the collared-rim pithos which is alien or intrusive to the ceramic repertoire of the Bronze Age Levant. Its main morphological attributes are first recognis- able, on a smaller scale, with the innovation of the Canaanite commercial jar: ‘that large ovoid or piriform, pointed based vessel, used for storage and transport of wines and oils, which first appeared in the Levant around the beginning of the second millennium BC and which, having become widely popular throughout the Eastern Mediterranean region

OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 15(3) 1996

during the following two thousand years, is the direct ancestor of the Greek and Roman amphora.’ (Parr 1973, 174).

The features that distinguish the collared- rim pithos from the Canaanite jar are the great size of its body and a pronounced, collar-shaped rim. Height measurements range from c.110-117 cm and at Giloh these pithoi were reported to have a maximum external rim-diameter of 22-25 cm (Mazar 1981, 27). The capacity of collared-rim pithoi varies between c.150 and 200 litres and the weight of an empty jar was measured at over 32 kilograms (cf. Hopkins 1985, 150; Zertal 1988, 351). The shaping and firing of a vessel of this magnitude would have required considerable expertise, and collared-rim pithoi would almost certainly have been the work of specialist potters

0 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 19%. 108 Cowley Road. Oxford OX4 IJF, UK and 238 Main Street. Cambridge. MA 02142. USA. 307

EGYPTIAN TASKMASTERS AND HEAVY BURDENS

120

60

I BC

Collored-rim Pithos -P

Figure I Morphological development of the collared-rim pithos

(Kempinski 1985, 401; Esse 1992, 97). The technological benefits of this form

over other storage vessels relate to ease of movement. Flat-based jars are vulnerable to impact at the sharp junction of base and walls, but the Canaanite jar (and likewise the collared-rim pithos) with its rounded base and regular, ovoid body, ‘can be lifted . . . pivoted, and generally man-handled with far less risk of damage, while the stresses emanating from the weight of its contents are more evenly distributed throughout the whole fabric of the vessel’ (Parr 1973, 177). The presence of handles on collared-rim pithoi also suggests that movement was an objective. The major disadvantage of this form is the lack of stability afforded by a pointed base. When stationary, the pithos would probably have been leaned against a wall or another vessel, or set into a stand or floor depression.

The movement of collared-rim pithoi over great distances on land has been dernon- strated by Neutron Activation Analysis,

which has also confirmed that the contents of the pithoi rather than the jars themselves were in demand (Yellen and Gunneweg 1989, 133-141; Glass et al. 1993, 271-284). Transport of these bulky vessels over land would most likely have been by camel but could conceivably have been achieved by oxcart or by donkey, and evidence from Egyptian wall-paintings and the Ulu Burun wreck, off the coast of Turkey, indicate that pithoi were carried on board ships (Artzy 1994, 137-8; Holladay 1995, 394, and cf. Davies and Faulkner 1947).

The majority of these vessels were produced in the late 13th-12th century BC, the transition from the Late Bronze to the Iron Age, during which the main axes of political and economic control in the Levant lay under the yoke of Egyptian colonial domination (Ussishkin 1995). Their use is testimony to a short, intense period of centrally-organised exploitation, in which the natural resources of the central highlands of modern IsraeVPalestine and neighbouring

OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY

308 0 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996

DAVID WENGROW

regions were channeled via major Egyptian- controlled centres in the Jordan and Jezreel Valleys to the Mediterranean coast for export. How, then, did this striking ceramic remnant of the economies of scale which dominated trade in the eastern Mediterranean for much of the second millennium BC become appropriated as the prime material indicator of a group of humble semi-nomads thought to have settled in the central hill- country of modern IsraeVPalestine during the Iron I period?

SCRIPTURE AND CIRCULARITY

The postulated association of the collared- rim pithos with the Israelites of the Old Testament has influenced the study of the late secondearly first millennium BC in the Levant for well over half a century. The biblical narrative locates the Israelites in the central highlands of Canaan at the end of the period of the Judges and at the beginning of the United Monarchy. For W.F. Albright and his colleagues in the 1920s and ‘~OS, it was largely this fact which guided the choice of sites for excavation (cf. Esse 1992). A common element in the ceramic assemblages produced by these early projects was the collared-rim pithos, which, along with cooking pots, became closely associated with the central hill country and was quickly appropriated as a chronological indicator of the Early Iron Age (1200-1000 BC). In accordance with the academic framework of ‘Biblical Archaeology’, this provided an empirical basis for the establishment of a distinctively ‘Israelite’ material culture.

During the 1950s and ‘~OS, the ethno- chronological associations of the collared- rim pithos took on an existence independent of scripture, becoming widely acknowledged among the first generation of Israeli archaeologists. Excavation continued to focus upon

the central hill country and produced collared-rim pithoi in quite large quantities (Esse 1992, 85). Since Albright’s original proposal, however, the ideological context of the supposed relationship between collared- rim pithoi and Israelites was undergoing important changes. In 1970, Aharoni identified Megiddo VI as an Israelite city, despite the varied nature of the ceramic assemblage, basing his conclusions on the presence of collared-rim pithoi in the stratum (Aharoni 1970, 264-265). Based on the ‘Book of Joshua’, Aharoni referred to the typical assemblage from Iron I sites in the central hill country, composed largely of collared- rim pithoi and cooking pots, as ‘conquest ware’. Correspondence to the biblical narrative, however, was no longer the deciding factor in determining the ethnic affiliation of a given site. Instead, the presence of the collared-rim pithos was in itself considered sufficient proof of Israelite occupation.

In his publication of the results from Izbet Sartah, a site on the fringes of the central hill country with only loose connections to the biblical tradition, Finkelstein commented directly on the ethnic identity of the inhabitants: ‘The scarcity of decorated Philistine ware at Izbet Sartah, in contrast to its abundance at neighbouring sites like Tel Qasile and even Gezer, makes it difficult to identify its inhabitants as Philistines. Collared-rim storage jars [pithoi], which are common mainly in early Israelite hill country sites . . . were relatively abundant in Stratum 111, whereas very few were found in the contemporary levels at Tel Qasile, Aphek and Gezer . . . This indicates the affinities of Izbet Sartah with the Israelite hinterland rather than with Canaan or Philistia.’ (Finkelstein 1986, 205).

On the one hand, supposedly secular ‘Syro-Palestinian’ archaeologists could claim to have freed themselves from the constraints


0 Blackwell Puhlishers Ltd. 1996 309


of textual reconstruction; on the other, while the biblical narrative had been laid aside, its major ethnic protagonists, the Israelites, Canaanites and Philistines, were being cast in new historical roles through the straight- forward equation of pot-types and ‘peoples’. The full impact of this approach is most apparent in the intensive excavation and survey work carried out in the central hill country of Israel during the 1970s and 1980s, and in the ensuing publications. During this period, projects were initiated at Khirbet ed- Dawara, Giloh, Mt. Ebal, Shiloh and Izbet Sartah, and also at Dan in the Upper Galilee. At the latter site, the presence of collared-rim pithoi was singled out by Biran (1989, 83) as confirmation of the northward migration of the biblical Tribe of Dan as described in Judges 18.

Neither the fact that collared-rim pithoi were appearing in contexts not traditionally associated with the Israelite settlement (eg. Sahab and Jerusalem), nor their apparent absence at sites labelled ‘Israelite’ according to scripture led to a refutation of their ethnic attribution. In his report on the excavations at Giloh, entitled Giloh: An Early Israelite Settlement Site near Jerusalem, Mazar suggests that ‘pithoi could be used as containers for grain and water, and would be an essential item in the early Israelite house, together with the cooking pots.’ (Mazar 1981, 30). Perhaps most significant are the extensive regional surveys conducted over this period which claim to have located some 300 ‘early Israelite’ settlements (cf. Dever 1993, 22). For instance, Zertal’s 1986 survey of the northern range of the central highlands, published as The Israelite Settlement in the Hill Country of Manasseh, claims to have located 96 Iron I sites. These were labelled ‘Israelite settlements’ in spite of the biblical tradition, which emphasises the Canaanite presence in the region (cf.

Weippert 197 1 , 20). Zertal saw water-control as the major challenge facing the Israelite settlers, and the storage capacity of the collared-rim pithos as the major solution, allowing settlement to take place away from permanent water sources (Zertal 1988, 35 1).

The ideological stance and practical results of this phase of archaeological research are encapsulated in Finkelstein’s The Archa- eology of the Israelite Settlement ( 1988). The collared-rim pithos features prominently in this synthesis of the archaeological evidence for the early Israelite settlement. Finkelstein is explicit in formulating the equation between material culture and ethnic group: ‘The starting point of a discussion about the characteristics of Israelite Settle- ment sites is the historical biblical text (the only source available), which speci ties the location of the Israelite population. . . Israelite cultural traits must therefore be deduced from the Iron I sites in the central hill country . . .’ (Finkelstein 1988, 28). The term ‘Israelite’ is defined as ‘hill country people in a process of settling down’ and the description of the Israelite ‘cultural inventory’ shows no development from Albright’s original proposal in 1937: ‘The sites of Israelite Settlement are characterized by simple and relatively meagre pottery. The repertoire of types is very limited: most vessels are collared-rim store jars and cooking pots.’ (Finkelstein 1988, 30-3 I).

The ethnic attribution of the collared-rim pithos is thus firmly rooted in the notion of a territorially contiguous Israelite population located in the central hill country during the Iron Age I period. Finkelstein attempts to dismiss those contexts where the pithos appears outside the geographical and temporal scope of the proposed ‘Israelite population’ by emphasising the quantitative factor. ‘The jars’, he writes, ‘were manufactured primarily in the regions of


310 0 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 19%

DAVID WENGROW

Israelite Settlement, but also travelled to neighbouring districts, Ammon, Philistia and the Canaanite enclaves.’ (1988, 285). Nevertheless, i t is accepted wisdom among proponents of the ‘Israelite Settlement’ that the size of the collared-rim pithos precludes its use as anything but a stationary storage jar (Finkelstein 1988, 285; Mazar 1981, 30-31). Only as a static element of material culture could i t serve the exclusive needs of an isolated Israelite population.

Included in Finkelstein’s account is a detailed report of his Land of Ephraim Survey, one consequence of which was the discovery that collared-rim pithoi are found at sites close to abundant water sources, arguing against Zertal’s functional explana- tion. Like the ‘Mannaseh Survey’, however, the ‘Ephraim Survey’ treats the terms ‘Iron I’ and ‘Israelite’ as synonymous in the central hill country, based on the ethnic attribution of previously excavated sites dated to the 12th and 11th centuries BC (Finkelstein 1988, 121). In circular fashion, the assignment of sites to the Iron I period is conducted according to ceramic typology, the diagnostic wares being collared-rim pithoi and cooking pots (Finkelstein 1988, 189-190, 3 134) . Since any site assigned to the Iron I period in the central hil l country is automatically considered ‘Israelite’ on the basis of the Old Testament, the use of the collared-rim pithos as a chronological indicator of the 12th-I I th centuries BC in this region is tantamount to its appropriation as an ethnic marker. Most recently, an Iron I Israelite presence has been intimated in central and northern Trans- jordan, both the ethnic and chronological attribution of the sites concerned being grounded in the presence of large numbers of collared-rim pithoi (Chang-Ho 1995, 138).

It should be stressed that no independent confirmation exists for the assignment of central hill-country sites containing collared-

rim pithoi to the Iron I period. The majority of ‘Israelite Settlement’ sites exhibit negligible stratigraphy and meagre material assemblages. Chronological significance has been wrongly attached to the appearance of agricultural terracing and plastered water- cisterns in the region as Iron I (and therefore ‘Israelite’) innovations (Finkelstein 1988, 30; Stager 1985). These features simply reflect the ecological demands of the hill-country environment, however, and have no necessary chronological or ethnic import, a fact which is confirmed by their appearance in this region during the Middle Bronze Age (London 1989, 47-48). The construction of ‘pillared buildings’, also used as indicators of the Iron I period in the hill country, is recorded as early as the Middle Bronze I1 period at Emeq Refa’im, and from late 13th century BC contexts at Tel Batzah, Tell Abu Hawam and Tel Masos in association with Egyptian-style private houses (Eisenberg 1988, 89; Kelm and Mazar 1982, 9-12; Callaway 1985, 34-38; Fritz 1981, 66-67).

Cooking pots with ‘vertical rims’ are often cited as evidence of the Iron I period, and are contrasted with those that have ‘everted rims’, the latter held to be characteristic of the Last Bronze Age tradition. Cooking pots with both kinds of rim are found together, however, at a number of sites including Giloh, Shiloh, Tell en-Nasbeh and Gibeah in the central hill country, and Tel Masos in the Beersheba Valley (Aharoni 1982, 174; Kempinski 1985,402). Moreover, it has been clearly illustrated that ‘there is virtually no difference between Canaanite” and “Israelite” cooking pots . . . the early Iron I examples from all sites, “Israelite” and even “Philistine” , are immediate and direct descendants from the typical Late Bronze cooking pots’ (Dever 1993, 27-30). With regard to the other vessels found at hill country sites, Aharoni (1982, 174), himself a


8 Blackwell Publishers Lld. 1996 31 I


major proponent of the ‘Israelite Settlement’, conceded that ‘typical conquest ware [with the exception of collared-rim pithoi and vertical-rim cooking pots] is . . . indistin- guishable in its basic forms from that of Late Canaanite [Bronze Age] 11’.

The only justification for the wholesale assignment of these sites to the 12th-I I th centuries BC is the tautological claim that Israelite cultural traits must, in the first instance, be deduced from Iron I sites in the hill country, and that the material culture of the hill country is, at the same time, diagnostic of the period of the Israelite settlement. As Bunimovitz (1995, 324) points out, the effect is an artificial splitting up of continuous cultural processes and the creation of dichotomies such as ‘Late BronzeAron I, CanaanitesAsraelites, High- IandsLowlands’. The discovery of large numbers of collared-rim pithoi dated securely to the 13th century BC at the coastal site of Tel Nami (Artzy 1994) has paved the way for a reevaluation of this vessel’s distribution and its utilitarian role in the Levantine economy of the late second millennium BC.

THE ACTUAL DISTRIBUTION OF COLLARED- RIM PITH01

The data from excavated sites are divided, for convenience, into four separate units corresponding to distinct geographical zones in which collared-rim pithoi (referred to from now on as ‘CR’) have been found (see Figure 2). Within each zone the sites are listed in chronological order and the character and date of the relevant stratum according to the judgement of the original excavator is indicated, as well as the method of dating where possible. Due to the large number of excavations constantly underway in the region and the amount of unpublished data, this account is intended as a balanced outline

rather than a comprehensive account of the vessel’s distribution.

1. The Coastal Plain and Shephelah: The Egyptian Residency at Aphek (Beck and Kochavi 1985) yielded a letter from Ugarit, dated to c. 1230 BC, which was unearthed in the debris of the destruction layer in association with an almost complete CR. Although we may quite safely assume that the stratum was destroyed shortly after the letter arrived at Aphek, the date of the letter gives only a terminus post quem for the destruction (Kochavi 198 I , 788-79). At Tel Numi, a coastal site and aftluent trading point, large numbers of CR were found in association with Mycenean IIIB stirrup jars and other imported vessels dated securely to the late 13th c. BC. At the necropolis of the site, these vessels, along with smaller jars, were used as burial containers and were accompanied by a rich hoard of cult-related objects, mostly bronze. The assemblage exhibited Egyptian, Cypriote and Hittite influences (Artzy 1994, 127-130, 136). CR were also used for burials in the cemetery at Tel Zeror, about 28 km south of Nami, where they were again dated to the late 13th-early 12th century BC (Ohata 1970, p1.56). Salvage excavations at Tel Nuhariyu revealed a Late Bronze Age I11 stratum containing a few CR along with imported Cypriote and Mycenean LHIIIB ware in the vicinity of a probable ancient riverbed and anchorage; the finds were dated to the 13th-early 12th century BC (Yogev 1993, 1088-1089).

Excavations in the 1930s at Beth-Shemesh and Tell Beit Mirsim in the Shephelah yielded a few CR which were dated to the 12th-I l th centuries BC (Esse 1992, 83). The relevant strata at these sites were represented predominantly by grain silos. The stratigraphical relationship of these pits to earlier and later levels has not been reliably ascertained, and Greenberg has presented unpublished



DAVID WENGROW

L . . . .. Shiloh

1 T.e.%a'idiyeh Y%%P I yu-''a''

Figure 2 Spatial distribution of the collared rim-pithos

material from the silos at Beit Mirsim which is dated typologically to the 13th-12th centuries BC, casting doubt upon the original attribution (cf. Finkelstein 1988, 54-55). Very small numbers of CR were found in association with Cypro-Phoenician ware at Tell Mevorakh Vtll and at the port of Tell Qasile X - I X , where they appeared alongside a typically Philistine 'Ashdoda' figurine, and were dated to the 1 I th and 10th centuries BC (Stem 1978, 70; Mazar 1993b, 1204-1212).

2. The Central Highlands of modern Israel/ Palestine: Many CR were recovered from the two strata at Mt. Ebal, both of which feature a temenos wall enclosing a large courtyard, in the centre of which were built structures of uncertain function. Ramesside scarabs recorded from the earlier level were ascribed

0

A major complex

A minor residency 3 &d$;;lstration

0 village 1 fort

3 fortifications

to the late 13th century BC; the later stratum was dated to the 12th century BC (Finkelstein 1988, 82-85). The village of Izbet Sarfuh, on the western fringe of the hill country, yielded a small number of CR from each of its three occupation levels, which were dated from the late 13th to the 10th century BC (Finkelstein 1986, 198-201). A proto-Canaanite ostracon from Silo 605 at Izbet Sartah (stratigraphy uncertain) has been dated on palaeographic grounds to c. 1200 BC (Kochavi 1977, 12).

Excavations that took place from the 1920's to the 1940's at Bethel, Tell en- Nasbeh, Tell el-Ful and Beth Zur represent the first major attempt to construct a chron- ology for the Early Iron Age (Iron I). Writing of the sparse settlement at Bethel, Albright noted that 'if collared store-jars [pithoi] and

OXFORD JOIJRNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY

Q Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996 313


cooking pots were eliminated, the number of remaining types would be insignificant’. The CR in particular was singled out as an indicator of the 12th-I Ith centuries BC (cf. Esse 1992, 82-84). The presence of typical Late Bronze types has since been noted in the assemblages at Tell el-Ful and at Tell en- Nasbeh, along with Cypriote sherds. At Beth Zur, Cypriote pottery, a Dynasty XIX scarab, and the presence of ‘Canaanite’ jars clearly suggests activity in the 13th century BC (Aharoni 1982, 174; Finkelstein 1988, 48, 3 19, n. 33). By modern standards, these sites were ‘so badly dug and published that they are useless for comparative purposes’ (Dever 1993, p. 27).

At Giloh CR sherds and cooking pots again constituted the bulk of the ceramic assemblage. These fragments were not divided stratigraphically at the site, which had only a single layer of occupation, and the assemblage was therefore dated solely on the basis of ceramic typology. Despite the presence of a number of typical Late Bronze Age vessels, the date of 1200 BC was proposed, due to the presence of supposedly diagnostic cooking- pot rims and the pithoi themselves which, it was assumed, ‘appear without change throughout the twelfth4eventh centuries’ (Mazar 1981, 20-29). The presence of Late Bronze Age pottery was similarly overlooked at Shiloh V, identified as an important religious and economic centre and assigned to the 12th-1 l th century BC. The basis for this date was the presence of supposedly diagnostic pillared-buildings and an abundance of allegedly typical Iron I ceramic types, notably cooking-pots with vertical (as opposed to everted) rims and CR. The in situ discovery of a Canaanite Jar bearing the print of a ‘Hyksos’ scarab next to a row of CR was explained as reuse (Finkelstein 1993, 153- 162, 3834).

Overt attempts to reconcile biblical and

archaeological sources appear to have determined the dating of the single-stratum village sites of Khirbet-Raddana and Ai to the late 13th-1 Ith century BC. The presence of significant numbers of CR at both sites was taken as confirmation of their assignment to the Iron I period. The excavators at Ai even proposed a chronological distinction between pithoi with long necks and high rims, and those with short collars and folded rims, the former representing the 12th and the latter the I l th century BC. Both kinds of pithos-rim have since been found together in a number of contexts, consequently dis- proving this theory (Callaway 1979, 8-9; Finkelstein 1988, 67-72). At Khirbet- Raddana, the CR were found in association with an inscribed handle dated most recently to the late 13th c.BC (Cross 1979, 97, n.2).

CR were discovered at Shechem, a complex urban centre from the late 14th to the 12th century BC. The site suffered a major destruction at the end of the 14th century (Stratum XIII), but the rebuilt complex was occupied continually until its devastation ca. 1100 BC (Stratum XII-XI). The CR belong to the later phase of occupation (Campbell 1993, 1352-1354; Esse 1992, 85). The site of Gibeon, a major centre for wine production in the 8th-7th century BC, also yielded CR which were assigned to the 12th-I Ith century BC. Rims from these pithoi were reported from minor excavations at Khirbet Rhabud a walled city during the 13th century BC. A single stratum directly above the city was assigned to the 12th century BC (Kochavi 1974, fig. 512). At the small, fortified settlement of Khirbet ed-Dawara, a small number of CR were dated to the late 11th-10th century BC (unpublished but see Finkelstein 1988, 64, 272) and a CR is reported from the pre- palatial settlement at Samaria dated to the 10th century BC on the basis of comparison


314 0 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. I996

DAVID WENGROW

with Taanach IIB (Esse 1992, 85, n.29). 3. The Galilee and Jezreel Valley: Small-

scale excavations at Afula revealed a CR in association with Cypriote pottery, and at Tell Keisan, near to coastal Acco, another was found together with Egyptian-style jars and a Mycenean IIIC stirrup jar. Both assemblages were dated to the late 1.3th-early 12th century BC (Dothan 1993, 38-39; Humbert 1993, 862-866). At the Egypto-Canaanite centre of Megiddo VI, at least fifty-five CR appeared alongside a storage jar which is common at Afula IIIA, where it was dated to the mid-1 I th century. The discovery of a statue base of Ramses VI beneath a wall of the preceeding level indirectly supports an I 1 th century date for Stratum VI. Burials in CR were recorded from the destruction debris (Esse 1992, 88, 93, n.62; Finkelstein 1988, 301). A single CR is assigned to the city of Stratum VIIB, dated to the 13th-12th centuries BC and rims have also been reported from the major fortified centre of Stratum VB, dated to the 10th century BC. (Ussishkin 1995, Esse 1992, n. 47; Stern 1978, 68, n.9). CR are also reported from Beth Shean, an Egyptian cultic and administrative centre from the Armana period until its violent destruction at the end of the 12th century BC. The pithoi have been alternatively assigned to the reigns of Seti I ( 1 3th c.BC; Fitzgerald 1930, PLXLIV: 18) and Ramses the I1 or I11 (12th century BC; Albright 197 1, 28; McGovern 1993, 247).

At Tel Dan, in the Upper Galilee, about forty largely complete CR were discovered in pits dug directly into a level containing typical Late Bronze pottery, including imported wares, with no break in occupation. The pithoi were dated initially to the early 12th century BC, based largely on the typology of accompanying cooking pots, but 13th century wares have since been noted within the pits. CR appear in the following

stratum with vessels assigned to the middle or first half of the 1 1 th century at Hazor XI, Beth Shean VIA and Afula IIIA and were dated accordingly (Biran 1989, 73, 80; 1993, 326-329). CR and cooking pots were associated with a large building with plastered and painted walls at Susa; the stratum was based on bedrock and dated on the basis of the pottery to the 1 I th century BC (Gal 1993,453). Very small numbers of CR were found in clearly-stratified contexts dated to the 10th century BC at Taanach and the village site of Tel Qiri in the Jezreel Valley. They were also present in strata dated to the 12th and 1 Ith centuries at these sites (Rast 1978, 9-10, 27; Ben Tor 1987, 78, fig. 13:4; 207).

4. The Jordan Valley and Trans-jordanian Plateau: More than twenty pithos burials have been recovered from the cemetery at Tell es-Sa’idiyeh XII, which exhibits predominantly Egyptian-style architecture and artefacts. Grave-goods of an Egyptian character were placed inside and around the burials and included bronzework, ivory, jewellery and weapons very comparable to the hoards at Beth Shean Tomb 90, Megiddo VI, and the Nami necropolis. The assemblage was assigned to the 13th-12th centuries BC (Tubb 1993, 1299-1300; Negbi 1974, 160- 168; Artzy 1994, 130).

At Sahab, ‘the largest pre-Roman site on the desert frontier of Trans-jordan’, large quantities of CR were found, some in situ upon the plastered floors of rectangular buildings assigned to the 12th-I I t h century BC. The site had commercial relations with Egypt and the Aegean in the late second millennium BC and was settled continuously during the 13th- 1 1 th centuries with no break in occupation, however. In Tomb I, CR and a smaller storage jar were used as burial containers; the accompanying deposits included scarabs, alabaster vases, pottery and bronze weapons

OXFORDJOURNALOFARCHAEOLOGY

8 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996 315

EGYPTIAN TASKMASTERS A N D HEAVY BURDENS

which dated from the 13th-12th centuries BC (Ibrahim 1978, 117-122; 1987,78).

CR were also recorded at Khirbet el-Hajjar in association with walls dated to the 12th- 1 Ith centuries BC and CR sherds from the unfortified villages at Hesban and Deir Alla ‘A’ and at Madeineh, Amman and Dhiban were dated similarly. However, a high degree of continuity between Late BronzeAron I levels in architecture, pottery and burial practices from the 13th-12th centuries BC is noted for all of these sites (Ibrahim 1978, 122, n.32; 1987, 78; Esse 1992, 87). At Tell af-Umeiri, many CR were found in a destruction layer and preceeding fortified settlement dated to the 12th-I 1 th centuries BC despite the presence of Late Bronze Age wares including Cypriote imports. Typical 13th century wares were also associated with CR found at Tel Soreg, Tell Jalul, Jerash, and the fortified centre at Tell el-Fukhar. None of these sites exhibit a break in occupation from the 13th-I 2th centuries BC, but the levels containing CR were nevertheless assigned to the Iron I period on the basis of the pithoi themselves and occasionally ‘pillared-buildings’. The fortress at Iraq el-Amir was similarly dated on the grounds that CR were found there (cf. Chang-Ho 1995, 1 22-1 26).

Claims ranging from the 12th-6th centuries BC have been made for CR excavated at the settlements of Buseirah and Tawifan in southern Trans-jordan. Bienkowski (1992, 167) points out that at Tawilan, bedrock was reached with no stratigraphic evidence for occupation earlier than the seventh century BC. Finkelstein (1992b, 17 1) counters that ‘in almost every multi-period site in western Palestine, intensive activity in later periods removed all architectural traces of the sparse earlier occupations’. His suggestion of a 12th-I I th century date for these pithoi rests upon

parallels with ‘well-dated, rich Iron I assemblages from Palestine’. The appearance of supposedly ‘diagnostic collared-rim jars’ in 13th century Palestinian contexts is not acknowledged and the claim that the hill- country assemblages are ‘well-dated’ is highly questionable. Moreover, the claim that ‘pithoi of this type [presumably collar- rimmed] do not appear in any of the rich Iron I1 assemblages from Palestine’ (Finkelstein 1992a, 163) is contrary to the evidence from excavations at Taanach IIB, Tell Qiri VII, Megiddo VB, Tell Mevorakh VIII and Tell Qasile X-IX where small numbers have been found. There remain, however, no comparative data to support a 7th century BC (Iron IIC) date for these vessels, and the lack of a full stratigraphical sequence for the Edom region perpetuates the problem.

SUMMARY

The collared-rim pithos was in use for approximately 400 years, from at least 1300 to 900 BC. During this period it is found at sites from the Mediterranean coast of modern Israel to the desert fringe of the Trans- jordanian Plateau in the east. Its northern extent is currently marked by the site of Tell Dan in the Upper Galilee, and its southern reaches by the site of Tawilan in southern Transjordan. It is absent from the Beersheba Valley, on the northern fringe of the Negev, and is very scarce along the southern coastal stretch of Canaan.

At many small settlements which appeared in the central hill country of modern Israel/ Palestine during the late second millennium BC, collared-rim pithoi make up a large portion of the ceramic assemblage. The close dating of many of these contexts, which exhibit few stratigraphical layers and meagre ceramic assemblages, is problematical and much published data from the first half of



DAVID WENGROW

this century is useless for analytical purposes. By contrast, these pithoi appear in exotic assemblages at large, affluent sites outside the central hill country, where they often performed the secondary function of burial jars. Long stratigraphical sequences and a wider range of artefactual evidence, often including imported wares, provides a firmer basis for their dating. The majority may be securely assigned to the late 13th-12th century, although there is clear evidence of their use in small numbers during the 1 lth and 10th centuries BC. The sturdy nature of these vessels, combined with their technological adaptation to stress, may account for their survival and continued reuse over very long periods of time.

The artefactual assemblages from Mt. Ebal 11, Izbet Sartah 111, Giloh, Khirbet-Raddana and Shiloh in the central hill country all exhibit significant Late Bronze Age elements. Evidence from sites excavated early this century cannot be applied to the argument with confidence and re- examination of pottery from Beth Zur, Tell el-Ful, Tell en-Nasbeh and Tell Beit Mirsim has revealed a significant 13th century component. Most Trans-jordanian sites also exhibit strong cultural continuities from Late Bronze to Iron I strata. We are impelled by the evidence to abandon the traditional division of Late Bronzefiron I for interpretative purposes and to view the spatial distribution and function of the collared-rim pithos in relation to major socio-economic developments in the Levant over the main period of its use; that is, from c. 1300-1 100 BC.

THE PITHOS TRADE IN CONTEXT

The innovation of the Canaanite jar some time around the 17th century BC represents a scaling-up of interregional trade in the

eastern Mediterranean and an intensified exploitation of rural hinterlands by the regional palatial centres between which Syro-Palestine was parcelled out (cf. Sherratt and Sherratt 1991, 363-364). The rising prosperity of these city-states attracted the attention of the Hittites and of the Egyptians, both of whom intervened economically, politically and militarily in Levantine affairs from the 16th century BC onwards, forging a common frontier of interests between the northern and southern Levant. The intensification of competition between these two powers culminated in 1284 at the Battle of Kadesh, international instability reflected on a regional scale in the activities of subversive, independent groups such as the SA.CAZ and upiru (Ahlstrom 1986, 13). The growing inability of regional centres to maintain themselves and their rural dependents under the pressure of imperial demands resulted in collapse around the 13th century BC, witnessed in the destruction levels at Hazor XIII, Bethel, Lachish VII and Megiddo VIIB, for instance (Liverani 1987, 72; Kempinski 1985, 404).

The dissolution of the regional administrative network by no means marks the end of Egyptian domination in the southern Levant. The termination of major complexes at Lachish VI in the southern coastal plain and Megiddo VIIA in the Jezreel Valley, both of which exhibit the marks of Egyptian hegemony, dates well into the 12th century BC, and implies imperial control of all substantial commercial and military movement from northern to southern Canaan at this time (Ussishkin 1985, 220- 222; 1995). The collapse of the Canaanite regional polities meant, however, that local elites were no longer able to satisfy the demands of their imperial rulers, and the Ramesside government would have been forced to take a direct hand in the




administration of its colonial interests. It is in this context that we can begin to understand the manufacture and circulation of collared- rim pithoi.

Col lared-rim pi thoi were circulated between a wide range of contexts, both urban and rural, prestigious and poor, fortified and exposed, strategically prominent and geographically remote (Figure 2). It remains to identify the scale, level of integration, and social mechanisms involved in the movement of the pithoi and their contents. Our basis for elucidating the nature and degree of interaction between the cultural contexts (defined at the level of the ‘stratum’) in which pithoi are found is constituted by similarities and differences in their size and layout and in the contents and deposition of their material assemblages. According to these criteria, those strata in which collared- rim pithoi have been found in significant numbers may, with the exception of Tel Nami, be assigned to one of three broad descriptive groups: ‘major complexes’; ‘distribution and administrative centres’; ‘specialised villages and fortified outposts’.

‘Mujor Complexes’: Megiddo Vl, Beth Shean Vl, Shechem X I , Tell es-Su’iciiyeh Xll, Suhub. Although the relevant strata from these sites are exposed to highly varying degrees, all may be quite safely regarded as cities, large towns or regional centres. Large- scale fortifications are evident and the architecture of these sites indicates a high level of social stratification, generally including palaces, temples and fortresses, many of which possess overwhelmingly Egyptian characteristics. International contacts are also evident in the rich and varied artefactual assemblages at these sites, which include Cypriote, Mycenean, Egyptian and occasional Hittite pieces. The distribution of these sites forms a strategic network of command over the major

economic and military routes linking the lands east and west of the River Jordan.

Bronzework hoards dated to the late 13th- I 1 th century BC from Megiddo, Beth Shean (Tomb 90) and Tell es-Sa’idiyeh (Tombs 101-102) consist of highly comparable arrays of weapons, tools, vessels and figurines, including Egyptian, Cypriote and occasionally Syrian-style artefacts. As assemblages, these should be related to the Nami hoard, and individual elements bear comparison with finds from Deir el-Balah, Farah South, Tell el-Ajjul and Lachish on the southern coastal plain, Ugarit in Syria, and possibly also Shechem, Sahab and Dothan (largely unpublished) (Negbi 1974 and 1990; Artzy 1994, 127-131; Ibrahim 1972, 122; Cooley 1993, 374). A close correlation exists between the distribution of bronzework assemblages and that of burials i n jars and anthropoid coffins, forming a crescent passing along the coastal plain and entering Trans-jordan via the Jezreel and Jordan Valleys (Figure 3). These forms of interment, dated almost exclusively to the 13th-12th century BC, are known from only a handful of sites in the Levant, suggesting that burial in any kind of container was not an indigenous custom at this time (Gonen

Double-pithos burials, in which two vessels with the rims and necks removed were placed shoulder to shoulder with the deceased tucked inside have been associated with mercenary Hittite elements in the pay of the Egyptian administration (Tubb 1995). Single pithos burials, currently known from Megiddo, Tell es-Sa’idiyeh, Tel Zeror, Tel Nami and Sahab, bear a closer relation to the anthropoid clay coffins known from Deir el- Balah, Lachish and Farah South in the southern coastal plain, Beth Shean in the Jezreel Valley and Amman in Trans-jordan. In a number of cases a smaller storage jar

1992, 21-22).



DAVID W N G R O W

E

0 colonial 0 om.- ’

- - - ?!@??ce - - _ _ - -

‘NegM 1974 “Gonen 1992 hinterland _ * - - -

Figure 3 Bronzework hoard and container burial distribution, late 13th-I2 centuries BC

was placed at the head of a complete pithos burial, echoing the use of a separate lid on anthropoid coffins, while in others the head of the deceased was placed in a storage jar and the remainder covered with large sherds. Moreover, the assemblages associated with a number of pithos and coffin burials also have many features in common, notably concentrations of bronzework, jewellery and imported ceramics exhibiting strong Egyptian and Cypriote influences (Negbi

Artzy 1994, 127-130). It seems that in the absence of pre-made coffins or able craftsmen, collared-rim pithoi served as surrogate sarcophagi for Egyptian emissaries, perhaps sent as replacements for the floundering Canaanite aristocracy.

‘Specialised villages and fortijied outposts ’: Khirbet Raddanu, Ai, Giloh, Tell Beit-Mirsim, Tell en-Nasbeh, Dan, Izbet Sartah, pre-palatial Samaria, Tell Qiri, Tell al- Umeiri, Tell el- Fukhar, Iraq el-Amir. The

1974, 160-1 70; Tubb 1993, 1299-1 300;

common factor at these sites, which range from 0.4-2.5 hectares in size, is their degree of functional specialisation, which clearly surpasses the needs of the village population, suggesting involvement in larger distribu- tional networks. At Khirbet Raddana, Ai, Tell Beit Mirsim B2, Tell en-Nasbeh, Dan VI and Izbet Sartah 11-1 the emphasis appears to have been firmly on the production and storage of grain. All of these sites were littered with pits or silos, some stone-lined, others simply cut into the rock, the number of pits in a single stratum ranging from twenty five at Dan to fifty at Tell en-Nasbeh. Their purpose is confirmed by the presence of large numbers of grain-processing instruments such as sickle blades, grindstones, querns, stone mortars and pestles at these sites, and the discovery of carbonised wheat in two silos at Shiloh.

The size of individual silos varies considerably, but the average capacity of a single silo may be estimated at one metric


8 Blackwell Publishers Lrd. 1996 319


ton. The total silo storage capacity at Izbet Sartah I1 is reckoned to be c.150 cubic metres, allowing an average yearly holding of 53 metric tonnes of wheat or 21.35 metric tonnes of barley, an amount equal to one third of the volume of Pit 1414 at Megiddo and clearly out of all proportion to the subsistence needs of the village, even allowing for the prudent accumulation of surplus following the collapse of the Canaanite regional system (cf. Schwartz 1995,25-38; Holladay 1995,378). The silos, which are dug both within and around individual buildings (cf. Hopkins 1985, 15 I ) , tend to be clustered close together. At Izbet Sartah I1 some forty-three silos were clearly focused around a large central building and the distribution of pits at Tell Beit Mirsim indicates that a single residence may have controlled up to 57 metric tonnes of grain (Holladay 1995, 377-378). The discovery of a proto-Canaanite ostracon at Izbet Sartah further indicates the relatively advanced level at which the site was administered, and a Canaanite cuneiform tablet acknowledging receipt of a grain shipment was found in the early 12th century BC destruction of a large building at Taanach in the Jezreel Valley (Glock 1993, 1433).

Large quantities of sheep and goat bones are common at all of these sites, but only Giloh and Izbet Sartah I exhibit large, walled folding-spaces or courtyards, suggesting a strong pastoralist emphasis probably related to textile production. The presence of a winepress at Tell en-Nasbeh and olive presses and pits at Qiri indicate other forms of specialisation and facilities for both wine and olive production are also noted from the pre-palatial settlement at Samaria (Finkelstein 1990, 68; Ben Tor 1987, 68; Zorn 1993, 1098-1099; Stager 1990, 103). At Khirbet Raddana there is evidence of metallurgy in the presence of tuykres,

crucibles containing bronze slag and bronze items themselves, and there are clear signs of copper production at Dan V. Water-cisterns hewn into the rock are abundant at these village sites and, along with chisel-marks on the pillars of houses, imply a wider circulation of metal cutting implements than is currently evident, confirmed by the recovery of iron tools from Ai, and probably the result of regular recycling. The presence of daggers, armour scales, needles and javelin points at Khirbet Raddana, however, indicates that metal production may have served the needs of defense and probably conspicuous consumption as well as subsistence (cf. Callaway 1985, 38, 45;

A concentration of exotic items more commonly associated with urban centres is present at Tel Qiri, and the assemblages here and at Tell en-Nasbeh, Khirbet Raddana and Dan contained multi-handled kraters, probably used for libations, and quite rare in the southern Levant. Examples are currently known from the rich burial deposit at Dothan ( 1 3th-12th centuries BC), Megiddo VIA, Tel Qasile, Beth Shean, Shiloh and elsewhere (cf. Finkelstein 1988, 288, n.28). The twin bulls-head spouts adorning the Raddana krater also appear on a jar from Gezer, which maintained ties with Egypt until the 11th century BC, and a pottery chair-base from Ai is comparable to an Ashdoda figurine from Ashdod (Callaway 1985, 45-46; Fritz 1987, 89), suggesting connections with the southern coastal plain.

The square defensive tower contem- poraneously constructed alongside the village at Giloh contained a bronze dagger-blade shaped in typical 13th century style. The size and shape of the tower itself ‘indicate advanced planning and building techniques, as well as the highly developed social organisation required to erect such a

1993, 1253-1254.).


320 0 Blackwell Publishers Lld. 1996

DAVID WENGROW

formidable structure’ (Mazar 1993,519). The erection of a towered wall around the settlement at Tell en-Nasbeh, the nearby defensive structures at Tell el-Ful and the major architectural works undertaken at Gibeon should also be noted (Zorn 1993, 1098-1099; Lapp 1993,446; Pritchard 1964, 34-39), as well as the fortifications at Tell al- Umeiri, Tell el-Fukhar and Iraq el-Amir in Trans-jordan.

‘Distribution and administrative centres’: Mt. Ebal 11-1, Shiloh V. Located en route from the cluster of specialised villages in the central highlands to the major complexes in the Jezreel and Jordan Valleys, the economic function of this distinctive pair of highland sites is ascertained in relation to their limited size, lack of domestic dwellings, and the prescncc of large storage facilities in each. Ceramic handles with incisions and punctures are very common at both Shiloh and Mt. Ebal (Finkelstein 1993, 181, Fig. 6:6 1 ; Zertal 1986, 136-1 37) and are recorded in smaller numbers at Giloh, Tell en-Nasbeh, Bethel, Izbet Sartah, Tell el-Fara, Taanach, Afula and Megiddo (Finkelstein 1988, 286). Further evidence of the centrality of these sites in a wider politico-economic network comes from the glyptic finds, notably the Ramesside scarabs found at Mt. Ebal 11, a New Kingdom scarab-impression of a sphinx on the handle of a pithos from Shiloh V, and rosette or star impressions from a pithos-rim at Shiloh which are comparable to finds at Sahab (Finkelstein 1988, 82-85; 1993, 159, 278, 2 15-2 16; Ibrahim 1983, 48-50).

The discovery of thirty-four grinding stones at Mt. Ebal suggests significant agricultural activity and the large number of silos at Shiloh indicates the storage of massive quantities of grain, confirmed by the preservation of carbonised wheat in two such pits. A large pile of carbonised raisins found in association with a ceramic strainer,

jugs, collared-rim pithoi and a huge krater at Shiloh offers a rare insight into the other forms of industry taking place. While constituting a desirable product in themselves, raisins are also known to have been used in antiquity for the preparation of wine (Finkelstein 1993, 25, 354-361). As well as providing administrative foci for the storage and distribution of goods, then, it appears that the occupants of these sites were engaged in the production and packaging of regional resources.

CONCLUSION

‘It would probably be rewarding to study in detail the endeavor of Ramesside Egypt to re-define its presence in Asia, a presence which had been planned in a completely different way at the beginning of the eighteenth dynasty’ (Liverani 1987,7 I )

The proposition that highland villages constituted an isolated arena for the consumption and exchange of local goods is belied by the sporadic but decisive evidence of sophistication in architecture and artefacts, the rigorously specialised production and storage of grain, and the sheer quantities of organic produce implied by the number of pithoi at these sites. The suggestion that collared-rim pithoi were used as stationary storage containers for basic foodstuffs is incompatible with the abundance of grain pits and silos, the proximity of most sites to ample water sources, and the presence of cisterns (contra Finkelstein 1988, Mazar 1981, Zertal 1988). The distribution of pithoi in the central hill country is therefore explained in a wider context.

A demand for agricultural produce, livestock, wine and olive oil in Ramesside Egypt during the final phase of the New Kingdom Empire in Canaan ( 1 8th-20th


8 Blackwell Publishers Lrd. 1996 321


Dynasties) is attested in the Great Harris Payprus, which refers to income from ‘Syria’ (ie. Syro-Palestine; cf. Breasted 1906, 87- 206). The establishment of fortified outposts, specialised villages and distribution centres in the central highlands of modem Israel/ Palestine provided a crude mechanism for controlling the production, storage and distribution of grain (presumably carried in sacks) to centres of Egyptian authority in the southern coastal plain, northern valleys and Trans-jordanian plateau following the collapse of the Canaanite regional system. Collared-rim pithoi simultaneously facili- tated the packaging and movement in bulk of commercially valuable, perishable highland products, predominantly liquids like wine and olives rather than dry goods, over long-distances to centres in the Jezreel Valley

322

from whence they could be transported to the coast for export.

The enlargement of the ‘Canaanite commercial jar’ form which the collared- rim pithos constitutes may be seen as a reaction to the gradual devaluing of bronze, already under way in the 12th century BC (Sherratt 1994), which for the bronze-based Egypto-Canaanite palatial economy necessitated compensatory intensification at the lower end of the economic scale, i.e. organic commodities and their corresponding transport containers. The contemporary spread of the dromedary (Arabian camel) able to carry heavy loads further than a donkey, may also have been a factor (cf. Artzy 1994). The absence of these vessels at major centres in the southern coastal plain and in the Beersheba Valley suggests that


8 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996

DAVID WENGROW

they were principally valued as export containers by the Egyptian government, and were rarely intended for consumption by elites based in Canaan. The single pithos found at the Aphek Residency is a notable and self-explanatory exception.

For the time being, Tel Nami is the only definite anchorage site at which collared-rim pithoi have been found, but due to its small size and short duration of use was probably a relatively minor outlet for Levantine products during the late second millennium BC in comparison to Akko, Tell Abu Hawam and Byblos, for instance. It has been suggested that one source of Tel Nami’s exceptional wealth was the establishment of a long- distance caravan route bringing Arabian incense to the Mediterranean coast via Trans-jordan and the collared-rim pithos has been proposed as a container for this cargo

extraction of rural surplus on a regional basis by indigenous elites which characterised the preceeding Canaanite palatial economy was now replaced by larger mechanisms of exploitation, sanctioned by military force and overtly administered by a foreign power. The centuries-old Egyptian influence over the Levantine economy, previously evident only at elite levels of Canaanite society, was for the first time apparent to the populace at large. Villagers, previously fragmented by allegiances to rival city-states, were now able to conceive of themselves as united in opposition to an alien power, providing a focus for the crystallisation of southern Levantine ethnic and ultimately national identity manifested in the territorial states of Israel and Judah which followed the end of Egyptian rule in Canaan.

(Artzy 1994). The exploitation of this route is attested in the Egyptian texts and supported by the eastern extension of Egypt’s network of military and administrative centres from the Jezreel to the Jordan Valley and beyond’ The distribution Of collared-rim pithoi east Of the Jordan River reaching from Tawilan, via a number of fortified settlements, to Tell es- Sa’idiyeh and thence the Mediterranean coast confirms their use in this trade. St. Hugh’s College

For the rural population of the region, the University of Oxford intensification of Egyptian imperial involve- (Contact address: ment in the Levant would have meant 4 Meadowbanks heightened subjugation and deprivation. The Arkley, Herts EN5 3LY)

Acknowledgements

My thanks are due to all those with whom I discussed this article for their criticism and encouragement, particularly to Andrew and Susan Shematt. Roger Moorey and Ezra Marcus. Michal Artzy’s work was a direct inspiration and her comments on this piece much valued. I am grateful to Orna Zimhoni for her critical guidance and to Rinat Koren for her patience.

ABBREVIATIONS REFERENCES

A H A R o N i , Y. 1970: New aspects of the Israelite occupation in the North. In J.A. Sanders (ed.) Near

MAEHL New Encyclopedia (f Archaeolosical Eastern archaeology in the twentieth century, Essays in Excavations in the Holy Land. honour of Nelson Check (New York), 254-265. BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. AASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research. (London, SCM Press Ltd).

AHARONI. Y. 1982: The Archaeofogy of the Land of Israel




AHLSTROM. G.W. 1986: Who were the Israelites? (Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns).

ARTZY. M. 1994: Incense, camels and collared rim jars. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 13(2), 121-147.

BECK. P. and KOCHAVI. M. 1985: A dated assemblage of the Late 13th Century BCE from the Egyptian Residency at Aphek. Tel Aviv 12, 29-42.

in the Jezreel Valley (Jerusalem, Qedem 24).

BIENKOWSKI. P. 1992: The beginning of the Iron Age in Mom: A reply to Finkelstein. Levant 24, 167-169.

BIRAN. A. 1989: The collared-rim jars and the settlement of the Tribe of Dan. AASOR 49, 71-96.

BuNiMovin. s. 1995: On the edge of empires. In T. Levy ed. The archaeology of society in the Holy Land (London, Leicester University Press) 32 1-329.

Excavations. BASOR 196, 2-16.

CALLAWAY, J.A. 1985: A new perspective on the hill country settlement of Canaan in Iron Age 1. In J.N. Tubb (ed.) Palestine in the Bronze and Iron Ages, Papers in honour of Olga Tuffnel. (London) 3 1-49.

CALLAWAY. J.A. 1993: Tell Qasile. In NEAEHL vol. 4,

CAMPBELL, E.F. 1993: Shechem. In NEAEHL vol. 4,

CHANG-HO. CJI 1995: Iron Age 1 in central and northern Transjordan: an interim summary of archaeological data. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 127, 122-140.

COOLEY. R.E. 1993: Dothan. In NEAEHL Vol. I , 374.

CROSS, F.M. 1979: symposia celebrating the seventy-jflh anniversary ofthe foundation ofthe American Schols of Oriental Research (Cambridge).

DAVIES. N. and FAULKNER. R.O. 1947: A Syrian trading venture to Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 33, 4046.

DEVER. W. 1993: Cultural continuity, ethnicity in the archaeological record and the question of Israelite origins. Ererz-Israel 24, 22-33.

DOTHAN. M. 1993: Afula. In NEAEHL vol. 1, 37-39.

EISENBERG, E. 1988: Nahal Refa’im. Excavations and Surveys in Israel 7-8, 84-89.

ESSE. D. 1992: The collared pithos at Megiddo. Journal

BEN TOR. A. and PORTUGALI. Y. 1987: Tell Qiri: A Vi11age

CALLAWAY. J.A. 1969: The 1966 Ai (et-Tell)

1253-1254.

1345-1354.

of Near Eastern Studies 51, 81-103.

FINKELSTEIN, 1. 1986: Izbet Sartah. An early Iron Age site near Rosh Ha’ayin, Israel (Oxford, BAR International Series 299).

FINKELSTEIN. 1. 1988: The archaeology of the lsraelite settlement (Jerusalem, Israel Exploration Society).

FINKELSTEIN. I. 1990: The emergence of early Israel: anthropology, environment and archaeology. Journal of the American Oriental Society I 10.4, 677-686.

FINKELSTEIN. 1. 1 9 9 2 ~ EdOm in the Iron 1. Levant 24, 159-1 65.

FINKELSTEIN. 1. 1992b: Stratigraphy, Pottery and Parallels: A reply to Bienkowski. Levanr 24, 171-172.

Shiloh: The Archaeology of a Biblical Site (Tel Aviv, Lnstitute of Archaeology).

FITZGERALD. G.M. 1930: The Four Canaanite Temples of Beth-Shean. Part I1 - The Pottery (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Museum).

FRITZ. v. 1981: The Israelite ‘conquest’ in the light of recent excavations at Khirbet el- Meshash. BASOR 241,

FRITZ, V. 1987: Conquest or Settlement? Biblical Archaeologist (June, 1987) 84-100.

GAL. Z. 1993: Galilee. In NEAEHL, vol. 3, 452-453.

Petrographic analyses of MBA 111, LBA and IA I ceramic assemblages. In I. Finkelstein, S. Bunimovitz and S. Lederman (eds) Shiloh: The Archaeology of a Biblical Site (Tel Aviv, Institute of Archaeology) 271- 286.

CLOCK. N. 1993: Ta’anach. In NEAEHL, 1433.

CONEN. R. 1992: Burial patterns and cultural diversity in Late Bronze Age Canaan (ASOR Dissertation Series 7, Winona Lake, Indiana, Eisenbrauns).

HOLLADAY, J. 1995: The Kingdoms of Israel and Judah: political and economic centralisation in the Iron IIA-B. In T. Levy (ed.) The archaeology of sciciety in the Holy Land (London, Leicester University Press) 369-394.

HOPKINS. D.C. 1985: The Highlands of Canaan (Sheffield, JSOT Press).

HUMBERT, J. 1993: Tell Keisan. In NEAEHL vol. 4, 863- 867.

IBRAHIM, M.M. 1978: The collared-rim jar of the Early

FINKELSTEIN. 1.. BUNIMOVITZ, S. and LEDERMAN. S. 1993:

61-73.

GLASS. 1.. GOREN. Y., BUNIMOVITZ, S.. FINKELSTEIN. I. 1993:


324 0 Blackwell Publishers Lfd. 1996

DAVID WENGROW

Iron Age. In P.R.S. Moorey and P.J. Parr (eds) Archaeology in the Levant (Warminster, Aris and Phillips) 116-126.

IBRAHIM. M. 1983: Siege1 und Siegelabdriicke aus Sahab. Zeitschrqt des Deutschens Palastina Vereins 99,43-53.

KELM. G.L. and MAZAR. A. 1982: Three seasons of excavations at Batsah- Biblical Timnah. BASOR 248, 1-36.

KEMP1NSKI.A. 1985: The overlap of cultures at the end of the Late Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age. Eretz-Israel 18, 399407 (Hebrew).

KOCHAVI. M. 1974: Khirbet Rhabud = Debir. Tel Aviv I , 2-33.

KOCHAVI. M. 1977: An ostracon of the period of the Judges from lzbet Sartah. Tel Aviv 4, 1-13.

KOCHAVI. M. 1981: The History and Archaeology of Aphek-Antipatris. Biblical Archaeo1og.y 44, 75-86.

LAPP, N.L. 1993: Tell el-Ful. In NEAEHL vol. 2, 445- 448.

LIVERANI. M. 1987: The collapse of the Near Eastern regional system at the end of the bronze age. In M. Rowlands and K. Kristiansen (eds), Centre and Periphery in the Ancient World (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press) 66-73.

LONDON, G. 1989: A comparison O f tWO

contemporaneous lifestyles of the late second millennium B.C.E., BASOR 273, 37-55.

MAZAR. A. 1981: Giloh: An early Israelite settlement site near Jerusalem. Israel Exploration Journal 3 I ( 1-2). I - 36.

MAZAR. A. 1993a: Giloh. In NEAEHL vol. 2, 519.

MAZAR. A. 1993b: Tell Qasile. In NEAEHL vol. 4, 1204- 1212.

McGOVERN. P.E. 1993: The h e Bronze Age Egyptian Garrison at Beth Shean (University Museum of Pennsylvania).

NEGBI. 0. 1974: The continuity of the Canaanite bronzework of the Late Bronze Age into the Early Iron Age. Tel Aviv I, 159-172.

OHATA. K. 1970: Tel &ror 111 (Japan, Society for Near Eastern Studies).

PARR. P.J. 1973: The origin of the Canaanite jar. In D.E. Strong (ed.) Archaeological Theory and Practice (London and New York, Seminar Press) 174-180.

PRITCHARD. J.B. 1964: Winery. Defenses and Soundings at Cibeon (Philadelphia).

RAST. W. 1978: Taanach I . Studies in the Iron Age Pottery (Philadelphia, ASOR).

SCHWARTZ. G.M. 1995: Rural economic specialisation and early urbanisation in the Khabur Valley, Syria. In G.M. Schwartz and S.E. Falconer (eds) Archaeological views from the countryside (London, Smithsonian Institution Press) 19-36.

SHERRATT. A. and SHERRATT. S. 199 I : From Luxuries to Commodities: the nature of Mediterranean Bronze Age trading systems. In N.H. Gale (ed.) Bronze Age Trade in the Mediterranean (Studies in ~ Mediterranean Archaeology vol. XC, Jonsered, Paul Astroms Forlag).

SHERRATT. s. 1994: Commerce, Iron and Ideology: Metallurgical Innovation in the 12th-I Ith Century Cyprus. In Proceedings oj the International Symposium 'Cyprus in the 11th century' (Nicosia).

STAGER, L.E. 1985: The archaeology of the family in Ancient Israel. BASOR 260, 1-35.

STAGER, L.E. 1990: Shemer's Estate. BASOR 277-278, 103.

STERN, E. 1978: Excavations at Tel Mevorakh Part One (Jerusalem, Qedem 9).

TUBB. J.N. 1993: Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. In NEAEHL vol. 4,

TUBB. J.N. 1995: An Aegean Presence in Egypto-Canaan. In W.V. Davies and L. Schofield (eds) Egypr, the Aegean and the Levant: interconnections in the Second Millennium BC (British Museum) 136-145.

USSISHKIN. D. 1985: Levels VII and VI at Tel Lachish and the end of the Late Bronze Age in Canaan. In J.N. Tubb (ed.) Palestine in the Bronze and Iron Ages, Papers in Honour of Olga Tufnell. (London) 2 13-228.

USSISHKIN. D. 1995: The end of Canaanite Megiddo and its historical and archaeological implications (Paper given at Jerusalem, International Symposium, Mediterranean Peoples in Transition).

WEIPPERT. M. 197 I : The settlement of the lsraelite tribes in Palestine (London).

1295-1300.

YELLEN. J. and GUNNEWEG. J. 1989: hStt'Umentd Neutron Activation Analysis and the origin of Iron I collared rim jars and pithoi from Tel Dan. In S. Gitin and W.G. Dever (eds) Recent Excavations in Israel (AASOR 48) 133-141.


8 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 19% 325


ZERTAL. A. 1986: The Israelite sertlemenr in the hill Lipinski (eds) sriciery and Economy in the Eastern country ofManasseh (Ph.D. thesis, Tel Aviv University, Mediterranean (c. 1500-1000 B.C.E.) (Leuven, Hebrew with English extract). Uitgeveri Peeters) 341-352.

ZERTAL. A. 1988: The water factor during the Israelite ZORN. J.R. 1993: Tell en-Nasbeh. In NEAEHL vol. 3, settlement process in Canaan. In M. Heltzer and E. 1098-1 102.

326


0 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996

egyptian taskmasters and heavy burdens: highland exploitation and the collared-rim pithos of the...

Documents