excavations at tall jawa, jordan

EXCAVATIONS AT TALL JAWA, JORDAN

CULTURE AND HISTORY OFTHE ANCIENT NEAR EAST

EDITED BY

B. HALPERN, M.H.E. WEIPPERT

TH. P.J. VAN DEN HOUT, I. WINTER

VOLUME 11/1

EXCAVATIONS AT TALL JAWA, JORDAN

Volume I: The Iron Age Town

BY

P.M. MICHÈLE DAVIAU

WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY

PAUL–EUGÈNE DION, RONALD G.V. HANCOCK,

DAVID HEMSWORTH, MARGARET A. JUDD &

RYAN DEFONZO, DOUGLAS W. SCHNURRENBERGER

BRILLLEIDEN • BOSTON

2003

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Daviau. P.M. Michèle.Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan / by P.M. Michèle Daviau ; with contributions by

Paul-Eugène Dion ... [et al.].p. cm.— (Culture and history of the ancient Near East, ISSN 1566-2055 ; v. 11/2)

Includes bibliographical references and index.Contents: — v.2. The Iron Age artefacts —ISBN 9004123636 (alk. paper)

1. Jawa, Tall (Amman, Jordan) 2. Excavations (Archaeology)—Jordan—Jawa, Tall(Amman) 3. Iron age—Jordan—Jawa, Tall (Amman) I. Dion, Paul-Eugène, 1934–II.Title. III. Series.

DS159.9.J39 D39 2001933—dc21 2001052810

Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Einheitsaufnahme

Daviau. Paulette M. Michèle:Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan / by P.M. Michèle Daviau. With contributions by Paul-EugèneDion ..... – Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : BrillVol. 2 The iron age artefacts. – 2002

(Culture and history of the ancient Near East ; Vol. 11)ISBN 90-04-12363-6

ISSN 1566-2055ISBN 90 04 13012 8

© Copyright 2003 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, storedin a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,

mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior writtenpermission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is grantedby Koninklijke Brill 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.

printed in the netherlands

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxiExcavation Team Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxviiList of Tables and Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xxxiiiList of Illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xxxvii

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Chapter 1. The Site and its Regional Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Location and Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Previous Exploration in Central Transjordan . . . . . . . . . . . 5Recent Exploration by the Madaba Plains Project . . . . . . 8

Site Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Topography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Chapter 2. Excavation Project and Recording Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13The Tall Jawa Excavation Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Excavation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Field Recording . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Material Culture Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Using this Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Chapter 3. Preliminary Geological Overview of Tall Jawa(by Douglas W. Schnurrenberger) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Regional Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Local Bedrock Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Quaternary Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Chapter 4. Evidence for an Iron Age I Settlement. Field A:The Deep Sounding (1989) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29History of Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Stratum X – The Deep Sounding – Building 50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32Pottery and Artefacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Collared-rim Pithoi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Cooking Pots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Kraters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Bowls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Storejars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Jugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Painted Pottery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

The Nature of the Iron I Settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Chapter 5. The Fortification Walls and Towers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

History of Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Stratum IX – The Offset/Inset Solid Wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Field E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

North Wall 3006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Glacis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Retaining Wall 3023 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Passageway 309 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Field B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57West Wall 2023 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57Tower 2024 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59Guardroom 221 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60Passageway 219 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Fields B–A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62South Wall 2009+W1003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62Glacis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63Retaining Wall 1001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

End of Stratum IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Stratum VIIIB – The Casemate Wall System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66Field E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Outer Wall 3006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67Inner Casemate Wall 3000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67Casemate Rooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

Room 301 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72Field B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Outer West Wall 3050=2023+2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Drain B24:24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75The Western Casemate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Inner West Wall 2004=2029 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77Inner South Wall2001+2006=1030+1020 78

Channel 218 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79Comparanda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Fields B–A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82Inner Casemate Wall 2006=1030+1020 . . . . . . . . . 82

Casemate Room 121 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83Destruction of Stratum VIIIB—Fields E, B,and A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Stratum VIIIA Reconstruction of the Casemate System . . . . . 85Field E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Room 301 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Room 311 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Room 310 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Field B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Inner Wall 2001+2000 and 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Casemate Room 210 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Tower 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Field A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89Inner Casemate Wall 1004+1010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89Casemate Rooms 101, 200 and 201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Destruction of Stratum VIIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92Stratum VI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93Field C-West and C-East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Fortification Walls in C-west . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94Stratum IX Offset/inset Solid Wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

The Lower Retaining Wall in Field C-east . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97Flanking Walls 9007+9008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98Inner Wall 9007 and Wall 9010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

Pottery and Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102Summary: Characteristics and Parallels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

The Solid/Outer Wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103Inner Wall and Casemate Room Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

Total Thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105Parallels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

The Persian Burial (by Margaret A. Judd and RyanDefonzo) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

The Archaeological Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108The Adult . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

Dental Inventory and Palaeopathology . . . . . . 110The Child . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Taphonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111Persian Burials in the Levant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113References for the Excursus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Chapter 6. The Iron Age II Town. Fields A+B: Buildings 102,113, 100, 200 and 204 (1989–1995) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117Building 102 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119History of Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

Rooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122Doorways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125Stratum IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

Room 120 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 128Room 214 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Stratum VIII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130Room 110 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131Room 111 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133Room 217 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133Room 214 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 134Room 109 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

Room 105 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136Room 104 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137Room 204 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139Room 216 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

Building 113 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141History of Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142


Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144Stratum VIIIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

Casemate Room 121 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145Room 123 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145Room 126 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 149Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150Room 127 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

Stratum VIIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151Room 106 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152Room 108 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154

Oven A14:25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155Room 112 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157Room 107 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

Building 100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160History of Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

Room 122 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161Room 102 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165Room 202/222 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

Oven B63:40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168Oven B63:37 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168Oven B63:36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169Oven B63:32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169Oven B63:29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170Oven B63:30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

Room 225 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

Stratum VIIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173Room 202 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

The End of Iron Age Occupation in Field A–B . . . . . . . . . 174Strata VI–III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176Stratum I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176Field B – Building 200 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

History of Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178


Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182Stratum VIII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182

Construction and Use of Building 200 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182Room 212 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

The Ovens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 189Casemate Room 213 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189Casemate Room 215 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190Room 209 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 193Room 220 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194Room 208 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194Room 207 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 196Work Area 211 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

Building 204 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199Excavation History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201Pottery and Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

Chapter 7. Field E: The Domestic Complex (1992–1995).Building 300 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205


Stratum IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208The Fortification System and earliest Occupation . . . . . . 208

Stratum VIII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208Rooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210Doorways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212

Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214Stratum VIIIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

The Western Unit: Rooms 303, 304, 305, 315, 318 . . . . 216Room 303 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217Pottery and Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220Room 305 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221Pottery and Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225Room 315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225Room 304 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225Room 318 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226

The Central Unit: Rooms 302, 306, 320 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227Room 302 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228Room 306 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233Room 320 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238The Central Courtyard—R308+324 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239Courtyard 308/324 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239Room 326 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240Room 321 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241

The Eastern Unit: Rooms 312, 313, 314, 317, 327 . . . . . 242Room 312 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243Room 313 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246Room 314 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250Room 317 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251Room 323 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252

Stratum VIIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252The Western Unit: Rooms 303, 304, 305, 315, 316,318, 319 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252

Room 303 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253Room 304 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255Room 305 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255Room 315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257Room 316 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259Room 319 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260

Room 318 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey/Roof 263Room 322 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264

The Central Unit: Rooms 302, 306, 307, CisternE64:13, Cistern Area 308+ 324, Room 326 . . . . . . . . . . . . 264

Room 302 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264Room 306 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267

Cistern E64:13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269The Cistern Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275Room 324 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276Room 308 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278Room 307 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279Pottery and Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280Room 326+321 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281

The Eastern Unit: Rooms 312+321, 313, 314+327 . . . 282Room 312 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283Rooms 314+327, 325 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285

Stratum VII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285Stratum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285Stratum I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285

Chapter 8. Fields C-West And D: The Pillared Houses.Buildings 800 and 700 (1991–1995) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287History of Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290

Rooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292Doorways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295The Staircases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297

Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298Stratum VIIB–VIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299Construction and Use of Building 800 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300

The Northern Unit: Rooms 811–812, 810, 808, 809 . . . 300Room 811–812 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300

Destruction Debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305Room 812 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305

Room 808 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306Corridor 810 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306Room 809—Stratum VIIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307Room 809—Stratum VIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309

Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey 312Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

The Central Unit: Rooms 804, 806, 807 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313Room 807 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey 315Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317

Room 804 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317Stratum VIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319

The Twin Ovens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322East Oven—C27:63 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323West Oven—C27:68 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324Storage Area West of Oven C27:68 . . . . . . . . . . 326

Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 327Evidence for Final Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329Room 806 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329

The Southern Unit: Rooms 802, 803, 805 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330Room 805 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 333Evidence for Final Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334Room 803 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 336Room 802 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 340

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341Specialized Finds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342Evidence for Final Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343Formation of the Archaeological Record in Building800 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343

Building 700 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343

History of Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345

Rooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345Doorways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348Lintels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349

Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349Staircase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351

Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351Stratum VII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352

Rooms with Undisturbed Stratum VII Occupation . . . . 353Room 714 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354

Rooms along the South Side . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357Room 712 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 359Room 718 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359Room 713 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 362

Evidence for Iron Age Remains in the RemodelledRooms of B700 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364

Room 715 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364Room 707 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365Room 716 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369Cistern D15:2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370

Chapter 9. Field C-East: Gate Building and Domestic Quarter(1992–1995) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373


Building 910–905 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375


Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379Stratum VIIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380

Gate Building 910 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380Construction and Use of Building 910 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380The Western Unit and Central Roadway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381

Central Roadway 915 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 384Stratum VIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386

Building 905 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386The Western Unit: Rooms 906–908 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386

Room 906 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387Room 907 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 390

Excursus: TJ Burial 4—The Skeletal Remains(by Margaret A. Judd) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390

Room 908 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 392Destruction in Building 905 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393

The Central Unit: Rooms 909–913 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394Room 909 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 396Room 910 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397

Working Platform—C75:10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398Hearth C75:9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399

Room 911 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400Room 913 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400Room 912 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402

Building 900 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403Building Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404


Stratum VIIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406Construction and use of Building 900 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406

Room 901 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406Oven C54:18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409

Room 903 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 410Stratum VIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 410

Room 901 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411Room 903 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411Room 904 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412Room 902 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey . . . . . . . . 414

Destruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415Excursus: TJ Burial 1—The Skeletal Remains(by Margaret A. Judd) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

References for the Excursus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419

. 421

Chapter 10. Building Materials, Construction Techniques andArchitectural Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423Building Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424

Limestone and Chert Boulders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424Bedrock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425Mud Brick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426

Construction Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427Boulder-and-Chink Wall Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427

The Fortification Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427House Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429

Pillared Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431Wall Thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435

Surfacing Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436Building Plans and Room Arrangement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437

Room Size and Roofed Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437Room Arrangement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438

Staircases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439Ceiling Material and Roof Rollers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439Roof Rollers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440

Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440Type A. Roof Rollers with Depressions . . . . . . . . . . . . 441Catalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441Type B. Roof Rollers without Depressions . . . . . . . . . 442Catalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442Parallels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442

Architectural Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444Socket Stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444

Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444Criteria and Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445Catalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445Parallels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447

Thresholds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447Lintels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448

Catalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448

Pillar Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448Criteria and Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448Catalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449

Benches/Shelves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449Domestic and Industrial Installations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450

Stone Troughs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450Catalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450Parallels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452

Large Shallow Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452Catalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452Parallels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452

Boulder Mortars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454

Chapter 11. Elemental Analysis of Local Limestone andPrepared Plaster Samples (by Ronald G.V. Hancock) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457

Roof Roller (TJ 381) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457Prepared Plasters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465

Chapter 12. Settlement History at Tall Jawa:Chronological Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467Iron Age I (Stratum X) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467Iron Age II (Strata IX–VII) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469

Early Iron Age II (Stratum IX) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469Stratum VIIIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471Stratum VIIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474Stratum VII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474Stratum VIIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 475Stratum VIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 475Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479

Chapter 13. The Ammonites: A Historical Sketch (byPaul-Eugène Dion) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481

“Ammonites”—The Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481Second Millennium Attestations? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482“Ammonites” in Neo-Assyrian and Later CuneiformInscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482“Ammonites” in Ammonite Epigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483The Biblical Names for the Ammonites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483#ammôn or #amman?—The Greek Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . 484

The Ammonite Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485Approximative Delimitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485

The Ammonite Territory According to theLiterary Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485

Archaeological Pointers to the Extent of theAmmonite Territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486

Find Spots of Ammonite Inscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486Find Spots of Distinctive Aramaic Artefacts . . . . . . . 488Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489

The Character of the Ammonite Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490Chronological Presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491

Late Bronze Age Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491Emergence of the benê #Ammôn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493

The LaBianca-Younker Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493The Jephthah Narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494

Saul’s Rescue of Jabesh-Gilead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497Israelite Domination? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 498The Independent Ammonite Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500

When Did the Children of Ammon RecoverTheir Independence? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500The Ammonites and Their Neighbours beforethe Assyrian Takeover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502

The Ammonites under Assyrian Overlordship . . . . . . . . . . 504Sanipu, Servant of Tiglath-pileser III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504Assyrian Protection and Its Price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505Ammonite Prosperity under Assyrian Rule . . . . . . . . 507The Ruling Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 507Aramaization and Its Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508

The Ammonites and Babylon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509“Baalis,” the Last King of the Ammonites . . . . . . . . . 509

Assyria Loses Its Grip on Palestine andTransjordan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 510Baalis Resists the Babylonian Invasion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511Nebukadnezzar Puts an End to the AmmoniteKingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 519

Chapter 14. The Tall Jawa Multimedia Information System(by David Hemsworth) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521The Locus Summaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522

The Multimedia System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522Overview of the System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524The Tall Jawa Information System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526Main Menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526

Database Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527Record Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528Artefact Images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529

Full Image Preview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529Searching the Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 530Uninstalling the Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531

Wall Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 535

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541

Subject Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557

Geographic and Ethnic Name Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563

CD-ROM—Iron Age Multimedia Programme including field photo-graphs of the site, individual buildings, rooms, features, pottery andartefacts, and construction details, accompanied by a database of thephotographs. Additional data consists of a list of loci and locus sheets.

This page intentionally left blank

PREFACE

In 1914, Frederick Kenyon expressed the intention of the Trustees ofthe British Museum to publish the first of several volumes concerningthe finds and excavations initiated under their auspices at Carchemishin 1911. This promptly published report was not intended as a finalsynthesis but as a presentation of material for discussion and researchon the part of scholars and students (Hogarth 1914: Preface). Althoughseveral important excavations in Palestine in subsequent years werequickly reported, such as #Ain Shems by Grant (1932), and Hazor byYadin and his staff (1958 and 1960), this has hardly been the norm formore recent multi-disciplinary projects. The long delays in publicationmay be directly related to increasing complexity within the disciplineitself and the trend toward quantitative analysis of data drawn fromlarge samples.

Somewhere in between the simple presentation of finds with mea-gre documentation and the sophisticated statistical analyses of compre-hensive data sets, there should be room for a final excavation reportthat communicates detailed excavation information and complete doc-umentation while allowing for further analyses in subsequent studies.Such a conception seems to be reflected in the reports of the excava-tions at Tel Michal and Gezer in Israel, and at Tall al-#Umayri in Jor-dan.1 The Madaba Plains Project, currently working at Tall al-#Umayriand Jalul, publishes seasonal reports that present the results of theirexcavation and of their documentation of new sites within the MPPHinterland Survey Area. Each annual report is accompanied by exten-sive illustration of the architecture and of ceramic remains. Included ineach volume are subsequent studies and reports by specialists involvedin this interdisciplinary project. Because it was the good fortune of thiswriter to excavate at Tall al-#Umayri in 1987 and to serve as Field

1 For Tel Michal, see Herzog, Rapp and Negbi (1989). In the cases of Gezer andTall al-#Umayri, the seasonal reports are part of multi-volume series, and only one fromeach site is listed here as an example of prompt publication: Dever, Lance and Wright(1974); and Geraty, Herr, LaBianca and Younker (1989).

Supervisor and then Director during the first two seasons of excava-tions at Tall Jawa (1989, 1991), under the auspices of the MadabaPlains Project, she is now committed to continuing their tradition ofprompt publication.

This book is one of five volumes, which present the results of allsix seasons of excavation at Tall Jawa (1989, 1991–1995). Volume IIconsists of a functional and typological study of the Iron Age arte-facts (Daviau 2002), Volume III includes the technological and typo-logical analysis of the Iron Age pottery (Daviau, in preparation), andVolume IV is the report on the Umayyad house in Field D, includ-ing details of the architecture, decoration (painted plaster and mosaicfloors), glass, early Islamic pottery and artefacts (Daviau and Tempest,in preparation). In Volume V, there will be a report on the results of the1989 MPP Survey, along with survey and salvage work by the Tall Jawateam in subsequent years (Battenfield, in preparation). Additional anal-ysis of faunal remains, the lithics and ethnographic studies will be inthis same volume. In each volume, there are specialist reports, althoughthese volumes are not intended to be exhaustive. The material pre-sented in this volume is a complete description and illustration of themajor Iron Age structures, their architectural features and stratigraphy,along with a synthesis of the settlement history and chronology.

Initially begun as a Hinterland Excavation of the Madaba PlainsProject under the direction of Randall Younker, the preliminary reportof the first season of the excavation of Tall Jawa (1989) was included inthe larger Madaba Plains Project report in the Annual of the Departmentof Antiquities of Jordan (Herr et al. 1991), in the Andrews University Sem-inary Studies (Younker et al. 1990), and in Preliminary Excavation Reports:Sardis, Bir Umm Fawakhir, Tell el- #Umeiri, The Combined Caesarea Expeditions,and Tell Dothan (LaBianca 1995). Beginning with the 1991 season, pre-liminary reports appeared in Echos du monde classique / Classical Views(Daviau 1992a), as well as in the Annual of the Department of Antiquities ofJordan (Daviau 1992b, 1993c, 1994, 1996), with the exception of thefinal 1995 field season.2 During the entire seven year period of researchand excavation at Tall Jawa, the project was affiliated with the Amer-ican Schools of Oriental Research, first as part of the Madaba PlainsProject and then, following the 1992 season, as the Tall Jawa Excava-tion Project. The author wishes to express her deep appreciation for

2 Detailed annual reports prepared by Daviau for the 1991–1995 seasons weresubmitted to the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, along with a set of photographs.

the support and encouragement of the MPP directors, L. T. Geraty,L. G. Herr, Ø. S. LaBianca, D. R. Clark, and R. W. Younker, and fortheir expression of confidence in the continued success of the Tall JawaProject. In addition, a special thanks is extended to Ø. S. LaBiancafor his continued contribution to the Tall Jawa Project, especially withregard to the identification of faunal remains.

It was also thanks to the support and encouragement of the Depart-ment of Antiquities of Jordan, especially Dr. Safwan Tell, Director Gen-eral of Antiquities in 1991–1994, that our excavation programme wasable to become an independent research project working in Jordan,training both North American and Jordanian students in field tech-niques. A special thanks is extended to Nazmieh Rida Tawfiq, Depart-ment of Antiquities representative to the Tall Jawa Project, who gen-erously shared her expertise and vast experience with the students andvolunteers on our team, thus contributing enormously to the educationof us all. The support of the Department of Antiquities was continuedby Dr. Ghazi Bisheh, Director General of Antiquities in 1995, and byAdeeb Abu Shumais, representative of the Department of Antiquitiesduring our final field season.

Many people contributed to the exacting tasks of excavation, record-ing, registering and studying the material culture of Tall Jawa. I wantto thank all of our team members for their generosity of spirit and hardwork that enabled us to bring to light the Iron Age town at Tall Jawa.Each one made a significant contribution and shared many more tasksthan is mentioned in the lists of participants (see below). Thanks aredue also to L. Cowell for her work in experimental archaeology, repli-cating features related to ceramic technology and for the registrationof potter’s marks and reworked sherds (1991–1995), to E. Cowell foryears of service as camp manager, and to Prof. M. Lawrence, School ofSocial Work, Wilfrid Laurier University, for her care of a team memberwho was injured in an accident at Wadi Rumm.

The Tall Jawa Excavation Project also benefited from the generousinterest and scholarly opinions of numerous scholars in residence atthe American Center of Oriental Research, Amman, where the teamlived during the 1991–1995 seasons. Special thanks to the Director,Dr. Pierre Bikai, and to Dr. Patricia M. Bikai, for their support andscholarly advice. Support, housing, vehicles and dark room facilitieswere also provided by the British Institute at Amman for Archaeologyand History; a special thanks to the then director, William Lancaster,and to Felicity Lancaster. As a team, we want to thank the men who

served as Canadian Ambassador to Jordan, especially Michael Bell. Hesupported our work with great enthusiasm and offered his support intime of need.

Necessary funding for three seasons of excavation and research(1992–1995) was provided by a Standard Research Grant from theSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.3 Addi-tional funding that supported overseas training of student volunteersand supervisors was provided on an annual basis by Wilfrid LaurierUniversity. Generous internal grants provided a course remission dur-ing the 1993–1994 academic year to study the distribution of artefactswithin the architectural space,4 and a Senior Research Fellowship andShort Term Grant5 to cover costs of specialists contributing to researchon the Iron Age settlement at Tall Jawa. To assist with the creationand programming of the CD-ROM, which accompanies this volume,a WLU Book Preparation Grant was awarded in 2002. Gifts by P.-E. Dion and R. Levesque facilitated our work in the field and supportedthe publication of this volume.

The research presented here is the work of many team members,some of whom are contributors in their own right; Paul-E. Dion, DavidHemsworth, Ronald G. V. Hancock, Margaret Judd, Ryan Defonzo,and Douglas Schnurrenberger. Other scholars have assisted the authorby sharing their expertise; I would like to thank Piotr Bienkowski,Douglas Clark, Rudolph Dornemann, Lawrence T. Geraty, SeymourGitin, Larry G. Herr, John S. Holladay, Jr., Jean-Baptiste Humbert,Paul Jacobs, Østein S. LaBianca, David McCreery, Mohammed Naj-jar, Larry A. Pavlish, Joe D. Seger, Udo Worschech, and Robert Bol-ing (whose untimely death was a loss to us all). Thanks are also dueto Pamela Schaus (Cartographer, Wilfrid Laurier University), who pre-pared the regional map, and to other colleagues in the Department ofGeography, who provided information concerning geological samplesand assisted our team with the loan of equipment.

3 Site Definition and Fortification Strategies of Iron Age Tell Jawa in CentralTransjordan (Grant # 410–92–0134).

4 The course remission grant was awarded for the academic year September 1993–April 1994.

5 These grants were awarded concurrently from April 1993–December 1993. Theauthor gratefully acknowledges the financial support for this research, which was partlyfunded by WLU Operating funds, and partly by the SSHRC General Research Grantawarded to WLU.

My deepest appreciation goes to the field supervisors and theirsquare supervisors, who prepared written reports in the field describ-ing and interpreting the archaeological record. Without their conscien-tious work, the material presented here would be only a skeleton of theremains uncovered during excavation. A special thanks in this regard toRobert Chadwick, Laurie Cowell, Brenda Silver, Dayle Elder, SusanEllis-Lopez, Ryan Defonzo, Debra Foran, Robert Hutson, MargaretJudd, Stanley Klassen, Lynda Manktelow, Shawn Thompson, TracyWilson, Julie Witmer, and Michael Wood.

Illustrations were drawn and inked by Laurie Cowell, Nigel Pereira,Adele Tempest, and the author. Training in scanning pottery draw-ings, plans and sections was provided by the members of the GezerGate Project under the direction of Prof. John S. Holladay, Jr. andhis assistants, Taber James and Stanley Klassen, in the Departmentof Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, University of Toronto. Thelabour intensive task of scanning the field photographs, was under-taken by Dr. Bernard Haberstroh, M.D., Helen Moore and Paul Bai-ley; the database that accompanies the photographs was compiled byHelen Moore and Paul Bailey, and locus summaries were completedby Shelena Schmidt, Robert Vingerhoets, and Michael Berry. For allof this work, Wilfrid Laurier University provided lab space, equipment,archival facilities for the storage of original field notebooks and draw-ings, storage space for pottery and objects, computer use, and OntarioWork Study funding to assist students working for the Tall Jawa Project.A special thanks for perseverance goes to Paul-E. Dion and ElaineKirby who read the manuscript with great care, to Elaine Kirby forscanning and merging the plans and section drawings, to Paul Baileyfor the final coordination of the database and the photographs, and toBrendon Paul and David Hemsworth for refining the multimedia pro-gramme.

This report is dedicated, with respect and appreciation, to the menwho were responsible for my introduction to and field training in theWheeler-Kenyon method and its subsequent refinement, both in theclassroom—H. Darrell Lance (Colgate Rochester Divinity School) andJohn S. Holladay, Jr. (University of Toronto)—and in the field, DavidNewlands (at Morganville, NY, and Fort York in Toronto), LawrenceE. Toombs, John Mathers†, and Jeffrey Blakely (at Tell el-Hesi), andLarry G. Herr (at Tall al-#Umayri). While their expertise contributed tomy formation, the shortcomings in this work are my own.

The plans used in this book were scanned using Adobe Photoshop, they werethen opened in Adobe Streamline and converted to a vector image. Room,Locus and Wall numbers were added in Adobe Illustrator. The plans werethen inserted into a Word 2000 document. The database for the MultimediaProgramme was prepared in MS Access.

EXCAVATION TEAM MEMBERS

1989 (June 19–August 8)

Lawrence T. Geraty, MadabaPlains Project director, AndrewsUniversity, Berrien Springs, MI,USA

Randall W. Younker, director, MPPHinterland Excavations, AndrewsUniversity

P. M. Michèle Daviau, field director,Wilfrid Laurier University,Waterloo, ON*

Square supervisors:Nadine Brundrett, Baden ONAntonius Haakman, Waterloo, ONBruce Routledge, Toronto, ONBrenda Silver, Stratford, ONJulie Witmer, Kitchener, ONHakam Ziaddi, Amman, Jordan

Volunteers:Isabelle Crépeau, Montréal, QCNelsona Dundas, Etobicoke, ONAdele Tempest, Kitchener, ONMichael Wood, Cambridge, ON

Computer entry: Nelsona Dundas

Pottery registrar: Flora McKay,Toronto, ON

MPP Object registrar:Elizabeth Platt, Dubuque, IA, USA

MPP Ceramic technologist:Gloria London, Seattle, WA, USA

MPP Faunal Analyst: ØsteinS. LaBianca, Andrews University

MPP Flotation: Romona Hubbard,Andrews University, BerrienSprings, MI

MPP photographer:Thor Storfjell, Berrien Springs, MI,

USALand surveyors: Tim Woodard,

Lethbridge, AB; Glenn Johnson,Berrien Springs, MI, USA

* All team members were fromCanada, unless otherwiseindicated.

1991 (June 18–August 6)

Lawrence T. Geraty, project directorØstein S. LaBianca, director,

Regional SurveyP. M. Michèle Daviau, director, Tall

Jawa

Administrative assistant andarchitect:

Robert Hutson, Listowel, ON

Land Surveyor:Abbas Khammash, #Amman, Jordan

Field supervisor:Michael Wood, Cambridge, ON

Square supervisors:Margaret Judd, Kitchener, ONJoyce Palmer, Waterloo, ONBrenda Silver, Stratford, ONShawn Standfast, Kitchener, ON

Volunteers:Laurie Cowell, Waterloo, ONJoanne Hasan, Waterloo, ONShona Hunter, Toronto, ONKaren Kane, Toronto, ONAbdul Aziz, #Ammam, Jordan

Pottery registrar: Brenda Silver,Stratford, ON

Object Registrar: Margaret Judd,Kitchener, ON

Illustrator: Sally Clara, Toronto,ON

Ceramic technologist: LaurieCowell,

Waterloo, ON

Photographers: Shona Hunter,Toronto, ON

Mark Ziese, Berrien Springs, MI,USA

1992 (June 15–July 30)

P. M. Michèle Daviau,director/chief archaeologist



Land surveyor: Robert Force,Oakville, ON

Faunal osteologist: ØsteinS. LaBianca, Berrien Springs, MI

Camp Manager: Edward Cowell,Waterloo, ON

Field supervisors:Margaret Judd, object registrar,

Kitchener, ONBrenda Silver, pottery registrar,

Stratford, ONJulie Witmer, Kitchener, ONMichael Wood, Cambridge, ON

Square supervisors:Janice Beaupré, Hilton Beach, ONLaurie Cowell, ceramic technology,

Waterloo, ONDebra Foran, assistant registrar,

Aylmer, QCShona Hunter, photographer,

Toronto, ONKaren Kane, assistant registrar,

Toronto, ONPatricia Kenny, Shanty Bay, ONBrooke Ridsdale, Cambridge, ON

Volunteers:Béatrice Bérubé, Vimont Laval, QCJeffery Clare, Cambridge, ONRyan Defonzo, North Bay, ONSilke Force, Oakville, ONAtena Ganea, Kitchener, ONAbdul Kareem, #Amman, JordanAnn McLean, London, ONJoyce Palmer, camp assistant,

Waterloo, ONJason Radko, photographer,

Midland, ONMiranda Semple, Toronto, ONShawn Thompson, lithic registrar,

Mt. Brydges, ONTeresa Van Nes, Ethel, ONKen Whitford, Carlstadt, NJ, USA

1993 (May 20–July 1)

P. M. Michèle Daviau, projectdirector and chief archaeologist



Epigrapher: Paul E. Dion, Toronto,ON

Photographer: Timothy Hellum,Toronto, ON

Paleobotanist: Peter Warnoch,Columbia, MO, USA

Camp Manager: Edward Cowell,Waterloo, ON

Field supervisors:Margaret Judd, object registrar,

Kitchener, ONMichael Wood, Montreal, QC

Square supervisors:Deborah Beal, Kitchener, ONLaurie Cowell, ceramic technology,

Waterloo, ONRyan Defonzo, assistant registrar,

North Bay, ONDebra Foran, illustrator, Aylmer,

QCSilke Force, Oakville, ONKaren Kane, assistant registrar,

Toronto, ONSanaa Khalileh, illustrator, Irbid,

JordanStanley Klassen, Saskatoon, SKBrenda Silver, pottery registrar,

Stratford, ONShawn Thompson, lithic registrar,

Mt. Brydges, ONJulie Witmer, illustrator, Kitchener,

ON

Supervisor in trainingLynda Manktelow, Barrie, ONSusan Wakefield, London, ON

Volunteers:Timothy Epp, Winnipeg, MANHani Jabsheh, #Amman, JordanJohn Johannesen, Waterloo, ONStephanie Lawrence, Halifax, NSKathleen O’Grady, Puslinch, ONMarion Smith, Arthur, ONSerge Thibodeau, Montréal, QC

Camp manager: Edward Cowell,Waterloo, ON

1994 (June 3–July 28)


Survey Director:James R. Battenfield, Long Beach,

CA, USA

Administrative assistant:Robert Hutson, field supervisor,

Listowel, ON

Epigrapher: Paul E. Dion, Toronto,ON

Photographers: Karina Gerlach,Ayers Cliff, QC

Timothy Hellum, Toronto, ON

Field supervisors:Ryan Defonzo, North Bay, ONStanley Klassen, Saskatoon, SKShawn Thompson, lithic registrar,

Mt. Brydges, ON

Square supervisors:Lawrence Broadhurst, Toronto, ONRobert Chadwick, Ste. Anne de

Bellevue, QCLaurie Cowell, Waterloo, ONDayle Elder, New Lowell, ONLisa Knuttilla, Toronto, ONLynda Manktelow, Barrie, ONHamdan Mansur, Amman, JordanMiranda Semple, Toronto, ONSusan Wakefield, London, ON

Deborah Beal, object registrar,Kitchener, ON

Karen Kane, ceramic registrar,Toronto, ON

Volunteers:Jennifer Alboim, Ottawa, ONRoberta Ainsworth, Toronto, ONAlison Barclay, Toronto, ONJeremy Burke, Toronto, ONVanessa Davies, South Bend, IN,

USAAn Devriese, BelgiumDiane Flores, Toronto, ONElse Khoury, Midland, ONLeedine Lah, Mississauga, ONMaureen Lyall, Edmonton, ABDeborah Marquis-Lawley, Port

Severn, ONAngela Robinson, Ottawa, ONJane Saxton, Nanaimo, BCPierrette Tardif-Alarie, Repentigny,

QCSerge Thibodeau, Montréal, PQDonald Webers, Elora, ONTracy Wilson, Oakville, ON

1995 (June 5–July 27)


Surveyor and technical assistantRomeo Levesque, Johnson, VT,

USA

Paleo-ethnobotanist, consultant:David McCreery, Willamette, OR,

USA

Photographers:Robert Mittelstaedt, Cleveland,

OH, USAPhilip Silver, Stratford, ON

Field supervisors:Ryan Defonzo, object registrar,

North Bay, ONSusan Ellis-Lopez, assistant pottery

registrar, Mabton, WA, USALynda Manktelow, Barrie, ONDayle Elder, New Lowell, ON

Square supervisors:Jennifer Alboim, Ottawa, ONJanice Beaupré, Hilton Beach, ONLaurie Cowell, ceramic technologist,

Waterloo, ONPatricia Kenny, Shanty Bay, ONBrenda Silver, ceramic registrar,

Stratford, ONDonald Webers, Elora, ONTracy Wilson, Oakville, ON

Volunteers:Celeste Barlow, Milton, ONAndrew Bradshaw, Antigonish, NSKelly Diamond, Toronto, ONCatherine Duff, Toronto, ONNectaria Grafos, Windsor, ONSamuel Klapman, Waterloo, ONJoann Laird, Gloucester, ONWalter McCall, Waterloo, ONJohn Purtill, Thornton, ONEvelyn Ruskin, Chicago, IL, USAPaul Sodtke, Toronto, ONKeli Watson, Waterloo, ON

Camp manager: Edward Cowell,Waterloo, ON

Department of AntiquitiesRepresentatives:

Hanan Azar and Hefzi Haddad(1989)

Nazmieh Rida Tawfiq (1991, 1992,1993, 1994)

Adeeb Abu Shumais (1995)

LIST OF TABLES AND GRAPHS

Table 1A Size of Iron Age Fortified Residential Towns in Cisjordan (inhectares)

Table 1B Size of Iron Age Fortified Residential Towns in Transjordan(in hectares)

Table 2A Range of Room, Building, Wall, and Vessel NumbersTable 2B Sizes of Stones in Iron Age Masonry

Table 3A Stratigraphic position of the Upper Cretaceous carbonateformations underlying Tall Jawa

Table 4A Strata for the Deep Sounding in Field A

Table 5A Strata for the Fortification WallsTable 5B Casemate Walls at Town Sites in Central TransjordanTable 5C Casemate Walls at Palestinian Town Sites from Recent

Excavations

Table 6A Strata for Field ATable 6B Room Size and Proportion in Building 102Table 6C Location and Width of Doorways in Building 102Table 6D Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 102)Table 6E Pottery and Artefacts in Room 120, upper storeyTable 6F Pottery and Artefacts in Room 110Table 6G Pottery and Artefacts in Room 214Table 6H Pottery and Artefacts in Room 214, upper storeyTable 6I Pottery and Artefacts in Room 104Table 6J Pottery and Artefacts in Room 204Table 6K Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 113)Table 6L Strata for Field A—Building 113Table 6M Pottery and Artefacts in Room 123Table 6N Pottery and Artefacts in Room 126Table 6P Pottery and Artefacts in Room 126, upper storeyTable 6Q Pottery and Artefacts in Room 106Table 6R Pottery and Artefacts in Room 108Table 6S Pottery and Artefacts in Room 107, late phaseTable 6T Pottery and Artefacts in Room 122, earlier phaseTable 6U Pottery and Artefacts in Room 122, later phaseTable 6V Pottery and Artefacts in Room 222, earlier phase

Table 6AA Room Size and Proportion in Building 200, and CasemateRoom 210

Table 6BB Location and Width of Doorways in Field B (west)Table 6CC Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 200)Table 6DD Strata for Field B—Building 200Table 6EE Pottery and Artefacts in Room 212, upper storeyTable 6FF Pottery and Artefacts in Room 215Table 6GG Pottery and Artefacts in Room 209Table 6HH Pottery and Artefacts in Room 209, upper storeyTable 6JJ Pottery and Artefacts in Room 208, upper storeyTable 6KK Pottery and Artefacts in Room 207, upper storeyTable 6LL Pottery and Artefacts in Room 207, roof levelTable 6MM Pottery and Artefacts in Work Area 211

Table 6NN Room Size and Proportion in Building 204Table 6PP Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 204)Table 6QQ Pottery and Artefacts in Room 203Table 6RR Pottery and Artefacts in Room 206

Table 7A Room Size and ProportionTable 7B Location and Width of DoorwaysTable 7C Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 300 only)Table 7D Strata for Field ETable 7E Pottery and Artefacts in Room 303(B)Table 7F Pottery and Artefacts in Room 305(B)Table 7G Pottery and Artefacts in Room 318(B)Table 7H Pottery and Artefacts in Room 302(B)Table 7J Pottery and Artefacts in Room 306(B)Table 7K Pottery and Artefacts in Room 312(B)Table 7L Pottery and Artefacts in Room 312(B), upper storey/ceilingTable 7M Pottery and Artefacts in Room 313(B)Table 7N Pottery and Artefacts in Room 314(B)Table 7P Pottery and Artefacts in Room 303(A)Table 7Q Pottery and Artefacts in Room 303(A), upper levelTable 7R Pottery and Artefacts in Room 305(A)Table 7S Pottery and Artefacts in Room 319(A)Table 7T Pottery and Artefacts in Room 318(A)Table 7U Pottery and Artefacts in Room 318(A), upper levelTable 7V Pottery and Artefacts in Room 302(A)Table 7W Pottery and Artefacts in Room 306(A)Table 7X Pottery and Artefacts in Cistern Area, Stratum VIIIATable 7Y Pottery and Artefacts in Room 307(A)Table 7Z Pottery and Artefacts in Room 312(A)

Table 8A Room Size and ProportionTable 8B Location and Width of DoorwaysTable 8C Wall Thickness in centimetres

Table 8D Strata for Field C-WestTable 8E Pottery and Artefacts in Room 811Table 8F Pottery and Artefacts in Room 809, Stratum VIIBTable 8G Pottery and Artefacts in Room 809, Stratum VIIATable 8H Pottery and Artefacts in Room 809, upper storeyTable 8J Pottery and Artefacts in Room 807Table 8K Pottery and Artefacts in Room 807, upper storeyTable 8L Pottery and Artefacts in Central Hall 804Table 8M Pottery and Artefacts at south end of Room 804Table 8N Grid for Soil Layer C27:48 with Pottery Pail and Artefact

numbersTable 8P Pottery and Artefacts in Room 804, upper storeyTable 8Q Pottery and Artefacts in Room 806Table 8R Pottery and Artefacts in Room 805Table 8S Pottery and Artefacts in Room 805, upper storeyTable 8T Pottery and Artefacts in Room 803Table 8U Pottery and Artefacts west of Doorway E in Room 802Table 8V Pottery and Artefacts in Room 802Table 8W Pottery and Artefacts in Room 802, upper storeyTable 8X Classes of Pottery in Building 800

Table 8AA Room Size and Proportion in Building 700Table 8BB Location and Width of DoorwaysTable 8CC Wall Thickness in centimetresTable 8DD Strata for Field DTable 8EE Harris Matrix of Soil Layers in Probe into Iron Age Room

714Table 8FF Pottery and Artefacts from Room 714Table 8GG Pottery and Artefacts from Room 712Table 8HH Pottery and Artefacts from Room 712, upper storeyTable 8JJ Pottery and Artefacts from R713Table 8KK Iron Age Pottery and Artefacts from R713, upper storey

Table 9A Room Size and Proportion (B905, B910)Table 9B Location and Width of DoorwaysTable 9C Wall Thickness in centimetresTable 9D Strata for the Buildings on the Southeastern TerraceTable 9E Pottery and Artefacts in Room 907, upper storeyTable 9F Pottery and Artefacts in Room 909Table 9G Pottery and Artefacts in Room 909, upper storeyTable 9H Room Size and Proportion (B900)Table 9J Location and Width of Doorways (B900)Table 9K Wall Thickness in centimetres (B900)Table 9L Pottery and Artefacts in Room 901Table 9M Pottery and Artefacts in Room 901, upper surfaceTable 9N Pottery and Artefacts in Room 903, upper surfaceTable 9P Pottery and Artefacts in Room 904

Table 9Q TJ- Burial 1: Child’s skeletal metrics (mm)

Table 10A Thickness of Walls in Tall Jawa Structures in centimeters

Table 11A Roof Roller (TJ 381) analysisTable 11B Plaster samplesTable 11C Plaster analysesTable 11D Guestimate of the chemistry of the local sedimentary material

mixed with lime to make plasterTable 11E Plaster analyses, sorted by site locationGraph 11.1 Al versus CaGraph 11.2 Na versus Ca

Table 14A List of Fields in each Record of the Database

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1.1 Map of #Amman region, showing location of Tall Jawa(P. Schaus)

Fig. 1.2 Topographical Map, by G. Johnson; working grid showingFields and Squares (R. Force)

Fig. 1.3 East-west profile, North-south profile, prepared by R. ForceFig. 1.4 Tall Jawa in relation to Field M

Fig. 3.1 Location map of Tall Jawa in central JordanFig. 3.2 Bedrock and structural geology in the vicinity of Tall Jawa

Fig. 4.1 Excavation Grid in Field AFig. 4.2 Field A at beginning of excavation in 1989, showing modern

field walls and location of deep probe (A13:2)Fig. 4.3 Building 50, with Walls 1015 and W1016 in deep probeFig. 4.4 Iron Age I Wall 1016 and Wall 1015 at rightFig. 4.5 North balk, showing position of W1016 in relation to

Stratum-VIII Wall 1009Fig. 4.6 West balk, showing the collapse of debris layers A13:33, 29,

35 in Building 50Fig. 4.7 Collared-rim pithoi, 1) V8 (A13/88.2), 2) V10 (A14/36.1), 3)

V16 (E54/172.80), 4) V11 (A13/106.1); kraters, 5) V004, 6)V007

Fig. 4.8 Cooking pot, 1) sherd A2.67.11; bowls, 2) V1, 3) V2, 4) V3;jug, 5) sherd TJA13.113.1

Fig. 5.1 Casemate Wall system in Field E to the north, Fields E and Bto the west, Fields B and A to the southwest, and Field C tothe southeast

Fig. 5.2 Stratum IX Solid Wall in Field E, with Passageway 309 onright

Fig. 5.3 North face of Wall 3006, with Offset E54–bFig. 5.4 North face of Outer Wall 3006Fig. 5.5 Retaining Wall 3023 on North slope in Fields F–GFig. 5.6 Passageway 309 between Outer Wall 3006 on right, and Wall

3018 on leftFig. 5.7 Solid Wall 3050 in Fields E and BFig. 5.8 Wall 2023 looking north toward offset/inset B25–gFig. 5.9 Wall 2023 and Tower 2024, with Passageway 219Fig. 5.10 Guardroom 221, with Tower 2024 on left, and Outer Wall

2023 on the right

Fig. 5.11 South Wall 2009+1003, with Retaining Wall 1001 in Field AFig. 5.12 Outer Wall 1003 with Glacis A2:30, looking westFig. 5.13 Retaining Wall 1001, in Field AFig. 5.14 Stratum-VIIIB Casemate Walls in Field EFig. 5.15 South face of Inner Casemate Wall 3000 in Room 313;

boulder-and-chink construction with mud mortarFig. 5.16 Corridor 328 leading to Passageway 309, looking NorthFig. 5.17 Casemate Room 301 on the left, with Inner Casemate Wall

3000 in the centreFig. 5.18 Stratum VIIIB–A Casemate System and Drain B24:24 in

Field BFig. 5.19 Drain B24:24 looking east into Channel 218Fig. 5.20 Sump with Retaining Wall 2041 on right; cut through layers

of Glacis B24:4Fig. 5.21 Inner Casemate Wall 2004 in foreground, and W2000+2001

in background, looking southFig. 5.22 Drain Channel 218, south side, with Doorway K

(Stratum VIIIB) and Doorway A Stratum VIIIA, intoRoom 210

Fig. 5.23 Drain Channel 218, north side, with excavation through sumpat west (left)

Fig. 5.24 Casemate Rooms in Field A, with Doorway H connectingCasemate Room 121 with Building 113

Fig. 5.25 Casemate Room 121 with Stratum-VIIIA Wall 1004 inbackground

Fig. 5.26 Tower 2013 in Casemate Wall System, South of Building 204Fig. 5.27 Basin B44:4 reused in Inner Casemate Wall 2007Fig. 5.28 Inner Casemate Room 201+R200 and Room 101 in

Stratum VIIIAFig. 5.29 Casemate Room 201 on right of Inner Casemate Wall 1004Fig. 5.30 Total Wall System in Field C (C-west and C-east)Fig. 5.31 Casemate Room 801 with relevant locus numbersFig. 5.32 Casemate Room 801 with later phase Inner Casemate Wall

8004 over Wall 8005Fig. 5.33 Bastion 9007 with Buttress Wall 9008 and Retaining Wall

9015Fig. 5.34 Bastion 9007 with Buttress Wall 9008 on left

Fig. 6.1 Excavation Grid in Fields A–BFig. 6.2 Building 102 in Fields A and BFig. 6.3 Stratum IX loci in Room 120Fig. 6.4 Room 120 partially filled with upper-storey mud-brick

collapse; stacked boulder pillars visible in Wall 1022Fig. 6.5 North end of Building 102; Room 214 in foreground leads

into Rooms 217 and R111; Room110/120 is in the upper leftFig. 6.6 Building 102, with relevant Stratum-VIII locus numbersFig. 6.7 Room 110, looking west at Wall 1023

Fig. 6.8 South side of Building 102, with Rooms 104 and R105 at theend of the 1989 season

Fig. 6.9 Building 102, looking east with Rooms 214, R215 and R204(left to right)

Fig. 6.10 Building 113 in relation to Building 102 and the CasemateWall System

Fig. 6.11 Building 113 with relevant locus numbers for Strata VIIIB–AFig. 6.12 Pithoi smashed on floor in Room 106, around Mortar A13:23Fig. 6.13 Pithos Oven A14:25Fig. 6.14 Building 100 in Fields A–B, showing position of ovensFig. 6.15 Building 100 with relevant locus numbers, Stratum VIIIFig. 6.16 Room 122 with Wall 1012 above Surface A3:29.Fig. 6.17 South half of Room 202 with ovens and Partition Wall 2019;

Inner Casemate Wall 1004 on rightFig. 6.18 Oven B63:29 on left; Hearth B63:32 on rightFig. 6.19 Oven B63:30 with stones and plaster around upper edge;

plaster seals against Wall 1004Fig. 6.20 Oven B63:30 with pithos body and rim exposedFig. 6.21 Building 200 in Field BFig. 6.22 Building 200, with relevant locus numbersFig. 6.23 Looking south into Room 212 in Building 200Fig. 6.24 Oven B34:54 at left and Pithos Oven B34:50 at rightFig. 6.25 Pithos Oven B34:50, in situFig. 6.26 Clay Oven B34:54, in situFig. 6.27 Casemate Room 215 with Doorway C on left and Doorway B

in upper leftFig. 6.28 Building 204, Work Area 211, Room 207 and R208Fig. 6.29 Building 204 and Work Area 211 with relevant locus numbersFig. 6.30 Broken artefacts on surface in Work Area 211Fig. 6.31 Work Area 211 in relation to Building 204Fig. 6.32 Building 204 looking East

Fig. 7.1 Excavation Grid in Field EFig. 7.2 Building 300, Field EFig. 7.3 Building 300, western unit, Stratum VIIIBFig. 7.4 Building 300, Room 303+304, showing makeup (E44:12)

under earliest surface (E44:11); row of cobbles (E44:13) at baseof W3000

Fig. 7.5 Building 300, Room 303, with pottery in situ on SurfaceE54:31

Fig. 7.6 Room 303 in background, Room 305 in foreground; Room302 on right.

Fig. 7.7 Building 300, Room 315, Oven E53:23Fig. 7.8 Building 300, Room 305, Mortar E53:54, and bench with

loom weights in situFig. 7.9 Building 300, central unit, Stratum VIIIB

Fig. 7.10 Room 302, with Bench E54:24 on left, Bedrock work surfacein center, Boulder Mortar E54:38 in between

Fig. 7.11 Room 306 on the right; Room 302 on left with HearthE54:43 on upper left

Fig. 7.12 Building 300, eastern unit, with relevant locus numbersFig. 7.13 Room 312, pithos (V392) in situFig. 7.14 Room 314, looking north, Wall 3027 on rightFig. 7.15 Building 300, western unit, Stratum VIIIAFig. 7.16 Building 300, western unit, Room 319, 315, 305 (left to right),

Corridor 316 with stairs in Doorway J (foreground)Fig. 7.17 Building 300, Room 315, with cobblestone floor and pillared

wallsFig. 7.18 Room 319, Oven E63:10Fig. 7.19 Building 300, central unit, Stratum VIIIAFig. 7.20 Room 302, Bench E54:24 with broken potteryFig. 7.21 Room 306, pottery in situFig. 7.22 Cistern area with Wall 3009 on left, and Wall 3008 on right of

Cistern E64:13Fig. 7.23 Cistern E64:13, north-south section; drawn by J.

R. BattenfieldFig. 7.24 Cistern E64:13, plan and section drawings, showing location

of drain holes and mouth; drawn by J. R. BattenfieldFig. 7.25 Cistern E64:13 and its surroundingsFig. 7.26 Building 300, eastern unit, with relevant locus numbers

Fig. 8.1 Excavation Grid in Field CFig. 8.2 Building 800Fig. 8.3 Building 800, with relevant locus numbersFig. 8.4 Deep probe in Room 811, showing Pier A84:6 with Doorway

K at right, and upper storey flagstonesFig. 8.5 East side of Building 800, with; Room 809 in the lower left,

Room 808, Corridor 810, Doorway H, and Central Hall 804on the right

Fig. 8.6 Room 809, Hearth A93:27Fig. 8.7 Room 807, looking east toward Doorway GFig. 8.8 Central Hall 804, with Room 803 on lower leftFig. 8.9 Pottery and artefacts in collapsed debris on Staircase C27:43Fig. 8.10 Central Hall 804, looking south, with base rocks of twin ovens

in front of Pillared Wall 8015Fig. 8.11 Oven C27:68, with packed plaster and stones, in front of

Boulder C27:83Fig. 8.12 Room 805, with Basin C27:27 in southwest corner; Room 803

is on the rightFig. 8.13 Room 802, looking south toward stacked-boulder Wall 8012Fig. 8.14 Room 802, loom weights in niche in Wall 8012Fig. 8.15 Excavation Grid in Field DFig. 8.16 Building 700 in Field D

Fig. 8.17 Building 700 with relevant locus numbersFig. 8.18 View of Wall 7031 in Room 714 below W6004, with Lintel

D13:13 and later Umayyad Wall 6016 (D13:8)Fig. 8.19 Probe in Room 714, looking north; Lintel D13:13 over

Doorway E is on the leftFig. 8.20 Room 718 on left, with Doorway D on left and Doorway C at

north end of Pier Wall 7028 (during excavation)Fig. 8.21 Pier Wall 7028 and fill in Doorway DFig. 8.22 Limestone basin below floor in Room 707Fig. 8.23 Staircase D23:43; Doorway B is on the left and Doorway A

with Lintel D23:41 in place is on the rightFig. 8.24 Looking east in Room 716 at Wall 7021 and Doorway A into

Room 707Fig. 8.25 Cistern D15:2, north of Building 700; drawn by J.

R. Battenfield.

Fig. 9.1 Excavation Grid in Field C-east (C41–C91/C47–C97)Fig. 9.2 Plan of Building 910, Field C-eastFig. 9.3 Construction of outer West Wall 9019 and South Wall 9018,

showing diagonal linking stone (C65:38)Fig. 9.4 Gate Building 910 with lower Bastion 9007Fig. 9.5 Plan of Building 905, Field C-east; Stratum VIIAFig. 9.6 North face of Partition Wall 9023Fig. 9.7 Room 907, with pillar bases (C65:29, 30, 32)Fig. 9.8 Human remains in upper storey collapse of Room 907Fig. 9.9 Room 908 (left) and south end of R907; Partition Wall 9023,

East Wall 9021 in foregroundFig. 9.10 Plan of Building 905, Field C-east, with Locus numbersFig. 9.11 Room 909, looking east through Doorway J; Pavement

C76:16 at leftFig. 9.12 Building 905, looking east from R907 into R909 on left and

R910 in middle distanceFig. 9.13 Installation C75:10 in Room 910Fig. 9.14 Hearth C75:9, in Room 910Fig. 9.15 Building 905, with Room 908 in lower left, and R913 in

upper leftFig. 9.16 Room 712Fig. 9.17 Building 900, Field C-eastFig. 9.18 Oven C54:18 with Windbreak Stone C54:19, in Room 901Fig. 9.19 North end of Room 901 with Corridor 903 and Doorway A

at leftFig. 9.20 Building 900, with relevant locus numbersFig. 9.21 Wall 9000 at south end of Room 904, with Doorway DFig. 9.22 Artefacts in place in Room 904, between Bin C53:17 and

Doorway DFig. 9.23 Burial 1Fig. 9.24 Stone-lined cist grave C54:8

Fig. 10.1 Boulder-and-chink wall with doorway; previously published(Daviau 1999: fig. 5.1), reprinted with permission

Fig. 10.2 Stacked boulder W3005; previously published (Daviau 1999:fig. 5.3c), reprinted with permission

Fig. 10.3 Stacked boulder and pillar W3027; previously published(Daviau 1999: fig. 5.3b), reprinted with permission

Fig. 10.4 1) TJ 381, 2) TJ 814, 3) TJ 589Fig. 10.5 1) TJ 301, 2) TJ 960, 3) TJ 1480Fig. 10.6 Limestone Trough C27:27 in Room 805Fig. 10.7 Limestone trough from Room 715 in Building 700Fig. 10.8 Boulder Mortar A13.23; in Room 106

Fig. 12.1 Typical Stratum-VIII pottery from Field A; 1) V125(A14/29.4), 2) V118 (A14/29.1), 3) V189 (A13/53.4), 4)V101 (A13/87.1), 5) V145 (A13/39.2), 6) V147 (A13/29.3)

Fig. 12.2 Hippo style storejars from Fields A and E; 1), V126(A14/59.1), 2) V497 (E55/52.1)

Fig. 12.3 Typical Stratum-VIII vessels from Field E; 1) V425(E54/76.1), 2) V318 (E53/13.2), 3) V429 (E65/9.1), 4)V361 (E65/6.1), 6) V351 (E65/6.1), 7) V438 (E54/85.1)

Fig. 12.4 Typical Stratum-VIII vessels from Fields B and E; 1) V221(B63/63.4), 2) V512 (E64/72.3), 3) V314 (E54/170.7), 4)V462 (E54/89.6)

Fig. 12.5 Typical Stratum-VII vessels; 1) V808 (C17/71.6), 2) V812(C27/52.7), 3) V790 (C17/86.3), 4) V924 (C65/60.9), 5)V893 (A83/45.1), 6) V822 (C27/10.1), 7) V703 (D21/20.1),8) V879 (A83/98.2)

Fig. 12.6 Typical Stratum-VII vessels; 1) V795 (C17/85.7), 2) V786(C17/86.2)

Fig. 14.1 Main screen of the Tall Jawa information systemFig. 14.2 File submenuFig. 14.3 Copy to ClipBoard submenuFig. 14.4 One field from the registration portion of the databaseFig. 14.5 Record control objectFig. 14.6 Artefact Image control objectFig. 14.7 Search controls areaFig. 14.8 Accessing the Control PanelFig. 14.9 Accessing Add/Remove ProgramsFig. 14.10 Removing the Iron Age program

PART ONE

OVERVIEW

THE SITE AND ITS REGIONAL SETTING

Location and Identification

Tall Jawa (Tell Gâwa; Palestine Grid, 238.2E/140.8N)1 is a smallmound, located west northwest of the modern town of Jawa, 2.2 kmnortheast of al-Yadudah, and 10.9 km south of #Amman. The ancientsite2 stands as a mound of ruins overlooking the plain of Madaba fromthe east (Fig. 1.1, see also Fig. 3.1). At an elevation of 928 masl,3 TallJawa dominates the skyline for several kilometres in every direction. Tothe south, one can see the fortified tower immediately north of Tallar-Rufaisa (RS 22;4 Boling 1989:134; Franken and Abujaber 1989: fig.C23a). Visible to the northwest are Khirbat as-Suq and the outskirtsof modern West #Amman (#Abdun). Coming from the south, Tall Jawaforms the eastern skyline of the Balqa hills, whereas coming from theeastern plain near Sa .hab, the tell has an even more imposing appear-ance, with the northeast scarp and standing casemate wall clearly visi-ble (Boling 1989: fig. 5.58).

In view of its proximity to the Iron Age capital city of Rabbath-Ammon, Tall Jawa was an excellent candidate for a research projectdesigned to investigate the extent of the Ammonite kingdom and itscultural characteristics. This was confirmed by the recovery of Iron Age

1 The full reference in JADIS includes the following coordinates: UTME 7773;UTMN 35686; PGE 238.200; PGN 140.800; JADIS Site #2314.048 (Palumbo1994:2.137). Changes in orthography for place names, established by the Royal Geo-graphical Service since 1994, are gradually being adopted. When excavations began atTall Jawa, this change had not yet taken place and the older orthography is reflected inpublished articles and preliminary reports.

2 In certain Madaba Plains Project reports (Younker and Daviau 1993; Younker1999:17; Herr and Najjar 2001:334–336), the site is identified as “Tell Jawa (South),”or “Jawa South”, due to the better-known Early Bronze Age site of Jawa in Jordan’seastern desert (Helms 1973; JADIS Site #3319.010; Palumbo 1994:2.189). However,this is not its official name, and probably derives from the discovery of Roman periodstatues in the area of the modern village of Jawa (JADIS Site #2314.135)

3 A Royal Geographical Service Control Monument is located 0.17 m north of thenortheast corner of Square A69.

4 Madaba Plains Project Regional Survey site number.

Figure 1.1. Map of #Amman region, showing location of Tall Jawa (P. Schaus).

sherds dating primarily to the Iron Age II by the Madaba Plains ProjectRegional Survey in 1984 (Boling 1989:144). Already after the firstexcavation season, it was clear that the ceramic material shared muchin common with that found at Tall al-#Umayri, which has producednumerous inscribed seals and a small number of ostraca that clearlydemonstrate its Ammonite character (Younker 1985; Herr 1997).5 Thevalue of Tall Jawa as a research project was enhanced by the factthat this ancient site was not excavated prior to our interest in it. Asa result, the tell was well preserved, with only limited disruption ofthe archaeological record by modern agricultural use and by a certainamount of bulldozer activity on the eastern half of the upper surfaceand against the south slope.

The lack of interest in the mound may, in part, be the result ofthe limited historical information available concerning the kingdom ofAmmon. It appears that Ammon became a tributary state of Assyriaafter the expansionist campaigns of Tiglath-pileser III, but was never

5 Ammonite ostraca were also found at .Hesban (Cross 1986; Cross and Geraty1994) and at Tall al-Mazar in the Jordan Valley (Yassine and Teixidor 1986). For themost recent studies of Ammonite inscriptions and their phonology, morphology andsyntax, see Aufrecht (1989; 1999).

converted into an Assyrian province (Bienkowski 2000:45). Althoughreferences to the kingdom of Bît Ammana (Hübner 1992:183) appearin Assyrian texts (Millard 1992:35), few Ammonite sites have beenlocated whose ancient names are known, apart from Rabbath-Ammonand .Heshbon. The modern name (Tall Jawa) was that known to late19th and early 20th century explorers, whereas local people now call thesite, “The Rock”. To date, its ancient name remains a mystery (Younkerand Daviau 1993, pace Kallai 1993; Elitzur 1989).

Previous Exploration in Central Transjordan

The earliest 19th century references to Tall Jawa are found in Seet-zen (Scháua; apud Brünnow and von Domaszewski 1904:179), andlater in Warren (1870:291), and in Conder (Jâwah, s×n~; 1889:109),who says that this large ruin lies “on a prominent knoll beyond the"Adwan border”. In the report of their survey of Transjordan, Brün-now and von Domaszewski (1904:179) mention that they passed by thesite of Gâwa in April 1897, on their way from al-Qas.tal to #Amman.In 1900 and 1901, Alois Musil (1907:218) visited Tall Jawa, which hedescribed as a fortress located 2 km northeast of al-Yaduda. Musil sug-gested that the name Khirbat Nefa#a preserved the name of biblicalMepha#ath (Jos. 13:18, Jer. 48:21; Eusebius, Onomastica Sacra, Kloster-mann 1966:128–129), and that of the Roman camp known as CastronMefaa (Notitia Dignitatum, Bocking 1839–1853:82, 362–363). Since notell of that name was to be found at Khirbat Nefa#a, he thought thatTall Jawa was the location of the biblical period site (Musil 1907:352).6

This suggestion was immediately accepted by Clermont-Ganneau(1901), who was engaged in a debate concerning the location of theLevitical city of Mepha#at,7 and by Alt (1933:28), following his visitto the site in 1932. Other scholars, including Glueck (1934:4), Simons(1959:207), Abel (1967:385),8 who refers to Alt, van Zyl (1960:94), and

6 The geography of the immediate vicinity of Tall Jawa, in relation to KhirbatNefa#a, is shown most clearly in the study of the Joshua texts by Mittmann (1995:abb. 2). However, its position does not correspond to Musil’s report that Nefa#a is on thenorth slope of Tall Jawa; according to Mittmann, it lies to the northeast of Tall Jawa.

7 This debate continues to exercise scholars; see Dearman (1989b).8 Abel (1967:70) referred to biblical texts in Jos 21:36 f., 1 Chron 6:63 f., Jos 21:38

f. and 1 Chron 6:65 f., which placed Mepha#ath in Reubenite territory, an area whichencircled Ammonite territory along a line that ran from Nepha#a, past al-Yadudah toNaur. However, Mittmann (1995:19) has shown that Tall Jawa is 10 km north of thenorthern boundary of Reuben, according to the oldest stratum of Josh 13:15–23.

Boling (Geraty et al. 1989:144), all accepted this designation. What wasforgotten in this discussion is the evidence of Jerome who prepared aLatin translation of the Onamasticon in 390 AD, in which he mentionsthat there was a praesidium of Roman soldiers stationed at Mefaath,because of its isolated location (Klostermann 1966:129). After 6 seasonsof excavation and investigation at Tall Jawa, there was no evidence foroccupation between the Iron Age and the late Byzantine–early Islamicperiod.

Nelson Glueck conducted the first archaeological survey of the tellin 1933.9 He approached the site from the direction of #Amman andidentified “Jawah” as an oval tell, extending east-west, and measuringapproximately 100× 200 m (Glueck 1934:4; Jawah, Site 1 on his map,pl. 1). Glueck recognized the circuit of the city wall, which surroundsthe summit of the mound, and the revetment evident on the northside. Ever conscious of the need for water near ancient sites, Gluecklocated several cisterns outside the city wall on the east side of thetell (Glueck 1934:4). However, no mention was made of the press-like installation and cave located on the east slopes of Tall Jawa, orof the numerous collapsed buildings still visible on the summit. Glueckcollected surface pottery, which he dated to Early Bronze III,10 IronAge I and II (1934:4). Of significance is the fact that Glueck didnot identify any Roman or late Roman (Byzantine) period pottery,11

although he did see some glazed sherds that he called simply “Arabic”.Excavations at the site have confirmed Glueck’s observations to the

extent that no Roman period remains have been recovered, with theexception of a handful of small sherds consisting of Nabataean paintedpottery, one fragment of Eastern terra sigillata, and several early Romanundecorated sherds from the surface. The fortification wall visible toearly travellers dates to the Iron Age, while Building 600, visible aboveground level, was occupied during the Umayyad period, possibly as lateas the early Abbasid period. Later material consists of one glazed “Ara-

9 For a review of 20th century surveys and excavations in the region of Ammon, seeYounker (1999).

10 Although Glueck promised to publish the pottery from his survey sites (1934:4,n. 12), this material is still unpublished. As a result, it is not possible to see whether theinverted bowl rim that he identified as EB III does indeed date to that period. What isextremely common at Tall Jawa are inverted rim bowls, some with dark red slip, thatdate to Iron Age II.

11 Glueck made no mention of the visits of earlier explorers to the site of Tell Jawa,nor to Abel’s judgment that the building remains visible on the summit dated to theRoman period.

bic” sherd, the sherds of a brittle ware cooking pot (V658)12 recoveredin an early Islamic house (Building 600), some “Arab geometric” sherdsand fragments of clay smoking pipes, all of which may have been usedand discarded at the site sometime after Building 600 went out of use(Daviau and Beckman, 2001:265–266).

To date, no Roman or Byzantine period settlements have been foundin the immediate area of the tell, let alone a Roman military camp.The closest site with Roman and Byzantine period remains is Yadudah(Franken and Abujaber 1989), where Roman milestones can be seenre-used as roof supports in caves (Boling 1989: figs. 8.38–40). Vaultedtombs, already cut open by quarrying activities and containing stonesarcophagi, were seen in Yadudah by Buckingham (1825, apud Brün-now and von Domaszewski 1904:179). Tombs and floors covered withmosaics are visible at Khan Zaman, on the north side of the #Amman-Madaba Road. Evidence for occupation somewhere in the area of thevillage during the early Roman period is represented by a group ofceramic statues of Venus in the National Museum in #Amman thatcome from “Jawa south”. The only known structure from the Romanperiod, excavated by the Tall Jawa Project in 1994 and 1995, is Tomb1, located on the east side of the village of Jawa. This tomb had beenrobbed in antiquity and is currently being used for garbage disposal.Precise dating of the original use phase of the tomb is facilitated by thediscovery of a Herodian style lamp, smashed on the bench in front ofthe loculi. From this limited evidence for settlement in the area dur-ing the Roman period, and the complete lack of any material remainsfor the 4th–6th centuries AD, it would probably be more productive ifTall Jawa were no longer considered in the quest for the location ofthe Roman fort, Castron Mefaa (Younker and Daviau 1993; Piccirillo1990:527–41). The identification of Khirbat Nefa#a as the bearer ofthe name of Roman period Mefaa has not yet been substantiated. Theprecise location of the Roman site is still under discussion (Mittmann1995), as is the site of biblical Mepha#ath.13 In fact, the region of Ummar-Rasas corresponds better with the biblical references to Mepha#ath,especially those in Jer. 28:41, which presents a list of towns locatednorth of the Arnon (Wadi Mujib) in the region of Dibon. Such alocation for biblical Mepha#ath would suggest that it was located inMoabite territory, rather than 40 km further north at Tall Jawa, a site

12 See discussion of vessel numbers in Table 2A.13 For the most recent discussion, see MacDonald (2000:136).

which appears to have been located securely in Ammonite territory.Indeed, this suggestion is supported by current excavations (Dearman1989a:183; Schick 1991:63, n. 56). When all is said and done, only thearchaeological record can provide evidence for the identification of TallJawa, and to date there is no firm evidence for its ancient name.14

Recent Exploration by the Madaba Plains Project

In 1984, R. Boling conducted a surface survey at Tall Jawa for theMadaba Plains Project Regional Survey (RS Site #29). He estimatedthe accumulation of occupation debris to be 1.50–3.00 m above bed-rock. The period of heaviest ceramic representation was Iron Age II(early and late), with lesser evidence for other periods, including EarlyBronze, Iron Age I, Late Roman, Byzantine and Umayyad (Boling1989:144). During six seasons of excavation, only a handful of sherdswith a high organic content could be tentatively dated to the EarlyBronze Age, and these sherds may in fact date to Iron Age I. Thissupports Glueck’s view (1937:21) that there are no real tells on theTransjordanian plateau in his survey area. Most sites dating to theIron Age were new settlements, rather than a rebuilding on an artificialmound above earlier occupation.

Site SizeIn 1989, G. Johnson (Madaba Plains Project Land Surveyor) preparedthe initial topographical map of the tell.15 The area within the perime-ter walls measures ca. 20,850 m2, 2.08 hectares, or approximately 5acres. This puts Tall Jawa well within the range of Iron Age II resi-dential towns, such as Bethel, Beth Shemesh, Tell en-Na.sbeh, and Tallal-#Umayri.

14 A suggestion by Younker (personal communication, October 30, 1992) to recon-sider Du Buit’s identification of Tall Jawa as Abel Keramim, a site mentioned in theitinerary of Thutmosis III (Redford 1982) is not supported by the results of our excava-tions. At least, no occupation remains dating to LB I–LB II are present in the excavatedareas; most Iron Age II buildings at Tall Jawa are footed on bedrock.

15 Robert Force, Ontario Land Surveyor, prepared the final maps of the site, basedon a new set of readings taken in 1992.

Table 1A. Size of Iron Age Fortified Residential Towns in Cisjordan (in hectares)16

Sites in Cisjordan 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Beer-sheba 1Bethel 1.4+Beth Shemesh 2.6Tel Beth Shean 1.4Tell Beit Mirsim 3Tel Halif (Lahav) 1Tell en-Na.sbeh 3

Table 1B. Size of Iron Age Fortified Residential Towns in Transjordan (in hectares)17

Sites in Transjordan 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Tall Dayr #Alla 0.6?Dibon 3Lehun (Iron II) 0.8+Safut 0.5?Tall al-#Umayri 2Tall Jawa 2

The north slope of the tell may also have been part of the ancientsettlement. However, only limited archaeological evidence was foundhere, because much of this area was destroyed by a road which cutsinto bedrock, ca. 18.00 m from the encircling walls. Further north andeast, extramural occupation has been obscured by the development inthis century of the modern town of Jawa.

Topography (Figs. 1.2, 1.3)The top of the tell is relatively flat (927–924 masl), with an officialbench mark (928.00 masl) located on a mound of debris slightly westof centre. The site is surrounded by a double wall line made of largeboulders, and includes, within the walls, the visible remains of approx-imately 20 collapsed buildings and one cistern,18 probably all in usein the Umayyad period contemporary with Building 600 in Field D.19

The most recent structures are a series of property walls constructed oflimestone and chert boulders, many positioned above the ancient wall

16 Both Table 1A and 1B are adapted from Daviau 1997c: Table 1. The recent ex-cavations of Mazar (2001:290) provide updated data for the size of Tel Beth Shean.

17 The size of several sites is only approximate, due to limited excavations or todamage in modern times that has reduced the extent of the Iron Age remains.

18 These remains are located in Fields D, F, G, and H.19 The final report for Building 600 is in preparation.

Figure 1.2. Topographical Map, by G. Johnson;working grid showing Fields and Squares (R. Force).

lines. Within the field walls, limited areas of the tell have been plowedand used for growing grain. Apparently, this activity has been going onfor some time, since Glueck observed during his visit in 1933 (1934:4)that the top of the tell had been plowed in preparation for planting.20

More recently, a certain amount of bulldozer activity on the tell, east ofField D, formed a scarp through the Iron Age remains. A second seriesof levelling activities related to road building and construction were car-ried out on the south side of the tell, adjacent to Fields A–B. On thesouth, this cut exposed, and partially destroyed the face of a retainingwall (Chapter 5, below), but did minimal damage to the tell itself. Atthe southwest corner in Field B, a bulldozer cut a path onto the tell;a second path running east was cut from the levelled area, along thesouth side, up onto the east end of the mound, through Field C. Bothof these paths cut through the Iron Age fortification walls.

South of the tell, 16.00 m from Field A, is the mouth of a cisternin Field S. Documentation and soundings were undertaken in this caveduring 1992. On the west side two modern houses, which belong tothe landowner and his relatives, were founded on bedrock; these prop-erties are parallel to the casemate wall. In addition, the mouth of acave in the bedrock is located between these modern houses, and is

20 Glueck did not mention the modern property walls, which severely restrict exca-vation. It is possible that these walls had not yet been built.

Figure 1.3. East-west profile, North-south profile, prepared by R. Force.

one of nine caves and/or cisterns documented by the Madaba PlainsProject on the west side of Tall Jawa (MPP Regional survey site #127).In this area, there are also several stone troughs and a large reservoir.The proximity of the cisterns to the wall system indicates a consider-able investment in time and energy devoted to water management ina region without a local spring (see Chapter 3). In 1989, the #UmayriRegional Survey team under the direction of J. R. Battenfield carriedout limited documentation and photography of these installations. Dueto the lack of soundings undertaken at MPP Site 127, the date of con-struction and use of these installations is not known, although Daviau(1992) observed one cistern in current use on private property.

Beginning 100 m south of the tell, there are two tongues of exposedbedrock, each measuring approximately 50.00× 200.00 m. Evidenceof human activity is most clearly seen in the eastern tongue (MPPRegional Survey #118; Field M; Fig. 1.4), where numerous quarrymarks, some forming rectangular installations, along with cisterns,caves, a possible animal herding area, sumps, channels, and a crush-ing stone are all visible. Two of these installations, designated Cave M-13 and Wine Treading Floor M-2, were excavated in 1991. Furtherdocumentation of rock-cut installations in Field M was carried out byBattenfield in 1992. At the present time, the entire area south of thetell is surrounded by new roads and is being developed into a hous-ing project. In view of the rapid changes in the area adjacent to thetell, excavation in 1995 was designed to reach floor level in every Iron

Figure 1.4. Tall Jawa in relation to Field M.

Age building under excavation, and with this goal accomplished, ourresearch at Tall Jawa came to an end.

EXCAVATION PROJECT AND RECORDING DESIGN

Introduction

Current archaeological research is designed with specific goals in mind,usually in the form of hypotheses concerning major cultural or societalchange that are tested in long term field projects, or for informationgathering in the case of short term salvage excavations or surfacesurveys. The decision to excavate the mound known at present as TallJawa falls into neither of these categories. This tell was known to existfrom the surveys of travellers and explorers such as Musil (1898–1902)and Glueck (1933–1937), but no subsequent research project had beenformulated that involved its excavation prior to 1989. Instead, it waspart of the overall strategy of the Madaba Plains Project1 to documentall sites lying in randomly chosen grid squares within a five kilometreradius around Tall al-#Umayri (Geraty et al. 1989:3) that brought TallJawa under the purview of Ø. S. LaBianca, director of survey and R.W. Younker, director of hinterland excavations.

In 1987, LaBianca and Younker prepared a list of several sites thatmight add to our knowledge of the settlement patterns and subsistencestrategies of the inhabitants of the Balqa hills bordering the MadabaPlains on the north. The sites approved by the Department of Antiq-uities of Jordan included al-Drayjat and Tall Jawa. In order to acquireadditional information concerning Iron Age settlement patterns, thetell at Jawa was chosen as a possible excavation site in view of theresults of the surface survey conducted by R. Boling in 1984. Thewriter, already a member of the Madaba Plains Project, was invitedby the directors to supervise the first season of excavations in 1989,due to her previous experience with stratified settlement sites at Tell

1 The Madaba Plains Project was formed to expand the work begun at Tall .Hesbanby Siegfried Horn of Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan. The .Hesbanexcavations (1968–1978) had been the training ground for many of the archaeologistswho formed the core staff of the Madaba Plains Project in 1984 (Geraty et al. 1989:3–4).

el-Hesi (Israel)2 and Tall al-#Umayri. The sounding conducted at TallJawa in 1989 was intended to identify various periods within the occu-pational sequence and confirm the ceramic chronology recovered byboth Glueck and Boling.3

What followed the 1989 season was a change in strategy for workat the site, and a plan to expose areas of a site that should prove tobe an enormous resource for a better understanding of the ancientAmmonites. The first factor that had an impact on the work at TallJawa was the Gulf War of 1990–1991. During that year, all Americanswere discouraged from travelling to the Middle East and this travel banincluded Jordan. While Canada had initially issued a travel restraint,that situation changed by March of 1991, allowing for tourist travelto Jordan during the summer of that year. As field director for theexcavations at Tall Jawa, the writer was able to organize a team thatwould work at the site for six weeks and represent the Madaba PlainsProject in Jordan for that season. L. T. Geraty, Senior Project Director,Ø. S. LaBianca, Survey Director, and D. R. Clark, Consortium Direc-tor provided much needed coordination and assistance. No excavationswere carried out at Tall al-#Umayri, the principal site of the MadabaPlains Project, nor was the regional survey in the field, except for LaBi-anca’s assistance with the investigation of Field M at Tall Jawa.4

The Tall Jawa Excavation Project

Following the 1991 season, it was apparent that the results of twoseasons of excavation provided enough architectural and artefactualmaterial for the writer to formulate a research design for continuedexcavation at the site with a focus on the Iron Age remains. Beginningin 1992, the Tall Jawa Excavation Project entered the field with its ownfunding and research design. The relationship with the Madaba PlainsProject Consortium, which had contributed so much to the Tall Jawaexcavations in terms of professional standing and specialist support,

2 Daviau was a member of the Joint Expedition to Tell el-Hesi in 1975 (under thename of Michèle Shuell), and in 1977 and 1981 (under her current name).

3 Preliminary reports were published as part of the Madaba Plains Project; seeYounker et al. (1990), Herr (1993), and LaBianca (1995).

4 Rock cut installations (260–300 m south of Control Point 2), dating primarily tothe Byzantine period, had been previously identified by the Madaba Plains ProjectRegional Survey (Site #118), although full documentation and limited excavations inField M were undertaken only in 1991.

was changed into a cooperative agreement between two independentprojects;5 this relationship allowed both teams to share information andthe services of certain specialists. The recording system in use by theMadaba Plains Project, designed by L. G. Herr, continued to be used atTall Jawa, with slight modification (for specific excavation procedures,see Herr 1989: 213–215). This choice represents a commitment tostandardization in recording techniques among scholars working incentral Transjordan.6

The tradition of running a field school as an integral part of aresearch programme was an important element in the Madaba PlainsProject. So too, the Tall Jawa Project continued this tradition, onewhich the director had experienced first at Morganville, New York,and later at Tell el-Hesi and Tall al-#Umayri. Although the training ofstudents may result in an occasional mistake in recording or drawing,the MPP system is such that all information in preserved through thedetail required on the locus sheets and top plans. The overwhelmingsatisfaction of training students certainly outweighs any minor prob-lems that may result from their initial lack of experience. Most grati-fying was the growing competence of those students who returned toTall Jawa year after year and contributed their expertise and enthusi-asm.

Excavation Areas

At the outset of excavation, there was no large-scale regional grid inplace at Tall Jawa, comparable to the grid at Tall al-#Umayri. There-fore, in 1989, a working grid was established that would serve forthe initial season. The location chosen for Field A (see Fig. 1.2) wasbased on the topography of the tell, the visibility at ground level ofthree parallel wall lines, and the concern that imminent constructionwould further damage the tell. In a sense this was an arbitrary decision,because there was as yet no long-range research strategy for this site.Four 6.00×6.00 m squares (A1–A4) were laid out from south to north,beginning at the level of bedrock exposed by modern bulldozer activity

5 Daviau assumed sole responsibility as director of excavations at Tall Jawa andbecame responsible for the research design, organization, financial arrangements andexecution of the field project, and for final publication.

6 The Tall Jawa recording system is now in use at Khirbat al-Mudayna on theWadi ath-Thamad, a research project in Moab that is sponsored by Wilfrid LaurierUniversity and directed by Daviau.

and running up and over the three parallel walls that were almost per-pendicular to the line of squares. A fifth square (A13), east of SquareA3, was also excavated during the first season.7

Research Design

The scholarly objectives of the research programme at Tall Jawa, were1) to define the basic characteristics of an Iron Age walled town incentral Transjordan in terms of its defensive strategies, its town planand its typical economic, political, religious and domestic structures,and 2) to determine the relationship of Tall Jawa to other nearbyAmmonite settlements. These objectives were further refined in orderto a) classify the particular style of casemate fortifications and gatestructure at Tall Jawa, b) determine the types of domestic and publicbuildings located within the walled town, c) identify the typologicaland technological traditions manifest in various classes of artefactsand pottery, and determine their place in the processual sequence ofcultural evolution during the Iron Age, and d) situate Tall Jawa in termsof its political, economic, and socio-technological integration within thecultural system of the Kingdom of Ammon.

With the development of this research strategy, it was necessary tofurther expose and analyse the building plans, room arrangement andactivity areas of the Iron Age II buildings. Already in 1991, Field A hadbeen expanded to the east (Squares A14, A24), and to the west (as FieldB) along the line of the fortification wall (Squares B63, B64; Figs. 1.2,6.1). Two other fields were opened in the 1991 season; Field C (west;C5–C6, C16–C17; Figs. 1.2, 8.1), located at the point where a terraceextended south and east of the central town area, and seemed to markthe end of the outer defence wall, and Field D (D2, D12, D21, D22;Figs. 1.2, 8.15), where a well-preserved building (B600) was visibleabove ground level.8

7 Field A was laid out by Tim Woodard, a member of the MPP Survey Team,under the direction of J. R. Battenfield.

8 Control Point 2 (924.462 masl), which marks the western edge of Field C islocated 3.80 m east of the west balk of A53 (in A63) and 2.30 m north of the northwestcorner of C7; Control Point 3 (26.202 masl), marking the southwest corner of D1, islocated due east of CP 2 and 3.33 m east of the east balk of C27. The south balkof Field D (Squares D1–D51) is located north of C37–C97, each of these squaresmeasuring 8.30 m north-south). These points were linked to Field A by Control Point 1(925.003 masl), located in A3 on the inner casemate wall. Abbas Khammash, TechnicalSurvey Studies Office, #Amman, Jordan, established these control points in 1991.

Further testing of the fortification system was planned for the 1992–1995 seasons as part of an attempt to identify further the defensivestrategies of the ancient inhabitants, and to determine the characteris-tics of the town plan. In view of this goal, Field E (Figs. 1.2, 7.1) wasopened in 1992 directly north of Field B and was expanded in subse-quent seasons. The western squares of Field B, which ran along the lineof the casemate wall were laid out and excavation began between thewall and the western tower. So too, the eastern squares in Field C werelaid out over the gate area and designated C-east.9 Iron Age remainswere present in each of these fields. Only in Field D was there evidencefor the later reuse of part of this site during the Umayyad period.

Field Recording

Recording in the field made use of the locus sheets of the MadabaPlains Project, along with additional data sheets, which were designedby the Tall Jawa team as needed. Individual locus sheets are designedto record all data for a particular type of feature; these include soil loci,architectural elements, installations and burials (see CD ROM). Theprimary locator for a given locus was the Field+Square; each squarewas designated by a field letter and square number, beginning in thesouthwest corner of each field and running north (1–10) and east (1–91).10 In certain instances, the grid at Tall Jawa was modified; at the eastend of Field A, Field C-west cut into several squares along the east sideof Field A (A61–A63). Locus numbers in this text are always identifiedwith the full field+square designation, and an individual locus num-ber, separated by a colon (A13:36).11 Because a certain feature couldrun through more than one square, that feature would initially havemore than one locus number. At the time of analysis and descriptionof such a locus, new numbers were assigned to streamline the system.

9 Robert T. Force, Ontario Land Surveyor, set the corners of squares in Fields B, E,and C-east. Field E was in line with Field B on the west, and began immediately northof B10–B70+A10–A30.

10 This grid is similar to that used at Tell el-Hesi in that the squares were pre-numbered and did not depend on the sequence of excavation. At Hesi, the fieldswere assigned Roman numerals and the squares were labelled “Area” 1, 2, etc. Onedifference is in direction, for example in Field I, Area 1 is located in the northeastcorner and the squares run north to south and east to west (Worrell and Betlyon 1989:fig. 4). At both sites, topography was the primary factor in the layout of the field.

11 Beginning in 1991, a cleanup locus, assigned the siglum 0.5, was the first locus ineach square. There is no real depth to this locus, so that topsoil is represented by Locus1.

For example, each wall was assigned a wall number (e.g., A4:5+B64:7is labelled W1005).12 For the most part, these numbers are keyed to theroom and building numbers assigned to architectural units in each field.Only a few numbers in the range assigned for each field were used; nev-ertheless, this numbering system of walls, rooms and buildings allowedfor easier report writing during each field season. In this text, the siglumW, R, or B is attached to the number, unless the full word is used imme-diately before the number (Wall 1005, Room 103, Building 200).

Table 2A. Range of Room, Building, Wall, and Vessel Numbers

Field Room Numbers Building Numbers Wall Numbers Vessel Numbers

Sub-A 001–099 001–099 1000–1999 001–099A 100–199 100–199 1000–1999 100–199B 200–299 200–299 2000–2999 200–299C (west) 800–899 800–899 8000–8999 750–899C (east) 900–999 900–999 9000–9999 900–999D 700–799 700–799 7000–7999 700–750E 300–399 300–399 3000–3999 300–499

The descriptions of wall construction and of rockfall from the walls,both in the text and in the running list of loci, refer to the sizes ofstones listed on the locus sheet. Because these sizes are so important toan understanding of the architecture, they are repeated here.

Table 2B. Sizes of Stones in Iron Age Masonry

Wall Stones Cobble size 0.06–0.25 mSmall boulder 0.25–0.50 mMedium boulder 0.50–0.75 mLarge boulder 0.75–1.00 mVery large boulder 1.00+m

Chinkstones Pebble size 0.002–0.06 mCobble size 0.06–0.25 m

Fill stones were given the same sizes as the wall stones.

12 For convenience, a complete list of loci and their descriptions is given on the CD-ROM; a list of wall numbers and their equivalent locus numbers is found in theAppendix. Data recording in the field was the responsibility of the square supervisor,usually a student with previous experience and training at Tall Jawa in the FieldSchool Programme. As a precaution against supervisor error, and in order to recorda maximum amount of data, a top plan was prepared for each locus, indicating itsrelation to other known loci, and its elevations, both top and bottom.

Material Culture Registration

According to the Madaba Plains Project system, diagnostic ceramicsherds are registered according to Field+Square, Pail and Item num-ber (A3.25.1), with each item separated by a period. Diagnostic sherdsinclude rims, bases, handles, and sherds that are painted, incised orreflect special surface treatment. This system was in use during allsubsequent seasons. In addition, after the first season, an attempt wasmade to save all red slipped and all black burnished sherds, as well asall body sherds that could be reconstructed. In order to indicate a spe-cific vessel, each partially reconstructed pot was assigned a vessel num-ber, which is linked in the pottery database to the individual sherds thatwent to make up that vessel (for example, V151=A3.28.2+A3.39:8;Daviau, in preparation).13

Objects were given running numbers (TJ 1–2238) with Field+Square, Pail, and Object number (E54.110.1119; Daviau 2002:20–23).14 Since object numbers never repeat, an individual item is occa-sionally referred to by the last number in the sequence (e. g., FigurineTJ 1119). Reworked sherds are also numbered consecutively, but onlyin the range of 101–499, and are distinguished from objects by theaddition of the year (92/108). Potter’s marks are numbered with theiryear in the range of 500–799 (93/508), and sherds that show evidenceof technological change or unique aspects of the potter’s craft (mendholes, etc.) were registered in the range of 800–999 (94/814). In thosecases where a sherd was also diagnostic, it received two registrationnumbers.

Using this Report

In this report, the stratigraphic history of the settlement at Tall Jawa isdescribed, beginning with the evidence for an Iron Age I village (Chap-ter 4). Following the destruction of this village, a fortification system

13 Iron Age I collared-rim pithos sherds that represent a distinct vessel were assignedvessel numbers in the range 1–99 (Sub-A), even if they were found in fields where allthe architecture dates to Iron Age II.

14 For the 1989 season, all Tall Jawa objects were entered in the MPP running objectlist, with a “U” prefix, indicating #Umayri. When these objects were turned over tothe Tall Jawa project in 1992, they were re-numbered and assigned TJ numbers inthe range 1–100. For the 1991 season, a new system was adopted for the Tall Jawaexcavations (for details, see Daviau 2002:20–22), and object registration began withnumber TJ 101.

was constructed and in use during Strata VIII and VII (middle-lateIron Age II; Chapter 5). This is followed by a description of eachmajor building, including details of construction, room arrangement,and artefact and pottery distribution within each room (Chapters 6–9).Additional analytical studies are also included which relate to archi-tectural styles, building materials and built-in features or installationspreserved in the Iron Age buildings, and an analysis of lime plasterin use on wall and floor surfaces (Chapters 10–11). A chronologicalsynthesis of the settlement history and notes on the political history ofthe Ammonites attempt to place Tall Jawa in its cultural and histori-cal context (Chapters 12–13).15 This volume concludes with a descrip-tion of the design and utilization of the CD-ROM (Chapter 14), whichincludes a list of loci, photographs, top plans, and section drawings forthe principal Iron Age buildings. Additional analysis has been reservedfor Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan, Vol. V: Survey and Ethography. This willinclude studies of activity areas and artefact distribution, a typology ofthe lithics and an analysis of the faunal material from the Iron Agetown, as well as a report on survey work and salvage excavations in thevicinity.

15 This volume is primarily a level III report with the inclusion of level IV synthesis;these “levels” of publication are those discussed in Steiner (2001:3), where she distin-guishes Level III, “full illustration and description of all structural and stratigraphicalrelationships” from Level IV, “synthesized descriptions with supporting data.”

PRELIMINARY GEOLOGICALOVERVIEW OF TALL JAWA

D W. S

Introduction

Tall Jawa1 is situated at the crest of an east-west ridge approximately928.00 m above sea level, at Palestine Grid coordinates of 238.2/140.8(Fig. 3.1). The site overlooks the southerly draining Wadi al-Hinu/WadiUmm al-Kudsh, to the west and the Wadi Hinu al-Marashida to theeast. The low relief topography of the Madaba plains stretches off tothe south and the southeast with Tall Jawa obtaining a commandingview of this region.

The ridge on which Tall Jawa is located slopes steeply down intoWadi al-Hinu/Umm al Kudsh to the west. To the north, the slope issomewhat more gentle, leading down into the broad wadi bottom ofWadi Hinu al-Marashida. To the south and east the slope is very gentlecomprising exposed bedrock ledges and thin soil mantles.

Regional Geology

Throughout the region investigated by the Madaba Plains Project, thebedrock exposed at the surface consists of Middle to Upper Cretaceouscarbonates, phosphorites and cherts. Quenell (1951) divided this UpperCretaceous succession into an upper part, termed the Balqa Series (nowBalqa Group) and a lower portion, termed the Ajlun Series (now AjlunGroup). In general, the younger, Balqa Series, possessed a greater pro-portion of siliceous lithologies (cherts and siliceous limestones). Laterauthors have further subdivided these two stratigraphic units as dis-cussed by Schnurrenberger (1991).

1 The editor has substituted certain changes in orthography and added certaininformation in order to update this chapter, which was first written in 1991.

Figure 3.1. Location Map of Tall Jawa in central Jordan.

Local Bedrock Geology

Tall Jawa lies at the southeasterly contact between two upper Creta-ceous carbonate units (Fig. 3.2). The lowermost carbonate unit (andoldest) is locally termed the Wadi Sir Formation (Masri 1963:Ktws).Bender (1968) and Grieger and Tuqan (1963) labelled the Wadi Sirformation, the Massive Limestone Member, for the Jordanian nationalmap. The upper, largely carbonate unit, is the lowermost part of theAmman formation of Masri (1963:Kcaa). Bender (1968) split the rocksinto the upper Massive limestone Member (comprising the Wadi al-Ghudran Formation) and the Silicified Limestone Member (Table 3A).

Figure 3.2. Bedrock and structural geology in the vicinity of Tall Jawa.

The upper portion of the Wadi Sir Formation is a somewhat thinlyand occasionally thickly-bedded, chalky limestone, with nari partings,chalky limestone and occasional chert nodules. The lower limestoneunits are relatively resistant to weathering and form small cliffs, or steps,in the hillside, visible across the wadi from Tall Jawa. The relativelythin, overlying Wadi al-Ghudran formation consists predominantly ofnon-competent yellowish marls and chalks. Due to the ease with whichthis formation is eroded, the Wadi al-Ghudran formation is not visiblein section, being always covered by colluvium. Overlying these rocks,the lower #Amman Formation consists of thin to thickly-bedded, brown,brecciated chert beds. The chert beds are readily apparent beneaththe crest of the hill and serve as a marker bed for the lower #AmmanFormation.

Both the ridge on which Tall Jawa was constructed, as well as thesmall hilltop approximately 300 m to the northwest of the tell, owetheir existence to a resistant capping of the chert beds at the base ofthe Amman Formation. The more gently sloping surface to the southof the site, the surface of which is pocked with rock cut features, marksthe upper surface of the Wadi Sir formation. Here the overlying resis-

tant chert beds and marl beds have been previously removed by ero-sion. Across the surface of this unit are numerous intact and collapsedcaverns. There features represent exposure through erosion of ancientkarst systems.

Quaternary Sediments

The late Quaternary sedimentary fill of the tell was not subjected tointensive analysis. However, the preliminary examination of the initialsquares (A1–A4 in 1989) makes possible the following comments con-cerning the derivation of the sediment making up the site.

The late Quaternary fill consists of very poorly sorted, matrix-supported, silty clays with numerous angular to sub-angular limestoneand chert gravel fragments. These sediments are primarily anthro-pogenic in origin, intermixed with probably considerable loess from thesurrounding Madaba Plains.

Table 3A. Stratigraphic position of the Upper Cretaceous carbonate formations underlyingTall Jawa2

2 Modified after Khalid (1985). Coloured portion indicates those formations under-lying the site. Group names after Quenell (1951). Member names after various authors.

References

Bender. F.1974 Geology of Jordan. In Contributions to the Regional Geology of the Earth, ed.

H. J. Marini. Supplementary Edition of Volume 7. Berlin: Gebruder Bor-traeger.

Grieger, J. and Z. Tuqan1963 Geology and phosphorite possibilities in the area between Ruseifa and

Jiza. Unpublished report of the Natural Resources Authority. Amman.Khalid, M. B.

1985 Sedimentology and microfacies of the Wadi Sir Formation in the Ajlun-Irbid area with a review of Turonian Lithostratigraphy in the Middle East.Unpublished Thesis, University of Jordan.

Masri, M. R.1963 Report on the Geology of the Amman-Zarqa area. Unpublished report of

the Natural Resources Authority, Amman.Quenell, A. M.

1951 The Geology and Mineral Resources of (former) Transjordan. ColonialGeology and Mineral Resources 2:85–115.

Schnurrenberger, D. W.1991 Preliminary Comments on the Geology of the Tell el-#Umeiri Region.

Pp. 370–376 in Madaba Plains Project 2. The 1987 Season at Tell el- #Umeiri andVicinity and Subsequent Studies. eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBiancaand R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

PART TWO

STRATIGRAPHIC EXCAVATIONS AT TALL JAWA

EVIDENCE FOR AN IRON AGE I SETTLEMENT

FIELD A: THE DEEP SOUNDING (1989)

Introduction

Several important Iron Age I settlements, including Sa .hab (Ibrahim1974, 1975) and Tall al-#Umayri (Clark 1996, 1997) provide evidencefor occupation in the land of the Benê #Ammôn, south of Rabbat-#Ammon.1 At these two sites, only limited areas of the Iron Age Isettlements have been exposed, so that the character of these settle-ments is not fully known.2 Tall al-#Umayri was fortified with a casematewall and contained one or more houses built up against the wall sys-tem. The most important finds here consist of a complete house thathad standing pillars to support the roof and an adjoining storeroombetween the inner and outer casemate walls, a room that was filled withstorejars containing a variety of food stuffs (Clark 1997:64; figs. 4.11–19). The ceramic forms, primarily the storejars with collared-rim, arethe best indicator that this site was occupied during Iron Age I (Herr2001:241–242; figs. 14.2, 14.3). Similar rim forms, found at Tall Jawa,are evidence that here, too, there was a settlement during Iron I. Findsat Sa .hab, 8 km to the east (Ibrahim 1978), and at Balu# in Moab(Worschech 1992: fig. 2:1–3) confirm the widespread use of the dis-tinctive collared-rim storejars, although these are short-necked forms,and probably date to the late Iron I or early Iron II period.

The complete sequence of Iron Age occupational phases in Field Aat Tall Jawa was identified only at the end of five seasons of excavation.While that sequence was further refined in the final season (1995),

1 This is not to say that there was not earlier occupation at these sites; clearly therewas a significant Early Bronze Age settlement at Tall al-#Umayri, with some reuse ofthe site during the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze Ages (Geraty et al. 1989; Herr et al.1991). However, occupation was hardly continuous.

2 At Sa .hab, this is due to the presence of a modern town above the ancient remains.The location of the excavation areas is shown on the 1980 base maps (Ibrahim 1989:figs. 2, 3).

enough was then known to identify the phasing for the major IronAge structures in Fields A–B (Chapter 6) and correlate them withfinds from Field E (Chapter 7). In a deep probe in Field A (SquareA13), sections of the earliest walls on the mound were uncovered belowthe level of the Stratum-IX fortification wall (Herr et al. 1991:170).So too, in Field C-east (Square C71), it became apparent that therewere earlier walls (Stratum X) adjacent to and immediately undercertain sections of the Stratum IX wall system, suggesting the presenceof occupation from Iron Age I (Herr et al. 1991:170).3 Although nocomplete rooms or buildings from this occupation phase were exposed,a considerable amount of pottery in the fill layers and ceilings oflater buildings (Strata IX, VIII), along with a small group of LateBronze Age sherds (Bienkowski, personal communication), support thehypothesis of an Iron Age settlement.

History of Excavation (Figs. 4.1, 2)

In Field A, three squares north of the fortification system were openedin 1989 to investigate the architectural remains inside the ancient town.Squares A3 and A4 ran south to north, with an additional square (A13)located east of Square A3. The strategy for the first season was toexplore the remains of settlement at the site and determine the con-struction history and function of various buildings adjacent to the wallsystem. At the same time, a deep sounding to determine the completechronological history of the site was opened along the west side ofSquare A13. The sounding was not continued below Iron Age I lev-els due to the depth of the trench, and because other research strategiesgained priority following the first season of excavation. The primaryreason for this modification of excavation goals was the fact that TallJawa was a virgin site with no previous history of excavation, a fact thatsuggested good preservation of the town plan. Only evidence from pre-vious surface surveys, incomplete by their very nature and hampered bythe degree of preservation of the surrounding Iron Age II wall system,was available before excavation began (Chapter 1, above). Subsequent

3 Pottery recovered in the deep sounding has been re-examined in relation to theknown wares and forms assigned to Iron Age II. Only one sherd (TJ A13.101.7),originally identified as Middle Bronze Age, is anomalous. All other sherds that arenot Iron Age II or Umayyad (Stratum III) can, with a certain degree of certainty, beassigned to Stratum X, Iron Age I.

Figure 4.1. Excavation Grid in Field A.

to the 1989 season, it was apparent that horizontal exposure of struc-tures inside the town was essential for understanding the plan of eachbuilding and the overall layout of this Ammonite town.

Table 4A. Strata for the Deep Sounding in Field A

STRATUM FIELD PHASE(S) PERIOD

IA–IB 1–2 modernII no remains post-UmayyadIII pottery only UmayyadIV no remains ByzantineV no remains RomanVI no remains PersianVII no remains Late Iron IIVIIIA 3/reuse Middle Iron IIVIIIB 4/casemate wall Middle Iron IIIX 5/solid Wall Early Iron IIX 6/destruction debris Iron IXI pottery only Late Bronze

STRATUM X – THE DEEP SOUNDING – BUILDING 50

The sounding in Square A13 extended along the west side of thesquare and measured 2.00× 5.00 m long;4 this probe ended at the pointwhere it ran up against the north face of Inner Casemate Wall W1010.Following the removal of a Stratum-VIII north-south wall (W1009),which was located along the east edge of the trench, the sounding wasexpanded in width to 2.50 m. Excavation below Wall 1009 made itpossible to uncover the earliest architectural features. These featuresconsist of burnt mud bricks and two stone foundation walls (W1015,W1016) forming the southeast corner of a structure (Building 50). Bothwalls are constructed of small and medium limestone boulders rangingin size from 0.25–0.70 m, with cobble chink stones.5 Although the limitsof the sounding prevented complete exposure of these walls, it appearsthat north-south Wall 1016 extends 2.50 m from the north balk to thepoint where it abuts east-west Wall 1015 (Fig. 4.3). Four courses of Wall1015 were exposed along its north face yielding a minimum heightof 1.30 m and a thickness of 0.65 m. Wall 1016 runs parallel to asubsidiary balk along its eastern face, so that its true thickness couldnot be determined with certainty. The eastern edge of Wall 1016 is alsoobscured by wall stones that have slipped off of the remaining courses;

4 Initially, the probe was 4.32 m in length, due to the accumulation of field stonesthat covered the ancient wall along the crest of the mound.

5 The present tense is used wherever possible to give the impression that the readersees the archaeological record in the same manner as the excavators.

Figure 4.2. Field A at beginning of excavation in 1989,showing modern field walls and location of deep probe (A13:2).

nevertheless, this wall appears to be in the range of 0.80–0.90 m thick.No surfaces in use with these walls were reached, nor have any otherremains of Stratum X been exposed in other areas of the tell, apartfrom isolated ceramic sherds. As a result, the debris layers describedhere date to the final destruction phase of Stratum X, rather than to itsperiod of construction or use.

Figure 4.3. Building 50, with Walls 1015 and W1016 in deep probe.

A series of superimposed debris layers associated with Walls 1015and 1016 consist of soil and burned mud bricks. The collapsed mudbrick superstructure was separated into several loci for better control(A13: 29, 33, 35; Figs. 4.5, 6). In the corner formed by the two foun-dation walls, the bricks within the lowest layer of debris (A13:35) aregrey, suggesting that they had been smothered by the overlying collapse.Within this concentration of mud brick collapse, the largest completebrick measures 0.65× 0.35×0.15 m thick.6 Where this brick superstruc-ture underwent severe burning, it became bright red and stained thesurrounding soil layers (A13:35).

The bricks were sealed by a layer of mud brick and plaster material(A13:33), possibly ceiling material, and by fallen stones. These collapsedwall stones (A13:32), also present immediately above Walls 1015 and

6 D. Wimmer (personal communication, #Amman, 1991) showed the author a brickof comparable size from Tall Safut, that he dated to the Iron Age I. Photographs ofindividual features are illustrated on the CD-ROM, along with a database that providesdetailed locus information and a caption (see Chapter 14).

Figure 4.4. Iron Age I Walls 1016 and W1015 at right.

1016, consist of small (0.25–0.50 m) and large (ca. 0.75+m) bouldersand cobble-size chink stones. This collapse probably represents thedestruction of the topmost courses of Walls 1015 and 1016, which weredisturbed by the collapse of the mud brick superstructure. Mud bricksand stones continue in the uppermost debris layer (A13:29), whichserves as a fill layer below the succeeding Iron Age II building (B113).This Iron Age I destruction debris (A13:29) was sealed in turn byStratum-VIIIB Debris Layer A13:26, a locus which was contemporarywith Surfaces A3:30 and A3:31 (Room 123; see below, Chapter 6). Theassemblage of ceramic sherds, artefacts and animal bones in this debrislocus (A13:26) appears to be a continuation of the food preparationand/or consumption activities carried out in Room 123 (Building 113,Stratum VIII).

Figure 4.5. North balk, showing position ofW1016 in relation to Stratum-VIII Wall 1009.

Figure 4.6. West balk, showing the collapse ofdebris layers A13:33, 29, 35 in Building 50.

Pottery and Artefacts

Early Iron Age II pottery7 dominated the debris layers above the col-lapse of the Stratum X structure. However, it was in these layers alsothat large numbers of pottery sherds from Iron Age I were present.8 InStratum X itself, the floors in use with Walls 1015 and 1016 were not

7 During the 1989 season, R. W. Younker read the pottery with the assistance of theauthor. L. G. Herr served as consultant for less well-known forms and wares.

8 The sherd material was present in floor surfaces and in overlying debris layersthat may represent collapsed ceiling material. Because the Iron Age II buildings at TallJawa were not destroyed by fire, their ceilings decomposed over the centuries and wereextremely difficult to separate from other debris layers.

reached, with the result that there are no intact or restorable vesselsin the Iron I corpus. Also because of the nature of the loci involved(A13:32, 33, 35), few artefacts were recovered, with the exception ofone spindle whorl (TJ 93) that came from the debris which was adja-cent to the Stratum X walls.

Collared-rim PithoiBy far, the most distinctive Iron Age I form is the collared-rim pithos.These vessels are well represented, with more than 15 examples inField A,9 although only a small sample of the various types is presentedhere.10 Both the rim and the collar vary in shape from one vessel toanother, similar to the variety of rim forms seen in the pithoi fromTall al-#Umayri (Herr 2001). Although not identical, these large jarsappear to be the closest parallel to the Tall Jawa jars. In general, therims are folded and are supported on a tall neck, some flaring out(V10, Fig. 4.7:2, V16, Fig. 4.7:3) and others standing more upright(V8, Fig. 4.7:1). These pithoi all have a thickened rim, with no clearbreak at the point where it joins the neck.11 In some examples, there isa mid-neck ridge, above the collar (V10; Fig. 4.7:2) and a large, sharplydefined collar. The collar was pinched to form a sharp angle or wasleft rounded. Most unusual among the Tall Jawa jars is one pithos (V9)with a rounded collar, which is actually flattened in some places aroundthe neck. The closest parallel, although not an exact one, is among thepithoi in the casemate room at Tall al-#Umayri (Clark 1997: fig. 4.17).Another close, but not exact, parallel comes from Shiloh (Bunimovitzand Finkelstein 1993: fig. 6.49:4), and a pithos from .Hesban with arounded collar is dated by Sauer (1994:239) to Iron Age IB.

In the examples of pithoi with more upright neck, the rim is foldedin two with a clear break where it meets the neck (V11, Fig. 4.7:4;V12); at the base of the neck, the collar is small and neat. Goodparallels for this form also appear at Shiloh (Bunimovitz and Finkelstein1993: fig. 6.51:4; Buhl and Holm-Nielsen 1969: pl. 10:123), Bethel(Albright and Kelso 1968: pl. 56:15), and at Tall al-#Umayri, both in the

9 Additional sherds of collared-rim pithoi were recovered from debris layers inFields C and E.

10 A complete study of all Iron Age I forms, their ware types and constructiontechniques will be included in a forthcoming study of the Iron Age pottery (Daviau,in preparation).

11 This style of rim was already in use at Beth Shan in Level VIII (13th century;James and McGovern 1993: fig. 32:4).

casemate room in Field B (Clark 1997: fig. 4.19:9), and in Field F (Low1991: fig. 8.9). Although 25 pithoi have been published to date fromTall al-#Umayri, this corpus does not provide any parallels for several ofthe Tall Jawa forms.12 The most notable difference is the length of theneck between the rim and the collar. As well, the size and shape of thebody should be an important feature for comparison, but this can onlybe inferred from the slope of the shoulder, since only rim sherds wererecovered at Tall Jawa.

Cooking PotsAnother vessel type with a distinctive rim is the cooking pot. In earlyIron Age I, this rim is usually triangular in shape and everted in stance,forming a wide mouthed pot (Rast 1978: fig. 2:2–6). At Tall Jawa, thestance of the upper body and rim differs from contemporary vesselsin Israel and Judah. In this case, the rim stance is upright, ratherthan everted (sherd A2/67.11, Fig. 4.8:1), closer in style to the Type1 cooking pots from Tall Dayr #Alla (Franken 1969: figs. 27; 46:1).A folded, rectangular rim form also appears, although this is moredifficult to distinguish from the folded rim form used in Iron Age II,albeit with a very different stance because in Iron II the pot becomes aclosed vessel.

KratersSeveral examples of kraters (V4, Fig. 4.7:5; V7, Fig. 4.7:6) are repre-sented among the large bowl forms. Vessels with an everted rim, similarto Vessel 4, appear in the later phases at Tall Dayr #Alla (Phase L; mid10th century; Franken 1969: fig. 75:93), while V7 has a parallel in PhaseF (Franken 1969: fig. 62:25). Krater V7 also has a parallel at Tall al-#Umayri (Clark 1991: fig. 4.7:20).

BowlsSmall bowls come in a variety of sizes and fabrics. Of note is a thinwalled, cyma rim bowl (V1), similar to Franken’s Type 14, which heidentifies as an early form (1969:151). At the same time, a second bowlwith an everted rim (V3; Fig. 4.8:2) appears to be a shallow dish, ratherthan a deep bowl, with the result that the rim is somewhat more evertedthat the Tall Dayr #Alla examples.

12 It should be noted that the so-called Iron I pithoi from Edom (Finkelstein 1992:fig. 2) are very different in their formal features, and in fact may be later, since pithoi

Figure 4.7. Collared-rim pithoi, 1) V8 (A13/88.2), 2) V10 (A14/36.1), 3) V16(E54/172.20), 4) V11 (A13/106.1); kraters, 5) V4 (A13/104.3), 6) V7 (A13/126.2).

Figure 4.8. Cooking pot, 1) sherd (A2/67.11); bowls, 2) V3 (A13/114.10),3) V2 (A13/106.3), 4) V15 (A13/78.1); Jug, 5) sherd TJA13/113.1.

with grooves on the upper part of the shoulder continue in Transjordan throughoutIron Age II (Daviau 1995).

Bowls with an upright, thickened rim appear in both unpainted graymetallic ware (V2, Fig. 4.8:3), and white slipped with reddish-brownpainted bands on the interior surface (V15, Fig. 4.8:4). White slip andpainted decoration also appears on the exterior surface of a thin walledbody sherd (A13/93.1). Other examples of painted decoration appearon unslipped body sherds (see below). Bowls with a “pink” slip andbrown paint appear in the Iron Age I ceramic corpus at Tall al-#Umayri(Clark 2000: fig. 4.31:20).

StorejarsDue to the small amount of sherd material recovered from secure Iron Iloci, it is difficult to identify storage jar sherds. In some instances, jarrims share the same shape as jug rims, although the fabric and surfacecolours are somewhat different. Rim forms are either simple roundedrims, or externally thickened rims.

JugsIron Age I jugs are easily distinguished from Iron Age II material, dueto their gray fabric and gray surface colour (2.5YR 6/0).13 However,only a small number of rim styles occur, represented primarily by a tall,externally thickened, triangular rim (V14; sherd A13/113.1, Fig. 4.8:5),or by a folded trefoil rim (V13). Examples of complete, biconical jugswith gray fabric are present in the Iron Age I pottery assemblage atTall al-#Umayri (Clark 2000: fig. 2.30:16, 19).

Painted PotteryApart from the gray ware that is so distinctive in the class of small jugs,painted sherds also indicate Iron Age I occupation. At Tall Jawa, onlya small number are present in the corpus. Nevertheless, several vesseltypes are represented, including shallow bowls, jugs, pyxides, and flasks.In the bowl forms, a white slip is sometimes present, along with a red-brown painted band (Fig. 4.8:4). Most common is the lattice design inred paint on an unslipped surface. Sauer (1986: figs. 11–12) illustratessherds with similar design among the finds from .Hesban; as well, two

13 The sherds assigned to Iron Age I are very distinctive, in that the fabric is grayand not just the core. In addition, the colour of “gray” can vary, especially among thebowls and jars where a light gray fabric, with distinctive black and white inclusions,clearly separates these wares from Iron Age II wares. In the case of the latter, the fabricis penetrated by the heat at firing and appears pink, while only the inner core is gray.

pyxides with paint on the shoulder area are reported from Tall al-#Umayri (Clark 2000: fig. 4.32:7, 8).

The Nature of the Iron I Settlement

With such limited exposure, it is not possible on the basis of the archi-tectural remains to adequately characterize the settlement at Tall Jawaduring Iron Age I. However, two hypotheses can be put forward; first,the settlement consisted of structures with stone foundations and mudbrick walls, and secondly, the destruction of the Iron I buildings pre-ceded the construction of the Inner Casemate Wall (W1010). Thissequence is clearly seen in the position of the base of Wall 1010, whichwas marked by a row of cobble size stones (A13:38); these stones werelocated in the debris layer (A13:29) that covered the Iron I destruction.The soil (A13:40) under Wall 1010 remains unexcavated.

The pottery is a better indicator of the nature of the settlement. Thefull range of domestic vessels appears to be represented, bowls, kraters,cooking pots, jugs, jars, pithoi, and lamps; in this corpus, only jugletsseem to be under-represented. The well-balanced distribution of formaltypes associated with food preparation and consumption, along withthe large number of storage vessels suggest a permanent settlement,in use for a period of time before the fire that destroyed Building 50.The contamination of Iron Age II surfaces and ceilings by Iron Age Ipottery makes it impossible to determine the exact location of otherbuildings in use at the same time as Building 50, except to say thatin Fields C-west, D, and E, the Iron Age II houses were founded onbedrock and there is no evidence for Iron I structures in these fields. Inthe southeast (Field C-east), Iron I pottery in the form of a collared-rim pithos (V921) was recovered from a probe below the flagstonepavement (C65:21) in Room 908 (Stratum VIIB).14 Since Building 910was founded on bedrock along its north end, it is not clear whetherthe debris layer containing these Iron I sherds is the result of anextension of the Iron Age I settlement into Field C, or only a fill layerneeded to level the south end of the gate building above the rapidlysloping bedrock. In Field E on the north, several Iron Age I sherdswere present in debris layers (floor makeup, collapsed ceiling material),

14 Three sherds, clearly originating from an illicit probe in Room 908, mend withone registered sherd from inter-seasonal accumulation in Room 907 (V021). A secondcollared-rim pithos sherd (C65/51.4), similar to sherds with manganese burnishingfrom Field A, was present in a probe excavated in 1995 in Room 908 (C65:31).

including gray ware shallow bowls (E65/124.2) and collared-rim pithoi(E75/31.2, 32.7, 58.12, 74.0; and V016). In spite of this evidence forIron I occupation, it was only in Field A that there was architecturalevidence for this early settlement.

The southern perimeter of the Iron Age I settlement can no longerbe identified with certainty, due to the later construction of the forti-fication system and to modern bulldozer activity which removed theslope of the tell below the outermost retaining wall (W1001). Assum-ing that the slope continued gently to the south from the preserved topof Wall 1001, as it does in Field C to the east, one could imagine theIron Age I settlement spreading over the entire southwestern side of themound. Debris layers north of Retaining Wall 1001 contained a largenumber of Iron I sherds, although they were located primarily in theIron II rooms north of the outer solid wall (W1003). Since RetainingWall 1001 was founded on bedrock (A1:3), it may have served as aperimeter wall during Stratum X, although the necessary relationshipto Iron Age I soil layers was not determined during excavation.

In Field C, south of the three late Iron Age II buildings (B800,900, 905+910) which were excavated in whole or in part (Chapters8, 9), there is evidence for a retaining wall (8036), which runs easton the south slope of the mound (C2:2=W8036). This wall is alsovisible in the scarp of the bulldozer cut that removed the slope of themound further west (in Field A). Wall 8036 may be a continuationof Wall 1001 in Field A. If we assign Wall 8036 to the Iron Age IIperiod, it appears that Tall Jawa was an unwalled settlement duringIron Age I. The establishment of an unfortified village is comparable tothe Iron I settlements at Hazor and Lachish, following the destructionof the Late Bronze Age urban centres (Lemche 1985:390). Stratum XIIat Hazor had little in the way of architecture, except for a few walls,pavements, ovens and pits (Yadin et al. 1989:25–28).15 The ovens areof special interest, because they consist of the upper part of an invertedpithos, a style that continues at Hazor into Iron II (Yadin et al. 1989:25),and is the dominant style at Tall Jawa in Stratum VIII. At Lachish, thedevelopment of an unwalled settlement in Stratum V appears to date tolate Iron I, rather than earlier in that period. Houses were built alongthe crest of the tell, above the Late Bronze Age debris, in order to forma line of defence (Ussishkin 1983:116; fig. 9). The pottery from these

15 In 1972, Yadin characterized the Iron I settlement as a group of circular founda-tions, ovens and pits (Yadin 1972: 129).

houses is red slipped with vertical burnishing, closer in style to findsfrom Stratum IX rather than Stratum X at Tall Jawa. Closer in time toearly Iron I is the final reuse of Stratum VI at Lachish, which has onlybeen exposed in Area S (Ussishkin 1983:114; fig. 8).

The best parallel for occupation during three distinct phases ofIron I is the unwalled site of #Izbet .Sar.tah (Finkelstein 1986). Followingthe destruction of the earliest settlement (Stratum III), the site wasresettled; a small number of houses and numerous pits constitute theStratum II settlement. In the final phase, there were fewer pits; it isthis stratum (I) that dates to the late 11th-early 10th century. Iron I atTell Beit Mirsim is also characterized by a settlement in which theremains of architecture were minimal, but where pits or silos werenumerous (Albright 1943:1; pl. 2). Of more relevance for Tall Jawaare the small, unprotected sites that appear throughout the centralhill country, where groups of sites were located in the hinterland oflarge Late Bronze Age cities (Lemche 1985:393). Such settlements alsoappear in the Samaria area and are described in detail by Finkelstein,Lederman and Bunimovitz (1997). If Tall Jawa in Transjordan wasalso an unwalled village, it was considerably different from the siteof Tall al-#Umayri, which was surrounded by a strong casemate wallwith casemate rooms that were an integral part of the adjoining house(Clark 1997: fig. 4.8; 1996:241).16 This does not mean that these siteswere not contemporary, only that these settlements were different intheir function or in their need for fortification. In the end, both siteswere destroyed in major conflagrations. Of these two sites, only TallJawa was rebuilt in early Iron Age II (Stratum IX).

16 The revised illustration of the pillared house with a roofed lower storey (Bloch-Smith and Nakhai 1999:113) is much more convincing in terms of construction tech-niques (Daviau 1999:122, n. 22; 128–129, n. 27) than the original drawing in Clark(1996).

THE FORTIFICATION WALLS AND TOWERS

Introduction

With few exceptions, no Iron Age fortification walls standing to theirfull height survive in the archaeological record.1 This fact has ledarchaeologists to assume that, in most cases, ancient walls were con-structed of stone foundations with a mud brick superstructure. Al-though mud brick recovered in situ occurs primarily in Bronze Ageoccupation levels (Wright 1985:175), some evidence remains at IronAge sites located in coastal or semi-arid regions.2 Our current knowl-edge of Iron Age defence systems is based, for the most part, on thepartially preserved remains of the stone foundations used to supportthe superstructure of walls, gate rooms, and towers that are no longerpreserved.

Several phases of the Iron Age fortification system at Tall Jawa wereuncovered in three excavation areas; Field E on the north (E44–E76),Fields B and A on the west and south (B16–B14 and B24–A13), andField C on the southeast (C-west [C5–C7 and A73]; C-east [C43–63 and C62–C81). Visible at ground level, the complete perimeter ofthe casemate system can be traced around the tell,3 with the innerwall along its crest (Fig. 5.1) and the outer wall lower down on theslope (except in Field B, see below). The defensive wall consists first ofa solid wall with offsets and insets along its outer face (Stratum IX),followed by a casemate system with parallel walls joined by cross wallsat intervals, forming interior rooms or compartments (Stratum VIII).

1 Wright (1985:175) notes that the stone wall at Tell en-Na.sbeh, preserved to aheight of 14.00 m was probably very close to complete.

2 Examples of the extensive use of mud brick for defensive walls include both theEarly Bronze Age wall and the Iron Age citadel wall at Tell el-Hesi (Rose and Toombs1978: figs. 17a, 14/4, respectively), the Middle Bronze Age gate at Tel Dan (Biran1981:104; pl. 19A), and the casemate wall system at Tell el-Kheleifeh (Pratico 1993:26–27).

3 The casemate wall was not drawn east of Field E, although the topographyindicates the position of the fortifications.

Figure 5.1. Casemate Wall system in Field E to the north, Fields E and B tothe west, Fields B and A to the southwest, and Field C to the southeast.

The sloping soil layers below the outer wall are held in place byretaining walls visible on both the north and south sides of the tell.This chapter will present a detailed description and analysis of thefortification system and its associated features, based on the samplingstrategy employed during six seasons of excavation.

History of Excavation

In the first season (1989), excavation in Field A on the southwest slopeof the tell included three Squares (A1–A3), running south to northacross the three parallel walls visible at ground level. At the base ofthe tell, the face of a boulder-and-chink wall (W1001) was completelyexposed in Square A1. A second parallel wall (W1002), located midwayon the slope, was visible at intervals. The innermost wall (W1004)

ran along the crest of the slope and was partly obscured by a modernproperty wall (W1031; Herr et al. 1991: pl. III.1).4 The strategy for thefirst season was to expose this defensive wall system, determine its char-acteristics, construction history and chronology relative to architecturalremains inside the town (Daviau 1992b:145).

Based on the results of the first season, additional exposure of thewall system was undertaken in 1991, both to the west of Field A(in Square B63), and at what appeared to be the east end of thecasemates in Square C7 (Field C-west). The constraints on completeexcavation of the wall system led to the further development of aresearch strategy that included the sampling of the fortifications atstrategic points along its perimeter; in 1992, Field E on the north sideof the tell and Field C-east were opened. For the following seasons, thespecific areas of interest were located in Field B, where the wall formeda right angle in the southwest corner, in Field E where a second seriesof three parallel walls were visible on the north side of the tell, and inField C-west at the point where there seemed to be an interruption inthe wall system. Added to these areas was the investigation of a heavilybuilt wall low on the slope of the southeastern terrace (Field C-east),and its connection to the wall system, and of a section on the west sideof the tell in Field B, where it was possible to determine the associationof the West Wall (W2023) with a flanking tower (W2024). Sampling ofthe casemate wall on the east side of the tell was restricted due to thewishes of the land owner.

Stratigraphy

Evidence for the stratigraphic sequences of construction, use and de-struction of the fortifications varied from one excavation area to anoth-er. Although the fortification system around the entire perimeter of thetell appeared, at first glance, to be a single construction project, exca-vation revealed individual wall units and more than one constructionphase, especially noticeable where house walls ran under the InnerCasemate Wall. In Fields A and E, construction and use of a singlesolid wall appears to coincide with Stratum-IX occupation. In Stra-tum VIII, there were clear signs of more than one phase in Field A, theearlier phase consisting of the construction of a parallel wall to form

4 The property walls that run across the tell, dividing the surface into small plots,appear to be the result of stone clearing activities, rather than actual wall construction.

casemate rooms (VIIIB), and a second phase of repairs to realign thisinner wall (VIIIA). Here and in Field E, superimposed floors suggestmore that one phase of occupation. Certain features suggest that theCasemate Wall may not have been in use during Stratum VII, whensettlement was concentrated on the eastern half of the tell.5 A Persianperiod burial and an Athenian tetradrachm, with the face of Athena onthe obverse and her owl with the letters ΑΘΗ on the reverse (TJ 111,Daviau 1992a: fig. 6), indicate later disturbance of the wall system andcasemate Room 202 (both in Field B). While this coin seems to be com-parable to other fifth century B.C. coins (449 B.C., Kleiner 1975:6–7;Beckmann 1994; Daviau 2002:89), no buildings dating to this periodwere recovered at Tall Jawa.

Table 5A. Strata for the Fortification Walls

STRATA FIELD PHASE(S) PERIOD

I 1 modernII objects post-UmayyadIII pottery, etc. UmayyadIV pottery? ByzantineV no remains RomanVI 2/coin, burial PersianVIIA 3/pottery Late Iron IIVIIB 4/pottery Late Iron IIVIIIA 5/wall repairs Middle Iron IIVIIIB 6/casemate wall Middle Iron IIIX 7/solid, offset/inset wall Early Iron II

In order to present the stratigraphic details of the fortification system,the outer wall will be described first as it appeared in Field E, becauseit is here that the archaeological record demonstrates most clearly asequence of construction and use of a solid wall (W3006) with offsetsand insets. Also assigned to Stratum IX is the retaining wall and glacisassociated with the solid, offset/inset wall in Field E and a parallelconstruction in Field A. This will be followed by the evidence forthe building of an Inner Wall (W3000) in Stratum VIIIB, and theformation of casemate rooms between it and the outer wall. Finally,discussion will turn to the special features of the fortification systemincluding a flanking tower and a drain in Field B.

5 The phasing between the casemate wall and Building 800 is complicated, due inpart to the limits of excavation.

This phasing sequence seems reasonable, although it cannot beproven definitively because there was no evidence seen in the balk sec-tions or discerned while digging for foundation trenches associated withthese walls, and secondly, the walls themselves appear to have beenfooted on bedrock. This was not surprising because only a handful offoundation trenches were seen in the entire excavation, suggesting aconsistency in construction that applied to various types of architecturalunits.

STRATUM IX – THE OFFSET/INSET SOLID WALL

The Stratum-IX solid wall (W3006) in Field E curves gently around thenorth side of the tell, except on the west, where it turns at a sharp angleto continue as the western wall (W3050 in Field E, equal to W2023in Field B). Only here on the west does the solid wall run along thecrest of the hill rather than being footed on the slope, as it was in FieldE. Within the area of the tell available for excavation, this solid wallextends 138.00 m from Square E76 on the north to Square A12 on thesouth. From this point on, and for an additional 32.60 m, it is coveredin part by modern stone piles and appears only at intervals until itreaches Square C7 on the east.6

Field E

North Wall 3006 (Fig. 5.2)A solid wall (W3006)7 is well preserved and clearly visible for a lengthof 30.00+m in Field E (Squares E34–E76). Along its length, Wall 3006consists of 3–4 rows of roughly hewn limestone boulders with a highpercentage of stones (ca. 50%) in the range of large boulders (0.75–1.00m). Individual stones of >1.00 m in length serve to bond together tworows of smaller stones. The thickness of the wall varies from 1.90–2.60m. As far as can be determined, Wall 3006 is dry laid in boulder-and-chink construction with cobble size chink stones.

Although excavation of Wall 3006 against its outer face extendedfrom a top level of 923.42 (masl) to a bottom level of 919.42 (masl),the base of the wall was not reached (Fig. 5.3). In view of the levels

6 This entire wall line was drawn by R. Hutson during the 1992 season.7 Wall 3006 was given a locus number in each square where it was exposed;

E34:1=45:1=55:13=56:2=66:1=76:12.

Figure 5.2. Stratum IX Solid Wall in Field E, with Passageway 309 on right.

of exposed bedrock (922.20 masl) in Room 302 of Building 300, southof the Stratum-VIII casemate walls, and in the modern road cut (ca.918.00 masl) on the north, it seems likely that the builders positionedthe foundation of the solid (outer) wall on bedrock. The greatest pre-served height of Wall 3006 consists of 8–9 courses exposed in SquareE56, where it measures 3.92 m.8

Within the excavated area of Field E, there are two offsets/insets(E56–b, E77–c)9 along the outer face of Wall 3006. In Square E56, the

8 A similar situation appears in the publication of the Stratum-XB outer casematewall at Hazor (Yadin et al. 1989: Plan VIII), where the wall foundation in Room 148bwas exposed for a maximum height of 1.17 m without reaching the base of the wall.Dever (1993:48) was more fortunate at Gezer when he located the base of the OuterWall footed on bedrock and preserved for a height of 3.50–3.75 m.

9 Offset/inset is the terminology currently used in several publications for the

Figure 5.3. North face of Wall 3006, with Offset E54–b.

wall face has an inset of 90° with a maximum depth of 0.40–0.65 mreducing the total thickness of Wall 3006 from 2.60 m to 1.95–2.20 m(Figs. 5.3, 4). From this point on (inset E56–b), Wall 3006 continues east12.65 m to a second offset (E77–c), which is ca. 0.50 m deep, and has anangle of 120°. This offset is associated with a clear break in the wall line(see Passageway 309 below). Along this stretch of wall, no offset/insetis located on the inner face to match those on the outer face.10 Thiswas especially clear on the south face of Wall 3006 in Casemate Room301 where 5 courses are exposed directly inside offset/inset E56–b. Atthe same time, Wall 3006 in Squares E34–E45 is only 2.00–2.20 mthick, suggesting that there is an offset close to the point where Wall3006 enters Square E55 from Square E45, resulting in a thickening ofthe wall before it is again reduced in width by the inset (E56–b) onits outer face. The outer wall remains unexcavated in these westernsquares (E34–E45).

change of location for segments of wall sections in both casemate and solid style curtainwalls (e. g., Herzog 1992:265, 318; Dever 1993:43). Wright employs the more technicalterms “salient and recess” (1985:182), which is probably more appropriate for the TellJawa curtain wall, since the recess or salient only affects the outer face.

10 A straight inner face is also seen at Hazor along the north and west walls of theCitadel (Area B; Yadin et al. 1960:48, pl. CCV) where deep (1.60 m) recesses or insetswere present along the outer face. By contrast, no such offsets/insets were present inthe casemate wall (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CXCIX).

Figure 5.4. North face of Outer Wall 3006.

A third offset/inset (E24–a) is located 20.80 m west of offset/insetE56–b, at the point where the solid wall (W3006) turns sharply southat an obtuse angle of approximately 145°. The resulting inset (E24–a) is ca 0.45 m deep on the west face of West Wall 3050, where it isvisible below the stones of a modern property wall (Fig. 5.2). From thispoint onward (E24–E21), Wall 3050 continues south for ca. 60.00 m, asfar as Drain B24:24; within Field B (B21–B29), this is Wall 2023. Thefunction of the offsets/insets may have been multi-purpose, includingdefensive11 and supportive, although it seems most likely that this styleof construction was designed to enable the builders to adjust the wallto changes in the level of bedrock and to the curvature of the naturalhill.12

11 Wright (1985:177) points out that the width of the superstructure must be suffi-cient for the defenders of the town to walk on the wall and to fight from its battlements.Although there is no remaining evidence at Tall Jawa for the brick superstructure, thestone sockle is certainly wide enough for one or two persons to walk on its topmostcourse.

12 Yadin (1989:173) had the same opinion regarding the irregularly spaced offsets/insets along the city wall at Hazor in Area G. More recently, Herzog (1997:226) usedthe same explanation to account for the shallow (0.50–0.60 m deep) projections alongthe inner and outer faces of the solid wall at Megiddo (Stratum IVB).

GlacisA deep probe (2.35 m) against the north face of Solid Wall 3006,through a series of arbitrary loci (E56:15–26), exposed layers of packedsoil (E56:12, 14), along with stones and plaster (E56:7, 10), that form ahard sloping surface extending north down the natural slope of the hillto the outer retaining wall (W3023). These packed earth layers do notshow the sophisticated layering with tongues of soil and chalk typicalof a Middle Bronze Age glacis (Dever, Lance and Wright 1970: pl. 5),but appear to serve a similar purpose, enhancing the steep slope ofthe mound between the major fortification wall and a lower retainingwall.13

Plaster Layer E56:10 seals against a single row (E56:8) of medium-sized cobbles (0.10–0.20 m) that appear to run parallel to the face ofWall 3006. A narrow strip (0.09–0.15 m) of sterile soil (E56:9) fills thesmall gap between the cobbles and the wall face, being widest (0.26 m)where the outer wall is inset. Two superimposed plaster layers (E56:7aand 7b) cover Cobbles E56:8 and Soil locus E56:9 to seal againstWall 3006. Together these layers are 0.08–0.20 m thick and extendapproximately 1.14 m down the north slope. The outer edges of theseplaster layers appear to have been destroyed by subsequent rock fall(E56:3, 5)14 that accumulated after the wall system went out of use. Thenorth edge of Rockfall E56:5 was parallel to Wall 3006 suggesting thatthe stones had formed part of the superstructure of the wall itself, ratherthan the more common mud brick wall for which there is no remainingevidence in Field E.

Retaining Wall 3023 (Fig. 5.5)An east-west wall (W3023), visible at several locations on the north sideof the tell in Field E and extending further east into Field F, was notexcavated in Square E57, although a line of small and medium boul-ders (E57:4) appears to continues its trajectory. Here, wall line E57:4 isin place above a soil layer, in contrast to Wall 3023 which is exposed 6courses high, and is footed on bedrock. Exposed sections of Wall 3023

13 A rampart originally constructed during the Middle Bronze Age at Tall al-#Umay-ri was reused with glacis and retaining walls during Iron Age I (Clark 1997:62–63).

14 It is unlikely that these stones were related to the modern property wall (W3049)which consists of medium and large boulders piled along the inner casemate Wall(W3000). While a few random boulders were scattered on the surface of the northernslope, the consistent layer of rockfall (E56:3) sealed under modern topsoil represents adifferent episode in the archaeological record.

Figure 5.5. Retaining Wall 3023 on North slope in Fields F–G.

show that it was built of boulder-and-chink construction, in horizontalcourses. In its present condition, large parts of this northern wall areunderground and there is no evidence for a mud brick superstructureor for collapsed wall stones. Such evidence strongly supports the inter-pretation of this structure as a retaining wall comparable to Wall 1001in Field A on the south (see below).

The case of wall line E57:4 is somewhat different. It runs east-west,exactly 9.00 m down slope from the Outer Casemate Wall, whereas onemight expect Wall 3023 to begin to curve toward the south near thenorthwest corner of the wall system, given the changing topography inthis area. The explanation for wall line E57:4 may be that it marks theposition of the uppermost wall stones of North Wall 3006 where theyfell north, down the slope. Further down slope to the north, the hill iscut through by a modern east-west road, which reveals the bedrock andthe overlying soil layers.

Figure 5.6. Passageway 309 between Outer Wall 3006 on right, and Wall 3018 on left.

Passageway 309 (Fig. 5.6)In Field E, there is only a single break in the Casemate Wall, Passage-way R309,15 located just west of offset/inset E77–c. This opening in theNorth Wall was carefully constructed with the lower courses of the Wall(E76:25) forming a pavement inside the entryway. On either side, theupper courses of Wall 3006 on the west, and its continuation as Wall3018 on the east, form vertical faces, 0.75–0.90 m apart, for a distanceof 2.25 m through the entire thickness of the wall.16 At the northeast

15 In 1993, before the full nature of the passageway was known, this area was givena room number, R309. It is retained here for ease of discussion.

16 The height of Outer Wall 3006 and W3018 is 2.00 m above Pavement E76:25,

corner of Passageway 309, Wall 3018 extends a further 0.50 m beyondthe line of Wall 3006. This adjustment in the wall alignment (offsetE77–c) enabled defenders to protect Passageway 309 and also has theeffect of casting a shadow over the entrance.

Although the evidence for occupation inside the town during Stra-tum IX is obscured by the construction of the inner casemate wall inStratum VIIIB, and by subsequent collapse of North Wall 3006 at thisvulnerable point, a few remnants of that early period were recovered.Most significant are two features located near the southern end of Pas-sageway 309, a socket stone (E76:19) and an interior wall (W3022) thatruns parallel to the North Wall. Wall 3022 consists of 2 rows of cob-bles and small boulders that remain standing 6 courses. Exposed in avery limited area (2.20 m) beneath Stratum-VIII Casemate Room 310,and immediately north of Inner Casemate Wall 3000, Wall 3022 islocated 1.40 m from the south face of North Wall 3006. The positionof Wall 3022 forms an indirect access into the Stratum-IX settlement.The presence of Socket Stone E76:19 suggests that this entrance couldbe closed with a door providing additional security.

Although other explanations for these features are possible, the func-tion of Entryway 309 during Stratum IX appears to have been that of apostern, the only exit from the town on the northwest side. This wouldallow the inhabitants to have access to water collected in cisterns cut inthe bedrock where they can still be seen at the foot of the tell.17 Dueto the severe erosion through Passageway 309 during the succeedingmillennia, the original ground level outside North Wall 3006 cannotnow be determined. During its period of use as a postern, Passageway309 may have been linked to a ramp or stairs that led down the slope.Evidence for the end of Stratum-IX occupation is not well preserved inField E, due to the presence of the casemate rooms and the rooms ofBuilding 300, which all date to Stratum VIIIB (Chapter 7).

On the west side of Field E, another offset/inset (E24–a) is locatedat the point where North Wall 3006 turns southwest (as Wall 3050) andruns up to and along the crest of the hill. Along its length in Field Emuch of Wall 3050 is covered by a modern property wall, although itsouter face is visible below these randomly piled boulders. When Solid

possibly the full height of this postern in antiquity.17 From the north side of the tell, it is possible to recognize numerous cisterns now

in use as septic systems in the courtyards of houses located north of the modern road.These cisterns predate the current expansion of Jawa village into this area.

Figure 5.7. Solid Wall 3050 in Fields E and B.

Wall 3050 enters Square E12 (running south), it is no longer visiblefrom the west, although both its inner and outer faces can be tracedonce it enters Field B (W2023).

Field B

West Wall 2023 (Figs. 5.7, 8)The principal Stratum-IX defensive wall exposed in Field B on the westside of the tell is a solid wall (W2023). Here the natural slope of the hillis less steep than on the other sides of the tell and to compensate for

Figure 5.8. Wall 2023 looking north toward offset/inset B25–g.

this fact Wall 2023 was built on the highest ridge rather than on theslope of the mound. Wall 2023 is 3–4 rows thick, and consists of small,medium and large boulders and cobble-size chink stones. In severalplaces along its length (in Squares B28–29), Wall 2023 measures 2.00–2.10 m thick. Changes in its width are only visible in Square B26 andB25 where a matching pair of offsets/insets (B26–e=B24:7, B25–f) areexposed on the inner wall face (Fig. 5.9). South of offset/inset B25–f,Wall 2023 reaches it greatest thickness (2.55 m), until an offset/inset(B25–g) on the outer wall face again reduces its width to 2.00 m. Onits outer, western side, the boulders in Wall 2023 are coated with 0.03m of plaster (B26:9a), and the crevices between them are packed to adepth of 0.08 m.18

Although covered in part by a modern wall (W2043) and its owncollapse, excavation exposed Wall 2023 for a length of 13.00 m, to thepoint where a modern path cuts through its upper courses revealing thenorth jamb of Stratum-IX Passageway 219 (see below). The foundinglevel of West Wall 2023, discovered in a small probe in Square B26,consists of soil and pebbles (B26:16) that are packed under the west

18 The chemical composition of plaster samples were analysed in the SLOWPOKEnuclear reactor at the University of Toronto, see Chapter 11.

Figure 5.9. Wall 2023 and Tower 2024, with Passageway 219.

edge of the wall. Comparable loci (B16:11, 12) are present under Tower2024 that runs parallel to Wall 2023, at a distance of 1.65–1.75 mfurther west. Due to the nature of these loci, we can only assume thatthe soil and pebbles were packed into depressions in the bedrock tolevel the surface on which these massive stone structures are built.19

Tower 2024 (Fig. 5.9)Footed on the natural slope of the hill, West Tower 2024 is probablyfounded on bedrock, and on a consolidation layer of soil and pebbles

19 A similar construction technique is seen at Khirbat al-Mudayna under the piersof the six-chambered gate (B100; Chadwick, Daviau and Steiner 2000:260), which wasitself founded on bedrock.

Figure 5.10. Guardroom 221, with Tower 2024on left, and Outer Wall 2023 on the right.

(B16:11) filling the depressions in the rock. What appears to be thefoundation of Tower 2024 is formed of medium, large and very largelimestone boulders (0.80–1.25 m in length). For the most part, stonesare laid in boulder-and-chink construction, with a few areas of headerand stretcher formation. This tower measures 10.10× 5.65–5.90 m andremains standing 4 courses in height (4.80 m). On the inner, easternface, opposite Wall 2023, the boulders are coated with a greyish-white,hard, rough plaster (B16:5), and the gaps between the stones are filledto a depth of 0.10 m.20

Guardroom 221 (Fig. 5.10)The association of Tower 2024 with West Wall 2023 during Stratum IXis based on the similarity in construction techniques and masonry, andin the presence of soil layers that seal up against both wall faces. Withinthe excavated area, Tower 2024 does not appear to be attached to Wall2023, although excavation did not continue north of Square B16. The

20 Although it is possible that this tower was replastered in modern times, due toits proximity to a modern house, the chemical makeup seems to coincide with othersamples whose Iron Age date is without doubt (see samples 15, 16 in Chapter 11).

consolidation layer between the two wall faces yielded 1 iron point (TJ536), several iron fragments (TJ 592) and a small amount of pottery.21

Between Tower 2024 and Wall 2023, there is sufficient space for a smallguardroom (R221). Whether the guardroom was closed by a door, orwhether this entire southwest corner of the tell was further fortifiedcannot now be known, due to the presence of modern housing and thework of a bulldozer that created a path onto the tell just south of theTower. Debris layers within the Guardroom suggest that it continued inuse during Stratum VIII.

Passageway 219 (Fig: 5.9)The top of West Wall 2023 was damaged by modern farming activ-ities at the point where Passageway 219 and a Stratum-VIII drain(B24:24) pass through the wall. However, the lower courses (B24:23)of the two flanking sections of the West Wall, Wall 2023 on the northand its southern continuation as Wall 2002, are well preserved. Thelower courses of Wall 2023 form an offset/inset (B24–g), which is sealedagainst by the plaster layers of a glacis (B24:19).22 South of the Passage-way, Wall 2002 corners sharply, forming an angle of 110o with SouthWall 2009. What appears to be a continuation of the lower courses ofthe West Wall (W2027=W2023+2002) forms the floor of Passageway219 and of the Stratum-VIII Drain (B24:24), and extends slightly eastof the wall line into the town.

Evidence for a Stratum-IX passageway (R219) in this location is onlypartially preserved due to reconstruction during Stratum VIIIB. How-ever, certain elements of the earlier construction are similar to thoserecovered in Passageway 309 in Field E. Primary among these is thecontinuation of the lower courses of the Solid Wall to form a pavement(B24:23), which is framed by vertical, perpendicular wall faces throughits entire thickness. On the south side of Passageway 219, the verticalwall face or jamb is well preserved. Here, the distance between the twojambs measures 1.75–1.85 m wide, forming a passageway almost twicethe width of Postern 309. The north jamb is seen most clearly wherea coating of plaster (B24:27) is preserved on the vertical, south face of

21 Only a handful of sherds were recovered; these date to early Iron II. Withoutmore examples, it is not possible to decide whether or not the single sherd of a ringbase vessel (B26.27.1) was late Iron I.

22 Plaster B24:19 appears to have formed a glacis sloping away from the outer wallface. However, plaster put in place in Stratum VIIIB, after the construction of thedrain, obscured the earlier slope.

Figure 5.11. South Wall 2009+1003, with Retaining Wall 1001 in Field A.

certain wall stones. In Stratum VIII, West Wall 2023 was inset a secondtime (B24–h) at just this point, reducing the outer entrance from 1.75m to 1.45 m wide. The position of this inset (B24–h) is quite clear, inspite of modern disturbance, since the wall stub which forms it sealsup against the plaster (B24:27) of the north jamb. This plaster wrapsaround and covers the western, outer face of Wall 2023.

A passageway or gate at this point in the wall line would haveprovided access to cisterns cut in the bedrock to the west of the tell(MPP Regional Survey Site 127). In addition, its position on the westside of the corner makes the entry into the town less visible from theoutside than a passageway opening on the southwest facing the plain ofMadaba. Tower 2024 is also in position to protect this entrance fromattack by an enemy. A mirror image of this pattern of protection isseen at Hazor, Stratum VIII (Area G), where Tower 10014 protectedentryway 10067d, a passageway 1.50 m wide, through the city wall(Yadin et al. 1989:175; plan XXXII).

Fields B–A

South Wall 2009+W1003 (Fig. 5.11)The west face of Wall 2002 is in line with that of Wall 2023 north ofinset B24–h. This location suggests a matching offset (B24–j) to restore

the wall to its full 2.00 m thickness, beginning at the point whereW2002 constitutes the south jamb of Passageway 219. From the northface of the jamb, Wall 2002 extends south 2.25 m (as W2027) to meetand bond with South Wall 2009. The sharp angle (110o) formed bythis change of direction is even more acute than the angle at the northend of West Wall 3050, where it meets North Wall 3006. South Wall2009 consists of large and very large boulders, up to 1.60 m in length.Although not excavated along its outer face in Field B, South Wall2009 is partially exposed and is visible from the base of the tell; itstands 5+courses high (ca. 2.00 m) and can by traced for 34.25 min Squares B23–A12. Along its length, only one offset/inset is visible(B33–k). At this point the wall thickness increases from 2.00 m to 2.25m, although the pile of collapsed wall stones along its outer face makesit difficult to determine the exact line of South Wall 2009 adjacent tothis offset/inset.

Further east in Field A, South Wall 1003 represents the earliestphase of construction (Stratum IX), with Wall 1002 rebuilt above itduring Stratum VIIIB. The Stratum-IX wall (W1003) is formed of 2–3rows of medium to large boulders (0.50–1.00 m), dry laid with cobblechink stones. In this area, Wall 1003 has a maximum width of 1.60m, somewhat narrower than its continuation to the west (W2009) inField B. Whether Wall 1003 was redesigned with the construction ofthe Stratum-VIIIB casemate system, or whether excavation has uncov-ered the South Wall at a point where it has been reduced in widthby another offset/inset was not determined. South Wall 1003 (or itsrebuild as W1002) is visible at soil level in Square A12, and can be pro-jected to the east where it is exposed as Wall 8002 in C7 (Fig. 5.1). Herethe wall again measures 2.00 m thick.

Glacis (Fig. 5.12)A layer of plaster (A2:30) that seals up against the south face of Wall1003 was the only continuous surface that appears to connect theSouth Wall with Retaining Wall 1001. However, since this surface wasnot excavated the full distance to the inner face of Wall 1001, itsperiods of use in the complete stratigraphic sequence remain unclear.Surface A2:30 consists of crushed nari and appears to be the earliestin a sequence of superimposed layers (A2:7, 18, and 30) that formeda glacis on this side of the tell. Other similarities that this glacis mayhave with the plaster glacis outside North Wall 3006 were not identifiedduring excavation, because Square A2 was not reopened in subsequent

Figure 5.12. Outer Wall 1003 with Glacis A2:30, looking west.

Figure 5.13. Retaining Wall 1001, in Field A.

seasons. However, on both sides of the tell, the Stratum-IX wall isassociated with a retaining wall.

Retaining Wall 1001 (Fig. 5.13)Evidence for a retaining wall was first observed in 1989 on the southside of the tell in Field A. Here the outer face of Wall 1001 (A1:4) isvisible for a height of 1.50–2.00 m above the modern surface (A1:1),and extends east-west beyond the excavated area for a total length of

11.10 m (A11–B61). It is assumed that the wall continues further eastand west, but recent bulldozer activity has damaged the wall in bothdirections. Wall 1001 is made of limestone (80%) and chert (20%) fieldstones that range in size from small to large (0.25–0.80 m) boulders;these stones are dry laid in irregular courses and are supported withchink stones.

Excavation demonstrates that the lowest course of masonry is laidon bedrock (A1:3) and on pockets of virgin soil which fill the shallowdepressions in the rock. This soil (A1:5), composed of coarse sand andpebbles, is almost sterile with only 3 ceramic sherds and one piece offlint reported. Because this wall is still standing and is covered withsoil (A1:6), the founding level of its inner face has not been exposed.This north face may in fact be founded on bedrock as well. Alternatingsoil and plaster layers (A1:2) seal against the bottom course of masonryon the south face of Wall 1001 and against protrusions of the bedrock(A1:3). These plaster layers were probably designed to prevent waterfrom undermining the base of the retaining wall. Whether or not theuppermost plaster surface was exposed in antiquity remains unclear,although it is more likely that it was covered with additional soil layersand was not visible, as is the case further east in Field C-west.23

End of Stratum IX

Apart from the subsequent construction of a Casemate Wall system,no evidence for the destruction of Stratum IX was seen in any of theexcavation areas. No actual destruction debris along the fortificationsystem can be assigned to Stratum IX, except for the presence ofweapons embedded in the layers (A2:7, 18, 30) of the plaster glacisoutside South Wall 1003, and along the West Wall in Guardroom 221adjacent to Tower 2024. Many of these weapons show evidence of use;the tip was bent or broken indicating that they had been shot againsta stone wall. Altogether, there were 15 iron arrowheads and javelinpoints outside of South Wall 1003 and an additional 31 points alongwith several fragments of iron recovered from the plaster layers outsideWest Wall 2023.24 However, the reuse of the Solid Wall as the Outer

23 A good example of the use of a retaining wall to support soil layers that cover theouter face of a parallel wall, located up slope, is seen at Tell el-Fûl (Lapp 1976: fig. 6).

24 Only those weapons located outside the wall system are included in this count;TJ 1, 16–21, 25, 26, 37, 38, 65, 67, 255, 266, 453–455, 518, 520–525, 527–541, 949,1215–1217, 1229, 1239; 1454.

Casemate Wall makes it impossible to determine whether this attackwas the event that brought Stratum IX to an end. It is more likely thatthe weapons are related to later events in the history of the town.

STRATUM VIIIB – THE CASEMATE WALL SYSTEM

One very common style of defensive system during several periodsof the Iron Age (11th–10th, 9th–8th, and 7th centuries BC)25 was thecasemate wall “built as two stone faces tied together by cross partitions”(Wright 1985:174). For our purposes, this definition for casemate wallsis preferable to that of Reich and Katzenstein (1992:313) who describethe cross walls as “short partitions” that divide the space between thetwo parallel walls. While, in some cases, the cross walls may have beenshort wall sections, extending only part way from the outer to theinner wall, in other cases the cross walls extend the full width of thecasemate room, as at Hazor, Str. X–IX (Yadin et al. 1960: pl. 199),and Tell Beit Mirsim (Albright 1943: pl. 3). In certain instances, thesewalls were bonded to the outer and inner parallel walls, actually tyingthem together. Such wall systems were used to surround villages, defendentire towns and protect distinct districts or building complexes withinthe town, such as temples, royal citadels or public buildings.26

At Tall Jawa, the fortification wall that can be traced along the crestof the tell at ground level on the north, east and south sides is the innerwall of a casemate system. On the west side, the inner wall line wasdifficult to locate because the western Outer Wall (W3050=W2023)was itself in position on the crest, with the parallel wall located insidethis perimeter. The construction of any fortification system was a majorundertaking for the local inhabitants. When a new wall system wasdesigned for Tall Jawa, the Stratum-IX offset/inset wall was reusedas the outer casemate wall and an inner, parallel wall was built andlinked to it for greater strength. Discussion of the wall system will beginin Field E, followed by a discussion of Stratum-VIIIB construction inFields B, A and C.

25 Herzog (1992:269) limits the use of casemate walls to the middle Iron Age II(10th to end of the 8th century BC), although it is clear that Tall al-#Umayri had a truecasemate system during Iron Age I (LaBianca et al. 1995: 102, 104).

26 A comprehensive list, current to 1976, is presented by Lapp (1981:50–53), whoincludes the “Solomonic” casemate systems from Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer alongwith those at rural border villages, in her comparison with the excavated remains fromTell el-Fûl (fig. 21).

Figure 5.14. Stratum-VIIIB Casemate Walls in Field E.

Field E

Outer Wall 3006 (Fig. 5.14)North Wall 3006 was reused during Stratum VIII as the Outer Wallof the casemate system. Changes to the upper courses have left littletrace, because subsequent abandonment of the town at the end of theIron Age was accompanied by a collapse of the upper part of the wallsystem. This makes it practically impossible to identify Stratum-VIIIBreconstruction except in Passageway 309, where the east end of NorthWall 3006 was rebuilt and linked to the new inner wall by Walls 3019and W3020.

Inner Casemate Wall 3000 (Fig. 5.14)The inner wall (W3000)27 of the casemate system runs east-west undera modern property wall (E55:1=E76:1) on the crest of the mound.Within the excavated squares of Field E, W3000 runs west, parallel tothe Outer Wall (W3006), from Square E76 on the east to Square E34.As it approaches West Wall 3050 (in Squares E24–E34), Inner Wall3000 becomes somewhat difficult to trace and its position could not bedetermined along its entire length at ground level.28

Inner Casemate Wall 3000 consists of 3 rows of roughly hewn smalland medium boulders, 90% limestone and 10% chert, in boulder-and-chink construction (Fig. 5.15). For most of its length, Wall 3000 mea-sures 1.25–1.55 m thick, and together with outer Wall 3006 constitutes

27 Loci E44:3=E54:17/E55:2=E65:2=E76:2 all designate the inner casemate wall(W3000) within the excavated area.

28 The position of the inner wall on the west side was anomalous in that it was nolonger on the crest of the mound (see below, Field B). Installation of a telephone polealso disrupted the wall line in this area.

Figure 5.15. South face of Inner Casemate Wall 3000 inRoom 313; boulder-and-chink construction with mud mortar.

a fortification system 5.20–5.30 m thick. This thickness remains rela-tively constant even where an offset/inset adjusts the wall line. Whatappears to be a shallow offset (E65–d) on the north face of Inner Wall3000 increases the thickness of the wall and reduces the size of Case-mate Room 301. The space between the walls varies from 1.85–2.05 mwith the narrowest width (ca. 1.25 m) located in Room 301, where boththe Outer and Inner Walls are at their thickest.

The Inner Wall was exposed on its north face in Casemate Rooms301, R310, and R311 and on its south face in Rooms 302, R303,R306, R312 and R313 of Building 300 (see Chapter 7). In Room 302,this wall is preserved a maximum of 11 courses without our reachingits base. This continuous wall line does not bond with any of the wallsof Building 300, which are built up against its south face. The InnerWall runs east without an opening until it reaches a point south ofPassageway 309. Here, the position of Wall 3000 is probably affectedby the presence of Stratum-IX Wall 3022. This can be seen in a slightchange of direction by which Inner Wall 3000 seals against the southface of the earlier wall, beginning at the west edge of cross Wall 3021.The southeast corner of Wall 3000 is marked by a large, well hewn,hammer dressed stone, at the point where it forms the same kind of

jamb for a passageway through the thickness of the wall as those semi-hewn stones in Outer Wall 3006. The limestone boulders of the uppercourses on either side of the passageway were carefully dressed to formvertical faces at each end of the wall line (W3000 on the west, andW3015 on the east side of Passageway 309). Below these vertical jambs,the lower courses of the Inner Wall forms a Pavement (E76:33) thatgives access to Passageway 309; from this point onward, the Inner Wallcontinues east as W3015.

A pair of narrow walls (W3019, W3020) links the Inner and OuterWalls on either side of the Passageway. On the west, Wall 3019 appearsto bond with the upper preserved course of Outer Wall 3006, althoughthis may be a feature of modern stone piling activities. The uppermostcourse is formed of a single line of 0.50 m long, flat-topped boulders(E76:13) that may have supported a mud brick superstructure. Thelower courses of this same wall (W3019) are built of larger boulders,making the space (0.75–0.80 m) in the Passageway somewhat narrowerthan the opening in the Inner Wall.29 Due to this rough construction,it is difficult to determine the exact sequence of building and repairthat resulted when linking-Wall 3019 was built over the top of Stratum-IX Wall 3022. However, Wall 3019 is indeed secondary, since it abutsInner Wall 3000.

The mirror image of this construction is seen in north-south Wall3020 that links Outer Wall 3018 with Inner Wall 3015 on the east.Along the west face of Wall 3020, certain of its wall stones jut out fromthe vertical, with the result that Wall 3020 appears to be inset alongpart of its length. This results in a narrowing of the passageway as itruns through the Outer Wall. Here, it is clear that the linking wall(W3020) does not bond with Outer Wall 3018. On the east face of Wall3020, the details of wall construction were not documented, becauseexcavation did not proceed below topsoil. The fact that these linkingwalls are some of the narrowest walls built in Field E does not meanthat they could not support an upper storey room or roof. Their prox-imity across the narrow passage (0.60–0.85 m), and that of the major

29 By contrast with passageway 10067d at Hazor (Yadin et al. 1989:175), there isno clear evidence for a door at the north end of Passageway 309. The narrowness ofthe opening probably rendered a door unnecessary since the shadow of offset/insetE77–c would have obscured the entrance. There was a socket stone (E76:19) within thecollapse (E76:25), immediately south of Outer Wall 3006, that may have fallen fromabove, or have been used in an earlier phase (see Stratum IX).

Figure 5.16. Corridor 328 leading to Passageway 309, looking North.

Casemate Walls (2.25 m), is enough together to bear the weight. Oth-erwise, the purpose of Linking Walls 3019 and W3020 remains unclear,although they may have framed entrances into the Casemate Roomson either side or to the roof of the fortification system.

It was apparent during excavation that the construction sequenceof these Stratum-VIIIB walls is very complex. Most problematic is thelocation of Stones E76:23 immediately north of the opening throughInner Wall 3000; here these stone seal against the lower stones of Wall3000 at the point where it forms Pavement E76:33. This pile of stones(E76:23; 0.50–0.60 m in height) appears to block the entryway; at thesame time, its stones are so embedded into the linking walls on eitherside that they appear to bond with them. Stones E76:23 may haverested on the continuation of Stratum-IX Wall 3022. However, theircurrent position points to a difference in function in Stratum VIII;either these stones are a deliberate blocking of the entryway30 or theyare the part of the support for a staircase to the upper storey case-mate rooms. Secondly, Wall W3022 from Stratum IX remains in place

30 The stones could be collapse of an upper storey wall sometime in Stratum VIII,but this does not explain why some of them appear embedded in Walls 3019 andW3020.

and is sealed against by Inner Wall 3000. In the final use phase (Stra-tum VIIIA), Wall 3022 is covered by a plaster floor in Casemate Room310.

On the southern, inner side of the Casemate system there is addi-tional evidence that may indicate the function of Passageway 309 dur-ing Stratum VIIIB. Here, Wall 3016 on the west and Wall 3017 on theeast abut the corners of Inner Walls 3000=3015 on either side of Pas-sageway 309 (Fig. 5.16). These parallel walls form a Corridor (R328)31

which extends south a minimum of 7.00 m into the town, along the eastside of Room 313, with a probable total length of 12.00 m to the southend of Room 317. Each of these walls is 2–row boulder-and-chink con-struction in the size range of 0.70–0.85 m thick. At the north end ofWalls W3016 and W3017 is a double row of cobbles (E76:15), possiblya threshold, that runs across Corridor 328 and marks the entrance toPassageway 309 through Wall 3000.32 The level of these cobblestonesis ca. 0.15 m above the Inner Wall Pavement (E76:33), which is itselfsealed by a Soil layer (E76:24) as far as the inner edge of Stones E76:23.To the south of Cobbles E76:15 in Corridor 328, there was a series ofsuperimposed soil layers (E76:31, 32, 35) that may have been a deliber-ate fill or the remains of a ramp leading up to the fortification systemfrom inside the town, where floor levels in Rooms 313 and 314 wereca. 2.00 m lower. All the pottery sherds within these fill layers date toeither Iron Age I33 or Iron Age II, which is what one would expect inview of the occupation history of the site.

Casemate RoomsIn Field E, the casemate system was excavated along a 24.00 m length,exposing several distinct rooms within the wall system. One completeroom (R310) was excavated down to Stratum VIIIA levels, and twoother rooms (R301, R311) were partially exposed.

31 The designation “Passageway 309” is reserved for the entry through the casematesystem; the Corridor inside the town that continues the line of the passageway has thelabel “Corridor 328”.

32 Threshold stones mark both the inner and outer edge of the passage through theBastion in Area G at Hazor. While Passageway 309 at Tall Jawa shares certain featureswith the fortifications at Hazor, passage 10067d in Area G is considerably wider (ca.1.50 m, Yadin et al. 1989:175).

33 Sherds of collared-rim jars were present in several Iron Age II soil layers eventhough no architectural remains from Iron I were identified in Field E.

Figure 5.17. Casemate Room 301 on the left,with Inner Casemate Wall 3000 in the centre.

Room 301 (Fig. 5.17): The only evidence for Stratum VIIIB use of thecasemate rooms was exposed in Room 301. Here the casemate wallswere 1.25–1.50 m apart and Room 301 was excavated for a lengthof 5.50 m without reaching its cross walls. Below a Stratum-VIIIAflagstone floor, there was a group of smashed pithoi, sealed by collapsedwall stones and soil. Although the earliest floor level was not reached,the large number of sherds (almost 1100) from a great variety of vesselspoints to a compact storage area with ceiling collapse, which representsthe use and destruction phases of Room 301.

At the east end of this casemate unit, immediately west of Passage-way 309, there are two rooms that were in use during Stratum VIIIA.Room 310 is a very small room, located between cross Wall 3021 andlinking Wall 3019. The distance between these two walls is only ca.1.00 m, while the space between the casemates is 2.20 m. In spite ofits small size, it was carefully paved with a plaster surface (E76:22) thatcovered Stratum-IX Wall 3022. To the west, Room 311 remains mostlyunexcavated, although clearance along Outer Wall 3006 suggests thatit was, like Room 301, in the range of 5.00–6.00 m in length. Due tothe pattern of collapse and erosion at this point along the wall system,the precise function of these rooms could not be determined.

Field B

Outer West Wall 3050=2023+2002 (Figs. 5.7, 9)Investigation of West Wall 3050 in Field E made it clear that this wallserved as the Stratum-VIII outer casemate wall. Although its inner faceremains essentially unexcavated at its north end in Field E, West Wall2023 in Field B is clearly associated with an inner wall (W2004+2009)that forms casemate rooms along its east side. Tower 2024 continued inuse, and the outer wall was redesigned with the construction of a drainthrough Passageway 219.

Tower 2024 seems to have continued in use throughout StratumVIII, and the space between the tower and Wall 2023 was proba-bly used as a guardroom (R221). Such a hypothesis would help toaccount for the buildup over time of a thick hard packed surface(B26:11=B16:8)34 consisting of soil and plaster (B26:9b), which yielded43 pieces of metal, including 18 arrowheads. Within B26:11 was anash deposit (B26:13) with a maximum depth of 0.12 cm, that containedcooking pot sherds, burnt plaster, animal bones, an olive pit and seeds.This period of use is marked by large pieces of plaster, some of whichsealed up against West Wall 2023, suggesting repeated repairs to theface of the wall and to the tower. This plaster was crushed beneathcollapsed stones, which may mark the end of Stratum VIIIB, althoughassigning a date here is difficult. What is interesting is the presence ofa single ashlar stone (B26:15) that measures 0.40 ×0.43× 0.59 m.35 Theposition of this stone suggests that it was part of the superstructure orcorner of Tower 2024. No other such stones were recovered, althoughthe number of well dressed stones used in the construction of the early19th century village of modern Jawa leaves little doubt as to their origin(Daviau and Tempest, in preparation).

The principal change in Outer West Wall 2023 is the partial blockingof Passageway 219 and the formation of Drain B24:24 (Fig. 5.18). Noother changes in construction are evident in the architectural remainsof this wall, except the use of one course of chert boulders, which were

34 The balk line for Squares B16 and B26 ran between Solid Wall 2023 andTower 2024 (=B16:2). To simplify discussion, loci between these two structures willbe identified using only their locus numbers in B26. Loci associated with Tower 2024were assigned to Square B16; for further details, consult the Locus List on CD.

35 The fact that West Wall 2023 collapsed toward the east suggests that this may alsohave been the pattern for Tower 2024. If this were the case, it is more likely that ashlarstone B26:13 was part of the superstructure of the tower, and not of Wall 2023.

Figure 5.18. Stratum VIIIB–A Casemate System and Drain B24:24 in Field B.

preserved in several places along its inner edge. These stones may berelated to the collapsed mud brick (B24:15) located in Casemate Room215; this collapse is evidence of a Stratum-VIII mudbrick superstruc-ture of Outer Casemate Wall 2023.36 The use of impermeable chertboulders between the limestone foundation and the mud brick upperstorey wall protected both parts of the wall from dampness. Chert isalso used at other strategic points, e.g. as a capstone for Drain B24:24.

36 Within Casemate Rooms 213 and 215, West Wall 2023 is built of stone to thesecond storey level, 2.25 m above the floor of Room 215; it was not just the foundationfor a mud brick wall.

Figure 5.19. Drain B24:24 looking east into Channel 218.

Drain B24:24 (Figs. 5.18, 19)Passageway 219 from Stratum IX was transformed by the constructionof a 1.75 m long blocking wall (W2036) that was attached to the southend of Wall 2023. This additional wall unit left only a narrow spacebetween its south end and the north end of Outer Wall 2002, whichremained unchanged from Stratum IX when it served as the southjamb of Passageway 219. Now, the opening between these two sectionsof the outer wall is widest at it eastern mouth (ca. 0.50 m); from hereit tapers on an angle to 0.20 m at its exit on the west. The lowercourses (W2027; B24:23) of West Wall 2023, which served as the floorof Passageway 219, now serve as the floor of a Drain (B24:24) with aslope of ca. 10°.37

Along the west face of Wall Unit 2036, the outer row of stones hasbeen badly damaged during modern times, giving the appearance ofan inset. Nevertheless, several features associated with the constructionand use of the drain are preserved below ground level. These features

37 A similar construction appears in the Late Bronze Age drain at Bethel (Albright1934: fig. 5).

Figure 5.20. Sump with Retaining Wall 2041on right; cut through layers of Glacis B24:4.

include two flagstones set on their narrow edge that are part of Wall2036; these stones constitute the north lip of the drain exit along thesouth face of Wall 2036, directing the water further to the west. Inaddition, there is a 2–row cobblestone wall (Wall 2041) that seals upagainst these flagstones and runs west from the exit of Drain B24:24 forca. 3.65 m. Exposed only along its south face for 4+courses (Figs. 5.20,23), Wall 2041 probably cut through several layers of the Stratum-IXplaster glacis (B24:19=B14:5) seen outside Wall 2023 further north.38

A second line of stones (B14:16), positioned outside the south lip ofthe drain’s exit, extends west and then south from a single large boul-der. Thus a channel was created to prevent the water flowing outof the drain from accumulating against the west faces of Outer Wall2023+2002.

At the west end of this channel, only a portion of a sump wasexcavated. Here a series of soil layers witness to the passage of waterand waste through this drainage system. The lowest exposed layer ofsoil (B14:17) is brown; above it is a black layer (B14:15) stained with

38 Modern bulldozer activity in this area destroyed some of the connections betweenthe glacis and the features leading away from the drain.

ash. This is succeeded by two additional brown layers, the lower one(B14:14) being somewhat moist by comparison with the upper layer(B14:13=11). These soil layers are covered by a layer of flagstones(B24:35) which extend the floor (B24:23) of the drain beyond its exiton the west, and drop down gradually (as B14:9) to follow the base ofWall 2041. This drainage system was covered in turn by thick layers ofplaster and soil (B14:3, 7), packed in place on the southwest slope andsealing against the west face of Blocking Wall 2036.

Within the thickness of the outer wall, only one capstone (B24:12)remains in place spanning the drain. This feature consists of a singlechert boulder measuring 0.40–0.53× 1.40 m long, and 0.26–0.31 mthick. The capstone is in position above the east mouth (Fig. 5.19) ofthe drain, and rests on the flanking sections of West Wall 2002 andBlocking Wall 2036 at a height of 0.55 m above the floor. A secondfeature designed to protect the wall system from moisture is a plastercoating (B24:26), preserved on the south face of Blocking Wall 2036.In view of the repeated plastering of the drain’s channel further east(Fig. 5.19), one might suspect that the stone floor (B24:23) of the drainwas also plastered, although it has worn away over time.

The Western CasemateThe evidence for the simultaneous construction of the drain and ofInner Casemate Wall 2004 is seen clearly in the southeast corner, whereWall 2004 bonds with Wall 2003, the south wall of Casemate Room215. Wall 2003 abuts the east face of Blocking Wall 2036, effectivelyending the casemates along the west side. At the same time, Wall 2003forms part of the north wall of Drain Channel 218, making it clearthat the closing of Passageway 219 coincided with the construction ofthe casemate system in the southwest corner of the town and of DrainB24:24.

Inner West Wall 2004=2029 (Fig. 5.18): With the outer wall on thecrest of the natural hill, the inner casemate wall (W2004+2029) islocated inside the town. Due to its position and the impact of modernfarming on the tell, Wall 2029 is not visible above topsoil north ofthe excavated area in Field B. Where it is exposed in Squares B24and B25, two sections of wall on either side of Doorway B form theeast wall of two casemate rooms (R213, R215). Wall 2029, north ofDoorway B, is 1.05–1.13 m thick, and Wall 2004, south of the doorway,is 1.10–1.20 m. Both wall sections are built of small and medium

Figure 5.21. Inner Casemate Wall 2004 in foreground,and W2000+2001 in background, looking south

limestone boulders in typical boulder-and-chink construction, exceptwhere two large boulders mark the south end of Wall 2004. At thispoint, Wall 2004 bonds with Wall 2003, a short (1.60 m) wall of similarconstruction, measuring 1.25 m thick, that forms the south end ofCasemate Room 215.

The construction style of the inner wall, with two wall units framinga central doorway, is considerably different from what we saw in FieldE, where the inner wall ran parallel to the outer wall without any door-ways piercing its length. Here in the southwest corner, the casematerooms are joined to a structure inside the town and are themselves theback rooms of an adjacent building (B200; see Chapter 6).39

Inner South Wall 2001+2006=1030+1020 (Figs. 5.18, 21–22): Alongthe south side of the tell, the inner casemate wall (W2001+2006=1030+1020) is cut by two doorways, one in the southwest corner(Doorway K) and another (Doorway H) located 28.25 m further east

39 Such a system of back rooms serving as integral parts of the casemate fortificationswas fairly common in Cisjordan, for example at Beer-sheba (Herzog 1984: figs. 6, 7),although in this case the outer wall was not constructed as a separate entity but wasbuilt in units as the outer wall of a given house. By contrast, the Stratum-X casematewall at Hazor, with doorways in the corner of almost every room, opened onto a street(Yadin et al. 1989: Plan VIII).

Figure 5.22. Drain Channel 218, south side, with Doorway K(Stratum VIIIB) and Doorway A Stratum VIIIA, into Room 210.

in Building 113. Evidence for the first phase of construction (Stra-tum VIIIB) is most clearly seen adjacent to the southern lip of DrainB24:24, where Inner Wall 2001 abuts Outer West Wall 2002. Like Wall2003 on the north side of the drain, Wall 2001 on the south is aneast-west wall consisting of 3 rows of small and medium boulders thatappears to be founded at the level of the pavement (B24:23) formed bythe lower courses of Outer Wall 2023+2002; this pavement extendsslightly east of the wall face. Wall 2001 itself extends east for only2.00 m, where it forms a vertical face as the west jamb of DoorwayK. The full size of this doorway appears to be 1.90 m wide and 1.25–1.35 m deep (Fig. 5.22). Doorway K is not completely exposed to theStratum VIIIB level, due to the presence of Stratum-VIIIA ThresholdStone B34:60 and Wall Unit 2000, which seals against the east edge ofWall 2001. At least five courses of large, semi-hewn boulders at the westend of Wall 2006 form a jamb on the east side of Doorway K, whichserves as the entrance into Casemate Room 210 during both phasesof Stratum VIII (B–A). Wall 2006 consists of 2–3 rows of medium andlarge boulders and is 6+courses in height, serving also as the south wallof Drain Channel 218. Although obscured along much of its length,the Stratum-VIIIB inner wall is present under the Stratum-VIIIA wall(W2007=1004) build above it (see below).

Channel 218 (Fig. 5.23)Leading up to Drain B24:24 is a channel 8.35 m long. Channel 218runs between two distinct wall units, one on the south (W2001, Door-way K, and W2006), and an unbroken wall face on the north (W2003+W2005). This northern wall is in fact composed of two wall units;the south wall (W2003) of Casemate Room 215, and the south wall(W2005) of Room 209, which abuts Inner Casemate Wall 2004 atthe southeast, outer corner of Casemate Room 215. From this point

Figure 5.23. Drain Channel 218, north side,with excavation through sump at west (left).

onward, Wall 2005 extends the south face of Wall 2003 to the east.The remains of drain Channel 218 were difficult to understand duringexcavation because they reflect several phases of repair that could notbe directly associated with architectural construction phases. For thisreason, both Stratum VIIIB and VIIIA phases of the drain channel willbe described here.

Channel 218 appears to consist of the entire space (0.90–1.10 mwide) between the inner casemate walls on the south (W2001, W2006)and Wall 2003+2005 on the north. A layer of soil (B34:22) servesas make-up in the channel and seals against the walls on either side.Although this channel probably served also as a passageway leading toCasemate Room 210, what is of greatest interest are the superimposedlayers of plaster (B24:17a+b=B34:7) which cover the bottom of thechannel and seal up against the north wall (W2003+2005). The plas-ter is not well preserved on the vertical wall face at the west end ofChannel 218, where it enters Drain B24:24, but begins 0.80 m east ofthe drain’s mouth and continues eastward. So too, the plaster coatingis poorly preserved on the north face of Wall 2006, east of DoorwayK. Above the plaster within the central and northern side of the chan-nel is a layer of mud brick material (B34:18+47) that can be traced eastto the beginning of Channel 218, outside the southeast corner of Room209. Within this lens of mud brick material (B34:47) is a seam of chertgravel (B34:21), traced for 2.50 m along the south face of Wall 2005.The chert seam and the brick material are sealed in turn by anotherplaster layer (B34:19=44, probably Stratum VIIIA).

Above plaster layer B34:19 is a layer of soil and cobblestones (B34:17+42) with a large accumulation of broken pottery (1005 sherds), fallenwall stones, 17 pieces of chert, charcoal, burnt animal bones, and 7iron points (TJ 1213, 1225, 1230, 1258–1259, 1311, 1906). At this

level, the plaster (B34:46) along the south face of Wall 2005 is badlyworn, indicative of the extensive use of the drain during several phasesof occupation.

The eastern end of Channel 218 is marked by a low mud brickfender (B34:45) that runs east ca. 0.85 m from the east end of Wall2005 to a line of cobbles (B34:39) which extends south from Parti-tion Wall 2040 as far as the north face of Wall 2006. These cobblesare backed on the east by several large boulders (B44:22) set on anangle to form a spillway separating Channel 218 from Room 207. InStratum VIIIA, the source of water that flowed from the head of thechannel to the drain may have come in part from the roofs of the sur-rounding rooms. This hypothesis is supported by the presence of a hole-mouth jar (V206), with a diameter of 17.4 cm, that may have served asa drainpipe; it appears to have fallen with wall stones into the channel,although it could have been in place in front of Doorway A.40 Such apipe could have conducted water from the roof into the channel ratherthan served as a conduit within the channel itself.41

Comparanda: In order to better understand this architectural feature atTall Jawa, it helps to compare it with contemporary drains at Pales-tinian sites, although this is not the place for a complete study; a fewexamples will suffice. For instance, the Stratum-VIII stone-lined drain(10507) at Hazor, dated to the 9th century BC, is located in the westcorner of Tower 10029 (Area G), where it extends ca. 7.20 m through

40 The exit from Room 210, through Doorway A, led directly into the drain channel.Clearly, this was a place where extra support was needed to assure the flow of waterthrough the drain.

41 Two drainpipes (F 480/1, 480/2) recovered from Late Bronze Age levels atHazor (Area F, Locus 8071) were described as “thrown” into Room 8066 (Yadin etal. 1960:138), while a third (F 685) was recovered in the Cultic Area (Yadin et al.1960:131). Additional fragments of drainpipes found in Cistern 9017 (Area D) werealso in secondary context (Yadin et al. 1958: pl. CX: 3, 4), as were those in Area A,Trench 500, which date to Middle Bronze Age II (Yadin et al. 1989:56). In contrast, atTell Halaf several drainpipes were in situ in a channel that led directly to a catchmentarea (von Oppenheim 1950: pl. 87; thanks to P. E. Dion for this reference). The use ofpipes within a drain is also seen at Lachish in Stratum II (Tufnell 1953:96; fig. 8), wherethe drain through the gateway measures 0.40–0.60 m (Ussishkin 1978: fig. 18). Certaindrain pipes had handles, as did the three in Drain 3010 at Megiddo (Stratum VIII;Loud 1948:104; pl. 256:2). Drainpipes without handles were very common in the LateBronze Age (e.g., Hazor, Area F; Yadin et al. 1960: pl. CXLVII:7–9); similar pipesappeared in situ in Iron Age levels between Rooms A and B at Lachish (Tufnell 1953:pls. 23:1; 90:390).

the masonry. On either side of the drain, basalt stones, possibly in sec-ondary use, are built into the tower to facilitate the flow of water (Yadin1989:178–179). The inner mouth of the channel is 0.70 m wide and1.50 m high, whereas the outlet on the north face of Tower 10029 isca. 0.30 m wide. By contrast with Drain B24:24 at Tall Jawa, the drainat Hazor had 5 large capping stones preserved along its length throughTower 10029 (Yadin 1989: plan XXXI).

At Tel Yoqne#am, two drains which pass through the Stratum 11 (10th

century BC) and Stratum 10 (9th?–8th century BC) walls are preserved.During both strata, the walls are casemate style42 and the drains extendbeyond the full thickness of the walls (Ben-Tor, Portugali and Avissar1983: figs. 2, 6). In Stratum 11, a stone-lined channel inside the towndirected water toward the drain. The source of the water is uncertain,although the excavators suggest the possibility of a nearby water reser-voir (Ben-Tor, Portugali and Avissar 1983:40). No construction detailsare provided with the exception of an illustration of a section of thedrain floor (Ben-Tor, Portugali and Avissar 1983: fig. 6).43 The same istrue of Drain 1723 in Stratum 10 that is located 5.00 m southwest ofthe earlier conduit. In this case, the drain extends beyond the outerwall face for a distance of ca. 6.00 m (Ben-Tor, Portugali and Avissar1983:37).

Fields B–A

Inner Casemate Wall 2006=1030+1020Beginning at the east end of Drain Channel 218, the Stratum-VIIIBinner wall (W2006) extended east gradually changing its alignment,with the result that it was subsequently covered over by Stratum VIIIArepairs. This is seen quite clearly along the eastern stretch of Wall 1030in Squares B63–A3, where the line of its north face is ca. 0.20 m furthersouth than Stratum-VIIIA Wall W1004. The offset of the inner wall iseven more apparent east of Doorway H, where Wall 1020 is ca. 0.40 mfurther south than Stratum-VIIIA Wall 1010.

42 The excavators note that the cross walls within the double wall system (W200 and212) of Stratum 10 are only finished on one face. It is their judgment that these wallswere not “the free-standing cross walls of a casemate wall” (Ben-Tor, Portugali andAvissar 1983:35; fig. 2).

43 The drain, illustrated by Ben-Tor, Portugali and Avissar (1983: pl. 1B) as Stratum11, appears instead to be a section of Stratum-10 Drain 1723 at the point where asupport wall appears under the capping stones (1983: fig. 2).

Figure 5.24. Casemate Rooms in Field A, with DoorwayH connecting Casemate Room 121 with Building 113.

The west end of Wall 1020 consists of large and very large, wellhewn boulders that form the east jamb of Doorway H. Here, there isone semi-dressed stretcher (A13:42) that measures 0.45×1.15 m, and iscovered with a thin layer of plaster. Such careful construction is strongevidence that this entrance into Casemate Room 101 was in use duringboth phases of Stratum VIII. Although Wall 1020 was uncovered onlyin Square A2 east balk and lies unexcavated in Square A12, it seemsapparent that it was the earliest phase of the inner wall, which was inuse with Outer Casemate Wall 1003. The eastern extension of Wall1020 is not exposed in Field A (A12–A63), but it continues eastwardunder a modern stone pile (W1031). In Field C-west, Inner Wall 8005appears to be its continuation.

Casemate Room 121 (Figs. 5.24, 25): The Stratum-VIIIB use phase of acasemate room along the south side of the town was uncovered only inRoom 121. Exposed in the eastern half of Square A2, a hard-packedbeaten earth surface (A2:31) with flat-lying pottery was well preserved.This surface extends into Doorway H that leads into the rooms adja-cent to the wall system (Chapter 6). Surface A2:31 was subsequentlycovered by a deep (ca. 0.75 m) layer of collapse (A2:13+11), probably

Figure 5.25. Casemate Room 121 with Stratum- VIIIA Wall 1004 in background.

ceiling material. Within these layers were 2000+sherds and 4 brokenspindle whorls, evidence of extensive domestic use or storage. Soil locusA2:13 sealed against the lower stones of Wall 1020 on the east andaround the south end of Wall 1012 which runs through the inner case-mate wall (W1030). North-south Wall 1012 may have been a Stratum-IX wall that was truncated during the construction of Inner Casematewall 1030 and the establishment of the Stratum VIIIB-surface (A2:31),although this remains tentative. At the same time, the resulting wallstub may have served as a room divider between 2 casemate rooms (seeDoorway G, below). At its greatest width, Room 121 was 1.50–1.65 mand its length within the excavated area was 3.70 m.

Destruction of Stratum VIIIB—Fields E, B, and AEvidence for the end of Stratum VIIIB in Field E did not appearto affect the casemate wall system, but could be seen in collapsedceilings within the rooms built up against the inner wall (see Chapter 7)and by the destruction in Casemate Room 301. In contrast, the mostserious disturbance of the fortification system was seen along the southside of the town, especially in the collapse and reconstruction of theinner casemate wall and the redesign of the casemate rooms. Althoughthe stone architecture makes it difficult to trace this destruction inthe archaeological record, probably due to the reuse of many of thecollapsed boulders, the raising of floor levels is apparent, especially inCasemate Room 101 (R121 of Stratum VIIIB).

STRATUM VIIIARECONSTRUCTION OF THE CASEMATE SYSTEM

Field E

No massive collapse of the casemate walls in Field E could be assignedwith certainty to the end of Stratum VIIIB, although the excavationof Cistern E64:13 within Building 300 suggests the complete blockageof Passageway 309, at least as an access to cisterns outside the walls.From now on, this passageway could only be used as an entrance tothe casemate rooms which were furnished with new floors above thesmashed debris that was left in situ.

Room 301 (Figs. 5.14, 17)Casemate Room 301 extends 6.00 m without evidence for a cross wall.Located south of inset E56–b, where the distance between the inner(W3000) and outer (W3006) walls was ca. 1.25–1.43 m, Room 301 issomewhat narrower than Rooms 310 and R311, which are 2.25 min width. The principal surface (E55:17) in the western half of Room301 is paved with flagstones, while the eastern half has a beaten earthfloor (E55: 16). The soil layer (E55:12) immediately above the flagstoneand beaten earth surfaces (E55:16+17) contained 11 sheep/goat bonefragments, 2 basalt grinders (TJ 421, TJ 448), 1 stopper (TJ 450), smallpieces of charcoal and ceramic sherds. Although such an assemblageis not evidence for room function (see Daviau 1993a:31), it clearlysuggests domestic rather than military activities.

Room 311 (Figs. 5.14, 17)Casemate Rooms 311 and R310 are located at the east end of the wallsystem immediately west of Passageway R309. Only the east end (1.50m) of Room 311 was exposed in order to clarify the construction andassociation of Cross Wall 3021 with Inner Wall 3000 and Outer Wall3006. Although only the upper four courses were excavated, it is clearthat Cross Wall 3021 consists of 2 rows of small and medium boulders,a full 1.00 m thick. While it is probable that it bonded with the InnerCasemate Wall 3000, the join of Wall 3021 with Outer Wall 3006 wasless clear; it appears to abut. At this point in the casemate wall, thedistance between the inner and outer walls is 2.25 m. The debris layers(E76:4, 19) that fill the room consist of soil and scattered boulders,apparent rockfall that marks the final collapse of the wall system.

Room 310East of Room 311 is the smallest casemate room identified duringexcavation, Room 310. Framed by a sturdy wall (W3021) on the west,this small room is bounded on the east by Wall 3019, a single row(0.50 m thick) of small and medium limestone boulders linking theinner and outer walls. Parallel Walls 3019 and W3021 form a roomof only 1.60 m long (east-west). A plaster surface (E76:22) extendingthe full width of Room 310 slopes toward the north. No finds indicativeof room function were recovered in the overlying debris layer (E76:18),and no doorway into Room 311 was evident. In spite of these factors,Room 310 was clearly in use in Stratum VIIIA.

Of interest is the fact that the absolute level of Plaster SurfaceE76:22 is 922.93–922.75 masl, in the same range as the flagstonefloor in Room 301 (922.98–922.82 masl), even though the floor levelsimmediately south of Wall 3000 in R313 (Building 300) is 1.00 m lowerthan those in Room 302, adjacent to Casemate Room 301. Secondly,no doorways connecting the casemate rooms to Building 300 werediscovered anywhere in the 24.00 m length of inner Wall 3000 exposedduring excavation. At the same time, finds within Room 301 stronglysuggest that the casemate rooms were roofed and used for storage(see above). One can only suppose that the ancient inhabitants gainedaccess to these rooms from Passageway 309, or from above.

Field B

Inner Wall 2001+2000 and 2007 (Figl 5.18, 21)In the southwest corner of the town, Drain B24:24 shows no signs ofreconstruction in Stratum VIIIA, although Channel 218 received a sec-ond coat of plaster (B24:17a) and continued in use. The clearest evi-dence for a second construction phase is seen in Doorway K, whereBlocking Wall 2000 reduced the width of the doorway from 2.00 mto 0.95 m, forming Doorway A. Blocking Wall 2000 consists of dressedlimestone boulders, several in the range of large boulders. Within Door-way A is a carefully dressed threshold stone (B34:60) in situ at the north-ern lip of the entrance. Doorway A suggests that Channel 218 contin-ued to serve as a pathway to Casemate Room 210.

Casemate Room 210 (Fig. 5.18)In the southwest corner of the fortification system, a single narrowroom (R210) fills the space between the outer (W2002+2009) and

Figure 5.26. Tower 2013 in Casemate Wall System, South of Building 204.

inner (W2001+2006) casemate walls. Casemate Room 210 is trape-zoidal in shape and measures 1.15 m wide at the west end, 2.20 mwide on the east, and 8.50 m long. Because the soil and rockfall layers(B24:25=B34:6) that fill Room 210 were not excavated to floor level,its specific function could not be determined. However, the presence ofa single, well-built entrance (Doorway A) which leads into Drain Chan-nel 218 clearly indicates that Room 210 was used, and not just as aspace filled with debris to strengthen the wall system. In addition, wehave strong evidence that Channel 218 was used as both a drain and apassageway to Doorway K, since it was important enough to be remod-elled in Stratum VIIIA.

Tower 2013 (Fig. 5.26)The most perplexing construction sequence was seen in Squares B43–B53, where only the outer face of South Wall 2009 appears to continuealong the exposed length of the outer wall. The inner face is only visiblewhere Casemate Room R210 on the west and Rooms 201 and R101on the east were rebuilt. For a stretch of ca. 10.00 m, beginning at theeast end or head of Drain Channel 218, there are no rooms betweenthe inner and outer walls. Instead, the inner wall is part of a large unit(Tower 2013), distinct from the system of casemate rooms. Much of

Figure 5.27. Basin B44:4 reused in Inner Casemate Wall 2007.

the construction within this unit was probably built in Stratum VIIIA,along with the re-alignment of the upper courses (W2007) of Wall 2006.

Beginning immediately south of the head of Drain Channel 218,there is a north-south cross wall (W2008) built of one row of largeflat-topped boulders that links the inner and outer casemate walls andserves as the east wall of Casemate Room 210. This construction ismatched at the east end by Cross Wall 2012, which is also formed oflarge, flat-topped boulders and is the west wall of Casemate Room 201.The Stratum VIIIA rebuild (W2007) of Inner Casemate Wall 2006consists of large boulders positioned along its north face that coverseveral courses of smaller boulders.

Within the unit formed by these cross walls is an east-west line oflarge boulders (B43:12=B53:17) running parallel to Inner Wall 2007.North of these boulders, the south face of Inner Casemate Wall 2007is increasingly difficult to delineate and appears to consist only oflarge cobbles. Appearing to link boulders B43:12=B53:17 on the southwith Outer Wall 2009 was a clear, north-south line of small boulders(W2013) several courses high, that serves to stabilize two pockets filledwith cobbles and small boulders (B53:12, B53:15). It is not possible toseparate these elements into Stratum-VIIIB and Stratum-VIIIA con-

struction phases, with the result that the nature of the earlier use of thisarea remains unclear. At the same time, severe collapse along the southface of Outer Wall 2009 allowed for erosion and additional destructionduring the ensuing millennia.

The function of this unit (Tower 2013) is not immediately apparent,although it may have served as the foundation for a tower designedto give extra strength to the fortification system near the southwestcorner. If this were the case, such a tower could have stood higher thanthe adjacent casemate rooms providing extra visibility and a defensiveadvantage to the protectors of the town. However, this may not be theonly viable interpretation.

Of special note are two shallow round basins (B44:4 and B53:11)built into the north face of Inner Wall 2007; both are of limestone.Basin B44:4 is located immediately above the point where the west wall(W2011) of Room 206 (Chapter 6) abuts the inner casemate wall, whileBasin B53:11 is part of a more complex construction that marks theeast end of Inner Wall 2007.44 At this point, Wall 2014, the east wallof Room 203, cuts through the inner wall until it reaches the northend of north-south Cross Wall 2012. Basin B53:11 appears to serveas a capstone where Wall 2014 enters the inner wall line (Fig. 5.27).On either side of Wall 2014 is a single row of cobble size chert,several courses deep, that extends through the thickness of the InnerWall, marking the end of Wall 2007 to the west and the beginning ofStratum-VIIIA Wall 1004 on the east.45

Field A

Inner Casemate Wall 1004+1010 (Fig. 5.28)Evidence for the construction of a new Wall (W1004) slightly north ofthe earlier inner casemate wall (W1030) increases toward the wall’s eastend. Before construction of this inner wall segment, the builders laid aplastered surface (A3:10), covering part of Surface A3:15 in Room 103.Plaster Surface A3:10 continues through Doorway H into Casemate

44 A comparable round shallow basin was located to the east of Building F607 at TelBatash (Mazar 1997: P/S 102; Photo 248).

45 What remains unclear is the state of the casemate walls during Stratum VII. It ispossible that the wall in Field B was refashioned, and that the basins were part of anindustrial area created above the Stratum VIIIA destruction debris. This would helpto explain the presence of a large limestone olive crushing stone (B44:20; ca. 0.75 indiameter, and 0.25 m thick) embedded in the topsoil nearby.

Figure 5.28. Inner Casemate Room 201+R200 and Room 101 in Stratum VIIIA.

Room 101. This surface (A2:10) covers Debris Layer A2:11 that hadaccumulated in Stratum-VIIIB Casemate Room 121, subsequent to thepartial collapse of Wall 1003 along its southern perimeter. Founded onthis Surface, Wall 1004 runs west for 12.45 m, where it abuts the chertcourses that seal Wall 2014+2012 and Inner Wall 2007 in Square B53.A partial foundation trench (A3:14), dug to receive Wall 1004, cutsthrough the south end of Wall 1012 (Stratum IX); this is visible on thenorth side of Inner Wall 1004. This trench (A3:13) is also visible inthe east balk and consists of an area of soft soil, ca. 0.30 m in width,along the north face of Wall 1004. In Square A3, Wall 1004 is a 3–row, boulder-and-chink wall built of small to medium size limestoneand chert boulders (0.25–0.75 m). It is preserved to a height of 3–4courses (0.90 m) and measures 1.40–1.50 m in width. The fact that thealignment of this wall varies slightly several times along its length, andthat it is not in perfect alignment with Wall 1010, east of Doorway Hin Building 113, may indicate haste on the part of the builders.

Casemate Rooms 101, 200 and 201 (Fig. 5.28)Evidence for use and reuse of Casemate Room 101 is seen in thepresence of a foundation trench (A2:27), which cuts through Plaster

Figure 5.29. Casemate Room 201 on right of Inner Casemate Wall 1004.

Layer A2:10. The trench runs along the south face of Inner Wall 1004,beginning west of Doorway H, and extends as far as the east side ofWall Stub 1012. This trench is filled with moderately loose soil (A2:25)that extends into Doorway H (A2:26). Within the trench was the neckand shoulder of an inverted storejar (V174) that shows signs of burningand appears to have been used as an oven.46 The oven (A2:17) wassubsequently sealed by a beaten earth surface (A2:23) that covers thetrench to the level of Plaster Layer A2:10. The final surface (A2:29) inuse in Room 101 may be a continuation of the plaster surface (B63:14)exposed further west in Rooms 200+201.

Additional evidence for the reconstruction and final use of the case-mate system during Stratum VIIIA was uncovered west of Room 101in Room 201 (Fig. 5.29). Although it is apparent that the earlier, innerwall (W1030) continues to run below Wall 1004, its southern face isnot visible in Room 201. In this casemate room, a Stratum-VIIIA floor,consisting of a flagstone surface (B63:14=15) coated with plaster, seals

46 Comparable ovens formed of inverted storejars are reported from houses 14a and14 at Hazor in Stratum VI, Room 14a, and in Stratum V, Room 16 (Yadin et al. 1960:pl. VII 3, 5); Chapter 6 below.

against both inner (W1004) and outer casemate walls (W1003). A singlecross wall (W2017) dividing these surfaces is only a short partition wallthat leaves barely enough space (0.70 m) for Doorway G, betweenadjoining rooms. Wall 2017 is formed of 2 rows of small and mediumboulders that appear to be only one course high, although the bottomof this partition wall was not exposed beneath Plaster Surface B63:14=B63:15.

Casemate Room 201 measures 1.60 m wide and 4.00 m in length.East of Partition Wall 2017, the dimensions of Room 200 (=R101)could not be determined, because its eastern end remains unexcavatedin the west half of Square A2. Based on the relative elevations of thefloors in Rooms 200 and R101 and their relationship to Inner Wall1004, it is clear that these rooms were contemporary, and may even betwo sections of the same room.

Destruction of Stratum VIIIA

Evidence for the collapse of the Stratum-VIIIA fortification system wasseen in all excavation areas on the north, west and southwest sides ofthe tell (Fields E, B, and A). At the end of Stratum VIIIA, the Stratum-VIIIA debris layer (E55:12) in Casemate Room 301 was covered witha series of soil and rockfall layers (E55:9, 7=5), probably collapse fromthe casemate ceiling and superstructure. In the midst of the rockfalllocated at the foot of Outer Wall 3006 was a well-preserved limestoneroof roller (TJ 381; Chapter 10) and several ground stone tools, objectswhich could have been in use on the roof of Casemate Room 301.Recent soil accumulation and rockfall (E55:4) from modern Wall 3049sealed the ancient remains. In Field B, Guardroom 221, north of DrainB24:24, was filled by a series of rockfall layers that included largefragments of wall plaster which sealed the final use surface. While itmay not be possible to locate chronologically the various phases ofdestruction or abandonment of the wall system, a destruction level inField A was evident in the rock tumble (A3:19, 2:4=8) that extendedbetween the outer (W1002) and inner (W1004) casemate walls. Thistumble fell onto Plaster Surface A2:29 filling Room 101. What wasmost distinctive about this collapse was that Outer Wall 1002 slipped tothe north or uphill rather than down the south slope. Additional rocktumble (A2:5=9), probably from the last use phase of Wall 1002 itself,continued down the slope (as Locus A1:6) to the edge of the bulldozercut along the front edge of Wall 1001.

While this same pattern was not as obvious in Rooms 200 and 201 tothe west, these rooms as well were filled with fallen wall stones markingthe end of occupation on this side of the tell. Additional collapse wasespecially evident along the length of Outer Wall 1002, where theuppermost preserved course of wall stones was at the same level asthe latest floor in Casemate Room 201. In the southwest corner ofRoom 201, the Plaster floor (B63:15) itself had been exposed and itssurface was damaged before it was sealed by wind blown soil (B63:4,10). Finally, the inner wall (W1004+W1010) was covered in moderntimes by a property wall (W1031; A3:2+A13:6), formed of boulderswhich were piled up along the ancient wall line by farmers.

STRATUM VI

Only very limited evidence was recovered that may point to activity onthe tell during the Persian period. A single Athenian coin, recoveredfrom the floor in Room 200, may have been lost accidentally by atraveller and may not represent any use of the tell itself.

More perplexing is Burial 3 (B34:10), which was uncovered aboveCasemate Room 210, near the southwest corner of the wall system.The grave was located among the wall stones of the south face ofInner Casemate Wall 2007. The skeleton had been laid on a lowercourse of wall stones and covered with 3 rows and several courses ofcobblestones, in an area 0.50× 1.00×0.50 m in depth. When found,the bones were disarticulated and in very poor condition. Only theidentification of the bones as human and the presence of jewelleryconfirmed that this was indeed a burial and not just debris associatedwith a repair to the wall.

The jewellery consisted of 32 beads (TJ 1015/1–32) made of stone,glass47 and faience, a lapis lazuli cylinder seal (TJ 965), and a bronzefibula (TJ 995; Daviau 2002:35–37, 45). Most distinctive is the fibula,which was a plain semicircular bow with a rectangular section and ahole for rivet attachment, similar to Stronach’s Type I 2 (1959: fig. 3.1).Stronach (1959:187) dated this type of fibula to the 6th–4th century BC.Muhly and Muhly (1989: fig. 25.13:260, 263) compare similar fibulaefrom Tel Michal to one from the Iron Age at Lachish (Muhly andMuhly 1989:288). Such finds suggest a date in the late Iron Age or early

47 The glass beads were identified by W. Nassau, Professor Emeritus, Wilfrid LaurierUniversity.

Figure 5.30. Total Wall System in Field C (C-west and C-east).

Persian period, rather than one in the Christian or Islamic periods.This evidence is helpful in view of the extremely poor preservation ofthe human remains and the lack of a proper grave (see Excursus below,this chapter).

FIELD C-WEST and C-EAST

Fortification Walls in C-west

The only significant break (ca. 48.00 m wide) in the east-west trajectoryof the casemate fortification system is located between Squares C17and C86. These squares are on the south side of the tell, east of Field A(Fig. 5.1), at a point where the southeastern terrace extends south of thewall line (Daviau 1992b:152). In Squares C6–C7, excavation exposed acasemate room (R801) in which it was clear that the casemate walls hadat least two phases of use. We can only assume that these phases wereboth in Stratum VIII, although some evidence for repair suggests thatthe wall system may have been in use during Stratum VII. However,

Figure 5.31. Casemate Room 801 with relevant locus numbers.

the exact stratigraphic relationship of Casemate Room 801 to Stra-tum VII Building 800 remains unclear.48

Stratum IX Offset/inset Solid Wall (Figs. 5.30–32)The evidence for the presence of a Stratum-IX offset/inset wall inField C-west is limited to Outer Casemate Wall 8002. This wall contin-ues the trajectory of Outer Wall 1003 in Field A. In Field C, its phasing

48 The small number of late Iron II ceramic sherds found in Fields A, B, and Esuggests that the wall system went out of use at the same time as the buildings ofStratum VIIIA. However, this is not definitive; the wall may have been refashioned andcontinued in use during Stratum VII.

Figure 5.32. Casemate Room 801 with later phaseInner Casemate Wall 8004 over Wall 8005.

and founding level were not exposed; however it appears that OuterCasemate Wall 8002 was reused in Stratum VIIIB, covering an earlierwall. Wall 8002 appears to end where north-south Wall 8001 abuts iton the south. Both walls are formed of 3 rows of limestone boulders,with a core of smaller stones. Wall 8001 runs south through SquaresC6–C5 into Square C4, where a modern path cuts through the uppercourses, damaging the wall line. An east-west wall line, visible at inter-vals on the south crest of the terrace (W8035), may have served as thesouthern wall line in this area. Also due to the location of the mod-ern path, Wall 8035 could not be connected either to Wall 8001 or toSolid Wall 9000 excavated in Squares C43–C63.49 On the slope of theterrace, another wall (W8036) that is visible at ground level in SquaresC2–C12, soon runs completely underground, in contrast to the walllines (W9000 and W9009) on the crest of the slope in Field C-east,which remain above ground. Wall 8036 was also visible in a scarp atthe east end of the bulldozer cut that exposed retaining Wall 1001 inField A. Although Wall 8036 appears to be in line with Wall 1001,50

49 Further excavation in this area would be indicated in order to explore thissequence and determine the earliest occupation on the terrace.

50 When these walls (W8035, W8036) were first documented in 1991, they wereidentified as part of a casemate system (Daviau 1992b:152), although other explana-tions for the rockfall patterns on the south slope were just as likely. If lower Wall 8036were indeed a continuation of Wall 1001, then it would have functioned as a retainingwall in Stratum IX, in association with a solid wall higher up on the crest of the hill.

Figure 5.33. Bastion 9007 with Buttress Wall 9008 and Retaining Wall 9015.

the connection between these walls is missing. So too, the connectionof Wall 8036 with Retaining Wall 9015 in Field C-east was not deter-mined during excavation.

The Lower Retaining Wall in Field C-east (Fig. 5.33)

The earliest wall (W9015) on the southeastern terrace was revealed ina deep probe against the south face of Buttress Wall 9008. Foundedon bedrock (C71:20), Wall 9015 was only partially exposed (0.75–1.30 m wide over a length of 3.00 m), due to the presence of theoverlying wall system. The uppermost course appears to lean upslope,although that may have been an accident of preservation. Where itis visible, Wall 9015 stands 3 courses in height (ca. 0.85–0.90 m), isformed of small and medium limestone and chert boulders, and is atleast 2 rows wide. The large amount of chert (ca. 60%) is unusual in

that the typical defensive wall (e.g. W1002) consisted predominantlyof limestone boulders (90%). The composition and position of Wall9015 suggests that it was a retaining wall, similar to Wall 1001 in FieldA. Although the face of such a wall is visible on the north slope (seeField E, above), the extension of Wall 9015 around the east end of thetell could not be demonstrated due to heavy overburden and to thepresence of a modern cemetery, adjacent to Field C in Squares C91–C92, and to a fig orchard on the northeast.

Two soil layers (C71:19, 18) which seal up against Wall 9015 con-tain organically stained patches and ash pockets, along with one frag-ment of Quercus libani,51 and a concentration of small, medium andlarge boulders. Sealing these layers and covering Wall 9015 was a deep(ca. 0.30 m) destruction layer (C71:15) of ash stained soil, burnt pot-tery and large boulders, especially one, trapezoidal chert slab (C71:16)measuring ca. 1.80 m in length. Pottery associated with retaining Wall9015 and the destruction debris is predominantly Iron Age II, with asingle red slipped and burnished rim sherd from a vertical rim bowl(C71.55.1) resting on the preserved top of Wall 9015.52 The debris lay-ers (C71:15+18) that sealed Wall 9015 also contained pottery dating toIron Age I, most characteristic were triangular rim cooking pot sherds(C71.52.3; C71.54.2), crude bowl rims (C71.52.4), a heavy ring basecovered in white slip (C71.13.10), and a painted body sherd (C71.50.1).

Flanking Walls 9007+9008 (Figs. 5.33, 34)Following the destruction associated with Wall 9015, a defensive wall,constructed in two units (Wall 9007+Buttress Wall 9008), was builtinto the slope for a length of 15.30 m. Originally thought to be thefoundation for a tower (Daviau 1993c:333), comparable to Tower 2024outside West Wall 2023 (Field B), Flanking Wall 9007+9008 can onlybe identified with certainty as a solid wall, 3.40 m thick. Each compo-nent in this east-west wall line consists of 2 rows of boulders that rangein size from large to very large (0.75–1.50 m); these stones are verticallydressed on their outer faces and packed with cobble size chink stones(Daviau 1993c: fig. 7).53 The southern buttress wall (W9008) has a bat-

51 Identification was provided by Pierre Bikai, Director of ACOR, #Amman, Jordan.52 Carinated bowls with a vertical rim rising directly from the shoulder (vertical

rim bowls) are present in both Stratum VIII and VII, although they are in declinein Stratum VII.

53 In this drawing, Locus C61:16 is Buttress Wall 9008, C61:3 is Wall 9007, andC61:7 is the wall plaster.

Figure 5.34. Bastion 9007 with Buttress Wall 9008 on left.

tered outer face, designed to exert pressure against Inner Wall 9007and support this wall on the steep slope of the underlying bedrock anddebris layers.

This battered south face of Buttress 9008 was exposed in a deepprobe in Square C71 that reveals the sequence of its founding layers.The presence of a fire pit (C71:14) within a circle of stones abovedestruction Debris C71:15 suggests a period of time between the col-lapse of Stratum-IX Wall 9015 and the construction of Flanking Wall9007 and Buttress 9008. How long that period was cannot be deter-mined on the basis of the pottery, since other walls on the crest of theterrace may have been constructed during the interval. When construc-tion was undertaken, a sequence of superimposed soil and stone layerswere installed to provide support for Buttress 9008. The debris (C71:15)is covered by a soil layer (C71:13) packed with cobbles and small boul-ders. Uppermost is a clean layer of soil (C71:11) with a heavy concen-tration of chalky pebbles, well scattered, and little in the way of pottery.

Soil Layer C71:11 serves as the founding level for the boulders ofButtress 9008, which consists of an outer row of large to very largeboulders and 1–2 rows of medium boulders. Plaster (C71:5) seals theentire lower course of boulders, filling gaps between the stones to adepth of 0.08 m, and extending up the face of the wall. This limeplaster, comparable in composition to that from West Wall 2023 and

Tower 2024, served as a protection against water damage to the wallface, and was able to stand up to a winter season (1993–1994) of raineven after so many centuries.

Preserved to a height of 1.78 m (usually 3 courses), the buttress runseast, extending the full length of Wall 9007. The east end of both wallsis built of very large limestone boulders, hewn to form well dressededges.54 At its base, the buttress ranges in thickness from 1.69–1.74 m,and at the top, it is 1.30–1.41 m thick. The degree of slope for theouter, south face of Buttress Wall 9008 is 26°.

At the southwest corner of Buttress 9008, a similar sequence ofmake-up layers is present, beginning with a flagstone pavement(C61:10) that extends north along the west face of Wall 9008 and Wall9010. On this support is a layer of cobbles (C61:15), followed by a soillayer (C61:14) containing pottery sherds that is sealed in turn by twolayers of cobbles (C61:12=8, +C61:13=9). These layers seal aroundone very large (0.50×0.95 m) boulder (C61:17) that extends beyondthe outer edge of Buttress Wall 9008 and supports the southwest cor-ner. The preserved height of Buttress 9008 is one course lower thanInner Wall 9007. Whether this is a feature of these walls, that served asa method for supporting the superstructure, or whether it is due to thepattern of collapse, could not be determined because no evidence forthe superstructure is preserved.

Preserved in place against the north face of Buttress Wall 9008 isInner Wall 9007. Along its north face, the upper course of Wall 9007is formed of large and very large boulders (1.00–1.50 m in length) thatwere hewn along the outer wall face. The stones at the west end ofInner Wall 9007, where it bonds with north-south Wall 9010, are lesswell hewn than the stones at the east end, suggesting that more of thewall was below ground level at this point. There is no evidence to showthat Wall 9007 bonds with the outer Buttress Wall (W9008). Instead,one row of chink stones appear to separate the inner wall (W9007)from Buttress Wall 9008, suggesting that Wall 9007 and West Wall9010 were constructed first, and the battered buttress wall (W9008) wasadded later as a support.55

54 Fallen stones adjacent to these boulders indicate the importance of these walls;however, excavation was not possible since Walls 9007 and W9008 ended on the eastin the modern cemetery.

55 The 3–zone wall at Tell el-Hesi provides a comparable construction sequence(Daviau 1993c:334, n. 7).

Excavation north of inner Wall 9007 was extremely limited. Only asequence of soil loci (C71:7,3=C72:3) representing final collapse, soilaccumulation and the construction of an Umayyad(?) period field wall(W9009) were identified. However, what is visible in the north-southtrench (C61–62) is the full construction sequence of Wall 9010 alongits west face, demonstrating that it is sealed against at its south end byButtress Wall 9008.56

Inner Wall 9007 and Wall 9010Wall 9010 runs up the slope of the hill beginning at its meeting withinner Wall 9007, immediately north of Buttress 9008. Evidence for thefounding of Wall 9010 is preserved in a line of boulders (C61:22, 23)that jut out below the west wall face. These stones follow the slope ofthe underlying debris or bedrock, so that Wall 9010 climbs at an evenrate. Sealing up against these boulders from the west is a layer of firmmoist soil (C61:20) that contains additional boulders and cobblestonesand pieces of lime/nari (C61:19). This accumulation is covered inturn by a layer of loose soil (C61:18) that is the bedding layer for aplaster glacis (C61:6). The glacis, or plaster surface, consists of limeplaster with pebbles, small cobbles and ceramic sherds embedded in it.Damaged by fallen stones (C61:11) to which a fine plaster coating stilladheres, Glacis C61:6 is rough and irregular in thickness in the areaswhere it is preserved.

Wall 9010 is itself coated with lime plaster (C61:7) which covers thewest face of the wall stones, sealing crevices filled with chinkstones.This plaster appears to continue to the level of plaster surface C61:6,although its composition becomes increasingly composite the furtherwest it is from the wall face (Chapter 14).

Further upslope, Wall 9010 continues (Square C62), but is dam-aged by collapse (C62:10) and modern earth moving activity. An east-west line of stones (W9009), probably boulders from the gate complexlocated on the terrace (C64–67), has tumbled over the crest line andbecome embedded in debris. Along with these boulders is a heavy accu-mulation of pebbles (C62:6) that forms a pavement on the slope westof Wall 9010. Cut by a pit (C62:18), these features may date anytimeafter Iron Age occupation ended at Tall Jawa. Wall 9010 ends south

56 The slope of support stones underlying Wall 9010 indicates the rise of the under-lying bedrock, leading one to suspect that Wall 9007 itself could have been founded on,or just above, bedrock.

of the point where it was expected to join Wall 9000, a solid wall thatforms the southern perimeter of a group of rooms (R901, R902) whichyielded evidence for domestic activity. Nor does Wall 9010 join with thegate structure (B910; Chapter 9) further north. On the east, a modernproperty wall (W9043), formed of boulders and socket stones57 from theancient structures, extends 40.03 m north-south in Squares C81–C86.This wall limited excavation so that we could not investigate the rela-tionship of the L-shaped formation of Walls 9007 and W9010 with apossible roadway into the Iron Age town. In spite of this limitation, thesouthern terrace appears to be the most likely place for a road, sincethe casemate wall system can be clearly identified in Squares C86–C96,at the northeastern corner of the terrace.

Pottery and ChronologySoil layers that seal up against Inner Wall 9007 contain predominantlylate Iron Age II pottery forms. Four very characteristic types consist ofsaucers, black burnished bowls, mortar bowls and an incised “grater”(Daviau 1997b: fig. 8). Most distinctive were the black burnished bowlrims.58 While there is only one instance where sherds mended, sev-eral sherds were probably from the same vessel. In addition there isa thick black-slipped bowl base. Red slipped saucers, already begin-ning to appear in Stratum VIIIA become much more common in Stra-tum VII.59 The ceramic mortar bowl (C72.4.2) with external ridges andtripod feet appears during both Strata VIII and VII. Such bowls withwhite exterior slip and pink interior surface are also known in Building800 in Field C-west. However, the grater with impressions on its inte-rior is definitely a seventh century form. In the case of C71.15.9, thebowl is not an imitation of basalt bowls with ring base, but is a some-what deeper bowl with a disk base. This bowl style was the commonbowl modified by wedges or small round depressions in the interior, justabove the base; examples are reported by Chambon (1984: pl. 56:21,22) from Tell el-Far#ah (N) and by Lapp from Tell el-Fûl (Lapp 1981:pls. 64:19; 65:20).60 At Tall Jawa, only the shallow bowls which imitated

57 A comparable stone socket was reported from Tell en-Na.sbeh (McCown 1947:pl. 92.1).

58 Black burnished forms include C71.13.18+15.11; C71.7.6; C71.10.6, 7; C72.2.7.59 Several sherds mended to form V910, a red slipped and burnished saucer with

the splayed rim indicative of its development during Stratum VII; additional randomsherds of the same vessel type were also recovered (e.g. C71.18.1).

60 This type has been studied by Zertal (1989), Worschech (1991), London (1992),

basalt mortars had true wedge impressions; Bowl C71.15.9 had impres-sions made after firing with a tool that left a cup-shaped hollow. Thisstyle may have preceded the shallow wedge impressed bowls.

The stratigraphic sequence of the fortification system in Field Cis not linked to that in Field A to the west. Nevertheless, it is clearthat the walls were all in use during Stratum VII, when the buildingsin Field C were constructed and in use. Whether the wall system inField C-east was already in use in Strata IX is less certain. In FieldsA, B, and E, the casemate wall system appeared to collapse at the endof Stratum VIIIA, possibly due to earthquake activity or to an attackon the town. It cannot be determined with certainty whether a newsuperstructure was constructed in Stratum VII, or whether the wallsserved merely as integral components of the Field C buildings.

Summary: Characteristics and Parallels

The Solid/Outer WallThe solid wall with offsets/insets is similar to walls systems at sev-eral sites in Cisjordan, such as Megiddo, Gezer, Lachish, and Hazor(Herzog 1992:270–71). The spacing of the offsets/insets and the thick-ness of these walls varies from site to site. Nevertheless, in some cases,these walls include offsets/insets which are only ca. 0.40–0.60 m indepth, that do not allow for their full exploitation as shooting platforms.Examples of shallow offsets/insets include the walls at Megiddo (Stra-tum IVB) with salients of 0.50–0.60 m in size; Beer-sheba, where therecess is 0.55 m deep (Aharoni 1973:9); at Hazor (Area B), near Room3103c, where two insets are 0.30 m and 0.60 m deep respectively, whilethe offset/inset in Casemate Walls 3608 and 3708 are 0.50 m deep(Yadin et al. 1989: plan XX); and at Tell el-Kheleifeh in the Period IIsettlement, where the depth was 0.37 m (Pratico 1993:26). This use ofshallow offsets/insets is the same construction technique employed atTall Jawa, where the offsets/insets appear to facilitate slight changes inwall direction to accommodate the foundations to the underlying slopeof the natural hill.61 Such protrusions of the wall face do not by them-selves allow for the proper angle of defensive shooting along the wall

and Daviau (1997b).61 Herzog (1992:271) identifies certain walls as “saw tooth” in style, where the

pattern of offset and inset is not regular, or where all the adjustments to the wall faceare in the same direction; see also Wright (1985:190).

face. Herzog (1992:271) suggests that such offsets/insets would allowfor balconies that projected beyond the face of the wall in order to pro-tect the outer wall face. Whether such features were known in ancientAmmon cannot be determined from the evidence available at this time.

The thickness of the Stratum-IX Solid Wall at Tall Jawa is in therange of 2.00–2.50 m, somewhat thinner than the Stratum-V wall atBeer-sheba (ca. 4.00 m; Aharoni 1973:9, pl. 87), and the massive mudbrick walls at sites such as Ashdod (4.50–5.60 m thick).62 On the otherhand, as an Outer Wall in the Stratum-VIII casemate system, the wallat Tall Jawa is somewhat thicker than outer walls at contemporary sitesin Israel and Judah, where the average is 1.45 m thick.63

Inner Wall and Casemate Room SizeFor long stretches of the Inner Wall (W3000–W1004) on both the northand south crests of the tell, the upper course of stones in the inner wallwas preserved at approximately the same level. This phenomenon mayrepresent the surface on which a mud brick superstructure was posi-tioned, although the floor levels of the casemate rooms (101, 200, 201)in Field A–B were at various levels below the tops of the walls. Muchof the collapse in the rooms on the south side consists exclusively ofrockfall with no remains of mud brick. A somewhat different depositionhistory can be seen on the west side (Chapter 6), where the stone wallswere standing to the second storey level, although in the case of Case-mate Room 215 mud brick did fall into the room. Here also, the outerwest wall on the crest has a course of chert as its uppermost preservedwall stones suggesting a moisture barrier immediately below the mudbrick superstructure.

A Transjordanian parallel for such construction techniques can beseen in the Iron Age I remains at Tall al-#Umayri. Evidence for amud brick superstructure (7J89:29, 30, 21), that had collapsed into thecasemate rooms, indicates that mud brick was only used for the upperstorey walls since the stone walls of the lower room are still standing

62 Another type of solid wall with towers instead of offsets/insets, called “massive”by Herzog (1992:270), was considerably thicker (4.50–8.90 m) than the Solid Wall atTall Jawa. Examples include Hazor Area G and Tell en-Na.sbeh.

63 Outer wall thicknesses were taken from Lapp (1976: fig. 2); examples of town sitesinclude Hazor (Area A), 1.50–1.60 m; Shechem (Area G), 1.55 m; Tell Beit Mirsim,1.50 m; Beth Shemesh, 1.40–1.60 m; Megiddo (VA–IVB), 1.00 m; Arad (VI), 3.00–4.00 m; Tell el-Kheleifeh, 1.00 m; Samaria, 2.00; Beer-sheba, 1.60 m; and Tell el-Fûl(IIIA), 1.10–1.50 m.

2.30 m above the latest floor (7J89:33; Clark 1997:63). Unfortunately,at Tall Jawa, the presence of modern field walls immediately abovethe remaining upper course of the ancient walls suggests that whatevermud brick wall material might have existed was removed by erosion inantiquity.

The inner casemate wall at Tall Jawa is considerably thicker (1.30–1.50 m) than the average of 1.12 m documented at sites in westernPalestine.64 On the other hand, the space between the walls is notquite as great, measuring only 1.50–2.25 m versus 2.28 m on aver-age.65 These variations may be related to building materials or to roomarrangement at certain sites where the casemates were integrated intohouses built up against the wall system. This pattern was seen onlyin two areas at Tall Jawa (Building 200 in Field B; Building 113 inField A), since the inner wall lacks doorways along most of its excavatedlength on the north and south. Whether this style was a local traditioncannot be determined due to the stage of excavations in Jordan, espe-cially in the area of #Amman. Certain differences are, of course, due tothe availability of building materials, their quality and the manpowerneeded for the task. Nevertheless, it is clear that the tradition of case-mate wall construction was already known in Transjordan before it wasadapted to the needs of Tall Jawa.

Total Thickness: In spite of the variations in the thickness of the outerand inner walls and the size of casemate rooms, the total thicknessof the fortification system (5.50 m on average) is quite consistent withdefensive walls at contemporary sites (4.80 m). This consistency speaksof a shared awareness of the strength needed for defence against weap-ons of the day. This means that the site of Tall Jawa was protectedto the same degree as sectors of Hazor, Megiddo, Shechem, Tell BeitMirsim and Beer-sheba. Clearly the Ammonite kingdom had buildingtraditions similar to those of its neighbours to the west.

64 Inner Wall thicknesses from a sample of town sites include Hazor (Area A), 1.10m; Shechem (Area G), 1.50 m; Tell Beit Mirsim, 1.10 m; Beth-Shemesh, 1.10 m;Megiddo (VA–IVB), 1.00 m; Arad (VI), 1.30 m; Tell el-Kheleifeh, 1.00 m; Samaria,1.00; Beer-sheba, 1.00 m; and Tell el-Fûl (IIIA), 1.10 m (Lapp 1976: fig. 2).

65 The reported sizes of casemate rooms at Megiddo (2.00–4.00 m) and at Arad(Stratum VI, 3.50 m wide) are comparable to the width of rooms in domestic structures.In these cases, the differences in construction and room arrangement must be takeninto account.

ParallelsLapp (1981) and Pratico (1993) have both published studies of thedistribution of casemate walls at Palestinian sites during the Iron Ageand in earlier periods. Among the 35 sites studied by Lapp (1976: fig. 2),only the ashlar, outer casemate wall at Samaria is 2.00 m thick, whereasat all other sites the outer wall was in the range of 1.00–1.60 m thick.66

This is true even of Hazor, which is in many respects a close parallel toTall Jawa in its stone masonry and construction techniques.

In the recent excavations at Tel #En Gev, two parallel walls describedas “a city-wall, an adjacent built moat and a counterpart wall” seem tofall within the parameters of typical casemate wall systems of the IronAge. Here the outer wall was ca. 1.70 m thick, the inner wall was 1.50m and the intervening space was ca. 2.00 m (Kochavi 1993:188). Thetotal width of this wall system is ca. 5.20 m, very close to the Tall Jawaspecifications. Secondly, the outer wall at #En Gev appears to have hadan offset along its outer face, but not on its inner face (Kochavi 1993:fig. 3). This is also a characteristic of the Tall Jawa outer wall, althoughit is a feature which is not common at other Palestinian sites; anotherexception is the casemate wall at Tell el-Kheleifeh (Pratico 1993: pl. 4).

For the most part, excavators are not consistent in presenting detail-ed architectural information that would allow for accurate compari-son. Tables 5B and 5C include measurements compiled from publishedreports and measurements made by the author for sites recently exca-vated in Transjordan and Palestine.

Table 5B. Casemate Walls at Town Sites in Central Transjordan67

Site Outer Inner Room Total ReferenceName Wall Wall Width Width

Tall Jawa 2.00–2.25 1.50 1.50–2.10 5.00–5.85 m Daviau 1993cTall al-#Umayri 2.00–2.5068 1.00 2.75 4.75–6.25 m Clark 1997Khirbat al-Mudayna 2.00–2.25 1.30–1.60 1.50 -1.85 4.80–5.70 m Chadwick et al. 2000(Wadi ath-Thamad)Khirbat al-Mudayna 1.00 1.00 1.70–2.00 3.70–4.00 m Olávarri 1983(al-Ma#arradjeh)

66 These measurements take into account only the Iron Age walls and not theMiddle Bronze Age examples of casemate construction. Certain Iron Age forts andfarming settlements in the Negev have walls that are even thinner, as at Qasr er-Ruheibeh, where both inner and outer walls measure 0.70 m.

67 Data from Wilfrid Laurier University sponsored excavations have been culledfrom original field notes; Tall Jawa, 1989–1995 field reports, Fields A, B, C, E; Khirbatal-Mudayna (on Wadi ath-Thamad), Square A26 field report (1999), as well as basedon information in published reports.

68 Herr (2000:172) gives the size of the Iron Age I outer wall as 1.60–2.00 m.


Khirbat al-Mudayna 1.10–1.20 0.80–1.00 2.00–2.40 3.90–4.60 m Routledge 2000(al-#Aliya)Balu# 1.20 200 3.00–3.50 6.20–6.70 m Worschech and Ninow 1992Lehun 0.70–0.80 0.75 2.50 4.00 m Homès-Fredericq 1997Dhıbân 1.10 1.10 2.20 4.50 m Tushingham 1972

Table 5C. Casemate Walls at Palestinian Town Sites from Recent Excavations69


#En Gev 1.70 1.50 2.00 5.20 m Kochavi 1993#En .Ha.seva 2.50–3.00 2.00 Cohen 1994Re .hov 1.25 0.75 Mazar and Camp 2000Yoqne#am 2.00–2.20 1.60–1.70 1.50–1.60 5.00–5.50 m Ben-Tor et al. 1983

FunctionThe term “casemate,” frequently understood to be derived from “falseroom”, implies that the primary purpose of the space between the twoparallel walls was military or strategic. The space was not intended tobe used as a true room within an adjoining structure. In his discussionof the casemate wall systems in ancient Israel, Yadin (1963:370) sug-gested that the casemate rooms constituted storage space or barracksand that this system was strong enough to withstand the battering ramin use during the reign of Solomon, although this was not the caselater in the Iron II period. During the 9th century BC, the space wasfilled with rubble to strengthen the fortifications or support a walkwayfor defenders of the town. Current scholarly discussion is divided onthe function of such walls, interpreting the fill as a necessary feature ofconstruction.70

At Tall Jawa, there were only two cases where casemate rooms couldbe interpreted as integral components in adjoining buildings, Room213 and R215 in Building 200 and Room 103/123 in Building 113(Chapter 6). In all other cases, the casemate rooms were cut off fromthe adjoining structures. At the same time, their use as storerooms

69 Since Lapp’s treatment (1976) of casemate walls at Palestinian sites, several newsites have been excavated that contain casemate walls. Certain of these sites are in-cluded here, along with the fortress at #En .Ha.seva.

70 Herzog does not accept Yadin’s view that the purpose of rubble fill in casematerooms is to strengthen the walls in time of attack. Rather, he sees this constructiontechnique as necessary when a strong foundation is needed to support very high walls(Herzog 1992:270).

is supported by the presence of storejars and pithoi (R301), and ofspecially prepared floor surfaces (R200, R201), which were plasteredor partially stone paved. The method of access to such rooms was notdetermined during excavation, although the operating assumption isthat access was gained from upper storey rooms via ladders or stairs.

Excursus:The Persian Burial

[by Margaret A. Judd and Ryan Defonzo]

The Archaeological ContextOne intentional burial (B34:B3) was detected in Field B, Square 34,located in the southwestern corner of the casemate system at Tall Jawa.The installation was cut into the inner fortification wall (W 2006),which was built in boulder and chink style. This inner wall, composedof boulders (0.30–1.10 m) and smaller stones (0.10–0.15 m), variedfrom 1.50–2.00 m in thickness. The burial was cut into the south sideof the wall where two rows of stone were removed for an area of 1.00 m(east-west axis) and 0.50 m north-south, leaving a single row of stonesto form the north edge of the wall (Fig. 5.18). The grave was originallycontained in an area of three rows of six cobblestones that were threecourses deep.

The burial feature contained poorly preserved osteological remains.Many small bone fragments were also present in the casemate room,immediately south of the burial. It was this sample that led archae-ologists to remove a few of the inner wall stones of Wall 2006, thusrecovering the primary burial area. Artefacts associated with the cob-bles underlying the skeletal remains consist of a broken millstone (TJ1749) and a mortar fragment (TJ 2035; Daviau 2002:CD database), inaddition to a worn, pale red cylinder seal (Daviau 2002:89; fig. 2.46.1),32 beads of glass and stone (Daviau 2002:36–37), and a bronze fibula(Daviau 2002:45, fig. 2.23.1). The fibula was dated to the PersianPeriod (500–400 BC); the only other contemporary find at Tall Jawawas an Athenian tetradrachm coin dating to 449 BC (Beckmann 1994,Daviau, 2002:89).

The bones were extremely fragmentary and, as a result, were sortedby bone type and conjoined where possible. The ‘minimum numberof individuals’ (MNI) for the humans was established by inventoryingeach bone or diagnostic landmark by the left or right side and the

developmental stage of growth in order to determine the number ofhumans that contributed to this sample (White 1992:84–89). One adultand one child were identified.

The AdultAdult cranial fragments were clustered in situ at the east end of theburial and when conjoined formed the posterior half of the left parietaland an adjoining portion of the right parietal; the parietal eminencewas distinctly bossed. Though metric measurements were not possible,the size of bone and the fusion of the posterior sagittal sutures atlambda and obelion indicates that the bones were those of an olderadult.

Some of the conjoined long bone fragments formed recognisableportions of long bones. Portions of lateral segments of two clavicleswere identitified as the left and right from one individual. The leftand right tibial shafts were identified and sided based on the pres-ence and orientation of the popliteal lines and nutrient foramina. Thedistal left femur was identified by the linea aspera and nutrient fora-men. In all cases, the muscle insertion markings were robust. Otherlong bone fragments included the left distal humeral shaft; a proxi-mal and midshaft portion of the left radius with the nutrient foramenand radial tuberosity preserved; a distal radial fragment; and two ulnashaft fragments. Small fragments of flat bones included four rib bodyfragments and fragments of the left scapula from the spine and bor-der.

Bones of the extremities were also identifiable. The hands are rep-resented by the left fifth metacarpal, the right second and third meta-carpals, and four proximal phalanges. The left foot is composed of thenavicular, first cuneiform, and the fourth and fifth metatarsals. The firstand third metatarsal were recovered from the right foot, in addition tothe first proximal phalange; four unsided proximal phalanges were alsorecovered.

One cervical vertebra is the only bone recovered from the spinalcolumn and could only be identified as one of the third to sixth ele-ments. This lone cervical vertebra has a low bone mass, projecting boneextensions on the vertebral body (osteophytosis) and some bone growthon the joint margins of the articular facets (osteoarthritis). The fifthand sixth cervical vertebrae are commonly affected by these two dis-ease processes, which are multifactorial in aetiology—the aging process,weight bearing, locomotion, and upright posture, while specific activ-

ity is regarded as a secondary cause (Bridges 1994, Jurmain 1999:119,Jurmain and Kilgore 1995). Excessive cervical osteophytosis and osteo-arthritis has been noted in past populations and attributed to carryingloads on the head or using a tumpline (Bridges 1994, Judd 2001:472–476, Lovell 1994). Clinical studies of the modification to the cervicalvertebrae due to habitual activity are few and support for this aetiologyvaries between investigators (Jager, et al. 1997, Scher 1978).

Dental Inventory and Palaeopathology: Six permanent teeth were recoveredand most are heavily worn to Stage 4 of Smith’s scale (1984: 45–46)and nearly all exhibit some type of trauma:

1. Right maxillary canine: one tooth fracture on the distal-buccalocclusal edge; Smith’s scale=4.

2. Right maxillary second incisor: no damage; Smith’s scale=4.3. Right mandibular premolar 1: peri- or post-mortem tooth fracture

of the mesial buccal surface resulting in a linear fracture; Smith’sscale=4.

4. Right mandibular first molar: one large chip on the occlusal edgeof each of the tooth’s sides; Smith’s scale=4.

5. Right mandibular second molar: gross fracture of the enamelcrown and root on buccal surface with heavy cupped wear onall quadrants; the enamel of the mesial-lingual crown is not asextensively worn as the other sides, although chipping occurs;Smith’s scale=7.

6. Right mandibular M3: complete enamel fracture of buccal side ofcrown, particularly on the distal-buccal quadrant; Smith’s scale=4.

Turner and Cadien (1969:307) reported ‘pressure chipping’ of toothcrowns among the dentitions of 324 prehistoric and protohistoricAleuts, Eskimos and northern Indians that they attributed to the useof teeth as tools and as marrow extractors. This crushing or flaking ofthe tooth crown also characterised the molars of the adult from thisburial context, and even though there is a vast environmental differ-ence between these New World populations and the Jordanian adult,the occurrence of fractures and chipping indicate that the teeth wereused as a tool.

The heavy and cupped dental wear is associated with tough foods orcoarse particle inclusions introduced to the diet, which is most typicalof an agricultural subsistence pattern (Larsen 1997:254–255). Basalt

processing tools were indeed common at Tall Jawa (Daviau 2002:102–105, 122–161) and may well have been the culprits that introduced gritinto the diet during food preparation. However, other sources of hardgranules should not be excluded, such as sand, soil introduced duringcleaning, shells, husks, and insects (Leek 1972, 1973).

The ChildThe inventory of non-adult remains consists of one fibular diaphysis,one portion of a proximal tibia epiphysis, a cranial vault fragment, oneproximal hand phalange, three metatarsal shafts and the first proximalphalange of the right foot. The deciduous dentition includes threecomplete teeth and one fragment. The right maxillary first incisorwas completely formed, while the root of the canine was incompleteand partially diverged; the roots of the left lower canine were broken,but divergence into two roots was visible. The developmental stageof these three deciduous teeth placed the child at 3 years +/- 12months (Ubelaker 1978:47). Although the fibula was not complete,the diaphysis was measured in order to get some lower limit of theindividual’s age. A length of 152.9 mm placed the child at being at least2.5 years (Scheuer and Black 2000:Table 11–17).

Taphonomy: Taphonomy is the study of processes affecting the boneafter death has occurred (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994:182). Both indi-viduals were extremely fragmentary and the fragments poorly pre-served, both factors that limit the biocultural data obtainable fromthe sample. The fragments can best be identified as Stage 4 on theBehrensmeyer scale (1978). Bone in this stage is described as fibrousand rough in texture, with some splintering; cracks are open and mayhave splintered or rounded edges. A few factors may explain the poorpreservation of this burial. Firstly, the grave was quite shallow andlocated in an area, which experienced much of the site’s water runoff.Water movement and micro-organisms enhance natural bone decay.Secondly, the land was also used in modern times for animal hus-bandry; tooth gnawing marks were identified on the bone material intwo long bone fragments.

Brothwell (1981:2) cautions that loose, fragmented remains may notreflect the original burial type. This particular taphonomic alterationwas also mentioned by Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994:106). Indeed, inthis instance the carnivore tooth marks may provide the proof neededto understand the cause of the skeletal material’s extension southward,

outside of the burial boundaries within Wall 2006, in addition to theabsence of most of the child’s bones. The destruction of this burial waslikely due to some combination of water runoff, faunal turbation andperhaps tomb robbing.

Persian Burials in the LevantThe majority of Persian cemeteries that could provide an adequateparallel for this burial are located in Israel rather than Jordan and wereexcavated during the second half of the 20th century. Persian burialswere found at #En Ha-Na.siv located approximately 1.3 km south ofBeth Shean. The burials were typically a side niche cut into a verticalpit, which was closed by stone slabs (Porath 1973).

At #Atlit shaft burials with stone slabs protecting the inhumation wereexcavated by Johns (1933:58–59). Although no osteological data waspresented, as the skeletons were deemed to be too fragmentary, many ofthe tomb shafts and artefacts provide a good basis for comparison withother sites; dates, however, were not supplied. The author describedthe graves in sequence from the Hellenistic Period back to 1000 BCwithout specifically dating any of the interments. From the selection ofthe graves it was possible to observe that most of the individuals buriedat #Atlit were laid with the head to the east and aligned in an east-west orientation, as was the case of the Field B burial at Tall Jawa. Ofthe few bronze fibulae found, one was ‘definitely with a man’s burial’(Burial 859), although females, such as Burial 994, were also interredwith bronze fibulae (Johns 1933:55). It is important to note, however,that the sexing of skeletal material was determined by the artefactsassociated with the skeletons.

Eighty-four burials were excavated at Tall al Mazar in Jordan, acemetery dating to the Iron Age IIC, Persian and Late Ammoniteperiods (Yassine 1984). Although the majority of the graves were simplepits, brick or stone lined pits were also observed. A distinct patternoccurred in the burial attitude and grave good assemblages: the maleswere in an extended position and accompanied by weapons, while thefemales were in a flexed position and were buried with cosmetics andjewellery, including fibulae (Yassine 1984:97); nearly all of the skeletonswere on an east/west axis with the head to the east.

A Persian cemetery of more than 40 graves was excavated at the baseof the southeastern slope of Tell el-Hesi, located in southwestern Israel.Twelve of the interments held grave goods which included juglets,copper anklets, iron rings, a copper toggle pin, bead, iron dagger, seal,

and assorted potsherds (Coogan 1975, Coogan and Blakely 1989:328–334). Coogan and Blakely’s (1989:326) comparison of the Hesi burialswith those from Atlit, Gezer, and Lachish found that the east-westorientation, though most common, was not consistent. In addition,most of the skeletons were on their backs with the arms either attheir sides as at #Atlit, or with the right hand over the pelvis as seenat Lachish. In most cases, the skull faced north. The location of theHesi cemetery was responsible for the poor preservation of most of thebones, which lay in shallow graves often only a few centimetres belowthe surface and were, therefore, exposed to water run-off (Coogan1975:37). Other similarities exist between the burials at Tell el-Hesiand at Tall Jawa.

1. Some of the graves were dug into existing mud-brick walls and75% were oriented east-west with the head to the east.

2. Burials 5.008 and 13.013 contained a mixture of immature andmature skeletal fragments and the cists were refilled with theoriginal grave soil over top of the bodies.

3. Eleven of the Hesi graves were capped with limestone slabs oflocal, unworked limestone, some of which became displaced dueto tomb robbers or environmental elements.

4. Coogan (1975:46) concluded from the number of graves and thesparseness of grave furnishings that the community buried at Hesiwas not wealthy, but likely represented a small agricultural com-munity. Tell el-Hesi is probably the best site with which parallelscan be drawn with the interment at Tall Jawa.

Summary and ConclusionsThe fragmentary nature of the skeletal remains from the Field B inter-ment leaves little material for a macroscopic osteological analysis. Theburial itself, though a lone specimen, can be compared to surroundingPersian period burials and some similarities are apparent: isolated buri-als were frequently placed in standing walls built by preceding commu-nities; children were often interred with adults; stone slabs were popularas a lining or cover for the grave; and fibulae were often included withthe inhumation for both sexes. What may have once been considered ahaphazard, unplanned interment within Wall 2006 can now be betterunderstood as a common mode of interment utilised throughout theLevant during the Persian Period.

References for the ExcursusBeckmann, M.

1994 Fraternizing with the enemy: an Athenian coin from Persian Palestine. ThePicus:28–38.

Behrensmeyer, A. K.1978 Taphonomic and Ecologic information on bone weathering. Paleobiology

4:150–162.Bridges, P. S.

1994 Vertebral arthritis and physical activities in the prehistoric SoutheasternUnited States. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 93:83–93.

Brothwell, D. R.1981 Digging Up Bones. 3rd ed. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.

Buikstra, J. E. and D. H. Ubelaker (eds)1994 Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Fayetteville: Arkansas

Archaeological Survey Research Series, Vol. 44.Coogan, M. D.

1975 A cemetery from the Persian Period at Tell el-Hesi. Bulletin of the AmericanSchools of Oriental Research 220:37–46.

Coogan, M. D. and J. A. Blakely1989 A cemetery of the Persian Period. In Tell el-Hesi: The Persian Period (Stra-

tum V), edited by W. J. Bennett and J. A. Blakely, pp. 325–334. WinonaLake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.

Daviau, P. M. M.2002 Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan: Volume 2: The Iron Age Artefacts. Culture and

History of the Ancient Near East, 11/2. Leiden: Brill.Jager, H. J., L. Gordon-Harris, U. M. Mehring, G. F. Goetz and K. D. Mathias

1997 Degenerative change in the cervical spine and load-carrying on the head.Skeletal Radiology 26:475–81.

Johns, C. N.1933 Excavations at #Atlit (1930–31): The South Eastern Cemetery. Quarterly of

the Department of Antiquties in Palestine 2:41–104.Judd, M. A.

2001 The Human Remains. Pp. 458–543 in Life on the Desert Edge. Seven thousandyears of settlement in the Northern Dongola Reach, Sudan, by D. Welsby. London:Sudan Archaeological Research Society Publication Number 7.

Jurmain, R.1999 Stories from the Skeleton. Behavioral Reconstruction in Human Osteology. Amster-

dam: Gordon and Breach.Jurmain, R. D. and L. Kilgore

1995 Skeletal evidence of osteoarthritis: a palaeopathological perspective. Annalsof the Rheumatic Diseases 54:443–450.

Larsen, C.1997 Bioarchaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leek, F. F.1972 Teeth and bread in ancient Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 58:126–

132.1973 Further studies concerning ancient Egyptian bread. Journal of Egyptian

Archaeology 59:199–204.Lovell, N. C.

1994 Spinal arthritis and physical stress at Bronze Age Harrapa. American Journalof Physical Anthropology 93:149–164.

Porath, E.1973 #En Ha-Na.siv. Israel Exploration Journal 23:259–260.

Scher, A. T.1978 Injuries to the cervical spine sustained while carrying loads on the head.

Paraplegia 16:94–101.Scheuer, L. and S. Black

2000 Developmental Juvenile Osteology. London: Academic Press.Smith, B.

1984 Patterns of molar wear in hunter-gatherers and agriculturalists. AmericanJournal of Physical Anthropology 63:39–56.

Turner, C. G. and J. D. Cadien1969 Dental chipping in Aleuts, Eskimos and Indians. American Journal of Physical

Anthropology 31:303–310.Ubelaker, D. H.

1978 Human Skeletal Remains. Chicago: Aldine.White, T.

1992 Prehistoric Cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346. Princeton: Princeton Uni-versity Press.

Yassine, K.1984 Tell el Mazar I: Cemetery A. Amman: University of Jordan.

THE IRON AGE II TOWN

FIELDS A–B: BUILDINGS 102, 113, 100, 200AND 204 (1989–1995)

Introduction

The principal occupation levels in Fields A–B (Strata IX–VIIIA) repre-sent the full span of Iron Age II, prior to the large scale introductionof Assyrian elements in Stratum VII. Three phases represent early andmiddle Iron Age II occupation in Field A, where both the Solid Wall(Stratum IX) and the Casemate Wall system (VIIIB, VIIIA) are associ-ated with structures inside the town. One complete building (B102) andsectors of several other houses and work areas filled the entire exca-vation area in the southwest corner of the town. Surprisingly, no twostructures were alike, each one having its own unique plan, althoughfeatures within these structures, such as ovens and wall construction,show a common tradition. The pottery corpus is heavily contaminatedby Iron Age I sherd material that was present in the ceiling makeup.Nevertheless, the beginnings of certain ceramic styles can be docu-mented, especially the introduction of red slipped pottery and the tran-sition from Iron Age I collared-rim pithoi to later Iron Age II forms.

Excavation in Fields A–B was located in a trapezoidal area thatmeasures 51 m east-west, 18 m north-south along Outer West Wall2023+2002 in Squares B14–B16, and 30 m north-south on the east inSquares A1–A15 (Fig. 6.1). A modern field wall (W1018) runs east-west just north of the outer north wall of Building 102, and thencurves to the southeast limiting the exposure of Building 113. Withinthese parameters, excavation was undertaken each season in order toinvestigate the Iron Age town and understand its architectural andcultural traditions. In this chapter, the major structures and work areasare presented, along with the artefactual and ceramic evidence forvarious types of domestic and industrial activities. Special attentionis given to the functional analysis of artefact and pottery assemblagesrelated to the preparation, consumption, storage, and disposal of food,

Figure 6.1. Excavation Grid in Fields A–B.

a focus which derives in part from the overall Madaba Plains Projectfood system methodology (LaBianca 1990: 1–21), and from the specialinterests of the author.1 Discussion of individual buildings will beginin Field A, with B102, and will continue with B113 on the east, and

1 For a discussion of the theoretical framework concerning functional activity sets,see Daviau 1993: 34–68, 437–448; this framework has been utilized in the analysis ofTall Jawa artefacts (Daviau 2002).

–

B100 on the south. This last building or work area extends into Field B,where two other structures, B200 and B204 are associated with WorkArea 211. Of these, Building 102 appears to be the earliest structureand is here assigned to early Iron Age II (Stratum IX, 9th century)with occupation continuing into the late 8th century (Stratum VIIIB–VIIIA).

Table 6A. Strata for Field A


IA–IB 1–2 modernII no remains post-UmayyadIII pottery only UmayyadIV no remains ByzantineV pottery only RomanVI burial/coin PersianVII pottery, work area Late Iron IIVIIIA 3/repairs Middle Iron IIVIIIB 4/casemate wall Middle Iron IIIX 5/solid wall, B102 Early Iron IIX 6/deep probe Iron IXI pottery only Late Bronze (?)

BUILDING 102

Introduction

During six seasons of excavation, only one complete structure (Build-ing 102) was delineated in Fields A and B. This structure2 is located1.00 m west of Building 50, which was uncovered in a deep probe(Chapter 4), and 3.00 m north of the Stratum-VIII Inner CasemateWall 1004/1030. The northern wall (W1024=2034) of Building 102is in close proximity to a modern property wall (W1018) that restrictsexcavation to the north and east. Fortunately, the upper courses of theouter walls3 of B102 could all be uncovered within the excavation area.Although excavation reached the lower floor level only in Room 120,the overall plan and several features of the building could be identified.

2 In an earlier report, this structure was labeled Building 101 (Daviau 1994:178).3 Each of the outer walls of Building 102 was given a single number, except where

the continuity of the wall or the contemporaneity of its construction was not apparent;W1006 (east wall, south of Doorway F), W1011=2020 (south wall), W2032 (west wall),W1024=2034 (north wall), W1026 (east wall, north of Doorway F).

When first exposed in Field A, it was not immediately apparent thatmore than half of Building 102 was located in Field B. Following the1989 season, the excavation area was expanded of to the west of FieldA as the result of a change in research strategy that developed whenthe importance of Tall Jawa for Ammonite history and culture becameclear. In 1991, Squares B61–B70 were laid out along the west sideof Squares A1–A10, with Squares B1–B10 running south to north,adjacent to two modern houses located on the west slope of the tell.The addition of Field B made it possible to complete the excavation ofBuilding 102.

History of Excavation (Fig. 6.2)

When excavation began in 1989, two rooms (R104, R105)4 in thesoutheast corner of Building 102 were exposed in Field A. As horizon-tal exposure expanded in succeeding seasons, additional rooms wererevealed to the north (Squares A5) and to the west (Squares B64). Onlyduring the final season (1995) were all four outer walls uncovered (inA15 and B65), and the plan of the structure fully revealed.

The construction of the outer walls, formed of 2–3 rows of lime-stone boulders in boulder-and-chink formation, is in contrast to theinner walls, such as Wall 1005 and W1008, which consist of only onerow of flat topped boulders. It was not known during the first two sea-sons whether these walls were ground floor walls or were supports forupper storey masonry. The presence of several stone pillars, fallen in thedebris, suggested a complicated construction history that was not clar-ified until the final season (1995), when lower storey floor levels werereached in Room 120, below Room 110.

The construction history of Building 102 is still tentative in thatsecure stratigraphic links were never established between it and theadjoining buildings and work areas. Evidence from changes in ceramicmorphology over time suggests that Building 102 was in use bothbefore and after the construction of the Inner Casemate Wall (W1004).Thus, Building 102 was a major structure in the southwest sector of thetown and, in its final phase, it opened onto an alley (R107) leading toone of the few entrances (Doorway H) into the casemate room system.5

4 These rooms were originally numbered Room 4 and Room 5 respectively (Daviauand Dion 1994:158; fig. 1).

5 P. M. M. Daviau (1989, 1991), B. Silver (1992), and R. Defonzo (1993–1995) werefield supervisors.

–

Figure 6.2. Building 102 in Fields A and B.

Building Plan (Fig. 6.2)

Already in 1989, the plan of Building 102 suggested an original designwith long, narrow rooms running from east to west (Daviau 1992:fig. 3). Only one Doorway (F) to the outside from long Room 109was located in the east wall (W1006+1026). In shape, Building 102 isalmost square (ca. 12.00–12.20× 12.60 m; ca. 152.46 m2). The arrange-ment of rooms is surprisingly regular with a major division down themiddle from east to west (W1008). On both sides of this central divideis a long room (R105 and R109) flanked on the outer side by a some-what broader but shorter room, namely Room 104 south of Room 105,and Room 110 north of Room 109. The remaining space is L-shaped,surrounding the long rooms along the outside and wrapping around toserve as the back or western rooms. Each of these rooms is further sub-

divided by a wall stub that continues the wall line of the narrow rooms;Room 204 on the south is partially separated from Room 216 on thewest, while Room 217 on the north is partially separated from Room214. Room 217 is an anomaly in that it is further divided by Wall 1025,which forms a small alcove (Room 111).

This regular plan has no parallel at Tall Jawa among the housesfrom Stratum VIII (Building 200, see below, and Building 300, Chap-ter 7), or among the residences of Stratum VII (Building 800 and B700,Chapter 8). Building 102 is clearly an orthogonal structure, constructedindependent of the fortification system and standing alone in relationto other structures built nearby. At the same time, the typical build-ing techniques seen in other structures at Tall Jawa also appear inBuilding 102, including boulder-and-chink walls standing full height,stacked-boulder pillars, doorways located in the corners of rooms andpositioned between the end of one wall and the vertical face of a per-pendicular wall.

Few parallels are known from other Iron Age sites in greater Syria-Palestine. One might see a certain similarity with Palace 418 at Tell el-Far#ah (N), which is close in size (12.00× 17.00 m) and also has a four-part regular plan (Chambon 1984: Pl. 19). At the same time, Building102 does not resemble the typical four-room style house (Braemer1982), especially in overall size (ca. 152.46 m2 vs. 75.00 m2 on average).6

RoomsDuring the final phase, there were nine rooms in Building 102.

Table 6B. Room Size and Proportion in Building 102

Room Width(m) Length(m) Ratio W/L Bounded by Walls

104 2.50 4.50 .55 1005, 1006, 1011, 1027105 1.75 8.10 .21 1006, 1005, 1008, 2026109 1.70 8.00 .21 1006, 1008, 1022, 2026110/120 2.50 4.35 .57 1022, 1023, 1024, 1026111 0.80 2.50 .32 1022, 1023, 1024, 1025204 2.80 6.50 .43 1027, 2020, 2021, 2032214 2.50 4.80 .52 2025, 2026, 2032, 2034216 1.80 2.50 .72 2021, 2025, 2026, 2032217 1.50 2.50 .60 1025, 2033, 2026, 2034

6 Houses at Tell el-Far#ah (N) are on average 75 m2 with the exception of Building355 (Chambon 1984: from Tableau 1).

–

Range of sizes (omitting Room 111)

Width 1.50 → 2.80 average – 1.88 mLength 2.50 → 8.10 average – 5.15 m

(including the width of Room 111 with that of Room 217)

Width 1.50 → 2.80 average – 2.30 m

The average width of these rooms is comparable to that of rooms inBuilding 200 (1.96 m) but considerably narrower (1.88 m on average)than the rooms in Building 300 (2.32–2.46 m). The contrast is evengreater with Stratum VII Building 800 where the average room widthis 2.43–2.73 m.

All rooms in Building 102, except for Room 110/120, were assignedonly one number even though there may have been additional roomson an upper storey. More likely is the case that the Stratum VIII Build-ing had rooms comparable in size and shape to those in the StratumIX building. Since no other wall lines belonging exclusively to StratumVIII were identified, we can only assume that these rooms had similarmeasurements to those found on the ground floor. The regularity ofplan is also apparent in the measurements of rooms with only Rooms105 and R109 out of range in terms of their length. Even in this case,the rooms were well paired, with only the southwest corner of Room109 out of alignment due to the presence of a blocked Doorway (J).

DoorwaysDoorway (F) on the lower floor is the only entrance into Building102 from the outside, suggesting a considerable amount of security.This entrance is also one of the smaller openings by comparison withdoorways between interior rooms.

Table 6C. Location and Width of Doorways in Building 102

Doorway Room Width (m)

D 214, 217 1.40E 111, 217 0.75F 107, 109 0.90G 204, 216 1.75J 105, 109 1.15 (blocked)L 109, 217 1.40 (blocked)

Average width – 1.22 m (all doorways)Average width – 1.42 m (without Doorways E and F)

The average width of interior doorways is considerably wider (1.42 m)than the average width of doorways in Building 200, which are 0.78m wide, and in Building 300 (Field E), where the average is 0.84 m.Whether this difference is related to the function of individual roomsor to the construction techniques of the building as a whole remainsunclear. These wide doorways certainly allow for easy movement ofpersons and equipment from one room to another.

WallsThe exterior walls of Building 102 were all of boulder-and-chink con-struction with a coating of plaster (A14:33) visible on the east face ofWall 1006, adjacent to Doorway F, and with a crumbly plaster (B54:12)on both sides of the walls forming the southwest corner (W2020+2032). Whether plaster was present on the remaining walls was notdetermined due to the limits of excavation outside this structure.

Table 6D. Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 102)

Wall 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

1005 ×1006 ×1008 ×+1011 ×+1022 ×1023 ×1024=2034 ×+1025 ×1026 ×1027 ×2020 ×2021 ×2025 ×2026 ×2032 ×2033 ×2035 ×

Like the plan of the building itself, the walls show unusual consistencyin thickness. All of the exterior walls were in the range of 0.80–0.85m thick except for the west end of south Wall W2020, which was 1.00m thick. This anomaly may be due to repairs to the upper coursesof this wall at the end of Stratum VIIIB. Interior walls also clus-tered together in the range of 0.60–0.65 m thick. The rare exceptions

–

were the blocking walls (W2033 and 2035) that were somewhat thicker(0.70 m).

The most apparent difference between the inner and outer wallsis in their construction techniques. Whereas all of the exterior wallsconsist of 2–3 rows of small and medium limestone boulders with anoccasional large boulder, especially at the outside corners, all interiorwalls are formed of one row of medium to large flat-topped boulders.In contrast to the outer boulder-and-chink walls, which were all bondedat the four corners of the building, the interior walls abut the exteriorwalls and one another, with the possible exception of the join betweenWalls 2025 and W2026. Clearly, Building 102 was built according toa preconceived plan whereby the outer walls were built first and theinterior space was subsequently divided.

Stratigraphy (Table 6A)

At least two phases of occupation (Stratum IX–VIIIB) are apparent inthe architecture, especially where the lower storey walls show signs ofrepair. Since this evidence was restricted to Room 120, the only roomwhere ground floor levels were reached, discussion will focus first onthe northern rooms and then discuss the remains of Stratum VIII fromnorth to south within the building. While the stratigraphic depositionwithin Building 102 was fairly clear, less well known is the associationof this structure with adjoining buildings on the east, south and west.

Stratum IX

Room 120 (Fig. 6.3)Room 120 is located in the northeast corner of Building 102 and issurrounded on the east and north by the outer walls (W1026 andW1024 respectively). Wall 1024 remains standing 1.83 m above thefloor (A15:40), the lowest level reached in Building 102 during exca-vation.7 A boulder-and-chink wall (W1023), 0.65 m thick, formed of1 row of medium and large size boulders marks the western limit ofRoom 120. This wall (W1023) abuts both Outer Wall 1024 and Wall

7 The Stratum-IX floor levels in Square A15 are at an absolute elevation of 921.59–921.87 masl, whereas the Iron I Walls (W1015, W1016) and debris under Room 107are at 923.30–922.00 masl. While this does not represent Iron Age I floor levels, it doessuggest that either Building 102 was cut into Iron I remains, or that the level of theunderlying bedrock was sloping from east to west. Of course, both factors may havebeen involved.

Figure 6.3. Stratum IX loci in Room 120.

1022, which forms the southern limit of both Rooms 120 and Room111. Wall 1022 consists of three stacked-boulder pillars (A15:37, 38,39, east to west), each formed of medium to large size boulders stand-ing three courses high (ca. 1.50 m). The pillars were connected to oneanother at the top by one or two courses of flat boulders (A15:9), whichwere wedged in place, with a roughly corbelled construction, givingWall 1022 a maximum preserved height of 1.70–1.80 m (Fig. 6.4).

The western pillar (A15:39) is supported on a base of flagstones(A15:44) which are set in position on Surface A15:40. The pillarsappear to be free standing, with open spaces measuring 0.40–0.50 mbetween them. These spaces probably served for air circulation ratherthan as doorways, although this cannot be ruled out. The largest space

–

Figure 6.4. Room 120 partially filled with upper-storeymud-brick collapse; stacked boulder pillars visible in Wall 1022.

(ca. 0.70 m) is located to the west of Pillar A15:39, just east of the southend of north-south Wall 1023. This space would have served as themost convenient doorway from Room 120 into Room 109(b).8

Beaten earth surface A15:40, exposed in the western half of Room120, seals up against the base of the walls. This surface is stainedwith ash, charcoal flecks, nari, and brick material indicating exten-sive use. Immediately above Surface A15:40 was a superimposed sur-face (A15:36) with a small assemblage of pottery and artefacts thatincluded a saddle quern (TJ 2161) and a ceramic spindle whorl (TJ2183). Due to the limited exposure within Room 120, we can onlyassume that these very typical finds suggest domestic activities. The 133ceramic sherds represent bowls, juglets, jugs, storejars and a pithos witha collared-rim (see Chronology below), although it is difficult to sepa-rate these sherds from vessels that broke when they fell from the upperstorey.

8 In order to discuss lower storey rooms which were not fully exposed, these areaswill be designated with the same number as the upper storey room but will have thesuffix (b).

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyFallen onto Surface A15:36 was an oak beam,9 probably part of theceiling which collapsed into Room 120. A succession of soil and rockfalllayers (A15:35, 34, 33) filled with mud bricks, pieces of charcoal andlumps of plaster covered the beam. These debris layers also containedfood processing and textile manufacturing tools and mendable ceramicsherds. The presence of these finds is evidence of a second storey aboveRoom 120 that was also in use during the earlier phase of occupation.This upper storey room may have had a somewhat different layout thanRoom 120 since a heavy concentration of fallen mud brick (A15:11), inposition midway along the length of the room, points to a possible crosswall on the upper storey.

Table 6E. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 120, upper storey10

Locus Finds Reg. No. Characteristics

A15:33, 34 3 bowls V120, V181, V182 red slip15:35+36 cup V161 one handle

cooking pot V178krater V179 inverted rim, smudgeddecanter V142 crisp warelamp V160590 ceramic sherds11

stone tool TJ 20922 pestles TJ 2095, 2096 basaltgrinder TJ 2050 basaltmillstone TJ 2097 basaltpoint TJ 2090 ironspindle whorl TJ 2051 ceramic

The destruction of Building 102 appears to have caused the centralpillar (A15:38) in Wall 1022 to shift northward against the collapsedmud brick, since it is not in line with Pillars A15:37 and A15:39. Atthe same time, a clear plaster line, visible in the soil between the pillarssuggests the level at which Building 102 was reconstructed.

9 The wood of this beam was identified in 1995 by P. Bikai, Director of theAmerican Center of Oriental Research in #Amman.

10 The list of ceramic vessels represents a minimum number of vessels, namely thosethat have been reconstructed to date. The purpose of the list is to indicate the range ofvessel types and artefacts in use in a given room.

11 Total numbers of ceramic sherds are listed, even though several of these sherdsmay be partially restored in vessels with vessel numbers. This listing provides a meansof comparison among loci.

–

Figure 6.5. North end of Building 102; Room 214 in foregroundleads into Rooms 217 and R111; Room110/120 is in the upper left.

Room 214 (Fig. 6.5)Only one other room was excavated to Stratum IX levels. Room 214is a rectangular space that extends north-south within the northwestcorner formed by exterior Walls 2034 and W2032. Exterior west Wall2032 appears to have lost a course of stone for a distance of 2.00 mbeginning north of its meeting with Wall 2025, the southern wall ofRoom 214. Interior Wall 2025 is constructed of one row of mediumboulders with cobble chink stones; it abuts exterior Wall 2032 on thewest and appears to bond with interior Wall 2026 on the east. Eventhough excavation exposed only the uppermost boulders of Wall 2025,there is no evidence of damage to this wall, even at the point where it isadjacent to the damaged area of Wall 2032.12

A single doorway (D) in the northeast corner of Room 214, appar-ently in use during both Strata IX and VIII, provides a bent-axisentry from Room 217. The south jamb of the doorway consists ofsemi-dressed medium boulders, which also form the north end of eastWall 2026. This Stratum IX wall consists of stacked-boulder pillars on

12 It was not determined during excavation whether this damage is due to modernagriculture, or whether it marks the position of a Stratum VIII doorway into Building102 on the west.

Figure 6.6. Building 102, with relevant Stratum-VIII locus numbers.

the lower level with capping stones forming the support for the upperstorey wall, comparable to Wall 1022 in Room 120.

The earliest exposed surface in Room 214 (B65:32) and in Door-way D (B65:33) was in a probe (1.50×2.50 m). The irregularity ofthese surfaces suggests an underlying fill that was left in place when thebuilding was re-designed for use in Stratum VIII. While no other roomswithin Building 102 were excavated to Stratum IX levels, all rooms didyield evidence for Stratum VIII occupation above Stratum IX debris.

Stratum VIII (Fig. 6.6)

Building 102 continued in use after the collapse of the Stratum IXceilings. From the appearance of the outer walls, only exterior Wall1011=2020 on the south was rebuilt, at least in its uppermost courseswhere smaller boulders and chink stones were used (Fig. 6.6). Limitedevidence for the rebuilding of interior walls is seen on the south sidesof Rooms 217 and R209, where two Doorways (J and L) were blocked

–

Figure 6.7. Room 110, looking west at Wall 1023.

(in W2035 and W2033 respectively) in order to extend Walls 1022 andW1008 as far west as Wall 2026. Evidence for renewed occupation wasuncovered in almost every room, although disturbance of the ancientremains by modern agriculture is extensive. As a result, it is extremelydifficult to determine the location of activity areas within the architec-tural space.

Room 110 (Figs. 6.6, 7)Above the collapsed debris (A15:32+33) and mud brick (A15:11) ofStratum-IX Room 120, the pillars in Wall 1022 appear to have beenmodified with the use of a large boulder put in place at the top ofeach pillar (A15:37–38–39), and the capping stones put back in positionbetween the pillars to consolidate stone ceiling supports/pillars for thenew structure. One such monolithic pillar (A15:14; 0.25 ×0.50× 0.70m tall) had fallen north into Room 110. This pillar and the stonescapping the pillars would have raised the ceiling 1.87 m above theStratum VIII floor.13 Whether this ceiling (A5:18+A15:12) was also the

13 This height does not include the space of wooden beams put in place to supportthe packed mud ceiling. With the beams in place, the actual ceiling would have beenca. 1.95–2.00 m above the floor.

roof could not be ascertained definitively due to the severe disturbanceof the upper debris layers in which terra rossa had been added to the tellsurface and subsequently ploughed.

The accumulation of debris (A15:33) that serves as makeup belowthe Stratum VIII floor is covered by a thin plaster line which is mostclearly visible in the soil between Pillars A15:37–38–39. This thin sur-face is covered in turn by a beaten earth floor that was itself severelydamaged by subsequent collapse. Surface A15:31(=A5:19) was prob-ably the principal floor in Stratum VIII Room 110. Evidence for useof this room is present in the form of 773 ceramic sherds and a groupof artefacts partly embedded in the collapse of mud brick and plaster(A5:18=A15:12) that covers the floor.

Table 6F. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 110


A5:19+15:31 bowl V184 vertical rim15:8, 12, 13 bowl V183 red slip

2 kraters V185, V186 inverted rim, smudgedjuglet V141 red slip, not burnishedamphora V140 white slip, black bands773 ceramic sherdsstone object TJ 2028 imported3 pestles TJ 1893, 1909, 2016 basaltgrinder TJ 1949 basaltmillstone TJ 1579 upper loaf-shaped, basaltpounder TJ 1577 chertunregistered basalt fragments3 fragments TJ 1569, 1570, 2233 ceramicspindle whorl TJ 1901 ceramicloom weight TJ 1902 unfired clay

The small assemblage of food processing tools found here is typicalof the range of tools needed to crush, grind and pound grains, legumesand nuts. The full range of these tools also includes pestles and mortars.An essential tool within this group is the hammer stone or pounder,almost exclusively made of chert or flint rather than basalt (Daviau2002:297–313).

Most surprising among these artefacts are the 3 ceramic fragments,one (TJ 1569) of which was carefully painted red and black in an intri-cate lattice pattern within a black border. This fragment was finishedon two adjoining edges suggesting that it was part of a larger ele-ment. The closest parallel for the style of decoration is the facade ofa small model shrine, supposedly from the Mount Nebo region (Wein-berg 1978:31, 33). The remaining fragments were not painted but

–

were clearly broken off from a clay object that was of unusual shape.These artefacts should be considered in relation to other artefacts fromRooms 105, R217, and R204 in Building 102 that include a group ofclay cylinders (TJ 1816, 2234) in the form of free-standing or attachedcolumns, the largest measuring 9.50 cm (TJ 1829+2234), a ceramicdecoration in the form of a miniature Proto-Aeolic capital (TJ 218),possibly a “crown” of a figurine (Harding 1951: Pl. XIV) or of a col-umn on a ceramic shrine (Chambon 1984: Pl. 66:1), a ceramic limb(TJ 2062), the torso of a stone figurine (TJ 1872), a silt stone male fig-urine (TJ 1877; Daviau 2002:65–70, 80–84), and the ceramic head ofa male deity wearing the atef crown (TJ 100; Daviau and Dion 1994).Such artefacts suggest cultic materials, possibly used in domestic cultpractices (Daviau 2001b).

Room 111The smallest enclosed space within Building 102 is Room 111. Locatedwest of Room 110, Room 111 has a single entrance from Room 217.In view of the regular layout of this building, Room 111 appears tobe the result of dividing the area of Room 217 into two unequal partswith the construction of Wall 1025 (Figs. 6.5, 6). By comparison withother interior walls, Wall 1025 is exceptionally well built of mediumand large flat-topped boulders making it quite thick (ca. 0.70 m), whichis surprising given its position and function. Excavated only to floorlevel (A5:15) for Stratum VIII, Room 111 probably served as a storagearea. The principal find is a pithos, smashed in place on a beaten earthSurface (A5:15) in Doorway E. This vessel (V143), stands 1.00+m inheight, when complete, and is similar to those found in Building 113 tothe east (Daviau 1995). Also on Surface A5:15 was a basalt pestle (TJ1254).

Room 217 (Figs. 6.5, 6)Between Room 111 on the east and Room 214 on the west is Room217, a space which forms a Z-shaped passage with Doorway E in thesoutheast and Doorway D on the northwest. A single beaten earth sur-face (B65:21), marked only by the presence of ceramic sherds, a cameljaw bone and an iron arrowhead (TJ 2166), was badly damaged byfallen mud bricks, plaster and collapsed wall stones (B65:18). This evi-dence for severe destruction makes it impossible to identify the functionof Room 217. Only in the overlying material (B65:10) is there evidencefor the collapsed roof in the form of mud brick, rockfall and patches of

plaster along with the artefacts in use on this upper surface, includinga basalt mortar (TJ 1865), an iron point (TJ 1847), and the silt stonemale figurine (TJ 1877), mentioned above.

Room 214 (Figs. 6.5, 6)The use of Room 214 during Stratum VIII is most clearly seen in aprobe in the northeast quarter immediately west of Doorway D. Findsfrom loci in the probe consist of artefacts and a heavy concentration ofpottery (568 sherds), especially cooking pot sherds. A limestone mortarembedded in the floor (B65:30) and an upper loaf-shaped millstone (TJ2173) fragment in Doorway D were also in use in Room 214; such findspoint to domestic and craft/industrial activities.

Table 6G. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 214


B65:25 cooking pot sherds+65:30 753 sherds ceramic

polishing stone TJ 2135 crafts and industrymortar TJ 2143 limestonegrinder TJ 2153 basaltstone baetyl TJ 2236 crystalline

The most surprising find (TJ 2236) was a large piece of crystalline stone(graphic granite)14 that was unique at Tall Jawa and must have beenimported. What its precise importance was to the Iron Age inhabitantsis not clear, although it appears to have fallen from the upper storey orroof area and may have been a baetyl, due to its rectangular shape andexotic character (Daviau 2001b:219; fig. 5:3).

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyThe presence of a considerable amount of mud brick and scattered wallstones in the overlying locus (B65:25) suggests that this material is theStratum VIII roof that collapsed into the room. This collapse continuedacross the room (B65:25), but was not excavated. The final use ofRoom 214 is poorly represented, although the pottery from the upperdebris layers (B65:23, 7) is clearly that of Stratum VIII. The remainsof an installation (B65:19) built up against the east face of exterior Wall

14 I am grateful to Dr. G. Hall†, Department of Geography, Wilfrid Laurier Univer-sity, who determined the precise geological identification of this stone.

–

2032 consist of a semi-circle of cobbles and small boulders.15 Withinthis installation there was an accumulation of soil and pebbles and abasalt pestle (TJ 1982). In the surrounding soil layer (B65:23), therewere typical domestic artefacts.

Table 6H. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 214, upper storey


B65:23 286 sherds2 millstones TJ 1989, 1999 basalt, upper loaf-shapedspindle whorl TJ 1936 ceramicpillar TJ 1829 (figurine?) mends with fragment TJ 169616

This scattered distribution of finds among various rooms is furtherevidence of the disturbance of occupational material within Building102 after it went out of use.

Room 109 (Figs. 6.5, 6)Room 109/20917 is one of two parallel, long rooms (1.70×8.00 m)that occupy the centre of Building 102. It is bounded on the northand south by Walls 1022 and W1008 respectively, which are both one-row walls, formed of medium, flat-topped boulders (0.55 ×0.75 m), inposition above Stratum-IX stacked-boulder pillars that remain mostlyunexcavated on the lower level. One well-dressed, flat-topped stone(A5:13), probably a pillar base, had slipped off the wall line into Room109. Two Doorways (J and L) at the far west end of Room 109, bothon the lower level, were blocked up (W2035 and 2033 respectively) andserved as supports for renewed occupation above the underlying debris.Wall 2026, itself a stacked-boulder pillar wall from Stratum IX thatruns north-south, forms the west end of Room 109. The Stratum-IXdoorway (F) in exterior Wall 1006 on the east may have been reusedin Stratum VIII to provide access to adjoining structures, especiallyBuilding 113. The south jamb (A4:20), coated with plaster (A14:33)on its eastern face, consists of the north end of Wall 1006, whilethe north frame consists of the south end of Wall 1026 at the point

15 The exact nature of this installation was not determined during excavation.However, its position against the west exterior wall (W2032) of Building 102, adjacentto a work area in Courtyard 211, suggests a bin.

16 This second fragment was located in Room 109.17 This long room was excavated in two different squares and was assumed to be

two separate rooms; both numbers are given here for coordination with the Locus List(CD-ROM).

Figure 6.8. South side of Building 102, with Rooms104 and R105 at the end of the 1989 season.

where it is a continuation of the south face of perpendicular Wall 1022.This construction technique is extremely common at Tall Jawa (Daviau1999:216), and indicates that Building 102 was part of a continuingarchitectural tradition at the site.

In Room 109 there were several large boulders fallen at intervalsalong the length of Wall 1008, indicating the position of these ceil-ing supports (see A15:14). In this room also, the disturbance of theStratum-VIII occupational remains caused by fallen stones and mudbricks from the exterior wall (W1006) renders the evidence for roomfunction negligible. Ceramic sherds, charcoal and ash, a chert jar stop-per (TJ 1317), and a ceramic spindle whorl (TJ 1316), while suggestive,are too common to indicate more precisely the activities carried out inthis room.

Room 105 (Figs 6.6, 8)Immediately south of Room 109 is its twin (Room 105), which issimilar in size and shape (1.75×8.10 m). Room 105 shares a partywall (W1008) with Room 109 on the north and the continuation of

–

Wall 2026 on the west. Wall 1005 forms the southern wall of Room105 and is also a stacked-boulder pillar wall with flat-topped boulderslinking the pillars to form the foundation for the Stratum VIII ceilingsupports (B64:12). On the east, exterior Wall 1006 closes off Room 105from Alley 107.

Only Stratum VIII remains and subsequent destruction levels wereexcavated in Room 105. Built above Stratum IX collapsed mud brick(A4:18), soil layers representing a beaten earth floor (A4:16) with bro-ken pottery, animal bones and a handful of artefacts were sealed bymud brick collapse. Most interesting among these finds was a ceramicattachment in the shape of a Proto-Aeolic capital (TJ 218). Such attach-ments appear at the top of columns on the façade of a model shrinefrom Tell el-Far#ah (N); de Vaux 1955: pl. XIII). In the western halfof Room 105, a circle of stones (B64:13) in the shape of an oven wasbuilt up against the south face of Wall 1005. Although this installationwas lined with stones, the soil inside (B64:14) did not show evidenceof use as a hearth. The only finds were 5 pieces of chert. This dearthof domestic equipment throughout Room 105 (i.e., one spindle whorl,TJ 207) may point to a specialized function for this room, although theonly positive evidence that can be put forth to identify activities or useis a ceramic male figurine head (TJ 100, Daviau and Dion 1994). How-ever, this in itself is not determinative; the figurine may have been inuse on the roof and not in Room 105.

Room 104 (Fig. 6.6, 8)In the southeast corner of Building 102 is Room 104, comparable insize and orientation to its opposite, Room 110, in the northeast corner.The eastern and southern perimeters of Room 104 consist of exteriorWall 1006 and Wall 1011, both boulder-and-chink walls formed ofcobbles and small boulders. A cross wall (W1027) of small and mediumsize boulders serves as the western limit while, on the north, Room 104shares Wall 1005 with Room 105.

Evidence of Stratum IX destruction was only apparent along southWall 1011, where an ash concentration was exposed. Burnt rocks in thewall itself (W1011) suggest the place where ceiling beams rested whilethey smouldered. Flotation recovered wood charcoal and burnt bone,but the wood itself was not identified.

Stratum VIII use of Room 104 appeared to be disturbed by recon-struction of the Inner Casemate Wall (1004) and the adjoining building(100). Indeed, the south wall (W1011) of Building 102 was different in

Figure 6.9. Building 102, looking east with Rooms 214, R215 and R204 (left to right).

construction than the other exterior walls, in that small boulders andcobbles were used, suggesting severe damage that was repaired at thebeginning of Stratum VIIIA. Along the north wall (W1005) of Room104 was a stone built semi-circular installation (A4:4) filled with loosesoil, cobbles and small boulders (A4:3). Although it was once thoughtto be a concentration of rockfall, the stones that lined this pit/silo donot represent the pattern of collapse seen in Room 120. Excavationreached a depth of 0.80–1.05 m inside Installation A4:4 without anychange in the stone liner. Within the fill were a basalt pestle (TJ 14) andan upper loaf-shaped millstone (TJ 15).

Table 6I. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 104


A4:3, 8 bowl V157 large, hemispherical, burnishedkrater V158 piriform400 ceramic sherds2 grinders TJ 15, 31 basaltmillstone TJ 14 basalt, upper loaf-shapedsherd TJ 89/214 reworkedawl TJ 34 iron

–

Room 204 (Fig. 6.6, 9)Only in the southwest corner, west of Room 104, is the plan of Build-ing 102 slightly irregular. Here, Room 204 extends the full distancebetween Wall 1027, which it shares with Room 104, and exterior westWall 2032. In contrast to its construction along the west side of Rooms216 and 214 to the north, where it consists of small boulders, exteriorWall 2032 consists of medium and large boulders along the west endof Room 204. At this point, its exterior west face is coated with plaster(B54:12) near the southwest corner. Plaster is also in place on the southface of South Wall 1011 further east (see Room 203 below).

Room 204 constitutes the single largest space (18.2m2 vs. 14.1 m2

in R105) for a Stratum-VIII room. Floor levels were not exposed inthis room; only Stratum VIII collapse was recovered. Within the debrislayers (B64:3, 6, 7, 9) was a representative group of ground stone toolsand sherds of ceramic vessels.

Table 6J. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 204


B64:3, 6, 7, 9 bowl V231 smudgedbowl V232 inverted rim, smudgedsmall jug V230lamp V223lamp V212 miniature5,214 sherds ceramicsmall mortar TJ 122 limestone, cosmeticmortar TJ 153 basalt, with spoutmortar TJ 1738 limestonegrinder TJ 205 basalt4 millstones TJ 162, 188, 197, 1719 basaltmillstone TJ 180 basalt, iron rustpounder TJ 213 chertbutton/buzz TJ 144 ceramicspindle whorl TJ 136, 217 ceramic

Room 216Adjoining Room 204 on the northwest is Room 216. Its entrance isthrough Doorway G, the widest (1.75 m) in Building 102. This doorwaywas created by the extension of Wall 2021, the north wall of Room 204,which forms the east jamb. North of Wall 2021 is north-south interiorWall 2026, a two-row wall formed of small and medium boulders.Because exposure of this wall did not extend below Stratum VIIIlevels, it could not be determined whether there were stacked pillars in

Stratum IX. Stratum IX debris (B65:27) consisting of soil and rockfall,was sealed by a firm soil layer, probably a beaten earth surface (B65:11).Although there was a considerable number of ceramic sherds (1101) inthis locus and in the overlying soil layer (B65:6 and B64:8), only a smallnumber of artefacts consisting of three spindle whorls (TJ 161, 166,208) were recovered.

DestructionThe disaster that ended Stratum VIIIB occupation, and necessitatedthe reconstruction of Inner Casemate Wall 1030 further south (Chapter4), was probably the same event that brought about the end of Build-ing 102. In Room 110, the final destruction of Building 102 is markedby chunks of ceiling plaster (A5:18=A15:8) scattered on floor SurfaceA5:19=A15:31 and in the debris layers (A5:12, 17=A15:13, 12) imme-diately above. This debris consisted of collapsed and burnt mud brickfrom the exterior walls, ash, and pieces of charcoal, which accumulatedfor a total depth of 0.75 m.

In Room 111, falling wall stones (A5:11) smashed the pithoi whichstood in place (A5:15) within this small room. Ash lenses were alsopresent in Debris Layer A5:17 and on Floor A5:19. In Room 217,fallen stones and mud brick material (B65:10) extended along thelength of the exterior north wall (W1024–2034). The amount of mudbrick appears to diminish in Room 214 in the northwest where soiland rockfall (B65:23) mark the end of Stratum VIII occupation. Thispattern of collapse strongly suggests the use of mud brick for the super-structure of the exterior walls and a direction of collapse toward thenorthwest.

In the central rooms (R109, R105), mud brick fragments are moreconcentrated along the east end (A4:18, 14), while in the west half ofthese Rooms, mud brick is widely scattered (B65:17), and the accumula-tion of debris consists of loose soil, scattered cobbles and small boulders(A5:6, 10; A4:7). Ash pockets are still common throughout these loci.In the southern rooms (R104, R204), the pattern is different yet again,in that there is a heavy concentration of fallen wall stones (A4:8; B64:5,6, 7, 8). It seems most likely that this represents the collapse of exteriorsouth Wall 1011, itself repaired during Stratum VIII.

ChronologyThe surface treatment of many of the vessels from the lower floor ofBuilding 102 (Stratum-IX Room 120) suggests that this structure was

–

built and first occupied at a somewhat earlier date than Building 300in Field E, which was clearly built after the construction of the innercasemate wall (Chapter 7). How much earlier is hard to tell, althoughthe collars on the pithos sherds in Room 120 appear to be vestigial,probably at the point of transition to the double ridge form which ischaracteristic of Iron Age II pithoi found in association with red slippedand burnished pottery (see Buildings 100, B113 and B200 below). Thislater form is present in the upper storey collapse of Room 110 alongwith one unburnished red slip juglet (V139) and an imported Cypriotamphora (V140). Such characteristic forms suggest that the earlierphase of occupation was within the early Iron Age II (Stratum IX),probably contemporary with the Solid Wall, while the later phase wasduring Stratum VIIIB.

BUILDING 113

Introduction

East, south and west of Building 102 were various structures (Building113, B100, B204, and B200) built in association with the constructionof Inner Casemate Wall 1020+1030 in Stratum VIIIB. These build-ings and work areas ran up to the earlier phase of the Inner Wall andshowed severe disturbance where the inner wall was rebuilt in Stra-tum VIIIA. Although only exposed along its west side, Building 113yielded floor levels from both Stratum VIIIB and VIIIA and a ceramiccorpus that set the standard for Middle Iron Age II pottery forms andwares at Tall Jawa.


Building 113 is located in Squares A3–13 and A14–A24, and was exca-vated only during 1989 and 1991. In following seasons, excavationdid not continue to the east or north due to the presence of mod-ern property walls that cut diagonally across Squares A14–A24. Whenfirst exposed in 1989, little was known about the style of architec-ture employed in domestic structures of Iron Age II or in the rangeof ceramic ware form types in use. The presence of a number ofiron points both inside and outside the fortification system led to theassumption that the site had experienced repeated attacks, although itwas later realized that such weapons were also a common item in store-rooms. Only with the exposure of Building 300 in Field E in subsequent

Figure 6.10. Building 113 in relation to Building 102 and the Casemate Wall System.

seasons (Chapter 7) was Building 113 put into an architectural and cul-tural framework, so that the refinement of its building phases could beattempted.


Although the excavation of Building 113 was extremely limited, twolarge Rooms (R106, R108) could be identified as belonging to thisstructure. West of the principal north-south wall (W1009+1014) were

–

two additional Rooms, R103/12318 and R107/127, that may also havebeen an integral part of this building. Room 103/123 opens into Case-mate Room 101/121 through Doorway H, while Room/Alley 107 tothe north appears to serve as a link with Building 102 on the west.

On the south, Building 113 was built up against Inner CasemateWall 1020 and its re-build, Wall 1010. No other possible exterior wallwas identified even though there was a considerable amount of rockfallalong the east balk of Square A13, a sure sign of a major wall. Thelocation of Doorway H between Casemate Room 101/121 and Room103/123 on the west suggests that the casemates were part of theadjoining building. As with Building 200 against West Wall 2023 (seebelow), no complete plan could be designed which would illustrate thisstyle of room arrangement.

RoomsWhile no complete rooms were excavated in Building 113, the lengthand width of several areas are suggestive. The largest space was Room106 which measures a minimum of 4.50 m east-west and 5.50 mnorth-south. To the north, Room 108 was at least as wide. Room 103occupies the space (3.10 m) south of Building 102, between Wall 1012and the west wall (W1009) of Room 106 (3.75 m). On the north, Room107 extended at least 6.50 m along the east side of Building 102 asfar as Doorway F. Whether it continued beyond that point to east-westWall 1028 remains uncertain, due to the limit of excavation.

DoorwaysThe principal Doorway (H) was that from Room 123 into CasemateRoom 121. At a width of 0.80 m, it was a standard size (compare 0.846m average in Building 300). This doorway continued in use duringStratum VIIIA, when the inner casemate wall sections were rebuiltalong the same lines.

WallsThe majority of walls assigned to Building 113 date to Stratum VIIIAalthough Wall 1012 was in use at least as early as Stratum VIIIB. Noevidence for other Stratum VIIIB walls was exposed.

18 R123 represents the earlier of the two phases identified in this room; the sameapplies to R121, R126, R127.

Table 6K. Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 113)

Wall 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

1009 ×1012 ×1013 ×1014 ×

The size of these interior walls is surprisingly consistent, in the range of0.70–0.75 m. By contrast, their style varies from one wall to another;Wall 1009 consists of limestone boulders that served as pillar bases withcobblestones between the bases, Walls 1013 and W1014 appear to besimple boulder-and-chink, while Wall 1012 is a stone foundation witha mud brick superstructure. In spite of this variety, Walls 1009, W1013and W1014 meet to form the northwest corner of Room 106.

Stratigraphy

Two Stratum VIII occupation phases19 are clearly represented in Build-ing 113 and its adjoining rooms (R103, R107) which were constructedwith the inner casemate wall already in place. Although this samesequence will be seen south and west of Building 102, the assump-tion that these phases were absolutely contemporary from one area toanother has yet to be demonstrated.

Table 6L. Strata for Field A—Building 113


I 1 modernII no remains post-UmayyadIII pottery only UmayyadIV pottery (?) ByzantineV no remains RomanVI no remains PersianVII pottery only Late Iron IIVIIIA 2/repairs Middle Iron IIVIIIB 3/casemate wall Middle Iron IIIX pottery only Middle Iron IIX pottery only Iron I

19 The principal occupation in B113 was originally identified as Field Phase 5 (Da-viau 1992:149).

–

Stratum VIIIB

Stratum-VIIIB remains were excavated in Casemate Room 121 andin Rooms 123 and 126. Within these rooms, the beaten earth sur-faces appear to support several Stratum-VIIIA walls (W1009, W1013,and W1014). Whether there were Stratum-VIIIB walls, other than theinner casemate and the exterior walls (W1006, W1011) of Building 102,was not determined during excavation.

Casemate Room 121 (Fig. 6.11)With the construction of Inner Casemate Wall 1020+1030 in Stra-tum VIIIB, a single casemate room (R121), with an entrance (DoorwayH) into Building 113, shared in the activities of the adjoining rooms.The only Stratum VIIIB surface identified in Room 121 was a hard-packed floor (A2:31) with flat lying pottery that seals against the northside of Outer Wall 1003 and the west side of Inner Wall 1020, at thepoint where it forms the eastern frame of Doorway H leading intoRoom 123 (Chapter 5). While its full length is not known with cer-tainty, Room 121 could have been up to 8.25 m long20 and 2.75 mwide between the inner and outer casemate walls (W1003). The func-tion of Room 121 is amply demonstrated by the large amount of pot-tery sherds (2000+) and artefacts, including spindle whorls (TJ 81, 86,87, 88), found in the debris that filled this narrow space at the endof Stratum VIIIB. The consistency of the material culture remains inthis room with the finds from Rooms 123 and R126 suggests exten-sive food preparation and cooking along with other domestic tasks suchas spinning, and recreation. In this room, there were 24 disc-shapedreworked sherds and 5 ceramic triangles; this is the largest assemblageof reworked sherds of any locus in Field A (17.3%). Faunal remainsconsist of 48 large mammal bones, 7 cow bones, 6 pig bones, 3 don-key bones, 2 small mammal bones, and 294 sheep/goat bones fromapproximately 330 baskets of soil.

Room 123 (Fig. 6.11)Stratum-VIIIB living surfaces, north of Inner Casemate Wall 1030,were first exposed in Room 123 in 1989.21 With further excavation

20 As suggested above (Chapter 5), Wall 1012 may have served as a room divider. Inthis case, the length of Room 121 is only 3.70 m.

21 At the time of excavation in Square A3, two rooms were identified (R2 and R3;Daviau 1992: fig. 3), one on either side of a north-south wall (W1012). These rooms,

Figure 6.11. Building 113 with relevant locus numbers for Strata VIIIB–A.

along the casemate wall system in Field B, it became apparent thatRoom 123 had first been in use in Stratum VIIIB in association withthe original casemate wall (Chapter 5). A series of beaten earth surfaceswere in position below the lowest course of Stratum-VIIIA Inner Wall

subsequently renumbered (R102 and R103; Daviau 1994: fig. 2), were assumed to bepart of a single Building (B100). With the removal of balks in 1995, it became apparentthat Room 102 constituted the eastern sector of Room 202.

–

1004. The level (923.23–923.21 masl) of the earliest surface (A3:31)in Room 123, along with that of Surface A2:31 in Doorway H ofCasemate Room 121 and of Surface A13:31 further east (see Room126), was consistent throughout the contiguous squares, suggesting thatthis extensive area of domestic activity adjacent to the fortificationsystem was all in use at the same time.

The western half of Room 123 is framed by Inner Casemate Wall1030 on the south, Wall 101222 on the west and the southern exteriorwall (W1011) of Building 102. The earliest surface (A3:31) which sealedup against all three walls is a packed earth floor of yellowish brown soil(10YR 5/4). Better understood is a second beaten earth surface (A3:30)which is marked by an accumulation of charcoal, 57 sheep/goat bones,1 chicken and 9 large mammal bones, (some mendable) and severalartefacts.

Table 6M. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 123


A3:30 cooking pot sherdsstorejar sherds302 ceramic sherdsgrinder (unreg) basaltpounder (unreg) chertserrated tooth TJ 65 shark3 whorls TJ 99 ceramic spindle whorls (+2 unreg)animal bones

Surface A3:30 may have extended across the east half of Room 123and continued as Surface A13:40 in Room 126, the principal room inuse during Stratum VIIIB.

An accumulation of friable soil (A3:25+22) covering Surface A3:30also contained abundant faunal remains consisting of 141 sheep/goatbones, 2 of which were burned, 5 large mammal, 2 pig, and 1 birdbone. In addition to the ceramic repertoire (561 sherds), there were 7reworked sherds. Although it is not yet clear where the eastern perime-ter of Room 123 was located, Debris Layer A13:26 appears to sealthe Stratum-X collapse (A13:29, 32) and extend the full length (north-south) of Square A13 east of the east balk of Square A3. Within thisdebris there were 509 ceramic sherds, 2 upper loaf-shaped millstones,

22 See discussion of Room 102+202 for description of Wall 1012.

2 ceramic spindle whorls (TJ 90, 91), 1 unfinished whorl, and a largenumber of animal bones (3 donkey, 3 cow, 2 pig, 24 large mammal,and 130 sheep/goat). This assemblage of ceramic sherds, artefacts andanimal bones in A13:26 appears to be a continuation of the food prepa-ration and/or consumption activities in Room 123 represented by Sur-faces A3:30 and A3:31.

Evidence for the final Stratum VIIIB occupation phase in Room123 is most clearly seen at the top of Soil Layer A3:22. Here a row ofcobbles (A3:12) runs along the east face of Wall 1012 at the point wherethe stone foundation (A3:18) is covered by mud bricks (A3:11). Thisconstruction feature, seen already in Casemate Room 201, as well asalong the north face of Outer Wall 3006 and Inner Wall 3000 (Chapter5), appears to mark the point at which a surface meets a wall. Theassociated Stratum-VIIIB Surface (A3:15) of hard-packed beaten earthjoins plaster Surface A3:10, which runs under Inner Wall 1004 intoCasemate Room 121.

Room 126The largest excavated space in Building 113 is Room 126, which in-cludes the same area as Stratum-VIIIA Room 106, and is adjacent toRoom 123. Apart from Inner Casemate Wall 1020, no other walls canbe assigned to this room. The earliest surface (A13:40) was exposedat the point where it runs under Stratum-VIIIA Inner Casemate Wall1010, adjacent to Doorway H. Immediately east of this doorway wasan ash accumulation (A13:31), probably a cooking area, although therewas no evidence for an oven in use with this surface.23

The most clearly defined surface (A13:30) in the centre of Room126 is a beaten earth floor that seals up against a hearth (A13:34) con-structed out of mud bricks. The hearth is founded on earthen SurfaceA13:41, which was itself stained with ash. Evidence for domestic activi-ties was preserved on Surface A13:30, which was also stained with ash,and was covered with several pieces of charcoal, 16 artefacts, more than500 pottery sherds and an intact red juglet (V102). This floor (A13:30)was severely damaged by rockfall (A13:39, 17), especially on the southand east sides, a pattern of collapse which suggests that the major wallsof Building 113 fell toward the northwest.

23 Excavation ended at this level in 1989; Surface A13:40 was only exposed alongthe north face of Wall 1020; it was not excavated through the west balk of Square A13to determine precisely its relationship with Room 123 further west.

–

Table 6N. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 126


A13:30+39 bowl V113 burnishedcooking pot sherdsjug V103, V124 V124=red slipjuglet V102=TJ 77 red slip486+ceramic sherdsweight TJ 70 basalt, perforated2 pestles TJ 63, V249 basalt2 grinders TJ 72, V251 sandstonemillstone TJ 252 upper loaf-shaped, basalt5 pounders TJ 62, 73, 74 chert5 metal points TJ 66, 68, 69, 71, 75 ironanimal bones

The hearth, cooking pot sherds and ground stone tools indicate theextensive food preparation activities which took place on this floor.This functional interpretation is supported by the faunal remains whichconsisted of 85 sheep/goat bones, 6 large mammal, 2 pig, and 2 cowbones. Although the presence of metal arrowheads and javelin pointsmay suggest the reason for the subsequent rebuilding of Wall 1020 (asW1010), and the apparently hasty construction of Wall 1004 west ofDoorway H, defence of the town is not the only possible explanationfor these finds.

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyWithin Building 113, Debris Layer A13:22 accumulated on SurfaceA13:30 in the southern and eastern sides of Room 126. This debrisprobably represents a collapsed ceiling along with fallen wall stones.This fill itself contained numerous artefacts, tools, ceramic vessel sherdsand animal bones associated with food preparation activities.

Table 6P. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 126, upper storey


A13:22 bowl V123 red slip842 ceramic sherds2 whetstones TJ 40, 42 42=sandstoneroller pestle TJ 41 limestonetray TJ 43 basaltgrinder TJ 46 basaltmillstone TJ 44 upper loaf-shaped, basaltsaddle quern TJ 253 basaltpounders TJ 47, 48 chert


2 metal points TJ 60, 61 ironspindle whorl TJ 92 ceramicsharpened sheep incisorworked flint fragment9 reworked sherdsanimal bones

The faunal remains consist of 173 sheep/goat bones, 3 donkey, 32 largemammal, and 2 cow bones. The location of this upper storey workarea within the confines of building 113 cannot be determined withina complete building plan, because no exterior walls were uncoveredin the excavated area, apart from Inner Casemate Wall 1020. Rockfall A13:39, apparently from a north-south wall along the east side ofRoom 126, accumulated in association with Soil Layer A13:22 in thenortheast corner of the square and represents the destruction of Room126 in Stratum VIIIB.

DestructionComparable debris (A13:29) accumulated on Surface A13:40, adjacentto cooking area A13:31.24 This area, just north of Doorway H wasseverely disturbed, probably at the time of construction of Stratum-VIIIA walls (W1010, W1009). Evidence for similar domestic activitieswas present in Casemate Room 121 to the south, and to the north ofthe doorway as far as the northeast corner of Room 123 where it meetsRoom 127, the only Stratum-VIIIB remains exposed in that area.

Room 127 (Fig. 6.11)Remains of Stratum VIIIB were only located in the southern half ofRoom 127. These remains consist of a soil layer (A13:26) which coversthe Stratum-X remains in the deep probe (Chapter 4) and constitutesa fill under the Stratum-VIIIA occupation of Room 107. This fill wasmost probably contemporary with Stratum-VIIIB Surface A13:30 and

24 It is difficult to interpret these debris layers, since there is no preserved evidencefor ceilings in this area. The buildings were not burned and, as a result, ceiling materialwas not consolidated. When the ceilings collapsed, the soil they contained covered thelower floor surface forming make-up for a new (Stratum-VIIIA) surface, but did notretain its character as a ceiling. This situation is common in several buildings at TallJawa, and is in contrast to the archaeological record at Khirbat al-Mudayna (Thamad),where two layers of hardened ceiling material could be easily identified (Chadwick,Daviau and Steiner 2000:262).

–

the collapsed debris above it, although this was not determined duringexcavation because a subsidiary balk was left in place for safety sake.The presence of 2 spindle whorls (TJ 90, 91), 2 upper loaf-shaped mill-stones (unregistered), 500+ceramic sherds and 130 sheep/goat bonesindicates a continuation of domestic activities, either of food prepara-tion as in Room 126 further east, or the discarding of domestic refuse.Because of the disturbed nature of this debris, it is not clear whetherwe are dealing with ceiling collapse, or with the remains of the lowerstorey surface. Room 127 represents the space between Building 102and Room 126 in Building 113.

Stratum VIIIA (Fig. 6.11)

Evidence for the collapse of the Stratum-VIIIB Inner Casemate Wall(W1020 and W1030) was evident along its entire length on the southside of the tell (Chapter 4). Fallen stones covered Stratum-VIIIB floorsand the work of reconstruction disturbed these debris layers and theunderlying occupational remains. The end of occupational use of thefood preparation area in Room 123 was marked by the collapse (A3:20)of the mud brick superstructure (W1011) of Wall 1012 above Sur-face A3:15. This collapse may have occurred at the same time as thecollapse of Outer Wall 1003 and Inner Casemate Wall 1020, whichboth fell onto Debris Layer A2:13 in Casemate Room 121, and werelater sealed by Debris Layer A2:11. This fill extended from the northside of collapsed Wall 1003 to the south side of Inner Wall 1020 andcontinued through Doorway H into Building 113 (as Loci A2:28 and13:25).

Into the debris caused by the collapse of Stratum-VIIIB Inner Wall1020, and the construction of Inner Wall 1010, several new wallswere built east and north of Doorway H. These walls (W1009+1014,W1013) framed a series of rooms that lay to the east of Building 102.Although these rooms (R103, R106, R107, R108) constitute only thepartial remains of a larger complex, they are still assigned to Building113. The association of Casemate Room 101 with Building 113 isless clear than in the previous phase, although Surface A2:29 mayrepresent the latest occupational level. Better preserved is the evidencefor occupation in Stratum-VIIIA Rooms 106, R107 and R108.

Figure 6.12. Pithoi smashed on floor in Room 106, around Mortar A13:23.

Room 106 (Fig. 6.11, 12)Rooms 106 and R108 shared a major north-south wall (W1009 and1014) constructed immediately east of Doorway H. For a distance of5.50 m, this pier-and-cobblestone wall (1009), founded on Soil LayerA13:22, formed the western perimeter of Room 106. North of thatpoint, Wall 1014 appears to be constructed in boulder-and-chink styleand is bonded to east-west Wall 1013 that forms the north wall ofRoom 106. In its construction, Wall 1009 shared some characteristicswith Walls 1005 and W1008 in Building 102, notably in the size ofits boulder pillars or pillar bases, which were the full thickness of thewall (0.60–0.70 m). At the same time, Wall 1009 differed from thesewalls (W1005, W1008) in the use of full-width cobblestone wall sectionsbetween the boulders. In this way, Wall 1009 is closer in style to Wall3007 in Building 300 (Chapter 7, Figs. 7.19, 22).

Doorways into Room 106 from Room 103 on the west probablyled through Wall 1009 between certain well-spaced pillar bases. Forexample, at the south end, the distance between the last known pillarbase and Inner Wall 1010 was 2.00 m,25 while the space at the northend was 1.00 m, a reasonable size opening for a doorway.

25 Serious disturbance of this area due to the location of the deep probe may havedislocated a pillar base located ca. 1.00 m north of the inner wall (W1010).

–

The principal occupation phase in Room 106, is represented bya beaten earth floor partially paved with cobblestones (A13:12+21).Embedded in this surface and centrally placed was a large bouldermortar (D 45 cm; A13:23) surrounded with chink stones (Figs. 6.12,10.8). The mortar was used in association with 2 chert pounders,a broken basalt millstone, 13 ceramic disks, ceramic spindle whorls,and numerous ceramic vessels, all Iron Age II in style. The heaviestconcentration of vessels consisted of a row of pithoi along the west andnorth sides of Room 106 (Fig. 6.12).

Table 6Q. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 106


A13:12, 21 bowl V115 red slip, hemisphericalbowl V118krater V126 red slipcooking pot V135 miniature9+pithoi V137–139, V144–149jug V105 no slip, paintedjug V122 red slipjuglet V101 red slip, intact4 juglets V106, V107,

V108, V110 3=red slip2,568 ceramic sherdsshell pendant TJ 3326 Glycymerispestle TJ 12 basalt2 grinders TJ 29, 32 basaltmetal point TJ 30 iron5 whorls TJ 78, 79, 80, 92, 95 ceramic spindle whorls

Among the ceramic vessels found smashed in situ in Room 106 wasa complete juglet (V101) which was a twin to the earlier one foundon Surface A13:30 (V102). These small flat bottomed juglets are com-mon throughout the Stratum-VIII ceramic corpus while dipper juglets,common at Palestinian sites (for example, at Hazor; Yadin et al. 1960:pl. LXXXVI:7–15) and in the Jebel Nuzha and Madaba tomb mate-rial (Dornemann 1983: fig. 25:8–15), are unknown. This was unex-pected given their usefulness for extracting a small amount of liquidfrom larger jars. This was clearly their use at Tell Miqne where Indus-trial Building 1 yielded 25 dipper juglets, and Industrial Building 2,10 dipper juglets (Gitin 1989: Tables 1–4). Among the storage ves-

26 For a study of the shell material from Tall Jawa, see Reese (2002).

sels, the most distinctive characteristics of the pithoi from Room 106is their height (up to 1.10 m tall), and the fact that at least three vesselswere perforated, each with two holes located approximately one halfof the distance from base to rim.27 Perforated jars or kraters were usedat Iron Age Tell Miqne in the production of olive oil (Gitin 1990: 38;1989: 39) and at Tell Hadidi, Syria, during the Late Bronze Age in theproduction of beer (Dornemann 1981: fig. 3:2, 3.; Gates 1988:66–68).The storejars from Gibeon that Pritchard thought were used to storewine28 during fermentation in underground cellars were perforated atthe shoulder but differed from the Tall Jawa pithoi in that they mea-sured only ca. 0.70 m (Pritchard 1964: 25; fig. 32:8). Unfortunately,no parallels to the Tall Jawa jars have been published that have simi-lar holes, so that we cannot exclude the possibility that the holes wereformed accidentally at the time of the room’s collapse.29

Ridged-neck hippo style storejars, which also served as liquid storagecontainers, were found in association with the pithoi, jugs, small jugsand juglets. Such an assemblage suggests a considerable amount ofliquid storage along with food processing and preparation.30

Room 108 (Fig. 6.11)The northern limit of Room 106 is marked by east-west Wall 1013which forms the south wall of Room 108. This wall was built of tworows of small and medium size boulders and small cobble-size (0.06–0.25 m) chink stones and measures 0.60–0.70 m thick. It remainsstanding for only 1–2 courses in height above cobbled surfaces A13:12in Room 106 and Surface A14:15. As such, it appears to be an exampleof a stone foundation wall whose superstructure was not preserved.31

The second major wall (W1014) of Room 108 is a party wall sharedwith Room 107 on the west. Although Wall 1014 appears to havebeen a continuation of Wall 1009, it is built of boulder-and-chink

27 For a study of the forming techniques employed to produce these pithoi, seeDaviau (1995).

28 Cross accepts Pritchard’s initial identification of the jars as containers for wine(1962:18).

29 The suggestion that pithoi used to store oil were coated with plaster on theirexterior to reduce loss and discoloration (Artzy 1987:3) was not borne out at TallJawa, even though several pithoi were stained yellowish-green on their interior surface,indicating oil residue.

30 L. E. Toombs (oral communication, July 24, 1990) has suggested that the pithoicould have been used as settling vessels in the process of wine making.

31 The preserved top of Wall 1013 was ca. 0.23 m below topsoil in Square A14.

–

construction, ca. 0.60 m thick, rather than of boulder pillar bases. Wall1014 bonds with Wall 1013 at the corner where pillared Wall 1009abuts them on the south. It does appear, however, that these walls areall part of the same structure (Building 113).

In Room 108, the principal floor is a partially plastered (A14:14)cobbled Surface (A14:15), which extends north from Wall 1013. Whileit is likely that the entire floor was originally plastered, there is insuf-ficient preservation to make this assumption. Scattered across FloorA14:15 (+14+16), and in the superimposed debris layer (A14:12) werenumerous mendable ceramic vessels and artefacts.

Table 6R. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 108


A14:12 bowl V125 hemispherical, red slip2 bowls V124, V136 red slipbowl V118 smudged2 saucers V129, V130 red slipcooking pot sherdsjug V136juglets V116, V117lamp V172=TJ 225680 ceramic sherdsbow drill bit TJ 108 bronzepolishing tool TJ 240 stoneraw materials TJ 131, 132, 257 pink quartzraw materials TJ 239 porphyrysmall trough TJ 140 rectangular, limestonegrinder TJ 129 basalt, miniaturesaddle quern TJ 141 basalt2 pounders TJ 121, 174 chert4 metal points TJ 109, 115, 150, 241 ironspindle whorl TJ 118, 202 ceramicoven V169 inverted pithos

The bow drill bit (TJ 108) and the small, semi-precious stones indicatean area of craft activity, probably related to jewellery making. Theremaining finds are more typical of food preparation and cooking,probably associated with Oven A14:25, located in the southeast corner.

Oven A14:25 (Fig. 6.13): Just past the east end of Wall 1013 was ashallow depression cut into Floor A14:15. Set into the depression wasthe inverted shoulder, neck and rim of a pithos (V169) that served as an

Figure 6.13. Pithos Oven A14:25.

oven. Inside the pithos, which was discoloured by burning, additionalsherds appear to form a partial liner, although they may merely havebroken off from the upper body.32 A layer of packed sherds fills theneck to form the floor or cooking surface of the oven. At its upperedge, Oven A14:25 measured 54.00 cm-close to the standard shouldermeasurement of ca. 50.00–52.00 cm for pithoi found in Room 106.On the outside of the oven, cobblestones (A24:9) seal up against itsshoulder where a single flue is cut through the ceramic. The flue is anoval opening (5.50×9.30 cm) located 13.00 cm from the rim. The totalpreserved height of the oven itself is 26.70 cm. This style of oven issimilar to two pithos ovens found in Room 222 in Building 100, southof Building 102 (Daviau 1992:148–149; pl. I.1).33

32 With the discovery of additional ovens, it became apparent that the base ofthe pithos was removed from the vessel, and the cut edge formed the rim of theoven when it was inverted. In the case of Oven A14:25, the upper edge was badlydamaged, suggesting that it had suffered during the destruction of Room 108 and fromsubsequent deep ploughing.

33 Ovens of this same style were also found in Room 222 and R319, see discussionbelow.

–

North of Oven A14:25 is a rectangular depression (A24:7) with acobblestone perimeter. Due to the dearth of finds in the immediatearea of Installation A24:7, its function was not determined. What wasevident is that the paved floor Surface (A14:15) in Room 108 did notextend east of Oven A14:25 and Installation A24:7 into Room 112.

Room 112The easternmost Room (R112) in Building 113 was only exposed inthe southwest corner of Square A24 (3.00 m east-west ×3.35–4.90m north-south), in order to leave in place the modern property wall(A24:2) which runs diagonally through the Square. In line with OvenA14:25 and Installation A24:7 is a single limestone boulder (A24:8)that may mark the northern end of both Rooms 108 and R112. Thisboulder was probably one in a line of similar ceiling supports or pillarbases comparable to those of Wall 3013 in Building 300 (Chapter7). The presence of this boulder pillar is evidence that Building 113extends north of the excavation area, probably as far as Wall 1028which runs east from the northeast corner of Building 102. At the sametime, boulder Pillar A24:8 may indicate the trajectory of the east wallof Room 106.34 Segments of this wall appear to have been robbed outca. 2.00 m north of the south balk and again at 3.00 m north.

The most significant find in Room 112 is a limestone roof roller(TJ 229), which fell into the room when the ceiling collapsed (A24:5).The presence of a roof roller, clear sign of roofed space, is especiallyimportant here where the major support walls are missing or wererobbed out. Evidence for one such wall is seen in the collapse of cobblesand boulders (A24:4) partially excavated in the centre of Square A24.Included in the collapse were fragments of a chert rod (TJ 147), a basaltgrinder (TJ 152), ceramic spindle whorls (TJ 154, 159), and a saddlequern (TJ 170).

Room 107 (Fig. 6.11)The Iron Age II occupation preserved in Room 107 can be sepa-rated into two field phases, the earlier of which may have precededthe Stratum-VIIIA surface (A13:12/21) uncovered in Rooms 106 andR108 on the east. The primary evidence is the sequence of construc-tion for Walls 1014 and 1009, with the latter abutting the former. For

34 Boulder Pillar A24:8 lines up well with the wall collapse (A13:39) exposed inRoom 106.

the purposes of this discussion, Room 107 will be limited to the spacewest of Wall 1014, while Room 103 to the south remains assigned tothe space adjacent to Wall 1009. The west wall of Room 107 was theexterior, east wall (W1006) of Building 102. Although no north wallwas exposed, Wall 1014 appears to end opposite Doorway F into Room109 of Building 102, possibly to form the south jamb of a doorway. Thesouthern limit of Wall 1014 is marked by the presence of a single boul-der (A14:31) that may have been a component in a cross wall at thenorth end of Wall 1009.

In Stratum VIII, a series of superimposed surfaces (A14:24, 20,17 and 6) seal against the west side of Wall 1014. The earliest loci(A14:24, 20) seal against a stone-lined Installation/Bin (A14:22) andextend south along the wall to meet boulder A14:31. The installationconsists of an L-shaped wall line (W1017), which is built on beatenearth Surface A14:24, and continues in use with Surface A14:20. InsideInstallation A14:21 is a hard-packed floor (A14:27), which seals againstWall 1014. Above the floor, the soil within the installation consists ofa layer of wind-blown soil (A14:22) which suggests that this area mayhave been open or unroofed at some time during antiquity. A similarfeature, rectangular in shape, was reported from Gezer (Stratum 8A,Field II). Here again, a single row of cobbles, 1 course high, marks offan “area” whose precise function remains unclear (Wright, Dever andLance 1970:59).35

Surface A14:24 extends west and seals against Wall 1006 of Building102. This connection indicates that Building 102, built in Stratum IXwas still in use with this surface and with Wall 1014. The compositionof Surface A14:24 was beaten earth and scattered small cobbles. InRoom 107, a pumice pendant (TJ 155), 2 grinders, one basalt (TJ210) and the other limestone (TJ 209), a spindle whorl (TJ 212) anda representative collection of Iron Age II pottery sherds were spreadacross the floor and embedded in the overlying soil layer (A14:23). Athird grinder (TJ 193), this one of sandstone, was located in the fill(A14:22) inside Installation A14:21.

35 Dever (Wright et al. 1970:59) assumed that the presence of a tabun (1069) inthis area “proved” that it was an open courtyard rather than a roofed room. This issurprising in view of the size of the area (2.6 ×4.5 m), and the fact that it was boundedby walls on all sides and had a doorway to another area that also contained a tabun(L. 1087; Plan XIII). See Rogers (1989:356, rpt of 1862) who describes a typical one-room house with cooking installations inside the house and soot stained walls. Also seethe arguments by Daviau (1993: 449–52) for the use of closed rooms for cooking.

–

A second use of Room 107 is represented by Surface A14:20, also abeaten earth surface with scattered cobbles. On Surface A14:20, therewas a group of artefacts including one spindle whorl and two groups offlat-lying Iron Age II ceramic sherds. Within overlying Debris LayerA14:17 was a ceramic zoomorphic bull(?) vessel (TJ 139) decoratedwith red slip and black painted bands. Only the head, shoulders andsherds from the torso were preserved. Although the best example of itskind, it was not unique at Tall Jawa.36

Table 6S. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 107, late phase


A14:17+20 725+ceramic sherdsawl/needle TJ 149 bronzemortar bowl TJ 151 basaltmillstone TJ 204 lower, basaltpounder TJ 201 chertbull vessel TJ 139 ceramic2 whorls TJ 167, 211 ceramic spindle whorls

The small number and the types of finds from these loci suggest awork area or craft centre. This corresponds to the finds from Room108 where stones for the manufacture of jewellery and a bow drill bitwere in use. Such activities may be appropriate in this southern sectorof the town that also included an extensive cooking area (R202) and anarea where ground stone tools were refashioned (R211).

The artefacts on Surface A14:20 and their associated ceramic vesselswere in use together before the latest Stratum-VIIIA surface (A14:6)was laid. This layer of cobblestones may have been part of a pavementduring the final use phase of Room 107, when it was converted intoan alleyway leading south to the entrance (Doorway H) into CasemateRoom 101. On Surface A14:6 was a basalt grinder (TJ 236), a chertpounder (TJ 117), and almost 800 Iron Age II ceramic sherds. Inthe topsoil layer covering these northern rooms of Building 113, therewere remains of 2 storejars (V126, V170) and 2 jugs (V131, V132),providing clear evidence that modern ploughing has severely disturbedthe archaeological record.

36 Another example (TJ 1900), lacking the red slip and paint, was recovered fromBuilding 700, which also yielded a badly damaged head with a spout through themuzzle (TJ 1286). For a typological study of zoomorphic vessels from Tall Jawa, seeDaviau (2001:73–79)

Figure 6.14. Building 100 in Fields A–B, showing position of ovens.

BUILDING 100

Located between the Stratum-VIIIB Inner Casemate Wall (W1030)and the south exterior wall (W1011+2020) of Building 102 is a singlerow of rooms designated Building 100 (Fig. 6.14). Room 123, describedabove, is better understood as part of Building 113 even though thedisruption of this area during the rebuilding of Inner Casemate Walls1004 and W1010 severely disturbed the evidence that could clarifythe stratigraphic links with Room 106 in Building 113. West of Room103/123 are two rooms (R102/122+202/222 and R225) that servedas a large food preparation and cooking area (3.00×9.50 m).37 Room122 is blocked on the east by a north-south wall (W1012) that runsbetween the inner casemate wall and Building 102, while on the westWall 2014 serves as the limit of Room 225.

37 Originally these rooms were numbered Rooms 102 and 202 (Daviau 1994: fig. 2).With the refinement of the numbering system, all rooms associated with the Stra-tum VIIIB Inner Casemate Wall were given numbers in the range 120–129. Wherethis distinction was not possible, the original numbers were retained.

–

Figure 6.15. Building 100, with relevant locus numbers, Stratum VIII.


Excavation began in Square A3 in 1989 and exposed almost the entirearea of Room 102/122. In 1991, excavation immediately west ofSquare A3 was located in Square B63. This square included a sec-tion of the inner casemate wall (W1030), Casemate Room 201, andRoom 202/222, to the north. During the 1995 season, excavation inthe western rooms of Building 102 clarified the sequence of walls asso-ciated with Room 102+202. It is possible that this large room wasoriginally part of Building 102, although the latest repair of south Wall1011+2020 of Building 102 cut this area off from the final phase ofoccupation in B102. In the rooms themselves, two occupation phaseswere identified, although they do not fit neatly into Stratum VIIIAand VIIIB. What is certain is that the earliest floors were in use withthe Stratum VIIIB inner casemate wall (W1030).

Room 122 (Fig. 6.15, 16)East Wall 1012 consists of two rows of small and medium boulders inboulder-and-chink construction.38 This wall, preserved to a height offour courses (0.60–0.80 m), appears to serve as the foundation for a

38 This is the same wall that served as the west wall of Room 103 (see above).

Figure 6.16. Room 122 with Wall 1012 above Surface A3:29.

mud brick superstructure (A3:11). The lowest stone course was set onbeaten earth Surface A3:29, which was exposed only in Room 122.Wall 1012 abutted the south wall (W1011) of Building 102 at a levelthat demonstrates the priority of Building 102. On the south end, thesituation is less certain, because Wall 1012 runs under Inner CasemateWall 1004 and appears to have been built over by Inner Wall 1030in Stratum VIIIB (Room 121, above). Although exposed only on thenorth of Inner Casemate Wall 1030, Surface A3:29, along with Wall1012, may have been contemporary with Surface A2:31 in CasemateRoom 121 on the south, since both floors were at the same absolutelevel (923.22–923.23 masl).39 On the west, Room 122 opens into Room222, an area of ovens and hearths (2.80×7.75 m). The west wall ofthis large area is Wall 2014, a two row boulder-and-chink wall that alsoserves as the east wall of Room 203 (see B204, below).

39 Whether these surfaces had been in use during Stratum IX was not establisheddue to the end of excavation in Room 103 at Surface A3:31 and in R102 at SurfaceA3:29, both Stratum VIII floors. The amount of red slipped and burnished vessels inBuilding 100 suggests a somewhat later phase than the construction and first use ofBuilding 102.

–

Smashed on Surface A3:29 and resting against the south wall(W1011) of Building 102 was a red slipped, bent-sided bowl (V120)40

with burnishing on the rim. Additional vessels and artefacts probably inuse on this floor were attributed to an overlying surface (A3:28) also ofbeaten earth. Both hard-packed surfaces (A3:29, 28) consist of soil thatis dark greyish brown (10YR 4/2), and stained throughout by ash fromthe cooking and food preparation activities which apparently occurredhere over an extended period of time. The depth of Surface A3:28 was0.09–0.20 m deep with the greatest ash accumulation on its uppermostsurface. On this surface also, there were artefacts related to food prepa-ration and consumption; the finds from both surfaces are presentedtogether in Table 6T.

Table 6T. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 122, earlier phase


A3:28+29 shallow bowl V120 red slipcooking pot V153256 ceramic sherdsmillstone TJ 53 upper loaf-shaped, basaltsaddle quern TJ 59 basalt2 pounders TJ 51+1 unreg cherttabun fragmentsanimal boneslithic fragments

The artefacts on Surface A3:28 consist of the typical tools for food pro-cessing, preparation and cooking. Although the basalt saddle quern andupper millstone were both broken, numerous examples of such toolsin situ indicate that they continued in use. These were accompaniedby two chert pounding stones (Daviau 2002:297–313) and numerousfragments of a clay oven. While the outline of the oven could not bedefined with absolute clarity, it appeared to be located against the westside of Wall 1012. Also present on Surface A3:28 were faunal remains(55 sheep/goat—1 burned, and 2 large mammal bones), ashes, and 24lithic fragments. All of the pottery can be dated to the early Iron II andIron II periods.

A similar food preparation area on Surface A3:24 was located imme-diately above Surface A3:28 in Room 122. Surface A3:24 was also

40 Bent-sided bowls is the designation for bowls with a single change of direction inthe body wall. The term “carination” is used for vessels with two changes of direction.

stained with ash (10YR 5/2, greyish brown), although there was noclear evidence of an oven. The surface of this floor was disturbed byclumps of nari that were also present in later loci (see A3:23, below).The presence of cooking pots and of numerous animal bones (161sheep/goat, 2 cow, and 8 large mammal bones) indicates clearly thatSurface A3:24 was used for cooking. Additional artefacts, along withseveral stone tools, suggest that food preparation and spinning werealso carried out in Room 122.41

Table 6U. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 122, later phase


A3:23,24 2 bowls V119, 121 inverted rimbowl V152 red slip, hemisphericalcooking pot V187, 188 +sherds907 ceramic sherdsraw materials TJ 52 carneliangrinder TJ 49 basaltcube grinder TJ 50 miniature, basaltmillstone TJ 45 upper loaf-shaped, basaltspindle whorl TJ 247 ceramiclithic fragments

The position of Soil Layer A3:23 in Room 102, just below the found-ing level of Wall 1004, and the presence of ash layers, fragments of aclay oven, cooking pots, small bowls, and animal bones (32 sheep/goatand 2 large mammal), suggests that this locus was an accumulationof debris, or a collapsed ceiling, above the earlier cooking area. Thissoil layer (A3:23) was disturbed by the presence of large amounts ofwhite (5YR 8/1) plaster (A3:21) and 125 pieces of chert flakes, evidencewhich suggests that this material was produced during the constructionof the new inner casemate wall (W1004), probably the result of trim-ming the wall stones.42 Additional evidence for this Stratum-VIIIA con-struction is present at the south end of the stone foundation of Wall1012, which was cut down to form a foundation trench. A second,shallow foundation trench which cut into the upper courses of Wall

41 While the small number of registered finds does not allow for statistical analysis,the same range of finds in greater numbers in Building 300 allow for distribution studiesand the identification of activity areas.

42 This interpretation was suggested by L. T. Geraty, July 1989. The same phe-nomenon is seen in Debris Layer A3:8 in Room 103 where 303 chert fragments wererecorded.

–

1012 at its north end is the only evidence to suggest the reconstructionat the same time of Wall 1011 along the south side of Building 102.While comparable evidence does not exist for the east wall (W1006) ofBuilding 102, it is clear that these earlier walls (W1006 and W1007),were both still in use during this latest phase. Following repairs to Walls1004 and W1011, mud brick material was packed into the founda-tion trenches at both ends of Wall 1012, although the reason for thisremains unclear, unless it was just a matter of levelling off the collapseddebris and re-establishing an east wall for Room 102.

Room 102No living surfaces were preserved in Room 102 following the construc-tion of the Stratum-VIIIA inner casemate wall (W1004). Instead, adeep (0.25–0.30 m) layer (A3:17, 8, 5) of soil, broken pottery and arte-facts appears to represent the collapse of upper storey rooms, possiblyfrom Building 102, at the end of Stratum VIIIB. In Room 102, therewas an accumulation of ash (A3:6; 1.10 × 1.30 m in size), which waslocated in Soil layer A3:5. Although few bones were associated with thislocus (5 sheep/goat), botanical remains were plentiful and consisted ofbarley, wheat, lentil, coriander, sweet helby, olive pit, and green bean.43

This ash concentration was surrounded by a compact soil layer (A3:5),which may represent the final accumulation before modern times. Allassociated pottery was Iron II or earlier, suggesting that this fireplacewas in use subsequent to the abandonment of the town (see below).

Room 202/222 (Figs. 15, 17)To the west of Room 102/122 is Room 202/222, an area with sixovens in use over a period of time.44 The sequence of floor levels andthe evidence of two flues in the largest oven (B63:30) point to the use ofthis room in Stratum VIIIB and possibly in Stratum VIIIA as well.At the same time, the exact contemporaneity of all phases of theseovens with Stratum VIIIB surfaces in R122 was not demonstratedunivocally, although the continuation of surface A3:28 was reached in1995 in the east balk of Square B63 (B63:53). For greater clarity, the

43 Processing of botanical remains was carried out by R. Hubbard of the MadabaPlains Project. These were subsequently revised by R. Low (report unavailable).

44 With additional excavation in the east balk of Square B63 during the 1993 and1995 seasons, it became clear that there was no north-south cross wall separating thetwo rooms.

Figure 6.17. South half of Room 202 with ovens andPartition Wall 2019; Inner Casemate Wall 1004 on right.

earlier installations (east to west) will be presented first, followed bya discussion of overlying installations and of those ovens that showedevidence of reuse.45

The earliest Stratum-VIIIB occupation level is represented on theeast end of Room 222 by Surface B63:53(=A3.28+29), which wasexposed in a very limited area (1.00×2.00 m). One artefact, a small,round basalt mortar (TJ 1819) embedded in the overlying soil layer(B63:54), identifies the surface as a continuation of the food processingarea located in Room 122. Soil Layer B63:54 served later as the under-lying support for Oven B63:40, which was in use with overlying SurfaceB63:46, a bright red mud brick surface (5YR 5/8)46 which covers the

45 A detailed preliminary report (Daviau 1992:148–149) presented the results of the1991 season. Removal of the east balk in 1993 and 1995 revealed the remainder ofOven B63:40. Presented here are refinements to the stratigraphic sequence and a fullerdescription of Oven B63:40.

46 The brick material (B63:46) itself contains lumps of nari, chert chips, and char-

–

Figure 6.18. Oven B63:29 on left; Hearth B63:32 on right.

eastern half of Room 222. Surface B63:46 was baked hard by the pres-ence of overlying ovens and strained with ash and charcoal. This ashstained surface may be contemporary with soil and ash Layer A3:24 inRoom 122 on the east, as both were in use with Inner Casemate Wall1030.

In the western half of Room 202/222, Surface B63:46 continuesas Surface B63:44, a hard-packed beaten earth floor stained grayishbrown with ash (10YR 5/2). Surface B63:44 runs up to a stone par-

coal, evidence that the soil used to make this floor was collected from the debris thatresulted from trimming the stones for Wall 1030.

tition wall (W2019); west of this short wall is Room 225, a small areaadjacent to the oven room.47

Oven B63:40: Located at the east end of Room 222 is a pithos oven(B63:40) in position against the west face of a row of support stones(B63:51), mud plaster (B63:52), and brick material (B63:50).48 OvenB63:40 was installed on a hard-packed beaten earth surface (B63:53),and consists of an inverted pithos, ca. 0.55 m in diameter at the shoul-der, with its base cut off. This pithos (B63:49)49 was wedged in placewith 5 cobblestones (B63:48) packed with plaster, forming a circle 0.71m in diameter to allow space for the handles.50 Partially fired clay,orange in colour, fills the rim where it is embedded in the underlyingfill.

The pithos oven (B63:40) contains small amounts of ash and plaster(B63:47), and a lump of iron. In addition, there is an accumulationof very black, oily material (B63:39) that might be decayed organicmatter (saved for future analysis), and an inverted cooking pot filledwith white chalky lime.51 These contents were sealed with clay thatserved as the support for a second oven (B63:37), also formed froman inverted vessel.

Oven B63:37: Put in position above the fill within Oven B63:40 wasan inverted storejar (V218; hippo style), with an interior rim diameterof 8.00 cm. Little can be said about this poorly preserved installation,except that sherds of the storejar were concentrated on Surface B63:46along with a deposit of ash (B63:45), ca. 0.14 m deep, that extendsacross Room 222 between Ovens B63:37 and B63:36 and Hearth

47 The function of Room 225 is incomplete, due in part to the fact that the northbalk was left in place; only the southern half of Rooms 222 and 225 were excavated tofloor level.

48 Excavated during three seasons (1991, 1993, 1995) in the east balk of Square B63,this feature is less well understood than the ovens excavated during the 1991 season.

49 Each oven was given a locus number which represents the entire installation(B63:40). The pithos used as the oven wall, the fill inside the pithos, the support stones,and the plaster also have their own numbers (B63:47, 49, 48, 51, 52, etc.), since themeasurements and composition of each component is recorded on a separate locussheet for greater control.

50 The oven was damaged following the end of the 1991 season, but the handles andshoulder sherds were recovered in place.

51 The presence of lime and lithic debitage may indicate repair to the inner case-mate wall.

–

B63:32. Above this installation, in the East balk of Square B63, is adeep (ca. 0.38 m) ash accumulation or firepit (B63:47), 0.50 m in diam-eter, containing fragments of mudbrick and pockets of plaster. Withinthe ash, there was a piece of oak and lumps of camel dung containingchaff.52

Oven B63:36 (Fig. 6.15): West of Oven B63:37, another storejar oven(B63:36) was built up against Inner Wall 1030 and founded on mudbrick Surface B63:46. In position on this surface is a broken, basaltsaddle quern (B63:43=TJ 226; 0.35 ×0.37× 0.09 m thick), that formsthe base rock for the oven. An inverted storejar (V219) with a rimmeasuring 10.8 cm in diameter was placed on the quern and the upperpart of the jar was surrounded with 12 cobblestones and plaster. Thesestones form the upper edge of the oven while the jar forms the lowerwall. The oven is bonded for support with mud plaster to Wall 1030 onthe south. Both Ovens B63:36 and B63:37 were subsequently coveredby mud brick collapse (B63:22), putting these installations out of use.The storejars used as ovens are similar to one another in ware andform, with rims that identify these jars chronologically as Iron Age II,probably 9th–8th century.

Oven B63:32 (Fig. 6.18): Installation B63:32, constructed directly onSurface B63:46, is approximately 0.40 m north of Oven B63:36. Thisinstallation is an open hearth or fire pit formed of a circle of 10 mediumcobblestones and a reused basalt weight (TJ 222). The stones are par-tially sealed with mud plaster, which forms the floor of the hearth andwas itself covered by an accumulation of ash (B63:33), 0.05–0.10 mdeep. The original exterior measurement of Hearth B63:32 was 0.90–1.00 m. Flotation of Ash B63:33 yielded only one small animal tooth.53

Over time, ash and debris (B63:45) built up on Surface B63:46and a new floor surface (B63:41) was installed. As a result of thisaccumulation, certain ovens were modified and new installations wereconstructed and were in use long enough to stain Surface B63:41 withash and organic material. On this surface there was a ceramic spindle

52 P. Warnock conducted flotation analysis of samples from the 1993 season andidentified the wood as FAGACEAE, cf. Quercus.

53 Samples for flotation from the 1991 season were processed by D. Thomas and C.A. Cullingworth in 1995. Additional samples from these ovens, entrusted in 1992 toR. Low of the Madaba Plains Project, were not analyzed prior to publication; theywere returned to the project in 1999.

whorl (TJ 177), a basalt scraper (TJ 173), and an upper loaf-shapedmillstone (TJ 198).

Oven B63:29 (Fig. 6.18): Built over the eastern edge of Hearth B63:32is Oven B63:29, a free-standing installation, 0.31 m high and 0.42 min diameter at its base.54 It was carefully constructed on a flat stone(B63:31; 0.15×0.25 m) base. The stone itself is surrounded by a layerof clay (0.05–0.10 m. deep) that supports an inverted storage jar (V216).This jar is blackened on the interior and its fabric is very friable, dueto repeated exposure to heat. The base of the jar had been removedand the opening was surrounded by 15 stones, one reused from HearthB63:32. Inside this stone circle, there is packed clay (B63:19) and sev-eral storejar sherds that line the storejar and seal against the stones.The stone circle, thus formed, is also plastered on its outer face andmeasures 0.38 m at its upper edge. The circle appears to have a singleopening on the north side, where the stones form a narrow channel orflue. Flotation of material (B63:19) within B63:29 yielded only sherdsfrom the storejar oven, flint chips and pieces of plaster.

Oven B63:30 (Figs. 6.19, 20): The largest and best preserved oven(B63:30) is located near the west end of Room 222, east of PartitionWall 201955 and north of Inner Casemate Wall 1030. Partition Wall2019 was constructed of one row of small limestone and chert bouldersand stands 2–3 courses in height. It abuts Inner Wall 1030 and formsthe western limit of a work area adjacent to Oven B63:30. Leaningagainst Wall 1030, there was half of a cooking pot (V221), adjacent toa group of food processing tools and several animal bones.

Table 6V. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 222, earlier phase


B63:44 cooking pot V221133 ceramic sherds2 mortars TJ 192, 200 basalt, squarepestle TJ 203 limestonegrinder TJ 199 basaltanimal bones

54 This installation was damaged by vandalism before it could be excavated system-atically.

55 B63:28; see Daviau (1992:148).

–

Figure 6.19. Oven B63:30 with stones and plasteraround upper edge; plaster seals against Wall 1004.

Immediately east of these remains of food preparation activity isOven B63:30, which was installed in a depression cut through SurfaceB63:44. The rim of an inverted pithos (V217) was set in place on thishard-packed surface; the neck and shoulder were supported by stonesand soil, and a flue was cut in its shoulder. The oval flue hole is located7.00 cm from the rim and measures 4.50× 7.50 cm. The upper partof Oven B63:30 consists of the tapering body of the pithos, for a totalheight of ca. 53.00 cm. Eight flat stones (ca. 0.16×0.26 m), standing onend, surround the upper opening, where the base has been removed.The stones are in turn sealed with plaster to the outer surface of thepithos and to the north face of Inner Casemate Wall 1030.56

56 Although this type of oven is not common at sites in Cisjordan, there are severalexamples at Hazor that were constructed in the same way (Yadin et al. 1961: pls.

Figure 6.20. Oven B63:30 with pithos body and rim exposed.

Oven B63:30 measures 0.47 m inside the top opening, and 0.60–0.66 m on the outside (including the plaster and stones), while thelargest interior diameter across the shoulder was 0.53 m. The oven hada total interior depth of 0.46 m, from the preserved height of the stonesto the inverted pithos rim, and contained, at its lowest level, ca. 0.10 mof layered sherds (B63:17) which facilitated the circulation of heat insidethe oven. A basalt pestle (TJ 128) was on top of the layered sherdsalong with broken cooking pot sherds, and pieces of charcoal. Underthe sherds, in the neck of the pithos, there was an astragalus. Both theinterior of the pithos and the cooking pots were blackened, althoughno ash was found inside the oven. Additional cooking pot sherds werebroken against the outer east wall of Oven B63:30. Evidence for theuse of this oven comes from the friable condition of the pithos whichshowed repeated exposure to heat57 and from the heat-baked plasterand mud brick material surrounding it.

XVII:2, 4; XXIII:2). A full study of traditional and Iron Age ovens is in preparation(Daviau, ed.).

57 Traditional clay ovens still produced in Jordan today have a life span of only 3–4 years. One might suspect that a fired clay pithos might have a longer life since theoriginal fabric was prepared to withstand the high firing temperatures of the kiln.

–

Room 225Contemporary with these ovens was Room 225, a small work arealocated west of Partition Wall 2019. This small room (1.75× 3.00 m)fills the space between Partition Wall 2019 on the east, Inner CasemateWall 1030 on the south, north-south Wall 2014 on the west, and thesouth wall of Building 102 on the north (W2020). Wall 2014 runs northand seals against the plaster covering the southwest corner of Building102, thus providing good evidence for the building sequence of Rooms225 and 222. The principal surface (B63:35) excavated in Room 225 isof beaten earth and supported only one small mortar. This object mayvery well have been in use with the ground stone tools found at the westend of Room 222 (see Table 6V, above).

Stratum VIIIA

Room 202The clearest evidence for the reuse of Room 222 (as Room 202) duringStratum VIIIA is Oven B63:30, whose upper edge was plastered tothe lowest course of stones of Inner Casemate Wall 1004, and theconstruction of a new partition wall (W2018). Inner Wall 1004 wasbuilt on a line that was ca. 0.15 m north of Stratum-VIIIB Wall 1030.This overhang was especially noticeable on the south side of OvenB63:36 that is now below the level of the later wall. West of OvenB63:30, a north-south mudbrick wall (W2018) was keyed into a recessin the Inner Wall (W1004). Wall 2018 consists of cobblestones andbrick material that includes chips of flint, organic matter, and plaster,all hardened by the heat of the oven. This wall served as a windbreakand separated Room 202 from work area (R205) to the west.

Additional evidence for a second period of use for Oven B63:30 canbe identified by the presence of a second flue hole located 10.50 cmfrom the lower one. The need for an additional opening coincided witha rise in level of the floor in use with this oven. We can only assume thatthe cooking pot (V220) found in situ in the upper part of Oven B63:30dates to its final period of use. Additional broken cooking pots were inposition against the stones that formed the upper east edge of the oven.At this point, Oven B63:30 was resting against the north face of Wall1004.

In the eastern half of Room 202, an uneven accumulation of plaster(B63:25) built up on Soil Layer B63:34, which seals up against OvensB63:29, 32, 36 and 37. Adjacent to Wall 1030, Oven B63:36 was cov-

ered with a layer of brick material (B63:22) which may have been theremnants of wall collapse from the superstructure of Wall 1030, thatthen hardened in place due to heat from the oven. Additional remainsof this brick material (B63:20) is evident across Room 202, although theabsolute level of Oven B63:29 suggests that it may have been reusedwith Surface B63:20. Eventually, all of these ovens went out of use andwere sealed by a layer of collapse (B63:12). This soil contains lumpsof plaster or nari (B63:16), comparable to the accumulation (A3:23) inR122 that resulted from the trimming of limestone blocks to form Wall1004. Within this soil layer (B63:12) was a large ash pocket (B63:8,comparable to A3:6), suggesting reuse of this area at a later time (seebelow). Although far from certain, it is possible that these features werecontemporary with the latest use of Building 102, since all potteryforms from these loci were consistently Iron Age II.

The End of Iron Age Occupation in Field A–B

All of the Stratum-VIIIA surfaces and features within Buildings 113and B100 went out of use at the same time as the fortification system.In Building 113, the latest surfaces in Rooms 108 and R112 were cov-ered with rock fall (A14:11, 12, 16 and 24:4), which was sealed in itsturn by Debris Layers A14:5, 7 and 24:5. Immediately south in Room106, the clearest sign of the final destruction of Iron Age Jawa wasthe accumulated pottery smashed in situ against Wall 1009, spreadingacross the top of Mortar A13:23 and Floor A13:12/21.58 Deep accu-mulations of loess, along with pottery churned up by ploughing fromthe underlying occupation levels (A13:3, 4, 10), covered the remainsof Room 106. Within Soil Layer A13:10 was an unslipped and unbur-nished krater (V168), which may have been on an upper storey.

In Building 102, Locus B64:3, which probably represents a collapsedceiling, contained an exceptionally large number of ceramic sherds

58 Amid the wall collapse (A13:16) on the east side of Room 106 were two ironpoints (2074, 2076). Thirteen additional iron arrowheads were found outside the wallsystem, embedded in the nari Surfaces (A2:7, 9, 30) which sealed against the outerfoundation courses of Wall 1003. The location of these weapons, especially thoseoutside the fortification system strongly suggests an attack on the town, although itis not certain that this was the event which brought about the end of Stratum-VIIIoccupation. As suggested above, the weapons embedded in the glacis may testify tothe end of stratum IX and have nothing to do with the Stratum VIII–VII transition.Another possible explanation is earthquake.

–

(3369), chert flakes (258)59 and animal bones. This pattern of debrisis similar to that in all the rooms along Inner Casemate Wall 1004.The functional interpretation of this debris is more difficult, since itmay consist of the collapse of the rooms in the wall system. However,evidence for chronology is supplied by the ceramic remains, which areconsistent with middle Iron Age II(B) wares and forms comparable tothose from sealed loci, especially from the final phase in Building 300.

At or subsequent to the end of this occupation, Inner CasemateWalls 1004 and W1010 collapsed (Debris Layers A3:9 and A13:18),filling Doorway H in the casemate system, while Outer Wall 1002collapsed onto Surface A2:29 filling Casemate Room 101 with debris(A2:6). Probably at the same time, the stones of Walls 1011, W1005and W1008 in Building 102 slipped off their foundations and collapsednorth onto Debris Layers A4:12, 4:18 and 4:17 respectively.

Although the historical cause of Jawa’s destruction remains a mys-tery, there was no evidence of fire. No clear ash layers, comparable tothe accumulation in the deep sounding (Building 50), appears in thedebris that seals the upper parts of walls in Buildings 100, 102 and 113.While occupation continued, or resumed, in Fields C and D (Chap-ters 8, 9), no Stratum VII occupation took place in the excavated areaof Fields A–B adjacent to the casemate wall system, with the possibleexception of repairs to the wall system and some industrial activities.This may account for the presence of two basins (B44:4 and B53:11)positioned on Inner Casemate Wall 2007, above the south ends of Walls2014 and W2011 respectively (Chapter 5). The position of these basinssuggests that the inner wall was without a superstructure along its innerface at this point, or was part of a larger structure whose function is nolonger apparent.

Other anomalies in this area include an olive crushing stone (B44:20)at topsoil level, west of Room 207, and a smashed pithos adjacent toWall 2028, north of Work Area 211. The ware of this vessel was verybrittle, unlike any of the wares used to make the more than 50 pithoitypical of Stratum VIII (Daviau, in preparation).

59 The lithic finds from 1989 were identified as unworked and discarded by Schnur-renberger (Herr, personal communication). They may, however, represent debitageflaked off of the tools used to trim the stones of the Inner Casemate Wall.

STRATA VI–III

Some time after the final Iron Age destruction phase, a 1.00 m widefoundation trench (A3:13) was cut into Debris Layers A3:17 (in Room102) and A3:8 (in Room 103), as well as through the upper, mud brickcourses of Wall 1012. The continuation of this trench appears to berepresented in Pit A13:15, observed in the western balk of Square A13.Within the trench, large amounts of limestone detritus was exposed,possibly the result of repairs to the wall in Stratum VII, or possiblyduring construction of later structures on the tell in the Umayyadperiod, or even robbing of fallen wall stones in modern times.60

No evidence for Umayyad period (Stratum III) building activity inField A was identified,61 although a collapsed building north of mod-ern Wall 1032 may be an indication of the spread of occupation acrossthe tell during that period. Sherds identified as late Roman or Byzan-tine appeared in topsoil layers, probably spread by ploughing. Beforethe 1991 season, occupational remains on the tell from the Umayyadperiod were not recognized, with the result that all late Byzantine-stylepottery was identified as “Byzantine”, without making any allowancefor possible Umayyad occupation. Since no subsequent occupation(apart from Byzantine-Umayyad) occurred on the tell before modernagricultural activities began, it was a surprise to discover one Fatimidsherd from Topsoil Layer A3:3 (Pail 7).62

STRATUM I

The undisturbed appearance of the soil and surface vegetation on theslopes of the tell (A1:6=2:2, A2:1, A2:19, A3:1) and above the walls ofthe fortification system (W1002, W1004) in Field A seems to indicatethat this accumulation had changed little in the intervening millennia.Topsoil A2:19, with its covering vegetation, sealed up against displaced

60 The early 20th century AD settlement of Jawa to the east of the tell shows reuse ofbuilding stones from the Iron Age site and from a Byzantine site in the area. Numerousdressed stones with crosses carved in relief are indicative of this collection of buildingmaterials from abandoned structures

61 A small number of Umayyad sherds were present in topsoil layers, although thesemay have been deposited at any time since the construction of Building 600 in Field D.

62 Unfortunately, this sherd was not registered. Another remnant of the Medievalperiod is V1201, an Ayyubid painted jar.

–

boulders of the inner casemate wall and was present on the crestof the tell under the modern field wall (W1031), demonstrating thedepositional sequence in this area. Ceramic sherds in these loci weremixed, including late Roman, Byzantine, and Umayyad with Iron IIforms dominating the field readings.

The latest activity on the tell is represented by a series of ploughedfields within the lines of the modern field walls that run east-westand delimit familial property rights. In Squares A4 and A14, red terrarossa added to the fields to increase their fertility produced a verycompact soil layer now embedded in the plough zone. In recent years,windblown soil layers (A3:3, 4:1, 13:1, 2, 14:1 and 24:1) accumulatedbetween the ploughed ruts formed in underlying soil layers and piledup against the north face of Inner Casemate Wall 1004=1010.

The date for the construction of the modern field walls above theline of the ancient walls in Fields A–B is not known for certain althoughit seems apparent from aerial photographs taken in 1981 that thesewalls, along with all other field walls on the tell, were already inexistence. Because the tell was being cultivated at the time of Glueck’ssurvey in 1933, it is probable that some walls were already in place,although he does not mention them. According to the principal landowner, Mr. .Hamad Talafiya, the walls indicate property lines and notjust field clearing activities (oral communication). These modern wallsappear to be formed by the reuse of ancient building materials eventhough they contain a larger proportion of chert boulders than theancient walls, where uncut chert boulders represented only 10–15% ofthe wall stones. Numerous quarry marks in the bedrock out-croppingsthat extend to the south and west of the tell are evidence for the sourceof much of the ancient stone (see Chapter 12, below).

Evidence for the build up of wind blown soil was also present againstthe face of Wall 1001, which runs northwest-southeast through SquaresA1–11 and B62 at the foot of the tell. This accumulation (A1:1) wassubsequent to recent bulldozer activity that cut into and removed thelower slope exposing, and partially destroying, retaining Wall 1001.Prior to the bulldozer activity, the bedrock may have been covered withan earlier revetment comparable to that still visible on the north (FieldE) and southeast (Field C) sides of the tell (Chapters 5, 7, and 9).

FIELD B – BUILDING 200


With the discovery in 1993 of Drain B24:24 at the southwest cornerof the site, it became imperative to expose the structures immediatelyinside the town to determine the origin of the drain and the typesof structures associated with it. Excavation in Squares B34–B35 com-pleted the investigation of the casemate wall system (Chapter 5), andexposed four rooms of a building (B200) adjacent to Outer West Wall2023. In the following seasons, Squares B45, B55, and B65 were alsoopened, in order to establish the connection of this area of the townwith the large cooking and storage complexes further east in Buildings100 and 102.

Excavation along West Wall 2023 began already in 1992 in an at-tempt to identify the style of fortification system in place along the westside of the town, since only one wall line was visible at ground level.The discovery in 1993 of an “inner” casemate wall (W2004+W2029)with doorways which opened into rooms on the east provided evidenceof a different pattern of room arrangement for Building 200,63 whencompared to Building 300 on the north, where there was no directaccess to the casemate rooms. Even though Building 200 was not com-pletely excavated, the floors of three rooms were reached with interest-ing results for our understanding of the range of Iron Age II architec-ture and for the relative chronology of occupation during Strata VIIIand VII, especially in the style of ovens (see Room 212, below).


Building 200 has a unique plan for a Stratum-VIII house at Tall Jawa.It is the only structure which incorporates two casemate rooms (R213,R215) into its plan, with a doorway (B) leading directly from the mainroom (R212) into the casemates. The only other case where there wasdirect access is Doorway H in Building 113. The best examples of thispattern are seen in the Stratum-VII houses at Beer-sheba.64 In each ofthese cases, the back room of the house forms a single casemate room,and the outer wall is that of the house proper rather than a continuous

63 Field reports were prepared by L. Cowell and R. DeFonzo.64 A group of 5 houses of the four-room type in Stratum VII at Beer-sheba are

classic examples (Herzog 1984: figs. 7–11, Buildings 2524, 2060, 2309, 2358, 2356).

–

Figure 6.21. Building 200 in Field B.

wall line independent of the rooms built up against it. Somewhat laterat Tell Beit Mirsim, houses were located up against a previously existingouter wall. In this case also the back room of each house formed one ormore casemate rooms (Albright 1943: plan 3).

RoomsThe rooms framed by the southwest corner of the fortification systeminclude Building 200 and Casemate Room 210.

Table 6AA. Room Size and Proportion in Building 200, and Casemate Room 210


207 3.75 -?– 2007, 20112022208 -?– -?– 2028209 1.50 3.75 .40 2004, 2005, 2022, 2031210 1.60 8.35(?) .19 2001, 2002, 2009, 200665

212 2.70 4.50(?) .60 2004, 2029, 2028, 2031213 2.00 3.75(?) .53 2023, 2030, 2029, ?215 1.90 2.50 .76 2003, 2004, 2030, 2023

Range of sizes (omitting Rooms 207, R208)


(omitting Room 210)

Length 2.60 → 4.50 average – 3.65 m

The casemate rooms on the west (R213, R215) are both ca. 2.00 meterswide, while casemate Room 210 on the south measures 2.00 m wide atits east end, but decreases to 1.40 m on the west. Because it was notexcavated to floor level, the full length of Room 210 may not be anaccurate measurement; this space may be divided in two by a partitionwall, as was the case with Rooms 213 and 215 (Partition Wall 2030).

Room 209 of Building 200 was somewhat narrower than the case-mate rooms, being in the range of 1.50 m wide. Room 209 and Case-mate Room 213 were both 3.75 m long, although the full length ofRoom 213 remains uncertain. The same uncertainty exists for Room212, where no east wall was located within the excavated area.

DoorwaysTwo doorways with dressed stone jambs cut the inner casemate wallson the west (B) and on the south (A). Doorway M, in the northeastcorner of Room 209 was more typical in that it was framed by the endof one wall (W2022) and the perpendicular face of another (W2031).

65 The solid stone fill between Outer Wall 2009 and Inner Wall 2006/2007 formedthe east end of R210.

–

Table 6BB. Location and Width of Doorways in Field B (west)


A 210, Channel 218 1.00B 212, 213 0.75C 213, 215 0.90K 210, Channel 218 (early phase) 1.90M 207, 209 0.70

Average width—1.05 m (all Doorways)Average width—0.84 m (without Doorway K)

Doorways A and K both served as entrances into Casemate Room210. The true size (1.90 m) of Doorway K during Stratum VIIIBremains tentative, because of the rebuilding activities evident alongDrain Channel 218. Blocking Wall 2000 appears to reduce the width ofDoorway K in half with Doorway A in use during the final occupationphase (VIIIA).

WallsWall sizes for domestic and industrial rooms are anomalous because theInner Casemate wall served as house walls, which are compared withother interior walls in the house.

Table 6CC. Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 200)

Wall 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

2000 1302001 1202003 1252004 1102005 ×2006=2007 1252022 ×+2027 ×2028 ×2029 ×2030 ×2031 ×

The walls associated with the casemate system are all in the rangeof 1.00 m or more thick. The narrowest wall (W2030, 0.50 m) is across wall between Casemate Room 213 and 215. The least sturdy walldividing two rooms along its entire length appears to be Wall 2031,

which was built of stacked-boulder pillars and cobblestone connectingunits standing full height. Wall 2031 was also damaged; it appearsto buckle midway along its length so that the central pillar juts out,leaning to the north.

Stratigraphy

The only excavated feature in Field B that is assigned to Stratum IX isthe solid wall with Passageway 219, which cut through the wall, justnorth of the southwest corner. No floor levels of buildings contem-porary with Passageway 219 were exposed. The principal occupationphase for Building 200 is Stratum VIII, with fragmentary evidence forrebuilding evident in Drain Channel 218.

Table 6DD. Strata for Field B-Building 200


I 1 modernII no remains post-UmayyadIII pottery, artefacts UmayyadIV pottery (?) ByzantineV no remains RomanVI no remains PersianVII no remains Late Iron IIVIIIA 2/repairs Middle Iron IIVIIIB 3/casemate wall Middle Iron IIIX 4/solid wall Middle Iron IIX pottery only Iron I

STRATUM VIII

Construction and Use of Building 200

North and east of Drain Channel 218 are the remains of a singlehouse (B200) and an industrial work area (211). House 200 fills thespace between the channel and the inner casemate wall on the west,incorporating its rooms into the house. During the final season ofexcavation in 1995, the Stratum-VIII floors were reached in Rooms209 and R212. Since these rooms were built in association with theStratum-VIII casemate walls and drain, a single occupation phase willbe described.

–

Figure 6.22. Building 200, with relevant locus numbers.

Room 212 (Figs. 6.22, 23)The principal room appears to be Room 212, a rectangular space thatextends east-west and leads into the casemate rooms (R213, 215) atthe back of the house. Among the rooms in Building 200, Room 212is the largest (2.70–2.75× 4.50+m), due in part to the fact that theeastern wall was not exposed during excavation. Along the north sideis a major east-west wall (W2028), which extends 12.50 m east fromInner Casemate Wall 2029 until it forms a corner with Wall 2027. At

Figure 6.23. Looking south into Room 212 in Building 200.

a distance of 3.00 m west of this corner is a single monolithic pillar(B45:2), which measures 0.45 ×0.56× 1.50 m in height, comparable toPillar C17:13 (Chapter 8). This pillar may have served as a ceiling sup-port for an upper storey room. Unfortunately, no additional informa-tion is available, due to the limited exposure of the north face of Wall2028. This extra-long boulder-and-chink wall (W2028), built of smalland medium boulders, may have been the support for the ceilings ofmore than one room, leaving the question of the length of Room 212still unanswered.

The south wall (W2031), between Room 212 and 209, is formedof stacked-boulder pillars, positioned 0.70 m apart, and consisting ofsmall and medium boulders. The spaces between the pillars are filledwith cobblestone connecting units standing full height. Both the pillarsand the cobblestone wall units are capped by large and very largelimestone slabs. Built up against its north face and filling the southwestcorner formed by Wall 2031 and Inner Casemate Wall 2004 is agroup of installations including two ovens and an L-shaped partitionwall (W2039). All of these installations are embedded in a hard-packed

–

Figure 6.24. Oven B34:54 at left and Pithos Oven B34:50 at right.

beaten earth surface (B35:29) which is heavily stained with ash in anarea measuring 1.05×2.00 m in front of the ovens.

The Ovens (Fig. 6.24): Two ovens (B34:50 and B34:54), each with itsown construction style, were set side by side against the north face ofthe south wall (W2031). The larger (B34:50) of the two ovens is locatedin the southwest corner (Fig. 6.25). Its footing consists of a group ofstones embedded to a depth of 0.10–0.15 m into beaten earth SurfaceB35:29. Positioned above these stones was an inverted pithos body, 0.50m in diameter and preserved 0.60 m in height. Although the rim66 andbase of the pithos had been removed, the diameter and the presence ofthe handles reveal that the entire shoulder and upper body were used to

66 Among the six ovens formed from pithoi, Oven B34:50 is the only one without itsrim.

Figure 6.25. Pithos Oven B34:50, in situ.

form the oven.67 Evidence that the pithos had been cut to these precisemeasurements is apparent on examination of the oven wall and of thebroken sherds recovered from inside. When in use, the oven was roundand had an opening only at the top. Packed between the outer wall ofthe oven and the surrounding house walls were a basalt saddle quern,ceramic sherds, cobblestones and mud plaster (B34:58). Such packingwas common for ovens formed of inverted vessels (B63:30, E63:10).

Inside Oven B34:50 there was a number of pithos sherds formingthe floor above the foundation stones. These sherds were covered bya 0.10 m deep accumulation of ash (B34:51), which filled the bottomof the oven. Botanical remains within the fine fraction of this ashsample include malva, grape, legumes (peas and beans), and barley.68

This ash was covered in turn by soil and stones (B34:49) that appear to

67 This same treatment of a pithos for use as an oven is seen at Tall al-#Umayriin Phase 9 (late Iron I; Lawlor 2000: fig. 3.20). Although Lawlor (2000:38–39) thinksthat this oven fell from an upper storey, the oven itself shows the fracture pattern thatis typical of a ceramic vessel used as an oven; its fragility would have resulted in itscomplete breakage if it had fallen from above.

68 My sincere thanks S. Ellis-Lopez for floating our samples and to D. McCreery forhis identification of the botanical material from the 1995 season.

–

Figure 6.26. Clay Oven B34:54, in situ.

have fallen into the oven when the surrounding walls (W2004, W2031)collapsed, breaking the upper edge and wall of Oven B34:50 on itsnorth side.

East of Oven B34:50 is a second oven (B34:54), also in place againstWall 2031 (Fig. 6.26). Oven B34:54 is set in position on a chert slab(0.30×0.40× 0.11–0.15 m thick), which serves as a support stone(B34:56). This stone is itself surrounded by cobblestones, which holdit in place; in addition, the stones probably provided insulation for theoven. Support Stone B34:56 was severely burnt indicating high heatlevels in Oven B34:54.69 The oven itself is horseshoe-shaped, and washand built of clay; it measures 0.30–0.36 m wide, 0.36 m long and waspreserved 0.15–0.31 m in height. Shortest on its northern side whereit was broken by rockfall (B34:48), Oven B34:54 was probably cylindri-cal when is use, with a single opening at the top. Where it was com-plete, the clay oven was 1.40–1.60 cm thick and had a finished rim atthe top. On the outside, the oven was surrounded by stones, including

69 Support stones under Ovens C27:63 and C27:68 were stained with ash and alsoshowed signs of burning. However, the damage to Support Stone B34:56 was muchmore serious and suggests higher heat levels. The recovery of “slag” from soil sent tothe sifter points to craft activity that may have required increased temperatures.

one flagstone (0.28×0.40× 0.05 thick), potsherds and an upper loaf-shaped millstone standing vertically; this support is packed in mud plas-ter (B34:59). Adhering to the north side of Oven B34:54 is an accumu-lation of clay-like material that appears to seal a 10.00 cm flue holelocated immediately above Support Stone B34:56. On the outside, thehole is plugged with pebbles and soil. Whether the sealing of the fluerepresents a change in function for this oven at some time during its usecould not be correlated with the material preserved in the surroundingash accumulation, although the pieces of slag-like material recoveredfrom the ash and from flotation of soil samples suggests some kind ofindustrial activity.

Inside the oven was a 0.32 m deep accumulation of ash (B34:55) andthe oven wall itself was crumbly, badly damaged by the heat. On theeast side, a 0.60 m deep accumulation of ash (B35:24+26) filled thespace between Oven B34:54 and Partition Wall 2039. This L-shapedPartition Wall was formed of 1–2 rows of large cobbles and smallboulders set into Surface B35:29. When found, this feature stood 2–3 courses high and its lowest course extended west toward the oven.Both this stone course and Partition Wall 2039 itself were covered withash. It appears to have served both as a windbreak and as a retainingwall for ash from Oven B34:54.

Oven B34:54 was the only one of its type among the 14 ovensexposed in Fields A, B, and E that date to Stratum VIII. The closestparallels are twin ovens C27:63 and C27:68 in Stratum-VII Building800 in Field C.70 This fact, and the style of Oven B34:50, which didnot have its rim and neck attached, suggests that these ovens weresome of the latest Stratum VIII features built at Tall Jawa. At the sametime, their construction techniques indicate the short transition periodto Stratum VII.

Additional features which suggest domestic activities, especially foodpreparation, include a limestone mortar located north of Oven B34:50,a second mortar on the surface (B35:21) in Doorway B, and cookingpot sherds in position on surface B35:29. A second installation (B35:28)is located in the northwest corner adjacent to Doorway B and oppositeOven B34:50. This feature includes a narrow, L-shaped Partition Wall(W2038), built of one row of cobblestones forming the eastern andsouthern limits of a packed earth shelf. Unfortunately, only a handful

70 Rim fragments (D12.45.4) of a comparable oven were recovered from Building700 in Field D. These sherds were 3.40 cm thick and had a finished rim.

–

of sherds were found here, not enough evidence to determine withcertainty the function of this feature.

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreySoil Layer B35:23=27, containing pebbles, ceramic sherds, a basaltpestle (TJ 2089), fragments of a basalt quern, and a spindle whorl (TJ2053), seals Surface B35:29. Packed hard by rockfall, Locus B35:23=27 is covered by additional soil (B35:20) that may represent the col-lapsed ceiling in Room 212. Although destroyed in antiquity, Building200 was not burnt, with the result that ceilings are only evident whenmarked by the presence of plaster or scattered artefacts as on a surface.All organic remains within the ceiling makeup, such as wooden beamsand reeds, decomposed with time. By contrast with Room 209 on thesouth, the collapsed ceiling in Room 212 was more difficult to distin-guish. The presence of numerous artefacts and a high sherd count (835)in this overlying rockfall and soil layer (B35:20) do suggest an upperstorey room, as in Room 209. Certain finds, such as a small limestonetrough (TJ 1606) and a chert pounder had fallen with ceiling materialinto Doorway B.

Table 6EE. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 212, upper storey


B35:20+ 835 ceramic sherds35:14 trough TJ 1606 limestone

mortar basalt2 pestles TJ 1387, 1388 basaltgrinder TJ 1386 basaltmillstone TJ 1343 loaf-shaped, sandstonepounder TJ 1523 chertpoint TJ 1371 iron

Additional rockfall (B35:7, 15) yielded similar finds, 729 sherds, 1 basaltpestle (TJ 1283), 1 grinder (TJ 1256), and 1 upper loaf-shaped mill-stone.

Casemate Room 213 (Fig. 6.22)Doorway B leads directly from Room 212 into a pair of casemateRooms (R213+R215). This doorway is framed by two sections of theinner casemate wall, Wall 2004 on the south and Wall 2029 on thenorth. Each wall end is reinforced with dressed limestone boulders,somewhat larger than the undressed stones that comprise the remain-

der of these walls;71 on either side of the doorway, these walls remainstanding 1.50–1.66 m above Surface B35:21=29. The position of adoorway in the middle of a wall line is rare at Tall Jawa; the more typ-ical position is in a corner, where the entrance is formed by the end ofone wall and the face of a perpendicular wall, for example Doorways Cand M.72 The anomaly of Doorway B may be explained by the fact thatCasemate Rooms 213 and R215 were an integral part of Building 200,itself a rarity at Tall Jawa.

Room 213 is framed on the west by Outer Casemate Wall 2023 andon the east by Inner Wall 2029. On the south, Partition Wall 2030 andDoorway C separate Room 213 from Room 215. Partition Wall 2030abuts Outer Wall 2023 and extends east 1.00 m, leaving a space of0.90 m for Doorway C.73 A few missing wall stones suggest that thiswall stub (W2030) was probably incomplete at a height of only 0.75 mabove floor level; it may have had additional stone courses or a mudbrick superstructure, since large amounts of brick material were presentin the collapse.

The debris immediately above floor level was reached in Doorway C(B25:28) and north of Wall 2030 (B25:24). Only the uppermost layersof collapsed wall stones (B25:9, 10) were removed in the remainder ofRoom 213 while additional layers of rockfall (B25:19) were left in situ.

Casemate Room 215 (Figs. 6.22, 27)South of Doorway C is the southernmost room of the western case-mates (R215). At this point, Outer Wall 2023 again serves as the westwall of the room, while the east wall (W2004) runs south from DoorwayB and bonds with east-west Wall 2003 to form the south wall of Room215. Both of these walls are more than 1.00 m thick, which indicatestheir importance in the defensive system and makes it likely that theysupported a superstructure of one or two additional floors.

Floor level was reached in Room 215, revealing a beaten earthsurface (B24:37). Although Room 215 provides no evidence of an oven,its proximity to Room 212 with its two ovens made the casemate room

71 This same construction was used at numerous sites including Tell el-Far#ah (N)(Chambon 1984: fig. 6c).

72 A good example of this same style of doorway in the corner of a room formed byperpendicular walls is seen at Hazor, between Room 44a and 14a (Yadin et al. 1960: pl.VII.1).

73 In Field B, Square 63, Doorway G was formed by a comparable partition wall(W2017), which separated Casemate Room 200 from Room 201.

–

Figure 6.27. Casemate Room 215 withDoorway C on left and Doorway B in upper left.

an ideal place to store ceramic vessels in use with these ovens. Indeed,the sherds on the floor and in the overlying soil layer (B24:36+B25:28)include a heavy concentration of cooking pot ware.

Table 6FF. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 215


B25:26+ 843 ceramic sherdsB24:36 cooking pot sherds

fibula TJ 2217 copper/bronzetray TJ 2214 basaltrubbing stone TJ 2210point TJ 2216 ironchert nodule TJ 1678loom weight TJ 1680 unfired clay, burnt2 weights TJ 2218, 2219 unfired clay loom weights

Clear evidence of collapse was visible in the section through the debristhat accumulated in Room 215. Rockfall smashed down on ceramicvessels resulting in tip lines that slope sharply from west to east. Be-tween each layer (B24:15, 16) were lenses of plaster (B25:25) and piecesof mud brick, probably originating from the superstructure of the forti-fication system. Plaster layer B25:25 appears to represent a ceiling that

served as the floor of an upper storey room. Preserved on this surfacewere ceramic sherds, a basalt pestle and 2 upper loaf-shaped millstones(TJ 1628) and a faience bead (TJ 1628). This in turn was covered byanother layer of rockfall and mud brick material which is sealed by anupper layer of plaster (B24:15=B25:22). This surface appears to repre-sent the roof of Casemate Room 215 that was itself used for domesticactivities. Above Surface B24: 15+16 were a small group of domestictools including a basalt millstone (TJ 980), a saddle quern (TJ 1000)and a polishing stone. These tools were surrounded by burnt ceramicsherds, consisting primarily of cooking pot sherds.

The function of the casemate rooms in Building 200 was certainlyrelated to the activities carried out in the rest of the house, especially tothe use of the ovens in Room 212. Although there is no direct accessbetween R215 and R209, there is evidence for the same kind of textilemanufacturing equipment in both rooms, although the smaller numberof loom weights in Room 215 suggests that here they were in storage.

Room 209 (Fig. 6.22)The north and south walls of Room 209 were constructed after theinner casemate walls were in place. The south wall (W2005) of thisroom abuts the southeast outside corner of Room 215, formed by InnerCasemate Wall 2004 and Crosswall 2003. The result is a continuouswall line (W2005+W2003) that serves simultaneously as the south wallof Building 200 and the north wall of Drain Channel 218. On the west,Inner Casemate Wall 2004 serves as the back wall of the room. Onthe east, a single doorway (M) ran through short Wall 2022 into R207.From within Room 209, there is no direct access to Room 212 on thenorth.

A surface of hard-packed earth (B34:31) forms the floor, which sealsup against the surrounding walls to a height of 0.10–0.20 m and ispacked into the corners. Patches of this mud plaster were present onthe north face of Wall 2005 to a height of 0.75 m above the floor. Wedo not know whether this wall face was completely covered, althoughthis is likely in view of the presence of Drain Channel 218 along itssouth face. Stains and ash on the floor surface suggest a variety ofactivities including food preparation. Botanical remains recovered fromthe surface consist of 10 grape seeds, 1 chenopod, wheat, and Pistachiaatlanticus (McCreery). Although no actual oven was found in Room 209,the presence of two ovens in Room 212 to the north indicates theproximity of a cooking area. This is consonant with the presence of

–

cooking pot sherds and ash in Room 209 itself. Also on the floor was alamp, providing evidence that this was a roofed room. Beside the lampwas a group of unfired clay loom weights, a smashed pithos and otherceramic vessels.

Table 6GG. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 209


B34:30–31 juglet V203=TJ 1879 intactlampcooking pot sherdspithos sherds480 ceramic sherds7 weights TJ 1841–1846 unfired clay loomweights

1881

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyWithin Room 209 were two superimposed layers of brick material, soiland wall stones, indicating an upper storey room (B34:28+29) and aroof (B34:15). The presence of a considerable amount of mud brick,unusual in the houses of Tall Jawa, points to a single, massive collapseof the superstructure of the house. In Room 209, it is not possible toidentify a second period of use with a clear floor level. Instead, the mudbrick material was scattered across the room, broken into clumps andembedded in the ceiling that was immediately above the ground floorartefacts. Included in this collapse were numerous artefacts, especiallytools used in processing and preparing food.

Table 6HH. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 209, upper storey


B34:28–29 455 ceramic sherdspendant TJ 1813 pumicemortar TJ 1786 limestonemortar TJ 1749 basalt, reused millstonegrinder TJ 1796 basaltmillstone TJ 1801 upper, loaf-shaped2 querns TJ 1752, 1753 basalt, saddle querns2 pounders TJ 1750, 1793 chertjar stopper TJ 1745 ceramicmurex shell TJ 1812spindle whorl TJ 1818 limestone

The second superimposed soil layer (B34:15), which was identifiedas the roof, was extremely hard-packed along the west wall (W2004),and included brick material in which mortar lines were visible.74 Inthis uppermost locus there was a basalt pestle (TJ 1730), a grinder (TJ1734) and a small square mortar (TJ 1737). The presence of a singlemurex shell in the second storey assemblage and the purple-stains onthe basalt grinder (TJ 1734) from the roof suggests additional craftactivity, possibly related to the textile tools uncovered on the lower floorof Room 209.

Room 220 (Fig. 6.22)Located parallel to Rooms 209 and R212 and North of Wall 2028,Room R220 was not excavated below the level of its collapsed ceiling(B35:9). This ceiling was marked by the presence of hard-packed soilwith pieces of chert and worked bone inlay (TJ 1218). On the basis ofthe pattern seen in Rooms 209 and R212, we would expect a seriesof rooms to be built up against Inner Casemate Wall W2029, withaccess into additional casemate rooms. Although this may in fact havebeen the case, the northern and eastern limits of Room 220 were notexposed during excavation. Room 220 may have been connected witha second room that extended east along Wall 2028, as far as the cornerwith Wall 2027.

Room 208 (Fig. 6.28)Along the south side of Wall 2028 is Room 208, only partially exposedduring the 1994 season. This room appears to form the eastern extrem-ity of Building 200. Wall 2028, which serves as the north Wall of Room212, is also the north Wall of Room 208. Due to the limited excavationin this area and the presence of balks which remain unexcavated, theevidence for the use of the upper storey room was limited to an accu-mulation (B55:1) of pithos and krater sherds smashed in place at thesouth of Wall 202875 along with several ground stone tools.

74 This hard-packed material (B34:15) and the underlying locus (B34:27) were locat-ed in a restricted area along the west side of Room 209. These loci may representthe eastern extent of collapse from inner Casemate Room 215 that had a differentcomposition than the roof over Room 209.

75 The absolute level of these sherds (923.85) was 2.00+m above the floors in Rooms209 (921.65) and R212 (921.78) and 0.80 m above the final level (923.05) of Work Area211 to the east.

–

Figure 6.28. Building 204, Work Area 211, Room 207 and R208.

Table 6JJ. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 208, upper storey


B55:4, 7 worked stone TJ 1304 limestonetray TJ 1308 basaltmortar TJ 1307 basaltgrinder TJ 1305 reused as a mortar, basaltspindle whorl TJ 1306 ceramic

Room 207 (Figs. 6.22, 28–29)Excavation in Square B44 revealed a single room (R207) built upagainst the Inner Casemate Wall (W2006). Located between Room 206on the east and the head of Drain Channel 218 on the west, Room 207

opens into Room 209 through Doorway M. Only the southeast cornerof Room 209, formed by Walls 2005 and W2022, marks the westernextent of Room 207. Due to the limits of excavation, the north wall ofRoom 207 was not exposed, although there is clear evidence that thishad been a roofed room adjacent to or part of Room 208 on the north.Wall 2011 of Room 206 constitutes its eastern limit.

On the south, the Stratum-VIIIB phase of Inner Casemate Wall2006 extends below the earliest exposed floor (B44:18) in Room 207.This hard-packed, beaten earth surface was only uncovered in a 1.50m probe that produced Iron Age II painted pottery, a basalt grinder(TJ 987) and animal bones. While these finds suggest typical domesticactivities, the limited exposure is insufficient for determining the func-tion of the entire ground floor room. Also on this surface, and sur-rounded by collapsed ceiling material, was an ash deposit (0.85 × 1.38m, and ca. 0.52 deep) that contained pieces of charcoal, mud bricks andburnt pottery. Although other suggestions are lacking, this may havebeen a cooking area. However, no univocal evidence was preserved tosuggest that this accumulation marked the position of an oven, hearth,or pit. The ash was located against the north face of Inner Wall 2006and east of the stone spillway (B44:22) at the head of Drain Channel218. Unfortunately, this location does not do anything to clarify thedeposition history or function of the ash.

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyFallen on Surface B44:18 were two superimposed ceilings (B44:14+15and B44:11). The floor of the second storey room (B44:14+15) wasmarked by extensive rockfall, firm soil and a lens of firm plaster againstthe west face of Wall 2011. The use of this surface in an upper storeyroom is suggested by the presence of several artefacts and a significantamount of broken pottery.

Table 6KK. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 207, upper storey


B44:14+ 871 ceramic sherdsB44:15 scraper bone

stone TJ 840 limestone, polishingraw material TJ 838, 839 green stonepounder chert2 points TJ 869, 931 ironhook TJ 837 metal

–

Figure 6.29. Building 204 and Work Area 211 with relevant locus numbers.

Additional rockfall was sealed beneath the collapse of the uppermostceiling, or roof (B44:11). That this was in fact the roof is supportedby the discovery of a roof roller (TJ 814) among the artefacts andmendable pottery (1258 sherds) scattered throughout the overlying soillayers (B44:9–10). Whether all of the finds from these loci can beassigned to activities carried out on the roof is difficult to determinedue to the subsequent collapse (B44:8–7) of the fortification system andmodern agricultural activity that disturbed the uppermost soil layers(B44:2, 1).

Table 6LL. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 207, roof level


B44:9+10 1258 ceramic sherdsB44:11 roof roller TJ 814 limestone

small trough limestonemortar TJ 782 miniaturemortar TJ 750 limestonefigurine TJ 826 zoomorphic, fragment2 whorls TJ 793, 794 ceramic, spindle whorls2 points TJ 787, 788 iron

Work Area 211 (Figs. 6.29, 30)An area (R211) immediately west of Building 102 was exposed onlyin the southern 3.00 m of Square B55. Its eastern limit is Wall 2032,the exterior west wall of Building 102, while the southern limit is thenorth wall (W2015) of Rooms 203 and 206, although a balk was leftin place between these units. On the west are north-south Wall 2027,and Rooms 207 and R208. A beaten earth Surface (B45:8) that runsalong the south side of Wall 2028 is assumed to be part of Room 208,because it did not yield the same kind of artefacts as the surface in WorkArea 211. This distinction suggests that Surface B45:8 was adjacentto or within Building 200, whereas Work Area 211 was outside thehouse.

Work Area 211 may very well have been unroofed, given its locationbetween the two principal buildings (B102 and B200) in the southwestsector of the tell. Its finds distinguish it from enclosed rooms, which arecharacterized by a heavy concentration of food processing and prepa-ration tools. Here in the work area, there was a series of superimposedsoil layers (B55:19, 20, 21), above a hard-packed surface (B55:22), all ofwhich were stained gray (10YR 5/2) due to a heavy accumulation ofground basalt. These layers contained a minimum of 93 broken basaltartefacts, along with 8 chert pecking stones. Sixteen complete artefacts,possibly manufactured from the broken millstones, were also recoveredfrom this area (Fig. 6.31).

Table 6MM. Pottery and Artefacts in Work Area 211


B55:19, 561 ceramic sherds20+21 mortar TJ 1287 basalt

2 pestles TJ 1289, 1290 basalt2 grinders TJ 1291, 1292 basalt

–


6 millstones TJ 1294–1299 upper, loaf-shaped, basaltmillstone TJ 1293 lower, basaltsaddle quern TJ 1300 basalt3 anvils TJ 1301–1303 stone working surfacespounder TJ 1288 chertpecking stones TJ 632=L-524, TJ 873, chert

TJ 1521, L 429, L 510,L 598, L 658, L 690

2 metal points TJ 1309, 1310 iron

Along with the registered artefacts, there were 14 additional pieces ofupper loaf-shaped millstones and 10 saddle quern fragments. Thesefinds in Area 211 indicate extensive refashioning of broken millstonesand querns into hand grinders, pestles, and small mortars. Tools forthis work consisted of chert pounders and pecking stones along withstone working surfaces (anvils). The layering evident during excavationsuggests an area used over a considerable period, allowing for the buildup of wind blown soil and debris from the grinding process. Such asuggestion implies that Work Area 211 was an open court, although itwas certainly surrounded on the east, south and west by roofed roomsand was within the size range for a roofed space (4.50 × 5.00 m betweenflanking walls).

Work Area 211 went out of use and was sealed by a series of hard-packed surfaces (B55:10, 12+16) that included a limestone mortar(TJ 1235), a basalt pestle (TJ 1192), a limestone millstone (TJ 1195)and broken pottery. These soil layers along with Rockfall B55:18 mayrepresent the collapsed ceilings from the upper storey rooms of Building200 on the west and the Stratum VIIIA collapse of Building 102 on theeast. Uppermost (B55:4+6, 7) was the continuation of the smashedpithoi located at the southeast corner of Wall 2028 (R208 above).

BUILDING 204

Excavation History (Fig. 6.1)

Excavation along the north face of the inner casemate wall (SquareB53) in 1992 exposed this wall at a point where it forms a solidfoundation for Tower 2013 (Chapter 5). Excavating further north in1993 (Square B54), two small rooms (R203, R206) built up against thewall and against the southwest corner of Building 102 were cleared.

These rooms shared a party wall with Room 205, to the east. Thesetwo rooms were without doorways, suggesting that they were enteredfrom above.


Rooms 203 and R206 are located south of Work Area 211 and east ofRoom 207; they seal up against the north face of Wall 2007=Tower2013 (Chapter 5). At this particular point along the inner casematewall, there are no rooms in the casemate, only a solid stone foundationthat is a component of the second construction phase (VIIIA) of thewall system. The complex sequence of construction techniques is diffi-cult to unravel; only the presence of a sharp break in the continuouswall face of the inner casemate wall, clearly seen at the point where theeastern wall (W2014) of Room 203 runs south through the inner wall(W2007), suggests that Wall 2014 preceded the other walls of Room203. At the same time, Wall 2014 abuts the south face of Wall 2020 atthe southwest corner of Building 102.

Table 6NN. Room Size and Proportion in Building 204


203 2.00 3.75 .57 2014, 2015, 2016206 2.60 2.75 .94 2015, 2016, 2011

Range of sizes


The ratio of width to length clearly shows that Room 206 was practi-cally square, rare among the rooms in Fields A–B, where long narrowrooms are the dominant shape.

Surprising is the fact that no doorways are present, either betweenthese rooms or with adjoining Room 207 and Work Area 211. Thequestion that this evidence poses is the manner of access. Assumingthat these rooms were entered from above, how were the upper storeyrooms connected to Room 225 or 207 to make this access possible? It ispossible that access could be had from a room in Tower 2013, howeverthere is no evidence for stairs from the tower or from any adjoiningroom.

–

Figure 6.30. Broken artefacts on surface in Work Area 211.

Table 6PP. Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 204)

Wall 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

2011 ×2014 ×+2015 ×+2016 ×

Wall 2015 serves as the north wall of both rooms. This wall also abutsBuilding 102, sealing up against the west, plastered (B54:12) face ofWall 2032. At its west end, Wall 2015 bonds with north-south Wall2011, the west Wall of Room 206, and forms a corner marked by avery large limestone boulder. Dividing the two rooms is Wall 2016,which abuts both Wall 2015 on the north and the inner casemate wallface (W2007) on the south. The rooms within these walls measure only2.00×3.75 m (R203) and 2.60× 2.75 m (R206), slightly larger than theaverage width (1.96 m), but smaller that the average length (3.65 m) ofrooms in Building 200.

Stratigraphy

Only one phase of occupation is represented by the floor surfaces inBuilding 204, Stratum VIIIB (Fig. 6.29, 31, 32). This judgment is based

Figure 6.31. Work Area 211 in relation to Building 204.

on the position of Wall 2016, which extends under the later phaseof Inner Casemate Wall 2007. At the same time, there is nothing tosuggest that these rooms did not continue in use during Stratum VIIIA,except for the lack of clearly defined superimposed surfaces.

The sequence of deposition was similar in both rooms. Underlyingthe hard-packed beaten earth surface in Room 203 was a make-uplayer of plaster and ash (B54:17). Although not as elaborate, a make-up layer of pebbles and small cobbles (B54:16) was exposed in partin Room 206. Each room was paved with a beaten earth surface(B54:13=R203 and B54:14=R206) that seals against the surroundingwalls. Smashed on these surfaces by fallen wall stones were several

–

Figure 6.32. Building 204 looking East.

mendable vessels along with a modest number of food preparationtools.

Table 6QQ. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 203


B54:9, 13 bowl V228 red slip587 ceramic sherds2 grinders TJ 803, 810 basaltspindle whorl TJ 792 ceramic

Table 6RR. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 206


B54:11, 14 cooking pot sherdsjuglet V227 red slipdecanter V201 painted277 ceramic sherdswhetstone TJ 885 sandstone2 mortars TJ 880, 916 basalt

Pottery and Chronology

The sherd material in Room 203 is quite different from the pottery inRoom 222/202 to the east, where cooking pots and food preparationutensils and tools were in clear evidence. Instead, Room 203 containeda corpus primarily of bowls (51%), kraters (12%), and jugs (11%), with61% of the entire corpus having some type of surface decoration. Inaddition, 5% of the pottery was black burnished ware, more typical ofStratum VII, but representative of high status vessels. Apparently, thisroom was used for the storage of ceramic vessels, since so little in theway of artefacts and ecofacts were recovered.76

For the most part, the ware form types from Rooms 203 and R206were comparable to those in Buildings 102 and B200, although fewfully mendable vessels were recovered. Several pithos rims retained col-lars (B54:26.7, B54:26.8), indicative of early Iron Age II, while sherds ofa flask (B54.49.15+B54:53:10) and of a tripod, perforated cup(B54.41.6+ B54.41.12) are similar to those from Building 300 (Stra-tum VIII). Bowls with thickened rim and ridge/bar (V228) found be-tween the stones of Wall 2015 are typical of forms that span Stra-tum VIII–VII. The red slip and burnishing on these bowls points toStratum VIII rather than VII, where this form appears in black bur-nished ware.

Summary

The construction history in Field B reveals a sequence that gives prior-ity to the construction of the casemate wall system. Building 200 wasconstructed when the inner wall and Drain Channel 218 were alreadyessential features of the town plan. The relationship of Work Area 211to the drain is less clear, although water may have been a necessaryelement for the refashioning of broken basalt artefacts into new groundstone tools. In the case of Building 204, the north face of Tower 2013forms the back wall of both Rooms 203 and 206, and east Wall 2014cuts through the inner casemate to form the eastern perimeter of thetower. This integration of rooms and features of the casemate systemwith the adjoining buildings is not represented in the Stratum-VIIIbuilding complex (B300) in Field E to the north.

76 Brenda Silver undertook the research on ceramic distribution.

FIELD E: THE DOMESTIC COMPLEX (1992–1995)

BUILDING 300

Introduction

The largest Stratum-VIII domestic complex is located in Field E. Thisis the designation for the northwest sector of the grid, where SquaresE1–E61 are adjacent to Field B (Squares B10–B70), while SquaresE71–91 are north of Field A (Squares A10–A30; Fig. 7.1). Along thewest side (B23–E24), the tell is only ca. 66.00–70.00 m wide and the lineof the fortification system is clearly visible above the present surface.Also visible in Field E are several modern property walls, some consistof stones piled up above the casemate system (W3051), and other wallsrun east-west across the tell. A very large (ca. 0.90× 1.40 m) limestoneboulder (E23:2), with two circular depressions on its upper surface, wasfound leaning against fortification West Wall 3050; it was probably anindustrial installation. Although found in association with a tether stoneand the Iron Age II walls, the date of these installations could not bedetermined.1 They remain, like the press in Field L, some of Tall Jawa’smysteries.

Beyond the Outer North Wall (W3006), the tell slopes steeply towardthe north where it is cut by a modern road. Along this scarp (E58–78), the bedrock and overlying soil layers are visible as are sections ofa retaining wall (W3023). Depressions in these soil layers and naturalcaves in the bedrock itself hint at the presence of Iron Age tombsor installations. Exploration of this slope in a trench which ran north18.00 m (E55–E57) from the south edge of Inner Casemate Wall 3000revealed instead the construction techniques of the fortification system

1 E. Meyers examined installation E23:2 during an ASOR-CAP inspection tour in1994 and noticed a semi-circular relief on one of its long faces. This suggested to himthe garland decoration on stone-carved sarcophagi. If this function was the originalintended use, this stone certainly ended up fulfilling a very different purpose. However,the observation by Meyers puts the date of this feature in even greater doubt.

Figure 7.1. Excavation Grid in Field E.

and its glacis, without answering any of our other questions concerningthe original surface outside the wall and its appearance in antiquity.However, this investigation did coincide with the primary researchstrategy designed to define the characteristics of a walled town inIron Age II, and to test the hypothesis that the wall system was aroyal project, built to protect a strategically located settlement on thesouthern flank of the Ammonite kingdom.2

2 Subsequent excavations at Jalul (Younker et al. 1996:73) and preliminary resultsof the Wadi ath-Thamad survey demonstrate that the southernmost border of theAmmonite potting tradition with its characteristic double disc bases on bowls andjuglets appears to run between sites on either side of the Wadi ath-Thamad, 30 ksouth of Tall Jawa. While this evidence may extend the border of ancient Ammon, thestrategic location of Tall Jawa and its proximity to #Amman indicate its usefulness as adefence of the Ammonite core or heartland.


Excavation began in 1992 with three squares (E55, 56, 57) as partof a sampling strategy designed to investigate the extent and style ofthe casemate wall along the north side of the tell (Chapter 5). Priorto excavation, such sampling was deemed necessary because the WestWall (W2023=3050) appeared to be a single wall rather than the outerwall of a casemate system, even though two parallel walls could beidentified at other points around the tell. Secondly, the presence of IronAge structures adjacent to the inner casemate wall face in Fields A–B on the south side of the tell (Chapter 6) suggested that this patternwas characteristic of Iron Age town planning at Tall Jawa. To test thishypothesis in Field E, Square E55 was positioned across the inner wallface (W3000) of the casemate system to expose a small area adjacentto it on the south. The goal was to investigate the relationship of thedefensive wall system to structures located in the northwest quadrant ofthe site.

The results of the 1992 season showed that the inner casemate wallface (W3000) served as the back wall of an adjacent work area thatcontained a shelf/bench and an assemblage of domestic artefacts andpottery (Room 302A; see details below). Following analysis of thesefinds, Field E was expanded in subsequent seasons along the south faceof Wall 3000 in five squares (E44, 54, 65, 75, 76)3 and in a secondrow of squares further south (E53, E63–64, E74). With the discoveryin 1993 of a narrow passage (R309) that ran perpendicular throughthe casemate wall in Square E76 (Chapter 5), it was apparent that thedomestic complex (Building 300) extended east only as far as the westwall (W3016) of Passageway 309.

For the 1994 and 1995 seasons, the excavation strategy was to exposethe western and southern outer walls of Building 300 in order to clar-ify its plan and establish the type, style and function of the buildingand of its individual rooms. Functional analysis of all artefacts andtheir distribution within the architectural space was planned to fur-ther define activity areas, and correlate those areas with the roomarrangement within the building. In 1994, it became evident that cer-tain rooms within Building 300 had successive floor surfaces preserved

3 Due to the topography of Field E and the position of the wall system in relationto the location of the squares, balks were established on the north and west sides ratherthan on the north and east as in Field A.

within rooms that had undergone minimal rebuilding. Additional exca-vation was undertaken beneath the floors identified in 1993 and balkswere removed to expose entire rooms and uncover each floor level in itsentirety, to the extent that time allowed.4

STRATUM IX

The Fortification System and earliest Occupation

The clearest evidence for Stratum IX activity in Field E is the con-struction of North Wall 3006 that was exposed above ground alongthe entire north side of the tell. While it is certain that this defensivewall preceded the complete casemate system of Stratum VIIIB (Chap-ter 5), it could not be ascertained whether the area inside the Solid Wallwas occupied. In Field E, there was no Stratum IX architecture uncov-ered beneath Stratum VIII remains in Building 300, since bedrock wasused as the footing for walls and work areas. Only under the floor ofCasemate Room 301 was there the remains of pithoi smashed againstthe south face of North Wall 3006 that could be assigned to Stra-tum IX. However, in style these vessels are homogeneous with the Stra-tum VIIIB jars in Building 300.

STRATUM VIII

With the construction of an inner wall to form a casemate system ofdefence, occupation appeared to spread across the tell, completely fill-ing the enclosed area. The principal structure in Field E was Building300.


Building 300 is the only structure excavated in the northwest quarter ofthe tell. Located immediately inside the inner wall of the casemate sys-tem, this structure consists of five rooms built up against the defensivewall (Rooms 302, 303, 306, 312+Bin/Room 321, 313).5 Additional

4 Field reports for the 1992–1995 seasons were prepared by Robert Hutson, Mar-garet Judd, Stanley Klassen, Lynda Manktelow, Paul Sodtke and Tracy Wilson, whoserved as field supervisors.

5 A sixth room on the west (R304) also abuts Wall 3000 but appears to be outsideBuilding 300 (see detailed discussion below). Only additional excavation within the

Figure 7.2. Building 300.

rooms immediately to the south (Rooms 305, 307, 308, 314, 324, 326)all appear to have been an integral part of the same structure, althoughBuilding 300 may in fact be more than a single house. The northernrooms are separated from one another by six parallel walls (W3001,W3003, W3005, W3011, W3025, W3016), which run southeast, gener-ally perpendicular to the inner face of Wall 3000. In some cases, crosswalls abut these walls (W3011, W3025) as they extend south, formingthe perimeter of more than one room.

The eastern end of Building 300 is enclosed by Wall 3016, the westwall of Passageway 309. The west side was not as clearly marked due tothe presence of Room 304 that appears to be either outside of Building300, or an abandoned room. The full length of this building, excludingRoom 304, is ca. 20.90 m. Although by the end of the 1994 season thefull width had not been exposed, Building 300 appeared to contain atleast 11 rooms and consist of more than 213 m2 of living space.6

northwest corner of the tell will fully explain the function of this area and its associationwith neighbouring structures.

6 In 1995, only the southern 2.00 m of Square E53 in Room 318, and the west endof Corridor 319 were added to the total floor space. This calculation does not includethe cistern room.

Rooms

Within Building 300, any space that is enclosed by at least three adjoin-ing walls is identified as a room. Due to the central location of Cistern13 of Stratum VIIIA, several rooms do not have a solid wall enclosingthem on the fourth side. If the fourth wall is not present, measurementsare taken at a right angle from the maximum extent of the existingwalls. Of the 16 rooms in Table 7A, only one (R312A+B) was rela-tively square while all others were rectangular (see Table 7A for ratio ofwidth to length). Certain areas around the central cistern (R308+326,R324, R325), and rooms only partially exposed (R318, R322, R323),are not included in Table 7A.

Table 7A. Room Size and Proportion


302 3.00 5.00 .60 3000, 3003, 3005, 3013303 3.00 4.70 .63 3000, 3001, 3004, 3003304 2.20 ? ? 3000, 3001, 3002, ?305 2.50 4.50 .55 3004, 3001, 3024, 3035+3037306 2.00 3.75 .53 3000, 3005, 3030, 3011307 1.70 3.10 .54 3007, 3013, 3024, 3039312(A) 3.50 4.00 .87 3000, 3011, 3025, ?312(B) 2.75 3.20 .78 3000, 3025, 3043, 3041313 2.20 6.00 .36 3000, 3016, 3025, 3026314+327 2.75 6.75 .40 3027, 3028, 3036, 3043?315 2.00 3.00 .67 3031=32, 3033, 3034, 3035=37316 1.00 2.00 .50 3024, 3034, Doorways B, J317 2.60 4.30 .60 3026, 3027, 3048, 3016?319 1.00 5.00 .20 3033, 3038, 3040, 3047320 0.70–0.80 2.35 .33 3008, 3011, 3030321 1.10 2.40 .45 3011, 3042, 3028, Doorway N

Range of Sizes (omitting Rooms 304, 312(A), 316, 319, 320)

W 1.70 → 3.00 m average – 2.46 mL 3.00 → 6.75 m average – 4.43 m

Range of Sizes (omitting Rooms 304, 312(B), 316, 319, 320)

W 1.70 → 3.50 m average – 2.32 mL 3.00 → 6.75 m average – 4.51 m

Doorways

By the end of the 1994 season, there were nine doorways visible withinthe building complex (A–I, L), with another (K) only partially exposed.Several different styles of doorjambs were in use simultaneously; for

example Doorway L has two dressed stone wall ends on oppositesides of the entryway, Entrance G consists of stacked boulders formingflanking pillars, Doorway I in Room 305 has the north face of Wall3031 as its southern doorjamb and the south end of Wall 3001 as itsnorthern jamb.

Table 7B. Location and Width of Doorways


A 303, 305 1.10B 305, 316 1.00C 302, 307 0.70D 302, 306 0.90E 302, Cistern 13 0.85F 302, 320 0.75G 305, 315 0.65H 303, 305 0.90I 304?, 305 0.90J 319, Corridor 316 1.00K 313, 314+327 0.85L 314, 325 0.65M 314+327, 317 0.60N 308, 326 1.00P 319, ? 1.00

Average width - 0.846 m.

Of the fifteen doorways identified during excavation, Doorways B, F, J,N and P are at the end of narrow rooms or corridors and extend thefull width of the room. Of these entrances, all (except Doorway P) areconstructed between parallel walls. Of these, all are in the size range of1.00 m except Doorway F. Without these doorways in our calculations,the average width is 0.79 m.

The most common location for a doorway is in a corner where itis framed by two perpendicular walls, such as Doorway A betweenWall 3001 and the end of Wall 3004, and Doorways C, D, H, I, K,M (Fig. 7.2). This choice of location had a long history at Tall Jawa andis seen also in Stratum VII structures. Only Doorway G, which leadsinto the centre of Room 315, and Doorway E into the cistern area arelocated in the middle of a wall line.

Walls

The major support wall for Building 300 was Wall 3000, the innerwall of the casemate system, which ran along the entire north sideof the tell and measures ca. 1.30–1.60 m thick. This wall consists ofthree rows of medium (0.50–0.75 m) and small boulders, chinked withcobblestones. Within Building 300, Wall 3000 stands to a height of2.20–3.00 m above floor level. Seven walls within the building and thewest wall of Room 304 (W3002) abut the south face of Wall 3000.Of these eight walls, six were built of limestone and one of chert inboulder-and-chink construction and the eighth, Wall 3005, consists oflarge boulders (ca. 0.75 m) stacked on one another to form pillars thatare connected by cobblestone wall units.7 This style is seen already inthe Iron Age I house at #Ai where rough boulders were stacked to formpillars which were linked to one another by boulder-and-chink partitionwalls (Callaway 1970: fig. 6).

Table 7C. Wall Thickness in centimetres (Building 300 only)

Wall 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

3000 1403001 ×3002 ×3003 ×3004 ×3005 ×3007 ×3008 ×+3009 ×3010 ×3011 ×3012 ×3013 ×3014=3028 ×+3016 ×3024 ×3025 ×3026 ×3027 ×+3029 ×3030 ×3031 ×+3032 ×

7 Although only one of the walls built up against Casemate Wall 3000 was ofstacked boulders, this style was more common as a dividing wall within the domesticunits in Field E and around Cistern E64:13.

Wall 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

3033 ×3034 ×3035 ×3036 ×3037 ×3038 ×3039 ×3040 ×3041 ×3042 ×3043 ×3044 ×3045=3008 ×3047 ×

Walls in the fortification system are not included here.

The limestone boulder-and-chink walls (W3001, W3002, W3003,W3011, W3016, W3025) that abut Casemate Wall 3000 are all in therange of 0.70–1.00 m thick, load-bearing walls that can easily supportan upper storey, although irrefutable evidence for upper storey rooms islacking for some rooms. These walls consist of boulders chinked withcobblestones in a two-row construction. Each wall is stone built fora considerable height above floor level without any evidence of mud-brick superstructure. A typical example is Room 313 where Wall 3016remains standing 2.25 m above Floor E76:16.

By contrast, secondary interior walls sufficient for roof support mea-sure 0.55–0.70 m thick. Besides the difference in thickness, there is alsoa marked difference in construction techniques employed in the designof these secondary walls. In several cases (W3004, W3005, W3007),the wall was formed of stacked boulders that could have supportedwooden pillars up to ceiling level. A third style of roof supporting wallwas built of a single row of flat-topped boulders (W3024; Fig. 7.2). Inthis case also, such a wall could have supported wooden or stone pil-lars, although there is at present no positive evidence for the pillarsthemselves in Field E.8 Pillared walls of this style would allow for lightand air to circulate into the surrounding rooms.

Partition wall (3030) and low walls surrounding Cistern E64:13 (e.g.3009, 3012) are even narrower (0.40–0.55 m thick). While the large

8 See above, Field A, Building 102, where collapsed stones appear to have beenpillars supported on Wall 1005.

boulders at the ends of Wall 3013 and 3008 may have supportedwooden pillars, it is not clear that partition walls were intended toreach ceiling height. They may have been designed for safety in thecistern area, rather than for room division or roof support. The pres-ence of these three types of walls, sometimes enclosing a single room,and the arrangement of doorways between rooms strongly supports theview that this was one, or at most, two houses sharing party walls.

Stratigraphy

The construction, use and abandonment of Building 300 appears todate to the middle Iron Age II (B) (Stratum VIII). No subsequent occu-pation occurred at this location during the late Iron Age II period(Stratum VII), contemporary with Building 800 in Field C or B700 inField D (Chapter 8). Nor were there any architectural remains from theearly Islamic period (Stratum III), even though there are several struc-tures to the east (Field F; Fig. 1.2), whose pattern of collapse appearssimilar to that of Building 600 in Field D, prior to its excavation (Chap-ter 8). Serious disturbance of debris in Room 314 and partially robbedout walls (W3036, W3043) suggest a major transformation at the endof Stratum VIIIB, possibly at the same time as the digging of CentralCistern E64:13. Two occupation phases of Stratum VIII (B, A), dis-tinguished clearly in Rooms 302, 303 and 306, were represented bysequential living surfaces rather than by distinct construction levels.9

In Rooms 303 and 304, certain walls (W3001, W3002), first identi-fied with the later floor levels of Stratum VIIIA, were seen to be thesame walls in use during the earlier phase (Stratum VIIIB). In somecases the phasing is difficult to determine due to the construction styleemployed in Building 300, where walls were built in short segments thatabut rather than bond with perpendicular walls (e.g., W3032, W3033,W3047, see Chapter 12). Particular problems will be discussed on aroom by room basis.

The ceramic remains and the artefact assemblages from the roomsin Building 300 were exceptionally rich. Floors were covered with asmuch as 0.30–0.65 m of smashed vessels, artefacts and ecofacts. For

9 The distinction between major construction phases and the local resurfacing ofcertain rooms, along with the simultaneous abandonment of other living areas, hasbeen recognized by several scholars as a major factor in the archaeological record(Schiffer 1987:89; Voigt 1983: 11–12).

the rooms in which such assemblages were completely uncovered, anattempt is made in their description to list all vessels and artefacts.While there was a certain amount of contamination from the sherdmaterial included within the beaten earth ceilings which collapsed intothese rooms, the vessels listed represent the minimum number thatcould be partially or completely reconstructed and clearly identified inprimary context.

In order to do justice to the archaeological record, this housingcomplex is divided into three sectors, the western unit (a group ofrooms that lead into one another (R303, R305, R315, R316, R319)along with two rooms further west (R318 and R304); the central unit(R302, R306, R307, R308, R324, R326, and Cistern E64: 13 in Stra-tum VIIIA); and the eastern unit (rooms along Passageway 309 (R312+321, R313, R314+327, R317, R323). While we have not found evi-dence for two phases within each room, discussion of individual roomswill begin with the western unit where this sequence (Strata VIIIBand VIIIA) was evident in Room 303.

Table 7D. Strata for Field E


I 1 modernII pottery only post-UmayyadIII pottery only UmayyadIV pottery (?) ByzantineV no remains RomanVI no remains PersianVII no remains Late Iron IIVIIIA 2/repairs Middle Iron IIVIIIB 3/casemate wall Middle Iron IIIX 4/solid wall Early Iron IIX pottery only Iron I

STRATUM VIIIB

The earliest occupation in Field E is represented by the founding ofwalls on bedrock and the filling of depressions in the bedrock to createlevel floor surfaces. Bedrock itself was uncovered in Rooms 302 and314. A gravel fill that served as floor makeup was exposed in Rooms302 and 303. In the northernmost rooms, walls and floor surfaces ranup to Inner Casemate Wall 3000 and sealed against it.

Figure 7.3. Excavation Grid in Field E.

The Western Unit: Rooms 303, 304, 305, 315, 318 (Fig. 7.3)

Three parallel, broad rooms (R303, 305, 315) are located along thewest side of Building 300. The northernmost room (R303) is the largest(3.00×4.70 m), while Room 315 on the south is the smallest (2.00 ×3.00 m), because it shared its space between the principal eastern(W3024) and western (W3032) walls of the unit with Corridor 316(Table 7A). Due to the limits of excavation in Field E, it remainsunclear whether Building 300 was a single free-standing structure oradjoined another domestic complex further west. Secondly, the rela-tionship of Rooms 304 on the west and R318 on the south to Rooms303 and R305 in Stratum VIIIB remains unclear, since Square E43was not excavated, with the result that the south end of Room 304remained undefined. In addition, no exterior wall was identified on thewest and south sides of the building.

Figure 7.4. Building 300, Room 303+304, showing makeup (E44:12) underearliest surface (E44:11); row of cobbles (E44:13) at base of W3000.

Room 303 (Fig. 7.4)The Stratum VIIIB construction phase of the western unit was locatedonly in Room 303.10 Locus E44:12=E54:57 consisted of two layersof cobblestones, the first of medium size stones (0.12–0.18 m), thensmall cobbles covered by a layer of pebbles (0.03–0.06 m) and sur-rounded by hard-packed soil that served as makeup for the earliestfloor (E44:11=54:32). Visible within this makeup was a row of stones(E44:13=14) along the base of the inner casemate wall face (W3000);these stones may represent either the lowest course of the wall itselfor, more likely, a technique used as a support for the earliest surfaceat the point where it sealed against a major wall.11 These cobblestones(E44:13=14) were sealed first by the upper pebble layer of MakeupE44:12 and subsequently by the floor of Room 303.

10 Bedrock (E64:50) and a makeup layer (E54:49) were also identified in Room 302located in the central unit, see below.

11 At the time of excavation, it appeared that Cobblestones E44:13, 14 were fillwithin a foundation trench for Inner Casemate Wall 3000. Because there was no otherevidence for a foundation trench, another explanation was sought. This feature iscomparable to the single row of cobblestones (E56:8) set against the outer casemate

The Stratum VIIIB floor (E44:11) consists of a beaten earth sur-face laid above the pebbles of makeup Layer E44:12. While its westerncontinuation was not located below Wall 3001, and may have been fur-ther west in the area of Room 304, Floor E44:11 extends east overthe entire room (as E54:32) as far as Wall 3003. This surface consistsof very brown soil (10YR 6/4) with orange flecks and random pock-ets of charcoal and ash. There was a substantial patch of ash in theextreme northeast corner along with several smaller ash lenses scat-tered across the room. This evidence points to a considerable amountof burning, presumably for cooking purposes. This interpretation isfurther supported by the presence of a large patch of ash (E54:40;0.42×1.08× 0.02 m thick), immediately above Floor 54:32. This ashwas associated with a hearth formed of a circle of stones embeddedin the floor surface. A group of severely burnt cooking pot fragmentsfound on Floor E54:32 suggests that this area was used for cookingover a considerable period of time. Other finds embedded in or lyingon the floor surface consist of artefacts, lithics and animal bones.

Table 7E. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 303(B)12


E44:11/7 saucer V422 red slip54:32/31 3 bowls V479, V480, V483 red slip, knobs

3 bowls V478, V481, V482 red slip3 bowls V431, V484, V4853 kraters V416, V433, V4732 cooking pots16+pithoi V439, V459–468,

V470–472, V475–476storejar V438 hole mouthjuglet V423 red sliplid V378 mushroom shape1275 ceramic sherdsbead TJ 1219 faiencering/earring TJ 1151 bronzepin/needle TJ 1233knife TJ 10292 flakes L612, L620 utilized1 blade L625mortar TJ 1031

wall face (W3006) at the level of sloping Plaster Surface E56:10, which was sealed inturn by Plaster Layer E56:7 (see also, cobbles along face of W1012 in B113).

12 M. Judd prepared the initial quantification of pottery and objects for Rooms 302,303, 305, and 306.

Figure 7.5. Building 300, Room 303, with pottery in situ on Surface E54:31.


4 grinders TJ 1018, 1021, basaltTJ 1026, 1154

3 millstones TJ 870, 1013, 1022 upper, loaf-shaped2 querns TJ 962, 1032 basalt, saddle querns7 pounders TJ 808, 1012, 1025, 1028, chert

TJ 1109, 1143, 1226point TJ 1006 ironfigurine head TJ 1249 zoomorphicstone weight TJ 899 limestone, perforatedstone TJ 824 unworked basalttool TJ 1024 stoneanimal bonesanimal teeth

In the debris (E54:31=44:7) immediately above the floor, was a collec-tion of pottery that consists mainly of storage vessels, especially pithoi(at least 16 were identified) and storejars, mixed with fine red slippedbowls, a ceramic footed-bowl, jugs and juglets (Fig. 7.5).13 The assem-blage of chert pounders, basalt grinders, millstone fragments, a quern

13 This pottery was mended in the Near Eastern Archaeology Laboratory at WilfridLaurier University by students employed by the Ontario Work Study Programme.

and a large mortar suggests that food was prepared, stored and cookedhere. Metal tools include one iron point as well as a knife (TJ 1029)with part of the handle still attached. The knife was positioned besidethe skeletal joint of an animal, one of 15 animal bones in this locus. Allthe finds from the 1993–1994 seasons confirm the functions attributedto Room 303 in 1993, namely cooking, storage and food processing(original research by M. A. Judd, unpublished). The depth of this accu-mulation of soil, cobblestones, pottery and artefacts was ca. 0.52–0.67m.

Wall 3004 is a short wall between Doorways A and H that separatesRoom 303 from Room 305 to the south. The wall itself is formed ofthree stacked-boulder pillars connected by units of wall consisting oftwo rows of cobblestones (Fig. 7.6).14 The wall is preserved to a height of0.56–0.74 m and measures ca. 3.00 m long. One boulder at the easternend of Wall 3004 serves as the western frame of Doorway H and iscoated with plaster (E54:56) on its vertical face. Although pottery onFloor E54:32 appeared initially to continue under Wall 3004, it becameclear during excavation that the cobblestone units had slumped ontothe floor at the time of destruction sealing the pottery in place. Thematerial on the floor was covered by a hard-packed soil layer (E54:19),which contained a succession of plaster surfaces, visible only in patchesacross the room. These surfaces may have constituted a ceiling or, morelikely, a Stratum VIIIA floor that was subsequently damaged when ittoo was destroyed (see below).

Pottery and ChronologyWhile many ceramic vessel types do not have good parallels from sitesin western Palestine, the pithoi with rolled rims and the hippo stylestorejars with rounded bases from Room 303 are identical to thosefrom Field A, Building 113 (Daviau 1992: fig. 7). The best date for thestorejar forms appears to be between the 860 BC and 732 BC horizons(Hazor, Str. Xb-IX; Yadin et al. 1961: pls. CLXXII:10; CCXI:3). Jarswith a similar shape continue to appear throughout Iron Age II atTall Jawa. The best parallels for the hippo jars are those from .HorvatRosh Zayit, although these are dated to the 10th century by Alexandre

14 The use of stacked boulders/drums that supported wooden pillars was commonin the Iron Age I buildings at Shiloh. Here too, the pillars were connected by low cob-blestone walls that served to separate rooms from one another (Finkelstein, Bunimovitzand Lederman 1993:23, figs. 2.13, 2.18).

Figure 7.6. Building 300, Room 303 in background,Room 305 in foreground; Room 302 on right.

(1995:86–87). At the other end of the chronological spectrum is a vesselfrom Tall as-Sa#idiyya (Pritchard 1985: fig. 9:12) that is assigned toStratum VI (early 8th century BC). A second chronological indicatorfor the pottery from Field E Stratum VIII is the high percentage(36.3%) of red slipped and red slipped and burnished pottery. Thisis in contrast to Building 800 in Field C, where the percentage is muchlower (11.2%), suggesting a 7th century date for Stratum VII (Daviau1993).15

Room 305 (Figs. 7.3, 6)Room 305 is located immediately south of Room 303 and has a broad-room plan. Two doorways (A and H) lead from Room 303 into Room305 at either end of Wall 3004 (see above), which is plastered along itssouth face (see E54:19, 56). The wall plaster is 0.025m thick and con-tains a considerable amount of organic material. Although plaster coat-ing on wall faces appears in other rooms within Building 300, it doesnot appear anywhere else in Room 305 or in Room 315 to the south.

15 These data are based on a count of Stratum VIII vessels recovered during the1992 and 1993 seasons.

Figure 7.7. Building 300, Room 315, Oven E53:23.

The east side of Room 305 is formed by Wall 3024, which consistsof a single row of medium to large boulders, in the 0.60–0.75 mrange, fixed in place by cobblestones.16 Two distinct units comprise thesouth wall (W3037, W3035), one on either side of Doorway G, whichis located between stacked-boulders E53:9 and E53:10. Altogether inthese two walls, there are three pillars formed of medium size (ca.0.49 m) boulders stacked in two or more courses, and standing ca.0.61–0.75 m in height. Each boulder is rounded in shape and heldin place by a few chink stones. On the east of Doorway G, PillarsE53:10 and E54:8 are joined to one another (=W3037) by a lowmud-brick bench (E53:19), 0.31 m in height and 0.43 m in width.The height and composition of this unit makes it clear that it wasthe stacked-boulder pillars that supported the ceiling in this room andmay have served as a type of pillar base with an additional support,possibly in wood, set between the upper boulder and the ceiling. Anaccumulation of collapsed mud brick and stone above Debris LayerE54:51, which rested in turn on Floor E54:53, suggests that BenchE54:19 may originally have stood higher and served as a connecting

16 This wall (W3024) is comparable in construction style and width to Walls 1005and 1008 in Building 102 in Field A.

Figure 7.8. Building 300, Room 305, MortarE53:54, and bench with loom weights in situ.

wall in its own right. On the west side of Doorway G, in Wall 3035,Pillar E53:9 stands 0.54 m in height and is connected to west Wall3031+3032 by another mudbrick connecting wall/bench (E53:22) thatis only 0.28–0.43 m in height. The function of these low wall units wasprobably to give support to the stacked boulders and allow light and airto circulate between Rooms 305 and 315.

Along the west side of Room 305 was the continuation of Wall3001 with Doorway I located in the southwest corner. The bottomelevation of this section of wall suggests that it was also a Stratum VIIIAconstruction with the result that the true size of Room 305 duringStratum VIIIB remains unclear.

The earliest floor (E54:53=E53:27) in Room 305 was a hard-packedbeaten earth surface stained with nari and ash pockets. The greatestconcentration of ash (E53:24) in Floor E54:53=E53:27 was immedi-ately north of Oven E53:23, which was in position against the northside of mudbrick Bench E53:19 in Wall 3037. This oven consisted ofan inverted cooking pot (V415), broken at the point of carination, andburied in the floor surface (Fig. 7.7). The oven (V415) was supported byeight small stones, three of which were broken basalt tools (2 millstonesand a small quern fragment), sealed in place with packed mud. A fewanimal bones were also associated with the oven.

In the southwest corner of Room 305, in front of Wall 3035, weretwo slabs of stone, possibly a shelf/bench (E53:26; 0.18 × 0.86 and0.18×0.93, respectively). When found, it appeared that these horizon-tal slabs had been stacked one on top of the other and that the upperslab had slipped out of position when Room 305 was destroyed. Behindand underneath these dislocated bench stones were 8 unfired-clay loomweights (donut-shaped) and one flat perforated stone disk, objects whichindicate textile production in the area (Fig. 7.8).17

A limestone boulder mortar (E54:54), 0.55–0.63 m in diameter, wasembedded in the floor surface (E54:53) north of bench/shelf E53:26.This mortar is comparable to Mortar E54:38 located in the earliestfloor (E54:41) of Room 302 (see below). Smashed in situ on the rim ofMortar E54:54 were sherds of red slipped bowls, jugs, juglets, ordinarycooking pots and pithoi. A funnel18 whose spout fit snugly into the neckof the typical Stratum-VIII storejar was located north of the mortar.Additional sherds of vessels in use with Floor E54:53 were contained inDebris Layer E54:51 which covered the floor and its installations. Allthe pottery dates to the early Iron II and middle Iron II periods.

Table 7F. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 305(B)


E54:51, 53 2 bowls V412, V414 red slip+53:20, 27 bowl V437 no slip

bowl V430 burnished, vertical rim2 bowls V325, V427 red slip, knobs, V427=paintkrater V429 small, smudgedkrater V418 large, pink interiorcooking pot V413pithosjug V314 small, red slip, paintjug V321 red slipflask V303 small, painted

17 Unfired clay loom weights of similar shape and size to those in Room 305 werecommon at other Iron Age sites. One such group was located in the domestic buildingsin Area B at Hazor where they are dated to Stratum VA (740–732 BC; Yadin et al.1960:63; pl. XVIII:2). Another group of 34 unfired loom weights from Tell el-Far#ah(N) date to a somewhat earlier period (Stratum VIIB=10th century BC; Chambon1984:12; pl. 76:1). For a typological study and additional comparative material, seeDaviau (2002:191–197).

18 Funnels similar in form are known from Gibeon (Pritchard 1964: figs. 33:16;48:16), Tell en-Na.sbeh (Wampler 1947: pl. 77:1775) and Tall Dayr #Alla (Franken 1992:fig. 5–3:11).


funnel V4361253 ceramic sherdstripod mortar TJ 1547 basaltshell TJ 2228 Arcularia gibbosulus3 pestles TJ 1596, 1597, 1600 basaltgrinder TJ 1598 sandstone3 grinders TJ 1653, 1619, 1688 basaltpounder TJ 1652 chert8 weights TJ 1669–1976 clay, unfired loom weightsstone disk TJ 1668 limestone, perforatedpoint TJ 1613 iron

Pottery and ChronologyThe pottery in Room 305 is homogeneous with that in Room 303,although this could also be said of the somewhat later material fromStratum VIIIA. In fact, these two occupation phases must have fol-lowed each other quite quickly as the rooms in Building 300 seem tohave retained similar functions over the two phases. The presence ofMortar E54:54 in the floor of Room 305 is no guarantee that it waspart of the earliest phase of Building 300 (Cf. Mortar A13:23 whichwas embedded in the second phase floor of Building 113). This occu-pation phase came to an end with the collapse of the ceiling and stones(E54:51) from the surrounding walls. In spite of this destruction, occu-pation resumed in Room 305 and in Room 315 to the south.

Room 315The Stratum VIIIB phase of Room 315 was not exposed during exca-vation. From the Stratum-VIIIA configuration of this room it is clearthat there had been a doorway in the southeast corner that led orig-inally to Room 316 and was blocked (W3034) in Stratum VIIIA. IfWall 3034 was itself part of the redesign of the entire area after Stra-tum VIIIB was destroyed, then Room 315 would have been 4.60 m inwidth, a broad room with two doorways (G, B) like Rooms 305 andR303. For a discussion of its final occupation phase, see Stratum VIIIAbelow.

Room 304Doorway I in Room 305 led west into the south end Room 304, aspace surrounded in Stratum VIIIA by Casemate Wall 3000 on thenorth and Walls 3001 and 3002 on the east and west sides respectively.As we saw earlier, Walls 3001 and 3002 were not in use with the

earliest, Stratum- VIIIB floor (E44:11) in Room 303, although thewestern wall associated with this floor was not recovered. A deep debrislayer (E44:9=E44:16), possibly the collapse of Stratum-VIIIB walls andceiling material, accumulated in the area of Room 304 and was used asthe foundation for both Walls 3001 and W3002 (see Stratum VIIIAbelow). Only the presence of a hard-packed surface (E53:31) over asoil and rockfall layer (E53:32) within Doorway I provides evidence foradditional occupation at the level of Stratum-VIIIB Floor E53:27 inRoom 305.

Room 318South of Room 304, only the northeastern half of Room 318 wasexposed, leaving the north (W3031) and east (W3047) walls to continueinto the balks. These walls were party walls shared with Rooms 315 and319 on the east and Room 304 on the north. The discovery of this addi-tional room on the west side of the building suggests that Building 300was indeed a complex of rooms without clearly defined exterior walls.During four seasons a total area 24.00 m east-west by 12.50 m north-south of contiguous rooms was uncovered. The position of Room 318suggests that this pattern extended even further to the west and south.

The north wall (W3031) of Room 318 consists of small and mediumlimestone boulders with one very large stone that may have been a sup-port for the superstructure. Wall 3031 is founded on a layer of hardpacked soil, 0.40 m below the earliest known living surface (E53:39),which suggests that this wall belongs in fact to Stratum VIIIB. The eastwall (W3032–3047) is composed of three segments that all abut oneanother, including in its length the thickness of Wall 3033. Even thoughmany of the architectural features in Room 318 clearly date to Stra-tum VIIIA, the presence of two surfaces, each with abundant mendablepottery, as well as evidence for activities on the roof, demonstrate thattwo occupation phases (VIIIB and VIIIA) can be identified. The lackof staircases19 in Building 300, and the thickness and construction tech-niques employed in the major walls, suggest single storey occupationover two phases, rather than two-storey domestic quarters.

19 Staircases in Buildings 700 and 800 (Chapter 8) are well built between solidsupport walls and remain standing to the seventh step. If a second story were intendedover the rooms in the western unit of Building 300, one would expect some evidence inthe construction techniques of walls and door frames needed to support the weight ofupper storey walls.

The principal Stratum-VIIIB surface (E53:39) of beaten earth withnari and plaster inclusions was packed in place above a fill (E53:43)consisting of soil, pebbles and pottery dating to Iron I and early IronAge II.20 Surface E53:39 sealed up against the surrounding walls andwas itself covered with broken pottery vessels and ground stone tools.

Table 7G. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 318(B)


E53:39 bowl V534 red slip, hemisphericaljug V529juglet V326 red sliptripod cup V359 paint674 ceramic sherds2 pendants TJ 2059, 2085 limestone, shellbead TJ 20612 mortars TJ 1993, 2036 limestone, basalt2 pestles TJ 1983, 2017 basalt4 grinders TJ 1987, 1988, 1991, 2020column TJ 2123 ceramicspindle whorl TJ 2070

The Central Unit: Rooms 302, 306, 320 (Fig. 7.9)

Immediately east of Rooms 303 and R305 is the largest interior space(4.8×5.5 m) in Building 300, formed by Rooms 302, 306, and R320.Rooms 302 and 306 are divided by Wall 3005, constructed of stackedboulders and low cobblestone units (E65:21), which are an integralpart of the wall, and were probably built to support the pillars (Daviau1999:119–120; fig. 5.3c). This style of wall construction allowed a cer-tain amount of air and light to enter the smaller of the two rooms(R306). On the south side of these two rooms, there was a second seriesof low partition walls (W3008, W3013) associated with Central Court-yard 308+324. These walls, formed of tall boulders and cobble con-necting walls also allowed light and air into the northern rooms. Room320 is a narrow space, parallel to the south end of Room 306, whichopens directly into Room 302.

20 Within the underlying fill there was no evidence for Iron Age I architecturalremains even though small numbers of typical Iron I ceramic forms, such as collared-rim jars, could be identified among the ceramic remains.

Figure 7.9. Building 300, central unit, Stratum VIIIB.

Room 302 (Fig. 7.10)The area of Room 302 covers part of four squares (E54–E55 and E64–E65).21 Running through Squares E54–E55–E65 is Wall 3000, the innercasemate wall face that serves as the north wall and main support forboth Rooms 302 and R306. In Room 302, Wall 3000 remains stand-ing 2.00–2.07 m above the Stratum VIIIB floor. On the west, Room302 is bounded by Wall 3003, a 2-row boulder-and-chink wall that is

21 To facilitate recording the location for elevations and artefact finds, a 1.00 m gridwas established for Room 302, rather than using the grid numbers for each of the foursquares (see recording methods, above). In addition, the designation of Debris LayerE54:37 became the locus number for material in all four Squares (E54:37=55:37=64:37 =65:37).

Figure 7.10. Room 302, with Bench E54:24 on left, Bedrockwork surface in center, Boulder Mortar E54:38 in between.

preserved 1.34 m in height and continues south as Wall 3024. Thissouthern extension is formed of one row of large, flat-topped bouldersthat stand only 0.80 m above Room 302 floor level and separatesit from Room 305 in the southwest. Wall 3013 marks the southernperimeter of the room and forms the western frame of Doorway E. Inthis stratum, there may also have been a doorway (C) at the westend of Wall 3013 into Room 307. On the east side, Doorway F intoRoom 320, Doorway D into Room 306 and Wall 3005 constitute theperimeter of Room 302.

The founding level for the earliest Stratum VIIIB floor in Room302 consists of Bedrock E64:50 and Makeup Layer E54:49, an accu-mulation of rocky debris consisting of small and medium size cobblesexposed over an area of 0.99× 2.08 m from Hearth E54:43 to Boulder

Figure 7.11. Room 306 on the right; Room302 on left with Hearth E54:43 on upper left.

Mortar E54:38. In consistency and elevation (921.84–921.96 masl), thislocus was comparable to Makeup E44:12 in Room 303.22 Within theexcavated area of Room 302, there were no artefacts or pottery presentin the makeup, although its surface was stained by the ash from HearthE54:43.

The earliest floor (E54:41=E64:40) in Room 302 was a beaten earthsurface, approximately 2.82×4.69 m in length and 0.10 m deep. Fromnorth to south over the length of the room, the elevation rose from922.07–922.14 to 922.19–922.22 masl. Changes in elevation were alsoevident around Mortar E54:38, where it was 922.11–922.13 masl andin the area around Hearth E54:43; here the elevations ranged from921.98– 922.08 masl. Thus it appears that the floor sloped toward thetwo installations, although the surface may have subsided over time,affected by the level of the underlying bedrock.

Hearth E54:43 and Boulder Mortar E54:38 were built into FloorE54:41 and were in use simultaneously (Fig. 7.11). Hearth E54:43 wasfounded on Makeup Layer E54:49 and consisted of a single circle of

22 A small area of Makeup E54:42 under Floor E54:41 was uncovered south ofboulder Mortar E54:38. In Room 306 on the east, the makeup (E65:33) under FloorE65:29 remains unexcavated.

stones with exterior measurements of ca. 0.96–1.06 m, and was 0.23–0.26 m in height. A layer of firm soil (E54:47) formed the floor and oneside of the hearth and sealed against the lower edges of the hearthstones, but did not line the sides of the hearth as such. Inside thehearth was Locus E54:44, a very soft, fine ashy soil that containedpottery sherds standing vertically within the fill. These sherds, alongwith four iron points, apparently fell into the hearth when Room 302was destroyed. This appears to have happened while the hearth was inuse, because the collapsed debris and artefacts fused with the sherds.Some stones and ceramic sherds around the hearth area also showedsigns of burning, evidence that the hearth was probably in use for sometime before its destruction.

The ashy soil in Hearth E54:43 was comparable in texture to LocusE54:48, an accumulation of ash immediately south of the hearth. Thisash pit was 0.51×0.76 m in size and at least 0.10 m deep. It appearsto have built up over time, suggesting that the hearth was occasionallycleaned out to facilitate cooking. The relationship of Ash Pit E54:48 toFloor E54:41 remains unclear in that the sides of the floor appear toend at the perimeter of the ash. However, it seems probable that FloorE54:41 did in fact lie under the ash and was stained by it.

Directly south of Ash Pit E54:48 was boulder Mortar E54:38, whichwas embedded in Floor E54:41 and adjacent to an outcropping ofbedrock (E64:50). The exterior of the mortar was squared, while theinterior depression was rounded, ca. 0.30 m in diameter and 0.16 m indepth. This central depression was filled with soil (E54:39) of the samecomposition as Debris Layer E54:37, which covered Floor E54:41.Sherds of a pilgrim flask and other Iron II vessels were uncovered insideMortar E54:38. Two murex shells23 and polishing stones were found onthe floor beside the mortar.

A third installation, also in use with Floor E54:41, is Shelf/BenchE54:24, which was founded in Stratum VIIIB and continued in usein Stratum VIIIA. In its earlier phase, Shelf/Bench E54:24 was builtagainst the east face of Wall 3003 for a length of 3.34 m. It is ca. 0.50m wide and 0.35 m high, and was built of two rows of small bouldersand chink stones.

23 A murex shell (murex brandaris) found at Tall Dayr #Alla (Van der Kooij andIbrahim 1989:60) poses the same question as those found at Tall Jawa; namely whatcould a small number of shells have been used for, since commercial dyeing took suchenormous quantities?

On the east side of Room 302 was a plaster layer (E65:23), whichseals against the cobblestone unit of Wall 3005. Although the plasterdid not cover all of the cobbles, it did seal against the bottom courseof cobblestones sloping down from 922.09 masl to 922.06 at the levelof Floor E65:41. The plaster extends west from the wall face approxi-mately 0.13–0.15 m, a feature designed to reduce damage to the footof Wall 3005, which itself did not appear to extend below the Stratum-VIIIB makeup layer (E54:49). Although Plaster E65:23 did not con-tinue further west across Floor E65:41, these loci were contiguous andapparently from the same occupation phase.

The primary function of Room 302 during its time of use wasdomestic activity, including food storage, storage of equipment andfood preparation. Only a few of the items in use in the room wereembedded in Floor E54:41, while the majority of pots and objectswere contained in the overlying soil layer (E54:37) that filled the room.Debris Layer E54:37 was a thick (ca. 0.25 m) deposit of pale brownsoil (10YR 6/3) which included ca. 55 objects and 1786 ceramic sherdsfrom reconstructible vessels. These sherds were lying almost horizon-tally in numerous superimposed layers that were both above and belowthe layers of artefacts, including a group of metal points. Altogether 33iron points were recovered from Floor E54:41 and Layer E54:37, someof which were fused to each other and originally counted as one item.Since several points (TJ 1379) were fused to a sherd from a jar; it seemslikely that these weapons were in storage at the time Room 302 wasdestroyed.24 Ceramic vessel types present in this fill were bowls, kraters,cooking pots, jugs, juglets, flasks and storejars.

Table 7H. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 302(B)


E54:37+41 4 bowls V357, V474, V493,E55:37 V 525 red slipE65:37 bowl V363 inverted rim

pithos V4962 flasks V302, V304decanter V309 white slip, black paint1786 ceramic sherds

24 A similar find was reported from Late Bronze Age Tell Batash, where a brokenjug contained almonds and a groups of metal points fused together (Kelm and Mazar1982: fig. 11).


bead TJ 1247 starfish fossilpestle TJ 1340 basalt2 grinders TJ 1267, 1268 small, cosmetic7 grinders TJ 1271, 1283, 1285, basalt

TJ 1345, 1347,1405, 1406

grinder TJ 1400 largemillstone TJ 1238 upper, loaf-shaped2 scrapers L619, L640 lithicstone chisel TJ 1408whetstone TJ 12783 stone tools TJ 1246, 1270, 1274 chert, polishing2 pounders TJ 1349, 1401 chertspindle whorl TJ 1381 ceramicspatula TJ 1507 bone35 iron points TJ 1245, 1319–1331, iron, fused in 2s and 3s

TJ 1360–1362, 1364,TJ 1372–1374, 1376–1379

2 stones TJ 1269, 1370 worked limestoneworked stone TJ 1279 sandstonestone nodule TJ 1402 sandstone2 murex shells samplesanimal bones

A modest amount of wall collapse in the form of small (0.06–0.12m) and medium (0.12–0.18 m) sized cobblestones was present in themidst of the broken pottery and objects in Room 302 sealed under aplaster surface (E54:26), suggesting only minor destruction at the endof Stratum VIIIB. This deposit was probably the result of cobblestonewall units that fell when the ceiling collapsed and filled the room. Sincethe arrowheads and javelin points appear to have been in storage, thecause of the collapse was probably not an attack on the town. Evidencefrom other rooms in the same building may help to clarify the factorsthat brought Stratum VIIIB to an end.

Room 306 (Figs. 7.9, 11)Adjacent to Room 302 is a small space (2.00×3.60 m) designatedRoom 306, which can be classified as a long room with bent axisentry, because Doorway D is situated at the south end of its long, westwall (W3005). In this room also, the inner Casemate (W3000) serves asthe north wall of the room. A boulder-and-chink wall (W3011) abutsWall 3000 at an acute angle (80o) and runs south for 5.90 m, endingwith a well-dressed doorframe just beyond the southern limit of Room

320. At a width of 0.75 m, Wall 3011 was a major support for the cen-tral unit. Six courses were exposed in Room 306 above the earliest floor(E65:29), where the wall stands at a height of 1.25–1.38 m. Due to thelimits of excavation during the 1995 season, it is not clear whether Wall3011 divided two buildings or merely two rooms in the same structure.

The remaining architecture in Room 306 consists of one wall(W3005) on the west formed of stacked pillars, one pillar (E65:7) at thenorth end that abuts inner Casemate Wall 3000 and a second (E65:14)on the south that forms the north edge of Doorway D. On the south isa two-row cobblestone wall (W3030) with one limestone pillar (E65:20;0.46×0.65 m), which marks the west end of the wall, for a total lengthof 2.56 m. Pillar E65:20 is in line with Wall 3005, and it forms thesouth frame of Doorway D. On the east, the cobblestone unit (E65:32)of Wall 3030 abuts Wall 3011, ca. 1.50 m north of its south end. Eventhough it remains standing ca. 0.70 m above Floor E65:29, Wall 3030may have been a partition wall between Room 306 and Room 320,since it was only ca. 0.35–0.45 m thick.25

The Stratum-VIIIB floor (E65:29) was a hard packed, beaten earthsurface with red and black flecks that sealed against all four walls andthe threshold (E65:32) in Doorway D. Although this surface was notremoved, its levels (922.04–922.14 masl) correspond closely to thosein Room 302 (922.07–922.22 masl), supporting its identification as aStratum-VIIIB surface. On this surface were 21 objects and numerousceramic vessels smashed in situ. Comparable finds, many mendable withthose on the floor, were present in the overlying Debris Layer (E65:28,see Table 7J).

Threshold E65:32 in Doorway D consists of one small boulder em-bedded in Floor E65:29, covered by several rows of small cobblestonesstanding two courses high (ca. 0.10 m). The upper surface and westside of the threshold was covered with a layer of Plaster (E65:31) thatobscured further construction details. Together these loci had a totalwidth of 1.00–1.05 m between the ends of Walls 3005 and 3030.Because Threshold E65:32 was so low, the ceramic vessels and artefactsfrom Rooms 302 and 306 were scattered across its width and weresealed in the overlying deposits (E65:30, 65:27+28) which accumulatedat the time these rooms were destroyed. Of special note within Layer

25 The closest parallel for a side room separated from the main room by both astacked pillar wall and a low cobblestone partition wall is Room 335 in Building 335 atShiloh (Finkelstein, Bunimovitz and Lederman 1993: figs. 2.3, 2.18).

E65:30 are half of a perforated disk and 1 complete perforated disk,both probably related to the disks inside Room 306.

Debris Layer E65:28 was a yellow brown (10YR 5/9) soil layer filledwith smashed pottery vessels and artefacts for a depth of 0.15–0.23m above Floor E65:29. Artefacts included 1 bone spatula, an undec-orated bone or ivory spindle (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 97:744, alsoundecorated), 2 spindle whorls (Daviau 1996: fig. 6:5, 6), and 16 per-forated stones (Daviau 1996: fig. 6:7, 8), that may have been associatedwith the production of textiles.26 Architectural elements consisted of 2limestone door weights and part of a roof roller. Personal possessionsincluded 6 metal points, a bead, and several pendants. Among the foodprocessing and preparation tools was a selection of ground stone toolsand broken ceramic vessels. The small and medium size ceramic ves-sels, including 2 intact juglets (Daviau 1996: fig. 6:1, 2), were coveredwith pithos sherds, a pattern of deposition seen repeated in the super-imposed Stratum-VIIIA levels of smashed pottery in this same centralunit.

At the south end of Room 306, Debris Layer E65:28 became morehard packed and was filled with collapsed debris (E65:27), includingmud-brick material concentrated in front of Wall 3030. Some of thestones within this layer were burnt, although no distinct cooking areawas identified. The pottery again included cooking pots, red slippedbowls and juglets, and storejars.

Table 7J. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 306(B)


E65:27+26 bowl V424 red slip28, 29 3 bowls V450, V451, V458 red slip, simple rim

2 bowls V352, V452 red slipbowl V342 red slip, paint3 bowls V337, V338, V444 inverted rim, smudgedkrater V341 smallkrater V375 smudgedjar V453 hole mouth4 pithoi V454, V455,

V461, V463storejar V456 2 handlesamphoriskos V307 white slip, paint2 jugs V306, V308 painted2 jugs V311, V334 small

26 For a complete study of textile production artefacts at Tall Jawa, see Daviau(2002).


juglet V312(=TJ 1548) white slip2 juglets V313(=TJ 1511),

V348 red slipjuglet TJ 347 paintedflask V301 painted2 lamps V346, V379964 ceramic sherdspendant TJ 1627 greenstonebead TJ 1609 faience2 shells TJ 1610, 2230 conuscowrie shell TJ 2231 Cypraea annulusroof roller TJ 1552 limestonemortar TJ 1654 limestonemortar TJ 1660 basalt, red staintray TJ 1531 basalt2 pestles TJ 1633, 1651 basaltgrinder TJ 1514 basaltmillstone TJ 1601 upper, loaf-shaped6 points TJ 1592, 1611, iron

TJ 1612, 1615,TJ 1617, 1618

2 spindles TJ 1530, 1603 ivoryspindle whorl TJ 1689 ceramic2 stones TJ 1624, 1638 limestone, perforated12 stone disks TJ 1534–1540, nari, perforated

TJ 1593, 1594+1602,TJ1595, 1607, 1665

2 shells

Doorway DE65:30 bowl V336 inverted rim

pithos sherdsjug V332 smalltray TJ 1637 basaltmortar TJ 1654 limestone2 disks TJ 1634, 1666 nari, perforated

Among the bowls and juglets, there is a heavy concentration of redslipped vessels. In many cases, these vessels are not burnished or haveburnishing only on the rim and interior of bowl forms. In the case ofshallow saucers, which appears to be a form that has just entered theceramic repertoire, the burnishing is radial from rim to centre (V421)and the rim continues the line of the bowl without splaying outward.27

27 In Room 305, there was a unique example of a saucer with black paintedlines forming a cross (Daviau 2001b: fig. 3.11) that has a parallel in Tomb C atAmman (Harding 1951: fig. 1:5=Dornemann 1983: fig. 32:1). Harding emphasizedthat Tomb C should be dated to the 8th century rather than the 7th because the

Other bowl forms are similar to those found in Room 302 and in FieldsA–B, namely hemispherical bowls (Dornemann 1983: fig. 20:3), verticalrim carinated bowls (Dornemann 1983: fig. 44:LXIII), shallow bowlswith rounded sides and thickened rims (Dornemann 1983: fig. 43:XIX),and inverted rim bowls.28

Although the fabric of ceramic vessels at Tall Jawa comes in a vari-ety of wares, most of these are now known to us. In all the potteryfrom Building 300, only one vessel from Room 306 appears to be animport, namely the larger of two white-slipped amphorae. This vessel(V307=E65.88.13) has a very thin-walled, pale red (2.5YR 7/3) fab-ric covered with a thick, very pale brown (10YR 8/2), almost white,slip that has been heavily polished. The folded rim is tall and rectan-gular in section. Two flat strap handles (not otherwise represented inthe Stratum VIII corpus) spring from a mid-neck ridge and are paintedwith short black dashes on each edge (Daviau; 1996: fig. 6:3). Numer-ous black painted bands appear on the rim and sides of this biconi-cal vessel, similar to the pattern on Cypriot White Painted II–III wareimported to Hama (Riis and Buhl 1990: fig. 82:652).29 In the case ofthe Tall Jawa vessel, the base is a ring base, in contrast to the typicaldouble disk base found on a smaller white-slipped vessel from Room302 (V309, Stratum VIIIB) that appears to be a local imitation.

The presence of a roof roller fragment in Debris Layer E65:28 isevidence of the roof collapse in Room 306 that brought Stratum VIIIBto an end. Fallen wall stones were present at the north end of Room306, where the accumulation was deepest. Additional evidence for roof

ceramic wares appear to be earlier than those from the Tomb of Adoni Nur and thetomb at Meqabelein (1951:37). Dornemann appears to agree, since he locates Tomb Cin the range of 780–660 BC (1983: Table 4).

28 Dornemann (1983: fig. 20:3), in his Sequence I from the early Iron Age, illustratesa wide range of bowls with rounded sides that fall into the category of hemisphericalbowls. Bowls with vertical upright rims appear in the corpus from Tall al-#Umayri(Lawlor 1991: fig. 3.26:1) and in Dornemann’s own sounding on the #Amman citadel(1983: fig. 44: LXIII). Shallow bowls with rounded sides and thickened rims are usuallyred slipped and burnished and are common at #Amman (Dornemann 1983: fig. 43:XIX). Bowls with inverted triangular rim and smudged interior were also common atsites in ancient Ammon (Lawlor 1991: fig. 3.13:22–26).

29 The pattern of black painted lines on the sherds recovered at Hama (Riis andBuhl 1990: fig. 82:652) that probably come from a vessel comparable to an amphora(Riis and Buhl 1990: 138, fig. 63:426) appears comparable to the Tall Jawa vessel; thepainted sherds from Hama are dated to the 720 BC destruction. However, V. Kara-geoghis affirms that unlike the Hama imports, the Tall Jawa amphora is not of Cypriotmanufacture (personal communication, May 1988).

collapse is the continuation of smashed pottery in Debris Layer E65:24,which covered sherd-filled Layer E65:28 These two loci could only bedistinguished from on another by the presence of a circular ring ofstones that formed Rockfall E65:25. This pattern of collapse, which wasincomplete on the north side, measured 1.00–1.25 m across and had adepth of 0.14–0.24 m. Within the circle, its fill (E65:26) contained palebrown soil (10YR 6/3), burnt stones and a broken pithos. This featuresuggests the pattern that results from the collapse of upper wall stonesaround a large pithos, in this case one that was located against Wall3005. Vessels and a rectangular basalt mortar from the upper storey orroof terrace were scattered in the collapse.

Although no clear surface sealed Layer E65:24, the presence ofanother superimposed debris layer (E65: 18=13) suggests a collapsedceiling. When Room 306(B) was destroyed, the uppermost cobblestonesof Wall 3005 fell into the room and smashed the vessels in use atthe time. At this point, the surrounding walls with cobblestone units(W3005, 3030) remained standing, ca. 0.40 m above the floor to heightsof at least 922.79–922.87 masl. With its mud-brick superstructure,Wall 3030 may even have had a top elevation of 923.01 masl, whileboulder-and-chink Wall 3011 on the east was preserved to 923.23–923.33 masl. The pottery contained in soil Layer E65:18 was smashedin situ and much of it was mendable. Some sherds were burnt andthe collapsed mud-brick superstructure of Wall 3030 was reddenedsuggesting damage that occurred when Stratum VIIIB ended.

The presence of additional soil layers within Room 306 (E65:11, 8)suggests Stratum-VIIIA occupation at a somewhat higher level than inRoom 302 (922.50 vs. 922.22 masl). This may have been due to thesmall size of Room 306 that made it difficult to remove collapsed wallstones before the installation of a new floor.

Room 320Along the south end of Room 306 is a small space (R320; 0.70 × 2.35m) that opens directly through Doorway F into Room 302, adjacentto the southern entrance (E).30 Boulder-and-chink Wall 3011 forms theback end of Room 320, while its side walls (W3030, W3008) consistof low cobblestone partition walls. Wall 3030 on the north consists ofone large boulder (E65:20) that separates Doorway D on the north

30 Although the south wall of Room 320 was in Square E64, the floor levels weredug as E65 due to their close relationship to floors in Rooms 302 and R306.

from Entrance F to the south, along with 2 rows of cobbles and smallboulders that stand 3–6 courses high and run east to Wall 3011. On thesouth is a well-built wall unit (E64:32) of 2 rows of cobblestones cappedby flat topped small boulders running west from Wall 3011 to meet 2large boulder pillars (E64:7) that form the south side of Entrance F andthe east frame of Doorway E.

Entrance F is the full width of Room 320 and provided easy accessto the ceramic vessels in storage within the room. Here were a pithos,a very small red slipped bowl (V382), a miniature krater (V383), and abasalt grinder (TJ 2187). This small room would have been a suitableplace for storage of extra vessels when not in use. This same functionwas probably continued in Stratum VIIIA, where evidence for theposition of an upper surface is marked by the base of a toppled pithos(E64:27=33) smashed by rockfall.

The Central Courtyard—R308+324The central and eastern rooms in Building 300 suggest by their loca-tion, orientation, and style of architecture the presence of a centralcourtyard (designated R308+324). The digging of Cistern E64:13 inthis area in Stratum VIIIA obscured to a certain extent the evidence forthe earlier use of this court. At the same time, the proximity of bedrockto the surface, visible in the cistern’s mouth and three drain holes, indi-cates the suitability of this area for an open court, where water woulddrain away quickly into natural underground cavities. The deep soillayers, filled with broken pottery, preserve the remains of activities car-ried out here in Stratum VIIIB before the construction of the mouthof the cistern and Stratum-VIIIA Partition Wall 3012, which separatesthe Courtyard into two rooms; R308 on the north and R324 on thesouth. Each “room” was dug separately because of the size of the area(4.70×5.00+m), and the constraints of time during the final season.An attempt will be made to discuss the courtyard during Stratum VIIIBas one unit.

Courtyard 308/324The earliest floor in the central courtyard was a beaten earth and plas-ter surface (E64:59) uncovered in the northeast quarter. This surfaceappears to cover a layer of cobble size stones evident in the western halfof the locus. The absolute level (922.24 masl) of Surface E64:59 wasjust below that of the top edge of the stones (E64:9, 14; 922.29 masl)which lined the mouth of the later cistern. This same surface extended

underneath the packed soil (E64:71, 64:54) which built up across thearea over time31 and supported Stratum VIIIA Partition Walls 3009and W3012 around the cistern mouth. Additional evidence for a Stra-tum VIIIB surface was located on the south side of the courtyard (inR324) along the balk where the consistency of the surface (E64:70)changed as it ran east from beaten earth to gravelly soil with pebblesand small cobbles. The use of the courtyard is seen most clearly here inthe south where a 0.25 m thick layer of soil (E64:63, 64),32 containing anoticeable amount of animal bones and 1100+ceramic sherds, built upon Surface E64:70.

Along the west side were two holes that may have been connectedto Drain #1, although the holes themselves did not appear to join.One such hole was rectangular (0.10×0.20 m) and surrounded bylarge pebbles while the shape of the second hole was more amorphous.Although the proximity of the beaten earth surface (E64:70) to bedrockwas suspected, excavation ended before the underlying makeup couldbe investigated. So too, the exposure of a direct continuation of thislocus (E64:70) as far north as Surface E64:59 in Room 308 remainsincomplete. At the same time, it is clear that this courtyard providedaccess to the rooms surrounding it on all sides, and continued to serve avital function after Stratum VIIIB ended and the area was remodelledduring Stratum VIIIA (see below).

Room 326In the northeast corner of the central courtyard (R308) is a small roomor corridor designated R326. The west face of Wall 3028 and the eastface of Wall 3011 form this narrow space (1.15 × 2.40 m), which leadsdirectly into the courtyard through Entrance N, marked by the dressedsouth end of Wall 3011. At the north end, the space becomes evennarrower and may have served as a bin (R321) or dry well, west ofStratum-VIIIB Room 312.

The earliest soil layer (E65:53=56) exposed in Room 326 was onlyexcavated in part and the remainder was left in place when it wasrealized that this soil seals against the bottom course of Wall 3042 at

31 Pottery scatters within E64:54, immediately below Wall 3012, suggest continuoususe and a quick succession of phases.

32 Only in the southeastern corner was there a concentration of pebbles and gravellysoil comparable to that in Surface E64:70.

922.26 masl, and then extends under it to cover Room 321.33 The levelof this soil layer is clearly in the same range as the Stratum-VIIIB sur-face (E64:59) in the central courtyard and probably represents Stra-tum VIIIB in R321, where Soil layer E65:55 runs under Wall 3042from the north. Because this locus was not excavated all the way tothe northern limit of Room 321, against Casemate Wall 3000, theevidence for the Stratum-VIIIB relationship of Rooms 326 and 321remains incomplete.

A similar build-up of soil layers seen in the courtyard was present inR326, where Soil Layer E65:52 contained patches of plaster, a waterchannel along the west face of Wall 3028, animal bones and pocketsof hard packed soil and scattered stones. Since this layer reached thesame level (922.43 masl) as Stratum-VIIIA surface E64:52, the upperpart of this locus (E65:52) may represent collapsed ceiling material, aswas the case for Soil Layer E75:21 in Room 312, and Layer E65:54in Room 321. Since there was evidence of reuse at an even higherlevel, the space of Room 326, along with R321, appears to have beenincorporated into the final Stratum-VIIIA occupation of Room 312.

Room 321North of Room 326, and divided from Room 312 by Wall 3041, isan even narrower space (0.80 m) that extends south (2.80 m) fromCasemate Wall 3000, as far as the north end of Wall 3028. At thispoint, Wall 3041 seals against the west face of Wall 3028. The lowestsoil layers (E64:55, 56) in Room 321, excavated only in a probe atthe south end (0.75×1.25 m), consist of soil mixed with a considerablenumber of cobble size stones and pebbles, some of which showed signsof burning. Animal bones were frequent, although pottery was rare.Whether this narrow space served to compensate for the rapid drop inbedrock levels (see below) or had a more specific function, such as amidden, which also served as a dry well that would help to channelwater away from the lower floor level of Room 312 and into thecourtyard, was not determined during excavation. The only evidencefor the latter is the high percentage (90%) of chert in W3041, anamount which is in sharp contrast to the typical wall, where limestone

33 Although further excavation was not possible, one can only suppose that the southend of Wall 3041, which reduced the width of Room 321 due to its alignment, wouldhave been visible from Room 326 if in fact there had been an earlier surface runningthe full length of both rooms at a lower level.

Figure 7.12. Building 300, eastern unit, with relevant locus numbers.

boulders and cobbles are in the 80–90% range. This choice of animpermeable stone and the impression of a water channel in R326,south of Wall 3042, point to a special relationship of this narrow spacewith the nearby courtyard. At the same time, the channel may havebeen formed during the intervening centuries and not have been partof the original features in this area.

These debris layers were in turn covered by another layer (E65:54)of loose soil with areas of hard packed earth on its upper surface. Therewere also pockets of ash and nari, animal bones and 120 ceramicsherds. There is, however, no assemblage of artefacts and pottery inthis locus that would indicate the function of this space during Stra-tum VIIIB.

The Eastern Unit: Rooms 312, 313, 314, 317, 327 (Fig. 7.12)

The evidence for Stratum-VIIIB construction and occupation of theeastern unit of rooms is more complex than that for Rooms 302 and303 further west. For example, in Room 312 just east of Room 321

and the central courtyard, the bedrock slopes steeply from west toeast, dropping ca. 1.00 m from the level (922.27–922.06 masl) of thebedrock outcrop (E64:50) in Room 302. This factor is true for all therooms in the eastern unit since they share the same deep floor levels(921.25–921.00 masl). When they went out of use, these rooms wereburied under 2.35–2.80 m of collapse and fill. Construction techniquesnecessary to adjust to this change in elevation are also apparent, sincehere the walls in these rooms measure 0.70–1.00 m thick.

At least five rooms in the eastern unit are located between a seriesof north-south walls (W3011, W3025, W3016, W3028 and W3027),that tend to form long rooms. For example, Rooms 313 and 314 wereboth 6.00+m in length.34 At the same time, these parallel walls aremostly boulder-and-chink construction and remain standing 2.00+min height, by comparison with the walls in the western unit that remainstanding only 0.65–1.30 m high. When found, several rooms werewithout doorways (R312, R321), and could be understood as basementrooms, which supported an upper storey, although that is not the onlysuitable interpretation of the evidence. Due to the limits of excavationin this area, the full stratigraphic association of these rooms to Room327 and to the remainder of the house was not determined withcertainty, although it is clear that the north-south walls of these roomwere built with Inner Casemate Wall 3000 already in place. In additionto the depth of deposition, a fill layer of extremely hard “red” soilwith numerous nari inclusions was present in several rooms indicatinga peculiar destruction history, unlike the rest of Building 300.

Room 312Built up against the inner casemate Wall (W3000), Room 312(B) isa square room (2.75×3.20m) that shares the space between Walls3011 and 3025 with R321. Separating Room 312 from R321 is Wall3041, a thin (0.50 m thick) boulder-and-chink wall, which abuts innerCasemate Wall 3000 on its south face. At the point where it reaches9–11 courses high, this 2–row chert wall (W3041) is capped by smalllimestone boulders. At this height, Wall 3041 is ca. 0.45–0.53 m belowthe top of the major north-south walls (W3011, 3025, 3028) and ofCasemate Wall 3000, which was 11 courses high and stood ca. 3.00 mabove the earliest floor (E75:26).

34 This assumes that Room 314 included the area labelled R327 that was not excav-ated.

On the east of Room 312, Wall 3025 runs the length of Room313 as far as Doorway K (5.40 m) into R327/314. This is an excep-tionally well built wall, formed of small boulders and chink stones,except at its south end, where large, semi-hewn boulders frame door-way K. The total width of Wall 3025 is 1.10–1.20 m. Although onewould expect a doorway between neighbouring Rooms 312 and 313,no Stratum-VIIIB access was discovered, either through Wall 3025 orinto R327/314 on the south. This is somewhat surprising since thesecond wall to be constructed in the formation of Room 312 was mostprobably Wall 3028, which runs parallel to Wall 3025, and whose northend of dressed boulders marks the south side of Room 312. Insertedbetween Wall 3028 and Wall 3025 is a thin (0.50 m thick) partitionWall (W3043) which stands 0.60 m lower than the top of the majorwalls.35 Possibly a doorway between Rooms 312 and 327=314 wasblocked by the construction of Wall 3043, although this is not evidentin the wall itself. At the same time, Wall 3043 bonds with the northend of Wall 3028, and the earliest known floor surface in Room 312seals against and runs up the sides of the surrounding walls, makingit clear that there was no reconstruction of Room 312 during Stra-tum VIIIB. This well-preserved beaten earth surface (E75:26), probablyjust above bedrock, forms the floor and seals up against the walls, fillingin the corners. Crushed on the floor and within the overlying soil layer(E75:25) were numerous artefacts and mendable vessels, most notablya pithos with a potter’s mark (V392) and a red slipped and painted jug(V310).

Table 7K. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 312(B)


E75:25–26 saucer V397 red slip, thick walledbowl V364 red slip, vertical rimbowl V405 inverted rimcup V403krater V345 3 loop-handle feet2 pithoi V392, V4072 storejars V391, V393jug V310 red slip, paintjuglet V316 small, black burnished1859 ceramic sherdsastragalus TJ 2818 perforated

35 The height of these thin walls (3041, 3043) marks the level at which StratumVIIIA floors covered the underlying debris (see below).

Figure 7.13. Room 312, pithos (V392) in situ.


lithic flake L8562 stone tools TJ 2068, 2184 polishing stones2 mortars TJ 2082, 2180 limestone2 grinders TJ 2071, 2078 basalt2 millstones TJ 2139, 2176 basaltstopper TJ 2057 stonespindle whorl TJ 2146 ceramicloom weight TJ 2164 clay2 points TJ 2074, 2075 iron, one with rivetmetal TJ 2169 copper fragment4 sherds 95/153, 156, 162, 172 reworked

Pithos V392 was in situ on an angle that brought its rim to a point0.30 m above Surface E75:26 (Fig. 7.13). This indicates the amount ofceiling debris (E75:25) that collapsed into the room. Above the ceiling

material was another living surface (E75:21–22) with an assemblageof pottery and artefacts that were broken in the collapse. Whetherthese items were in use in an upper storey room or were on the roofcannot be determined definitively, but the amount of rockfall in bothSoil Layers E75:21 and E75:22 suggest the former. Within these lociwere two installations; Saddle Quern TJ 1898 on a compact plasterpatch attached to the quern itself and located adjacent to south Wall3043, and Installation E75:24, a stone working surface that measured0.35–0.43 wide ×0.64 long ×0.15 m thick.

Table 7L. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 312(B), upper storey/ceiling


E75:21–22 bowl V401 red slip, vertical rim2 bowls V402, V404 red slipbowl V396 inverted rimkrater V406cooking pot V395jar V408 hole mouth2 jugs V344, V3941291 ceramic sherdssocket stone TJ 2060 limestonestone tray TJ 2011 basaltbowl/mortar TJ 1935 basaltknife TJ 2029 ironlithic blade L837 chert3 pestles TJ 1914, 1966, basalt

2032grinder TJ 1924 basaltmillstone TJ 1917 upper, loaf-shaped3 querns TJ 1898, 1899 saddle

20452 pounders TJ 1944, 1965 chert

The pottery and artefacts within Room 312 were all part of the equip-ment of food processing and preparation activities typical of Building300. Although it is not possible to determine how long these activitiescontinued in this room, it is apparent from the archaeological recordthat Room 312 was filled with additional rockfall (E75:18) and thenreused in Stratum VIIIA.

Room 313At 6.00 m in length, Room 313 is one of the longest rooms in Building300.36 By contrast with Rooms 302 (4.80 m) and R303 (4.70 m), thenarrow end of Room 313, with a width of 2.30 m, is along innerCasemate Wall 3000. Wall 3016, which is footed on bedrock at thesouth end of Room 313, forms the eastern wall of this room and thewest wall of Passageway 309. No doorway connects Passageway 309 to

36 The other long room is Room 314, exposed only in its southern two thirds. Sincethere is a possibility that Wall 3026 continued west beyond Doorway K as a partitionwall, the northern third was labelled R327. Together, Room 314+327 are 6.75 m long.

Room 313, so that the function of the corridor in relation to Building300 remains obscure. While it appears that Wall 3016 was the outsidewall, it had a thickness of only 0.75 m and was a 2-row thick wall,whereas Wall 3025, the west wall of Room 313, was a 1.00 m, 3-row wall, more appropriate for an outer wall. Be this as it may, bothwalls abut the inner casemate wall face (W3000) and are capable ofsupporting one or more upper stories. The only entrance is DoorwayK at the south end of Wall 3025, leading into Room 327/314.

The earliest floor in use is Surface E75:16, an earthen surface imme-diately above bedrock, that was covered in places with ca. 0.02 m ofplaster. Floor E76:16, exposed only in a 1.00 m square probe, sealsagainst Wall 3016 on the east and Wall 3026 on the south. Resting onthe floor in Room 313 were sherds of a smashed pithos, ashes and ani-mal bones in a layer (E75:15) of darkened soil (10YR 4/4) that suggestsextensive organic remains, possibly from the storejars which had beenpropped up along the wall. All ceramic vessels were associated withfood preparation and storage. No evidence for other activities could beidentified.

Table 7M. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 313(B)


E75:15–16 cup V403 1 handlepithos V387amphoriskos V389 biconical, white slipflask V388 painted

A series of soil layers (E75:14, 13, 12) which accumulated above DebrisLayer E75:15 probably consist of collapsed ceiling remains, as evidentin the presence of plaster lenses, crushed mud-brick, pottery, especiallycooking pot sherds, 23 animal bone fragments, broken millstones, anda limestone mortar (TJ 1605). The source of the mud brick is uncer-tain, since Casemate Wall 3000 remains standing 3.00 m above FloorE75:16, and its superstructure could hardly have tumbled into Room313 to the depth of Soil Layer E75:14. A more probable source wouldbe the superstructure of flanking Walls 3016 and 3025, or of southWall 3026 which is formed of one row of medium sized boulders andremains standing 2.09 m above the plaster floor.

Where one would expect evidence for Stratum VIIIA reuse of Room313, there is instead a reddish soil layer (E75:11; terra rossa) with plas-ter/nari inclusions, especially in the south end of the room. This layer

Figure 7.14. Room 314, looking north, Wall 3027 on right.

appears to have been a deliberate fill that marks the abandonment ofRoom 313 and is even more evident in Room 314 (see below). In con-trast, at the north end of Room 313, there was a group of ground stonetools including broken millstones, a saddle quern (TJ 1506), a limestonedoor weight (TJ 1508), and a chert blade (L863). Since no mendablepottery was associated with these artefacts, it is not clear whether thisrepresents a work area on the roof that had a different pattern of col-lapse, or was just a midden. Additional rockfall loci (E75:3, 5), whichrepresent the end of occupation in Building 300, cover the flankingwalls of Room 313 and extend the full length of the square over southWall 3026.

Room 314 (Fig. 7.14)Another rectangular room (R314), comparable in size to Room 313(2.75×4.25 m; +R327=6.75 m long), runs parallel to Room 317 andPassageway 309 to the east and flanks the central Courtyard (Room308) to the west. Doorway K from Room 313 leads into the northernthird of Room 314 (designated R327), framed by the end of Wall 3025and the north face of Wall 3026. Doorway M is framed by the southface of the same wall (W3026) and by the end of Wall 3027. A thirddoorway (L), located in the southwest corner, is formed by the ends of

Walls 3028 and W3029, and opens into Courtyard 308. Wall 3028 isa two-row wall with boulder-and-chink construction in the size rangeof 0.75–0.85 m thick, which indicates that it served as a major supportwall for Rooms R314+R327. In contrast, Wall W3036, which formsthe south end of Room 314, is only 0.55–0.60 m thick. Wall 3036 runseast-west to abut the north end of Wall 3029 and the south end of Wall3027, where it stood ca. 0.80 m lower than the tops of the flankingwalls, suggesting that it may have been robbed out. However, since thissame pattern was also true of Wall 3043 on the south side of Room312, the full meaning of this anomaly remains unclear. Midway alongits length, Wall 3036 appears to rest on a bedrock step whose northface was cut away to form the lowest “course” of the wall itself.

In terms of construction, the most outstanding wall is W3027 (Fig.7.14), formed of stacked-boulder pillars, one monolithic pillar, andcobblestone connecting units all topped by large rectangular boulders(Daviau 1996: fig. 7; 1999: fig. 5b). Both Walls 3027 and W3036 arefooted on bedrock (E74:24), which was exposed in the eastern halfof Room 314, where excavation reached floor level. In the west halfof the room, rockfall layer E74:18 remains in place to a height of1.00 m above bedrock. In view of the depth of Stratum-VIIIB floorlevels in Room 314, almost 1.00 m below those in courtyard 324+308,excavation in this area did not reveal the complete picture of the trafficpatterns among the rooms in the eastern unit or their relationship tothe central courtyard during Stratum VIIIB.

Covering the limestone surface (E74:24)37 is a thin layer of soil thatfills the shallow pockets in the bedrock. On this floor, and under 0.20cm of overlying soil, were a fibula, tibia and patella of a person whostood ca. 1.58–1.67 m in height. While the rest of the skeleton wasnot recovered, one may assume that it lies buried in the west halfof the room under the rockfall (E74:18) which remains unexcavated.The collapse itself (E74:23, 21, 22) appears to have fallen from northto south, and to have been a ceiling which supported red slippedbowls, a grinder and tabun fragments. This ceiling was covered in turnby collapsed wall stones (E74:21), and additional artefacts includingseveral iron points.

37 Bedrock was initially identified as a “plaster surface”, when first uncovered in themiddle of Room 314 at 921.28 masl. A similar situation occurred in Room 313 where“plaster” Surface E75:16 was exposed at a comparable elevation (921.25).

Table 7N. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 314(B)


E74:20, 21, 23 2 bowls V409, V410 red slip, black paint2 bowls V385, V386 smudgedbowl V411 yellowbowl V390 red slip, vertical rimminiature jug V526473 ceramic sherds2 blades L684, 685 chertgrinder TJ 1661 limestonemillstone discarded burnt fragmentsaddle quern TJ 1662pecking stone chert2 points TJ 1590, 1614 irontabun fragments

DestructionThe cause of the original Stratum-VIIIB collapse and the reason forskeletal remains in Room 314 are unclear, although earthquake is apossibility. What is certain is that Wall 3027 with its distinctive architec-ture remained standing to its full height of 1.80–2.00 m above bedrockwith its capping stones in place. Rockfall E74:21 fell into Room 314from the north, possibly representing the collapse of an upper storeywall or another partition wall that divided the full space into two units(R314+R327).

Partially covering the rockfall in the south end of Room 314 wasa lens of plaster at the bottom of a deep clay layer (E74: 22, 20,19) that contained nari inclusions and scattered stones. This compactmaterial was also found south of Wall 3036 in Room 323 (E74:15,17), where it was separated from the same fill in Room 314 by aloose, sandy soil layer (E74:14, 8) which seems to fill a robber trench38

above Wall 3036. However, this same sandy layer was present bothunder (E74:14) and over additional layers of hard soil and nari clumps(E74:7, 9). The origin of this hard, compact soil, or terra rossa, was mostprobably Cistern E64:13, cut at the beginning of Stratum VIIIA. Wecan imagine the problem of where to put all the soil from the natural

38 The fact that there are other walls (W3041, 3042, 3043) that are of the same sizeas Wall 3036 (ca 0.50 m thick), and did not reach the preserved height of the majorwalls which they abut, suggests that these walls were deliberately built in this way atthe same time. Thus the appearance of a robber trench (E74:8) above Wall 3036 mayrequire another explanation.

depression, which the ancient inhabitants emptied and enlarged toform the cistern.39 It appears that they sacrificed several eastern roomswhose deep floor levels made reuse unpractical. At the same time, thedeath in Room 314 was sealed under the fill, and the area was usedonly as an open work area during Stratum VIIIA. Evidence for suchan interpretation is the uneven upper level of the fill layer (E74:7) andthe presence of broken pottery, a limestone mortar (TJ 1503), a spindlewhorl (TJ 1396) and several flagstones (one possibly a socket stone) inthe overlying soil layer (E74:4). Caught in the general destruction inDoorway L was a figurine (TJ 1375; Daviau 2002:62–63) consisting ofa red slipped clay “tree” trunk with the impressed figure of a nudefemale on one side. This form is not the usual pillar figurine type,where the woman’s skirt forms the pillar. In this case, the female figureis an addition to clay cylinder.

Additional evidence can be seen in the contrast between this areaand the uppermost remains in Room 312 (see below), and in theposition of stones (below E74:18) within Doorway L that blocked theentrance to the cistern area almost to the height of Wall 3036. West ofthe doorway was Stratum-VIIIA Wall 3044, which surrounds Corridor325, further cutting off Room 314 from the area around the newcistern.

Room 317Room 317 is east of Room 314 and immediately south of Room 313,separated from it by Wall 3026. Approximately the same width (ca.2.5 m) as room 313, Room 317 appears to end on the same line asRoom 314 giving it a length of only 4.30 m. Only the southwest cornerof south Wall 3048 was exposed, at the point where it abuts the eastface of Wall 3027. Although not excavated, it seems apparent that Wall3016, or its continuation along Passageway 309, forms the east wall ofthe room. While it would have been interesting to see if Room 317 wasalso abandoned after the disaster at the end of Stratum VIIIB, onlythe uppermost soil layers and rockfall (E74:3=E75:10) were removed.At these levels (923.00 masl), the reddish soil that filled Room 314 andspilled over into Room 313 was not encountered.

39 A similar dilemma was faced annually by the excavation team, since the soildumps were restricted to certain areas on the tell itself, due to the rights of thelandowners.

Figure 7.15. Building 300, western unit, Stratum VIIIA.

Room 323South of Room 314, the hard red soil of brick-like material with nariinclusions (E74:9, 15) is present south of the walls (W3036+W3027+W3048) which serve as the north wall of Room 323. Although only anarrow segment (1.00–1.50 m) of this room was excavated, it is clearthat the same depositional sequence seen in Room 314 is present hereas well. As a result of the depth of deposition, and the apparent aban-donment of the eastern unit of rooms in Building 300, Stratum-VIIIAremains can only be described for the western and central rooms.

STRATUM VIIIA

The Western Unit: Rooms 303, 304, 305, 315, 316, 318, 319 (Fig. 7.15)

The rooms of the western unit of Building 300 were reused and, insome cases, remodelled following the destruction of Stratum VIIIB. Al-

though the same sequence of superimposed floors and ceilings evidentin the central unit could not be duplicated with the same certaintyin the western unit, it is clear from the addition of new walls, andespecially from the ceramic vessels and artefacts in situ under the finalStratum-VIIIA collapse, that these two units were in use simultaneously.

Room 303In Room 303, the Stratum-VIIIA builders reused Wall 3003 on theeast and founded Wall 3001 within Debris Layers E44:7+9 on thewest. Although Wall 3001 is a two-row boulder-and-chink wall thatis on average 0.80 m thick and could have supported a ceiling overa major room (303) within Building 300, there is evidence to suggestthat this was not the case. When found, Wall 3001 was preserved only1–2 courses in height (0.25–0.32 m). So too, Wall 3002, which formsthe west side of Room 304, is ca. 0.85 m in width and is preserved toa height of only 0.35–0.65 m. This minimal preservation suggests thatthese were either partition walls or foundations, which could have beena footing for wooden pillars or mud bricks, rather than walls that stoodthe full height of the room.

Evidence for a Stratum VIIIA floor (E44:7, upper levels=E54:19) inuse with Walls 3001, W3003 and W3004 is marked by the presence of anumber of objects and flat-lying pottery at a level of 0.50–0.80 m abovethe earlier floor (E54:32=44:11). This hard-packed soil layer (E54:19),compressed by the collapse of stones from the surrounding walls whenBuilding 300 went out of use, contained several superimposed plasterlenses suggesting a collapsed ceiling.

Table 7P. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 303(A)


E54:19+ saucer V421 red slipE44:7, upper bowl V425 red, hemispherical

cooking pot V486jug V4341566 ceramic sherdstray TJ 786 basaltmortar TJ 1130 limestonegrinder TJ 1116 limestone

At a somewhat higher level, above the fallen stones and plaster frag-ments embedded in E54:19, was a soil layer (E54:14, 13=E44:6) withash pockets, animal bones and teeth, indicating cooking areas and a

group of food processing tools. From the same loci were a collection ofunique artefacts and ceramic vessels that point to cultic activity, includ-ing a basalt tray (Daviau 1994: fig. 6.2), a strainer bowl,40 a nearly intactred slipped juglet (E54.112.1), sherds of a white slipped and painteddecanter, the upper half of a female figurine (TJ 1119) and tripodcups,41 one with petals hanging from the carination just above the base.This assemblage suggests a different range of activities from those onthe lower floor, where artefacts and ceramic vessels seem to have beenused mainly for storage and food processing, while the upper floor orroof had a greater variety of activities, including elements of a domesticcult (Daviau 2001b).

Table 7Q. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 303(A), upper level


E54:13–14 bowl V487 burnishedE44:6 cooking pot V488

2 pithoi V489, V490juglet V360=TJ 1132 red slipdecanter V377 red slip, 2 strainersstrainer bowl V491 red slip, holes in basetripod cup V358=TJ 1475 paintedminiature cup V492886 ceramic sherdsfigurine TJ 1119 female, mould-made, paintedstone TJ 1114 limestone, perforated

Room 304The eastern (W3001) and western (W3002) walls of Room 304 are bothboulder-and-chink walls set into a deep Stratum VIIIB Debris Layer(E44:9=15+16) of yellowish brown soil (10YR 5/4) that continued tobuild up inside this room. Probes through the debris did not encountereither the Stratum-VIIIB or -VIIIA floors uncovered in Room 303 tothe east of Wall 3001. Within this debris layer was a large amount ofsherd material (820), animal bones (569), and a few artefacts consistingof two basalt hand grinders (TJ 884, 966) and a ceramic spindle whorl(TJ 947). While these finds suggest domestic activities, their patternof distribution appears random and there is no evidence of cooking.Because no specific activity areas could be identified, the accumulation

40 A strainer cup with handle from Level VII at Beth Shan (James and McGovern1993: fig. 52:4) is the closest parallel in terms of size and shape.

41 Perforated tripod cups are attested as early as the 9th century B.C. at #En-Gev(Mazar et al. 1964:10; fig. 8, pl. 12A).

of sherds and animal bone fragments in Room 304 suggests a middenin an abandoned room or in an area especially designed for thatpurpose.

DestructionThe pattern of rockfall suggests that the inner Casemate Wall (W3000)collapsed into Room 304 from the north, covering almost the entirearea of Square E44. Only along the south balk was there an accumu-lation of gravel (E44:5) that may represent a segment of ceiling, eitherfrom Room 304 itself or more probably from the casemate room ata higher level. Since Square E43 was not excavated, the continuationof this locus in the south balk was not traced and its original func-tion remains uncertain. Of interest is the large number of artefacts (20)contained within the rockfall (E44:6, 2) from Casemate Wall 3000 andfrom the walls of Room 303. While most of these objects were the usualground stone tools, there was one complete millstone (TJ 736) and thealabaster handle of a jug (TJ 688), comparable to a jug from Dayr #Alla(#Amman National Museum).42

Room 305 (Fig. 7.16)Following the end of Stratum VIIIB in Room 305, the ceiling material(E54:21=50) which accumulated above the fallen wall stones servedas the foundation for Stratum VIIIA occupation. Within this debris,the inhabitants extended Wall 3001 to the south, so that it formed thewest wall of both Rooms 303 and R305, and the north frame of door-way I. Wall 3004 on the north remained in use as did Wall 3024 onthe east and Walls 3035+3037 on the south. Doorway H showed evi-dence for a rebuild in the form of a semicircle of stones that markedits north side. This same feature, possibly a support for the threshold,is also seen in Doorway G from Room 305 into Room 315. A hard-packed soil layer (E54:15) and severely disturbed artefacts and pottery(E54:12) suggest reuse of this area within the new confines Room 305.

The domestic activities evident in the Stratum VIIIB use of Room305 probably continued in this final occupation phase, although theartefact distribution was less clear in the archaeological record, dueto the severe collapse of the surrounding walls at the end of Stra-tum VIIIA.

42 Personal observation, 1995.

Figure 7.16. Building 300, western unit, Room 319, 315, 305 (leftto right), Corridor 316 with stairs in Doorway J (foreground).

Table 7R. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 305(A)


E54:12+15 bowlskratercooking pot sherdsflask V305 paintedstrainer sherds772 ceramic sherdstray TJ 1351 basaltstone TJ 1365 polishingmortar TJ 900 limestonepestle TJ 781 basaltgrinder TJ 913 basalt3 millstones TJ 784, 789, 851 upper, loaf-shaped2 pounders TJ 783, 1422 chert

Collapsed wall stones (E54:9) fill Room 305 and mark the end ofoccupation. Within the collapse in Doorway I on the west (E53:21)was a fragment of worked bone (TJ 1631) and a silver earring (TJ

Figure 7.17. Building 300, Room 315, with cobblestone floor and pillared walls.

1755).43 These few refined artefacts can be associated with the numer-ous specialty items and figurines found in the uppermost loci in Build-ing 300, pointing to a complex social and economic system in place inthis rural town.

Room 315 (Figs. 7.16, 17)Adjoining Room 305 on the south is Room 315, a small room only2.00×3.00 m in size. Excavated in 1994, Room 315 was exposed in thenorthern half of Square E53. By the end of the 1995 season, only oneStratum-VIII floor (E53:17) had been reached. Although it is possible

43 Earring TJ 1755 was a high status possession that was only partially preserved;for a full description, see Daviau (2002:42–43). Several earrings in the gold hoard fromTawilan with similar characteristics have been compared to the jewellery from Nimrud(Ogden 1995:72), although detailed publication of the Nimrud tombs has not yetappeared. A silver earring with a pendant cluster from Tel Michal is also comparable toNeo-Assyrian jewellery, a style that reached its apex during the Persian period (Muhlyand Muhly 1989: fig. 25.10:195).

that this floor was in use at the same time as Stratum-VIIIB floorsin Rooms 305, R303, and R302, Room 315 is presented here as anintegral part of Building 300 in its later phase. This judgment is basedon the evidence for reconstruction seen in a possible blocked doorwayat the south end of Wall 3034, and on the floor levels, which werecomparable to the Stratum-VIIIA surface in Room 305.

Room 315 is bounded on the west (W3032), south (W3033) and east(W3034) by 2–row boulder-and-chink walls comprised of small (0.25–0.50 m) boulders. Wall 3033 on the south remains standing ca. 0.76 min height, with a total width of ca. 0.70 m. Wall 3034 on the east (ca.0.60 m thick) runs south from a stacked-boulder pillar (E54:8) in northWall 3037. Midway along its length, Wall 3034 becomes a cobblestoneunit that abuts south Wall 3033.44 The north wall (W3035, W3037)is formed of two units flanking Doorway G, each section consists ofstacked boulders (E53:9 and E53:10) with mud-brick or packed mudconnecting units (E53:19, 22), which are preserved ca. 0.32 m and 0.56m high respectively. Mud-brick detritus within both Rooms 305 and315 (E53:11) indicates a certain amount of collapse from these units.

The western boundary of Room 315 is composed of Wall 3032which is formed of several discrete units, including Wall 3031 that runswest into the balk. Wall 3031 consists of large boulders, two courseswide (ca. 0.63 m wide); Wall 3032 runs north to seal against its southface. A stone on the north face of Wall 3032 has a vertical, semi-dressedside that suggests it was the southern frame of a very large doorway (I)in an earlier phase. The southern end of Wall 3032 abuts Wall 3033,the south wall of Room 315.

Cobble Surface E53:17 covers the floor of Room 315 and continuesup the west face of Wall 3034 and along the base of Walls 3033and W3032. As far as could be observed, this surface is comprisedof limestone cobbles in the range of 0.06–0.25 m that were laid ina mud plaster bedding. Three additional stones were positioned in asemicircle on the cobbles as a threshold between Pillars E53:9 andE53:10 in Doorway G (see Doorway H above). Running north-southon Floor E53:17 were two parallel lines of cobbles (E53:11a and 11b)that connect the south Wall (3033) to stacked pillars E53:9 and 10.

44 This unit in Wall 3034 may mark an earlier doorway between Rooms 315and R316 that was blocked in Stratum VIIIA, although this sequence could not beconfirmed. At its present level (922.51 masl), Surface E53:17 appears somewhat higherthan the Stratum VIIIB-floors in Room 305 (922.32 masl) to the north.

These rows of cobbles were found in a state of collapse along witha certain amount of mud-brick material, but appear to divide Room315 into three equal parts, each ca. 0.80 m wide. This arrangement,and the cobble surface itself (E53:17), which seals the floor and thelower parts of the surrounding walls, suggests special measures to createa room impervious to intrusion by small animal pests and moisture.Room 315 may have served as a kind of bin or granary for sacksof foodstuffs, although in its latest use period a number of ceramicstorejars were in the room along with millstones, 4 iron points and anobsidian arrowhead (TJ 1500).

Additional food preparation tools, 917 pottery sherds, and 1 ironpoint were present in the overlying debris (E53:6). Evidence for thedestruction of Room 315 is present in the collapse of the ceiling (E53:4)which filled the room and covered the low mud-brick wall units(E53:19, E53:22). The most distinctive finds recovered from the ceil-ing were a tall tripod mortar of vesicular basalt (TJ 1185; Daviau 2002:fig. 2.84:1) and a pumice bead (TJ 1192).

Room 316 (Fig. 7.16)Room 316 is a corridor (ca. 1.00 m wide×3.00 m in length) parallel tothe east side of Room 315, that connects Room 305 with the cookingarea in Room 319 on the south. This walkway includes two entrances,Doorway B into Room 305 and Doorway J into Room 319. If thesuggested phasing for Room 315 is accepted, it is possible that Corridor316 was an integral part of Room 315 during Stratum VIIIB, beforeWall 3034 was constructed, although within Corridor 316 itself there isno evidence for an earlier phase.

Doorway B on the north leads directly into Room 305, while onthe south Doorway J is marked by a rise of 0.25–0.30 m. This rise isaccommodated by three steps, which extend the full width of Corridor316 and are formed of limestone flags held in place with chink stones.A beaten earth surface (E63:23) seals up against the north edge of thelowest step and against the flanking walls (W3024, 3034). This surfaceis marked by the presence of plaster and ash embedded in the floor. Atthe south end of the stairs, the stones of the top step serve as a thresholdin Doorway J.

Covering the surface within Room 316 were several concentrationsof broken ceramic vessels surrounded by the soil of the collapsed ceiling(E53:18=63:15). A group of pithos sherds were smashed on the floor atthe north end of the corridor, while cooking pot sherds were scattered

along its length. Not surprisingly, no artefacts were located in this hightraffic area. Above the stairs was an accumulation of mudbrick likematerial (E63:8) that filled the space between the two flanking walls(W3024 and 3034). While clearly part of the archaeological record forthis corridor, the origin of this hard-packed material may be assignedto the upper storey. Only one artefact, a chert pounder (TJ 2018), and33 ceramic sherds were recovered from this locus. Accumulated soil(E63:3) and topsoil (E63:2) sealed both the collapsed ceiling and thewalls of Corridor 316.

Room 319 (Fig. 7.16)Parallel to the south wall of Room 315 is a narrow space (1.00× 6.30m), designated Room 319. This area is enclosed on the north by Wall3033, which it shares with Room 315, and Stairs E63:17; Wall 3047 ison the west, and Wall 3040 and Partition Wall 3038 are on the south.All three walls (W3033, W3040, W3047) are 2–row, boulder-and-chinkconstruction with Wall 3033 extending from Doorway J to the westface of Wall 3047. At this point, Wall 3047 abuts Wall 3033 on its southface. In turn, Wall 3040 abuts Wall 3047 on its east face. This southernwall runs east only 2.20 m where it ends adjacent to Oven E63:10. Atthis point a 1–row, L-shaped partition wall (W3038) abuts the southface of Wall 3040 and continues east forming the southern perimeterof the cooking area (E63:21). The east end of Wall 3038 is marked bya 2–row wall stub (E63:22) which may have framed a doorway (P) ormarked the position of a robber trench (E63:7).

Along the south side of Room 319 is a recess (E63:21) which mea-sures 0.27× 2.40 m within its surrounding wall (W3038); here the wallstands 0.90–0.93 m high. Within this recess is a large oven (E63:10),consisting of an overturned pithos without its base (Fig. 7.18). Thepithos measures 0.53 m in diameter at the shoulder and the wall of thevessel is 0.02–0.03 m thick. The rim of the pithos is at floor level and itsneck and shoulder are sealed in place by a hardened layer of soil andplaster (E63:11) that fills the space between the oven and the adjacentwalls.45 Next to this plaster is an accumulation of ash and soil (E63:24)

45 The utilisation of an inverted pithos packed around with clay to form an oven issimilar to Oven B63:30, which was also flanked by a one-row partition wall (W2019;see above). The location of a pithos oven in the thickness of a wall is also seen at TelDan, where an upside down storage jar filled with ashes was set into W 5070 (Biran1999:45; figs. 5, 6).

Figure 7.18. Room 319, Oven E63:10.

which built up against a hard-packed earthen bench or shelf (E63:16)within the eastern corner formed by Wall 3038 and Wall Stub E63:22.Resting on top of this installation was an iron point (TJ 2073), whilewithin the soil that formed the bench/shelf were numerous fragmentsof flint.

Inside the inverted pithos was a layer of loose soil (E63:12) thatfilled Oven E63:10 when it went out of use. Below this soil, the neckof the oven was filled ca. 0.40 deep with hardened soil (E63:13) thatlooked like mud-brick material and included 70 fragments of the ovenwall. Another distinct soil layer (E63:14) contained ash pockets and 18oven fragments. Missing from this assemblage are cooking pots sherds,although several were recovered from Corridor 316.

The floor of Room 319 is a beaten earth surface with plaster andhardened earth inclusions (E53:42=63:18).46 Although this surface is

46 Although identified as “mudbrick” in the field, no true bricks with mortar werefound either as a superstructure or as brick collapse. Firm, packed earth or pisé withorganic inclusions appeared scattered throughout the soil layers adjoining OvenE63:10.

best preserved in the western end of Room 319, it clearly seals againstStairs E63:17 on the east and extends into the recess to form thesurface on which Oven E63:10 was placed. Present on this surface arethe usual ubiquitous ground stone tools used in food processing. Clearlythis area was intended as a food preparation and cooking room. Withthe collapse of the surrounding walls and ceiling, Room 319 and recessE63:21 were filled with the same soil and “mud-brick” debris and smallboulders (E63:6=53:38, E63:4) seen in Room 316. Here, too the mud-brick detritus was more plentiful in the west end, near Wall 3047.

Table 7S. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 319(A)


E53:38= small jug V528E63:6 882 ceramic sherds

mortar TJ 1939 basalt, small2 mortars TJ 1964, 1994 basaltmortar TJ 2003 limestonepestle TJ 2067 basaltgrinder TJ 1959 basaltmillstone TJ 1998 upper, loaf-shapedquern TJ 2000 basaltpecking stone TJ 1947 chert

Room 318To the west of Rooms 315 and 319 is Room 318 where remains oftwo occupation levels were exposed in the eastern half of the room.This can be seen most clearly by the addition of two architectural fea-tures, stacked-boulder pillar E53:40 and one boulder of a second pillar(E53:41). Pillar E53:40 stood adjacent to the west balk and remained inplace four courses high (0.96 m) above a hard-packed floor surface. Inuse with these pillars was a floor (E53:37), in place above the Stratum-VIIIB surface (E53:39). The lowest Stratum-VIIIA surface must havebeen in use for some time, since it was covered by a layer of soil repre-senting the build-up of a living surface. Both loci were damaged bysubsequent rockfall that appears to represent wall collapse. Embed-ded within the surface and the collapse were small boulders and chinkstones, as well as soil with patches of packed earth (mud-brick mate-rial) and mendable pottery, including cooking pots, red slipped bowlsand juglets. Also on the surface and embedded within it there were 32artefacts that indicate numerous food processing activities.

Table 7T. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 318(A)


E53:37 bowl V319 red slip, paint, very smallbowl V330 red slip, burnishedcup V318cooking pot V320juglet V324=TJ 1908 red sliplamp V371504 ceramic sherdspendant TJ 1934 stonemortar TJ 1946 basalt, small2 mortars TJ 1897, 1956 brokenmortar TJ 1895 tripod7 pestles TJ 1911, 1913, 1915, basalt

TJ 1916, 1918,TJ 1919, 1920

8 grinders TJ 1912, 1921, 1922, basaltTJ 1938, 1950, 1951,TJ 1953, 1963

2 millstones TJ 1923, 1925 upper, loaf-shaped2 querns TJ 1896, 1969 basalt saddle querns4 pounders TJ 1943, 1945, 1952, chert

TJ 1960spindle whorl TJ 2026 ceramic3 stones TJ 1910, 1958, 2008 workedweight TJ 1941 basalt

Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey/RoofSuperimposed above E53:37 was a soil and rockfall layer (E53:35) thatcontained small and medium cobble size stones and small bouldersalong with mendable pottery clusters. Two almost complete red slippedjuglets mark this surface while large pithos sherds suggest food storage,probably on the roof.

Table 7U. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 318(A), upper level


E53:35 jar V327 hole mouthjuglet V315=TJ 1867 red slip and paintjuglet V366 incised checkerboardpendant TJ 1930 pumice2 pendants TJ 1859, 2225 Glycymerisshell dish TJ 1860 Uniopestle TJ 1883 basalt, small

Room 322East of Room 318 and south of Partition Wall 3038, there was noevidence for an exterior wall for Complex 300. Instead, a debris layer(E63:5) exposed in the southwest corner of Square E63, and probablyequal to E53:36 further west, suggests an additional room (R322) whichlay to the south of Corridor 319. As in E53, the soil layer excavated in1995 (E63:5) was not completely removed as the purpose of excavationwas merely to delineate the south face of the L-shaped walls of Room319. In spite of this limited exposure, additional rooms surroundingcentral Cistern E64:13 seem very likely. No entrance into this complexof rooms from the outside was identified prior to the end of excavation.

DestructionDestruction along the west side of Building 300 appears to have oc-curred in stages. While the major collapse brought down the ceilingsand made it impossible to remodel the building, a midden area (E44:5)that consists of gravel and 300 ceramic sherds accumulated aboveRooms 303 and 304, just south of wall collapse E44:2. There were noartefacts in Gravel Layer E44:5, whereas Rock Layer E44:2 containeda limestone quern and a mortar, a basalt millstone, a chert pounder,and an alabaster jug handle along with fragmentary ground stone tools.While E44:2 may represent part of the original destruction, E44:5 mayhave been the result of later activity, prior to the full collapse of thewall system, which finally covered both E44:2 and E44:5 with a layer ofboulders.

The Central Unit: Rooms 302, 306, 307, Cistern E64:13, Cistern Area 308+324, Room 326 (Fig. 7.19)

Room 302Following the destruction of Stratum VIIIB in Room 302, the occu-pants reused the existing walls (W3000, W3003, W3005, W3013), andlevelled the collapsed ceiling to form a new surface. This plastered floor(E54:26=27=E55:19), initially exposed in 1992, seals up against Case-mate Wall 3000 on the north, Shelf/Bench E54:24=55:24 and Wall3024 on the west, Wall 3013 on the south, and slopes up againstWall 3005 on the east. Shelf/Bench E54:24, originally founded onMakeup E54:49 of Stratum VIIIB, is formed of 2–3 rows of semi-dressed stones and several long stone slabs (E54:24 and E55:24) thatform a corner against Inner Casemate Wall 3000 (Daviau 1993c: fig. 4).

Figure 7.19. Building 300, central unit, Stratum VIIIA.

The uppermost slab of the shelf/bench measures 0.19–0.30 wide, 0.94long, and 0.12 m thick. Bench/shelf E54:24 runs south, ending justnorth of a windbreak (E54:28) that consists of a large basalt saddlequern (0.29×0.57 m) set into the floor on its long edge. The quernprotected a cooking area located in the corner formed by the end ofBench/shelf E54:24 and Quern E54:28 itself. A scatter of cooking potsherds lay on ash stained Surface E54:26, adjacent to the quern.

The eastern extension of Surface E54:26=E65:12 was clearly visiblewithin a sub-balk left against Stacked Boulder E65:14 of Wall 3005.Here the surface, a distinct plaster layer, ca. 0.10 m thick, is on anangle above Stratum VIIIB Debris Layer E65:37, as it slopes downfrom Wall 3005. Additional plaster was present on the west face ofthe adjoining cobblestone unit (E65:21) of Wall 3005. Further south,

within the north balk of E64, Surface E54:26=E65:12b is very patchy,possibly the result of heavy traffic through Doorway E from Room 302to Cistern E64:13, which was the central feature of Building 300 duringits final occupation phase.

On this floor (E54:26=55:21), the artefacts that had been in useduring its occupation were broken and scattered across the room andmixed with the overlying debris (E55:19, 54:23). Along with cookingpot sherds were those of red slipped bowls, some on the upper surfaceof Bench E54:24 (Fig. 7.20), basalt saddle querns, upper loaf-shapedmillstones, pestles, pounders, and a variety of mortars. Sealed in posi-tion on Bench E55:24 by a layer of plaster (E54:19) were several minia-ture basalt tools along with the base of a ceramic figurine, a ceramicstrainer vessel, a perforated stone, storejars and pithoi.

Table 7V. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 302(A)


E54:23, 26, 27 bowlE55:19, 21 cup V399

kratercooking potspithos V469storejar sherdsstrainer bowl V420 finger size holes887 ceramic sherdsbead TJ 553 starfish fossilstone TJ 548 chert, polishingmortar TJ 503 miniature, basaltpestle TJ 542 basaltgrinder TJ 557 granite?/porphyry3 grinders TJ 545, 550, 551 limestone8 grinders TJ 516, 517, 543, basalt

TJ 563, 570, 586,TJ 977, 1017

4 querns TJ 558, 587, basaltTJ 929, 996

quern TJ 569 limestone, largepounder TJ 565 miniature, chertpoint TJ 526 ironfigurine TJ 493loom weight TJ 568 clay

Evidence for the collapse of the Stratum-VIII ceiling (E54:18) and thesuperimposed fallen wall stones (E54:5, 7) does not show clearly what

Figure 7.20. Room 302, Bench E54:24 with broken pottery.

activities might have been carried out on the roof. Only a small number(3) of ground stone tools were recovered, and they were scattered overRooms 302 and R303. Thus the pattern of destruction in these tworooms is similar, even though Room 302 leads into the Cistern Area(R308+324) and a different pattern should be expected, if Room 308was in fact unroofed. A more complete sequence of use on both theStratum-VIIIA floor and upper storey is seen in Room 306.

Room 306The inhabitants of Building 300 used Walls 3000, 3005, 3011 and3030 in their reuse of Room 306 during Stratum VIIIA. No plas-ter surface, comparable to Floor E54:26 in Room 302, was apparent,but a series of superimposed debris layers, each with flat-lying potterystrongly suggests continued occupation. The lowest Stratum-VIIIA sur-face (E65:18; 922.46–922.58 masl) is marked by an accumulation ofpottery and artefacts, with the heaviest concentration in the centre ofthe room. At this point, the floor is ca. 0.11–0.15 m above the east sideof Plaster Floor E54:26, where it seals up against Wall 3005 at levels of922.49 and 922.38 masl.

Superimposed above the collapsed stones of E65:18=13 were twomore debris Layers (E65:11, 8). Soil Layer E65:11 contained fragments

Figure 7.21. Room 306, pottery in situ.

of plaster and fallen wall stones which filled Room 306. In the southernhalf of the room was a small accumulation of pottery along with a bonespatula and a perforated stone disc (Fig. 7.21). That this was the first ina series of superimposed Stratum-VIIIA surfaces, as was apparently thecase east of Wall 3011 in Room 312(A), is confirmed by the fact thatSoil Layer E65:11 was above the topmost stones of Wall 3030.

Debris Layer E65:8 contains the same sequence of accumulation asLayer E65:18; namely, a layer of smashed ceramic vessels and artefactscovered by fallen wall stones. This debris layer (E65:8) consists oflight gray soil (10YR 7/2) marked by scattered fragments of plaster,suggesting a ceiling that broke up when it fell into the room. It extendsthe full length of Rooms 306 and 320, representing the final phase ofR306(A). The pottery scattered across the collapsed stones and soil ofE65:8 consists of ca. 1100 sherds, some from red slipped bowls withinverted triangular rims that were decorated with black bands andwhite wash which fills the space between the bands.47 These vessels areassociated with spindle whorls, basalt grinders, mortars and millstones,and an iron point.

47 This decorative scheme is described by van der Kooij and Ibrahim (1989: 103;fig. 117) as “characteristic of the Ammonite potters” in Iron IIC, 750–600 B.C.

Table 7W. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 306(A)


E65:8+11 saucer V333 red slip2 bowls V356, V451 red slipbowl V353 red slip, paintbowl smudgedkratercooking potpithos V449 hole mouthpithos V495jug V369 red slip2 juglets V349, V354 red sliplamp1133 ceramic sherdswhetstone TJ 1020 basaltmortar TJ 985 limestonemillstone TJ 978 basaltpounder TJ 975 chertwhorl TJ 967 ceramicspatula TJ 1153 bonepoint TJ 985 irondisk TJ 1167 limestone, perforatedknob TJ 1009 bone, small3 sherds 93/301, 302; reworked

94/140

The final destruction of Building 300 consists of more than a few fallenceilings. The evidence in Rooms 306 and R302 shows that the wallsalso collapsed, filling the rooms with boulders and cobblestones andsmashing all the ceramic vessels in use at the time. Roofs fell in as well,being covered in turn by more fallen stone, possibly derived from thecobblestone wall units that were preserved to the same height as thestacked pillars with which they were associated.

Cistern E64:13 (Figs. 7.22–24)

The plan of Building 300 during Stratum VIIIA, especially the layoutof rooms in the central unit, indicates that it was rebuilt with seriousmodifications, especially the infilling of several eastern rooms (313,R314+327, R323) when Cistern E64:13 was dug. The cistern itselfappears to have been cut in an area where a natural depression filledwith terra rossa had served as a sump for rain water in Central Court-

Figure 7.22. Cistern area with Wall 3009 onleft, and Wall 3008 on right of Cistern E64:13.

yard 308 during Stratum VIIIB.48 The new cistern was roughly circularin shape (5.69 m north-south, 5.98 m east-west, carved out of bedrockto a depth of 2.57 m from ceiling to floor. A ledge/shelf of rock, ca.0.36 m in height and varying in width from 0.50–0.73 m, ran alongthe southwest perimeter at floor level. The characteristics of this ledgewere not clear,49 because it was covered with the same plaster (E64:17)that completely lined Cistern E64:13, except for the ceiling. Marks atvarious points on the plaster indicate water levels within the cisternat various times in the past. At present, there is no way to determinewhether these marks reflect ancient or modern water levels, since waterfrom the surrounding area has continued to collect in the cistern.50

48 Such cavities are seen wherever bedrock has been cut through as a result of roadbuilding activities in the #Amman area.

49 No attempt was made to excavate the ledge. It may have been merely a hardervein of bedrock that the rock cutters left in place. However, a similar ledge, also alongthe south side, appears in Cistern D15:2, and may have served in both cisterns as aguide to low water levels.

50 The landowner was not surprised at the discovery of a cistern in this locationsince he has seen water, which collected here during a rain storm, seep away quickly(H. Talafiyeh, personal communication, June 1993).

Figure 7.23. Cistern E64:13, north-south section; drawn by J. R. Battenfield.

Within the cistern, and covering most of its floor area, was a coneof soil that had filtered in through the principal opening, which islocated off-centre to the north. Probes within the cone (E64:18, 19, 20,21) yielded soil samples51 and little else.52 Although the cone was notremoved, the fact that no pottery was recovered from the probes withinthe cistern suggests that it was cleaned out subsequent to the Iron Age,possibly for reuse during the early Islamic period.53

In addition to the mouth, there were three blocked openings,54 whichappeared to be secondary, used only for draining water into the cisternbut not for removing it. These openings (#1, 2, 3) were visible in the

51 A soil sample was also taken by P. Warnock in the secondary cone (E64:22) underdrain opening 2 in the southwest, immediately north of the ledge.

52 Debris containing Iron Age II sherds and a few bones entered Cistern 64:13during the winter of 1993–1994. However, this additional material cannot be used todate the construction or use of the cistern.

53 The cistern in Field D (D15:2) had been partially emptied in modern times andthe debris, containing Iron Age pottery sherds, was dumped onto the northwest cornerof Building 600. The ceramic evidence is not diagnostic, since the neighbouring fieldsare filled with Iron Age sherds. Although it may have been first cut and used during theIron Age, its location suggests that this cistern was reused in the Umayyad period, aswas Cistern I at Dhıbân (Reed 1964: pl. 99). See Battenfield, forthcoming.

54 The “drains” into Cistern E64:13 appear to be natural crevices, comparable tothose seen in Cave/Cistern S-1.

Figure 7.24. Cistern E64:13, plan and section drawings, showinglocation of drain holes and mouth; drawn by J. R. Battenfield.

ceiling from inside (Fig. 7.24). Drain #1 was blocked with stones andrubble, while Drain #2 appeared to be filled only with soil. By the 1995season, the opening of Drain #1 had not been found on the surface,although some evidence for Drain #2 appears in Room 324, whilecrevices at floor level in Room 307 indicate the location of Drain #3.55

55 During excavation, these depressions could not be followed to determine theirexact connection to Drain #3, although they were clearly in the same area as theopening seen from inside the cistern.

The principal opening where water could be drawn out of CisternE64:13 is a cylindrical shaft (0.95× 1.15 m) carved out of bedrock witha height of 0.68–0.72 m. Plaster E64:17 ran up to the underside of theshaft where it still appears in patches, especially at the point where fourstone perimeter walls (E64:9, 64:10, 64:11, 64:14) are positioned abovethe shaft. These walls, formed of chert slabs and limestone boulders,possibly cut out of the cistern itself, stood to a height of 1.40 m abovethe base of the bedrock shaft. Traces of plaster (E64:16) were preservedin the corners between the walls and on their inner surfaces, probablyintended to fill the crevices between the wall stones, and to protect boththe shaft of the cistern and the ceramic vessels lowered into it. Theuppermost course of each shaft wall formed a paved stone floor aroundthe cistern’s mouth. The construction sequence of these cistern mouthwalls is not clear, due to the presence of a series of overlying partitionwalls (W3009, 3012). These walls surround the mouth and obscure thedimensions of the shaft walls. However, it seems that shaft Wall E64:9on the north was earlier than west Wall E64:10 which abuts it from thesouth.

The choice of this precise location for a cistern appears to be basedon the presence of natural drain holes. These holes appear to haveall fed into a natural cave which could account for the shape andsize of Cistern E64:13, since it does not share the proportions of the“standard” types known from other Palestinian sites (Wright 1985:fig. 238). Secondly, there is nothing to indicate that a cistern in Field Ewas in use before the founding of the Iron Age settlement in Stratum Xor in Stratum IX–VIIIB, prior to the rebuilding that took place at thebeginning of Stratum VIIIA. This sequence explains the presence ofthe terra rossa in Stratum-VIIIB rooms following the collapse of theirceilings, and the difficulty which the ancient inhabitants would havehad in removing large amounts of soil and stone from this cavity withthe surrounding rooms already in use.

When found, Cistern E64:13 was capped by a single large boulder(E64:4; 0.70×0.75× 0.70 m in height) that fit snugly into the mouthformed by the perimeter walls. Whether this boulder was in use duringStratum VIIIA cannot be determined with certainty since the cisternmay have been plugged at any time after Building 300 went out of use.However, parallels such as the cisterns at Khirbet Raddana (Callaway1983:53) suggest that the mouth was capped during the periods of useto protect and conserve the contents.

In Transjordan, the site with the most impressive number of cisterns

is Dhıbân, where 100 cisterns were located on the tell and in the sur-rounding area.56 Cistern I, in use during the “Arab” period in Build-ing A, was generally circular in shape with a diameter of ca. 6.50 mand a height of 5.90 m from the floor to the opening in the bedrock(Reed 1964: pl. 99). On top of this opening were what looks like twostages of stone lining for the shaft which measure 3.80 m in depth.Reed (1964:47) suggested that Cistern I was in fact an Iron Age fea-ture, probably in secondary use, because the shaft was north of centre.He does not explain why this characteristic was a sign of Iron Age con-struction, but it does coincide with Tall Jawa Cistern E64:13, where theshaft is definitely north of centre.57 At the same time, Cistern I is verydifferent in shape from Cistern E64:13.

Hill country sites in western Palestine also contain rock-cut cisterns.58

The best parallel for cisterns under the floors of Iron Age structuresis Tell en-Na.sbeh (McCown 1947:129). Here the cisterns are bottle-shaped or cylindrical, usually deeper than they were wide. Also at Tellen-Na.sbeh, the location of the cisterns inside the houses was random,although they appear in three instances to be adjacent to interior walls(McCown 1947: fig. 54).59 While the excavators admit that the openingsof certain cisterns were in roofed rooms, they assumed that for the mostpart the presence of a cistern coincided with an open court area,60 asif the only way to collect water would be from rain falling into thecistern itself (McCown 1947: 215, 217). In fact, this is probably the leastefficient water collection method, at least when compared to collectingwater from surrounding roofs and channelling it to the cistern.61 The

56 Unfortunately, the precise location of these cisterns was not indicated on the sitemap (Reed 1964:46). This omission makes it virtually impossible to evaluate the inter-pretation of the excavator who correlated the number of cisterns with the injunction ofMesha that individuals should construct cisterns under their houses (Reed 1964:46).

57 No details of the six cisterns uncovered by members of the Dhıbân team insoundings at "El-#Al near .Hesban are included in the brief report on the site by Reed(1965:12–16).

58 Although Tell el-Far#ah (N) shares much in common with Tall Jawa, especially theuse of stone pillars in houses, there are no references to cisterns under the Iron Agehouses (Chambon 1984:36–38).

59 Cistern 156 appears to be adjacent to a wall constructed of standing pillars andcobblestone units, similar to the location of cisterns in Iron Age I buildings at KhirbetRaddana (Callaway and Cooley 1971:13).

60 While this author assumes a similar situation for Cistern E64:13 at Tall Jawa, itis important to note that there was a lamp recovered in the collapse beside Wall 3012(Stratum VIIIA).

61 The plan and section of each cistern is not available in the final publication; only

large number of cisterns (53) indicates that Tell en-Na.sbeh was notlocated near a continuous source of running water sufficient for thepopulation, a situation comparable to that of Tall Jawa.

The 63 cellars at Gibeon were also rock-cut features that clearly hada distinct function, since the majority were unlined and very porous(Pritchard 1964:9). Only two of these cellars (L. 204 and 208, 208s,209, 209w) were converted into cisterns during the Iron Age (Pritchard1964:10). Even these cisterns, like the remaining cellars, were bell-shaped with an average diameter of 2.00 m (Pritchard 1964:1).62

Late Bronze Age cisterns at Beth-shemesh, some of which were re-used in the Iron Age, appear to be similar in shape to Cistern E64:13at Tall Jawa. Among the 24 cisterns reported, Cisterns 17 and 18 arein the same size range (ca. 4.50–5.00 m in diameter), with a rock cutshaft surmounted by unhewn stones (Grant and Wright 1939:41, 43;fig. 4). By contrast, Middle and Late Bronze Age rock cut cisterns,best represented at Hazor in Areas D and E, are cylindrical in shape.Cistern 7021 in Area E is bottle-shaped with a diameter of ca. 2.50m and a depth of 9.00 m (Yadin et al.1958: pl. CLXXXIV).63 InArea D, there are four cisterns, three of which (9024, 9027, 9028)opened directly from the bedrock, while the mouth of Cistern/Silo9017, had originally been cut from bedrock, but had acquired overtime a shaft built of four to five courses of field stones (Yadin et al.1958:118; pl. CLXXXII). Such cisterns probably served an individual house,whereas Cistern E64:13 was central to several units of rooms thatsurrounded it on all sides.

The Cistern Area (Fig. 7.25)At least four partition walls (W3008, W3009, W3010, W3012) sur-round the mouth of Cistern E64:13, with an entrance on the north(Doorway E) that leads into Room 302. Partition Wall 3008 is pairedwith the north wall (W3013) of Room 307 (see below) to form theframe of Doorway E. In construction, Wall 3008 is similar to the other

a small number of the 53 cisterns are illustrated (McCown 1947: pls. 44–45). However,the photograph of Cistern 363 shows a “down-drain” which channelled water into thecistern.

62 At Arad in southern Palestine, large cisterns supplied the Iron Age citadel (Shiloh1992:288). These cisterns appear in plan to be more than 10 m in extent; detailedpublication is still awaited.

63 Cistern 6243 in Area C is even smaller, 0.90×1.30 m with an elliptical shape, andca. 5.20 m deep.

Figure 7.25. Cistern E64:13 and its surroundings.

partition walls in that it is ca. 0.50–0.60 m thick and is formed ofsmall (0.25–0.50 m) limestone boulders, above two rows of cobblestones(E64:32). This wall, already in use during Stratum VIIIB, stands (ca.0.70 m) high and fills the gap between limestone boulder pillar E64:7band Wall 3011.

The builders utilized the same construction techniques for Wall3009, which is formed of one row of small flat-topped boulders abovecobblestones. Due to the use of this building technique, it is not possibleto determine on architectural grounds which wall was constructed first;Wall 3009 is, however, clearly in position above the eastern perime-ter wall (E64:14) of the mouth of the cistern, clear evidence that thepartition walls were constructed after the cistern was completed. Walls3008 and W3009 meet at a right angle formed by pillar E64:7b. At itssouth end, Wall 3009 appears to join Wall 3012, although a unit of cob-blestones may in fact be debris that collapsed into a doorway leadingto the cistern mouth from Room 308. Another partition wall (W3012)runs east from the south end of Wall 3009 toward Room 314, formingthe south end of Room 308. All of these low walls may have served atone time or another as shelves for water-carrying vessels, as well as tokeep people and things from falling into the cistern.

Room 324 (Fig. 7.25)Evidence for a Stratum-VIIIA use of the cistern area is seen mostclearly in southern Room 324, where the soil layers above Stratum-

VIIIB Surface E64:70 served as makeup for the Stratum-VIIIA floor(E64:61). This floor surface consists of beaten earth and was coveredwith smashed pottery. Surface E64:61 extends across the cistern arearunning up to Wall 3010 on the west, W3044 on the east, and W3012on the north. Wall 3010 appears to rest on underlying Surface E64:70or to be embedded in the debris layers (E64:64, 63) above it. This wallis formed of two rows of cobble size stones and capped by one row ofsmall boulders. Altogether Wall 3010 stands six courses high (0.75–0.90m) and forms an L-shaped enclosure against the east face of Wall 3007,immediately south of the cistern mouth (E64:11). The space betweenthe two walls is filled with soil and cobbles (E64:25), which initiallysuggested that Wall 3007 was strengthened at this point. If this werenot the function of this feature, then its real purpose may be suggestedby the presence of diagnostic storejar sherds that indicate a bin/shelf orwork area.

On the east side of the Cistern Area, Wall 3044 was built imme-diately above a plaster layer that appears to have been the originalStratum-VIIIA surface (E64:61) that extends into Room 314, where itseals the thick layer of terra rossa. Wall 3044, also a one-row limestoneboulder wall, forms an L-shaped recess or corridor (R325) against thesouth end of the west side of Wall 3028.64 This effectively blocked directaccess from Room 314 to the cistern through Doorway L, althoughthe Corridor may have served as a ramp leading into this area fromthe south. The stratigraphic situation of the two walls (W3010, W3044)south of the cistern area, indicates that both were features associatedwith the Stratum-VIIIA use phase.65

Although pottery was abundant in this use phase (648 ceramicsherds), it is clear that there was considerable traffic in the cistern areaand vessels cannot be said to be in situ, at least not in a primary context.The scattered animal bones and the small number of artefacts clearlyindicates that this was not an area where people carried out daily activ-ities of the kind performed in the adjoining rooms, such as Rooms 302,303 and even in Storeroom 306.

64 Another example of a partition wall that forms an L-shaped space is Wall 3038 ofRoom 319, which surrounded Oven E63:10 (see above).

65 Excavation in Corridor 325 ended at the level of Stratum-VIIIA floor levels withLocus E64:68.

Room 308The debris layer (E64:63, 64) recognized in Room 324 continues alongthe east side of Cistern E64:13, where it runs under Wall 3009 (asE64:71) and extends north (E64:52) as far as Wall 3008+3045. WithinDebris Layer E64:52 were patches of plaster, brick material, animalbones, a single bead (TJ 2122), a cowrie shell (TJ 2124) and almost1200 ceramic sherds. Whether these finds are evidence of extensiveuse of the area or of a deliberate fill prior to the construction ofStratum VIIIA features is difficult to determine.

Two partition walls (W3012, W3009) that run along the south andeast sides of Cistern E64:13 were badly disturbed by the final destruc-tion of this area, but appear to have been Stratum-VIIIA features builtabove debris layers E64:71 and E64:54. These low walls, only twocourses in height, consisted of one row of flat topped small boulders.The north end of Wall 3009 abuts the south face of Wall 3008. At itssouth end, Wall 3009 appears to end before it meets Wall 3012 whichruns east. This space left an opening between the walls to access thecistern. Wall 3012 in its turn ended midway between the cistern andthe west wall (W3028) of Room 314 thereby separating Room 308 onthe north and R324 on the south.

The surface (E64:61) identified in Room 324 appears to continueeast of Wall 3012, where hard-packed soil with pockets of nari andbrick-like material (E64:51) are well preserved. In situ against Wall 3028is a rectangular limestone trough (E64:57=TJ 1827), which is quitesmall in view of its position near the cistern (exterior measurements,0.26×0.35× 0.23 m in height; interior, 0.17×0.27× 0.15 m in depth).Due to the lack of diagnostic finds in the immediate area, the precisefunction of this installation remains uncertain.66 At the same time, thelarge number of ceramic sherds, randomly distributed across the area,indicates discard rather than the final destruction of the building.

Within Room 308 proper, a beaten earth surface (E64:52) marksthe Stratum-VIIIA use phase. In this area, close to major Walls 3011and W3028, the surface suffered severe damage from rockfall thatoccurred at the end of Stratum VIIIA. Along the east side, closer toWall 3028, the surface is in better condition. Here a section of plasterfloor (E64:55) was exposed that probably continues north into an area(R326) adjacent to Room 308.

66 No evidence for animals in Building 300 has been identified, with the result thatwe cannot interpret this trough as a water trough for small animals.

Table 7X. Pottery and Artefacts in Cistern Area, Stratum VIIIA


R308, R324 lamp sherds1690 ceramic sherds3 mortars TJ 689, 694, 849 basaltmillstone TJ 691loom weight TJ 906 ceramicspindle whorl TJ 932trough E64:69 limestone

Room 307 (Fig. 7.19)South of Room 302 and west of Cistern E64:13 is Room 307. Thissmall rectangular room is enclosed by two stacked-boulder walls(W3007 on the east and W3013 on the north), each with connectingcobblestone units. The east face of Wall 3007 was built over the west-ern edge of the mouth of Cistern E64:13, clear evidence that the cisternwas dug before the reconstruction of the surrounding rooms. On thewest, Room 307 shares with Corridor 316 a party wall (W3024) whichis formed of flat topped boulders, while Wall 3039 on the south fillsthe space between Walls 3024 and W3007, abutting both of them. Theonly evidence for a doorway (C) was in the northwest corner formedby Walls 3024 and 3013, where rockfall (E64:38) filled the space at thewest end of W3013.

The principal floor, a beaten earth surface (E64:62) with plasterinclusions, covers a layer of cobble size stones and seals against all fourwalls. Only in the northwest corner is there a hole in the floor thatmay be related to the drain holes (especially Drain #3) feeding intothe central cistern. On the floor and within the collapsed ceiling androckfall layer (E64:26=58) was a considerable amount of restorablepottery, including an intact saucer bowl, and a variety of artefacts.

Table 7Y. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 307(A)


E64:26=58 saucer V398=TJ 2159 red slip, intactE64:62 3 saucers V441, V443, V507 slipped

saucer V513 slipped, incisedsmall saucer V5047 bowls V440, V442, V505, red slip

V508, V509,V516, V517

2 bowls V445, V448 vertical rim


large bowl V511cooking pot V5123 juglets V447, V501, V514 red slip, paintamphoriskos V5021225 ceramic sherdsbead TJ 2202 glassmortar TJ 2215 basalt2 pestles TJ 2137, 2185 basalt9 arrowheads TJ 2133, 2144, 2145, iron

TJ 2204–2209spindle TJ 2203 ivory2 whorls TJ 932, 2200 ceramic spindle

whorls, brokenloom weight TJ 906 clayweight TJ 2211 basalt

Pottery and ChronologyThe most significant clue for the identification of the assemblage ofceramic vessels in Room 307 with Stratum VIIIA occupation is thepresence of an increasing number of saucer bowls. This form wasrare in Stratum VIIIB, where the dominant small bowl forms werethe hemispherical bowl (e.g. V350) and the shallow, bent sided, simplerim bowl (e.g. V493). The introduction of the saucer, first with radialburnishing (V421) and then with ring burnishing, appears in Stra-tum VIIIB, but develops rapidly in Stratum VIIIA. This development isan important link with the Stratum VII buildings (B700, B800), wherethe hemispherical bowl is absent and the saucer bowl is the dominantform (see detailed discussion, Chapter 12).

DestructionThe destruction of Stratum VIIIA in the cistern area is marked by col-lapsed wall stones and accumulated soil (E64:60=23, 26, 15, 12, 5, 3)covering the entire area, including Room 307. The heaviest concentra-tion of boulders was present within R324 near the south balk, a factwhich suggests the proximity of a wall running east-west. There was noevidence of ceiling material;67 however, it is not certain that this areawas unroofed, since lamp sherds were present. Artefacts of daily usewere also scattered throughout the collapse.

67 Due to the lack of burning during the destruction and abandonment of thesebuildings, there is no clear evidence for roof construction.

The cause of this destruction was not apparent in the archaeologi-cal record. The few iron points recovered in this area from both Stra-tum VIII phases suggest casual discard or loss, rather than a seriousbattle, thus demanding another explanation for the abandonment ofthis major domestic complex. While earthquake is possible, politicalchange may also have been involved. Re-use of the cistern during theUmayyad (Stratum III) period is possible although the scant occurrenceof Umayyad pottery is not strong evidence for such an interpretation.Clearly, Cistern E64:13 had its principal use during Iron Age II.

Room 326+321The narrow space (R326) located between the east wall (W3011) ofRooms 306 and R320 and the west wall (W3028) of Room 314, con-tinued in use during Stratum VIIIA. At the same time that PartitionWalls 3012 and 3009 were built in the cistern area, a wall (W3042)was built that separated Room 326 from R321 further north. This wallconsists of two rows of small limestone boulders that stand 4–5 courseshigh (ca. 0.75 m), and bonds only with the upper courses of Wall 3041,which runs north to Casemate Wall 3000. What was peculiar about thisconstruction is the fact that Wall 3042 is only preserved for 4 courseswhereas Wall 3041 is 9 courses deep at the point where it was sealedagainst by Stratum-VIIIB Surface E75:26 in Room 312. If Wall 3042was indeed a Stratum-VIIIA construction, it is strange that there wasno clear evidence of a rebuild of Wall 3041 in its upper courses whereit bonds with Wall 3042.

Within Room 326, beaten earth Surface E65:45 seals up againstWall 3042 and covers a patch of plaster on the south face of the wall.The surface itself was covered with gray, black and red flecks andscattered patches of plaster. Perpendicular to Wall 3042 at the levelof the second course of stone from the top is a single line of smallboulders, which extends along the east face of Wall 3011. This featureis poorly understood in its present position, although it may have servedas a bench/shelf in the vicinity of the cistern.68 Surface E65:45 wassealed by another beaten earth and plaster Surface (E65:44) whichcovered the bench/shelf and reached the top of Wall 3042.

68 A single row of cobblestones (E56:8) along the face of a wall was used outsideCasemate Wall 3006 at the point where two superimposed plaster layers meet the wall.The same technique is also seen in Casemate Room 201 (B53:9), at the point where acobblestone floor sealed with plaster (B53:7) meets the west wall (B53:5) of the room.

On the north side of Wall 3042, additional soil layers (E65:47+48)built up or were installed as a fill under Soil Layer E65:46, which coversthe top of Walls 3041 and W3042 and forms the foundation for Cob-blestone Surface E65:43. This surface was well preserved only in thewest half of Room 312(A) above R321, where the pavement coveredboth walls that had formed R321(B). A few patches of the pavement,along with scattered large cobbles (E65:44), were located above R326along with a limestone door weight (TJ 1795). The cobbles were sealedby a hard-packed plaster surface (E65:42), fragments of which werealso found among the cobbles in Locus E65:44. Best preserved abovethe cobblestone pavement is plaster Surface E65:43, which was presentacross the entire area of Room 312(A). From this point on, the super-imposed soil layers in this area are part of one large room (312A) thatextends from Wall 3011 to Wall 3025.

The Eastern Unit: Rooms 312+321, 313, 314+327 (Fig. 7.26)

Among the five rooms (312, 313, 314, 317 and 323) located on theeast side of Building 300 west of Passageway 309, only one (R312)appears to be in use during Stratum VIIIA and associated with thosein the western and central units. The depth of the topsoil and itsconfiguration above the occupational debris is similar to that over theother rooms of Building 300. At the same time, the original elevationof the floor levels in the Stratum VIIIB house points to a differentconstruction style along Passageway 309, a corridor which was notsignificantly changed in Stratum VIIIA. The boulder-and-chink walls(W3011, W3025, 3016) of Rooms 312 and 313, that run perpendicularto the inner casemate wall face, appear to remain functional. Thesewalls which were all in the range of 0.80 m or more, could easilybe reused following the destruction that covered the lower cross walls(W3043, W3036) at the north and south ends of Room 314.

The suggestion that the north-south walls (W3011, W3025, W3016)supported a second storey in the original Stratum-VIIIB occupation ismost clearly seen in the traffic patterns between rooms in this unit.Doorway K in the southwest corner of Room 313 led into Room327, and Doorway L, located in the southwest corner of Room 314,led into the courtyard. Since there appears to be no connection inStratum VIIIB between Room 314+327 and Room 312 on the northand Room 323 on the south, access from above was possible and mostlikely. However, this was probably not the case in Stratum VIIIA, when

Figure 7.26. Building 300, eastern unit, with relevant locus numbers.

Walls 3043 and 3036 were no longer barriers between occupied areasand the remaining debris suggests little or no occupation in Room 314.

Room 312During Stratum VIIIA, Room 312+321 became a single room. Assuch, Room 312 shared a party wall with Room 306 on the west andwas divided by a short section of Wall 3028. Soil Layer E65:4 was prob-ably a surface superimposed above the plaster floor (E65:43), a surfacecomparable to Debris Layer E65:8 in Room 306. Typical Stratum-VIIIred slipped bowls with double disk bases, along with domestic groundstone tools, such as a millstone, pounder and mortar were all smashedon or embedded in the soil layer/surface. Of special note is a quernset in place on its long edge with ash and cooking pot sherds in placeunderneath the bowls that were broken beside the quern. This use of a

quern as a windbreak appears in Stratum VIIIA in Room 302, as wellas later in Stratum VII (R802, Chapter 8; R901, Chapter 9). The posi-tion of the quern is strong evidence that there had been a beaten earthsurface at this level, even thought it has been so severely damaged bymodern ploughing that it was difficult to discern during excavation.

Among the ceramic vessels, there was only one example of a deepglobular bowl covered with red slip and painted with black bands(V335). There was evidence for slight contamination of the potteryby the presence of 1 late Byzantine-early Islamic style sherd. Suchcontamination is not unusual due to the proximity of the topsoil (<0.58m above) which had been ploughed deeply in this area of the tell.

Table 7Z. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 312(A)


E65:4+16 3 bowls V343, V340, V355 red slipE65:42 deep bowl V335 red slip, paint

bowl V384 bar handlecooking pot V457pithosjug V329 paintedjuglet V367 red slipstone bowl TJ 1761 basalttray TJ 1751 basaltmortar TJ 946 limestonegrinder TJ 1463 basaltmillstone TJ 941 basaltpounder TJ 937 chert

Rooms 314+327, 325Evidence for the reuse of Room 314 is scant, although it was clearlyblocked off from the cistern area by Corridor 325 in Stratum VIIIA.Only in certain areas was there the usual soil and rockfall (E74:8) withsmashed ceramic vessels and basalt tools in place suggesting a workarea associated with Room 312 to the north. Deep layers (E64:7, 9) ofhard packed “clay” and nari filled Room 314+327 and did not appearto have been carefully levelled off for reuse during Stratum VIIIA.However, there is evidence in Doorway L and in Corridor 325 of thetypical soil and rockfall that marks the end of Stratum VIIIA in thecentral rooms. The precise function of this small corridor, apart fromblocking the entrance to Room 314, was never determined. Additionalexcavation further south in Room 324 may have revealed a connection

between Room 325 and the cistern area or with another housingcomplex. At present, this remains only an hypothesis.

DestructionThe walls of the rooms in the eastern unit were very well preserved,standing 2.00 m high in some places. Although one of the top boul-ders of Wall 3027 was cracked, the wall appeared to be completelypreserved when found. In spite of the good condition of the walls inRooms 313 and R314, occupation did not resume here following theend of Stratum VIIIB, and the dead were not rescued from their grave.

STRATUM VII

Iron Age occupation was not renewed in Field E following the destruc-tion of Building 300, but seemed to be concentrated instead in Field Con the southern terrace and in Field D. No evidence for activity thatwould further damage the occupational debris in Field E was presentsouth of the casemate wall system, probably because of the deep accu-mulation of collapsed wall stones that began immediately adjacent tothe wall and extended about 2.00 m to the south.

STRATUM III

No building remains from the late Byzantine-early Islamic period arepreserved in Field E. The recovery of ceramic material in the form ofscattered sherds that can be dated to the Byzantine-Umayyad transi-tion or to the Umayyad period itself is consistent in topsoil loci of allsquares. The presence of this material, along with such finds as “Turk-ish” pipe fragments (TJ 649),69 points to occasional activity on the tellin later times.

STRATUM I

Activity in Field E during modern times consists of the clearing offieldstones and agricultural use of the area. Field stones (E55:1) werepiled up on top of the inner wall face (W3000) of the casemate wall

69 The presence of such pipe fragments in Umayyad debris layers at Tall Jawa andin Roman levels at Khirbat al-Mudayna may suggest an earlier date for these pipes(Daviau and Tempest, in preparation).

system. Compared to the accumulation of stones above the casematewall in Fields A–B, that in Field E was minimal and the upper courseof Wall 3000 was visible at many places.70

Topsoil71 covered all the Iron Age remains except for Wall 3000,which was visible at ground level forming the northern crest of the tell.Although the landowner suspected the presence of an underground cis-tern, its exact location was unknown prior to excavation. This meansthat the Iron Age structures were not disturbed in antiquity, althoughsome of the pottery vessels on collapsed ceilings were incomplete. Whilethis may have been the result of modern ploughing, the close arrange-ment of sherds from bowls smashed in situ suggests that the missingsherds were disturbed at the time of destruction or at some time in thepast, but not during the present century.

70 Because of the poor preservation of the “modern” wall (E55:1=W3049) abovethe Iron Age Wall (W3000), the stones removed in cleaning were not given a separatelocus number except in Squares E55 and E76.

71 Locus numbers for topsoil in Field E include E44:1; 53:1–53:3; 54:1; 55:3; 64:2;74:1; 75:1.

FIELDS C-WEST AND D: THE PILLARED HOUSES

BUILDINGS 800 AND 700 (1991–1995)

Introduction

Field C is located on the south side of the mound, midway betweenthe east and west ends of the tell (ca. 70.00 m east of Outer West Wall2023 in B15; Fig. 1.2). Within the limits of this field is a terrace thatextends south ca. 18.00–24.50 m from the casemate wall line on thecrest of the mound.1 Beginning at the west, where the casemate wallis still evident in Square C7, Field C is contiguous to the east end ofField A (Squares C7–C27 are immediately south of A73–A93). Fromthis point, the terrace extends east more than 50.00 m to a modernproperty wall, which runs north-south through Squares C81–C86, andforms the western edge of a small modern cemetery (Fig. 8.1). Theterrace is bordered on the west and south by steep slopes that descend6.00 m to the level of a modern bulldozer cut. Only the modern pathinterrupts the scarp as it climbs the tell from the southwest and runsalong the north edge of the southern crest of the terrace (C4–C84).East of Field C, the slope outside the casemate wall is more gentle.

Field C-west (Squares C5–C27, A73–A94) is the designation for theexcavation area that comprises Building 800, and was excavated sep-arately from Field C-east. Although the modern path was the clearestfeature in Field C prior to excavation, no squares were opened in thepath itself, due in part to our excavation strategy and to the needs ofthe local people. Along the north side of Field C-west is a modernproperty wall that begins in Field B on the west, covers the inner wallof the fortification system and continues along its length as far east asSquare C7, where it turns northeast across Building 800 (A83–A94). InField C-west, this wall (W8034; C7:1–A93:4) was ca. 1.50–2.50 m thickand remained standing ca. 1.00–1.50 m in height.

1 The slope of the terrace itself is ca. 2.00–2.50 m from north to south over 30.00m.

Figure 8.1. Excavation Grid in Field C.

Before excavation, the entire area of Building 800 was covered bytopsoil, weeds and large boulders, which protruded from the surface.Although few wall lines were clearly defined, the presence of imposingstructural remains and the interruption of the circumvallation of thecasemate system were both apparent.


The interruption of the casemate wall, which appears to end at the westside of the terrace (C7) and resume its trajectory on the east imme-diately north of the cemetery (C86), was first noticed in 1989 whenexcavation of the wall system began in Field A (A1–4). Field C was sub-sequently chosen for excavation to sample the fortification system andthus determine the extent of continuity and degree of modification tothe overall defensive strategy during Iron Age II. A second goal wasto determine whether the modern path marked a major entrance intothe town (Chapter 9), since no other comparable break in the wall lineseemed to be suitable for the location of a chambered gate, such asthose known from Palestinian sites, for example at Beer-sheba (Aharoni1972:37; fig. 1).2

Excavation began in C-west in 1991 (Daviau 1992:152–153; fig. 2).The westernmost squares (C5–C7) were aligned south to north acrossthe easternmost room (R801) of the casemate wall to ascertain therelationship of the fortification system with structures on the terrace.Additional squares (C16, C17)3 flanked this trench on the east. With theexposure of a room (R803) in what appeared to be a pillared building,and a wall with stones measuring 1.20–2.00+m in length (C17:2), anew excavation strategy was designed to expose this building (B800) inits entirety and identify its plan and function. In 1992, Square C17 wasexpanded to the northern edge of Field C-west, and Square C27 wasopened to the east.4 In 1994 and 1995, the northern rooms in Building800 were uncovered in Squares A73–84 and A93–94, squares whichare contiguous to the northern limits of Squares C17 and C27.

Already in 1992, it was apparent that the two monolithic pillars(C17:12, 13) first uncovered in 1991 (Daviau 1992: pl. II.1) were partof a series of roof supports in a structure that had at least two par-allel rooms (R803, R804) and one, perpendicular broad room (R802)across the back of the building (Fig. 8.2). With additional excavationin 1993 and 1994 that exposed two stone-built staircases and addi-

2 Chambered gates are best known at the “major administrative cities” of Hazor,Megiddo, Gezer and Lachich (Herzog 1992: Table 5), centres which can be distin-guished from secondary planned towns, such as Beer-sheba and Tall Jawa.

3 In 1991, only half of Square C17 was opened. It measured 6.00 m east-west and3.00 m north-south.

4 The size of Square C27 (8.30×9.33 m) is anomalous due to the position ofField D. It was thought desirable to have a long section connecting the west side ofField D with Field C (Fig. 8.1); for details of the grid, see Chapter 2.

tional rooms (R806, R807) further north, it became clear that Build-ing 800 was much larger than expected, and had a different overallplan than the typical “four-room” house (Braemer 1984: fig. 11, Shiloh1970: fig. 2).5 With modern construction rapidly approaching Field Con the south, an effort was made in 1995 to delineate the outer wallsand excavate the northernmost rooms (808, 809, 810, 811, and 812) tofloor levels. Bedrock was reached in a probe in Room 811, although thefloor was not exposed across the entire room. By the end of the season,Corridor 810 was only partially excavated and Rooms 808 and 812remained unexcavated, although their surrounding walls were com-pletely defined. So too, West Wall 8028+8033 was shown to have aninset half way along its length, where Staircase A83:19 meets Wall 8010which runs south, completing the exterior west wall of the Building.The construction details showing the association of these walls to oneanother are not available, because founding levels were not reached.While further excavation might have clarified such details,6 our projectwas only able to recover the plan of the building during its major periodof use.7


On the west, Building 800 was built up against Room 801 of the Case-mate Wall system (Fig. 5.31), and extended north of the inner faceof the fortification system. In shape, Building 800 is somewhat irreg-ular, with maximum external dimensions of 13.50 (east-west)×18.00m (north-south) along the west side, and a minimum length of 15.10 m(north-south) along the east side. Although the function of every groundfloor room could not be definitively identified, there were at least 9rooms of various sizes arranged around Central Hall 804. Apart fromBuilding 700 in Field D, which appears to be a somewhat smaller ver-sion of B800, no comparable building plan is known from neighbouringsites.8

5 The careful study by Holladay (1997) of various house plans now replaces theinitial study of Palestinian houses by Beebe (1968).

6 The construction of Building 800 may have coincided with the remodelling(W8004) of inner casemate Wall 8005 (Fig. 8.2, Daviau 1994: fig. 10).

7 M. Wood, S. Thompson, and D. Elder were Field Supervisors.8 Building 700 shares many formal characteristics in its room arrangement with the

Late Bronze Age Tablet Building at Tell Hadidi (Dornemann 1981: fig. 2). However,the function of individual rooms and of the building as a whole (a brewery, Gates1988:68) is in contrast to the finds from Tall Jawa. Meijer’s study (1989:222) may

Figure 8.2. Building 800.

The present dearth of buildings that appear to share a similar plan maybe the result of limited excavation and publication of sites in the imme-diate region of #Amman,9 for example Sa .hab (Ibrahim 1975: fig. 2),

already have been in press by the time Gates showed the usefulness of correlating roomarrangement, ceramic finds and texts to interpret the “utilitarian function” (Meijer’sterm) of a building.

9 Braemer (1982:1) noted the small number of excavated Iron Age houses in Tran-sjordan available in 1982 for comparison with the “four-room houses” of western Pales-tine. Little has changed in the interval. Recent excavations in Moab exposed a pillaredbuilding with 7 rooms at Lehun (Homès-Fredericq 2000), and documentation of thearchitecture of pillared buildings at Khirbat al-Mudayna al-#Aliya (Routledge 2000)add to the number of known buildings with stone pillars.

where only a limited area was available for excavation, Tall al-#Umayriwhere excavations are still in progress,10 the #Amman citadel (Humbertand Zayadine 1992: Foldout A), and Tell Safut (Wimmer 1987). ThusBuilding 800, with its full complement of rooms and corridors, alongwith twin staircases that lead to a second storey, appears at present tobe the most complete example in central Jordan of a high status housefrom the late Iron Age.11

RoomsThe rooms identified on the ground floor of Building 800 vary consid-erably in size, shape, and function.

Table 8A. Room Size and Proportion


802 2.50 5.55 .45 8006, 8011, 8013, 8014803 2.20 4.20 .52 8011, 8014, 8015, 8016?804 4.85 8.00 .60 8014, 8015, 8022, 8026805 1.2012 3.20 .37 8016, 8017, 8018806 2.75 2.80 .98 8020, 8021, 8022, 8023807 2.75 3.00 .91 8025, 8026, 8027, 8028808 1.25 1.75 .71 8029, 8031, 8032809 2.50 4.15 .60 8021, 8023, 8024, 8031810 0.65 2.55 .25 8029, 8030811 1.85* 2.85 .70 8024, 8025, 8033, A84:6812 2.50 3.50*13 .71 8024, 8025, 8033, A84:6

10 At Tall al-#Umayri there also appears to be a chronological difference of occu-pation phases. A large pillared building (B) excavated over several seasons contained astoreroom filled with collared-rim pithoi that date to Iron Age I (Herr 2000:173–175).

11 Although not identical in plan, the government residences in Area B at Hazorare comparable in size on the ground floor to Building 800; Building 3100b was13.00×13.70 m (ca. 178.10 m2), while Building 3067b was 12.30×12.60 m (ca. 155m2; Yadin 1960:44–45). However these structures are not comparable in terms of totalfloor space, in view of the upper storey which covered all of the rooms in B800. Thesame is true of the largest houses at Tell el-Far#ah (N), where only two houses exceed100 m2, Maison 327 (103 m2) and Maison 355 (108 m2; Chambon 1984: Tableau 1, 2).The “palace”, with 440 m2 of floor space, is in a class of its own (Chambon 1984:44).By comparison, Building 800 at Tell Jawa, with its two storeys, probably had 320 m2

of interior floor space, definitely much larger (three times) than average Iron Age IIdomestic structures such as those at Tell el-Far#ah (N) (Chambon, above).

12 The full size of Room 805 was 3.00×3.20 m, although what is represented here isthe width of the L-shaped passage that results from the position of Support Wall 8018in the middle of the room.

13 In the evaluation of room size, Rooms 811 and 812, divided only by Pier A84:6,

Range of sizes (omitting Rooms 804, 805, 808, 810)


(omitting Rooms 805, 808, 810)Width 1.20 → 4.85 average – 2.73 mLength 2.80 → 8.00 average – 4.25 m

Several areas within Building 800 (R805, 810) were not full size roomsas is evident in the ratio of width to length (less than 40%). AlthoughRoom 808 was almost square, it was the smallest enclosed space. Forthe remaining rooms, Central Hall 804 with a length of 8.00 m isalso out of range, being the largest room in the building. Averagesizes were first calculated for rooms wider than 1.00 m and longerthan 2.00 m, excluding Rooms 804 and 805.14 Secondly, average sizeswere calculated including Room 804. The average widths (2.43–2.73m) probably are indicative of the length of roof beams available duringLate Iron Age II and the engineering skills of the builders. Central Hall804 was also roofed, although the longest single length needed wouldhave been 4.00 m, assuming that beams were positioned across theroom at its narrowest point. Additional support for the ceiling couldhave been provided by Socket Stone (A83:31), assuming that it held aroof support (see details below) and not a pithos, several sherds of whichwere found in its central depression.

Two units, Rooms 806 (2.75×2.80 m) and R807 (2.75× 3.00 m), onopposite sides of Central Hall 804, are close in size and shape, andcomparable to the full space (3.00×3.20 m) of Entryway 805. Rooms803 and 809 are medium size rectangular rooms with a maximumlength in the range of 4.20 m, whereas Room 802 and combined Room811+812, also rectangular in shape, are in the range of 5.50–6.00 m inlength.

have been considered separately. If R811 and R812 were taken together, this largeroom would measure ca. 2.56×6.00 m, similar in size to Room 802.

14 If the full size of Room 805 (3.00×3.20 m) is included in these calculations, therange of sizes would be: (omitting R804, R808, R810)Width 1.85→3.00 average – 2.50 mLength 2.85→5.55 average – 3.65 m

or(omitting R808, R810)

Width 1.20→4.85 average – 2.76 mLength 2.80→8.00 average – 4.13 m.

The presence of two interior staircases suggests that this was a twostorey building with approximately 20 rooms. Finds and architecturalelements (flagstones and stone installations) from some upper roomswere recovered in the collapsed debris (Daviau 1996:92). These findsclearly indicate that the second storey consisted of finished rooms andnot just a roof terrace. The thickness of the ground floor walls suggeststhat the room arrangement of the upper storey was similar to the lowerstorey, although the collapse along the south side of Building 800 wasso extensive that no upper storey assemblages could be identified forrooms above R802 and R803.

DoorwaysOn the ground floor, only one doorway (A) in the southeast cornerleads into Building 800. This entrance was restricted to an L-shapedentryway (R805) that provided indirect access into Central Hall 804at Doorway B. From R804, doorways leading into surrounding roomsare positioned between standing pillars (Doorways C, D, and F) or atthe end of walls (E, G, H). No doorways are built directly through awall, which extends in both directions on the same trajectory, althoughthis style was common in pillared houses (i.e., Chambon 1984: fig. 13,Houses 327, 362, 366. 148). Doorway K was the only entryway inBuilding 800 formed by a truncated wall or pier forming the frame onone side with only the continuing face of a perpendicular wall formingthe opposite door frame (cf. B700 below).



A 805, exterior 1.00B 804, 805 1.20C 803, 804 0.80D 803, 804 0.75E 802, 804 0.95F 804, 806 0.65G 804, 807 0.75H 804, 809 0.85I 809, 810 0.65J 810, 812 0.6515

15 Corridor 810 was not completely exposed at the point where it enters Room


K 812, 811 1.65L W8007, W8008 1.4016

Average width - 0.844 m (not including Doorways J, K and L).

Three of these doorways were above average (0.90+m) in width.Doorway A into Entrance Room 805 from the exterior of the buildingwas 1.00 m in width. Its size alone is not evidence that Doorway A wasthe principal entrance; a second doorway from the outside may havebeen located on the upper storey.17 Doorway B connecting Entryway805 with Room 804 south of Staircase C27:43 was slightly larger,ca. 1.20 m in width, as was Doorway E from R804 into Room 802.Entrance K formed by Pier A84:6 between R811 and R812 was thelargest doorway on the ground floor, measuring 1.65 m in width.

WallsAlthough boulder-and-chink was the dominant construction techniqueemployed in building the walls of Building 800, several other styles arerepresented in this building.

Table 8C. Wall Thickness in centimetres

Wall 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

8010 ×+8011 ×8012=8014 ×8013 ×8015 ×8016 ×8017 ×+

812. The width of the corridor appears consistent along its entire length and serves toconnect Rooms 809 and R812.

16 Doorway L is located between two walls of a structure located south of Building800. Only limited excavation was carried out in this area (Square C16).

17 Several places along the outer walls may have been suitable for a major entrance,for example in the northwest corner where a large socket stone (A84:12) was built intothe corner, and at the point where each staircase formed a landing against the outerwall. Due to post destruction damage to North Wall 8024, the exact position and sizeof a doorway in this area cannot be reconstructed. So too, there is insufficient evidencefor an upper storey entrance at the west end of Staircase A83:19, where the west wall(W8028=8033=8010) forms an offset.

Wall 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

8018 ×8019 ×+8020 ×8021 ×+8022 ×8023 ×8024 ×+8025=8030 ×8026 ×8027 ×+8028 ×+8029 ×8031 ×8032 ×8033 ×

The outer walls on the west (W8010 and W8028=W8033), north(W8024) and east (W8021) sides of B800 are formed of two to threerows of limestone boulders in boulder-and-chink construction. Thesewalls, all in the range of 0.90–1.50 m thick, are 0.20–0.50 m thickerthan the walls in Building 300 (Field E) of Stratum VIII, suggestingthat Building 800 was constructed of exceptionally heavy masonry andwas designed to support one or two upper stories. The narrowest outerwall, W8011 on the south, was built of one row of extra large boulders18

and measures 0.90 m thick, although its extension (W8017) as the southwall of Room 805 is a full 1.00 m thick. The reason for a thinnersection of this southern wall can only be explained by the presenceof a secondary structure that protected Building 800 at this point.Unfortunately, erosion and modern construction of the path along thecrest of the terrace have destroyed much of the ancient remains.

Interior walls are of varying thickness depending on constructiontechniques (see Chapter 10). Four walls (8013, 8026, 8025=8030,8027), all of boulder-and-chink construction are in the range of 0.80–1.00 m thick, considerable by contemporary standards for interiorwalls.19 Walls 8013 and 8027 extend east from outer Wall 8010 and

18 One stone in Wall 8011 along the south side of Room 803, originally thought tobe 2.00 m in length, actually measured 4.08+m when completely exposed. Due to alarge crack midway along its length, the measurement is not exact to the centimetre.

19 For example, at Balu‘ in Moab, interior walls were in the range of 0.30–0.55 mand outer walls were 0.76 m thick (Worschech and Ninow 1994:195, 198). For theMiddle Bronze Age in Palestine, average wall thickness for single storey houses was in

serve as support walls for Staircase A83:19, as well as perimeter wallsof major rooms (R802 and R807). Wall 8025=8030 serves as the northwall for Rooms 807 and 804, separating them from the northernmostrooms (R810–R812).

Sturdy free-standing walls, in the range of 0.55–0.70 m thick, includethose built of medium to large boulders, such as Walls 8019 and W8020that serve as parallel support walls for Staircase C27:43. Three walls(W8029, W8031, W8032) in the smallest size range (ca. 0.50 m thick)surround a small room or bin (R808) built against the south face ofNorth Wall 8024. The only other walls that measure 0.50 m thickare W8023, the south wall of Room 809, which stands full height butis built of only one row of small boulders, and Wall 8018 in Room805.

Wall 8015 (0.65 m thick) that forms the division between Room 803and Central Hall 804 consists of three standing pillars connected toone another by units of boulders and pierced by two doorways (C, D).On the west, Pillar C17:13 is connected by a stone slab and cobbles toperpendicular Wall 8012 which constitutes the west wall of Room 803.This wall (W8012=8014) appears to be formed of boulder-and-chinklimestone boulders at its south end (W8014), but changes its style ofconstruction as it runs north past Wall 8015, the point where it formsthe division between broad Room 803 and Central Hall 804. Here Wall8012 is constructed of stacked-boulder piers capped by long (0.75–1.00m) rectangular boulders. Between the piers are cobblestone units thatare less thick than the piers and, as a result, form recesses within Room802. A third variation on this style of construction is seen in Wall 8022where 2 stone pillars and a stacked-boulder pier are connected to oneanother by cobblestone units that stand full height and are as thick asthe pillars (see Chapter 12). The smooth line of the flat-topped cappingstones strongly suggests that this was a support wall for the beams ofthe second floor of Building 800.

The StaircasesA special feature of Building 800 is its stone-built staircases, one onthe east (C27:43) and the second on the west (A83:19), that both leadfrom Central Hall 804 to the upper storey. The eastern staircase issupported by two, free-standing walls (8019 south; 8020 north), each

the range of 0.50–0.70 m and for two-storey or high status houses, the average thicknesswas 0.70–1.00 m (see Daviau 1993a:213, Tables 3.60–3.63).

formed of one row of semi-dressed, medium to large boulders laidin regular courses (Figs. 8.3, 9). The steps consist of two, small tomedium boulders and an occasional chink stone. West Staircase A83:19is located between Walls 8013 on the south and W8027 on the north,both boulder-and-chink walls that form the narrow ends of Room 802and 807 respectively. At the west end of Staircase A83:19, outer Wall8028 forms an offset with Wall 8010 that may have served as thelanding, or as the location of a possible doorway into Building 800 atthe top of the stairs. In both staircases the steps are ca. 1.00 m in width,0.25–0.35 m in depth and 0.20–0.30 m in height.20

Stratigraphy

The construction, use, repair, reuse and abandonment of Building 800all appear to have taken place during the Late Iron Age II period(Stratum VII). Evidence of repair to the outer walls in Room 811 andsuperimposed floor levels in Room 809 suggest two building phases(Strata VIIA and VIIB), although only one building phase on theground floor could be identified in most rooms. There was little ifany change in the shape or size of these rooms with the exception ofRoom 807, where West Wall 8028 is slightly out of alignment and isthicker (1.50 m) than Wall 8033 (0.95 m), its continuation further north.Whether this anomaly provided extra support for the upper storey orwas related to the offset between Walls 8028 and 8010 to the south isunclear. Wall 8023 at the south end of Room 809 may also have beenan addition to support the upper storey during the final occupationphase (Stratum VIIA).

Additional support for the hypothesis that Building 800 had onlyone major occupation period is seen in the ceramic remains which arehomogeneous among themselves and with those recovered in Field C-east, both in the domestic structure (Building 900, Squares C43–54)and in the gate complex (Building 910), as well as with the finds in thelower storey of Building 700 (see chronological discussion below).

Ceramic remains dating to the late Byzantine and early Islamicperiods were deposited in Field C during construction, occupationand destruction of Building 600 in Field D (see Daviau and Tempest,

20 A comparable staircase (7K61:30) at Tall al-#Umayri (Lawlor 1991:20; fig. 3.6) hassix steps preserved. These steps were also ca. 1.00 m wide and varied in height from0.17–0.34 m.

in preparation) and in modern times.21 No architectural evidence foroccupation during these later periods was recovered above or within22

the Field C structures.

Table 8D. Strata for Field C-West


I 1 modernII no remains post-UmayyadIII pottery, etc. UmayyadIV no remains ByzantineV no remains RomanVI no remains Persian

VIIA 2 Late Iron IIVIIB 3 Late Iron IIVIII pottery only Middle Iron IIIX pottery only Middle Iron IIX pottery only Iron I

STRATUM VIIB–VIIA

Evidence for the earliest or founding phase of Building 800 was recov-ered in the northernmost rooms, especially in Room 811. Here thefloor level was ca. 1.05 m below Central Hall 804, and there was nodirect access through Wall 8025=8030 into either Room 807 or Cen-tral Hall 804. In order to better understand the room arrangement inBuilding 800 and the function of individual rooms, the northern rooms(R808–R812) will be described as a unit, separate from Central Hall804. This large room (R804) along with Staircases A83:19 and C27:43and flanking rooms R806 and R807 will be described as the CentralUnit. Finally, the southernmost rooms (R802, R803, R805) will be dis-cussed in their relationship to Central Hall 804.

21 Following the beginning of our excavations in 1989, children from the neighbour-ing village of Jawa would bring sherds from other sites to the tell as gifts. In addition,they and would leave sherds for us to find that they had recovered from their own smallexcavations, undertaken after we had left the field for the day. All this adds somewhatto the contamination evident in Fields C and D.

22 A fragmentary wall (C62:4=72:2) along the crest of the Field C terrace may havebeen formed as the result of clearing a modern path that ran eastward onto the tellthrough Field C (west and east).

CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF BUILDING 800

The Northern Unit: Rooms 811–812, 810, 808, 809 (Fig. 8.3)

Room 811–812The largest single unit north of Wall 8025=8030 was Room 811–812 (Table 8A). Three boulder-and-chink walls surround this spaceon the north (W8024), west (W8033) and south (W8025). Althoughall three walls are similar in construction techniques and thickness(0.90–1.10 m), Walls 8024 and W8033 are exterior walls, while Wall8025=8030 is an interior wall. North Wall 8024 consists of two rowsof fieldstones with rubble fill and measures on average 1.10 m thickat its uppermost courses.23 The foundation course is made of large(0.75–1.00 m) boulders, which were laid on bedrock (A84:11, at 922.52masl), while the upper courses are of small and medium size boulders.Altogether, Wall 8024 remains standing 10 courses high (ca. 3.50 m).While the field stones in this wall can be described as unhewn or, atbest, semi-hewn, the boulders appear to have been hammer dressedto provide vertical inner and outer faces. No evidence for the use ofmortar was identified. North Wall 8024 bonds with Wall 8033 on thewest to form the northwest corner of Building 800.

Although Wall 8033 measures only 0.95 m thick in its upper courses,it is similar in construction and building materials to Wall 8024. Herealso, the lowest exposed courses within Room 811 are built of largeto extra large (>1.00 m) boulders, while the upper courses are of smallboulders (0.25–0.50 m).24 Beginning 1.20 m above bedrock, these uppercourses, at least in the northwest corner, appear to have been rebuiltusing less care and precision than is evident in the lower courses.This may account for the awkward position of a socket stone (A84:12)located at the northwest corner of Walls 8024 and 8033.

Wall 8025 bonds with West Wall 8033 and runs east for ca. 8.50m to form the southern perimeter of Rooms 811, R812, and Corridor810 (as Wall 8030). Although it is an interior wall, Wall 8025=8030

23 Of the 50 Iron Age houses studied by Mitchell (1992), only six had walls in thesize range of 0.80–1.00 m thick: 1–2) Vered Yeriho (2 houses; Eitan 1983:247–248); 3)Beer-Sheba, House 2060 (Herzog 1984:18); where R175 and R181 are casemate wallsthat are thicker than comparable walls in the adjoining houses; 4) Khirbet er-Ras 943(Gibson and Edelstein 1985:142); 5)Tell Beit Mirsim NW31:10–11 (Albright 1943:50;pl. 6), and 6) SE23:12–13 (Albright 1943: pl. 3).

24 A probe along the outer face of Wall 8033 (A84:5) clarified the wall line andexposed the second course of boulders and chink stones.


was 0.90–0.95 m thick, comparable to outer Wall 8033. As well, thesewalls are similar in construction and building materials at least for theupper 2.00 m, where Wall 8025=8030 is exposed along its north andsouth faces.

Room 811–812 is divided by a stone-built pier wall (A84:6) located2.00 m east of the northwest corner of Room 811. This cross wall is

founded on bedrock and forms an opening (Doorway K) of 1.65 mbetween the two rooms. The pier, almost square in plan (0.95×1.10 m),is built of 10 courses of large (0.75–1.00 m) fieldstones, and stands thefull preserved height (ca. 3.50 m) of North Wall 8024. Like Wall 8033,the pier bonds with Wall 8024, clear evidence that it was built at thesame time. At present, the precise function of this architectural elementis far from evident, although it may have served both as a room dividerand as a buttress for the exterior wall (W8024).25 Such a support mayhave been needed for an upper storey wall or to stabilize outer Wall8024 at a point where the bedrock began to slope toward the south.

Immediately above Bedrock A84:11 was a soil layer (A84:10) whichcontained small lumps of charcoal and flecks of lime with a concentra-tion of lime appearing to mark the top of the layer. Within the limitsof the probe it was not possible to recognize the function of this accu-mulation, although the lime itself and the small number of loose stonessuggest collapsed wall plaster or ceiling. The pottery resting just abovebedrock and smashed within Debris Layer A84:10 consists of one redslipped saucer bowl and bowl sherds, a juglet, cooking pot ware, andpithos sherds (Table 8E). As will be seen in the following discussion,this same range of domestic wares appears in virtually every room ofBuilding 800.

Above Soil Layer A84:10, the probe was expanded to run the entirelength of Wall 8024 in Room 811 (1.00 ×1.85 m). Here was anotherdebris layer (A84:9) which also contained plaster flecks, especially onits upper surface. Unlike A84:10, this soil layer was damaged by rockcollapse and contained pebbles, cobbles and boulders. The potteryrecovered from this locus indicates the types of vessels in position alongthe walls, even though these represent only a small portion of vessels

25 Parallels for Pier Wall A84:6, which separates Rooms 811 and 812, are numerousat Tell el-Far#ah (N), for example, in Palace 148 and Houses 327, 328 and 411, wherethey function as door frames (Chambon 1984: pls. 18–22). Also in House 411, there aretwo such piers in Room 409 that were not positioned opposite each other (Chambon1984: pl. 18); these may have had a different function. Chambon (1984: fig. 12)identifies examples of such piers that abut the perpendicular wall as well as otherswhich bond to it. At Tall al-#Umayri, there is a single “pedestal” located against a wallimmediately adjacent to a doorway (Herr et al. 1994:150, fig. 3). In Building 700 at TallJawa, a stone pier wall supports one end of a lintel over a doorway between Rooms712 and R713 (see below). This same construction technique was used at Busayra,where a “pier” wall (90) bonds with the outer wall, and serves as a cross wall betweentwo rooms (Bienkowki 2001: fig. 3; 2002: fig. 4.5). While this technique is also used incasemate wall systems, what is of interest here is its use in domestic structures.

Figure 8.4. Deep probe in Room 811, showing Pier A84:6with Doorway K at right, and upper storey flagstones.

used in Room 811. Nevertheless, the concentration of sherds from alate Iron II wide-mouth pithos with four handles (V844),26 identical toVessel 806 from Room 802, is clear evidence of the contemporaneityof the rooms in the northern unit with those in the southern part ofthe house. In addition, the top of Locus A84:9 may represent a newfloor for the final occupation phase (Stratum VIIA) of the Building. Atthe level of 923.40 masl, it was close to that (923.73 masl) of the mainFloor Surface (C27:66=A83:32) in central Hall 804. Surface A84:9may also have served as the construction platform from which outerWalls 8024 and 8033 were repaired. As it was, this beaten earth surface,marked by a small scatter of flat lying sherds, was damaged further bythe final collapse of the building whereby the ceramic vessels in use atthe time were smashed, their sherds embedded within layer A84:9 byfalling boulders and scattered throughout the overlying debris (A84:8).

A dense rockfall Layer A84:8, excavated over the entire area ofRoom 811 for a depth of ca. 1.00 m, contained the collapse of Stra-

26 This wide mouth form does not appear in the corpus of pithoi (40+ ) from FieldsA–B and E in Stratum VIII.

tum VIIA wall stones into Room 811 along with a group of flagstones(Fig. 8.4), probably upper storey paving slabs similar to those recov-ered in Room 807 to the south. The pottery in use before the collapse,and subsequently smashed by falling stones, consists of partially mend-able vessels with clean fractures and little evidence of disturbance afterdeposition. Absent from this sherd material are the indicators of wealthand status found in other rooms of Building 800, namely black bur-nished ware (only one rim sherd was recovered, TJ A84.26.11) andpainted ware (2 body sherds).27 This predominantly utilitarian potterysuggests a variety of domestic activities while the flagstones point to awell-appointed room on the second floor.

Table 8E. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 811


A84:8–10 saucer bowl V843 red slipbowl V841 carinatedpithos V844 wide mouthsmall jar V842 hole mouth2 juglets V840, 848tripod cup V846mortar bowl V845 ceramic, ring base, wedge decorationmortar bowl A84.38.3 ceramic, tripod feet28

stone tool TJ 2174 polishinglead ingot TJ 2168 pendant?, perforatedmillstone TJ 2192 loaf-shaped, brokenpounder TJ 2182 chert

Ceramic finds of special note include the shallow saucer, which becamethe most common small bowl form in Stratum VII.29 The wide mouth

27 As in previous chapters, the vessels listed are those that could be mended in largepart and were clearly distinct from other known vessels. All registered artefacts arelisted, and can be studied in Daviau (2002); for a complete listing with drawings, seethe CD-ROM.

28 Ceramic tripod mortar bowls were in use with basalt mortars in both Strata VIIIand VII. Parallels to this form appear at Tall Dayr #Alla in the Jordan Valley (Homès-Frederdicq and Franken 1986: #480), and at Tall al-#Umayri (Geraty et al. 1989:fig. 19.16:16; Low 1991: fig. 8.12:11).

29 Three such bowls with slightly splaying rim (V803, 804, 805) all have the samediameter, 0.17–0.18 m. Dornemann (1983:236) identifies this form as Type I, the mostopen vessel shape in his formal typology. Numerous parallels appear in his Sequence II(1983: fig. 32:2–16) from tombs in #Amman, Madaba and Sa .hab. This form is also seenat Tall al-#Umayri in Field Phases 2 and 3, although in many instances these bowls arenot slipped (Lawlor 1991: fig. 3.15:2–6). At Hesban, Type Sb:1a appears in a variety of

pithos30 was also a new form even though the narrow mouth pithoscommon in Stratum VIII was still in use. Both pithos types sharethe same shape from the base to the level of the shoulder and are inthe same height range (1.00–1.20 m). A new style of shallow ceramicmortar bowl also made its appearance; mortar bowl V845 is identicalin shape and in fabric to a second wedge-decorated bowl from Room802 (V828).

Destruction Debris: The uppermost layers of debris (A84:4 and 3) inRoom 811 show an increasing density of boulders and stones of allsizes and a decreasing amount of soil, suggesting that the upper storeywall fell south into Room 811. At the bottom of Debris Layer A84:4,there was a broken roof roller (TJ 2046), the second found in Building800 (see R805 below), 1 chert pounder and 2 basalt mortars (TJ 2034,2080), probably evidence for activities on the roof. At the same time,many ceramic sherds included in these layers were worn and pitted,evidence of their proximity to the surface and possibly of secondarydeposit and occasional disturbance. Stones of all sizes and badly wornceramic sherds covered the modern surface; these point to later infillingduring Stratum III, the Umayyad period, and in Stratum I, possibly atthe time of construction of the modern property wall (A83:1=A93:4).

Room 812 (Fig. 8.3)To the east of Pier A84:6 is the space designated Room 812. Only theuppermost Debris Layers (A84:3 and 4) of second storey wall collapsewere removed in order to determine the size of this room (2.50× 3.50m) and clarify its wall lines. Room 812 is bounded by Wall 8024 on thenorth, Wall 8032 on the east, Wall 8025=8030 on the south, and PierA84:6 marks its western limit. In the southeast corner, Doorway J leads

colours including yellowish red (5YR 5/6) slipped and burnished (Lugenbeal and Sauer1972: pl. IXA:508), pink (7.5YR 7/4) unburnished (pl. IXA:509), and very pale brown(10YR 7/3) (pl. IXA:515).

30 This form does not appear in Dornemann’s corpus (1983), due in part to the factthat much of his material is from tombs. The Tall Jawa pithoi differ from Beer-shebaexamples of Judean pithoi with a similar rim form in three important respects; 1) theTall Jawa pithoi each have a noticeable change of direction at the shoulder where thetop of the handles are attached, 2) their conical lower body and rounded base is insharp contrast to the ovoid forms and ring bases on examples from Beer-sheba and TelHalif (Lahav), and 3) the maximum height of 1.20 m is almost double that of Judeanforms that stand 0.45–0.60 m (Aharoni 1973: pl. 73:6, 7, 8; Blakely and Hardin 2002:figs. 10, 13).

into Corridor 810 that links Room 812 to Room 809. Due to limitedexcavation, no evidence was recovered for the function of Room 812during the period of occupation of Building 800, although its positionand inaccessibility from Central Hall 804 suggests that it may haveserved, like Room 811, as a domestic storeroom.

Room 808 (Fig. 8.3)Room 808, the smallest space in Building 800, is surrounded on threesides with boulder-and-chink walls (8029, 8031, 8032), one row thick(all ca. 0.50 m). We can only assume that these thin walls remainstanding the full height of the building on the basis of Wall 8031, whichis exposed for ca. 2.80 m in height on its east face in Room 809, similarin height and size to W8023 which forms the south wall of the sameroom (R809).

In Room 808, only the remains of a modern wall (A93:4), and 0.70m of the upper debris layers (A93:14 and 5), consisting of collapsed wallstones, were removed. Positioned inside the southeast corner formed byWalls 8029 and 8031 was Door Socket A93:7 (TJ 1542), and a perfo-rated stone/door weight (TJ 1549) that suggests a door into an upperstorey room above Room 808. Because of the damage to this buildingin modern times, and probably already in the Umayyad period, no evi-dence remains for the upper storey rooms except the collapsed ceilingsand their superimposed remains.

Corridor 810 (Fig. 8.3)Flanked on the south by Wall 8030=8025 and on the north by Wall8029 is a Corridor ca. 2.50 m long and 1.00 m wide that connectsRooms 812 (Doorway J) and 809 (Doorway I). No opening from Cor-ridor 810 into Room 808 was apparent in the 1.90 m long probeagainst the south face of Wall 8029. A series of superimposed soil layers(A93:16, 22, 35, 37) with collapsed boulders from the surrounding wallsfilled the Corridor. Within Soil Layers A93:37 and 35 were ceramicsherds but no recognizable mendable vessels. Soil Layer A93:22 alsocontained collapsed boulders and soil along with one millstone and oneflagstone. As in other rooms, the flagstone appears consistently to markthe upper storey floor surface (see Room 811 above, and R807 andR809 below). The uppermost Soil Layers (A93:16, 14, 6) that coveredthe whole square also filled Corridor 810. These layers consisted ofcollapsed boulders, soil and debris containing sherds from both IronAge II and Umayyad periods.

The entrance (Doorway I) into Room 809 is marked by two super-imposed stones (A93:39), each 0.70 m long, that extend between Walls8029 and 8030. While it was clear that these stones served as thethreshold, their association with superimposed floor levels recoveredwithin Corridor 810 and in Room 809 was not clearly defined for bothphases (B and A) of Stratum VII.

Room 809—Stratum VIIB (Figs. 8.3, 5)Located in the northeast corner of Building 800, Room 809 forms thelink between the rooms in the northern unit and Central Hall 804. Thisrectangular room is bounded on the north by Wall 8024 and on theeast by Wall 8021. Both walls are formed of two rows of large and extralarge (>1.00 m), unhewn and semi-hewn limestone boulders, dry-laidin a boulder-and-chink construction with a total thickness in the rangeof 1.25–1.50 m, and a maximum preserved height of ca. 3.00 m.31 Thetop of East Wall 8021 is very uneven along its length and has sufferedsevere damage to its upper courses at the north end. This damageappeared initially to mark a doorway to the outside. However, withfurther excavation at the point where the outer walls (W8021, 8024)form the northeast corner, it became clear that they remain standingca. 2.30 m above the lowest Stratum-VII floor surface (A93:34) with nosigns of a doorway on the ground floor.

The western perimeter of Room 809 consists of the east end of Wall8030 and the east face of Wall 8031, which also serves as the east wallof Room/Bin 808. Wall 8030 also forms the south side of Doorway Ifrom Corridor 810 and the north side of Doorway H, which leads intoCentral Hall 804. On the south is Wall W8023, built in one row (0.50m) of dry-laid, boulder-and-chink construction. This wall was almostentirely of small limestone boulders with one re-used basalt millstonefragment. While its north face was carefully finished, the south face inRoom 806 is very rough and the entire wall slumps toward the centreof Room 809.32 Its sorry state may be an indication of a collapsed sec-ond row or damage caused during the final collapse. What remains ofthis wall (W8023) appears to abut both outer East Wall 8021 and Wall

31 Excavation ended at this point due to the danger of rock fall from the outer walls,which appear to have suffered earthquake damage.

32 The condition of Wall 8023 is surprising, considering the well-built walls in therest of Building 800. While it is clear that it supported a ceiling, W8023 probably couldnot have supported an upper storey wall.

Figure 8.5. East side of Building 800, with Room 809 in the lower left, Room808, Corridor 810, Doorway H, and Central Hall 804 on the right.

8022 at it north end, where it consists of a large pier of dressed bouldersthat bonds at the top course with Wall 8023. Such construction sug-gests that Wall 8023 could have been a Stratum VIIA wall constructedin association with Hearth A93:27 (see below) or, if it had been partof the Stratum VIIB house, it was probably rebuilt at the same timeas the hearth. This leaves us uncertain about the original size of Room

809 which may have extended as far as Staircase C27:43 (7.50 m) andincluded Room 806, although this appears unlikely given the averagelength (4.25 m) of other rooms in this Building (Table 8A).

Due to the instability of Walls 8023 and 8021, excavation was termi-nated before reaching bedrock in Room 809. The earliest occupationphase, designated Stratum VIIB, is represented by smashed ceramicvessels and artefacts embedded in a soil layer (A93:34) located belowthe level of Hearth A93:27. The “surface” on which these vessels werebroken was itself penetrated and covered by the Stratum VIIB col-lapse of large wall stones (A93:33) found scattered throughout the roomnorth of the hearth. This impressive installation was not removed toreveal the full extent of Loci A93:33 and 34 or, for that matter, to testthe full extent of Room 809. The assemblage of pottery and objectsfrom Surface A93:34 is most likely incomplete. Nevertheless, severalmendable vessels were recovered.

Table 8F. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 809, Stratum VIIB


A93:34 bowl TJ 872 red slipbowl V864 black burnishedplatter V830 red slip, thick-walledkrater V834 smudged interiorcooking pot A93.129.2 sherdstripod cup V847juglet V863 miniaturejuglet V867 globular, paintedlamp V868basin V831 ceramic, heavy industrial33

bead TJ 1878grinder TJ 1851 basaltstone ring TJ 1890 small

Room 809—Stratum VIIAStratum VIIA occupation is marked by the construction of HearthA93:27.34 A plaster surface (A93:38), 0.03 m thick, seals Debris Layer

33 Basin sherds (A83.31.1, A83.39.1) present in Room 807 are also evidence ofindustrial activity. Basins similar in style appear to have been used as coffins in certainlate Iron Age II tombs, such as the tomb of Adoni Nur (Harding and Tufnell 1953:59–60; see also Zorn 1993).

34 The location of the Hearth A93:27 inside a room is not unexpected; severalStratum-VIII ovens (i.e., A63:30, 36; B34:50, 54) were built inside roofed rooms along-

A93:33 in the south half of Room 809 and forms a floor (A93:45)under the hearth. Positioned slightly above this plaster surface werethree flat stones on edge, along with one basalt millstone fragmentand a hand grinder that form the perimeter of the hearth on the east,north and west sides. These stones are held in place with packed clay,later hardened by the heat of the oven. The south side of the hearthwas formed by east-west Wall 8023, preserved 8 courses in height.The hearth itself has exterior measurements of 0.90×1.50× 0.49 m inheight.35 Whatever superstructure the hearth may have had was notrecognized during excavation, primarily because the uppermost soillayer (A93:28) within the hearth consisted of hard-packed soil with nariinclusions, fragments of bone, flint and pottery, similar in compositionto Locus A93:25 which extends completely across Room 809, andrepresents the collapse of the Stratum-VIIA ceiling (A93:29) and upperstorey floor.

Inside the hearth were two other distinct layers of debris. The lowestsoil layer (A93:44), immediately above Plaster Surface A93:45, consistsof hard-packed reddish soil with some animal bone, flint and ceramicsherds. This is covered by a layer of ash (A93:43) that contains similarfinds. Additional ash accumulation (A93:26) fills the space between theeast edge of Hearth A93:27 and the corner formed by Wall 8023 andOuter Wall 8021. In the ash was a black burnished bowl (V865), one ofseveral high status vessels in use with the hearth and with beaten earthSurface A93:31, which served as the principal Stratum VIIA floor.

side a wall. This was also the case in Middle and Late Bronze Age houses where only3.2% of all ovens studied were unequivocally located outside of the house (Daviau1993: chart 6.2). Although this is the only hearth of its type recovered at Tall Jawa,hearths formed of perimeter stones were common in Late Minoan levels at Kommoswhere nine different structures were constructed of stones set on their long edge. Thehearths themselves were enclosed on only three sides and had a front opening. Suchhearths were located against a wall or in a corner (Shaw 1990:238).

35 Two rectilinear installation in the squatter reoccupation of the fort of .Horbat RoshZayit were each built up against a wall and consisted of one row of stones packed withclay. Although not identified by the excavators as cooking installations, “several cookingpots, bowls and juglets” were uncovered within one of these installations (Gal andAlexandre 2000:23). At Tall al-#Umayri, in a room dated to the early Persian period,there was an accumulation of ash, measuring 0.90–1.48 m, located above a floor of flatstones (7K80:22; Clark 1991:69; figs. 4.10, 4.11). The excavator called this installationa “hearth”, even though there is no verbal description of the stone perimeter walls.Only the locus summary sheet indicates the presence of these perimeter stones, whichare standing 0.26 m in height (Cash and Trenchard 1991:483).

Figure 8.6. Room 809, Hearth A93:27.

Table 8G. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 809, Stratum VIIA


A93:31 bowl V839 red slip, thick-walledkrater V829 wide mouth smudged int.storejar V832jug V837 largejuglet V862 oblong2 decanters V835, V849 small, spout, strainer,

red slip, painteddecanter V866=TJ 1759 intact, red slipdecanter V836 large436 ceramic sherdsshell pendant TJ 1833 Glycymeris, perforated2 grinders TJ 1787, 18222 millstones TJ 1798, 1808 basaltsaddle quern TJ 1717

Within and immediately above this surface (A93:31), there were morethan 400 ceramic sherds, many from mendable vessels, all associatedwith food preparation and consumption. Other finds in the assemblagefrom this room, especially three large “tether” weights, which suggestindustrial and craft activities (Daviau 2002:208–210), appear to havefallen from an upper storey room, since they were found in a vertical

position against the north and west walls. Usually, such weights areassociated with olive oil production (Daviau 2002:208–210), althoughno pressing stone was found on the ground floor level of Room 809 orin the debris surrounding Building 800.

There were no other installations within Room 809 that might sug-gest its function. The presence of a hearth strongly suggests domes-tic use, since cooking pot sherds were in association with it. Cookingremains the most likely interpretation of this hearth’s function, eventhough it is very different in style from the two ovens in Central Hall804 and the cooking area in Room 802 (see below).

Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey: The destruction of Stratum VIIAis especially evident in Room 809 where the northeast corner of theouter walls (W8021, 8024) collapsed with the upper storey walls(A93:23–24–25, A93:14, 16). That these walls were stone built is appar-ent from the massive amount of boulders and chink stones removedfrom every room in Building 800 during excavation. Among the wallstones (A93:25) in Room 809 were dressed flagstones comparable tothose recovered in Room 811. In addition, there were mendable vessels,one (V852) probably imported from Assyria (see discussion below), andground stone tools that suggest a domestic assemblage for the upperstorey room. The probability that the three large weights found in thecollapse were originally in use on the upper storey may be confirmedby the presence of limestone table (TJ 1543)36 which fell into Room807. Industrial activity on the upper storey, especially olive pressing,cannot be completely ruled out since there is growing evidence at con-temporary sites of small scale domestic oil processing. At .Horbat RoshZayit, a building with a plan that shares many similarities to B800,also contained olive pressing installations (Gal and Frankel 1993: fig. 2),although in this case it seems certain that is was an industrial building.

Table 8H. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 809, upper storey


A93:14, 16 2 bowls V869, V870 red slip, carinated2 bowls V838 everted rim

V825 gray burnishing37

36 Although this “table” has affinities with larger crushing platforms (Daviau 2002:121–122), its small size (47.50×42.00×13.00 cm) suggests that it could have had adifferent function (Daviau 2001b:220).

37 Part of this same vessel was recovered above the ceiling at the foot of Stairway


goblet V852 green warejuglet V871 red slip, tall-neckedjuglet V833 large1652 ceramic sherdssocket stone TJ 1683mortar TJ 1657 limestonepestle TJ 1642 basaltgrinder TJ 1576 basaltmillstone TJ 1513 upper loaf-shapedwork surface TJ 1517 basaltworked stone TJ 1646 function unknownbasalt TJ 1516 unused3 weights TJ 1810, 1811, 1825 large, limestone, perforated

Destruction: As in Room 811, Debris Layers A93:8, 6, 1, suggestingmodern disturbance, covered the tops of the ancient walls obscuring theouter walls and architectural plan of Building 800. Modern propertyWall 8034 ran the full length of the northern outer wall (W8024).Soil and ceramic sherds in a worn and pitted condition, disturbedby agricultural activities in the recent past, filled the crevices of themodern wall (A93:4) and spilled over it to cover the topsoil (A93:1),filling in Rooms 809, 808 and Corridor 810.

The Central Unit: Rooms 804, 806, 807 (Fig. 8.3, 5)

The Central Unit consists of Central Hall 804 and two small roomsthat open off the hall; Room 807 on the west, north of StairwayA83:19, and Room 806 on the east, north of Stairway C27:43.

Room 807 (Fig. 8.7)On the west side of Central Hall 804 is a small square room (2.75×3.00 m) that fills the space between Room 811 and Staircase A83:19.All four perimeter walls (W8025, W8026, W8027, W8028) have two-row boulder-and-chink construction, formed of small to medium sizeboulders and are more than 0.90 m thick. Outer Wall 8028, withindividual limestone boulders in the range of 0.45×0.60× 0.80 m,became three rows thick (1.30 m) at the point where it met east-west

C27:43. This widespread scatter pattern suggests a single large room above Rooms 806and R809. It appears that several items in use in this upper storey area were scatteredon the stairs as well as in the lower rooms.

Wall 8025.38 A single doorway (G) of average proportions (0.75–0.80 mwide), located in the southeast corner of Room 807, opens into CentralHall 804.

Only one occupation phase (Stratum VIIA), identified in Room 807,coincided with the major use of Central Hall 804. Within Room 807,the lower storey floor is a beaten earth surface (A83:16) that sealsup against all four walls and extends through Doorway G (A83:33)as far as Threshold Stone A83:34. The floor itself (A83:16) is at thesame absolute level (923.77–923.87 masl) as the beaten earth surface(A83:32) outside Doorway G in Central Hall 804, where ThresholdStone A83:34 is located. The threshold is actually formed of one large(0.50×0.75) flat-topped stone slab and a second, smaller stone (0.20 ×0.30 m) that together completely fill the space between Walls 8026 andW8027. Debris layers (A83:17, 18) within the doorway were almostdevoid of pottery, good evidence of a heavy traffic area on both thelower and upper floors. Within Room 807, beaten earth SurfaceA83:16 was covered with smashed vessels concentrated along the south(W8027) and east (W8026) walls and in Doorway G.

Table 8J. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 807


A83:16 3 bowls V766, V887,39 V899 red slip2 bowls V873, V893 black burnishedkrater V8902 cooking pots V896, V8972 pithoi V877, V891storejar V884 mend holes2 juglets V861, V898miniature cup V854stopper TJ 1589 ceramic, red slip, paintedbead TJ 1629 broken, carnelianball/grinder TJ 1639 basalt2 stones TJ 1621, 1644 polishingmetal TJ 1616 fragments2 pestles TJ 1574, 1622 basalt3 grinders TJ 1563, 1640, 1641hand grinder TJ 1573 oversized

38 The reason for this added thickness is not immediately apparent. It could havebeen part of the remodelling of the northwest corner, seen in R811, or an attempt togive added support for the upper storey flagstone floor (A83:9–11).

39 Shallow bowls with grooves below the rim appear at Hesbon (Lugenbeal andSauer 1972: pl. IXA:521, 522), and as far north as Rujm al-Henu in the Baq#ah Valley(Clark 1983: fig. 3:32–34).

Figure 8.7. Room 807, looking east toward Doorway G.


7 millstones TJ 1561, 1564, upperTJ 1565, 1566, 1568,TJ 1643, 1648

millstone TJ 1567 lowerquern TJ 1630 basaltwork surface TJ 1656 stone2 pounders TJ 1562, 1575 chertpecking stone Lithic chertpeg/stopper TJ 1608 bone9 weights TJ 1556–156040 unfired clay loom weights

The presence of doughnut-shaped loom weights, comparable to thosefound in Room 802 (Daviau 1994:185), suggests extensive textile pro-duction in this building even though spindle whorls were surprisinglyfew.

Evidence for Features on the Upper Storey: Above Surface A83:16 is a 0.30m deep layer (A83:15) comprised of superimposed levels of packed soiland lime that suggests several resurfacings. Pottery is scattered across

40 Several loom weights were so fragmentary that they were not given individualregistration numbers, even though they were recognized during excavation.

the hard-packed soil layers culminating with Surface A83:14, in whosesoil was a concentration of vertical pithos sherds (V891),41 concentratedin the southwest corner. Ceramic vessels were recovered from variousloci indicating a complicated process of collapse. This pattern of accu-mulation in Room 807 is somewhat different from Central Hall 804,where the upper storey ceiling (C27:55, 56) was immediately abovethe principal floor surface (C27:65, 66). Instead, it appears that theceiling material (A83:9, 10, 12, 13) in Room 807 is quite thick andmay contain several re-surfacings of the upstairs room. Easiest to detectwas Lime Surface A83:10, located in a narrow strip against east Wall8026 and sealed against by Soil Layer A83:12, which covered the restof the room. The uppermost hard-packed surface (A83:9) representingthe final use of the upper storey room is marked by the presence of naripockets and a flagstone pavement that was broken up and scattered inthe surface material itself, and in the underlying layers of collapsed sur-faces (A83:10, 12). The flagstones measured ca. 0.30× 0.40 m×0.10 mthick, with the largest being 0.40 ×0.60 m. While the heaviest concen-tration of flagstones was recovered here (36 were counted), it appearsthat all the upstairs rooms including those in the northern unit adja-cent to the outer walls may have been paved with these fine limestoneflags. Numerous finds from the upper storey indicate food preparation,storage and high status personal possessions, possibly including culticartefacts.

Table 8K. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 807, upper storey


A83:9–12 bowl V888 brown slipkrater V883 smudgedstorejar V885jug V886juglet V892 red slipdecanter V889 two-handled, spoutedlamp V778 mendable sherdsshell pendant TJ 1314 Glycymerisshell dish TJ 1471 Tridacnatable TJ 1543 limestonemortar bowl TJ 1338–1339 basaltmortar TJ 1587 basalt

41 These sherds are all part of V891, which was probably standing on lower SurfaceA83:16, and was broken in place when the ceiling collapsed around it.


mortar TJ 1358 limestonepestle TJ 1472 basalt3 grinders TJ 1470, 1474, 15782 grinders TJ 1315, 1469 reused as mortars6 millstones TJ 1342, 1475, 1482, upper loaf-shaped

TJ 1486, 1488, 1512millstone TJ 1515 reused as small mortarsaddle quern TJ 13333 surfaces TJ 1354, 1473, 1483 working, basaltpounder TJ 1281 chertarrowhead TJ 1520 ironstopper TJ 1275 stone3 weights TJ 1468, 1484, 1518 unfired clay loom weights

Among the high status items were the undecorated tridacna dish and theglycymeris pendant (Reese 2002), as well as the large (0.42×0.47 m and0.13 m thick) limestone “table” (TJ 1543)42 found intact while restingon one of its corners against the inner face of Wall 8028. This artefacthad clearly fallen into the lower room when the ceiling gave way.

Destruction: Deep debris layers filled with small and medium bouldersfilled Room 807, both above (A83:5) and below (A83:7) a soil layer(A83:6) which may represent the roof or windblown soil accumulatedduring a period of abandonment. This soil locus was well preserved inthis small room where subsequent disturbance was less apparent thanin larger adjoining rooms. Additional wall collapse was present in theuppermost soil layer (A83:2) which was covered in part by the modernproperty wall (A83:1) that cut across the square.

Room 804 (Figs. 8.3, 5, 8)As the largest space on the ground floor, Central Hall 804 covers anarea of ca. 34.4 m2. The southern half of this hall, along with twostaircases (C27:43 and A83:19) was partially exposed during 1993 and1994. Excavation in the northern half (in Square A83) took place in1995. The goal was to determine whether Central Hall 804 extended

42 Table 1543 was associated with a group of high status artefacts that suggest its useas a libation table (Daviau 2001b:220–221; fig. 5.5), although these are otherwise rarefor the Iron Age. For example, the offering basin located on the gate podium at Beth-saida is one of the few shallow basins/tables that are close in size (ext. 69×50×35 cmin height, and int. 53×35×10 cm in depth (Bernett and Keel 1998:2, n. 11; figs. 3, 4).

north as far as Wall 8030 and to clarify the arrangement of Rooms 807and 809. A second task was to complete the exposure of Walls 8025and 8030 that appeared to be two segments of a single wall.

The results of the final season demonstrate that Rooms 807, R806and R809 do in fact open into Central Hall 804; in the case of Room809, a small corridor in its southwest corner (Doorway H) leads intoR804, immediately south of Wall 8030. Clearance of debris layers thatseal against Wall 8030 exposed its continuation as Wall 8025, whichincludes a centrally placed niche measuring ca. 0.90 m in length×0.68m in depth and 0.50 m in height (Fig. 8.8). Although this featureappears to have been deliberately built at a height of 1.20 m abovefloor level and was constructed of carefully dressed stones forming thebase and sides, no artefacts or other remains witness to its purposeor use (lamp niche?). Wall 8025 continued west as far as Outer Wall8033 and formed a major (1.00 m thick) east/west division in Building800. Within Hall 804, Wall 8025=8030 remained standing 1.75–2.00m above Floor A83:32.43 Fragments of plaster on its south face appearto be evidence that the entire wall was coated with plaster.

Wall 8026 bonds with Wall 8025(=8030), 2.00 m west of the niche,and forms the west wall of R804 north of Doorway G into Room807. South of Doorway G, east-west Walls 8027 and W8013 supportStaircase A83:19 and serve secondarily to extend the line of the westwall. A stacked-pillar wall (W8012) with cobblestone connecting unitsforms the southern segment of this west wall line in R804.

On the east side of the Central Hall is Wall 8022 that runs southalmost 3.00 m from Doorway H to Doorway F of Room 806. Thiswall is formed of one pillar built of five stacked boulders framingDoorway H, and two standing pillars, with cobblestone and smallboulder connecting units (Fig. 8.8). South of Doorway F is StaircaseC27:43 with its supporting walls (W8020, W8019), which serve also aswall segments. Doorway B, along with the north end of Wall 8016,forms the southeast corner of R804.

The southern wall (W8015) consists of three monolithic limestonepillars (C17:13, C17:12=C27:22, C27:19) which stand 1.40–1.80 mtall. The western pillar (C17:13) is connected to north-south Wall 8012by several stone slabs that form a low connecting wall (C17:14). The

43 Technically, the northeastern quarter of Floor Surface A83:32 was in Square A93.However, to assist with the removal of deep rockfall layers (A83:26–29) and with theexposure of the floor itself, all loci were assigned to A83.

Figure 8.8. Central Hall 804, with Room 803 on lower left.

two eastern pillars (C27:19, C:27:22) are connected to each other byone large limestone block that stands 0.32 m high. This constructiontechnique results in the formation of recesses between the pillars. Thiswall line (W8015) is pierced by Doorway C between Pillar C27:19 andWall 8016 on the east, and by Doorway D between Pillars C17:12 andC17:13 on the west.

Stratum VIIAA surface of beaten earth (A83:32=C27:66) extends the full length ofCentral Hall 804; when discovered this floor was carpeted with potterybroken in situ. This surface was clearly the lower storey floor in usewith the twin staircases and the threshold stones that were in frontof Doorway E (C27:78) and Doorway G (A83:34).44 This principalsurface (C27:66=A83:32) is founded on debris (A83:35), that consistsof firm soil and small cobblestones. Whether this matrix served as sub-floor makeup or was evidence for an earlier, Stratum VIIB phase wasnot determined. The surface itself was coated with plaster and ash.Installations located on this floor consist of two ovens (C27:63, C27:68)at the south end, and a boulder mortar (A83:31) in the northern halfthat was possibly reused as a base for a ceiling support. Its central

44 The superimposed plaster surfaces (C27:55, 56), uncovered in 1994 above FloorA83:32=C27:66, are now understood to be the ceiling and upper storey floor.

depression (ca. 0.35 m diameter) was partially lined with pithos sherdsand unfired clay.45 Other installations on the floor include the flat stonesthat serve as the lowest step of each staircase (C27:43; A83:19).

The heaviest concentrations of ceramic vessels on surface C27:66=A83:32 were along the walls and around the twin ovens, although scat-tered sherds and artefacts extend across the floor. Running counter-clockwise, from Stairway C27:43, along Wall 8022,46 were 5 clay loomweights, along with the neck of an extra-large pilgrim flask and a smalljar/large jug (V851) of bright light red, sandy ware (Daviau 2001a:321).Within Doorway H (A93:40), adjacent to Hearth A93:27 in Room809, was an accumulation of pithos sherds, ground stone tools and ashell pendant. The location of these vessels and the Hearth in Room809 would have made access from Room 804 quite awkward. How-ever, no other ground floor access was available since east/west Wall8025=8030 ran all the way from Room 809 to outer West Wall 8033.In the northwest corner of Room 804 was a flask,47 this one made ofextremely poor ware comparable to flask V301 from Stratum VIII inBuilding 300. Nearby at the entrance to Room 807 there were 3 morebasalt ground stone tools and a red slipped jug broken on the steps ofStaircase A83:19.

Scattered on the floor in the centre of the room were numerous arte-facts consisting of 2 upper loaf-shaped millstone fragments, 1 reused asa mortar, 2 pestles, 1 basalt mortar fragment, 2 basalt hand grinders, 1pounder, 1 large (ca 0.14 m in diameter) stone ball comparable to thosefound on Stairway C27:43, 1 sandstone working surface, 2 querns, 2shells and a group of fused iron points. In addition, there were brokenstorage vessels. Some of the ceramic sherds mended with others found

45 This lining of sherds suggests that the boulder was not used as a mortar in itsfinal phase, but rather held a vessel or a wooden post for roof support that was wedgedin place by the sherds. The base of the pithos is missing, so it was clearly not thisvessel that was in use at the time. Installation A83:31 sat on Surface A83:32, midwaybetween W8022 and the end of W8027, whereas boulder mortars recovered in earlierIron Age contexts (A13:23=Room 106, E 54:38=Room 302, E 54:53=Room 305),were embedded in the floor and fixed in place by a circle of cobblestones.

46 A round depression in the south face of Pillar A83:45 may have been related toweaving, in view of the proximity of the loom weights to this pillar. At the same time,if this were its function, one would expect the depression to be at the top of the pillarrather than somewhere in the middle.

47 The neck of this flask, broken off at the point where extra clay had been added tothe opening in the body, was recovered in Room 809. The presence of all body sherdstogether on Floor A83:32 suggests that this vessel was still in use at the time of theceiling’s collapse.

Figure 8.9. Pottery and artefacts in collapsed debris on Staircase C27:43.

on Staircase C27:43 (Fig. 8.9), suggesting that these vessels came fromeither an open area above the stairs, or were among the pottery andartefacts stored on the stairs when the building collapsed. This distribu-tion was most notable in the case of a straight-sided, red-wash decanter(V850), which may have been an imported vessel since its fabric inunique at Tall Jawa (Daviau 2001a:231). Artefacts still in position onthe steps included a basalt quern and 3 pounders/large hammer stones.

Table 8L. Pottery and Artefacts in Central Hall 804


A83:32+ 2 bowls V787, 878 red slipC27:66 chalice V858 painted

cup V853 one handlepithos V87748

2 storejars V783, 8802 jugs V791, 823jar/jug V851 sandy, pitted2 flasks V856, V855 large, painteddecanter V897 small red sliptripod cup V859892+ceramic sherdsshell TJ 2148 Glycermeris, perforatedmortar TJ 2171 reused millstone fragment

48 The severe destruction of Building 800 is evident in the scatter of sherds in morethan one room. Vessel 877 was a pithos, ca. 1.10 m tall, whose rim was found in pieceson the floor of Room 807 and mendable body sherds were present in Central Hall 804.


3 pestles TJ 2149, 2150, 2152 basalt3 grinders TJ 2172, 2088 basalt4 millstones TJ 1937, 2120, 2141 broken, +one unregistered2 querns TJ 2178working surface TJ 2127 sandstonepounder TJ 2115 chertstone ball TJ 2140 extra large tooliron points TJ 2119 fused5 weights TJ 2128–2132 unfired clay loom weights,

(doughnut-shaped)

C27:43 decanter V850 large, red wash(Stairs) 435 ceramic sherds

quern TJ 7493 pounders TJ 753, 756, 773 chert

A considerable amount of high status pottery is represented amongthe various sherd scatters that covered the floor of Central Hall 804.In addition to red-slipped wares, black burnished bowls and a paintedflask, there was a tripod cup, and a red slipped and painted chalice.

The Twin Ovens (Fig. 8.10): The most distinctive features at the southend of Room 804 were twin ovens (C27:63 [east] and C27:68 [west]),located north of Wall 8015. Each oven consists of a vertical ceramicwall,49 set in position on a flat stone or base-rock embedded in FloorSurface C27:66. The oven wall is finished on both the inner andexterior surfaces, and there is a finished rim at the top. These ovensare similar in form and style to Stratum-VII oven C54:19 (Chapter9), and to Oven B34:54, the only Stratum-VIII oven which was notformed of an inverted ceramic vessel.50 No ovens formed of packed clay

49 At Tall Jawa, the oven wall is hand-made, and is independent from the surround-ing plaster. This style of oven is different from Oven 10 at Tel Masos (Kh. el-Meshash)described by Gunneweg (1990:106) as “hard-baked beaten earth or loess,” which wassupported by stones on both the interior and exterior faces, and in some places ceramicsherds had been stuck against its outer face.

50 The only similarity with the early Iron Age ovens at Tel Masos (Gunneweg1983:106) is that the clay oven walls were 0.03 m thick. However, here the resemblanceto the Tall Jawa ovens ended, because these earlier ovens were circular, not open onone end, and the walls were slightly convex rather than straight. In size (0.50–0.58 m),the Tel Masos ovens were closer to the Stratum-VIII ovens which had a diameter of0.50 m. Ovens of this size have been recovered at Khirbat al-Mudayna in Gate Room153 (C96:29; Chadwick, Daviau and Steiner 2000:261; fig. 4), and in a kitchen southof Temple 149 (A18:34, Khirbat al-Mudayna 2001 report, unpublished).

Figure 8.10. Central Hall 804, looking south, with baserocks of twin ovens in front of Pillared Wall 8015.

with sherds impressed on the outer surface were recovered at Tall Jawa,although this was clearly the most common type in Cisjordan and inEdom.51

East Oven—C27:63: Oven C27:63 was located 0.75 m north of Con-necting Wall C27:33 that linked Pillars C17:12 and C27:19. The foun-dation or base-rock consists of a flat, circular limestone slab (C27:71),ca. 0.50 m diameter. On Floor C27:66, on three sides of the base-rock,

51 For example, see Hazor, Area G, Stratum VII (Yadin 1961: pls. XCV:2, 3); AreaA, Stratum VIa (Yadin 1961: pl. XXVI:1); and Tall as-Sa#idiyya (Pritchard 1985:fig. 44). For Edom, the same style of packed mud and sherds is reported; personalcommunication, P. Bienkowski (November 9, 1996).

were medium size field stones, probably used for protection and stabil-ity. The largest of these stones (C27:72; 0.42 m in length) was placedon its long edge south of the base-rock. In this position, Stone C27:72stood as high or higher than Oven C27:63, and may have served asa heat reflector to help maintain a constant temperature in the oven.Two other field stones were placed to either side of Stone C27:72 .

In position on the base-rock was the hand-built ceramic oven(C27:63), oval in shape, ca. 0.40 m in diameter, ca. 0.02–0.03 m thick,and preserved a maximum of 0.15 m in height. Resting against theceramic wall of the oven on Base-rock C27:71 were several small stoneswith no apparent pattern. There were also some small stones aroundthe front of the oven, apparently at floor level. All these stones werecemented in place by a layer of plaster (C27:79), which covered thespace around the oven, from its ceramic wall (C27:63) to the supportrocks (ca. 0.20 m) and sealed around their edges. When found, OvenC27:63 was poorly preserved with broken pieces of the oven wall scat-tered in the ash (C27:65) and soil (C27:64) that filled and surroundedthe oven, and spread across Floor Surface C27:66. Surface C27:66itself continued east as far as paved Floor C27:58, located in DoorwayB south of Staircase C27:43.

West Oven—C27:68 (Fig. 8.11): Oven C27:68 was located 0.40 m northof Pillar C17:13 and was similar in construction to Oven C27:63. Thecondition of this oven when found allows for a better understandingof the construction techniques used by the ancient inhabitants. A largerectangular boulder (C27:83), 0.60 m in length, was set in position onFloor Surface C27:66, flush against the north face of Pillar C17:13. Tothe north of this boulder, a rectilinear base-rock (C27:82) measuring0.36 m×0.38 m was set in place supported by small levelling stones.52

The space between the boulder and the base-rock was filled by a nar-row, rectilinear stone set on edge (0.55 m long) that extended 0.38m above the upper surface of the base-rock. This upright stone, sev-eral flanking stones (0.13×0.16× 0.07 and 0.12× 0.15×0.08 m), anda lump of clay protected the sides of base-rock C27:82 and oven wallC27:68, possibly serving as heat reflectors.

A layer of Plaster (C27:84) covered that part of the base-rock sur-rounded by the oven wall (C27:68) and extended to the back of the

52 Only in 1996, after a winter’s rain, was it apparent that Base-rock C27:82 wasitself supported by a basalt saddle quern embedded in the floor makeup.

Figure 8.11. Oven C27:68, with packed plaster and stones, in front of Boulder C27:83.

base-rock, sealing it and the surrounding stones and clay lump in place.The plaster also covered an oblong juglet (V860) wedged between thebase-rock (C27:82) and the narrow, upright stone. The juglet had beenfractured by heat from the oven, but was complete when found exceptfor its rim and upper neck (Daviau 2001a: fig. 7:3). Its position indicatesthat it was deliberately placed between the stones before the plastersealer. The ceramic oven wall (C27:68) was elliptical in shape and mea-sured 0.33 m north/south and 0.22 m east/west. Although the upperedge of the oven was damaged, it remained standing to a height of0.18 m.

A layer of ash (C27:65) accumulated around the front of the oven’sbase-rock (C27:82), where the oven was open at its north end, stainingthe rock itself and the plaster which covered its upper surface. Ash wasalso visible under the edges of the stones that flanked the base-rocksuggesting the prior use of Oven C27:63. At the same time, Ash C27:65did not extend to the west, where there was a storage area in the recessformed by Walls 8012 and 8015 (see below).

The location of these twin ovens at the south end of Central Hall804 exhibits several important features. The ovens were not directlyattached to Pillars C17:13 and C17:12 (=C27:22), but each had itsown support stone on the south side adjacent to the pillars. In thisposition, both ovens were just south of the line between Doorway Bfrom Room 805 and Doorway E into Room 802. As a result, the ovensbenefited from a certain amount of air circulation, while the indirectaccess through Room 805 on the east prevented a direct draft.

The precise function of these ovens is less clear. The accumulationof bowls and various ceramic vessels in their immediate area suggestsfood preparation, although the number of mendable cooking pots waslimited (see Table 8M).53 The presence of a quern to the east of OvenC27:68 and of a working surface and pounder east of Oven C27:63adds support to the functional identification of this area. However, themethod of cooking must have changed toward the end of Stratum VIII,since the size of these ovens (ca. 0.25–0.30 m) is considerably smallerthan the Stratum-VIII ovens formed of inverted pithoi which were allin the range of 0.50 m in diameter.54

Storage Area west of Oven C27:68: Immediately west of Oven C27:68, theconnecting wall (C17:19) which links the westernmost Pillar (C17:13)to Wall 8012 forms a niche or recess. In this small space (0.65× 1.20m), there were 15 unfired clay loom weights that appear to have beenin storage, rather than in use on a vertical loom (Barber 1991:92). Thisconcentration of weights corresponds to a group of 14 that were instorage in House 16 at Tall as-Sa#idiyya (Pritchard 1985:25; fig. 88).55

The proximity of the loom weights in Room 804 to central PillarC17:12 may explain a hole cut diagonally through the northwest uppercorner of this stone monolith (Daviau 1992: pl. I.1); such a hole could

53 A considerable amount of cooking pot sherd material was recovered which pointsto continued use of the ovens during the life of the building. As always, cooking potssuffer the extremes of hot and cold and their bases crumble into numerous unmendablepieces.

54 For a discussion of the ovens in Fields A–B and E, see above (also Daviau1992:148–149).

55 The distribution of loom weights on a diagonal between two walls in House 6 atTall as-Sa#idiyya suggests that they were in use at the time the house was destroyed(Pritchard 1985: text figs. 2, 3; figs. 73, 74). The storage of loom weights near an ovenwas reported for Room 44 of Stratum II at Beer-sheba (Beit Arieh 1973:36).

support the upper beam of a vertical loom56 when weaving was inprogress.57 The location for the opposite end of the beam is less certain,although it was probably in Room 803, away from the ovens.

Clustered around the front of Oven C27:68 was a small assemblageof ceramic vessels that scattered west into the recess between the pillarand Wall 8012, north as far as Doorway E into Room 802, and east asfar as the north side of Oven C27:63.

Table 8M. Pottery and Artefacts at south end of Room 804


C27:66 2 bowls V773, V802 red slip+27:70 bowl V798 black burnished+C17:42 krater V824

2 cooking pots V776, V881storejar V8762 jugs V857, V875 burnisheddecanter V874826+ceramic sherdsspindle whorl TJ 1891 limestone15 weights TJ2063, unfired clay, donut-shaped

TJ2099–2112

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyTwo surfaces (C27:55, 56), tightly superimposed within 0.15 m of eachother, constitute the collapsed ceiling which fell into Central Hall 804.Due to the importance of this room and the large amount of smashedpottery on Staircase C27:43 that leads up to the second storey, a

56 Barber illustrates the house of Thutnofer (1994: fig. 11.2), where she points out thedouble frame of the upright or vertical looms (1994:260). Because she imagined that thetomb painting illustrated a three storey house, she suggests that spinning and weavingof flax was carried on in the basement. Since Egyptian houses did not usually havebasements, the painting in the tomb of Thutnofer (TT 104), also known as Djehuty-nefer, probably illustrates the central rooms flanked by side rooms (Daviau 1993: fig. 1;403–404).

57 A depression in the southwest upper corner of the same pillar (C17:12) may alsohave been related to weaving. In his excavations of houses at Tell Beit Mirsim, Albright(1943:50) assumed that the pillars were intended to support both the ceiling, withoutcutting out light, and to support the beam of the vertical loom. (such an arrangementwas reconstructed in the Ha-Aretz Museum, when I visited there in 1975). At Tell BeitMirsim, loom weights in the shape of doughnuts were present in SE 51A-2 adjacentto stone pillars (Albright 1943:56, pl. 5). The same distribution pattern was noted inbuilding F607 at Tell Batash, where Mazar (1997:244) discovered 30 loom weights eastof the central pillars.

1.00 m2 grid was laid out in the south central area of Central Hall804, in order to excavate the soil (C27:48) immediately above SurfaceC27:55.58 Each grid was excavated separately and assigned its own pot-tery pail. All finds from a particular grid were to be plotted. Surpris-ingly little pottery (124 sherds) and few artefacts (1 seal-TJ 1128, 1basalt spheroid-TJ 1126) were recovered within the grid, with the resultthat pail numbers were assigned only as needed.

Table 8N. Grid for Soil Layer C27:48 with Pottery Pail and Artefact Numbers

Grid 46 Grid 47 Grid 48 Grid 49 G50/P119 G51/P124 P125

G37/P107 G38/P108 G39/P117 Grid 40 G41/P118 G42/P123113 111

G 1/P106 G 2/P116 G 3/P115 Grid 4 Grid 5 Grid 6112 120TJ 1126

G 7/P121 G 8/P122 Grid 9 Staircase C27:43TJ 1128

The paucity of finds in the earthen surfaces (C27:55, 56) and in theoverlying soil layers (C27:48, 47) suggests either a very thick ceilingmakeup (0.75 cm) or a high traffic area on the upper storey betweenthe two Staircases, which was covered in turn by the collapse of theroof (C27:46). It is only in the corners and in one of the overlying soillayers (C27:46) that the amount of pottery (522 sherds)59 and artefactspoints to extensive food preparation activities on the upper storey. Themost unusual find was a two-storey lamp or double vessel (V793), whichmay have been associated with the cultic bowl from Room 802 and thetripod cups.

58 Because the size of Square C27 was irregular (8.30×9.30 m), due to changesin the grid alignment of Field C (see Chapter 2), the usual 36 square meter grid wasexpanded to include Grid Squares 37–42 and 46–51. The use of the 1.00 m grid systemis described by Jacobs and Borowski (1992: x–xi) in their procedures and guidelines forcollection of materials at Tel Halif designated as locus.P (used with permission). Thesame method was used at Tell el-Hesi to record a dense artefact distribution (Field 1.51;1975), and at Ashkelon for the collection of soil samples from surfaces (Lass 1994:24).

59 A small amount of contamination was evident in the pottery. Whether this isdue to disturbance during the Umayyad period or during modern times with theconstruction of the property walls remains unclear.

Table 8P. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 804, upper storey


C27:42 2 mortars TJ 790C27:46 3 millstones TJ 775 fragments

lamp V793 double lamp522 ceramic sherdsgrinder TJ 802 basalt5 millstones TJ 765, 798, 821 upper loaf-shaped

(2=unregistered)quern fragment

Evidence for Final DestructionLayers of rockfall (C27:44, 38, 39, 37) filled with small and mediumsize boulders, scattered pottery, and broken basalt tools demonstratethe severe collapse that brought occupation in Building 800 to an end.This debris is consistent with that recovered in all rooms in the centralunit although it appears somewhat more disturbed, probably due tothe large size of the central hall that allowed for stone robbing in bothUmayyad and modern times.

Room 806 (Fig. 8.5)On the east side of Central Hall 804, Room 806 is close in size (2.85 ×2.80 m) and shape to Room 807 on the west. This square room fills thespace between Stairway C27:43 and the northeast room (R809). It isbounded on the east by the outer Wall (8021), on the north by single-row Wall 8023, on the west by Wall 8022, and on the south by thesupport wall (W8020) of the staircase itself. At the southwest corner is asingle doorway (F) that leads into the central hall.

Excavation in R806 did not reach floor level across the entire room,and no clearly defined installations were exposed. Alongside outer Wall8021, was an exceptionally hard packed surface (C27:60) which con-tained scattered oven fragments. It was not clear whether this repre-sents the collapsed ceiling that fell onto an oven and was baked by theheat, or whether it was an installation in its own right. Partial removalof the collapsed ceiling (C27:73) inside Doorway F along the north sideof Staircase C27:43 (W8020) exposed a floor surface (C27:75) whichwas contiguous to Surface C27:66=A83:32 in Room 804.

Evidence for room function is most clearly seen in the group ofgroundstone tools in Doorway F. Due to the limited exposure of thissurface, few mendable vessels were recovered making it impossible toidentify more precisely the range of activities in this room.

Table 8Q. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 806


C27:75 storejar V79680 ceramic sherds2 pestles TJ 2167, 2189 basaltgrinder TJ 2188 basaltmillstone TJ 2177 upper, loaf-shaped

The overlying debris layers (C27:37, 38) of collapsed wall stones filledthe upper two-thirds of Room 806 in the same pattern as seen inadjoining rooms. Only one use phase was identified here as was thecase in Room 807.

The Southern Unit: Rooms 802, 803, 805 (Fig. 8.3)

Two rooms (R802, R803) perpendicular to each other along the southand west sides of Building 800 flank Central Hall 804. To the east ofRoom 803 is a small entryway (Room 805), located south of StaircaseC27:43. Although the depth of accumulated debris along the south endof Building 800 was only 1.50 m, in contrast to 3.50 m at the north,the three ground floor rooms against the south wall (W8011=8017)were filled with collapsed wall stones consisting of medium to large sizeboulders and cobble size chink stones that made excavation extremelyslow and laborious. Excavation began in Rooms 802 and 803 in 1991,continued in 1992 in Rooms 803 and 805, and was completed in 1993in Room 802.

Room 805 (Fig. 8.12)Room 805 is an L-shaped space that contains the only ground floorentrance (Doorway A) into Building 800 that could be identified withcertainty. The shape of this room provides indirect access from Door-way A to Doorway B, which opens into Central Hall 804. This ar-rangement was achieved by the construction of Wall 8018, which runssouth from the southern staircase support wall (W8019), and serves inturn as support for the upper steps of the staircase over Room 805.Wall 8018 is only 1 row thick (0.50 m) and serves as a support for a filllayer (C27:53) under the stairs.

Doorway A (1.00 m in width) is located between the south end ofouter East Wall 8021 and the north face of South Wall 8017. This for-mation results in the location of Doorway A in the southeast corner of

Figure 8.12. Room 805, with Basin C27:27 insouthwest corner; Room 803 is on the right.

Room 805, rather than in the middle of a wall line. This constructiontechnique is a feature that was used extensively here and in Building700 in Field D (see below), as well as in B300 in Field E (see above).Both of the outer walls (W8021, W8017) of Room 805, formed of 2–3 rows of small to large size boulders, are in the range of 1.20–1.30m thick. The boulders at the ends of both walls were carefully chosenand semi-hewn forming vertical dressed edges. Bonded to South Wall8017 is interior Wall 8016, which forms the west wall of Room 805.Wall 8016 is formed of one row of medium to large boulders and, at itsnorth end, is built of dressed boulders at the point where it forms thesouth side of Doorway B. The north side of Doorway B and of Room805 is framed by stairway support Wall 8019. This wall is formed ofone row of hewn, rectangular boulders in the range of 0.75–1.20 m inlength.

In line with Doorway A is a rectangular limestone basin/trough(C27:27) that is located in the corner formed by Outer Wall 8017 andwest Wall 8016. The external dimensions of the basin are 1.00× 0.75×0.45 m in height, while its interior depression is ca. 0.75×0.55× 0.35m in depth. In the southwest, lower corner there is a drain hole located0.18 m below the rim and 0.04 m above the bottom that ranged in size

from 0.05–0.13 m in diameter.60 Inside the basin, below the level of thedrain hole was an accumulation of mud plaster(?), 0.04–0.05 m thick(C27:30). Whether this layer had a functional purpose or representsa residue has not been determined. Additional fill layers (C27:26a–d)within the basin appear to consist of soil and do not contribute to afunctional interpretation of this installation.61

According to Kelm and Mazar (1995:150; fig. C30), roof rollers wereused to crush olives in stone basins. While this may have been thecustom at Tell Batash where the roller was used perpendicular to thelong sides of the basin,62 the roof roller (TJ 589) found in Room 805is too long (0.68 m) to be used in Basin C27:27, and appears to havefallen from above (see below). In addition, the position of the drain holethat had its exit in a corner formed by two walls is counter productiveif crushing were the intended function, since a considerable amount ofoil would be lost.

Basin C27:27 is supported by chink stones (0.15–0.25 m in size) inposition on a beaten earth and stone paved surface, or sub-floor, whichwas not exposed in the centre of Room 805.63 In the northeast corner,on Surface C27:76, was a saucer bowl (V813) and a broken storejarthat may have been in use with the basin prior to the installation ofa second stone pavement. The bottom of the basin is sealed with asoil layer that serves as the foundation for Flagstone Pavement C27:34,the final use phase in Room 805.64 The stones in this pavement are in

60 The drain hole was certainly cut from the inside where it measures 0.13 m indiameter; it then tapers to 0.05 m on the outside.

61 An impressive basin located in the gate complex at Gezer (0.80×1.00 m) probablydid hold liquid, because there was no drain hole. Surprisingly, basins similar in shapebut slightly larger in size, identified as olive crushing basins used in the olive oil industryat Tel Miqne, had drain holes in some instances (Basin 197003 (1.75 ×1.05×0.70 m);Basin 86006 (1.25×1.00×0.42–0.50 m), although comparable basins (Basin 182007,Basin 166016) in this same Area II were not perforated (MacKay 1995:83, 163–64,Plan Nos. 858, 867c). Basins at Megiddo that functioned as mangers, according toHolladay (1986:116), were in the range of 1.20 ×0.60×0.70 m in height. Their interiordepression measures 0.90×0.30×0.12–0.15 m in depth.

62 One such basin, first reported in 1982 by Kelm and Mazar (1995: pl. 20B), waslocated in a private house that shares similar construction techniques with Building800, such as stacked boulder piers, monolithic stone pillars, boulder-and-chink wallsand a flagstone pavement in a broad room.

63 Evidence for this earlier surface is seen in Doorway B and in the southeast cornerof Room 804, where beaten earth Surface C27:76 is a continuation of C27:66, thesurface in use with Oven C27:63. Here, the flagstone floor (C27:58) is above the earliersurface.

64 At first, the disturbed condition of the flagstones in Pavement C27:34 suggested

the range of 0.20–0.40 m in length, 0.10–0.15 m in width and 0.10–0.12 m thick. The surface (C27:74) in Doorway B may have beenpaved with stone slabs which measure 0.07–0.09 m thick and 0.16–0.32m×0.21–0.56 m. These were found at a slightly higher level (923.91masl) than the Stratum VIIA floor level in Central Hall 804 (923.78masl), but appear to have been contemporary. In view of its small sizeand function as an entryway, Room 805 may have endured severalrepavings during the life of Building 800. As a high traffic area, thisroom contained few artefacts and little pottery.

Table 8R. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 805


C27:28 2 saucers V812, 813 red slip, burnishedsaucer sherds red slippithos sherdsbottle V788208 ceramic sherdspestle TJ 514millstone TJ 552 upper loaf-shapedsherd 92/117 reworkedshell pendant TJ 2165 Glycymeris, perforatediron point TJ 519

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyEvidence for the collapsed ceiling consists of a light yellowish brown(10YR 6/4) soil and plaster layer (C27:18) which contained fallenwall stones, especially pebbles, cobbles and small boulders. The sizeof these stones, here as elsewhere, suggests that the upper storey wallswere made of smaller stones than those on the ground floor. Certainrectangular stones in the debris may have come from the upper steps ofStaircase C27:43 where it turned south above Room 805. In the midstof this collapse was roof roller TJ 589 that had pierced the flagstonepavement when it fell from the north, probably through an open areaabove Stairway C27:43.

an upper storey floor that had collapsed. However, the elevation of this pavement(924.00 masl) was very close to that of the pavement in Doorway B (923.91 masl)and to the main floor (C27:66; 923.78 masl) in the adjacent rooms (R804 and R803),whereas the collapsed flagstones in Room 807 were at least 0.60 m higher.

Table 8S. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 805, upper storey


C27:18 2 saucers V810, V811 red slipbowl V822 red slipbowl V821 black burnishedjug V785279+ceramic sherdsroof roller TJ 589 limestone2 millstones TJ 440, 509 upper loaf-shaped1 millstone TJ 442 lowergrinder TJ 449 basaltwhetstone TJ 564 sandstoneshell Sh 6 Glycymerissheep and goat bones

Evidence for Final DestructionUppermost layers of rockfall filling Room 805 and Doorway B (C 27:3,6, 9, 10, 11, 12) contained wall stones of all sizes including small andmedium boulders, suggesting collapse over time of the upper courses ofthe lower storey walls. Pottery from these loci is contaminated with lateByzantine/Umayyad sherds. Additional contamination from modernagricultural and pasturing activities was present in topsoil layer C27:1.

Room 803 (Figs. 8.3, 12)Room 803 is the central room on the south side of Building 800. Thisbroad room opens onto Central Hall 804 through two entrances (Door-ways C and D) in Pillared Wall 8015. Within Room 803, Doorway Cis located between the west face of boulder-and-chink Wall 8016 andthe easternmost limestone pillar (C27:19), while Doorway D is betweenwestern Pillar C17:13 and central Pillar (C17:12=27:22). The twoeastern pillars (C27:22 and 19) are joined by a low connecting wall(C27:33) formed of a long (0.65 m) rectilinear boulder that supportsboth pillars. In similar fashion, the western Pillar (C17:13) is linkedto west Wall 8012 by a connecting unit (C17:19). The result is a wall(W8015) that consists of four openings allowing for air and light to cir-culate from the central hall. The south face of the two units of Wall8015 form a straight line and did not contain recesses as on the northface in Central Hall 804 (see above).

West Wall 8014 also presents a linear face in Room 803. South ofits meeting with Wall 8015, Wall 8014 is, for the most part, a boulderpillar and cobblestone unit wall. Wall 8014 appears to abut exterior

Wall 8011, which runs from the southwest corner of Building 800 asfar as Wall 8016, the east wall of Room 803.65 As the longest wall ofRoom 803, Wall 8011 is formed of medium to large boulders laid onthe extra-long (4.08+m) stone that forms its main support. In contrastto the northern exterior wall (8024) which remains standing ca. 3.70 mabove floor level, South Wall 8011 is only preserved 0.45–0.80 m aboveFloor C27:32, showing the pattern of erosion on the slope of the tell.

Stone Pavement C27:32=C17:18 covers the floor of Room 803 andis contemporary with Floor C27:66 in Central Hall 804. Formed offlagstones and cobblestones, this surface is connected through Door-way C to Pavement C27:58 in Doorway B, and to Pavement C27:34in Room 805. Additional flagstones form the threshold in Doorway D.With the exception of the southeast corner of Room 803, the pave-ment appears to be covered with a plaster coating (C17:17=C27:31)which was damaged by artefacts and broken pottery when the upperstorey collapsed. Pottery and artefacts are scattered across the surfaceand embedded in the overlying soil layer (C27:25).

Table 8T. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 803


C27:25 bowl sherds vertical rim, mends with V802C17:17 49+ceramic sherds

3 mortars TJ 310, 318, 378 limestone, basaltmortar TJ 189 basalt, smallmortar C27:35 limestone, boulder2 grinders TJ 206, 317 basaltgrinder TJ 316 extra large2 millstones TJ 308, 382 upper loaf-shaped2 pounders TJ 164, 307 chertbasin/mortar C17:15 limestoneshell pendant TJ 456 Glycymeris, perforatedanimal bones

An intact boulder mortar (C27:35), measuring 0.38× 0.48×0.24 m,was found leaning against South Wall 8011, where it was thrust byrockfall. These finds strongly suggest domestic or industrial activities,such as food processing. McCown (1945:14) reported a similar pattern

65 Wall 8011 appears to bond with Wall 8016.

for the paved room, which was used for storage, in Building 3 at Tellen-Na.sbeh.66

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyAlthough several loci (C17:10=14=C27:21=14) of collapsed wallstones were removed from the upper part of Room 803, there is littleevidence for activities on the upper storey since erosion was so severealong South Wall 8011. Most striking is the presence of a basalt mortarbowl with a ring base (TJ 191=344) and 2 weights, frequently iden-tified as tether stones (TJ 219, 221). These “tethers”, unlike the slabweights in Room 809, are natural stones with evidence that the perfo-ration has seen wear. The function of these weights, and those in Room809, is still a mystery. In Room 803, one might suppose that these werein use either as weights for the foot of a loom, whose clay loom weightswere in storage in the recess in Central Hall 804, or for some othercraft or industry carried out on the upper storey. Another industrial sizefeature was located in front of Doorway D. This large basin (C17:15)was broken and surrounded by fallen stones (C17:14); it measures 0.54m in diameter, 0.46+m in length and 0.40 m in height, and was eithercircular or oval when complete. The number of weights, the presenceof the limestone basin and a “table” (TJ 1543),67 also fallen from theupper storey, are similar to elements of an oil press and are frequentlyfound together. A square pressing table, considerably larger in size, wasuncovered at Tel Qiri in Stratum VII, an Iron II horizon (Ben-Tor andPortugali 1987: photos 19–21). However, the presence of such an instal-lation on the upper storey of a building is probably unique.

Room 802 (Fig. 8.13)Room 802, located in the southwest corner, is similar in size (2.50 ×5.55 m) and shape to Room 809 in the northeast corner. Room 802is enclosed by outer West Wall 8010 on the west and on the southby outer South Wall 8011. At the north end of Room 802 is Wall8013, the south support wall for Staircase A83:19. This was a boulder-and-chink wall that remained standing 1.42 m above Surface C17:52.

66 Clearly paved Room 803 was not used for animals, given the number of instal-lations present on the floor. This is in contrast to the suggestions for the use of pavedrooms in “four-room” houses, such as the one at Tall al-#Umayri (Herr and Clark2001:40), where (in an isometric drawing) an ox is shown standing in the paved room.

67 See Room 807, above.

Figure 8.13. Room 802, looking south toward stacked-boulder Wall 8012.

Patches of plaster (C17:48) on its lowest exposed course are the onlyremains of a plaster coating on the south face of this wall. The easternwall (W8014=8012) is composed of several construction units identi-fied individually during excavation. The south end of this wall (8014)appears to be a boulder-and-chink segment (C17:7) that was later seento be constructed in the same style as the northern unit (W8012). Wall8012 consists of stacked-boulder pillars (C17:33, C17:35) linked by cob-blestone connecting units (C17:34, 56; Fig. 8.13), and capped with longrectangular boulders that linked the piers. The cobblestone units areless thick (0.25–0.35 m) than the pillars (0.65–0.75 m) and form recessesthat were found filled with collapsed wall stones. Some of these wallswere badly damaged during the destruction of the building.

Figure 8.14. Room 802, loom weights in niche in Wall 8012.

Immediately north of Pillar C17:35 and south of east-west Wall 8013is a single Doorway (E) from Central Hall 804. In position on SurfaceC27:66, are three flat stones (C27:78) that mark the entrance and serveas a threshold. Inside Room 802, 0.50 m west of Doorway E, there isa large (0.25× 0.77×0.10 m thick) basalt saddle quern (C17:50) set onits long edge parallel to the threshold stones and perpendicular to Wall8013 (Fig. 8.3). This quern is embedded in a beaten earth floor surface(C17:51) which extends the length of the room (C17:52=53). Thequern serves as a windbreak for a fire place (C17:46), located againstthe south face of Wall 8013.68 Only ashes mark the position of thisfire; there is no oven as such. The heat from this fire may have helpedto preserve the patches of plaster (C17:48) that adhere to the lowestcourse of Wall 8013. The fireplace itself (C27:46) measures 1.00 × 1.20m in size and consists of ash, burnt ceramic sherds, 19+pieces of iron(slag?) and 1 fragment of an iron point.69 Due to its location in Building800, it is unlikely that Room 802 served as a craft area for forging

68 This same feature was seen in Room 303 (E54:27, Stratum VIII, Chapter 7) andin Room 901 in Field C-east (quern C54:19), where it was adjacent to a clay lined oven(C54:18).

69 The metal fragments and point were recovered in flotation.

new weapons. This was usually carried out in a room separate from theliving quarters or in an industrial building.70 Ground stone tools, usuallyassociated with food preparation, were also in position on Floor C17:51around the fire place.

Table 8U. Pottery and Artefacts west of Doorway E in Room 802


C17:46 lamp sherdiron fragmentsiron point TJ 778

C17:5 1 3 mortars TJ 742, 755, 767 rectangularpestle TJ 769 basaltpounder TJ 762 chert

Fireplace C17:46 was buried under 0.90–1.00 m of soil, fallen wallstones (C17:44=45) and smashed pottery that had probably all beenin use with Surface C17:51=52=53=54. The contents of these locisuggest that Room 802 was most probably a storeroom. It contained aconsiderable amount of mendable ceramic vessels, a total of 18 loomweights, 15 of which rested on Surface C17:54 located in a recessformed by stacked pillars C17:33 and C17:7 in Wall 8012 (Fig. 8.14).Their position indicates that these objects were not in use when thisroom was destroyed; the loom weights were merely stored here as werethe loom weights found in Central Hall 804, on the east side of thesame Wall (8012).71

The location of pithoi and store jars near the entrance of Room 802also points to the use of the room for storage. Foodstuffs taken fromsuch vessels may have been prepared either in Room 802 or in CentralHall 804 adjacent to the twin ovens. Numerous food preparation toolswere scattered across the floor of Room 802, especially in the vicinityof the fireplace and near a stone working surface.

70 For example, a mould to manufacture weapons was located in House E at Car-chemish, which was a separate unit from House D (Woolley 1921:130; pl. 23b, refer-ence courtesy of P. E. Dion). On occasion, metalworking is associated with temples,although the smithing in Temple 149 at Khirbat al-Mudayna in Moab (Daviau andSteiner 2000:6) may have been secondary.

71 It was a common practice to put loom weights in storage during the off-season,when weaving was suspended due to the pressure of other activities. Loom weights instorage were located in the storeroom at Ta#anach where they were put in a krater (paceFrick 2000: fig. 21).

Table 8V. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 802


C17:44–45 4 saucers V805, V807, V808 red slip+17:29 V803 yellow slip+17:49 2 bowls V814, V8264 bowls V790, V797, black burnished

V799, V8162 kraters V804, V819 hole mouth2 cooking pots V789, V7954 pithoi V815, V817, V818 hole mouth

V806 potter’s mark4 storejars V767, V781,

V786, V7941 storejar V782 small, 4 handles2 decanters V775, V7802 lamps V792, V820mortar bowl V828 wedge inpressionsmortar bowl V827 tripod, ceramicshell pendant TJ 901 Glycymeris, perforated,

very smallpendant TJ 757 bonebasalt bowl TJ 818 ring base3 mortars TJ 708, 716, 821 716=miniature2 grinders TJ 702 +one fragment5 millstones TJ 698, 709, 713, upper loaf-shaped

TJ 735, 8192 querns TJ 777, 853 basalt, saddle quernswork surface TJ 827 limestone2 pounders TJ 762, 823 chertstopper TJ 768 stonespindle whorl TJ 575 ceramic18 weights TJ 740–746, unfired clay loom weights

TJ 855–863, 908 (doughnut-shaped)6 sherds 93/165, 166, reworked

183, 227, 230, 2654 lithics L491, 492, 498, 503

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyBecause of its size and location, a considerable amount of collapsewas preserved in Room 802 although the southern Wall (8011) hadsuffered here also from extensive erosion. The collapsed ceiling wasmost clearly seen in soil layers (top of C17:47=24, 26–28=43) thatcontained rockfall and smashed pottery with some flat lying sherds.

Most notable were the presence of a cultic cup (V801) and an ostracon(Dion 2002). The cup was made in two parts that were attached at thebowl and then coated with red slip, burnished and painted with blackbands and white wash (Daviau 1994: fig. 11:6).

Table 8W. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 802, upper storey


C17:24–28 saucer V774 red slipjug V784 large324 ceramic sherdsmortar TJ 378millstone TJ 387

C17:40, 43 saucer V809 red slip171 ceramic sherdsgrinder TJ 664 basaltquern TJ 665 fragmentostracon TJ 1071 3 lines of textcultic cup V801=TJ674 red slip, painted

C17:47 grinder TJ 771 basaltiron point TJ 796

Summary

The pottery and artefacts from Building 800 are evidence of inten-sive domestic activities along with several crafts and industries. Withinthe ceramic corpus, the variety of pottery types indicates the range offood preparation activities and the presence of elements of a domes-tic cult most notable in the specialized wares and painted vessels. Apreliminary count of recognizable ware form types among the partiallyrestored vessels is presented in Table 8X.

Table 8X. Classes of Pottery in Building 800

Ceramic Class Totals Surface Treatment*N % N % %

of class of all

Saucer 11 8.59 11 100.00 22.00Bowl 29 22.65 26 89.65 52.00Platter 1 0.78 1 100.00 2.00Chalice 1 0.78 1 100.00 2.00Cup 1 0.78Goblet 1 0.78Krater 9 7.03

Ceramic Class Totals Surface Treatment*N % N % %

of class of all

Cooking Pot 6 4.68Pithos 6 4.68Storejar 14 10.93Hole mouth Jar 1 0.78Jug 9 7.03Juglet 10 7.71 2 20.00 4.00Flask 2 1.56 1 50.00 2.00Decanter-small 5 3.90 5 100.00 10.00Decanter-large 4 3.12 1 25.00 2.00Bottle 1 0.78Lamp 6 4.68Mortar bowl 3 2.34Tripod cup 3 2.34Cultic cup/stand 1 0.78 1 100.00 2.00Miniature vessels 2 1.56 1 50.00 2.00Basin 1 0.78

Miscellaneous 1 0.78Total 128 101.38 50 100.00

* Surface treatment refers to vessels that bear evidence for red slipand/or paint or were made of black burnished ware.

Specialized Finds

The large repertoire of pottery (128+vessels) and artefacts in Building800 and the amount of red slipped and black burnished wares are clearindicators of a high standard of living. In addition, certain finds point toa certain degree of official activity; these include the seal and ostraconand the presence of “rare” or imported vessels and shells. Other findssuggest cultic activity, for example the red slipped and painted chalice,a “cultic” cup, and a painted clay “stopper”, along with tripod cupsand a double lamp (Daviau 2001b). Although no figurines were foundinside Building 800, the head of a bull vessel (TJ 1286) was recoveredfrom debris sealed against North Wall 8024, and the torso of a figurinedepicting a nude female (TJ 1106; Daviau 2002:60) was found at thesift. This evidence for daily life in Late Iron Age II is supplementedby finds from Building 700 and from the domestic rooms (B900) andgate complex (B910) in Field C-east, where additional figurines werefound.

Evidence for Final Destruction

Topsoil (C17:1, 5, 20, 37) covered the uppermost wall stones bothinside and outside of Room 802. In debris layer C17:5, there were theremains of the modern wall that crossed the building at this point alongwith a group of architectural elements, consisting of pieces of a ceramicdrain, that was probably in use with Umayyad-period Building 600.

Formation of the Archaeological Record in Building 800

The complexity of the formation of the archaeological record of Build-ing 800 is seen most clearly in the distribution of broken ceramic vesselsbeyond the room in which they were used. While the majority of vesselswere smashed in place and could be successfully reconstructed, somevessels located near doorways were broken in such a way that sherdswere recovered from the adjoining room. In several cases, the distri-bution was more extensive; sherds were discovered almost on oppositesides of the building. This is seen most clearly in the case of V877, alarge pithos whose rim sherds were found in Room 807, to the westof Central Hall 804, as well as beside Wall 8021 in Room 806 on theopposite side of the hall. In both locations, the sherds were sealed bythe collapsed ceiling and tumbled wall stones. Although such distribu-tion suggests damage to the building before its final destruction, this ishard to imagine since B800 was not burnt. Although the soil from theceilings was present in every room, no wooden beams were preservedor ash layers encountered that would provide evidence of burning. Analternative explanation may be destruction by earthquake or abandon-ment due to military threat. Evidence for attack, such as weapons andburning, are clearly lacking however, as is historical documentation thatcould suggest events related to the destruction of Tall Jawa during thelate Iron Age.

BUILDING 700

Introduction

Field D is located to the northeast of Building 800 in Field C-west, andimmediately north of Field C-east (Squares C47–C77 are contiguousto Squares D1–D31; Fig. 8.15). Modern property walls run along thesouth, east and north sides of Field D. Adjacent to the northern prop-erty wall (D25–35) is an area covered with scattered tesserae (500+)

Figure 8.15. Excavation Grid in Field D.

that marks the position of a long (20.00+m) building whose walls arebarely visible at ground level. More apparent, prior to excavation, werethe outer walls of Building 700 that were preserved above ground leveland clearly delimited the entire perimeter of a structure filled withcollapsed debris. Most intriguing was a central depression that gavethe impression of a cistern mouth. In fact, the depression was the result

of ancient collapse and modern exploration on the part of local landowners earlier in the twentieth century.

A rock-cut cistern (D15:2), outside the northwest corner of Building700, was emptied in modern times and a dump of soil and brokenpottery (D14:1) was piled against the west wall of the ancient structure.The mouth of the cistern was covered with large stone blocks and,on first investigation in 1992, was found to contain a modern mortarshell. The presence of large numbers of Iron Age sherds in the dumpsuggests that this cistern was used initially in association with Building700, although reuse during the Umayyad period is also likely.


Before excavation began in Field D, the history of settlement at TallJawa was only known through the results of surface survey. Ceramicmaterial, gathered by Boling (1989:144), had identified only a fewsherds with Byzantine characteristics and one Umayyad sherd. Due toits preservation above ground level, it was assumed that the Field Dbuilding (B700) was a later structure even though the date of its con-struction and use was yet to be determined. Thus, excavation began in199172 to determine the association of the known Iron Age remainswith this later structure. Excavation continued each season until itwas ascertained in 1995 that Building 700 was first constructed andoccupied in the Iron Age (Stratum VII), and then later rebuilt in thelate Byzantine-early Islamic period (Stratum III, B600, Daviau andTempest, in preparation). This evidence was revealed in deep probesbeneath Rooms 601, 602, 604, and 609, where undisturbed Iron Agecollapse was sealed beneath the Umayyad floors of the upper storeyrooms.73


RoomsAt least five ground floor rooms (R714, 716, 712, 713, 715), one Cor-ridor 717, an possible entryway (R718), and the space of Stratum III

72 At least ten collapsed buildings are preserved above ground level on the northand east sides of Tall Jawa, indicating a considerable settlement during the Umayyadperiod. Of these structures, only Building 700 was within the area owned by Mr.Hamad Talafieh and available for excavation by the Tall Jawa Project.

73 The size of Building 700 is ca. 12.20×16.00 m; the east end was extended whenthe structure was rebuilt in the Umayyad period.

Figure 8.16. Building 700 in Field D.

Rooms 607=R707 and R606=R706 were probably in use duringthe Iron Age. The presence of one free standing staircase (D23:43),similar in all respects to Staircase C27:43 in Building 800, is firmevidence that there had been upper storey rooms as well. While thearrangement of these rooms may have duplicated that on the groundfloor, this cannot be tested or assumed, due to the extensive remodellingduring the Umayyad period. Iron Age floor levels were reached onthe west in Rooms 714 (below Room 609), and R716 (below Room608), on the south in Rooms 712 (only below Room 602) and R713(below Room 604), and on the east in R715 (below Room 605). Theseground floor rooms were securely dated by the discovery of in situ IronAge pottery immediately above the floors.74 These finds were sealedby debris layers consisting of soil and medium to large (0.50–1.00 m)

74 Rooms 706 and R707 were reused during the Umayyad period and all of theIron Age remains were removed. In Rooms 716 and 715, the Iron Age materialswere contaminated by Umayyad pottery and glass during reconstruction and repairof certain walls and of Staircase D23:43.

field boulders deposited in such a way as to indicate massive collapse.This collapsed material contained Iron Age pottery, including sherds ofwell-known late Iron II wares (see below), along with numerous groundstone tools.75

Table 8AA. Room Size and Proportion in Building 700


606/706 3.30* 3.50 .94* 7002, 7003, 6010, 6018707 4.50* 4.70 .95* 7003, 6018, 6015, 7020712 2.85 6.80 .42 7019=24, 7023, 7026, 7031713 3.10 5.30 .58 7024, 7025, 7026, 7028714 1.80* 3.50 .51 7017, 7029, 7019, 7031715 2.00 3.30* .60* ?, 7010, 7024, 6027716 3.70 4.00 .92 7017, 7021, 7030, 7031717 1.60 6.20 .25 7015, 7027, 7024, 7029718 0.90 3.10 .29 7023, 7024, 7026, 7028

* Room size in doubt due to reuse in Stratum III.

Range of sizes (omitting Room 717)


(omitting Rooms 712, 717)

Length 3.10 → 5.30 average – 3.91 m

Due to limited excavation under upper-storey Umayyad rooms (R601–605, 609), the full dimensions of certain Iron Age ground floor roomscould not be ascertained,76 for example Corridor 617/717 whose useduring the Iron Age has not yet been established, and Room 714 wherea probe only tested the debris layers along the west side of the room. Incertain rooms the Stratum III builders removed almost all evidence ofIron Age construction, for example in Room 606 where the walls and

75 The presence of late Iron Age II wares strongly suggests that the original Iron Agestructure was contemporary with Buildings 800 and B900 (in Field C-east, immediatelysouth of Building 600). This is seen especially in the ceramic fabric of vessels V701,a finely levigated clay with pink surface decorated with black painted bands that iscomparable to V901, and of a group of oblong juglets (V702, 703) that are identical tothose in Building 800 (V861, 862; Daviau 2001: figs. 8, 7, respectively).

76 In spite of the limits of excavation in Building 700, the average dimensions arevery close to those for Building 800; width=3.03 m vs. 2.73 m and length=4.44 mvs. 4.27 m.

floor represent the Umayyad period room; the location of the originalIron Age east wall appears to be marked only by Installation D33:28.This feature lines up well with Wall 7025, which marks the east endof Room 713 in the southeast corner of Building 700. Between thesetwo rooms, evidence for an eastern outer wall was not uncovered inRoom 715, because excavation ended just west of that line. At thatpoint, there was a stone pier which may have been built up against theouter east wall; however, it was not excavated and remains covered byan Umayyad period flagstone floor.

Another area of uncertainty is the original layout and size of themain hall or court (R707) during the Iron Age. The southern corridor(R717) may have been an Umayyad period construction to support anupper storey walkway that would facilitate entry to Rooms 609 andR605, if part of Room 607 were unroofed. This corridor may not havebeen in existence during the Iron Age, with the result that the earlierroom (R707) would have had a total length of 6.80 m. This lengthwould have put the central hall in the same class as Room 712, andCentral Hall 804 in Building 800.

Both the northeastern and northwestern rooms (R706, R716, R714)are almost square whereas the remaining rooms are rectangular. Alongthe south side of the building, Rooms 712 and R713+718 appear tobe more than 6.00 m in length. While this is longer than the averagelength of rooms in Building 800, the evidence for these dimensions wasclear at those points where probes revealed upper storey Umayyadperiod walls firmly footed in the upper layers of Iron Age collapse,rather than above lower storey walls. So too for Room 712, where theknown length cannot be checked; it is possible that there was a pieragainst the outer south wall dividing this room in two, comparable tothe one between Rooms 811 and R812 in Building 800.

DoorwaysOnly five interior doorways (A–D) in use during the final Iron Ageoccupation could be identified with certainty in Building 700. One ofthese (A) is located in the same place as a later Stratum III Doorway(AA), which made use of the Iron Age lintel, thus retaining the orig-inal Iron Age dimensions. The same system of reuse may have beenemployed for Doorway B, although that is less certain. Doorway C issituated at the north end of Wall 7028 and leads into a narrow corri-dor (R718), whose precise function could not be determined. Althoughthis space would be adequate for an entryway from the outside, no firm

evidence for this interpretation was recovered nor was the position of amajor ground floor entrance into this building located elsewhere. Door-way E, like Doorways A and B, is flanked on one side by the outer walland leads into twin rooms (R714, R716). Other possible doorways wereblocked up or were obscured by the later reorganization of the building.

Table 8BB. Location and Width of Doorways


A 716, Stairway D23:43 0.90B Stairway D23:43, 707 1.36C 718, 713 0.80D 712, 718 0.95E 714, 716 0.85

Average width=0.875 m (not including Doorway B).

LintelsOnly here, in Building 700, were lintels found in situ over DoorwaysA, D and E. In each case, the lintel consists of a very large (1.00–1.55m long) limestone boulder that was supported by a boulder-and-chinkwall at one and, on its other end, by a stacked-boulder doorjamb orthe end of a wall. Also in two cases (A and D), the wall supportingthe south end of the lintel continues the line of the lintel itself, whilethe wall supporting the north end ran perpendicular. The bottom oflintel D23:41 over Doorway A is positioned 1.76 m above the bedrocksurface and threshold stones, while that of Doorway E (Lintel D13:13)is 1.80 m above the floor, and in Doorway D the lintel (D12:34) standsat 2.07m.77

WallsWall thicknesses represent the width of the uppermost courses, manyrebuilt during the Umayyad period. Excavation outside the walls re-vealed the original width and wall line, which was utilized by theUmayyad builders in 90% of the cases.

77 Examples of well preserved lintels are known for the late Iron Age from Balu‘,where five doorways still have lintels in place (Worschech 1995:147; fig. 5). By contrast,these lintels are only 1.20–1.40 m above floor level. At Khirbat al-Mudayna al-#Aliya,lintels are as much as 2.00 m in length and consist of large stone slabs, positioned onwalls and on pillars at a height of 1.40–1.70 m high (Routledge 2000: 50). Closer indesign to B700 is the Late Bronze Age lintel at Tel Hadar, which is in place 1.70 mhigh (Kochavi 1994:138; fig. 3).

The major Iron Age walls of Building 700 were W7030 on the north,W7031 on the west, W7026 on the south and W7025 on the east.Although it is clear that East Wall 7025 bonds with South Wall 7026,it is less certain that it was in fact the exterior east wall of the originalbuilding, since the area further east remains unexcavated. While theUmayyad inhabitants repaired the exterior, south wall (W7026) of thebuilding and a second, interior east-west wall (W7024) that runs par-allel to it (as Walls 6005 and W6014 respectively), they did not reusethe east Wall (W7025) of the Iron Age structure, but built a new wall(W6002) 1.50 m further east. The foundation of Wall 6002 was notexposed during excavation and its history can only be surmised.78

Table 8CC. Wall Thickness in centimetres

Wall 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 90 100

7010 ?7011 ?7017 ?7019 1157020 ×7021 ×7023 ×+7024 ×+7025 ×+7026/6005 ×7028 ×7029 ×+7030/6003 ×7031/6004 ×

The Iron Age walls were constructed in boulder-and-chink style, com-parable to other late Iron Age II buildings at Tall Jawa. The main wallstones are medium (0.50–0.75 m) to large (0.75–1.00 m) size boulders,laid in rough courses in either two or three rows. Wall stones are pre-dominantly of limestone, although a certain amount of chert (20–30%on average) was used. The major walls that serve as exterior walls ormain support walls for upper storey rooms are in the range of 0.85–1.00 m thick, and many such walls remain standing 2.00–3.00 m high.The thickness of interior walls was more difficult to determine sincemany of these had been strengthened or rebuilt by the Umayyad inhab-

78 The west face of Wall 6002 was only exposed full height in Room 606.

itants. One such example is Wall 7019, between Rooms 712 and 714;this wall is 1.20 m thick, the heaviest interior wall in this structure. Wall7019 continues east as Wall 7024, which was ca. 0.90 m thick, compa-rable to interior walls in B800. The support walls for Staircase D23:43(W7020, W7021) are 0.70–0.75 m thick, again comparable to those ofStaircase C27:43 in Room 804 of Building 800.

StaircaseAs in Building 800, the presence of a stone built staircase (D23:43) offthe central hall (R707) provides clear evidence for a second storey inBuilding 700. In this case also, the staircase is situated between twoparallel walls, W7020 and W7021, each formed of large (ca. 0.85 m)boulders. The individual steps are supported on either side by thesefree-standing stone support walls, rather than built into one of theouter walls of the building, as was the case at Hazor in Area B onthe Citadel (Yadin 1960: pl. CCV), and at Tell en-Na.sbeh (McCown1947: fig. 43). Seven individual steps are preserved in place; these rangein width from 0.80–0.89 m and are 0.30–0.45 m in depth. The bottomstep, as well as the support walls (W7020, W7021), are founded onbedrock. This staircase, the orthogonal plan of Building 700, and theuse of construction techniques and materials comparable to Building800, show the use of a known building plan.

Stratigraphy

Building 700 appears to have been constructed, used and destroyed inStratum VII at the same time as Building 800. Because of the historyof reoccupation as well as the complexities of excavation, only oneStratum VII phase could be identified.

Table 8DD. Strata for Field D


I 1 modernII pottery only post-UmayyadIII 2 UmayyadIV 3 ByzantineV no remains RomanVI no remains PersianVIIA 4 Late Iron IIVIIB undetermined Late Iron IIVIII pottery only Middle Iron II

Figure 8.17. Building 700 with relevant locus numbers.


IX pottery only Middle Iron IIX pottery only Iron I

STRATUM VII

Building 700 was first built and occupied during Stratum VII. In spiteof considerable Umayyad period reconstruction, sufficient evidence isavailable to designate four ground floor rooms containing original Ironage remains as undisturbed Stratum VII occupation; R714 on the westside, R712, 718 and R713 on the south. Staircase D23:43 also appearsto be an original feature of the Iron Age building. On either side ofthe stairway was a doorway, one (B) leading east into Central Hall 707and the second (A) leading into Room 716. Two other doorways (C,D) linking Room 712, Corridor 718 and Room 713 appear to be theonly direct connection between rooms in the southeast section of theIron Age structure. The doorway (F) between eastern Room 715 and

Figure 8.18. View of Wall 7031 in Room 714 below W6004,with Lintel D13:13 and later Umayyad Wall 6016 (D13:8).

Room 707 was blocked in antiquity. In the following discussion, we willpresent first the evidence for rooms with undisturbed Iron Age remains(R714, 713, 712) and secondly, that for rooms with considerable remod-elling (R715, 707, 716) during Stratum III.79

Rooms with Undisturbed Stratum VII Occupation (Fig. 8.17)

The Stratum VII rooms along the west and south sides of Building700 are located on the ground floor level and are sealed by upperstorey rooms of Stratum III; Room 714 under R609, Room 712 underRooms 601and R602, Rooms 713 and R718 under Rooms 603 andR604. For the most part, the Iron Age collapse was left in place and theStratum III builders footed their upper storey walls on this foundation.

79 The area between Walls 7024 and W7015 (=6015) was filled with collapsed wallstones and was capped with Stratum III ceiling slabs. In the midst of the collapse was atomb. The use of this corridor during the Iron Age cannot now be established, and willbe discussed with the Stratum III occupation of Building 600 (Daviau and Tempest, inpreparation); the skeletal report has been prepared by M. Judd.

Figure 8.19. Probe in Room 714, looking north;Lintel D13:13 over Doorway E is on the left.

This practice contaminated the uppermost debris layers in these rooms,but left the collapsed remains of the ground floor Iron Age occupationin place. Due to the depth of accumulated collapse, the Iron Age floorswere only reached in narrow probes into Rooms 714, 712, and 713.

Room 714 (Figs. 8.17–19)The middle room (R714) on the west side of Building 700 yieldedevidence for undisturbed Iron Age occupation sealed beneath a Stra-tum III upper storey room (R609). The outer west Wall (W7031) thatextends the entire width of the building is footed on bedrock andremains standing ca. 2.07 m.80 The south wall (W7019) of Room 714,clearly in use during the Iron Age, appears to abut the outer wall(W7031), except at the lowest course, where the two walls were linkedby a large rectangular stone (D13:64) that extends into the room on anangle.81 This major wall (W7019) was exceptionally thick (1.20 m) at

80 The entire wall face was seen in a deep probe (Table 8EE). The courses that wereabove the 2.00 m level had been rebuilt in Stratum III (W6004) to stabilize the stonesabove Lintel D13:13, which was reused as the frame of a later installation.

81 This same construction technique is seen in Room 906 where a large boulder

the point where it separates Room 714 from Room 712 to the south.This thickness suggests strengthening of the wall during the Iron Agesince this same thickness was not noted further east, where Wall 7019(as W7024) forms the north wall of Rooms 712 and R713. At a dis-tance of 3.50 m east of outer west Wall 7031, Wall 7019=W7024meets and bonds with Wall 7029, which runs north forming the easternperimeter of Room 714. Both walls consist of small and medium boul-ders in boulder-and-chink construction. Within Room 714, W7019 wasdamaged, probably at the end of Stratum VII, with the result that thenorthern row of boulders stands only 7 courses (2.35 m) high, while thesouthern row is preserved in places to 10 courses (3.20 m).82 So too,Wall 7029 is poorly preserved, retaining evidence that it suffered severecollapse at its north end, near its meeting with Wall 7017.83

In Room 714, eastern Wall 7029 was only exposed in its uppermostcourses, since the probe in this room left collapsed debris (D13:35, 37,39, 41) in place in front of its west face. A similar situation applies tothe north wall (W7017), which does not extend west as far as outer Wall6004 and, as a result, was not present in the area of the deep probe.Instead, the probe exposed the fill in the doorway between Rooms 714and R716 (Table 8EE).

links the south and west walls across the corner.82 The north face of Wall 7019 was only exposed along the narrow end (0.65 m) of

a deep probe against outer Wall 6004.83 This collapse may mark the position of a doorway, although no doorjambs could

be identified.

Table 8EE. Harris Matrix of Soil Layers in Probe into Iron Age Room 714

Room 714 was paved with a rough flagstone floor (D13:45) packedwith heavy clay soil (D13:43) to fill gaps between the stones. In view ofthe absolute elevation (923.15 masl) of the flagstones, it is assumed thatthis floor was laid directly on bedrock although this was not exposed.84

At this level also, was flat-topped Slab D13:64, which probably servedas a working surface since a saddle quern was lying against one sideof the stone. Superimposed layers of beaten earth were stained brown,orange, and black and had the consistency of clay. This evidence of aliving surface was supported by the presence of ground stone tools andsmashed pottery within the uppermost surface layer (D13:41).85

84 A similar soil layer was found in Room 716 to the north, where the bedrocksurface (D23:38) sloped toward the south.

85 As in previous chapters, the table of room contents presents only a partial listwhich includes the best examples of partially restored vessels and artefacts. In this case,the sample is even more limited because only a portion of the room was emptied.

Table 8FF. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 714


D13:41 jug V708 wide neck87 ceramic sherdsmortar TJ 1585 rectangular2 grinders TJ 1582, 1583 basaltmillstone TJ 1586 upper loaf-shapedquern TJ 1581 basalt

The finds in ground floor Room 714 were sealed by deep (1.10 m)layers (D13:35, 37, 39) of collapsed wall stones and ceiling material thatincluded pockets or nari. In the midst of this collapse were Iron Agevessels, such as juglet V712 (D13:35) which has a typical Ammonitedouble disk base. While it seems apparent that these loci represent thedestruction of the Iron Age II building and the remains of an upperstorey room, the upper debris layers were somewhat contaminated withUmayyad pottery and glass; this Stratum-III material was probablyintroduced during reconstruction in the Umayyad period and with thereuse of Lintel D13:13.

Rooms along the South Side

Along the south side of Building 700 were two long rectangular spaces(R712, R713+R718), each 3.10× 6.80 m in size. Room 713 was distin-guished from Room 712 by the presence of a second wall (W7028) atits west end that separated a small space (R718) from the main room.The original function of R718 was not determined during excavation.

Room 712 (Fig. 8.17)Located in the southwest corner of Building 700, Room 712 is boundedon the west and south by outer Walls W7031 and W7026 respectively.A certain amount of evidence remains that shows internal stratigraphywithin Room 712, as well as the imposition of overlying Stratum-IIIrooms (R601, R602). Elements within the upper courses of the outerwalls, as well as installations built up against them in Stratum III,86

show the extent of Umayyad rebuilding. Of interest here is the evidencefor original Stratum-VII construction, use and destruction that remainsin place.

86 Two arch springers (D2:15, 16) in R601 and one in Room 602–603 (D12:22) arefooted on Iron Age collapse and are in position against the outer walls.

North Wall 7024 extends the full length of Building 700 from westouter Wall 7031 to Wall 7025, which appears to have been the easternouter Wall during Stratum VII. Although used as a foundation for aStratum-III wall (W6013), the Iron Age wall could be identified in boththe western (W7019) and eastern halves (7024) of Room 712. In thewest, this interior boulder-and-chink Wall (7019) was built of 3 rowsof limestone and chert stones. The 2–row construction of Wall 7024 ismost apparent in a deep probe (D12) that exposed a section of its southface, just west of Doorway D that had its lintel still in situ. The northand east walls of Room 712 appear to have been footed on bedrock,since the rough cobblestone paving (12:33) which covers the bedrockseals up against both walls. Wall 7024 remains standing ca. 2.05 mbelow Stratum-III Wall 6013.

The lintel of Doorway D consists of an extra large boulder (0.70 ×1.55×0.45 m thick), which runs perpendicular to Wall 7024. The northend of the lintel bonds with Wall 7024 and the south end is built intothe north end of Wall 7023. Based on its construction techniques andthe position of Lintel D12:34, Wall 7023 can be assigned to Stra-tum VII as an Iron Age wall that was not rebuilt in the Umayyadperiod. This wall marks the east end of Room 712 and remains inplace in the midst of the collapse that fills Rooms 712 and R718. Asa result, its building materials consisting of small to large boulders canbe compared favourably with other boulder-and-chink walls of the lateIron Age II.

At an absolute level of 922.99 masl, the Stratum VII builders install-ed a stone pavement (D12:33) and packed the crevices with clay-likesoil (D12:31). In the superimposed soil and rockfall layers (D12:30, 29,28) were mendable Iron Age vessels broken in the collapse that markedthe end of Iron Age occupation.87

Table 8GG. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 712


D12:29 juglet V702 oblong+12:30 95 ceramic sherds3 grinders TJ 1799, 1800, 1804 basaltmillstone TJ 1802 upper, loaf-shapedbead TJ 1817 glass, fragmentiron TJ 1790 fragments

87 The small number of finds from these loci reflect the limited area (0.85×0.90 m)of the probe at floor level.

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyIn Room 712, there was very limited evidence in the superimposeddebris layers (D2:22=12:24, 25) for upper storey activities during Stra-tum VII. Only a small number of typical ground stone tools and a beadcan be assigned to the Iron Age. These soil and rockfall layers were sep-arated from the ground floor material by Soil Layer D12:27, which hadno reported artefacts, at least in the area of the probe. This layer mayhave been the remains of a collapsed ceiling since Loci D12:24+25,immediately above, did have artefacts and pieces of charcoal. Althoughadditional debris layers (D12:21 and 23) were in place beneath theStratum III floor, they was too contaminated with Umayyad potteryand small finds to be useful in understanding the range of activities inthe Iron Age building.

Table 8HH. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 712, upper storey


D2:21–23 krater V709 interior smudged12:24–25 367 ceramic sherds contaminated

mortar TJ 1762pestle TJ 1795 used as a grinder3 grinders TJ 1760, 1763, 1778 basalt3 millstones TJ 1768, 1769, 1779 upper, loaf-shapedbead TJ 1756 carneliancharcoal

Room 718 (Fig. 8.20)East of Room 712 is a narrow space (R718) that runs north-south par-allel to Wall 7023. This space (0.75–0.80 m) extends north from southWall 7026 as far as Doorways C and D. Although the exact function ofthis area (R718) was not determined before the end of excavation, itsposition between two parallel walls suggests that it was either the loca-tion of a second staircase or of an entryway into Building 700. Using asa parallel Staircase A83:19 in Building 800 that was built between theshort end walls of two rooms (R802 and R807), it would not be unlikelythat there were steps leading up to a landing that turned and then fol-lowed the outer Wall (W7026), using it as a support for additional steps.The room arrangement and traffic patterns that would necessitate twostaircases cannot now be determined in view of the later transformationof the original building. However, on the basis of excavation to floorlevel, one can assume that Wall 7024 was a major support wall that ranthe full length of the building, effectively cutting off Rooms 712 and

Figure 8.20. Room 718 on left, with Doorway D on left andDoorway C at north end of Pier Wall 7028 (during excavation).

713 from the central hall.88 Access to these rooms through Doorways Cand D appears to have been provided only by R718.

Room 713 (Fig. 8.17)Doorway C leads east from Room 718 into a large (3.10× 5.30 m) rect-angular room (R713), which occupies the southeast corner of Building700. To a certain extent, this characterization is based on the assump-tion that Wall 7025 not only marks the east end of the room but also ofthe building. This judgement is based on the fact that Wall 7025 bondswith outer South Wall 7026, even though it could not be ascertainedwhether both walls are footed on Bedrock D31:36; bedrock was onlyexposed below north Wall 7024, which also bonds with Wall 7025. The

88 This construction style is similar to that seen in Building 800, where Wall 8025=8030 separated the northern unit of rooms from Central Hall 804.

Iron Age walls are of boulder-and-chink construction and consist of40% small (0.25–0.50 m) boulders, 30% medium (0.50–0.75 m) boul-ders and 20% large (0.79–1.00 m) boulders, while the interstices arefilled with pebble size chink stones. Each wall is at least two rows (ca.0.80–0.85 m thick), and remains standing 8 or 9 courses high formingthe perimeter of the ground floor room.

The original hard-packed earthen surface (D31:35) of Room 713 waslocated only in a probe (0.75×2.00 m in size) against the south face ofWall 7024. The continuation of this floor surface was not uncoveredin the western half of Room 713, due to the presence of UmayyadWall 6008 with it threshold stone in place at a higher level. The flooritself is ca. 0.10 m thick and is situated on bedrock (D31:36). Thedebris layer (D31:34) immediately above the floor contains collapsedwall stones and soil along with the pottery and objects in use onFloor D31:35. Prominent among the ceramic sherds are the remainsof several mendable vessels including the largest krater in the entireceramic corpus (V706; 0.42 cm interior diameter at the rim, 0.37 cmin height) and sherds of a second somewhat smaller krater, also with afolded inverted rim. Both vessels were smudged on the interior and hadirregular ring burning.

Table 8JJ. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 713


D31:34–35 cooking pot V705 smallkrater V706 extra largejug V704 grainy ware186 ceramic sherds2 pestles TJ 2009, 2015 basalt2 millstone TJ 2012, 2014 upper loaf-shaped, piecespin head(?) TJ 2027 ivoryloom weight TJ 2005 unfired clay

Although the functional identification of this assemblage cannot bedetermined statistically because of the small number of artefacts andceramic vessels, the finds do suggest food preparation and storageactivities as the primary use of Room 713.

Figure 8.21. Pier Wall 7028 and fill in Doorway D.

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyWithin the next 0.90 m of collapsed wall stones and soil with nariinclusions (D31:33, 32, 31)89 was a group of 10 unfired clay loomweights in the shape of doughnuts (TJ 1929–1930, 1970–1976, 1978–1981), the fragments of an additional 8 weights, and 1 upper loaf-shaped millstone (TJ 1997). These finds suggest that weaving was theprimary function of the upper storey room or roof area that fell intoRoom 713 when the building was destroyed. The ceramic evidencewithin Room 713 indicates occupation only during late Iron Age II, aswas the case with west Room 714.

Excavation west of Umayyad Wall 6008 again encountered IronAge destruction beneath the Stratum III floor. The western half ofRoom 713 extends 1.75 m beyond Wall 6008 and ends at Pier Wall7028 (Fig. 8.21). Although only partially exposed, Wall 7028 is builtof medium and small limestone and chert boulders in boulder-and-chink construction and is keyed into the southern jamb (D21:24) ofDoorway C. This doorjamb stands 0.80 m high, is the thickness ofWall 7028, and consists of medium and large semi-hewn boulders

89 Debris Layer D31:31 covered the entire area (2.20×2.80 m) between east Wall7025 and Wall (W6008) of upper storey Room 604.

(>0.90 m in length) in an irregular header and stretcher formation.The upper two courses of the doorjamb (or pier) are preserved abovethe height of Wall 7028, while the lower four courses bond with thewall. Although only the upper 1.80 m was exposed, it can be assumedthat the base of Doorjamb D21:24 and Wall 7028 is footed on bedrockand that this feature originally stood ca. 2.00–2.35 m in height. Thelocation of Doorjamb D21:24, 0.75–0.80 m south of Wall 7024, iscomparable to that of the north end of Wall 7023 that supports thelintel above Doorway D. Unfortunately, no lintel was in place overDoorway C.

The earliest debris layer (D21:29) uncovered within the west half ofRoom 71390 was a soil layer with a scatter of collapsed wall stones.Only collapsed debris layers (D21:27, 26, 23, 22, 20, 19) containingpredominantly Iron Age sherds and an increasing amount of Umayyadpottery in the uppermost loci were excavated. The contamination ofthese upper layers is evidence of disturbance during construction of theStratum III building.

Table 8KK. Iron Age Pottery and Artefacts in Room 713, upper storey


D21:27 bowl V707 red slip, vertical rimD31:31 2 bowls V713, 714 black burnished

krater V710 smudgedamphoriskos V701 paintedjuglet V703 oblong862 ceramic sherds contaminated

D21:26 tang+rivet TJ 2121 iron, broken

The most characteristic late Iron Age II vessel types were black bur-nished bowls and oblong juglets with a high loop handle that werepresent in both Buildings 700 and 800.91 Another interesting artefact

90 In 1995, when all excavation was within the confines of Walls 7023, W7026,W6008 (=a Stratum III wall left in place) and W7024, all loci were assigned to D21even though the northern two-thirds of Room 713 was in D22. A balk through theroom on the diagonal would have reduced the area available for excavation to animpractical size.

91 Two oblong juglets were recovered from the Iron Age collapse in Rooms 712and 713 (V702, V703), while three identical juglets are from Building 800 (V860,V861, V862). Parallels appear at Meqabelein (Dornemann 1984: fig. 38:8) and fallinto Dornemann’s Sequence II (late Iron Age II).

from the uppermost debris layers was an iron chisel (TJ 2054+2055+2083) with a slightly splayed end (Daviau 2002:99–100; fig. 2.56:1).Found along with Iron Age ceramic spindle whorls (TJ 2022, 2064) in aheavily mixed locus (D21:20) containing both Iron Age and Umayyadpottery, its allocation to the Stratum VII building remains tentative.Such an allocation would suggest that these finds were in use on theupper storey and remained in the collapsed debris that was in placewhen the early Islamic period builders refashioned the south side ofBuilding 700. In support of this Iron Age dating is the condition of theiron itself, and a close parallel from Tall as-Sa#idiyya assigned to IronAge Stratum VI (Pritchard 1985: fig. 8:23).

Evidence for Iron Age Remains in the Remodelled Rooms of B700

Room 715North of Wall 7024, the middle room (Room 715) along the east side ofBuilding 700 is positioned between Room 713 and Stratum-III Room606 in the northeast corner. Evidence for both Iron Age occupationand Umayyad reuse of this room (R605) was present, although distur-bance of the earlier remains renders functional analysis of the Stra-tum VII room impossible. Rebuilding of walls, blocking of doorways,and removal of Iron Age collapse altered the archaeological record.This was especially true in regard to east-west Wall 7010, which formsthe north wall of Room 715, and was later overlaid by Wall 6001.A probe to determine whether Iron Age Wall 7010 was founded onBedrock D32:51, as was Wall 7024, had to be abandoned due to thenarrow space between Wall 7010 and Pier D32:48 that occupies themiddle of the room. Even less certain is the history of the wall thatforms the eastern end of Room 715, since Umayyad rebuilding alteredthe position of the outer east wall so that Room 605 extends as far asWall 6002. In addition, the presence of an Umayyad flagstone pave-ment (D32:38), left in place above underlying debris layers, obscuredthe eastern wall line with the result that only a limited area of Room715 could be exposed. The west end is bounded by Wall W7011, whichruns underneath Wall 6008 and bonds with Wall 7024 of Room 713on the south. Umayyad construction of a staircase and wall (W6027)above the remains of Wall 7011 contaminated the evidence, althoughthe Stratum-VII wall appears to end before reaching north Wall 7010.Due to the presence of a Stratum-III blocking wall to support the stairs,the Stratum-VII doorway could not be fully exposed. In its original

condition, Room 715 measured ca. 2.20×1.80 m, dimensions whichwould make it one of the smallest rooms exposed in a Stratum VIIbuilding.92

Bedrock D32:51 was exposed at the base of the north face of Wall7024 and the east face of Wall 7011. There is very little differencein the absolute elevation of bedrock in Rooms 715 and R713 (922.91and 922.84 masl, respectively); this allowed for the sure footing of bothinterior and exterior walls, and for stone Pier D32:48.93

A limestone basin (D32:50) cut from a single block of stone was inplace above beaten earth floor (D32:49), which is immediately abovebedrock. This basin measured ca. 0.62×0.48–0.50,× 0.40 m high withan interior depth of 0.20–0.25 m. Its position in Room 715 gives noclue to its original function, although it may have had an industrial use(see Chapter 10). A similar situation applies to other finds immediatelyabove the floor, such as a basalt grinder (TJ 984) and a pumice stone(TJ 926). In the lowest levels of Debris Layer D32:47, late Iron Age IIpottery was dominant.

Room 707The evidence for the Iron Age construction and use of the central hallis even more meagre than for Room 715. Here, the Stratum III builderscleared away the Stratum VII features and, with the exception ofStaircase D23:43, built new walls (W6015, W6018), repaired old ones(W7030=6003), and laid a mosaic floor (D23:4) covering most of thebedrock in the central part of Building 700. Only on the north, betweenStaircase D23:43 and Statrum-III Doorway FF, is there an area ofexposed bedrock. In the centre, there is a small sump or small cistern,with several drain holes located on the south and east to channelwater into the drain. This feature was certainly part of the Umayyadstructure, but it may also have been an integral element in the IronAge II house as well. This would provide evidence for a central court,or impluvium, comparable to the room arrangement in Late BronzeAge House A at Ugarit, where the open central court was adjacentto the staircase and was a source of light and air circulation.94 On the

92 If this room were located in a corner of the building, it would be tempting tosuggest that R715 served as an entryway. It compares in size with Entryway 805(1.20×3.20m), Room 811 (1.85–2.85m), and R904 (1.60×3.60 m).

93 In the Umayyad period, a support wall ran west from Pier D32:48 in order tostabilize the debris under the upper storey Umayyad room (R605).

94 Court 10 in House A is almost square (3.50×3.90 m), somewhat smaller but

Figure 8.22. Limestone basin below floor in Room 707.

east side of the court there is a deep well that collected water whichwas channelled through grooved stone baseboards lining the walls oneither side (Callot 1983:31, 45; photo 12–13; fig. 27). The only otherevidence for Iron Age use of this part of the house was exposed in thecentre of the room in a pit (D23:24; 1.61 × 2.03 m) under the mosaicfloor (D23:4).95 This feature consists of a portion of a large limestone

similar in shape to R707 (4.50×4.70 m). Although an open room that would be asource of light, air and water was a common feature of palatial buildings at Bronze AgeAegean sites, houses of two-three stories at Akrotiri were constructed without a centralcourt or light well (Treuil et al. 1989:222, 331).

95 When first excavated in 1993, the centre of mosaic floor D23:4 was worn andsome tesserae were missing, although the underlying bedding plaster was intact. At theend of the excavation season, the floor was covered with mats and soil, and put underthe protection of a guard. At the beginning of the 1994 season, it was evident that therehad been a certain amount of vandalism over the winter. A large pit (D23:24) had beencut through the sub-floor leaving the native soil and floor makeup (D23:25) exposed.

Figure 8.23. Staircase D23:43; Doorway B is on the left andDoorway A with Lintel D23:41 in place is on the right.

boulder (ca. 0.68×1.23 m×0.40 m thick) with an off-centre depression(0.22×0.68 m× ca. 0.18 m in depth; Fig. 8.22). This feature, apparentlybroken in antiquity, had certainly been buried before the Stratum IIIfloor was laid and had probably been part of the Stratum VII building.

On the west side of Central Hall 707, the eastern support wall(W7020) of Staircase D23:43 forms the southern jamb of DoorwayB. Remodelled in Stratum III when an arch support was built againstits eastern face, the north end of Iron Age Wall 7020 appears to beslightly out of alignment with the south end. A second anomaly is thedistance of Wall 7020 from North Wall 6003; at 1.36 m this doorway(B) is wider than any in Building 800, with the exception of the openingbetween Rooms 811 and R812, where Pier C84:6 constitutes one jambof Doorway K.

In spite of these anomalies, Wall 7020 appears to be an Iron Ageconstruction, at least at its north end where it is formed of largehewn boulders in the typical header and stretcher style with individualboulders that span the full thickness of the wall. The course of stonethat is level with the exposed surface of Bedrock D23:38 is in position

Figure 8.24. Looking east in Room 716 at Wall 7021 and Doorway A into Room 707.

above a lower stone course that was set into a depression/foundationtrench in the bedrock. The continuation of this depression, immediatelynorth of Wall 7020, was then filled in to the level of the bedrocksurface (923.41 masl) with limestone slabs and half of a perforated stone(D23:37). The west edge of this fill seals against the east side of thelowest step in Staircase D23:43 that extends north beyond the end ofWall 7020.96

The rectangular stones used to form the steps of the staircase arein the same size range as those in Building 800, 0.70–0.90 m long(Fig. 8.23). These stones are stabilized by chink stones, while smallcobble size stones fill up the remaining space between the step and theparallel support walls, especially for Steps 1, 2, 4, 6. The depth of eachstep is in the range of 0.09–0.39 m for a minimum diagonal length of2.61 m. Seven steps are firmly in place, each with an average rise of

96 Due to the reuse of the staircase in Stratum III, Debris Layers D23:35, 26 aboveBedrock D23:38 and Fill D23:37 were contaminated with pottery from both majorperiods of occupation.

0.20 m,97 for a total height of 1.63 m. An eighth step, which wouldhave given the staircase a maximum height of ca. 1.88–1.90 m, wasdislodged and rested on the fill just south of Step 7. Whether this pointmarks a landing where the staircase turned west over the south end ofsupport Wall 7021 cannot now be ascertained due to the position ofUmayyad ceiling slabs in upper storey Room 608. Both Iron Age andUmayyad pottery and lamp fragments were found on the stairs, clearevidence of reuse during Stratum III. As well, Umayyad pottery underthe uppermost step suggests remodelling during Stratum III.

Room 716 (Fig. 8.24)The western support wall (W7021) of Staircase D23:43 forms the southjamb of Doorway A and the east wall of Room 716. Similar to thenorth end of Wall 7020, the end of Wall 7021 is built of large, dressedboulders that span the thickness of the wall itself. On the other hand,Wall 7021 extends the full length of the steps (2.25 m), blocking a viewof the lowest step from Room 716. Doorway A is 0.82–0.87 m wideand is marked by a threshold (D23:47) formed of two stone slabs laidon Bedrock D23:38. At the top of Wall 7021 is Lintel D23:41, whichspans Doorway A and is keyed into north Wall 7030. Due to extensiverebuilding in Stratum III of the upper courses of this outer wall (asW6003), it cannot now be determined whether or not Lintel D23:41was in the position it had during Stratum VII.98

Bedrock (D13:54) was also used as the floor surface in Room 716,where it served on the north as the footing for outer Wall 7030. Asit dipped to the south, the surface was levelled with a mixture of terrarossa soil and medium size cobbles (D13:57) to maintain an elevation ofapproximately 923.29 masl. This soil layer extends south along the westface of Wall 7029, an Iron Age wall that extends to the south the lineof staircase support Wall 7021. Unfortunately, the north end of Wall7029 was badly damaged in the final collapse of the building and itassociation with Wall 7021 can only be seen in the lower courses wherethe two walls bond. The upper courses had collapsed throwing the wall

97 The range in height of the rise from one step to another is 0.09–0.39 m, veryclose to the variation seen at Tell en-Na.sbeh (0.09–0.31 m; McCown 1947:213, n. 20).

98 Because it is somewhat lower in relation to the bedrock than is the lintel overDoorway D, one suspects that the Stratum III builders re-established the lintel inrelation to the position of stone ceiling slabs which they installed over the debris inRoom 716. The lintel was then bonded with the upper courses of outer Wall 6003,which shows evidence of extensive Umayyad construction.

out of alignment, however, it is clear that Wall 7029 was not linked tothe Umayyad rebuild of Wall 7021.

In the middle of Room 716 is a stacked-boulder pier (D13:62) thatserves to support the Stratum III ceiling. Although its constructiontechniques appear similar to other piers from the Iron Age, suggestingthat this was one of the original features of Building 700, it should benoted that the limestone boulders are less regularly dressed and not aswell supported by chink stones as are the stones of Piers A84:6 andD21:24. Pier D13:62 consists of four large boulders that are laid thefull thickness (0.90 m) of the pier. Preserved four courses high, it stands1.68 m tall, close in height to the bottom of Lintel D23:41 (924.92 vs925.00 masl). The obvious function of Pier D13:62 as a ceiling support,comparable to Pier D32:48, makes it difficult to ascertain its initialconstruction phase, since it was a construction technique used by theStratum-III builders as well.

Pottery and artefacts from the debris layers (D13:53, 55, 56) abovethe floor do not clarify the occupation history of Room 716, since eachsample contained Iron Age II pottery and Umayyad sherds and rooftiles. Like the architectural elements, the finds were mixed and includedanimal bones, especially canid, suggesting that over the centuries car-casses were deposited in the ruined building.

Cistern D15:2 (Fig. 8.25)Outside the northwest corner of Building 700 is a bell-shaped Cistern(D15:2) cut into the bedrock.99 Similar to Cistern E64:13, the cisternwas covered by large boulders and the upper 1.50 m wall of the mouthand neck is formed of five courses of large chert boulders. Below thelevel of the boulders, the cylindrical bedrock neck continues for anadditional 0.80 m. At this point, the wall of the cistern flares out toform an oval bell, 4.43 m wide on the east-west axis, 5.00 m long onthe north-south axis, with a minimum depth of 5.00 m.100 The wall wasplastered up to 3.10 m below the mouth; the plaster itself was 0.02–0.03 m thick at points where it could still be measured; it was in fairlygood condition, flaking off only at the upper edge. On the surface of

99 The mouth of the cistern is located in Square D6, but its interior extends underSquares D5 and D15. Battenfield first entered Cistern D15:2 in 1992 to document itssize, shape and features. Due to presence of a mortar shell, these tasks were completedonly in 1994.

100 The bottom of the cistern was covered by the base of the soil cone and by water,making it impossible to take true measurements of the maximum depth.

Figure 8.25. Cistern D15:2, north of Building 700; drawn by J. R. Battenfield.

the plaster were stain lines that indicate the level of water retained inthe cistern at various times in the past. Because of the presence of theplaster, tooling marks on the bedrock wall of the cistern itself were notvisible.

A second feature that this cistern has in common with the Iron Agecistern in Field E is a bedrock ledge or bench left in place just above

floor level. This bench ran 3.70 m around the southern wall of CisternD15:2 and was at the level of the water remaining in the cistern in June1994.101 The centre of the cistern was covered by a cone of soil andfallen stones, which had accumulated since it was last cleaned out inmodern times.102

The construction and original use of Cistern D15:2 was most prob-ably during the Iron Age. This suggestion is based on the numerousfeatures that this cistern shares with Cistern E64:13 from Stratum VIII(Chapter 7), and on the large amount (1249 sherds) of Iron Age pot-tery in the dump (D14:1) that represents the contents of the CisternD15:2.103 Typical late Iron Age II forms are represented by V711, ahole mouth krater with smudged interior, and by V715, a hole mouthpithos.

Because there is Stratum-VII occupation present in the eastern halfof Field C, the discussion of chronology (Chapter 12) will follow thedescription of the domestic and industrial buildings in C-east (Chapter9).

101 In 1994, the ledge around the south edge of the cistern could be identified anddrawn because the water level was considerably lower than in 1992.

102 Cistern D15:1 was cleaned by the relatives of the current owner, personal com-munication by H. Talafieh.

103 The only portion of Dump D14:1 excavated in 1994 was the accumulationagainst the outer walls (W6003, W6004). Thus the sherd corpus is only a sample ofthe contents. The sherds themselves were predominantly Iron Age, although the dumpwas contaminated by later pottery due both to its origin and to its vulnerable positionon the surface.

FIELD C-EAST:GATE BUILDING AND DOMESTIC QUARTER

(1992–1995)

Introduction

The eastern half of the southern terrace, in Squares C46–C86 onthe north and Squares C43–C73 on the south, covers an area ca.24.00× 24.00 m in size. Along the south crest of the terrace, Outer Wall9000 runs east-west, below which the mound slopes steeply (18o). To thenorth of Wall 9000, one heavy walled structure (B910) and a secondbuilding consisting of a series of rooms with domestic assemblagescharacterize the Stratum-VII remains. The system of defensive wallssurrounding these buildings (Chapter 5) appear to be related to theStratum-VIII casemate wall that resumes its trajectory around the townin Squares C86–C96, adjacent to the northeast corner of Building 910.Excavation of the eastern rooms in Building 910 was restricted by amodern wall line (W9043) running north-south in Squares C81–C86;this wall marks the western edge of a modern cemetery.


Excavation in Field C-east began in 1992 with a north-south trench(C61–C64) along the west face of Wall 9010 that extended north as faras the south wall (W9018) of Building 910. In 1993, expansion to thenorth enabled us to sample both the principal east-west wall (W9000;C43–C63) on the crest of the slope, and to identify structures visibleat ground level adjacent to the fortification wall. Several rooms (R901,R902, R904), each one containing an assemblage of food preparationtools and representative pottery, were exposed in Building 900.

The excavations in Field C-east during the 1994 season continuedwork begun during 1992 in the original north-south trench in order toclarify the connection between the defensive walls and Building 910,a structure that resembles a gate complex. The terrace itself seems tobe the most likely location for a city gate, since no other break in the

Figure 9.1. Excavation Grid in Field C-east (C41–C91/C47–C97).

fortification system of comparable size is apparent anywhere else onthe tell. Since this building appeared to have two phases of use (B910and B905), both within Stratum VII, additional work was undertakenhere during the final season (1995), even though the modern propertywall was not moved from its position over the eastern line of rooms.The end of excavation at Tall Jawa came before the stratigraphic links

-

between the buildings in C-east and Building 800 in C-west could beestablished. So too, the extent and plan of the domestic area remainsonly partially understood, although the ceramic finds provide firm linksbetween these rooms and both Stratum-VII houses (B800, B700).

BUILDING 910–905

On the east side of Field C, adjacent to the modern cemetery, is themost heavily walled building on the southern terrace. This structure(B910) could only be exposed west of the modern property wall thatruns north to the point where the casemate wall resumes its circumval-lation east and then north around the tell. Although the southern wall(W9018) of Building 910 was first cleared in 1992 (Daviau 1994: fig. 5),it was not until 1994 that excavation began in Squares C65–C66 to thenorth (Daviau 1996:93).


Structure 910–905 has a tripartite plan with three rows of rooms run-ning north-south. At the northeast corner, a single room (R912) of theeastern row, located at the point where the modern wall (W4043) ends,could be partially excavated. The western and central rows show evi-dence of extensive rebuilding, indicating a change of function followingStratum VIIB. The original plan is somewhat obscured by the additionof cross walls in the central row, by the blocking of certain doorways,and the creation of new ones. The features constructed in the final usephase (VIIA, B905) radically changed the traffic patterns throughoutthe building. This transformation may be associated with changes inthe political and military situation in Ammon that reduced the need forthe heavy defences in use during Strata VIIIB–VIIB.

Assuming a regular plan, the overall size of Building 910 is 12.50 mlong×15.75 m wide, not including the foundations for what appearto be small towers (T9020, T9036) or bastions. With these featuresincluded, the total length would be 15.50 m, almost a complete square.The middle row, probably the location of the central roadway (R915),measures 4.50 m in width, while the side rooms in the western row areca. 3.00 wide.

Figure 9.2. Plan of Building 910, Field C-east.

RoomsAltogether, seven rooms of Stratum VIIA were identified along withcertain features of Stratum VIIB. Since the major walls did not undergoany significant changes, the size of each room in Stratum VIIA will bepresented here; the Stratum-VIIB central roadway will be discussedseparately.

-

Table 9A. Room Size and Proportion (B905, B910)


906 2.50 2.50 1.00 9019, 9025, 9027, 9022907 3.00 3.50 .85 9019, 9022, 9021, 9023908 2.00 2.95 .67 9018, 9019, 9023, 9021909 2.60 4.10 .63 9024, 9026, 9027, 9028, 9035910 4.00 4.50 .88 9021, 9024, 9028, 9029, 9031, 9032, 9030911 2.40 4.60 .52 9021, 9030, 9032, 9036, 9037, 9038912 2.40 3.60 .66 9031, 9033, 9034, 9040913 4.20 4.25+ .98 9036, 9037, 9038, 9042914 NA NA NA 9018, 9019, 9020916 2.50 2.50 1.00 9022, 9019, 9025, 9024917 3.00 6.00 .50 9018, 9019, 9022, 9021

Range of sizes (Stratum VIIA, omitting Rooms 914, 916, 917)Width 2.40 →4.20 average – 2.88 mLength 2.50 →4.60 average – 3.75 m

DoorwaysDuring Stratum VII, certain doorways were in use during both phasesof occupation, while others were clearly blocked up, and new doorwaysbuilt between flanking walls. All recognizable entrances are classed asdoorways and studied in terms of their size and function. For the mostpart, access from one room to another is through an entrance betweenthe ends of two wall units. In only two cases (Doorways A and H) isaccess gained through a doorway located between the end of one walland the face of a perpendicular wall.



E 907, 908 0.70F 907, 910 0.70G 909, 910 0.82H 906, 909 0.80J 909, 912 0.75K 910, -?– 0.65L 910, 911 0.80M 911, 913 1.05N 906, 907 1.00P 907, 915 1.50Q 912, 915 1.20

Range of narrow doorways - 0.65–0.82 mAverage width - 0.745 m

Range of wide doorways - 1.00–1.50 mAverage width - 1.187 m

Doorway E is the only instance where a doorway is framed by the endof a thin (0.30 m) partition wall (W9023) on one side. In all other cases,the doorways open through the full thickness of flanking walls or areframed by a wall and a wall stub, both of which are formed of two rowsof medium and large boulders, with the result that the entryways areconsistently 1.00–1.50 m deep. The best example of a blocked entranceis Doorway H, which leads from Room 906 into the central row ofrooms (R909). The system of access to this room in Stratum VIIA wasprobably limited to Doorway N.

WallsThe Walls of Building 910 are formed of 2–3 rows of medium to verylarge boulders (>1.00 m long), and with few exceptions, are all in therange of 1.25–2.00 m thick. Such heavy walls exceed those in Building800, in Field C-west, and point to a specialized function for this multi-storied structure.1 The original (Stratum VIIB) plan of Building 910probably consisted of the eastern and western row of rooms flankinga central roadway. Changes to the building (VIIA) are most clearlyseen in the construction of cross walls that form three additional rooms(R909, R910, R911) in the central row. Access to these rooms is indirectthrough a series of Doorways (M, L, G) cut through the east-westcross walls, an unusual arrangement at Tall Jawa (see B300, B800above). The narrowest wall (0.35–0.50 m) is Partition Wall 9023, whichseparates Rooms 907 and R908. This wall is clearly secondary and isassociated with the domestic activities carried out in Room 907 (seebelow).

1 The walls of Building 910 are also thicker than the average size (0.90–1.10 m) ofwalls in the Citadel Building at Tall al-#Umayri (Lawlor 1991: figs. 3.3, 3.5). Closer insize (1.60 m thick) are the walls of the chambered gate at Hazor, although they appearto have been built of small size stones (Yadin et al. 1989:31; Plan VIII). The gate wallsat Khirbat al-Mudayna are also 1.60 m thick, with stones ranging in size from small tolarge (0.75–1.00 m) boulders (Chadwick, Daviau and Steiner 2000:258; fig. 2).

-

Table 9C. Wall Thickness in centimetres

Wall <50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225

9018 ×+9019 ×+9020 ×+9021 ×+9022 ×9023 ×9024 ×9025 ×9026 ×+9027 ×+9028 ×+9029 ×+9030 ×+9031 ×+9032 ×+9033 ×9034 ×+9035 ×?9036 ×+9037 ×9038 ×+9039 ×+9040 ×9042 ×

Stratigraphy

Like the situation in excavation areas on the west and north sides ofthe tell (Chapter 5), the defensive walls on the southeastern terrace dateto various periods, all within the Iron Age. Pottery from the Field C-east buildings dates as early as Iron Age I, but the architecture datesto Iron II, Stratum VIII at the earliest.2 As in all other areas excavatedat Tall Jawa, a certain amount of material from the later Umayyadoccupation is also present.3 The percentage of late material is higherhere because of the proximity of Building 600 in Field D.

2 The association of Building 910 in Field C-east with the casemate wall systemsuggests the presence of a gate in this area in Stratum VIII. Unfortunately, there is noevidence for Stratum VIII occupation. All evidence of an earlier structure may havebeen removed in Stratum VIIB, when Building 910 was constructed on bedrock.

3 The south slope of Field C-east was the only area that yielded sherds dating tothe early Roman period, including Nabataean painted pottery (C63.8.5). While these

Table 9D. Strata for the Buildings on the Southeastern Terrace


I 1 modernII 2/burials post-UmayyadIII pottery, features UmayyadIV pottery? ByzantineV pottery RomanVI no remains PersianVIIA 3 Late Iron IIVIIB 4 Late Iron IIVIIIA 5/repairs? Middle Iron IIVIIIB 6/casemate wall Middle Iron IIIX 7/solid wall Early Iron II

STRATUM VIIB

Gate Building 910

In Field C-east, the founding levels of the earliest walls in use in Build-ing 910 were reached below Room 908, where West Wall 9019 isfounded on bedrock. At the same time, the only evidence for occu-pation on the terrace earlier than Stratum VII also appears in Room908, where soil layers below Stratum-VIIA floor levels yielded sherdsof a collared-rim storejar (late Iron I-early Iron II).4 All other evidencefor occupation dates this structure to late Iron Age II (Stratum VII).Although two phases of construction were preserved, the features of theearlier phase are somewhat obscured by later additions.

Construction and Use of Building 910

The best preserved unit for understanding the Stratum VIIB construc-tion of Building 910 is the western row of rooms where the outer wallscould be exposed on both faces and their construction techniques stud-ied. Two other areas where Stratum-VIIB features are clearly seen is inthe composition of Roadway 915, both to the south of Building 910,and at the north end of the road itself, where it passes through theinnermost entryway.

sherds may be related to a child burial (C53) located slightly upslope, no finds in thegrave itself allow for secure dating.

4 The probe under Flagstone Floor C65:21 was undertaken between seasons bylocal inhabitants; they left the pottery in situ.

-

Figure 9.3. Construction of outer West Wall 9019 andSouth Wall 9018, showing diagonal linking stone (C65:38).

The Western Unit and Central Roadway (Fig. 9.2)

The northern wall (W9025) of the western rooms (R906–R908) bondswith west Wall 9019, which gradually increases in width (1.60–1.80 m)toward its south end, ca. 16.00 m away. Both walls are constructed ofmedium, large and very large limestone and chert boulders, includingseveral large chert slabs. West Wall 9019 extends beyond the southernlimit of Stratum-VIIB Room 917 to flank a narrow L-shaped space(R914), possibly a staircase, inside Tower 9020. Two heavy cross walls(W9022, W9018), each 1.25+m thick, meet and bond with Wall 9019along its length. At the point where Walls 9019 and W9018 meet inthe southwest corner, a boulder (C65:38) is set on the diagonal tyingthe walls together below floor level (Fig. 9.3). While not unknown from

other sites in Transjordan,5 this is one of only a small number ofexamples at Tall Jawa of this particular construction technique (cf.D13:64). Both Walls 9018 and W9019 extend below linking stoneC65:38 and are footed on bedrock (C65:39).

Against the south face of Wall 9018 is Tower 9020. This unit consistsof a heavy stone foundation that is integrated into the southern exten-sion of east Wall 9021. The southern edge of Tower 9020 extends westto Wall 9019, creating a structure that measures 3.45 m north-southand 6.00 m east-west, the full width of the west row of rooms. Againstthe south face of Tower 9020, at foundation level, there was an accu-mulation of cobbles (C64:14) packed with loose soil and patches of nari.The south face of these cobbles was battered, becoming ever thicker asthe foundations became deeper. This construction technique, used tostabilize the tower, suggests that the bedrock (C65:39) on which Build-ing 910 is founded begins to slope steeply to the south at this point.

Along the west and north sides of the inner core of Tower 9020 is anarrow space (R914) which separates the tower from West Wall 9019.The space is 0.60 m wide on the west and 0.75 m wide along thenorth and contains cobbles, small boulders and nari pockets (C64:2).Although this space is comparable in width to Drain Channel 218 (0.80m) through the southwest corner of the casemate wall system (Chapter5), its shape suggests a different function, possibly that of a staircase toreach the upper stories of the tower. Modern road building activitiesalong the crest of the terrace, and the severe erosion that followed, hasremoved all evidence of the superstructure.

Additional evidence for construction of the major features associatedwith Building 910 consists of Wall 9039, which runs south from Tower9020 to meet Solid Wall 9000, a major east-west wall protecting theterrace along the crest of the slope. Wall 9039 is inset from the easternedge of Tower 9020, forming a bastion. It is here, immediately north ofWall 9000, that there is a large limestone door socket; its twin on theeast side can be seen built into the modern wall (W9043).6

5 For this same construction technique, see the Iron Age architecture at Balu#

(Worschech 1995:147; fig. 4; see below, Chapter 12).6 This Socket Stone (C74:20), consisting of a very large boulder with a circular

depression, is located at the western limit of Plaster Surface C74:17, apparently withinWall 9039. Due to its elevation (923:76 masl), this stone appears to have been reusedin Wall 9039, so that its original position and possible use with the Stratum-VIIB gatecomplex cannot now be determined.

-

Figure 9.4. Gate Building 910 with lower Bastion 9007.

The western unit consists of one broad-room chamber, Room 917on the south, and a second, almost square, room (R916) on the north.Room 917 is the larger of the two, measuring 6.00 m from south Wall9018 to Wall 9022, an interior wall that separates the two rooms. Theentryway (Doorway P) into Room 917 from the central road was atleast 1.50 m wide, although this arrangement is far different from the

chambered gates in Cisjordan where certain gates appear to have sidechambers that are completely open to the road.7 Doorway H, betweenRoom 916 and the central road, is 1.00 m wide, since Wall 9024closes off 1.50 m of the room from the road. Nevertheless, these door-ways control access to the chambers in the gate, indicating that therooms functioned very differently from Israelite style gate rooms (Her-zog 1992: Fig. 21).

The only evidence for the Stratum VIIB surface in Room 917 wasseen in a deep probe through the floor (C65:21) of Stratum-VIIARoom 908 in the southwest corner. Here a plastered surface (C65:37)represents the earlier floor. Because the full extent of this surface wasnot uncovered horizontally, finds that might indicate the activities car-ried out in Room 917 were not recovered.

Central Roadway 915 (Fig. 9.4)In Stratum VIIB, there was a central access road (R915) into the townthat ran between the east and west units of Gate Structure 910. Clearevidence for the secondary nature of the Stratum-VIIA rooms in thecentral unit can be seen in a series of east-west walls which all abut theinner, north-south walls of the eastern and western units (see below).This construction feature indicates that Walls 9021 and W9024 on thewest and Walls 9031 and W9032 were originally the flanking wallsfor the central passage. The walls of the Building 910 remain stand-ing 1.00+m above the Stratum VIIA floors and exposed sections ofthe central roadway. Sections of stone pavement in Roadway 915 arepreserved at the north end and in Entryway 913 in the south. At thenorth end where the road leads into the Iron Age settlement, a flag-stone pavement (C76:16) is packed with firm soil and brick material.The flagstones were in the size range of medium to large boulders. Thissurface is present across the 4.00+m width of the roadway betweenDoorways H and J and extends further north under Stratum-VIIAblocking Wall 9026. South of the flagstones, the make-up for the Stra-tum VIIA surface (C76:15) consists of hard-packed terra rossa and peb-bles (C76:22). It is not clear whether this make-up had served originallyas the Stratum VIIB road surface, although small areas of surfacing arepresent beneath Stratum-VIIA levels in Squares C75–C74. Evidence

7 Narrow walls, closing off the gate rooms from the central roadway, are the normat Khirbat al-Mudayna in northern Moab, where each room had only a narrow (0.75–0.80 m) doorway (Chadwick, Daviau and Steiner 2000:265–266; fig. 2).

-

for the latest surface in Roadway 915 consists of a hard-packed surface(C75:27, 29) with the composition of cement, possibly containing terrarossa (see C76:22).8 Further south, in Entryway 913, the earliest Sur-face (C74:17) consists of a packed plaster layer that extends into SquareC73.

The degree of slope of the surface loci from the north end of Road-way 915 to the south end of Entryway 913 is ca. 6o from the horizontalfor a drop of 1.10 m over a distance of 18.00 m. Beyond that point,the decline appears to level off before dropping rapidly down the southslope of the terrace along the west face of Wall 9010.

The plan of Gate Building 910 has certain anomalies in comparisonwith contemporary chambered gate buildings in Cisjordan. Typically,a chambered gate is located inside the wall line with the outer wallattached to the outermost gate rooms on either side. At Tall Jawa,Wall 9000 forms the outer face of a bastion that forms the westernperimeter of the central road. On the east, the pattern is different.Instead, the casemate wall system is linked to the eastern wall (W9033)of Room 912, and from that point it resumes its trajectory around theeast end of the site. Because of the presence of a modern propertywall (W9043), we can only assume that the building plan on the east iscomparable to that on the west (Daviau 1996:93–94; fig. 9). This planwould then indicate an indirect entry gate complex with an approachroad beginning in the east. The lower Bastion 9007 would then flankthe road on the south and provide bent access to Road 915 through thegate building.

This gate plan appears to be a modified version of the gate complexat Lachish, with its approach road, which is flanked by an outer walland a bent access entry. However, all of the six-chambered gates inCisjordan were built inside the line of the casemate wall system. Interms of size, the gate at Tall Jawa is closer in width to the gate atGezer (17.00 m), whereas Megiddo is 17.50 m and Hazor measures18.20 m (Herzog 1992:268, Table 2). The width of the roadway at TallJawa is slightly larger (4.50 m) than at Gezer (4.10 m), closer in sizeto the roads at Hazor and Megiddo (ca. 4.20–4.25) m. The variationin room size is also distinctive of the Tall Jawa gate, suggesting a localadaptation.

8 Surface C75:27 was located in the southwest corner of Stratum-VIIA Room 910and Surface C75:29 was exposed along the south face of Wall 9030 in Room 911.

STRATUM VIIA

Building 905 (Fig. 9.5)

At some time during the late Iron Age II, Gate Building 910 wastransformed into an industrial and craft production centre (B905). Thischange is seen most clearly in the closing off of central Roadway 915by a series of cross walls to form discrete rooms (R909, R910, R911)north of Entryway 913, and in the blocking of doorways that originallyopened onto the road. In this discussion of the final use of this structure,the rooms of the western unit will be presented first, and then thedetails of the transformation that occurred in the central unit.9

The Western Unit: Rooms 906–908

The major walls of the western unit of Gate complex 910, Wall 9019on the west and Wall 9025 on the north, were reused in Stratum VIIAand retain the same numbering system. The east wall (W9024) wasbuilt in two units, the southern wall unit (W9021), south of DoorwayF, bonds with Wall 9018 to form the southeast corner of Building 905.Above floor level in Room 908, south Wall 9018 appears to abut theeast face of West Wall 9019, although below floor level the two walls aretied together by a diagonal stone (C65:38; Fig. 9.3, above). The sameconstruction technique may have been used in east-west Wall 9022 thatseparates Rooms 906 and R907. Wall 9022 was cut on the east byDoorway N to provide access to Room 906 after Doorway H, in Wall9024, had been blocked. Doorway N was subsequently filled with fallenwall stones distorting the appearance of Wall 9022.

Partition Wall 9023 is a new feature in Stratum VIIA (Fig. 9.6). Thissingle row wall is founded above a layer of cobble stones (C65:35) thatalso serve to position the principal use surface in Room 907.10 At itseast end, in line with Doorway N, is Doorway E, which leads southinto Room 908 from central Room 907. In the east wall (W9021),Doorway P was reduced in size, forming Doorway F, which is now theonly entrance into the three rooms of the western unit.

9 For details of room size, doorways and wall thickness, see Tables 9A, 9B, 9C).10 For this same feature in use during Stratum VIII, see E56:8; B53:9 and A3:12.

-

Figure 9.5. Plan of Building 905, Field C-east; Stratum VIIA.

Room 906The only access into Room 906 during Stratum VIIA was throughDoorway N from Room 907. Filled with collapsed boulders, this door-way was discovered when the underlying fill was excavated by chance.11

Surrounding this small (2.50× 2.50 m) room on the north and westare the outer walls (W9019, W9025), two of the heaviest building walls

11 This fill was disturbed by visitors to the site, causing the uppermost wall stone tocollapse into Room 906.

Figure 9.6. North face of Partition Wall 9023.

ever constructed at Tall Jawa, comparable only to the exterior walls ofBuilding 800. Rockfall and soil (C66:2, 7) filled this room and remainsunexcavated. Finds, such as upper loaf-shaped millstones (TJ 2160,2196) and an incised limestone stopper (TJ 2186; Daviau 2002:176)along with 850+ceramic sherds, show conformity with the materialculture of Building 905 but cannot be used to identify activities on theupper storey or roof of Room 906.

Room 907 (Fig. 9.7)Excavation to floor level in Rooms 907 and R908 provide evidence forthe principal occupation phase on the ground floor, along with remainsfrom the upper storey and the roof. The floor surface consists of beatenearth (C65:28) with ash pockets and a large almost circular area (0.70–0.80 m in diameter) stained with ash (C65:36). The ash concentrationwas located on the southwest side of a pillar base (C65:30), the centralone of three in a row embedded in Surface C65:28. The northernpillar base (C65:29) was set against the south face of Wall 9022 andsecured on its west side by 3 chinkstones (C65:33). The same techniquewas used around the base of central Pillar Base C65:30, where 5cobblestones (C65:34) were embedded in the floor. The third pillarbase (C65:32) was installed in the floor itself, just north of Partition

-

Figure 9.7. Room 907, with pillar bases (C65:29,30,32).

Wall 9023 where cobbles (C65:35) mark the level of the floor. No otherchinkstones were identified with this, the smallest (0.37 m in diameter,vs. 0.50 m in diameter) of the three bases. The bases are in place almostexactly along the middle of Room 907, although they were not quiteequidistant since the central base was offset to the south, probably dueto the location of Doorway F (Fig. 9.5). The resulting span of ca. 2.00 mon a side certainly made for a very strong ceiling, probably to supporta flagstone floor on the upper storey.12

Scattered across Surface C65:28 were several unfired clay loomweights (TJ 1848+unreg. fragments), a small chert pounder (TJ 1864),animal bones, yellow ochre, 90 ceramic sherds, and a partially mend-able storejar. By contrast with the heavy accumulations of potterysherds and artefacts from Buildings 300 and B800, the finds in Building905 were very limited. Whether this is the result of the function of theserooms or of their occupation history remains unclear. What is certainis that there was a second storey room and a roof, both of which mayhave supported work areas.

12 Small, or at least narrow, rooms (R805, R806, R809, R811) with flagstone floorson the upper storey were also seen in Building 800 (Chapter 8).

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyA firm layer of soil with packed nari (C65:20+27) represents the col-lapsed ceiling of Room 907. As in most other rooms excavated atTall Jawa, the organic material within the ceiling was not preserved,although flagstones that paved the floor of the upper storey roomand artefacts from this room were found among the fallen wall stones(C65:17+26). The flagstones measure 12.00–20.00 cm in width and17.00–42.00 in length. Some of the paving stones were still attachedto the plaster of the floor while others were on edge, standing almostvertically in the debris. This disturbance was probably due to the forceof falling wall stones and was especially noticeable near Doorway E. Atthe same time, the plaster of the ceiling accumulated in lumps along thenorth end of Room 907, possibly suggesting the direction of collapse.

Table 9E. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 907, upper storey


C65:26, 27 bowl V923 offset rimbowl V922 vertical rim, carinatedshallow bowl V924 grooved base187 ceramic sherds3 millstones TJ 1681, 1792, 1806 basalt, upper loaf-shapedmortar TJ 1826 limestoneweight TJ 1824

Also amidst the upper storey remains was a socket stone (TJ 1480),the cranium of a young female, a few teeth and long bones and acopper/bronze earring (TJ 1663).

Excursus: TJ Burial 4—The Skeletal Remains

[by Margaret A. Judd]

The cranial remains of one individual were recovered from Field C,Square 65 (C65:B4; Fig. 9.8). The bones were within a mixed matrixof friable, dry soil with inclusions of pebbles, cobbles and boulders(Fig. 9.9, on the right). A stone mortar (TJ 1467) and worked roundstone (TJ 1480), found in Debris Layers C65:12 and C65:17 respec-tively (Daviau 2002: CD database), along with the copper earring (TJ1663; Daviau 2002:42, fig. 2.20:1) were recovered from Soil LayerC65:18. The ceramic sherds from these loci were Iron II, Late Iron II,Byzantine and Umayyad.

-

Figure 9.8. Human remains in upper storey collapse of Room 907.

Portions of both parietal and the occipital bones were present andunmodified by disease processes; the oval puncture on the posteriorright parietal is likely an artefact of excavation rather than ancienttrauma since the light colour of the edges of the puncture contrastsharply to the earth-covered broken edges of other areas of the bone(Ubelaker and Adams 1995). The right mandibular second incisor andcanine were recovered. In both cases, portions of the dental crownwere broken postmortem and dental wear patterns could not be ascer-tained, although the remaining height of the crown suggests that littlewear was present (Scott 1979:214, Smith 1984:45–46). Similarly, thereis no evidence of dental disease, calculus or dental enamel hypopla-sia. The fully formed permanent teeth, absence of dental wear, andthe lack of the sagittal and lambdoidal suture closure are character-istic of a young adult, likely under 30 years of age. (see references,below)

Room 908 (Fig. 9.9)Like Room 906 on the north, Room 908 on the south had only onedoorway (E) which connected it to Room 907. Three of the four wallsof Room 908 were major support walls for Building 905, especiallywest, exterior Wall 9019. On the south and east, Walls 9018 and

Figure 9.9. Room 908 (left) and south end of R907;Partition Wall 9023, East Wall 9021 in foreground.

9021 bond to form the southeast corner of the western unit of rooms.Partition Wall 9023 separated Room 908 from Room 907 on the north.

The pattern of deposition present in Room 908 is similar to thatseen in Room 907 with the exception of a flagstone pavement (C65:21)in situ in the western half of the room. This pavement was in use with abeaten earth surface (C65:15), and had almost the same absolute level(924:54 masl) as the floor (C65:28, 924.56 masl) in Room 907. Smashedon the floor were the sherds of a red slipped bowl (V925) and someshattered clay loom weights. It is likely that these loom weights were inuse with those on the upper floor.

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyEvidence for a collapsed ceiling in Room 908 was well preserved; aloose soil layer filled with layers of plaster fragments (C65:14) had col-lapsed onto a beaten earth and flagstone surface (C65:15, 21). Asso-ciated with the ceiling were at least 3 unfired clay loom weights (TJ1409–1411), an upper loaf-shaped millstone (TJ 1352), a limestoneweight (TJ 1356) and a stone working surface (TJ 1467).

-

Figure 9.10. Plan of Building 905, Field C-east, with locus numbers.

Destruction in Building 905In Room 907, there was clear evidence of roof collapse marked by anaccumulation of silty soil (C65:24) which was buried by a subsequentlayer of rockfall (C65:23). Among the fallen boulders, this layer con-tained a roof roller (TJ 1754) a limestone bowl (TJ 1739) and a basaltgrinder (TJ 1743). A similar “sandy” soil layer (C65:11) was sealed byrockfall (C65:6, 5) in Room 908. In all three rooms of the western unit,these layers were filled with Iron Age artefacts consisting primarily ofground stone tools and pottery sherds. For the most part, the pottery

Figure 9.11. Room 909, looking east through Doorway J; Pavement C76:16 at left.

readings indicate little contamination from the Umayyad period eventhough Building 600 is only 12.00 m to the north. Only in the topsoillayers (C65:3, C66:1) was Umayyad pottery evident.

The Central Unit: Rooms 909–913

Room 909 (Figs. 9.10–9.11)The northernmost room in the central unit is Room 909. This roomwas formed by closing off the north end of Roadway 915 in GateBuilding 910 with an east-west wall (W9026) that fills the gap betweenthe eastern and western units. Wall 9026 was constructed of small,medium, large and very large boulders in the same dry-laid technique

-

used in the outer walls, but it was slightly narrower (1.40–1.50 m) thanWalls 9025 and W9040 (1.50–1.75 m). On the west side of Room 909,Doorway H was blocked by medium and large boulders (C66:8), whichfill the space between the north end of Wall 9024 and the south face ofWall 9025.

On the south and east sides, the reconstruction was more compli-cated. A new east-west wall (W9028) was built up against north-southWall 9024. This wall was formed of 2 rows of medium and large boul-ders with a single very large boulder in header position marking thewest jamb of Doorway G. A boulder of similar size and shape marksthe east jamb where it was built into a short wall unit or stub (W9029);this wall unit abuts Wall 9031 on the east. North of Wall 9029, Wall9031 was thickened on its west face (W9035) to form the south frameof Doorway J. Another wall stub (W9027) was positioned at the joinbetween blocking Wall 9026 and Outer Wall 9040, the original northwall of Room 912. The result of this reconstruction is that the trafficpatterns were altered. Access into Room 910 on the south is availablefrom Room 909 through Doorway G, and a new entrance (J) leads intoRoom 912, somewhat west of its position in Stratum VIIB. There is nodirect link with Room 906 on the west.

Both Doorways G and J had well hewn stones framing the passage-way through the thickness of the flanking walls and both preserved evi-dence of threshold stones. Doorway J was floored with cobblestones(C76:17) packed in the underlying soil while Doorway G retained ahewn boulder (C76:12) in situ and a dislocated dressed stone with araised edge that may have been reused as a threshold stone.

The principal surface in Room 909 was a beaten earth floor (C76:15)that covered the Stratum VIIB flagstones and sealed up against thesurrounding walls. Surface C76:15 was stained with 4 ash pockets andcovered with a soil layer (C76:10) containing artefacts and 518 potterysherds. Surprisingly, only partially mendable vessels were recovered.

Table 9F. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 909


C76:9, 10, 15 saucer V928 red slip2 bowls V929, 930 offset rim, 1 red slipbowl V931 heavy offset rim518 ceramic sherdsmortar TJ 2044 limestonemortar (unreg) limestone, small


3 metal points TJ 2049, 2084, 2113 ironloom weight TJ 1977 clay, unfiredcore tool lithics chert

Immediately above Surface C76:15 was an extensive lens of ash (C76:14; 1.50× 1.96 m) which sealed up against south Wall 9028 just west ofDoorway G. Whether this ash represented a cooking area or was a signof the final destruction of Building 905 remains unclear. At the sametime, its position adjacent to a doorway but away from the draught istypical of ovens seen in both Buildings 900 and B800.

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyThe size of Room 909 (2.60×4.10 m) posed no problem to the ancientbuilders for spanning the walls with a ceiling. The presence of unfiredloom weights and the ash concentration increase the probability thatRoom 909 was not only roofed but also carried a second storey. Thesequence of collapse in Room 909 yielded soil loci that were difficultto separate with the result that upper storey artefacts may have pene-trated into lower storey debris. Ceiling material and upper storey wallcollapse was represented by a deep accumulation (C76:9) of soil, brickmaterial, localized concentrations of nari and fallen cobbles and peb-bles. Heavy boulders and flagstones were concentrated in the overlyinglayer (C76:5) and in Doorway G. Artefacts and installations present inthese loci and probably in use on the upper storey represent domesticand industrial activities, such as weaving, crushing and grinding.

Table 9G. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 909, upper storey


C76:5,9 681 ceramic sherds slight contaminationC76:7 door socket TJ 2042 limestone

work surface TJ 1967 basaltmortar TJ 2002 basalt, reused millstonegrinder TJ 2031 basaltgrinder(?) TJ 2039 sandstone3 millstones TJ 1857, 1868, 1996 basalt2 querns TJ 1853, 1870 basalt saddle quernspounder TJ 1948 chertmetal point TJ 1905 ironloom weights TJ 2025 clay, unfired, brokenweight/tether TJ 2001 limestone

-

Figure 9.12. Building 905, looking east from R907into R909 on left and R910 in middle distance.


red ochre geologyyellow ochre geology

Room 910 (Fig. 9.12)A second room (R910) of somewhat larger size (4.00×4.50 m) is lo-cated to the south.13 Walls 9028 and 9029 served as the north wall ofRoom 910 and as the jambs of Doorway G from Room 909. On theeast, Stratum-VIIB Walls 9031 and W9032 were separated by Door-way K, which was exposed only in part due to the proximity of themodern wall (W9043). A new Stratum-VIIA wall (W9030) and wallstub (W9044) abut the north-south inner walls (W9021 and W9032,respectively) forming the southern limit of Room 910 and the door-frames on either side of Doorway L. The earlier walls (W9021, W9024)were reused on the west with Doorway F providing access to Room907. Each doorway is marked by a cobblestone paved threshold (F=C75:8; G=C76:12; K=C75:28; L=C75:11) and filled with collapsedwall stones and soil (C75:7, 12, 14). Since the thresholds of the door-

13 Excavation of loci in Room 910 was limited due to constraints on staff and thetermination of excavation in 1995.

Figure 9.13. Installation C75:10 in Room 910.

ways were installed on the cement-like surface which served as the latestStratum-VIIB roadway (C75:27, 29), we may assume that the east-westwalls were also built upon it.

Working Platform—C75:10 (Fig. 9.13): Two installations, one on thesouth and one on the west side of Room 910, were excavated. Thesefeatures were both installed on a beaten earth surface (C75:20) whichcovered roadway Surface C75:27+29. Installation C75:10 consists of2 rows of 3 large cobbles or small boulders that cover an area of0.75×0.80 m, and run perpendicular to east-west Wall 9030. Setabove these stones was a single flagstone (C75:10) that measures ca.0.45×0.70 m. In place along the eastern half of Stone C75:10 wereseveral lumps of plaster that still adhered to its upper surface. The func-tion of this installation was unclear since there was no evidence of ashor other residue apart from the plaster. In appearance, it is compara-ble to the base of Ovens C27:63 and C27:68 in Building 800, althoughthere is no evidence for the clay oven that would have been put on thisstone support.

-

Figure 9.14. Hearth C75:9, in Room 910.

Hearth C75:9 (Fig. 9.14): A second installation is in place against Wall9021, between the south edge of Doorway F and the southwest cornerof Room 910. The base stones (C75:19) for the hearth are set onSurface C75:20 and cover an area 0.80× 0.80 m. A border of largecobbles set on edge surround the base rocks forming a hearth with adepth of 0.28 m. Inside the hearth was a 0.30 m deep accumulationof ash (C75:17),14 clear evidence of use, although not of its purpose. Athin lens of ash (C75:18) covers the floor between the two installations.Such stone built installations are not rare; a good example is seen inthe re-use of Room 74 in the fort at .Horbat Rosh Zayit (Gal andAlexandre 2000:23; fig. II.26–28), where installations 71 and 72 areassociated with saddle querns, an upper loaf-shaped millstone, and acooking pot.

Pottery sherds in association with these features at Tall Jawa were few(39), as were the typical food processing tools so numerous in Building800. This may be due to the incomplete excavation of the centre ofRoom 910. In contrast, 12 food processing tools appear in the topsoillocus (C75:1) that covers the collapsed debris (C75:5) in Room 910,

14 There was no charcoal in the ash, which felt “greasy”; the fuel in use in thishearth may have been dung rather than wood (personal observation, S. Ellis-Lopez).

suggesting an upper storey or roof terrace where these artefacts hadbeen in use.

Room 911Room 911 is the smallest (2.40×4.60 m) of the three rooms built intothe space of the former roadway (R915), although the side walls of Gatecomplex 910 were slightly farther apart at this point. Two east-west wallstubs (W9038, W9039) of almost equal size frame Doorway M, whichleads from Entryway 913, forming an indirect access between the threerooms in this central unit. This pattern blocks one’s view from oneroom into another, and restricts entry into Complex 905. In order toaccomplish this, Wall 9038 on the west of doorway M is built up againstthe northeast corner of Tower 9020, while Wall 9037 abuts Wall 9036,which appears to be an addition to the north-south wall of the easterngate chambers or to a tower(?) on the east, opposite Tower 9020.15

Only limited areas along the south face of Wall 9030 and imme-diately north of south Wall 9038 and 9039 were excavated in Room911. Under the debris layers, the latest Stratum-VIIA surface (C75:29)appears to be a continuation of Surface C75:27 uncovered in Room910. Evidence for the use of Room 911 comes from the few finds asso-ciated with the overlying soil layer (C75:21). These artefacts consist ofa chert pounder (TJ 2220), a basalt bowl (TJ 2221), a basalt millstonefragment reused as a mortar (TJ 2222), and a large (16.1× 27.8 cm)basalt mortar (TJ 2223). The continuation of this locus on the southside of Room 911 was not reached, limiting our understanding of thefunction of this space in the redesigned building.

Room 913 (Fig. 9.15)In Entryway 913, a surface (C74:21) which overlies the Stratum-VIIBroadway, consists of a pavement of flat-lying boulders and cobbles. Theposition of this cobblestone and boulder pavement and its continuationeastward, under the modern property wall (C84:1), appears to mark thesouthernmost limit of Building 905. At this point, Wall 9036 is directlyopposite the south edge of Tower 9020 and west Wall 9019 (Fig. 9.4).Although additional sections of this stone pavement were not exposedin the northern part of Square C73 to the south, a similar pattern ofhard-packed soil with flat-lying boulders (C73:8) seals against the north

15 Clarification of the architecture all along the east side of gate Complex 910 wasrestricted by the presence of modern Wall 9043.

-

Figure 9.15. Building 905, with Room 908 in lower left, and R913 in upper left.

end of north-south Wall 9010 that runs down the slope to meet east-west Wall 9008 (see above). This packed surface also seals against theeast edge of a cobblestone pavement (C63:22) south of Solid Wall 9000.On the west side of Entryway 913, this surface appears to surroundWall 9042, a north-south wall unit formed of 2 rows of large and verylarge boulders that abuts Tower 9020 on the north and Solid Wall9000 on the south. Excavation ended here before the founding levelsof Wall 9042 could be determined. However, to the east of Wall 9042,in Entryway 913, is an installation (C74:24) that consists of a small pitformed of cobblestones set on edge around a rectilinear depression.This installation measured 0.60× 0.90 m and was ca. 0.12 m deep.Inside the depression were bits of broken or decayed plaster. Thisfeature may have been the support for an installation, such as a stonebasin associated with the industrial activities in Room 910. However, itsproximity to Plaster Surface C74:17 and the similarity of the plastermaterial in both loci also hint at the artificiality of this feature asan installation and suggest instead a certain amount of damage tothe pavement resulting in the exposure of the underlying surface. Atpresent, both interpretations of the evidence are possible.

Figure 9.16. Room 712.

Room 912 (Fig. 9.16)In the northeast corner of Building 905, at the point where a mod-ern path runs eastward onto the tell, the walls of one room were par-tially exposed north of the modern property wall (W9043). Room 912is bounded on the north (W9040) and east (W9033) by exterior wallsof the Stratum-VIIB gate complex. Both walls are formed of medium,large and very large boulders, with cobble chinkstones. In its presentcondition, Room 912 appears to measure only 2.40 × 3.60 m, with itsgreatest length extending north-south. The reduced width of Room912 may have been the result of refashioning inner Wall 9035–W9036along the east side of Roadway 915. Evidence for a change in align-ment is seen also in Entryway 913 to the south, where a single row oflarge and very large boulders is located west of the line of Wall 9032.In Room 912, the west Wall (W9035) appears to have been thickenedon its west face (W9031) where it bonds with Wall 9029. These newwalls, which formed the frames of Doorways J and G in Room 909,were built of cobbles and small boulders, in sharp contrast to the wallsof Building 905 as a whole. The position of Wall 9035 in the east balkof Square C75, and the limited exposure of the full width of Room 912under modern Wall 9043, concealed the construction details of bothphases during Strata VIIB and VIIA.

-

The uppermost soil and rockfall layer (C86:1) was cleared in Room912, clearly revealing the surrounding walls and the east side of Door-way J which opened into Room 909 in the central unit. Here on theeast side of Building 905, the traffic patterns differed from that on thewest, where the doorway (H) between Room 909 and 906 was blockedduring the final occupation phase. The relationship of Room 912 to theroom(s) further south is indicated by the presence of Doorway K, whichleads east from Room 910 into a room that may have been comparableto Room 907 on the west. However, there did not appear to be any evi-dence for a doorway in south Wall 9034 that would have opened intothe middle room from Room 912.

BUILDING 900

Occupation west of the gate complex (B910) is represented by SolidWall 9000 and by a group of rooms (R901/921, R902/922, R903/923,R904/924) that yielded finds indicating extensive food preparation ac-tivity. Only four Squares (C43–53, C44–54; Fig. 9.1) were excavatedin this area, with the result that the arrangement of these rooms withone another was clarified, but the complete building plan was notexposed. Wall 9013+9017, which marks the east side of Building 900,was traced north (C64–C65) for 13.00 m, indicating that there wereadditional rooms north of Room 901,16 probably still within Building900. The presence of a soil dump north of Squares C44–C54 and westof Wall 9017 prevented further exposure in this area during the finalseason.

Inset/offset Wall 9000, exposed for 13.00 m in Field C-east, runseast-west just north of the modern crest of the southern terrace. Thissolid wall constitutes the principal exterior wall protecting the struc-tures built against its north face. Wall 9000 consists of 2–3 rows of largeand extra large, flat-topped boulders, with cobble size chinkstones, for atotal thickness of 2.20 m. Although only 2 courses were exposed alongits south face, evidence for a plaster coating (C53:24) is preserved atthe corner where an offset/inset (C53–j) is located. These constructionfeatures are similar to those found in West Wall 2023 in Field B, where

16 The walls were in use during both Strata VIIB and VIIA. The Stratum VIIAroom numbers are used when describing the location of the principal walls. Becausethere appears to be only minimal changes in the major features from one phase toanother, the Stratum-VIIB building was not assigned a number of its own.

the original founding of the wall was assigned to Stratum IX. That thesame construction techniques continued to be employed as late as Stra-tum VII is not surprising given the reuse and repair of the wall systemevident during Stratum VIII.17

Wall 9000 remained unexcavated west of Room 902 (Square C43).However, its trajectory west through Squares C33–C3 could be seenat intervals at ground level. A second Wall (W8035) also ran east-westalong the crest of the southern terrace. This wall, originally thoughtto be a casemate wall, due to its size of 1.50 m, may have beenrelated to north-south Wall 8001 along the west edge of the terrace.The relationship of Walls 8035 and W9000 was not determined duringexcavation.

Building Plan

Building 900 is framed on the east by north-south Wall 9013 (=9017)which appears to bond with Wall 9000. By contrast, Wall 9001 onthe west may have abutted Wall 9000, as did interior Walls 9002 andW9041 (the south frame of Doorway D through Wall 9005). Within thisunit were twin Rooms 901 and R902, linked on the north by Corridor903, and located on either side of a small room (R904) which opensonly into Room 901.

RoomsThree rooms, one corridor and one possible staircase have been ex-posed sufficiently to determine their sizes.

Table 9H. Room Size and Proportion (B900)


901 3.00 5.50 .55 9000, 9005, 9016, 9013902 2.80 5.30 .53 9000, 9001, 9003, 9002903 1.20 3.00 .40 9003, 9006, 9016, Doorway A904 1.60 3.60 .44 9000, 9002, 9006, 9005905 0.80 3.00 .26 9003, 9004

17 While the fortification system located on the southeastern terrace may itself dateto Stratum VIII, Stratum-VII structures (B 800, B700 and B910) were founded onbedrock (Chapters 8 and 9, above). The presence of retaining Wall 9015, below theStratum-VII Buttress Wall 9008, points to the construction of defensive walls aroundthe terrace prior to its final occupation phase, possibly as early as Stratum IX.

-

Range of sizes (omitting Rooms 903 and 905)

Width 1.60 →3.00 average – 2.46 mLength 3.60 →5.50 average – 4.80 m

Although the number of rooms in Building 900 is limited, the ratio ofwidth to length is in the same range as rooms in Building 800 (0.45–0.70; Table 8A). At the same time, the arrangement of rooms, withRoom 904 flanked on two sides by larger rooms and closed off on thethird side by a corridor, (R903) is not found elsewhere.

DoorwaysClear evidence for four doorways indicates the traffic patterns amongthe rooms. From Room 901, Doorway D leads into Room 904 andDoorway C leads into Corridor 903. Corridor 903 extends westthrough Doorway B into Room 902. On the north side of Corridor 903is Doorway A, which opens into additional rooms that remain unexca-vated.

Table 9J. Location and Width of Doorways (B900)


A 903, ? 1.10B 902, 903 1.00C 901, 903 1.05D 901, 904 0.70

Average width - 0.96 m

The average width of Doorways A, B, and C (1.05 m) is 25% widerthan the average (0.84 m) in Building 800. This is due in part to thefact that Doorways B and C were conditioned by the size of corridorRoom 903, since they extend almost the full width of this room. Thismay also be the case for Doorway A, which leads north into a stonepaved passageway R918. Room 905, suitable in size for a staircase,may have opened into the passageway (R918) north of Doorway A. Sotoo, another doorway may have opened into a room opposite the stairs,north of Wall 9016.

WallsSolid Wall 9000 is in a class by itself since it was the exterior defensivewall for the southern terrace.

Table 9K. Wall Thickness in centimetres (B900)

Wall 60 70 80 90 100 125 150 175 200

9000 2209001 1409002 ×9003 1409004 ×+9005 ×9006 ×+9013 ×9016 ×

Wall thickness in both Buildings 910 and B900 is exceptional by com-parison with Stratum-VIII Building 300, where major support wallswere in the range of 0.70–1.00 m thick and secondary walls mea-sured 0.55–0.70 m. In Building 900, only the east and west walls ofRoom 904 were in the latter range whereas all other walls were 1.00–1.50 m thick. Such heavy construction indicates a concern for defenceand for support of upper storey walls. This is most noticeable in Wall9006, an interior wall that is more than 1.00 m thick, certainly builtto support ceiling beams and an upper storey wall opposite DoorwayA.

STRATUM VIIB

Construction and use of Building 900

During the 1993 season, excavation reached floors that represent twoStratum-VII phases of use in Rooms 901, 903 and 904. Room 902was excavated only in part to clarify the wall lines and traffic patternsbetween rooms. Additional exposure of earlier floors was not possiblein the final season.

Room 901 (Fig. 9.17)With the exception of Wall 9013, the major north-south walls of Build-ing 900 appear to abut Wall 9000 which serves as the south wall ofRooms 901, R904, and R902. Room 901 is located in the southeast-ern corner of Building 900 with no entrance from the outside. EastWall 9013+9017 consists of 2+rows of small and medium boulderswith rubble fill and cobble chinkstones. On the north side of Room

-

Figure 9.17. Building 900, Field C-east.

901, Wall 901318 appears to bond with Wall 9016, which was built of 3rows of small, medium and large boulders, forming a major east-westsupport wall (ca. 1.20 m thick). By contrast, Wall 9005 on the west wasa 1–row wall of medium size boulders that was clearly an interior wallseparating Room 901 from Room 904.

Two superimposed beaten earth surfaces (C54:30, VIIB; and C54:25=16, VIIA) were both disturbed by fallen wall stones that mark theend of Room 901 during Stratum VII. The earlier floor (C54:30), inposition above a make-up layer (C54:33), was only exposed over anarea measuring 2.75×3.5 m in Square C54.19 This surface seals up

18 This wall extends north as Wall 9017, forming the western edge of a “channel”(C65:9) between two parallel walls, with Wall 9019 of Building 910 forming the easternperimeter. The “channel”, excavated only partially at its south end, was packed with236+ceramic sherds.

19 The north balk of Square C53 remained in place and the only surface (C53:16)uncovered north of Wall 9000 was contemporary with the later floor (C54:25) in Room901.

Figure 9.18. Oven C54:18 with Windbreak Stone C54:19, in Room 901.

against Wall 9013 on the east and Wall 9016 on the north. On thewest, Wall 9005 was separated from Surface C54:30 by a single row ofsmall boulders with cobble chinkstones. This feature (C54:32), possiblya shelf (2.30 m long), sealed up against the east face of Wall 9005 formuch of its length north of Doorway D.

Table 9L. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 901


C54:29+30 bottle V902=TJ 964 carrot-shaped4 stone tools TJ 971, 972, 2 unreg. polishing stonespestle TJ 1003 basaltmortar TJ 969 basalt2 grinders unreg. basaltpounder TJ 974 chert

Scattered on Floor C54:30 were stone tools commonly in use for craftactivity or food processing and preparation. An Oven (C54:18) in usewith Surface C54:25 during the later phase may already have been inuse with floor C54:30. The most distinctive ceramic find was a carrot-shaped bottle, well known in late Iron Age II tomb groups (Dornemann1983: fig. 39:20–23).

-

Figure 9.19. North end of Room 901 with Corridor 903 and Doorway A at left.

Oven C54:18 (Fig. 9.18): Against north Wall 9016 was a cooking instal-lation consisting of an oven and a windbreak positioned midway be-tween east Wall 9013 and Doorway C. The windbreak stone (C54:19)was a limestone slab (0.29×0.75× 0.25 m thick) set into SurfaceC54:30 on its long edge with one end abutting Wall 9016. The oven(C54:18) was situated on the west side of the windbreak where a sec-ond stone slab (C54:36), set into the floor, served as a base rock (0.45×0.65×0.10 m thick). In place on the base rock was an oven of packedclay (C54:18) lined with pottery sherds on the interior (C54:17) andsealed with mud plaster to Windbreak Stone C54:19. It was not clearduring excavation whether the sherds were part of the original ovenor were added later to strengthen the oven wall. The oven itself wasslightly smaller than the base rock on which it sat. Ash accumulated tothe south (C54:21) of the oven and to the east (C54:22, 23) of the baserock. Here it was associated with a ring of cobble size stones (C54:37)that may have served as a small hearth with an exterior diameter of0.50 m. Although surrounded by rockfall, the function of this smallinstallation appears clear in view of the amount of ash (C54:23) thatsurrounded it.


Room 903 (Fig. 9.19)To the west of Oven C54:18, the beaten earth surface (C54:31) inDoorway C was also stained with ash. This doorway, located betweenthe north end of Wall 9005 and the south face of Wall 9016, marksthe eastern end of Corridor 903. Wall 9005 extends slightly (ca. 0.15–0.20 m) beyond the line of Wall 9006 to form a distinct frame forDoorway C, with the result that the entrance was slightly narrower(1.05 m) than Corridor 903 opposite Doorway A. This narrow room(1.20 m) was excavated to Stratum VIIB levels only in its eastern half.

STRATUM VIIA

A quick succession of surfaces was seen in Rooms 901 and 903, whererockfall scattered the sherds of ceramic vessels among various groundstone tools and covered these finds with soil and boulders.

-

Room 901 (Fig. 9.20)Room 901 continued to serve as a food preparation area in use withOven C54:18. Certain changes were seen with the rise in floor level,especially along the west side of the room, where Shelf C54:32 wasno longer visible above Surface C54:25. Additional exposure of thisuse phase in the south half of the room (in Square C53) indicatesthat the same range of activities was carried out in all parts of Room901.

Table 9M. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 901, upper surface


C54:24+25 bowl V911 red slipC53:16 krater V914 smudged

2 lamps V907, 908 ceramic2 stone tools TJ 888, 889 polishing stonesmortar TJ 815 limestone2 pestles TJ 881, 912 basaltroller pestle TJ 882 basalt2 grinders TJ 883, 897 sandstone5 grinders TJ 801, 868, 887, 893, 898 basalt3 querns TJ 865, 866, 878 basaltwork surface TJ 811 sandstone5 pounders TJ 807, 876–877, 879 chertlarge pounder TJ 873 chertknife blade TJ 667 ironanimal bones

Room 903Artefacts above a superimposed Surface (C54:26) within Doorway Cand in the eastern end of Room 903 suggest a continuation of foodprocessing activities. Here too, the beaten earth surface was disturbedby boulders and cobbles fallen from the surrounding walls. Between thestones were the remains of ceramic vessels, animal bones, and stonetools.

Table 9N. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 903, upper surface


C54:26 bowl V906 red slip, vertical rim2 juglets V904, 905 oblongmortar bowl V909 tripod2 grinders TJ 872, 874 basaltmillstone TJ 890 basalt, upper

Figure 9.21. Wall 9000 at south end of Room 904, with Doorway D.


work surface TJ 847 limestone, anvilpounder TJ 886 chert

Room 904 (Figs. 9.21–9.22)In the southwest corner of Room 901, Doorway D leads into a narrowspace (1.60× 3.60 m) designated Room 904.20 The doorway is posi-tioned between the south end of Wall 9005 and a wall stub (W9041)that abuts the north face of Solid Wall 9000. Within Doorway D thereare two carefully laid stones that serve as a threshold (C53:20) to forma step down into the room. A second north-south Wall (W9002), simi-lar in thickness (0.60–0.70 m) and in construction, constitutes the westwall. On the north, Wall 9006 serves as both the north wall of Room904 and the south wall of Corridor 903. This wall (W9006) is morethan double the thickness of the side walls of Room 904.

The principal feature of Room 904 is an installation (C53:17) builtof a single row of stones set on edge to form the semi-circular perimeter

20 Room 904 was only exposed to Stratum VIIA levels in Square C53. The southbalk of Square C54 was not excavated to reveal the room’s north end.

-

Figure 9.22. Artefacts in place in Room 904, between Bin C53:17 and Doorway D.

of a bin(?). This installation was built above an earlier surface andsealed on its exterior face with the hard-packed soil of Surface C53:25.Material from the lowest loci (C53:22, 23, 26) within InstallationC53:17 consists only of soil and cobblestones, not indicative of the func-tion of this feature. Only the uppermost locus (C53:18) contained loosesoil with 2 artefacts, a metal fragment and a stone tool (TJ 944). Unfor-tunately these finds were also ambivalent in regard to functional identi-fication.

Adjacent to Installation C53:17, and in use with it, was a small groupof stone tools, similar to those in Room 901 to the east. During exca-vation, it was clear that hand grinder TJ 952 was in use with mortarTJ 955. In several cases, it was apparent that every possible surfaceof a grinder was utilized so that the tool functioned as both a handgrinder and as a pestle (Daviau 2002:143). Although ceramic sherdswere present, there was insufficient mendable material to reconstruct arepresentative corpus of vessel types in use on the lower storey duringStratum VIIA.

Table 9P. Pottery and Artefacts in Room 904


C53:19=25 saucer bowl V916 yellow sliplong point TJ 948 ironmortar TJ 955 basalt2 grinders TJ 952, 953 basalt2 pounders TJ 809, 959 chert

Room 902Room 902 is the mirror image of Room 901. Together with Corridor903, these rooms form a U-shaped space around Room 904. Like theother rooms in this unit, Room 902 extends north from Solid Wall9000 as far as Wall 9003, which forms the northern limit of Corridor903 and flanks Doorway B. In this space (2.80×5.30 m), only theupper debris layers were excavated with the result that neither of theStratum-VII floor levels were reached. Soil and rockfall layers producedthe same range of finds as elsewhere in Building 900, namely IronAge pottery contaminated with sherds from the Umayyad period andground stone tools. Only the traffic pattern among the rooms duringStratum VII can be identified with certainty.

Evidence for Features on the Upper StoreyAlthough the heavily built walls of Building 900 strongly suggest theuse of upper storey rooms, evidence was very limited in Field C-east due to severe erosion along the crest of the terrace. Fragmentsof a unique vessel, a red slipped and burnished chalice with fingerdepressions (dimples; V920; Daviau 2001: fig. 2.4) were present amongupper storey wall stones (C43:6). Evidence for the removal and reuseof Iron Age wall stones is apparent in the Umayyad building (B600) inField D, as well as in the traditional houses in Jawa village (Ellis-Lopezin Daviau, in preparation/b) and in the hundreds of stones piled upto form a property wall (W9043) along the west side of the moderncemetery.

Within the rooms of Building 900, the upper soil layers containedhundreds of sherds, including recognizable vessel types. Examples ofseveral forms that show contemporaneity with Building 800 can becited, such as red slipped saucers (V915, V916), an everted rim bowl(V913) with no slip, a vertical rim carinated bowl with red slip and bur-nish (V917), an extremely thin, simple rim bowl with red slip (V918),

-

a black burnished bowl (V927), and a crisp ware jug (V919).21 A uniquevessel type is represented by a small, cylindrical jar or bottle (V901)which was formed of smooth, well-levigated clay and decorate withblack painted bands (Daviau 2001: fig. 8:2).22

Destruction

Extensive collapse of wall stones filled the rooms of Building 900, pilingup against Solid Wall 9000. Additional stones covered the wall andslid down the slope of the southern terrace. Outside the wall line,ceramic sherds and artefacts were also present, indicating the richnessof occupation during Stratum VII. Among the finds was a ceramicram’s head (TJ 961) which formed the corner of a larger artefact. Thehead was red slipped and decorated with black paint to highlight thehorns, eyes and forelock (Daviau 1994: fig. 9).

Excursus: TJ Burial 1—The Skeletal Remains

[by Margaret A. Judd]

Within the destruction debris was a small grave (C54:8; Fig. 9.23–9.24)built up against Wall 9013 and surrounded by the Iron Age rockfall,which filled Room 901. The burial was covered by boulder and cobble-stone debris layers (C54:5, 6) which were approximately 0.25 m thick.Potsherds from these soil layers derive from the Iron II, Late Byzan-tine and Umayyad period, however, the burial itself contained no gravegoods. The loose and dry burial fill (C54:7) was differentiated from themoist soil of Debris Layer C54:6. This oval burial fill measured 1.10m long, 0.50 m wide, and was 0.38 m deep at its greatest depth. Theskeleton was supine on an east-west axis and surrounded by stone slabs(Figure 9.24). The head, which rested on a stone pillow, was orientedto the west (320°) and faced north. The fill and body were enclosedin a pit with stone-lined sides, which when removed revealed the totaldimensions of the pit to be 1.35 ×0.75 m and 0.49 m at the great-

21 Along with these vessel forms are the shallow lamps (V907, V908), oblong juglets(V904, V905), and offset rim bowl sherds typical of late Iron Age II (Daviau 2001a:figs. 7:1–4; 9:1).

22 Vessels with a similar shape but without handles and undecorated were reportedfrom Madaba (Dornemann 1983: Fig. 40:7, 8). For a preliminary study of the fabric,see Daviau (1997b).

Figure 9.23. Burial 1.

est depth. When the burial was removed and excavation continued,soil layers and surfaces (C54:15, 24, 25, 29, 30) rich in domestic arte-facts (e.g., pounders, grinders, mortars, etc.) and Iron II potsherds werefound. The burial was later than the Iron II occupation, but previousto, contemporary with or later than the Umayyad period occupation ofthe site.

The entire body was preserved in situ and the condition was unmod-ified, that is the bones were solid and no evidence of taphonomicprocesses were observed, which is equivalent to Stage 0 on Behrens-meyer’s (1978) scale. The complete dentition, long bone length andcareful excavation of the epiphyses enabled an accurate estimation

-

Figure 9.24. Stone-lined cist grave C54:8.

of the individual’s age of 1 year +/– 4 months (Scheuer and Black2000: Table 11–17, Ubelaker 1978:47). The mixed dentition consistsof the 10 deciduous teeth of the upper and lower dental arcades, aswell as the permanent crowns of the mandibular central incisors. Fewbones were missing; one cervical and one sacral element were absent,as were portions of the hyoid, coccyx, and sternum. The hands wererepresented by seven metacarpal shafts and 24 phalanges, while eightmetatarsal shafts and nine foot phalanges were observed; 22 ossificationcentres were present. There were no pathological lesions observed onthe remains of this infant. Cranial and postcranial measurements forthis child, following criteria described by Fazekas and Kósa (1978) andillustrated by Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994:45–46), are appended (Table9Q).

Table 9Q. TJ- Burial 1: Child’s skeletal metrics (mm)

Measurement Left Right

Occipital base Length 14.4Width 21.9

Zygomatic Length 32.4 –Width 25.7 26.1

Mandible Body length 48.8 48.7Arc width 26.0 24.8Full length 70.2

Maxilla Length 24.9 25.7Width 34.1 33.0

Clavicle Length 58.4 56.5Diameter 6.3 5.9

Scapula Length 51.4 51.7Width 39.1 39.0Spine length 45.8 46.3

Humerus Length 95.4 94.5Width 24.2 24.3Diameter 8.2 8.3

Ulna Length 83.5 83.9Diameter 7.3 7.6

Radius Length – 75.1Diameter 6.3 6.4

Sphenoid Lesser wing length – 29.9Lesser wing width 17.6 17.4Greater wing length 48.3 50.4Greater wing width 30.8 –Body length 11.0Body width 23.6

Petrous portion Length 47.1 48.9Width 21.8 20.8Height 36.2 38.0

Ilium Length 52.6 52.3Width 46.6 46.6

Ishium Length 29.5 30.1Width 21.6 21.3

Pubic length 28.3 28.4Femur Length 116.3 115.2

Width 32.4 32.6Diameter 9.3 9.4

Tibia Length 97.7 97.7Diameter 9.5 9.6

Fibula Length 96.0 95.5Diameter 5.3 5.1

-

References for the Excursus

Behrensmeyer, A. K.1978 Taphonomic and Ecologic information on bone weathering. Paleobiology

4:150–162.Buikstra, J. E. and D. H. Ubelaker, eds.

1994 Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Fayetteville: ArkansasArchaeological Survey Research Series, Vol. 44.

Daviau, P. M. M.; M. Judd and M. Beckmann2002 Artefact classification and typology. Pp. 19–267 in Excavations at Tall Jawa,

Jordan: Volume II. The Iron Age Artefacts, by P. M. M. Daviau. Culture andHistory of the Ancient Near East, 11/2. Leiden: Brill.

Fazekas, I. and F. Kósa1978 Forensic Fetal Osteology. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.

Scheuer, L. and S. Black2000 Developmental Juvenile Osteology. London: Academic Press.

Scott, E. C.1979 Dental wear scoring technique. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 51:

213–218.Smith, B.

1984 Patterns of molar wear in hunter-gatherers and agriculturalists. AmericanJournal of Physical Anthropology 63:39–56.

Ubelaker, D. H.1978 Human Skeletal Remains. Chicago: Aldine.

Ubelaker, D. H. and B. J. Adams1995 Differentiation of perimortem and postmortem trauma using taphonomic

indicators. Journal of Forensic Sciences 40:509–512.

PART THREE

BUILDING TRADITIONSAND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES

BUILDING MATERIALS, CONSTRUCTIONTECHNIQUES AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES

Introduction

The Iron Age town of Tall Jawa is characterized by its stone architec-ture employed in the casemate fortification system and in the housesand public structures within the town.1 The ancient residents of centralTransjordan made use of building materials, construction techniquesand building designs which were embedded in a long architecturaltradition that flourished in southern Syria2 and Palestine,3 and whichremain partially preserved in the archaeological record. In order toappreciate the choices that the ancient builders made at Tall Jawa anddetermine the relationship of those choices to the regional architecturaltraditions, this study will present a summary description of availablebuilding materials, the specific techniques of construction evident inthe excavated remains (see Chapters 4–9, above), and the correlationof these techniques with the resulting building plans. The patterns ofroom arrangement in individual buildings are the meaningful expres-sion of culturally determined rules combining space, proportion and agroup of variables specific to the builders (Meijer 1989:221). The artic-ulation of these variables in stone architecture provides primary datafor the identification and classification of various building types.

The hypotheses to be tested in this chapter are first, that the archi-tectural remains at Tall Jawa represent a regional variation of knownIron Age architectural traditions, and second that comparison of build-

1 An initial study of the stone-built domestic architecture at Tall Jawa, #Amman,Tall al-#Umayri, Sa .hab, and Tall Jalul is presented in Daviau (1999).

2 While many Iron Age sites in southern Syria remain to be excavated, the north-ern coastal city of Ugarit illustrates well the second millennium building techniques,especially the use of stone in domestic and public buildings (Aurenche 1977: pl. 7; Yon,Lombard and Renisio 1987).

3 The names of “Palestine and south Syria” are used in the same sense as Wright(1985:2) who sees these areas as forming one entity in a contiguous geographicalregion. This region in antiquity contained several small states, especially during theIron Age and, in this study the regional terms are preferred over ethnic names.

ing materials, construction techniques and building plans at Tall Jawawith the same features from neighbouring sites in Transjordan, west-ern Palestine and south Syria will demonstrate a similar tradition, an“application of a system—a tradition” (Wright 1985: 332) of construc-tion and building design.

Building Materials

Limestone and Chert Boulders

The most widely used building materials in central Transjordan arelimestone and Senonian chert (Wright 1985: 338). Reich (1992:1) iden-tifies the several types of limestone with varying degrees of hardnessas mizzi yahudi, mizzi helou, meleki, nari and chalk. According to Reich,the hardest of these limestones, mizzi yahudi, was difficult to dress andwas used only in certain installations that received a lot of wear, suchas thresholds and door sockets. Chalk and nari are soft limestones thatwere easier to quarry and dress, although some chalk is probably toosoft for use as a building stone (Reich 1992:1). This would suggest thatnari limestone was probably the preferred building material.

For the immediate region around Tall Jawa, “carbonates… andchert” are the major components of exposed bedrock; the limestoneis both chalky limestone and a harder stone somewhat more resistant toerosion (Schnurrenberger, Chapter 3 above). It is the latter that wasused, along with chert slabs, in the construction of the fortificationwalls. Chert was used in certain features that required a vapour bar-rier between stone walls and other construction materials, such as mudbrick and plaster. Limestone boulders were used to build the founda-tion walls and part of the superstructure of the fortification system, aswell as the walls of individual houses within the town.

The precise location of the Iron Age quarries at Tall Jawa is notapparent in contrast to those for the late Byzantine-early Umayyadperiod. During this later occupation phase (Stratum III), stone wasquarried from the bedrock tongue to the south of the tell (Field M;Fig. 1.3), leaving precise negative reliefs where the stones had beenremoved. One such quarry, Feature M-85, contains the outline of stonesthat measure 0.40×0.48× 1.60 (Battenfield, in preparation),4 not quite

4 At present, bedrock is visible in the fields to the west and south of the mound andin the modern village to the north and east.

the size of the Iron Age pillars in House 800 that measure ca. 0.40×0.70×1.75–1.90 m. While this lack of information for the Iron Ageis not unusual (Wright 1985:340), the current setting of Tall Jawa,surrounded as it is by ploughed fields and a modern village, doespose some problems for understanding the stone gathering methodsemployed in antiquity. One area immediately adjacent to the tell wherestone may have been quarried is the north slope of the mound; unfor-tunately, this area has been cut by a modern road, destroying the evi-dence needed to support this suggestion. The clearest evidence for IronAge quarrying are two features in Field S (MPP RS 127), where itextends west beyond the modern houses adjacent to the tell. Here Fea-ture 15 is a long zigzag cut which indicates extensive quarrying of thebedrock outcrop, although it is not clear when this quarry was used.In their study of ashlar quarries, Shiloh and Horowitz (1975: pl. I)illustrate a quarry north of Jerusalem that appears comparable to Fea-ture 15.5 A second feature (18), a large reservoir with a staircase in thenortheast corner, may have been built at a place where earlier quarry-ing had taken place, although this is an argument from silence. Otherlikely sources of building stone were the cisterns cut into the bedrockimmediately south (Field M, Features 28, 47/48, 71, 81, 84(?), 87) andwest of the tell (Field S with its 9 cisterns),6 as well as Cisterns E63:13and D15:1 on the tell itself.7

Bedrock

Excavations during six seasons have added to our knowledge of thebedrock underlying the occupation debris on the tell and its use as abuilding material. The bedrock consists of very clean limestone thatis not dolomitic (see Hancock, Chapter 11), but does contains chertpockets. Bedrock has been reached in four areas on the tell where thewalls of several structures (Buildings 300, B700, B910, and B800) werefounded directly on the rock, demonstrating that its location was knownto the ancient builders. The earliest known wall (W9015) which was

5 The remains of a fallen quarry face at Busayra (Bienkowski 2002: pl. 1.5) showssimilar characteristics.

6 A complete report of these features will accompany the description of excavationsat the wine press (M2) and cave (M13) in Volume V, Survey and Documentation inField M (Battenfield, in preparation).

7 A large top-loading cave, Feature S-1, was excavated south of Fields B–A in 1992by the Tall Jawa Survey Team, directed by J. R. Battenfield. This cave may have beenused as a cistern.

founded on bedrock (C71:20) is located on the southeast side of the tell,below the Iron Age flanking wall (W9007) and buttress (W9008; seeChapter 5). A retaining wall (W1001), visible on the southwest side ofthe tell in Field A, may have had a different function than Wall 9015in Field C. Assumed to be part of the fortification system, Wall 1001was also founded on bedrock and the gaps under the lowest boulderswere filled with soil and small stones (A1:5) as a levelling device. We seethis same technique at the base of Outer Wall 2023 and Tower 2024 inField B.

Bedrock appears to have been used as a floor surface in severalrooms (R314), although in certain instances, the bedrock appears tohave been paved with lime plaster (R313). In another instance, a flag-stone pavement was installed immediately above the rock (R716).8 Var-ious installations either made use of the bedrock itself, or were cut intoit (in Squares A1, A84, C71, E74), including the two cisterns on the tell(E64:13 and D15:2), and a cave at the base of the tell (Feature S-1).

In addition to its use as a footing for wall foundations and for cis-terns, the bedrock was quarried and used for building stone, flagstoneflooring, plaster and a large variety of stone installations and objects.Paramount among these items were limestone pillars (C27:19, 22, 45),door frame stones (C17:35, C27:2, C54:11),9 thresholds (C54:14), lin-tels (D12:34, D13:13, D23:41), roof rollers,10 boulder mortars (A13:23,C27:35, C54.31.815), large troughs (C27:27, D32:50) and basins(B44:4, B53:11), medium size rectangular mortars and small troughs(Daviau 2002:160–161), and perforated stones used as various types ofindustrial weights (Daviau 2002:209–210).

Mud Brick

Mud brick, the second most common building material in ancientPalestine, was used for the superstructure of walls that had stone foun-dations (Reich 1992:5).11 Evidence for a mud brick superstructure hasbeen found at Tall Jawa only in a handful of cases. One area was the

8 McCown (1947:219) describes the floors in the houses at Tell en-Na.sbeh as beatenearth, lime, or stone pavements laid directly on bedrock.

9 Lintels, comparable in size to the pillars (ca. 1.60–1.70 m), were used in theField D building (B700).

10 Three roof rollers were recovered during the 1992 and 1993 seasons: 1) outsidethe casemate wall in E56 (TJ 381); 2) in Room 207 (TJ 814); and 3) inside Room 805(TJ 589) in House 800 (C-west).

11 Houses with mud brick foundations are also known, for example the Early Bronze

deep probe (A13, see Chapter 4, above) into Iron Age I occupationlevels that produced an intact mud brick (0.65× 0.35×0.15 m thick).Other remains of mud brick were located along the casemate wall sys-tem in Field B, where fragments of collapsed brick are present in smallamounts (B24–25) in the casemate rooms (R213, 215). The heaviestcollapse was located in Room 120, where mud brick collapse filled theroom and served as the foundation for the later phase of occupation.Only a few interior walls had evidence of a mud-brick superstructure,such as brick Wall 1011 which remained in place on stone foundationWall 1012, separating Rooms 102 and R103 (Buildings 100 and B113).

Construction Techniques

Boulder-and-Chink Wall Construction

The Fortification Walls (Figs 5.8, 17, 29)Limestone and chert boulders in boulder-and-chink style were used toconstruct the fortification walls and the majority of house walls. In thecasemate wall system, building stones consist of limestone boulders andlarge chert slabs. These stones range in size from medium to largeboulders (0.50–0.75× 0.75–1.00 m), with occasional examples of verylarge boulders (1.00+m). Such large stones were most common inthe flanking towers or walls on the west (B16) and southeast (C61–71) sides of the tell. Limited evidence for a course of rectangular chertboulders that appears to mark the transition from stone wall to mudbrick superstructure is preserved on Outer West Wall 2023 and onInner Casemate Wall 2006. Chert is also used as the capstone overDrain B24:24, and as a lining along the east face of W2012 as it runsthrough Inner Casemate Wall 2007 (Tower 2013).

For the most part, the boulders were “unhewn field stones”, withoutclear evidence for stone dressing. The flattest surface was used to formthe face of the wall, although the boulder itself was not squared.12 Theboulders were dry laid and held in place with cobble size stones and

Age remains at Tell el-Hesi (Rose and Toombs 1978:141). However, this technique wasnot used in Iron Age Transjordan.

12 A similar style of construction is seen in the outer wall of the casemate system onthe south side of Ramat Rahel below the ashlar courses (Shiloh and Horowitz 1975:pl. IV), as well as in the walls of individual buildings, such as the south wall (7K80:59)of Iron Age I Room B2 (Clark 2000: fig. 4.21), and throughout the late Iron Age IIcomplex in Field A at Tall al-#Umayri (Lawlor 2000: fig. 3.1).

pebbles (0.06–0.25 m in size). Semi-hewn stones were incorporatedinto the outer fortification wall at those points where there was anoffset or inset, to form a straight edge.13 Such stones may also havestrengthened the wall, although they were still used in boulder-and-chink construction; they were not ashlar masonry.14 The defensive wallswere usually three rows thick and were footed on bedrock. Only onoccasion did it appear that there was a rubble core formed of smallerstones (cf. Netzer 1992: fig. 11); for example, in the outer casemate wall(W2023).

The outer wall of the casemate system is almost consistently 2.10 mthick.15 Minor variations occur along its length so that certain sectionsare in the range of 1.90–2.60 m thick, due to the presence of the insetsand offsets which sometimes measure as much as 0.50 m in depth. Thesame is true in Field C-east, where a single fortification wall (W9000)measures 2.50 m thick. For the most part, the inner face of the case-mate system does not have offsets and is consistently 1.25–1.55 m thick.

The casemate system from Iron Age I recovered at Tall al-#Umayriis visible for 24.00 m. The outer wall measures 1.60–2.00 m thick, theinner wall is 1.00 m thick, and the casemate room measures 2.75 mwide, for a total thickness of ca. 5.00–5.50 m. Cross walls at inter-vals form discrete rooms, each approximately 5.00 m in length (Clark2000:74). Clark suggested that this fortification system be classed as“proto-casemate”, because certain cross walls not only bond with theouter and inner wall faces, but extend into the town, forming the wallsof rooms adjacent to the casemate system (Clark 1994:147, n. 2). Thissame style of construction was used at Tall Jawa in Iron II (in Building204), suggesting that this was a common Ammonite feature intended tostrengthen the wall system.

In northern Moab, 30 km south of Tall Jawa, the outer casematewall (W2001) at Khirbat al-Mudayna (on Wadi ath-Thamad) is 2.00–2.25 m thick and consists of 3 rows of limestone boulders with oneflattened edge used for the wall face (Chadwick, Daviau and Steiner2000:267). Similar construction is visible at ground level at Khirbat al-

13 For details concerning wall construction, especially the use of offset-inset on thefaçade of the outer casemate wall, see Chapter 5, above.

14 A good example of carefully constructed, dry laid boulder-and-chink walls withlarger stones in header-and-stretcher formation at the corners is seen at #Ara#ir on WadiMujib (Aurenche 1977: fig. 429).

15 Although Wall 3006=3018 was not sampled east of Field E, the wall line is visibleat ground level.

Hiri, a site with Ammonite style pottery located 4 km north of Khirbatal-Mudayna (Thamad),16 although the outer wall appears to be ca.3.00 m thick. At this site, the integration of the casemate rooms withadjoining structures appears to be the norm. This is in contrast to theroom arrangement at Tall Jawa, where doorways from the casematerooms opened only into Buildings 200 and B113.

House ConstructionHouse walls typically contain 90% limestone boulders and 10% chert,although several walls consist of nearly 100% limestone (e.g. C27:43,45, 49). Such field stones, classed as small, medium, large and verylarge boulders, range in size from 0.25–0.50 m to 0.75–1.00+m, andare found in both exterior and interior walls. On occasion, stonesgreater than 1.00 m in length were incorporated into these walls, tyingthe smaller stones together. The largest single stone, located in B800, ismore than 4.00 m in length (W8011).

The Iron Age buildings at Tall Jawa appear to have been constructedwith stone walls on the ground floor that were in the range of 0.50–0.90 m thick, and with stone or mud-brick walls on the upper storey.Stone construction appears at many other sites in Transjordan, such as#Amman (Humbert and Zayadine 1992: Foldout A), Sa .hab (Ibrahim1974: pl. XX.1), Khirbat al-Mudayna al-#Aliya (Routledge 2000:49)and at Balu# (Worschech 1989: figs. 7a, 7b).17 The lower storey wallsof the houses at Tell el-Far#ah (N) were also stone built, but here theywere one row thick and measured only 0.35–0.45 m, comparable tobuildings in the early phase of Stratum I at Tell en-Na.sbeh (McCown1947: fig. 43). Even though the house walls at Tell el-Far#ah(N) werepreserved to ceiling height (Chambon 1984:28), they could not supportan upper storey. Stone walls one and two rows thick were also com-mon at Jerusalem during the late Iron Age, where two storey houseswere the norm on the southeastern slope of the city (Shiloh 1984:18;

16 This Wadi ath-Thamad Regional Survey Site #17 (Palestine Grid 234.8N/114.8E; JADIS # 2311.009) was documented by J. A. Darman, survey director duringthe 1996 season. Daviau read the pottery and noticed the similarities with Ammonitematerial from Tall Jawa and Jalul; this ceramic corpus is very different in form andfabric from the contemporary pottery recovered at Khirbat al-Mudayna, on the southbank of the Wadi ath-Thamad (Daviau 1997a:226–227).

17 Stone architecture may also be the norm at Khirbat al-Mudayna (Thamad),although the only structure excavated inside the town with walls standing to the secondstorey is an industrial building (Daviau and Dion 2002).

Figure 10.1. Boulder-and-chink wall with doorway; previouslypublished (Daviau 1999: fig. 5.1), reprinted with permission.

pl. 28:1). While houses with second storey walls of stone may be rare inCisjordan, they do appear in heavily fortified sites, such as .Horbat RoshZayit (Gal and Alexandre 2000: figs. II.4, II.12), where the walls of cer-tain rooms were founded on bedrock and the rooms themselves servedas basement storerooms (Gal and Alexandre 2000:21; figs. II.18–20).

Within a single building, it was common for the interior boulder-and-chink walls to abut the exterior wall rather than bonding with it.At the corners, however, the exterior walls of structures were not onlybonded, but in some cases, were tied together with diagonal stones.This feature was seen most clearly in Building 910, Room 908 wherethe diagonal stones were positioned at and below floor level. This typeof construction technique was also seen in contemporary late Iron Agebuildings at Balu# (Worschech 1995:147; fig. 4).

Boulders incorporated into special features within domestic build-ings, such as Walls 8019 and W8020 supporting Staircase 43 in Build-ing 800, appear semi-hewn and smooth, with no rough edges. Nonoticeable tool marks were observed suggesting that many of thesestones were chosen because of their regular shape and suitability forwall construction (Wright 1985:340–41), while others were probablytrimmed and smoothed. These stones range in size from small (0.25–0.50 m) to large boulders (0.75–1.00 m). Medium and large boulders,carefully dressed but not quite ashlar, were used to reinforce doorwayframes (Fig. 10.1; for example, into Room 213 in Building 200) and theends of walls at the point where they separate rooms from one another(W3011 in B300; W8016 in B800).18 As a general principle, large semi-dressed boulders were used at Tell el-Far#ah (N) at the end of stub walls(Chambon 1984:29) that formed one frame of a doorway. Good paral-

18 Illustrations from Daviau 1999 are republished here with permission.

lels for this type of doorway construction can be seen in the UnfinishedBuilding 411 (Level VIIc=9th century B.C.; Chambon 1993:440), andon the plan of Stratum VA–B in Area C at Tell Qiri (Ben-Tor andPortugali 1987: plan 42).19 Doorways at Busayra, standing more than1.00 m high, also have carefully trimmed stones forming the doorframe(Bienkowski 2002: pls. 4.39, 72).

Pillared Walls (Figs. 8.8; 10.2–3)

A variety of styles of pillared walls were employed in the Iron Agebuildings at Tall Jawa. First among these is a wall (W8015) constructedwith monolithic pillars, which were connected by low partition walls.These pillars served as roof supports and stood on average 1.60–1.75m in height (C17:13) above floor level.20 We can only assume thatthese pillars were also linked by large lintels so that the ceilings were1.80–1.90 m above the floor, comparable to the style of stacked-boulderpillars in Building 102. Evidence for smaller drums at the top of eachpillar that would have supported the ceiling beams was not identifiedat Tall Jawa, although such drums were recovered at Tell en-Na.sbeh inRoom 640 (Zorn 1993b:582). The monolithic pillars in Building 800were linked to one another with stone slabs and boulders set on theirlong sides to form low (ca. 0.50 m) walls of masonry.21

Tall monolithic pillars used as ceiling supports and room dividers isa feature that was widespread in Palestinian architecture, especially inthe four-room style house. Classic examples of such pillars are locatedat #Ai, Tell en-Na.sbeh, Khirbet ed-Dawwara, and in the house of"A .hilud at Khirbat Raddana (Callaway 1983:44–45). At #Ai and Rad-dana, the houses include three types of wall construction; monolithicpillars, stacked-boulder pillars, and boulder-and-chink walls. Callaway(1970:14; fig. 5; 1993:1253) noted that both the stone pillars and thestacked boulders were linked with screen walls made of field stones.

19 It is very unfortunate that there is no verbal description of the wall constructiontechniques employed at Tell Qiri (Ben-Tor and Portugali 1987: 107).

20 At Tell en-Na.sbeh, monolithic pillars stand 1.70 m tall (Zorn 1993b:548).21 The low cobblestone connecting walls between the standing monolithic pillars

at Khirbet ed-Dawwara (Finkelstein 1993:333) and in Building 3 at Tell en-Na.sbehappear to fill the space between the pillars (McCown 1945: fig. 8; 1947:209; fig. 51).Zorn (1993b:507, 548) mentions several rooms with this style of screen walls betweenmonolithic pillars; for example, Rooms 366, 369, 376. While this style of wall construc-tion is preserved in Wall 3005 in Building 300, it is in contrast to the connecting unitsin Building 800 that are only about half as thick as the pillars.

Figure 10.2. Stacked boulder W3005; previously published(Daviau 1999: fig. 5.3c), reprinted with permission.

At Raddana (Callaway 1983:46–47), the pillars stand only 1.30 m inheight and require capstones to link them together and provide addi-tional height (Daviau 1999:118, n. 13). These pillars seem to be compa-rable in proportion to those at Tell Beit Mirsim (Albright 1943: pl. 44:a-c), and to the “low monolithic pillars” at Tell en-Na.sbeh (McCown1947: pl. 77:5).22

A second type of wall construction consists of stone pillars madeout of two or more large rectangular boulders, stacked one above theother23 and joined together by thinner screen walls or connecting unitsformed of small boulders. These pillars stand to a height of ca. 1.25m (C17:7, 33, 35=Wall 8012; A15:37, 38, 39=Wall 1022), and arepositioned at a distance of 0.50–0.75 m apart. Two types of connectingwalls were in use, either low boulder-and-chink partition walls (i.e.E65:21 in W3005), or cobblestone wall units which stand to the sameheight as the pillars themselves. In most cases, the pillars in such wallswere then capped by large rectangular boulders, laid horizontally tolink the pillars (W8012) and to raise the height of the wall to a totalof 1.75–1.80 m.24 In those cases (W8015 of Room 803) where the

22 Zorn (1993b:475) describes five monolithic pillars in Room 341a+b that measureonly 1.00 m above the floor surface.

23 Stacked drum pillars in place of monolithic pillars were used in Room 361b atTell el-Na.sbeh (Zorn 1993b:479).

24 Two pillars (7K71:14, 15) in Room 8 at Tell al-#Umayri were founded in FP 4Band reused in FP 4A. Lawlor (1991:21; fig. 3.6) describes these pillars as “monolithic”,although Pillar 15 appears to consist of two stacked boulders. In the later phase,

Figure 10.3. Stacked boulder and pillar W3027; previouslypublished (Daviau 1999: fig. 5.3b), reprinted with permission.

connecting units were low walls that braced the base of the pillars,windows were created between two interior rooms. An example of awall with connecting units standing full height is Wall 8012+8014; thiswall is formed of semi-hewn boulders (ca. 0.40–0.70 m) stacked to formpillars (C17:56) set at intervals along the length of the wall. Thick stoneslabs were used as capstones or linking stones, forming an additionalcourse at the top of the pillars (W8012). This technique is also seenat Khirbat al-Mudayna al-#Aliya (Routledge 2000: figs. 10, 18), wherelong slabs served as capstones, not just as lintels (personal observation).

The thickness of the standing pillars was ca. 0.70 m on average, withboulder-and-chink connecting walls measuring only about 0.30–0.40 mthick. In Building 800, this pattern resulted in the formation of a seriesof niches between the pillars, for example along the east wall (W8012)of Room 802. The ability of such a wall to support an upper storeyis strengthened in the case of Room 802 by its continuation to thesouth as a solid wall (W8014). The most complex walls are those thatcombine monolithic pillars, stacked pillars, and cobblestone connectingwalls, such as W3027 in B300 and W8026. Wall 3027 is an interiorwall in Building 300 that remains standing 1.80 m high and is at least

the pillars were attached to partition walls, one stone thick (0.30–0.40 m), that forma bin (Lawlor 1991:24). No evidence was reported concerning the type of ceilingsupport capping these “pillars” which stood to ca. 0.35 m. Stacked boulder pillars withcapstones in place are seen at Tell en-Na.sbeh in Room 390 (McCown 1947:209; fig. 51;pl. 77:2).

0.60 m thick.25 Two walls in Building 300 (W3005, W3035+W3037)were constructed of round boulders which were stacked one uponanother, supported by chink stones, and connected with low cobble-stone or mud-brick units that are the same thickness as the pillars.Since there was no evidence for the capping stones connecting thesestacked boulders, these may have been low partition walls. At Shiloh,short pillars made of stone drums stacked one on top of the other wereinterpreted by the excavators as pillar bases for wooden pillars thatsupported the ceiling (Finkelstein, Bunimovitz and Lederman 1993:fig. 2.18).

A variant of the stacked-boulder wall is seen in the wall constructionin Building 102, where the pillars standing full height on the groundfloor were linked at the top by flat-topped stones in a rough corbelformation, which in turn formed the foundation for an upper storeyrow of shorter pillars. It is here that one limestone pillar (A15:14)measuring only 0.70 m in height was recovered above W1022; inthis case, we can only assume that this pillar was supported by theflat-topped stones which themselves formed the lower courses of thewall above floor level (Chapter 6, above). This type of constructioncould support either stone or wooden pillars. If this were the case,these walls could have functioned as a stylobate or as pillar bases,although such bases usually appear individually, along the same axis(Reich 1992:9–10). The final type of wall construction is precisely theuse of wooden columns positioned on stone pillar bases which wereembedded in the floor (R907). In this case, the northernmost pillar inthe row of three bases was located right up against the north wall ofthe room, while the southern pillar was beside the south wall. Onlythe central pillar base was free-standing, approximately in the middleof the room. Albright (1943:51) also recognized a great variety of wallconstruction techniques at Tell Beit Mirsim and at Bethel (Albright andKelso 1968: pls 22:2; 23:1); he notes that there was great variation

25 At Balu#, Worschech (1989: figs. 7a, 7b) identified a blocked doorway consistingof two standing pillars and a fieldstone fill. At Tall Jawa, it was rare (W8022) to havea pillar forming both sides of a doorway, even when one entire wall consisted of arow of pillars (W8015). In this case, however, there were two doorways, one formed bytwo flanking pillars (the only example of this construction technique), and the secondconsisting of a pillar that forms one doorframe, while the other frame is the faceof a perpendicular wall. What Worschech has illustrated at Balu# appears to be twopillars with a connecting unit standing full height, although it is difficult to distinguisha blocked doorway without full plans of the buildings.

on this construction “theme”. There is also abundant evidence for thistheme at Tell en-Na.sbeh, where Room 376 has two boulder-and-chinkwalls, one wall constructed of one row of large stones in a headerpattern, and one wall with six monolithic pillars and low connectingwalls (“sections of masonry”; Zorn 1993b:548).

Wall ThicknessThe boulder-and-chink outer walls of Building 800 in C-east and B700in Field D measure ca. 0.80–1.00 m thick and remain standing to aheight of ca. 2.50–3.00+m. Since this appears to have been the latestIron Age building on the site, one might expect earlier buildings tohave employed different construction techniques, and this is indeed thecase. Although the boulders in the outer walls of Building 200 (FieldB) and B300 (Field E) show the same range of sizes (0.50–1.00 m), thewalls themselves are only in the range of 0.50–0.80 m thick. In somecases, the walls of contemporary sites remain standing ca. 0.60–1.00 m(Albright 1943: pls. 3, 6), or as much as 1.30 m in height (Yadin 1960:pl. 203), suggesting that they were more than mere foundations for amud brick superstructure.

The degree of standardization clearly indicates that the intention ofthe ancient builders was to construct walls that could support a sec-ond storey (Daviau 1993a:211–213). Comparable walls in the rangeof 0.80–1.00 m were constructed at Tell el-Far#ah (N) (de Vaux 1951:413) in Level VIId (9th–8th cent. B.C.). Tell el-Far#ah (N) is a partic-ularly apt comparison, because here too the stone walls appear to bemore than foundations for mud brick superstructure. In several cases,these house walls are standing ca. 0.78–.84 m above floor level (de Vaux1951, plan of Niveau 2), a degree of preservation that strongly suggeststhat the entire lower storey walls were built of stone as at Tall Jawa.While this may reflect a common architectural tradition, it may alsohave been influenced by the geographical location of these sites and theavailable building materials. Such construction techniques are in con-trast to those employed in the single storey structures at Tell Qiri wherethe choice was to build walls only 0.60–0.65 m thick (Ben-Tor andPortugali 1987: 134) and in the “poorer” houses at Tell el-Far#ah (N),where one-row thick walls measured ca. 0.40 m thick (de Vaux 1951,plan of Niveau 2).

Table 10A. Thickness of Walls in Tall Jawa Structures in centimeters

Type of Wall 50 60 70 80 90 100 150 200+

Outer Casemate Face ×Inner Casemate Face ×Retaining Wall ×Boulder-and-Chinkexterior × ×interior ×one-row walls ×Stacked Pillar ×Standing Pillars ×Flat-topped Boulders ×Boulder and cobblestone × ×Staircase support walls × ×

From this tabulation, it appears that the exterior walls of domestic andpublic structures at Tall Jawa were usually in the range of 0.80–1.00 m.Interior walls in boulder-and-chink construction were between 0.70–1.00 m thick, whereas stacked pillars, standing pillars, and boulderswith cobblestone units were all in the range of 0.60–0.70 m, exceptfor a small number of one-row boulder-and-chink walls (R810). For themost part, 0.70 m thick walls were standard for exterior walls at sitessuch as Hazor and Tell Beit Mirsim in the Late Bronze Age (Daviau1993a: Table 3.60, 3.62). This means that building techniques at TallJawa during a somewhat later period represent a slightly differentbuilding tradition, making use of walls that are noticeably thicker thanat other sites.

Surfacing Material

At Tall Jawa, there was very little evidence for mud mortar,26 althoughthere is evidence for its use in Wall 3000, where the south face wasexposed in Rooms 312 and R313 (Fig. 5.15). There is more evidencefor the use of lime plaster at several points along the fortification wallsand the towers to protect the outer surface of the wall against theweather. The vulnerability of dry laid stone walls to the action of windand water can be seen in the disruption that occurs on archaeolog-ical sites between excavation seasons. Steps to control water damage

26 Winnett (1964: 14) assumed that the mud mortar used in the boulder-and-chinkmasonry at Dhıbân had completely disappeared over time and had not remained inthe archaeological record.

were taken by the ancient builders who sealed the exterior face of for-tification walls and flanking towers with lime plaster (B16:2, B26:5,C71:2, 10; and C53:3) which continued below surface level.27 Plasterwas also used on the outer face of certain building walls (e.g. B102).The thickness of the plaster is in the range of 3.0–8.0 cm thick, cov-ering the outer surfaces of the boulders themselves and filling in thegaps between the boulders and the chink stones (for chemical content,see Hancock, Chapter 11).28 Extensive use of mud plaster on stone wallsurfaces is preserved at Busayra (Bienkowski 2002: pls. 4.25, 26, 44, 67),where it extends below surface level to cover the foundations.

Building Plans and Room Arrangement

Room Size and Roofed Space

The use of major load-bearing walls that measure 0.70–1.00 m thickpoints to a tradition of two-storey construction at Tall Jawa for whichthere was abundant evidence in the architectural record.29 At the sametime, the roofed space and the presence of upper storey rooms severelyreduces the amount of light and air that can circulate in a buildingas large as B700 with its 11 rooms on the ground floor alone. It is herethat the use of monolithic stone pillars, wooden columns on pillar bases,and stacked-boulder pillars serve an important function in facilitatingair circulation and illumination. So too, the staircases may have had asecondary purpose as light wells. While lamps in the lower storey roomsalso support the evidence for roofed space, the ground floor rooms werefilled with a variety of activity areas and their associated tools; thesewere not merely basement storerooms.

The size of roofed spaces varies depending on the design of thebuilding, the intended number of stories, the length of available woodenbeams, and the status of the structure. Portugali (1987: 133) suggeststhat the normal span for public and private buildings alike at TellQiri is 2.20 m, while Wright (1985:460) judged the normal span to beabout 4.00 m. At Tall Jawa, the range of room width varies from 1.50–4.85 m, with the averages falling in the range of 2.32–3.03 m, while

27 The plaster, in each case, has its own locus number; see detailed descriptions inprevious chapters.

28 The same use of heavy surface plaster is recorded at Lehun (Homès-Fredericq1992:194; figs. 16.6, 16.7).

29 See discussion of individual rooms above, Chapters 6–9.

rooms in the “Ammonite Citadel” at Tall al-#Umayri range in widthfrom 2.50–4.00 m (Lawlor 1991:20). Such architectural plans suggestthat the available building materials were able to span such widths andsupport the ceiling or roof without additional support.30

The difference in room width may have more to do with a building’sfunction and/or importance rather than a necessity of construction. AtTell el-Far#ah, the Level VIIb=Niveau III houses constructed of one-row stone walls have interior spaces of 2.00 m on average except forone larger room (410, 436, 440) that measure ca. 3.00–3.50 m (de Vaux1955: pl. VI), while the “Unfinished Building” of Level VIIc has severalrooms that measure 3.00–3.50 m (409, 410 411), and were most likelyroofed (de Vaux 1955: pl. VII). The same can be said for the 3.80 mwide central room (214) of the corner Tower (Area B) at Tel Jezreel(Ussishkin and Woodhead 1993: fig. 33).

Room Arrangement

The room arrangement in the Iron Age buildings at Tall Jawa variesfrom one building to another. And these structures have very little incommon with the layout of contemporary buildings at neighbouringsites. Although it is clear that similar construction techniques were usedthroughout ancient Ammon, no typical “Ammonite” style house hasbeen identified. Even the traffic pattern varies from one building toanother; in Building 300 the doorways are located at the end of a wallin the corner, or in the middle of two short walls, or at the two ends of apartition wall, while in Building 800, the doorways are almost always atthe end of a wall in the corner, but that is not the case in Building 905.For want of preservation, the traffic patterns for upper storey roomsare unknown, although one might suppose that a pattern similar to thelower storey was adopted.31

30 A very different building tradition appeared at Tel Halif where the interior spacebetween walls and standing pillars was 1.5 m (Jacobs 1993: 88, 230), although thebeams may also have spanned an adjoining room as well. The length of beams availablefor use in the olive presses at Tel Batash is estimated at 5.50 m in length (Kelm andMazar 1987:123), more than adequate for spanning rooms in the range of 4.50–5.00 mwide.

31 The average width of doorways at Tall Jawa is in the range of 0.745–0.960 m,with a limited number of wider doorways in Buildings 102 (1.22 m) and Gate Building910 (1.18 m). These sizes strongly support our understanding of the Tall Jawa buildingsas two storey structures, in sharp contrast to Busayra, where doorways are 1.50–2.50 mwide (Bienkowski 2002:72–73).

StaircasesThe most interesting feature is the well-preserved staircases in Building700 and B800.32 In all three cases, the staircases were “free-standing”,in that they were independent from the outer wall of the building.Instead, the two staircases in Building 800 were perpendicular to theexterior east and west walls, although they both extended up to thewall at the point where there was probably a landing. In Building 700,Staircase D23:43 was only linked to the outer wall by a lintel spanninga doorway. Flanking the steps on either side were parallel walls, builtof large and extra large (1.00+m) boulders, which remain standing1.50–1.75 m in height. Only one row of boulders was used to formeach wall. The steps were stretched between the walls and rested onbuilt-up debris that had been packed between the supporting walls.At the preserved top of the stairs, there was probably a landing; theonly remaining evidence for this hypothesis is a support wall (W8018)perpendicular to the south wall (W8019) of Staircase C27:43.

Stone staircases are an integral part of the architectural traditionof Syria and good parallels are found in Late Bronze Age houses atUgarit. For the most part, these staircases are keyed into the outer wall,rather than between two free-standing walls (Callot 1983:30; Photo 10,11). Another example of a staircase stretched between free-standingwalls has been observed in the Iron Age remains at Jerusalem, althoughthis appears to have been a stairway to an upper terrace rather thanto the upper floor of a house (Kenyon 1974: pls. 70, 74).33 At Tall al-#Umayri, a good example is the FP-4 staircase (30) which consists of sixsteps, each formed of three semi-hewn stones. Staircase 30 was ca. 1.00m wide and flanked on either side by support walls (7K61:15 and 21),each ca. 0.50 m thick (Lawlor 1991:20).

Ceiling Material and Roof Rollers

During six seasons of excavation, only minimal evidence for roofingmaterial appeared in the archaeological record at Tall Jawa. This maybe the result of the way in which the buildings went out of use and wereabandoned. Without a destructive fire, traditional, flat roofs made of awooden frame with branches and packed mud probably decomposed

32 For a detailed description of the staircases in Buildings 800 and B700, see Chapter8 above.

33 The existence of monolithic pillars dividing interior space (Kenyon 1974: pl. 70)in the “adjoining” house may suggest another interpretation.

and became part of the soil layers filling the buildings. Only with theheat of a fire would the roofing material become hardened to sucha degree that it could be recovered complete with impressions of thewood or reeds used to support the mud or beaten earth surface (Ben-Tor and Portugali 1987: Photo 61; Daviau 1991:103). Evidence thatsuch roofs were common at Tall Jawa is provided by the presence ofseven roof rollers.34 One roller was outside the casemate wall in Field E,fallen from the roof of Casemate Room 301, a second was in Room208, adjoining the wall system on the south (Field B), and a thirdhad fallen through the stairwell in Building 800 (Field C-west; note10 above). These tools were used to compress the earthen surface ofthe roof after each rain (Aurenche 1977: 156), and numerous exampleswere recovered at Ugarit and Hazor.

Roof Rollers

FunctionWatson (1979:119, 283) describes the process for constructing a tra-ditional mud-packed roof along with the function of the roof rolleras employed in the villages of Hasanabad and Ain Ali in Iran. Roofswere formed using a series of wooden beams set into the walls near thetop.35 These beams were covered in turn with reed mats, small crossbeams or branches and a layer of mud tempered with straw. A roofroller was used to pack this mud into a smooth surface. It was also usedafter heavy rains to consolidate the mud. People who did not have roofrollers walked all over their roofs, taking steps close together, to packdown the surface. Evidence from the archaeological record of Ugaritsuggests that a roof roller was present in almost every Late Bronze Agehouse (Yon 1992: 32).

CriteriaA roof roller is a cylindrical object made of stone, usually with ahemispherical depression in each end. When in use, the long, con-

34 The use of rollers in modern times to compact earthen roofs is seen at Raachine,Lebanon (Aurenche 1977: fig. 425).

35 Modern buildings in Jordan that are constructed in a traditional style have beamsplaced ca. 25–60 cm apart (personal observation at Sal.t, 1996; Khan Zaman in Petra,1998), although in some cases the beams are much closer together (Khammash1986:87, photo). See also a traditional house at Majdel Anjar, Lebanon (Aurenche1977: fig. 439), and the reconstruction of the Iron Age I house at Tall al-#Umayri (Herrand Clark 2001:43).

vex side is parallel to the surface of the roof. In present day Iran,rollers are on average 50.00 cm long and 20.00 cm in diameter with adepression in each end for a wooden handle (Watson 1979:283). Elliott(1991: fig. 11:6) illustrates an example of the handle in use with a con-temporary roof roller from Cyprus. The presence of handle depres-sions appear to be of secondary importance for Iron Age roof rollersalthough such depressions are seen in certain well preserved examples.

Two basic types of roof roller were present in the Iron Age strataat Tall Jawa. All rollers were of limestone and cylindrical in shapealthough several were quite irregular in diameter. Rollers varied fromone another in both length and diameter. Further classification distin-guished those rollers which had a depression in each end (Type A) andthose which did not (Type B), although it appears that broken rollerscontinued to be used.

Two fine examples of Type A rollers found in 1992 came fromStratum VIII. Roller TJ 381 had fallen from the casemate wall ontothe north side of the tell, while Roller TJ 814 was embedded in debrisin Room 207, adjacent to the Casemate Wall in Field B.

Type A. Roof Rollers with DepressionsAmong the finds from all seasons, three well preserved roof rollershave end depressions. Broken rollers, such as TJ 1552, could not beadequately classified.

Catalogue36

TJ 381 (Fig. 10.4:1; E56:5/10). Limestone. L 47.00, D 18.70–21.70cm. 1 depression, int D 4.00, int Dp 2.00 cm. Broken.

TJ 814 (Fig. 10.4:2; B44:11/22). Limestone. L 38.00, D 24.00 cm. 2depressions, int D 2.70, int Dp 1.50 cm. Complete.37

TJ 2046 (A84:4/20). Limestone. L 40.00, D 18.50–23.00 cm. 1 depres-sion, int D 4.75 cm. Broken.

36 Features are identified by their object registration number (TJ #), the figure# within the text, and by Field+Square:Locus #/Pottery Pail #. This is followedby material, technology, and measurements. The maximum dimensions in centime-ters are indicated for features that stand upright as H(eight), W(idth) or D(iameter),and T(hickness), while items which lie flat are described with their L(ength), W(idth)or D(iameter), T(hickness) and Wt (Weight). Features with depressions and perforatedobjects include the interior diameter (int D) and, where relevant, the depth of thedepression (int Dp).

37 This roller is in the collection of the #Amman National Museum.

Figure 10.4. 1) TJ 381, 2) TJ 814, 3) TJ 589.

Type B. Roof Rollers without DepressionsA total of three roof rollers without end depressions fall into TypeB. Since two of these rollers were in use in Stratum VII buildings,the difference in style may correspond to a difference in chronologicalperiod.38

Catalogue

TJ 229 (A24:6). Limestone. L 22.00, D 19.00–22.00 cm. Fragment.

TJ 589 (Fig. 10.4:3; C27:34/53). Limestone. L 67.00, D 20.40 cm.Complete.

TJ 1754 (C65:23/37). Limestone. L 41.50, D 21.00–24.00 cm.

ParallelsUgarit: Nine limestone roof rollers were catalogued from the 1978–1987excavations. Complete examples varied in length from 41.00–69.20 cmand in diameter form 14.00–26.00 cm. Depressions in the ends were

38 The classification of TJ 589 is somewhat tentative because the sides are notperfectly rounded. This stone could have seen little use or have been an architecturalelement, such as a lintel, that fell from the upper storey. At the same time, lintels foundin situ in Building 700 were twice the size.

5.00–7.40 cm in diameter and reached a maximum depth of 9.30 cm.As at Tall Jawa, several were broken (Elliott 1991:34; Yon et al. 1987:86;fig. 65).Hazor: Roof rollers in a variety of sizes with socket depressions in oneor both ends were recovered from domestic and public structures inIron Age levels. One limestone roof roller from Stratum VI (Area A)measures only 25.00 cm in length and 22.0 cm in diameter (Yadin etal. 1961: pl. CLXXXVIII:10); Yadin does not indicate whether or notthis object was broken, although it is possible that broken rollers contin-ued to be used. Other Iron Age rollers are visible in field photographsbut were not discussed elsewhere (Yadin 1958: pl. VII:1; Yadin 1960:pls. IX:4, X:4, XX:1, XXXII:2). A comparable but larger example inbasalt (L 50.00, D 18.70 cm) from Area H, Stratum XIII (1A; Yadin etal 1961: pl. CCLXXXV:6=CCCXXXIII:15) dates to the Late BronzeAge.Tell el- #Oreme: One complete roof roller at Tell el-#Oreme, made oflocal stone (basalt), had socket depressions in both ends (Fritz 1990:pl. 109:10).Megiddo: A limestone roof roller from Stratum IV and a basalt rollerfrom Stratum III (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pl. 114:9, 10) were onlytwo of several recovered during excavation.Tel Michal: Two complete rollers (Singer-Avitz 1990: figs. 31.4–5), eachwith socket depressions on both ends date respectively to the Iron Ageand the Persian Period. The smaller roller measures 31.50 cm while thelarger is 55.00 cm in length. The same range was seen at Tall Jawa.Tell en-Na.sbeh: Two rollers, different in size, are shown with othergroundstone tools (McCown 1947: pl. 91:1).Tel Batash: Rollers used to crush olives in stone basins (Kelm and Mazar1987:122) were either re-used roof rollers or were similar in size andshape if not in function.39

Khirbet er-Ras: Visible in the plan of a four-room house is a roof rollerwith an end depression. The roller was apparently in the debris falleninto the broad room at the back (Gibson and Edelstein 1985: pl. XA).Tell Beit Mirsim: The rollers described by Albright (1943: 51–52) appearto be in the same size range, measuring 40.00–68.00 cm in length and13.17–18.22 cm in diameter. Almost every house had its own roller.

39 In the Georgica, Virgil (1986: I, lines 178–179) mentions rollers used to levelthreshing floors.

Sa.hab: One roof roller, called a levelling stone, blocked a doorway(Ibrahim 1975: 71, fig. 2; 72, pl. XXV, 2). It appears to be about 50cm in length.Busayra: One roller (1235), described among the small finds, measures36.0 cm in length, 18.0 cm in diameter. One end of this roller is brokenoff; the preserved end has a 6.0 cm deep depression (Sedman 2002:380;pl. 10.152).Tawilan: Rollers with and without depressions were among the stoneimplements (Bennett and Bienkowski 1995: figs. 4.52, 9.43).

Architectural Features

Although it seems unreasonable to include large stone artefacts andinstallations among small finds, it is difficult to locate the divisionbetween small ground stone tools and the larger items of equipmentwith which they were used. In our study, built-in features which wereintegral to the architecture of the buildings at Tall Jawa were assignedinstallation locus numbers; these features include socket stones, thresh-olds, lintels, pillar bases, large stone basins and troughs and bouldermortars. On the other hand, roof rollers and small, portable stonetroughs were assigned an object number and included in the objectdatabase (Daviau 2002). However, all of these features are discussed inthis chapter in relation to the architecture.

Installations such as socket stones, pillar bases for wooden supportpoles, and lintels are often shown in photos or on top plans, but arerarely described in detail. While their function may be obvious inmost cases, there are certain installations whose function is less certain,because they may serve more than one function and are not directlyrelated to the architecture. These installations include boulder mortars,stone troughs and basins recovered in the buildings described aboveand at various places on the site.40

Socket Stones

FunctionDuring the Iron Age, doors were swung from a wooden pivot polewhich was greater in height than the door opening. Based on ethno-

40 Unfortunately, not all installations identified at Tall Jawa can be fully reportedhere, due in part to the removal of certain useful items by the local people.

graphic analogy derived from a study of mudbrick houses, it is probablethat the upper end was fitted into a loop or a forked stick to hold it inposition. This method of hanging a door dates back to Jarmo duringthe 7th millennium and is still used in rural Iran (Watson 1979:122).The stone construction at Tall Jawa offered other alternatives for secur-ing the upper end of the pivot beam, either between upper storey wallstones or between these stones and the lintel. In traditional houses,the lower end of the pivot pole stands in a hollow of wood or stoneimplanted in the floor (Singer et al. 1954:193) While limestone socketstones were found in several buildings at Tall Jawa, the evidence forthe upper socket or other means of securing the end of the pivot beamwere not recognized in the archaeological record.

Criteria and FunctionA door socket is an object made of stone, or possibly of wood with ametal fitting,41 that is of sufficient size and weight to support a pivotbeam. The socket is necessary to keep the pivot and the door in anupright position and prevent excessive wear caused by rotation of thelower end of the pivot pole and of the door itself. Usually, a depressionwas made on the upper side of a boulder to receive the pivot; thisdepression gradually increased in size due to the continuous rotatingmotion of the pole as the door was opened and closed.

Twenty-four door sockets42 were assigned to Iron Age II occupationlevels, although certain of these stones were found in surface loci aboveIron Age collapse, and may have come from Stratum III re-occupation(Umayyad period). Two types can be distinguished; A) an irregularlyshaped stone with a depression on its upper face, such as E76:19, andB) sockets formed from a boulder with both the depression and theouter surfaces somewhat finished. Only a handful of the best examplesare discussed here.

Catalogue

TJ 301 (Fig. 10.5:1; C17:0.5/23). Limestone. H 9.80, W 17.60 cm; singledepression, int D 10.00–11.00, int Dp 3.35 cm; Wt 4.500 kg. Complete.

41 Watson (1979: 122) notes that the door sockets in Hasanabad were made of woodor mud.

42 Twenty sockets were registered as objects; four additional sockets were assignedlocus numbers (A84:12; C74:20, C76:18, E76:19).

Figure 10.5. 1) TJ 301, 2) TJ 960, 3) TJ 1480.

TJ 960 (Fig. 10.5:2; E44:4/49). Limestone. H. 10.50, W. 19.00 cm; singledepression, int D 10.50, int Dp 6.00 cm; Wt 6.000+kg. Complete

TJ 1480 (Fig. 10.5:3); C65:17/29). Limestone. H 6.10, L 22.8, W 18.20cm; two depressions, int D 4.70, int Dp 0.085, D 3.70, int Dp 0.075 cm;Wt 4.140 kg. Chipped.

TJ 1542 (A93:7). Limestone. H 24.5, W 40.00 cm; single depression,int D 8.50, int Dp 5.90 cm; Wt 6.000+ kg. Broken.

TJ 1683 (A93:29/88). Limestone. H 9.4, L 23.6, W 19.9 cm; singledepression, int D 5.75, int Dp 1.80 cm; Wt 5.300 kg. Complete.

E76:19 Limestone. H 23.0, L 60.0, W. 50.0 cm; single depression, D10.00, int Dp 5.00 cm. Complete.

For the most part, socket stones have one depression on the upperface, although certain objects with a depression on upper and lowerfaces are also classified as sockets (TJ 1480). These objects may actuallyhave been weights whose central depression was unfinished. The largestsocket stone (57.00 ×80.00 cm) is Locus A84:12, built into Wall 8024in Building 800; its size suggests that it was originally used in the gate(B910) and reused in the construction of Building 800. This structureyielded the largest number of socket stones, several of which may havebeen in use on the upper storey. One of the smaller basalt socketsmeasures approximately 15.00 cm in diameter.

Parallels43

Ugarit: A socket stone, ca. 10.00 cm in diameter, was in situ in Doorway1057 in House A (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 14). A good example of a granitesocket is from House E (Yon et al. 1987: fig. 74).Tell el-‘ Oreme: What appears to be a basalt socket stone is describedmerely as a stone (Fritz 1990: pl. 109:7). Without a top view, theidentification of this object remains tentative.Megiddo: Several examples from Stratum II (Lamon and Shipton 1939:fig. 91) demonstrate the variously shaped stones chosen for use assockets. For the most part, these sockets appear only in public buildings(Lamon and Shipton 1939: fig. 89).Khirbet er-Ras: Visible in the plan of a four-room house is a socket stoneadjacent to a doorway (Gibson and Edelstein 1985: pl. XA).Tell en-Na.sbeh: Socket A84:12 has a good parallel in the socket stonefrom the gate at Tell en-Na.sbeh (McCown 1947: pl. 72:4).

Thresholds

The design of thresholds varied somewhat from Stratum-VIII buildingsto those in Stratum VII. For example, Doorway A between Rooms 303and 305 in Building 300 consists of a row of cobblestones forming ahalf oval shape and extending the full width of the entrance, whilethe threshold in Doorway E, leading from Room 802 into Hall 804in Building 800, was made of a large, flat-topped stone. In fact, the bestexamples of thresholds are found in the Field C buildings (B800, B900,B910), where one or more stones serve as a reinforcement, forming adoorsill that fills the space between the doorframes. Two superimposedstones serve as the threshold from Corridor 810 into Room 809, onestone marks the exit from Room 807 into Hall 804, and a single largestone leads from Corridor 903 into Passageway 918 in Building 900. Inother doorways, two or more stones were installed between the framesto serve as the doorsill.

It is interesting that Albright noticed the same development at TellBeit Mirsim where few stone thresholds were identified in the “ordi-nary” houses. This observation led Albright (1943:52) to suggest thatdoors were also lacking, although these could have been hung in such

43 Installations such as socket stones, pillar bases, and even roof rollers are rarelystudied for their own sake and even illustrations are rare; examples of such features doappear in published reports in site photographs, even when they are not entered intothe locus or artefact registration system, and can be used for comparison.

a way that they did not require a stone threshold, or a wooden door-sill could have been used. However, in a second house located in thenorthwest sector, Albright reported that there were five stone thresh-olds.

Lintels

Lintels were formed of one or more limestone boulders in one of twostyles, either a single large boulder, or a group of stones in a corbel stylethat linked two pillars and raised the height of the roof. In Building700, there were three lintels preserved in situ. These lintels were eacha single very large boulder that was bonded into the outer wall of thebuilding at one end, and supported by a wall at the other end. In thecase of Room 716, the two lintels (Doorways A, E) extended from theouter wall to a wall running in the same direction as the lintel, whereasthe lintel in Doorway D (between R712 and R718) connected to aperpendicular wall.

Catalogue

D12:34. Limestone; L 1.55, W 0.70, T 0.45 m.

D13:13. Limestone; L 1.45, W 0.50, T 0.40 m.

D23:41. Limestone; L 1.13, W 0.62, T 0.33 m.

Parallels to these lintels, although varying in material due to locallyavailable stone,

Pillar Bases

Criteria and FunctionDetailed studies of pillar bases do not usually appear in publishedreports.44 These stones, usually disc-shaped, served as supports forwooden posts that in turn support ceiling beams. Their size dependson the diameter of the post but can be distinguished from workingsurfaces/anvils by their lack of wear, their position in the architecturalspace, and their relationship to the floor surface. Only three bases could

44 A good example of the illustration of pillar bases at Tel Batash is accompanied bya discussion of one base surrounded by chink stones (Mazar 1997: Photos 28, 33). Inthis case, the function of this installation is somewhat in doubt, although the excavator’ssuggestion (1997:44) that this stone served as a work surface is mitigated by the fact thatthe tops of the chink stones rise above the level of the base stone.

be identified with certainty; for their position in Room 907, see the dis-cussion of Building 905, above (Chapter 9).

Catalogue

C65:29. Limestone; surrounded by chinkstones (C65:33); D 04=.45–0.50, H 0.24 m; embedded in Surface C65:28.

C65:30. Limestone; surrounded by chinkstones (C65:34), D 0.45–0.55,H 0.24 m; embedded in Surface C65:28.

C65:32. Limestone; D 0.33–0.37, H ca. 0.20 m; embedded in SurfaceC65:28.

Benches/Shelves

The distinction between benches and shelves in the archaeologicalrecord is difficult to determine. Generally speaking, a bench requiressufficient space for a person to sit (ca. 30.00 cm deep) and a heightof approximately 30.00–40 cm. Features that are wider than 30.00cm or lower than 30 cm may have been used as shelves. Artefactdistribution can help to distinguish these features from one another,although that is not always determinative, since the same feature maybe multifunctional.

Two styles of bench were present in the buildings at Tall Jawa, stone-built benches formed of cobble size stones, and individual stone slabs.Four examples occur in Building 300 and one bench is located inBuilding 900. Bench E54:24 was located along the east face of Wall3001 in Room 302. This bench is well built, consisting of two rows ofstones, two courses in height. Perpendicular to Bench E54:24 is a singlestone slab (E54:23) set against the south face of Inner Casemate Wall3000. Another example of stone slabs used as a bench was uncoveredin Room 305 In this case, the stones (E53:26) appear to have beenstacked, one above the other, but were out of place when found. Theonly other evidence for a bench in Building 300 is a single row of stones(E65:51) running along the east face of Wall 3011 in Room 326. Thenarrow size of this “bench” puts its function in doubt although it isprobably too narrow to serve as a shelf.

The same can be said for a single row of cobble size stones (C54:32)along the east face of Wall 9005. This is the only clear example of abench in a food preparation area within the Stratum VII buildings,although the archaeological record is incomplete due to the limits onexcavation in Buildings 905 and B700.

Figure 10.6. Limestone Trough C27:27 in Room 805.

Domestic and Industrial Installations

Stone Troughs

Stone troughs were used in a variety of domestic and industrial activ-ities, not all of which are understood from the evidence remaining inthe archaeological record. Small stone troughs in a variety of shapesand sizes were recovered in domestic buildings in association with mor-tars, pestles, and other food processing tools (Daviau 2002:160–161).The large troughs are less well understood; such limited knowledge hasled to the great debate over the identification of pillared buildings asstables or storehouses, based primarily on the function of troughs (iden-tified as mangers) located between the pillars (Holladay 1986; Davies1988). Two large troughs, one in Building 800 and the second in Build-ing 700 were distinctive due to their size and weight. In addition, therewere two shallow basins (B44:4 and B53:11) built into the casematewall (W2007) in secondary use.

Catalogue

TJ C27:27 (Fig. 10.6). Limestone; with drain hole; L 1.00, W 0.75, H0.45, int Dp 0.35 m.

Trough C27:27 was cut from a large boulder; the trough has roundedcorners but a generally rectangular shape on the inside. A drain hole,cut from the interior, is located in one corner, 4.00 cm above the base.

Figure 10.7. Limestone trough from Room 715 in Building 700.

The fact that the trough is located in the corner of Room 205, withthe drain pointing in the direction of the corner formed by two walls,is somewhat perplexing. Clearly, the liquid in the trough would havedrained into the masonry.

TJ D32:50 (Fig. 10.9:2). Limestone; L 0.62, W 0.48–0.50, H 0.40,int Dp 0.20–0.25 m; rim 0.09–0.11 m thick.

Trough D32:50 (Fig. 10.7) was finely made of hard limestone, withupright sides carefully smoothed. This trough is taller and the depres-sion is deeper than Trough C27:27. It was certainly designed as a con-tainer that could hold dry goods or liquids, since there was no drainhole. At the same time, it is too low to serve as a manger, which Hol-laday (1986:117) postulates should be 1.07 m above the floor. In bothcases, these troughs were in place on a floor surface. However, the exactfunctions of these troughs could not be identified on the basis of theirposition in the architectural space or the associated finds.

ParallelsShallow limestone troughs have been found in use in olive oil pressingbuildings, and were probably used in the separation of the oil from thelees..Horbat Rosh Zayit: A relatively shallow basin was in situ in a room withtwo pressing stones and two vats (Gal and Frankel 1993: pl. 17:A).Tel Miqne-Ekron: Numerous stone basins/troughs were reported fromthe more than 100 oil processing buildings excavated at the site (seeMackay 1995, and details in Chapter 8, above).

Large Shallow Basins

Two shallow basins, made of limestone, were installed in Wall 2007.This appears to have taken place at a time when the wall was no longerin use and at a place where industrial activities were carried on. Incontrast to the troughs, the basins were extremely shallow. A third basin(TJ 817), also of soft limestone, was in the collapse of Building 800. Allthree basins are semi-round in shape, rather than semi-rectangular, asis trough C27:27, or rectangular (D32:50). The fact that all three basinshad shallow depressions and had a low base, in contrast to the Megiddotroughs, indicates that these features had a specialized function. Thebasins in Wall 2007 may have been used in association with a large (Dca. 0.75, T 0.25 m) crushing stone (B44:20) found nearby.

Catalogue

TJ B44:4. Limestone; L 0.64, W 0.63, H 0.32, int Dp 0.09 m.

TJ B53:11 (Fig. 5.27). Limestone; L 1.00, W 0.75, H 0.35 m.

TJ 817 (C17:15). Limestone; D 0.54+, H 0.40, int Dp 0.20 m.

Parallels.Horbat Rosh Zayit: Immediately inside the entrance of Building 307,there is a shallow, rounded basin (Gal and Alexandre 2000: plan 10;fig. VII.3), whose precise function is unknown. Its position so close tothe entrance is similar to the trough in Building 800, Room 805, in thatit reduces access to the building.

Figure 10.8. Boulder Mortar A13.23; in Room 106.

Boulder Mortars

Large mortars fashioned out of a limestone boulder and embeddedin the floor are in a different category than the portable mortarsclassed as artefacts (Daviau 2002:134–135). These large mortars areusually surrounded by cobblestones, which help to hold them in place(Fig. 10.8). This additional feature suggests that the mortars were usedso strenuously that they would have been unstable or would causedamage to the beaten earth surface that sealed up against them hadit not been for the presence of the chink stones. The depression in theupper surface of the mortar is either bowl-shaped or hemispherical,but the wear pattern is different from that in socket stones. In twoinstances (R302, R804) the depression was filled with ceramic sherds,suggesting that the mortar was used either temporarily or secondarilyas a jar stand.45 For the most part, the mortars were used with thepestles, pounders (Daviau 2002:297–313), and hand grinders that werefound on the floors beside them.

45 Ceramic jar stands are not represented in the pottery corpus from Tall Jawa.

In every case, these mortars were discovered in rooms where a vari-ety of food processing activities were carried out (R106, R302, R305).This includes grinding, crushing and pounding of food stuffs as well ascooking. Other activities, such as food storage, crafts and textile produc-tion were also carried out near the mortar. Whether there was a directlink between any of the craft activities and the boulder mortars cannotbe distinguished from food processing, which was clearly the dominantactivity. The mortars themselves were an important architectural fea-ture embedded in the floor surface and associated with a bench or aworking surface. This same use pattern was also identified at Tel Halif,where a large boulder mortar was in position in the centre of a largeroom where typical domestic activities were carried out (Stratum VI,Field III; Blakely and Hardin: figs. 7, 9).

Summary

The architecture and features of each building excavated at Tall Jawacan be studied in detail, thanks to the deep collapse layers and goodpreservation of the exterior walls of most rooms. The combinationof construction techniques with various wall styles is not unique, butthe number of variants on a theme is distinctive. This variation mayappear elsewhere, but to date the excavations at #Amman, Sa .hab, andTall al-#Umayri have been limited to one or two major building types.The new excavations at Jalul, where Ammonite style pottery has alsobeen recovered, should be very rich, given its size; however, completebuilding plans have not yet been uncovered. To date, Tall Jawa offersseveral building styles that can be used as a model for 8th–7th centuryarchitecture in the region.

The same cannot be said for individual architectural features, sincethese appear to be similar over a wider area, with parallels in Judah,Israel, Moab and Edom. While the presence of door sockets, pillarbases, and staircases is documented at numerous sites, the use of in-verted vessels as ovens has fewer parallels. So too, the use of flat-toppedstones as working surfaces or anvils (Daviau 2002:159–160) is rarelyidentified, although this may be due to a lack of recognition. Thearrangement of these features in a given room and the designationand organization of activity areas has yet to be analysed, althoughovens/hearths were often in close proximity to boulder mortars, orsurrounded by portable mortars and ground stone tools used in food

preparation.46 Certain activities were certainly carried out in upperstorey rooms or on the roof, including religious activities (Daviau2001:201). Further comparison of Ammonite and Moabite sites, manynow under excavation, should clarify the distinctive character of Am-monite architectural traditions and its distinctive features preserved inthe archaeological record. Additional information regarding diet andethnicity will derive from functional analysis of the ceramic mate-rial and of its distribution in the architectural space. At present, anincreasing number of scholars and projects in Jordan will contribute tothis research, including the Madaba Plains Project, the excavations atTell Madaba and its many associated projects, the Wadi ath-ThamadProject excavations at Khirbat al-Mudayna and Shrine Site #13, andother excavation projects in Moab, such as Lehun, Balu#, and #Ataruz.At present, the architecture of Tall Jawa has its best parallels at the sitesof Tell en-Na.sbeh, Tell el-Far#ah(N), and Hazor although this may bedue in part to the extensive publication of these sites. Nevertheless, it isclear that it has less in common with coastal sites, and sites in southernJudah, especially those that made extensive use of mud-brick architec-ture.

46 Initial research by Judd will be expanded for publication in Excavations at Tall Jawa,Jordan: Vol. V: Survey and Ethnography, Daviau, ed. (in preparation).

ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS OF LOCAL LIMESTONE ANDPREPARED PLASTER SAMPLES

R G. V. H

Introduction

Excavation of the fortification system and major Iron Age buildingsat Tall Jawa yielded examples of artefacts manufactured from nativelimestone as well as samples of wall plaster. In order to determine thecomposition of the native bedrock and compare its chemical profilewith that of prepared plaster, samples of limestone were taken from aroof roller (TJ 381) and compared with 20 samples of wall plaster.

Analysis

Roof Roller (TJ 381)

Three small (44–80 mg) samples were taken from the roof roller. Thesesamples were weighed into 1.2 ml polyethylene vials, in which theywere irradiated sequentially in the SLOWPOKE nuclear reactor at theUniversity of Toronto for periods of five minutes, at a neutron flux of5.0×1011 neutrons cm-2 .second-1. The gamma-rays emitted from thesamples were counted twice, at nine minutes and again at twenty-sevenminutes after the irradiated samples came out of the reactor. This gaveanalytical information on twelve elements, listed in Table 11A. FromTable 11A, it can be seen that the Ca content is 36% to 39%. Thiscorresponds to quite clean limestone, since, based on atomic massesand from its molecular formula, pure CaCO3 contains 40.0% Ca.

The limestone is not dolomitic, as can be seen by the low Mg content(1500–3400 ppm=0.15–0.34% Mg). Furthermore, it is not shellfish-based limestone (aragonitic limestone) since the Sr content is too low(220–290 ppm instead of 1100±100 ppm) (Sheppard et al. 1996).

Table 11A. Roof Roller (TJ 381) analyses

Element #1 #2 #3

U ppm 4.4±0.3 3.8 5.1Dy ppm <0.52 0.51±0.08 0.36Ba ppm <120 <110 <70Ti ppm <300 430±60 <400Sr ppm 270±30 290 220Mn ppm 36±1 68±3 38Mg ppm 3500±100 3400 1500Na ppm 240±20 360 190V ppm 36±1 35 42Al ppm 3500±100 3600 3500Cl ppm <160 290±30 180±20Ca% 38±1 36 39

Mass (mg) 43.7 48.1 80.3

Prepared Plasters

Twenty analytical plaster samples were taken from ten samples of wallplaster excavated at Tall Jawa. Relatively large samples, ranging from180 mg to 590 mg, were taken for analysis. Sample masses, and thelocations from which they came, are listed in Table 11B.

Table 11B. Plaster samples

Sample Number Mass (mg) Location at the site1

1 320 C61.36 L16.432 2083 465 E56:10/254 5855 196 C71:3/96 3537 368 C71:5/178 5099 288 C71:510 39111 437 C71:512 40813 321 B26:10/2314 538

1 The site information includes Field+Square: Locus/Pail. Samples were takenfrom the outer face of the outer casemate wall, from Tower 2024 in Field B, and fromthe outer face of the buttress wall in Field C-east.

Sample Number Mass (mg) Location at the site

15 207 B16:516 43617 387 B26:918 47619 181 B16:7/3420 500

The samples were weighed into 1.2 mL polyethylene vials and wereirradiated for five minutes in the SLOWPOKE nuclear reactor at theUniversity of Toronto at a neutron flux of 1.0×1011 neutrons.cm-2.sec-ond-1. The gamma-rays emitted from the samples were counted aboutseventeen to nineteen minutes after they came out of the reactor. Thisprocedure gave analytical information on the seven elements reportedin Table 11C. The higher Ca samples are of similar chemistries tothe published chemistry of eighteenth-dynasty plaster adhesive foundat Tell el Dab#a in Egypt (Endlicher and Tillmann 1997); there are notenough data to establish more than the fact that limestone is limestone.

Table 11C shows that the Ca contents of the plasters vary between20% and 38%, with the other elements tending to be present in highconcentrations when the Ca is low and in low concentrations when theCa is high. This negative correlation effect can be seen in Graph 11.1(Al versus Ca) and in Graph 11.2 (Na versus Ca). Both show reasonablenegative correlations. The lumpiness of the Na versus Ca plot probablyindicates additional sources of Na-rich material. One such potentialsource of Na is NaCl. Every 355 ppm of Cl corresponds to 230 ppm ofNa.

Graphs 11.1 and 11.2 may be interpreted as a deliberate or inadver-tent mixing of limestone with differing amounts of local silicate rock-based (or sediment) particles. At a Ca content of 38% (samples 3, 4,and 17), one has essentially clean, natural limestone, while at a Ca con-tent of 20% one has an approximately 50–50 mixture of rock-basedparticles and limestone.

If one reconstructs the chemistry of the silicate rock (or sediment)-based particles, assuming there is only one source material, the data ofTable 11D are obtained. This “elemental fingerprint” may representlocal sedimentary material, or it may be the product of my overactiveimagination.

Table 11C. Plaster analyses

# Al% Ca% Cl ppm Mg% Mn ppm Na ppm V pmm

1 2.1±0.1 28±1 630±90 1.1±0.1 400±10 6300±100 97±42 2.0 27 350 1.0 530 4200 1203 0.6 38 <220 0.3 67 240 274 0.7 37 <130 0.3 57 200 285 2.3 26 950 1.1 400 6100 966 2.2 26 1070 1.1 460 7700 1207 1.8 29 490 0.6 280 2800 578 1.7 28 400 0.5 270 2500 539 2.9 22 1000 1.0 600 9100 9610 3.2 20 900 1.4 600 10400 8811 1.8 24 810 1.2 390 6600 24012 1.8 25 900 1.5 410 7600 24013 1.8 31 <340 0.5 290 980 5714 0.9 33 <110 0.4 140 470 3315 1.8 27 410 1.1 350 5700 16016 2.1 28 460 1.3 420 7300 16017 0.7 36 <260 0.6 110 560 2618 2.0 26 990 1.6 360 8300 17019 1.9 28 800 1.7 410 8800 21020 2.1 24 840 1.5 440 7900 150

TeD 0.36 36 – 0.9 – <1000 -

TeD=Tell el Dab#a plaster adhesive (Endlicher and Tillmann 1997).

Table 11D. Guestimate of the chemistry of the local sedimentary material mixed with limeto make plaster.

Al ≈5–6%Ca <2%Cl ≈0.2%Mg ≈2%Mn ≈1200 ppmNa ≈2%V ≈200 ppm

Reorganisation of the plaster sample data by location on the site, alongwith the roof roller (RR) data, produced Table 11E. In this it is easier tosee that most of the pairs of plaster samples are relatively close (within±10–20%) in their elemental concentrations.

The exceptions are the sample pairs 13/14 and especially 17/18,where sample 17 is mainly limestone and sample 18 is a 40–50%

mixture. This latter pair of samples is valuable in that it firmly links thelimestone to the mixed plaster.

Plasters with high or low Ca contents are not, however, associatedwith specific locations within the site.

As alluded to above, the source and variability of the Cl and Nais potentially interesting. The relative concentrations of Al, Cl and Nado not fit with a simple lime-sediment-salt system. On the other hand,if NaCl was added naturally or deliberately to the limestone prior toslaking it, some of the Cl may have fired out during the slaking process,leaving the Na (from the salt) preferentially enriched by factors of up toten, relative to the Cl.

Table 11E. Plaster analyses, sorted by site location


C611 2.1±0.1 28±1 630±90 1.1±0.1 400±10 6300±100 97±42 2.0 27 350 1.0 530 4200 12013 1.8 31 <340 0.5 290 980 5714 0.9 33 <110 0.4 140 470 33

E563 0.6 38 <220 0.3 67 240 274 0.7 37 <130 0.3 57 200 28

C715 2.3 26 950 1.1 400 6100 966 2.2 26 1070 1.1 460 7700 1207 1.8 29 490 0.6 280 2800 578 1.7 28 400 0.5 270 2500 539 2.9 22 1000 1.0 600 9100 9610 3.2 20 900 1.4 600 10400 88

B2611 1.8 24 810 1.2 390 6600 24012 1.8 25 900 1.5 410 7600 24017 0.7 36 <260 0.6 110 560 2618 2.0 26 990 1.6 360 8300 170

B1615 1.8 27 410 1.1 350 5700 16016 2.1 28 460 1.3 420 7300 16019 1.9 28 800 1.7 410 8800 21020 2.1 24 840 1.5 440 7900 150


RR 1 0.35 38 <160 0.2 36 240 36RR 2 0.36 36 290 0.3 68 360 35RR 3 0.35 39 180 0.2 38 190 42

RR=roof roller

Graph 11.1. Al versus Ca.

Graph 11.2. Na versus Ca.

References

Sheppard, P. J.; Pavlish, L. A.; and R. G. V. Hancock1996 A preliminary assessment of usefulness of the chemical analysis of Turbo

setosus shells for provenance studies in the Pacific Region. Archaeometry94:269–272.

Endlicher, G. and Tillmann, A.1997 Lime plaster as an adhesive for hafting eighteenth-dynasty flint sickles from

Tell el Dab#a, eastern Nile delta, (Egypt), Archaeometry. 39:333–342.

R. G. V. HancockDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Applied ChemistryUniversity of TorontoToronto, ON CANADA

PART FOUR

SETTLEMENT HISTORY AND CHRONOLOGY

SETTLEMENT HISTORY AT TALL JAWA:CHRONOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS

Introduction

Excavation at Tall Jawa yields a rich picture of the settlement history ofthis site over an extended period during Iron Age I and II. The remainsof architecture, pottery and artefacts indicate clearly the local traditionsthat have their parallels at the #Amman citadel, in the tombs of the#Amman region and in sites south of #Amman, such as Sa .hab and Tallal-#Umayri demonstrating the position of Tall Jawa within the Iron Agekingdom of Ammon. Ceramic vessel forms also make it possible for usto see certain correlations with sites in Moab to the south, Judah to thewest, and Syria to the north. The closest parallels appear to be withIsrael and southern Phoenicia, especially during Iron Age II.

Iron Age I (Stratum X)

The limited evidence for Iron Age I architecture suggests a small,unwalled settlement at Tall Jawa that made use of the surroundingfields for agriculture and pastoralism. That this community was longlived can only be assumed on the basis of the ceramic corpus, whichincludes a variety of plain and painted wares, some of which appearto continue Late Bronze Age painted styles. Most significant is thenumber of collared-rim pithoi which were produced in a great manydifferent fabrics and reflect changes in potting techniques and formalcharacteristics over a considerable period of time (Fig. 4.5:1–4). Thesize and location of the Iron Age village may also have changed duringStratum X, since Iron Age I pottery was located not only in FieldA, where contemporary architecture was present, but also in fill anddebris layers in Fields E and C, where no architectural remains wereidentified. A second distinctive feature of the Iron I pottery is thegray grainy fabric common in jug and bowl sherds. The colour isgrey throughout, including the interior and exterior surfaces. In certaincases, a gray ware bowl is covered with a white slip (Fig. 4.6:4). This

treatment does not seem to be present among the Iron Age I vesselsand sherd material from Tall al-#Umayri.1

The date of the earliest settlement at Tall Jawa can only be deter-mined following the full publication of Iron Age I pottery sequences atsuch sites as Tall al-#Umayri, Sa .hab, Jalul and the #Amman citadel. Todate, the known sequence for Transjordan is not tight enough to allowus to fit the various ceramic ware form types into a secure chronology.Clearly, Late Bronze Age ceramic traditions appear side by side withthe collared-rim pithoi, making it difficult to assign a clear beginningto the Iron Age I period (London 1999:64–67; Sauer 1994:235).2 Thepithoi themselves also underwent gradual change, as can be seen bythe comparison of the body shape and the height of the neck. At Tallal-#Umayri, the neck including the collar is tall, sometimes as much as12.00–15.00 cm, the shoulder is gently curved and set low on the body,ca. 35.00–40.00 cm below the rim (Clark 1997: figs. 4.16, 18). At TallJawa, the neck of tall-necked pithoi is in the range of 7.50–10.00 cm.Sauer himself (1994:235–243) was able to identify three phases of IronAge I pottery at .Hesban, the earliest (1A) is represented by “heavy”collared-rim jars, the second phase (1B) by “less heavy” jars, and thefinal, 10th century phase (1C) by “more bulbous” jars.3

Determining the final date for the Iron Age I settlement is mademore difficult by the longevity of individual vessels of such forms asthe collared-rim pithoi, which could last for as much as a century(London 1999:86). A settlement life of approximately one century atTall Jawa (Stratum X), prior to the construction of the offset-inset wall

1 As an example, see the colour coding of jug sherds from Phase 11 in Field B(early Iron I; Clark 2000: fig. 4.30), where the exterior fabric colour is “pink” or“reddish yellow” (4.30:1–11). Only one jar and two jugs are listed as “gray” throughout(4.30:15–17).

2 In view of the continuation of Late Bronze Age material culture into the late12th century at several sites west of the Jordan (Herzog 1997:190; Finkelstein 1999:36),it is surprising that Herr (2001:241) dates the founding of the Iron I settlement atTall al-#Umayri as early as the late 13th-early 12th centuries (see also, Clark 1994:147).At the other end of the sequence, a destruction date in the 10th century by KingDavid (Younker et al. 1990:22) supposes an extraordinary longevity for the collared-rimpithoi in the casemate room and adjoining pillared house at Tall al-#Umayri. A shortersequence does not mean that the potting tradition did not extend for two centuries(Esse 1992:103), only that the jars in a given house at Tall al-#Umayri may represent ashorter interval within that span.

3 None of these jars are illustrated (only photographs of individual sherds withoutcaptions), so it is not clear whether it is the body shape, the neck thickness, the rim orthe collar that is more or less heavy.

system in early Iron Age II (Stratum IX), may be sufficient to accountfor the presence of collared-rim pithoi with relatively tall necks andvarious styles of collar. However, the occurrence of collared-rim jarswith a short neck and a small mouth opening suggests occupation atthe site dating to the end of Iron I (10th century) or the beginning ofIron Age II, immediately before the transition to the Iron Age II stylepithos (9th century), a style that continues until at least the early 7th

century. This sequence would push the dating for the pithoi with tallnecks and pointed collars into an earlier period, possibly as early as thelate 12th-early 11th centuries.4

At both Tall al-#Umayri (Clark 1997: fig. 4.10) and Tall Jawa, theIron I occupation ended in a conflagration that destroyed the buildings,turning sun-dried mud bricks into heaps of collapsed fired bricks.

Iron Age II (Strata IX–VII)

Early Iron Age II (Stratum IX)

At Tall Jawa, the Iron Age I destruction set the stage for the estab-lishment of a walled town. Early Iron IIA is identified as the period ofconstruction of the outer offset-inset wall and of Building 102. Therewas also limited occupation in Field E, although little of this was recov-ered. The evidence for this stratum is derived from the vessels locatedon the lower floor of Building 102 (Stratum IX, Room 120). The sur-face treatment of some of these vessels suggests that this structure wasbuilt and occupied for some time before the inner casemate wall andBuilding 300 in Field E were constructed. This is, however, only a rela-tive sequence, which does not provide absolute dates for either of thesestrata. Certain ceramic forms are helpful in clarifying this sequence,especially the collars on the pithos sherds in Room 120 that appear tobe short-necked pithoi (Fig. 4.5:4), characteristic of the final stage ofthis forming technique, prior to the change to the double ridge formwhich is characteristic of Iron Age II pithoi.

At Sa .hab, the proportions of the neck and body of pithoi designatedas Iron I reflect the same changes over time seen in Tall Jawa Stra-tum IX; the neck and collar are 7.00–10.00 cm tall, the shoulder is

4 Herr (2001:241) dates the Tall al-#Umayri long-necked pithoi (Episode 1) to the13th century, since he assumes a gap in occupation from the 12th–10th centuries. His“Episode 2” follows in the 10th century BC.

Figure 12.1. Typical Stratum-VIII pottery from Field A; 1)V125 (A14/29.4), 2) V118 (A14/29.1), 3) V189 (A13/53.4), 4)

V101 (A13/87.1), 5) V145 (A13/39.2), 6) V147 (A13/29.3).

more pronounced and is only 20.00–25.00 cm below the rim. Clearly,the Sa .hab jars are considerably later than those from Tall al-#Umayri;in fact, they are closer in style to the Iron Age II, Stratum-VIII pithoifrom Tall Jawa (Daviau 1992a: fig. 5; 1995: figs. 2, 3), whose neck hasall but disappeared, the collar has been replaced by a groove withflanking ridges, and the shoulder is ca. 20.00 cm below the rim. Thesizes of the Iron I and early Iron II pithoi also vary; at both Tall Jawaand Tall al-#Umayri, the Iron I jars have larger rim openings (20.00–25.00 cm) than the pithoi at Sa .hab and the early Iron II pithoi at

Figure 12.2. Hippo style storejars from Fields Aand E; 1) V126 (A14/59.1), 2) V497 (E55/52.1).

Tall Jawa (15.00–17.00 cm). So too, the Iron I pithoi have a greaterrange in overall height (87.00–110 cm) compared with those of Iron II(105.00–120 cm). In view of the closeness of fit of the variables in formbetween the Sa .hab and Tall Jawa pithoi, this writer suggests a relativechronological sequence that places the Tall al-#Umayri and Tall JawaStratum-X collared-rim jars in Iron I-late Iron I, and the Sa .hab pithoiin late Iron Age I-early Iron Age II.5

Stratum VIIIB

Stratum VIIIB is characterized by the construction of the inner case-mate wall. Both Iron I and early Iron II pottery are represented inthe sherd material from loci associated with the fortification wall inField A. Whether this represents the more extensive fills used in theconstruction of the inner casemate wall, which was undertaken at thistime, or testifies to the Stratum IX founding of the solid offset-inset wall(W1003) remains unclear. Iron II pottery was dominant in all Stratum-VIIIB–VIIIA loci in Buildings 100 and B113 (Fig. 12.1–2). It is here,in Building 113, and in B300 in Field E that the later pithos formwith a double ridge at the top of the shoulder is found in large num-bers (Figs. 12.1:5, 6; 12.4:4), and is associated with hippo style storejars(Fig. 12.2:1–2), hole mouth jars (Fig. 12.3:7), and red slipped and bur-nished pottery.

5 This sequence is strengthened by the fact that at Tall Jawa both the tall and theshort-necked collared-rim jars are present in debris layers; and these are all earlier thanthe Iron II pithoi, which were in use with red slipped and burnished bowls, jugs, andjuglets (see especially Field E, below).

Figure 12.3. Typical Stratum-VIII vessels from Field E; 1)V425 (E54/76.1), 2) V318 (E53/13.2), 3) V429 (E65/9.1),

4) V361 (E65/6.1), 6) V351 (E65/6.1), 7) V438 (E54/85.1).

Based on the ceramic evidence, it seems probable that Building 102in Field A continued in use throughout Stratum VIIIB. Walls 1007on the south and W1006 on the east are preserved to a height of1.00 m, even though the outer face of their bottom courses was notreached below the earliest surface in adjoining Room 122 in B100.Stratum VIIIB was also the period of construction of Buildings 113and B204 inside Casemate Wall 1004 on the south, of Building 200adjacent to Drain 218, and of Building 300 in Field E. The occupationduring this period is marked by the highest percentage of red slipped,and red slipped and burnished pottery (Daviau 1993b) in the formof bowls, jugs and juglets. Three of the most common Stratum-VIIIbowl types consist of red slipped and burnished vessels; a) small hemi-spherical bowls (Fig. 12.1:1; 3:1), b) carinated bowls with vertical rim

Figure 12.4. Typical Stratum-VIII vessels from Fields B and E; 1) V221(B63/63.4), 2) V512 (E64/72.3), 3) V314 (E54/170.7), 4) V462 (E54/89.6).

(Fig. 12.3:4), and c) deep and shallow, bent-sided bowls with a sim-ple rim (Figs. 12.1:2; 3:2). Inverted rim bowls and kraters (Figs. 1:3;3:5, 6), often smudged on the interior suface, occur in both unslippedand slipped and painted versions. Painted pottery was recovered in allStratum-VIII structures, although the finest examples are from Build-ing 300 in the form of bowls (Fig. 12.3:6), and large and small jugs(Fig. 12.4:3). In the case of V351, the entire vessel was red slippedand painted with thin black bands on a broad band of white wash.Unslipped bowls with inverted triangular rim (Fig. 12.1:3) and kraterswith inverted rectangular rim with a smudged (black or gray) interiorare also common forms. One-handled cups (Fig. 12.3:3) were present inB300, but rare in other buildings, and are almost exclusively a Stratum-VIII form. The characteristic juglet of the buildings in Fields A–B is aglobular juglet, red slipped, with a ridged rim and spout (Fig. 12.1:4);a greater variety of juglet types is represented in B300, including twoblack juglets (Daviau 2001: fig. 2:5–6).

Stratum VIIIB–A appears to have been the floruit of Ammoniteculture. The adoption of red slip as the characteristic surface treatmentfor small bowls, juglets, and painted jugs is comparable to the ceramictraditions operative in Phoenicia, Israel, and Judah at the same time.Recent 14C dates at Tel Dor help to establish a sequence of dates thatputs the first occurrence of red slipped pottery after 850 BC (Gilboa2001:1347). However, there is still little in the way of absolute datesto anchor this ceramic development in Transjordan, especially in viewof the current debate concerning state formation in Israel and Judah(Finkelstein 1999; see his bibliography). Steiner (2001:113) notes thatthe dating of the early Iron II “administrative centre” of Jerusalemprobably falls into the 10th or 9th century, when red slip pottery is almostcompletely absent; it does appear, however, in the expanded town of thelate 9th-8th centuries.

Stratum VIIIA

The transition from Stratum VIIIB to VIIIA at Tall Jawa appears tohave been less violent than that of Stratum X to IX, but is marked byrebuilding of the inner casemate wall, especially in Fields A and B, thepartial blocking of Doorway K to form Doorway A, the laying of newfloors (or the use of collapsed ceilings as floor surfaces) in Building 300,and the clearing of Cistern E64:13. The latest pottery forms present inBuilding 300 show the introduction of new forms, such as the straight-sided saucer bowl, along with a few new fabric types; these assemblagesprobably date to the second half of the 8th century BC, with parallelsfrom Hazor Strata V and IV (Yadin 1958: LXXIII:38; 1960: XCIV:14,XCIX:18).

Stratum VII

Changes to the wall system during the transition from Stratum VIII toStratum VII were most apparent in the southeastern part of the townwhere a terrace was defended by a single, solid wall rather than thecasemate system. At the same time, the gate complex (B910) locatedhere may have already been in use in Stratum VIII; its reuse and finalremodelling as an industrial complex is contemporary with Buildings900 (Field C-east), B700 (Field D) and B800 (Field C-west).

Stratum VIIB

The construction of two rectilinear buildings (B700, B800) on thesoutheast terrace, both different in style from the Stratum VIII-build-ings, suggests that a new style of town planning was introduced. Build-ing 700 was not built up against the wall system as were the domes-tic units of Stratum VIIIA, but was located near the centre of thetell, north of Buildings 800 and 900. Both Buildings 700 and B800were domestic structures, but appear to be larger than what might beexpected for modest housing; B800 measures 231.5m2 and B700 is atleast 195.2 m2. on the lower floors alone. In Building 800, there wouldhave been approximately 22 rooms on two stories, and in Building 700there may have been as many as 18. In both cases, there were stone-built staircases that led up to the second storey (Daviau 1994: fig. 13),a feature that appears to be local.6 Although these structures share cer-tain similarities with other 7th century buildings in Cisjordan (Daviau2001a:220–221), there are no known parallels from Transjordan. Assyr-ian influence can be seen when these building plans are compared tohouses in Assur (Daviau 2001a:221, n. 23), although these are usuallydescribed as having a central court, whereas the main room of thelargest Tall Jawa house (B800) was clearly roofed.

Stratum VIIA

The fortification system appears to have changed during Stratum VIIA,since the gate area was transformed into a group of industrial rooms. Itis not known where the major entrance into the settlement was locatedat this time, although it may have been somewhere on the east side ofthe site. Occupation in the damaged buildings on the west and northsides (B102, B300) of the site does not appear to have resumed; thisarea may have been abandoned or used for industrial purposes.

A certain amount of continuity in the ceramic assemblage can beseen in the use of the carinated, red slipped bowl form (Figs. 12.3:4;12.5:6), the pithos, hippo jars, and the cooking pot with folded rim(Fig. 12.4:1). The most significant changes are evident in an increasingnumber of saucer bowls (Fig. 12.5:1, 2) and the virtual disappearance ofhemispherical bowls of Stratum VIII. So too, Assyrian style carinated

6 This feature was not part of any of the fully exposed Stratum VIII-houses at TallJawa, or of the earlier buildings at Khirbat al-Mudayna al-#Aliya (Routledge 2000:49–58).

Figure 12.5. Typical Stratum-VII vessels; 1) V808 (C17/71.6),2) V812 (C27/52.7), 3) V790 (C17/86.3), 4) V924 (C65/60.9), 5) V893

(A83/45.1), 6) V822 (C27/10.1), 7) V703 (D21/20.1), 8) V879 (A83/98.2).

bowls were not present in Stratum VIII, although they do appear inStratum VII (Daviau 2001: fig. 5:1–2). This repertoire is also charac-terized by eggshell thin, fine wares, possibly an imitation of the “PalaceWare” known in Assyria (Oates 1959: pl. XXXV:18, 20, XXXVI:27,28, 29). At Tall Jawa, these bowls appear in the traditional clay fab-ric well known from Stratum VIII and were red slipped and bur-nished. Other new forms that make their appearance are the carrot-shaped bottle, vessels with finger depressions (Daviau 2001b: fig. 4.3;2001a:225–226; fig. 6), and off-set rim bowls (Fig. 12.5:3–4).7 Minor

7 A good example of a typical late Iron II ceramic assemblage with parallels toseveral Tall Jawa vessel types comes from Field Phase 6B in the administrative complexat Tall al-#Umayri (Lawlor 2000: fig. 3.29).

Figure 12.6. Typical Stratum-VII vessels;1) V795 (C17/85.7), 2) V786 (C17/86.2).

changes are also reflected in cooking pots that have a thickened rimand short neck (Fig. 12.6:1).

A more significant change is seen in the introduction of a largepithos with a folded, rectangular rim, wide mouth and multiple handlesthat shares these features with deep kraters. The Tall Jawa kraters aresimilar to those from Stratum II at Beer-sheba (Aharoni 1973: pl. 65:1–4, 7), although the shoulder is more pronounced; this shoulder appearsin earlier versions (Stratum VI) of this vessel at Beer-sheba (Brandfon1984: fig. 29:5). The multi-handled pithoi at Tall Jawa that share thesame upper body form as the kraters are twice as large (ca. 1.20 m) andhave the lower body and base of the standard Stratum-VIII pithoi. Thetradition of the hippo style storejar continues, although certain vesselsreflect change over time. This is seen in new rim forms (Fig. 12.6:2)and in a narrowing of the shoulder and body of the vessel, a tendencyseen already in B300 (Fig. 12.6:2). Another new form is the decanter;this form appears in both small (Fig. 12.5:8) and large versions and is avessel type well known from late Iron II Judah. Several small decantersare painted with black bands and have a strainer spout on one side;these vessels have close parallels in the assemblages from the tomb atSa .hab and at Madaba (Dornemann 1983: fig. 37:14–17).

More significant as a chronological marker of cultural change is theintroduction of a group of new ceramic fabrics.8 The distinguishingelement in one of these fabrics is the production of highly levigatedclay;9 there was a virtual elimination of organic inclusions and the

8 Dornemann (1983:179) claims that there was “a complete overlap” in the formsand fabrics used for red slipped, black slipped and creamy wares in late Iron Age II. AtTall Jawa, the new fabrics of Stratum VII appear in only a limited number of tradi-tional Stratum-VIII forms and in almost all of the new Stratum-VII vessel types.

9 Certain scholars limit the definition of “levigation” (Homès-Fredericq and Fran-ken 1986:26) to a refined clay used to produce the fine wares of Petra in the lateHellenistic-early Roman period. However, Rawson’s (1954:170) analysis of Assyrian

reduction in size of non-plastic inclusions.10 The use of a fast wheel(Dornemann 1983:49) would necessitate this change in clay fabric toprotect the potter from injury caused by the rotation of clay containinglarge inclusions. The speed of the wheel is evident in the sharp rillson the interior surfaces; this is seen most clearly in the oblong juglets(Fig. 12.5.7). A second technological change is apparent in a higherfiring temperature that resulted in the fully oxidized cores and hardfinish of the levigated vessels.11 A second diagnostic fabric for the periodis black ware that was slipped and burnished. This fabric was usedexclusively for bowl forms at Tall Jawa (Fig. 12.5.5; Daviau 2001a:fig. 9:1–4).12

A change also took place in the realm of utilitarian wares, for exam-ple in the case of the ceramic mortar bowl or grater (London 1992:90).Whereas these bowls usually have tripod feet in Stratum VIII, the newtype is very shallow, with a ring base and wedge-shaped depressions inthe centre of the bowl (Daviau 2001a: fig. 10).13 Zertal (1989:81) was thefirst scholar to suggest that this decoration originated in Mesopotamia;however, his view that this vessel form and its characteristic depressionscame to the hill country of central Palestine with deportees from Baby-lonia may not apply to the situation at Tall Jawa, where the local cul-tural traditions continued in use.14 At present, there is insufficient evi-dence for Zertal’s interpretation of cultural change at Transjordaniansites. It is clear that the introduction of these graters reflects a change,either in food processing techniques or in diet, which was probably

Palace wares from Nimrud characterized the clay as either naturally washed or “artifi-cially levigated”.

10 At Dayr #Alla, Franken (1982:144) dated this change in fabric to the 7th centuryBC, and associated it with the re-introduction of the fast wheel, which allows for theproduction of “wheel-thrown pottery.”

11 For a more detailed discussion of the five vessel types that appear in this fabric,see Daviau (2001a:227–233).

12 Small black juglets appear only in Stratum VIII loci and reflect an earlier tradi-tion.

13 The shallow ceramic mortar bowls with tripod feet (V827) in use in Stratum VIIIcontinued into Stratum VII; however, the wedge incised graters were produced in adifferent fabric, with a different surface colour (gray).

14 More serious disruption of the local cultural traditions took place at towns inSyria, where Assyrian control resulted in deportation of certain elements of the pop-ulation and the introduction of settlers from other areas of Assyria. This disruption isrepresented by a deterioration in the ceramic repertoire and the abandonment of thefortifications, such as at the site of Tell #Arqa (Chaaya 2000: 216–217).

part of the technological and cultural changes resulting from increasedAssyrian influence in the region.15

Conclusion

It is at the two ends of the chronological spectrum (Iron Age I andlate Iron Age II) that the links with known technological and culturalchanges are evident. At the same time, the beginning and end of thisspectrum cannot be located in an absolute chronology. Iron I beginswhen the collared-rim pithos is already the current form for large stor-age jars, and Iron II ends during the time of obvious Assyrian influence.No seals with Babylonian motifs were recovered, not was there anyother evidence for exclusively 6th century material, although its contin-uation during the Babylonian period is a possibility (Chapter 13). Theprecise event that brought occupation at Tall Jawa to an end remainsunknown. What is certain is that the periods of occupation preservedat this site represent the time before and during state formation on theJordanian plateau. The strong links between the ceramic traditions ofTall Jawa and that of #Amman confirm its integration into the kingdomof the benê #Ammôn. Tall Jawa’s position in the landscape emphasizesits strategic importance for the small kingdom, but does nothing to illu-minate its particular history, the events that brought each stratum to anend, or its ancient name.

15 Sherds from similar bowls appear at Tall al-#Umayri (Low 1991: fig. 8.22:22, 23),at Balu# (1991), and at Tall as-Sa#idiyya (Pritchard 1985: fig. 16:14). At Tall al-#Umayri,the wedge incised bowls are assigned to the early Persian period (Low 1991:173); thisis not surprising at a site where occupation was not interrupted but continued into thePersian period.

THE AMMONITES: A HISTORICAL SKETCH

P-E D

Introduction

This short presentation of the Ammonites—their name, territory, ori-gin, and political history until the fall of their kingdom—is based aboveall on ancient texts. It is meant as a companion piece to MichèleDaviau’s study of Ammonite material culture in the Tall Jawa finalreport. This is neither a complete nor an exhaustive coverage of Am-monite history during the Iron Age. Scholars who had the privilege ofreading Hübner’s magisterial monograph (1992) will not learn much inthe following pages, although I sometimes adopted different positions,and was able to bring into the picture a few tiny pieces of evidence thatwere not yet available to that historian. Everyone will notice that I didnot discuss Ammonite language nor Ammonite religion, a difficult taskthat was accomplished recently and successfully by Aufrecht (1999a;1999b). I have tried to quote all the relevant ancient sources of anyimportance, but I did not refer to any large amount of secondary lit-erature, a task that would have generated a mass of annotation andbibliography, dwarfing the text of this short essay.

“Ammonites”—The Name

Orientation

The English word “Ammonite” belongs to a well-known class of eth-nic designations characterized by the ending -ite, which also includes,for instance, “Moabite” and “Edomite.” As we shall see, this usage dif-fers from that of the Hebrew Bible and the other ancient sources; inAntiquity, when referring to this people, one normally used phrasestranslating as “children of Ammon” or “house of Ammon.”

Second Millennium Attestations?

No mention of #Ammôn, nor indeed of the benê #Ammôn (“children ofAmmon”) can be found in any document firmly dated to the 2nd millen-nium or earlier times, whether in the Ammonite language or in Egyp-tian, Akkadian or Hebrew. In our days no serious biblical scholar willput an early date on the story of Lot and his daughters (Gen 19:30–38),or on the narratives of Moses’ conquest of Transjordan (Num 21–36passim, espec. 21; Deut 2–3). The heroic legends of Jephthah (the coreof Judg 11:1–12:7) and Saul (1 Sam 11:1–11) may not be devoid offactual foundations, and may deal with events of the eleventh century;but these stories too came down to us in redactions much more recentthan the events they purport to relate, and they cannot be trusted topreserve the earliest name given to the Ammonites and the date whenit first appeared. Priority must be given to contemporary, epigraphicsources over the biblical materials with their long history of literarytransmission and modification.

“Ammonites” in Neo-Assyrian and Later Cuneiform Inscriptions

In 853, Shalmaneser III allegedly defeated a coalition of “twelve” Syr-ian kings at Qarqar (Tell Qarqur?) on the Orontes (Dion 1997:183–89). In his Kurkh Monolith, which was inscribed soon after this bat-tle, the Assyrian lists his adversaries (RIMA 3:23), mentioning amongthem Ba-"a-sa son of Ru-

˘hu-bi KUR a-ma-na-a-a, “Baasha (…) of the

country Amana.” It has been widely accepted that this Baasha was anAmmonite ruler; the Qarqar narrative used an ethnic designation ofthe same type as Hebrew #Ammonî, and attested to the existence of anAmmonite kingdom in the mid-ninth century. However the “Amana”mentioned in this text is more likely to be the Gebel es-Sarqi, or Anti-Lebanon (Cogan 1984; Lipinski 2000:343); and the use of a-ma-na-a-a for “Ammonite” does not agree with later cuneiform usage. Whenthey refer to the Ammonites, Tiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC; text inTadmor 1994:170)1 and his successors constantly use expressions con-taining the sumerogram É, for bît, “house;” typically, one finds URU(“city”) É Am-ma-na-a-a, or KUR (“country”) É Am-ma-na-a-a (Hübner1992:244).2 The testimony of the Kurkh Monolith must therefore be

1 This is Tiglath-pileser’s longest “summary inscription” (No. 7 in Tadmor’s edi-tion), written between 729 and 727.

2 A tantalizing exception is KUR ba-an am-ma-na-a-a, which is found on two Nim-

left aside.3 Without it, the Neo-Assyrian material clearly does not bringus back to the beginnings of the Ammonite state; but its homogeneity,4

and its agreement with the epigraphic and biblical data to be reviewedforthwith, will prove important in assessing the nature of Ammonitesociety.

“Ammonites” in Ammonite Epigraphy

The name of the Ammonite people appears very seldom in the morethan 150 Ammonite epigraphs that have been recovered (Aufrecht1989; Hübner 1992:15–129). Its only two attestations from the daysof independence are the title mlk bn #mn, repeated three times on lines1–3 of King #Amminadab’s inscription on the Tall Sıran bronze bottle(Aufrecht 1989:203); and the same title, born by king B #lys # (the biblicalBa#alis, a contemporary of Jeremiah, Jer 40:14), restorable on a sealfrom a private collection (Deutsch and Heltzer 1999:53–56).5

The name #mn has also been found on a bulla in Aramaic scriptdiscovered at Tall al-#Umayri in 1989, in the phrase sb" #mn, apparentlythe name plus condensed title of a Persian governor of the Ammoniteprovince (Herr 1992:190–93 and figs. 3–6). Here the mention of #mnalone (the city of #Amman as a name for the whole province?), insteadof the older phrase bn #mn, reflects the new political situation, and doesnot detract from the significance of the massive attestation of bn #mn /(KUR/URU) É am-ma-na-a-a in the days of the Ammonite monarchy.

The Biblical Names for the Ammonites

The Old Testament uses three different designations for the Ammo-nites: #ammôn alone, as a collective; the gentilicium #ammonî ; and thephrase benê #ammôn, “the children of Ammon.”

benê #ammôn is vastly predominant; it appears 104 times. #ammôn asa collective occurs in Ps 83:8, in a context containing other unusual

rud tablets of the late 8th century, ND 2765 and, by means of a restoration, ND 10078;see, conveniently, Timm 1989:339. As noted by Hübner, this form may imitate theAmmonite expression bn #mn.

3 Contrast Halpern 2001:179–83.4 The oscillation between the determinatives URU and KUR is immaterial; the

same uncertainty occurs in the Neo-Assyrian designations of many other nations.5 Many have also restored bn #m[n] at the end of the fragmentary Amman Theatre

Inscription (late 6th century?); but the second letter of the last word is more probably asin than a mem (Aufrecht 1989:153).

expressions, such as peleset for the Philistines. This form also appears inthe Masoretic Text of 1 Sam 11:11, and it is hard to decide betweenthis reading and that of the Versions, which imply benê #ammôn butmay be normalizing the phrase instead of preserving the original text.Finally the gentilicium #ammonî, the closest linguistic equivalent to ourword “Ammonite,” appears twenty times. Two of these are mere rep-etitions of the book of Kings by the Chronicler; and seven occur inthe post-exilic Ezra-Nehemiah, which never uses benê #ammôn. Out-side Ezra-Nehemiah, most examples are of the type “So-and-so theAmmonite” (e.g., Na.has ha #ammonî, 1 Sam 11:1, 2), and are not at log-gerheads with the use of benê #ammôn as the nation’s name; in 1 Kgs 11:1above all, an adjective is particularly apposite. Only three times (Deut2:20; 23:4; 1 Kgs 11:5) does the choice of #ammonî(m) instead of ben- orbenê #ammôn seem somewhat a-typical.

#ammôn or #amman?—The Greek Evidence

English “Ammonite” is derived from Ammonites, which translates #ammonîin the Latin Vulgate; but the Latin, as well as the Greek and Syriac,does not privilege this term and follows the Hebrew preference for“children of Ammon.” The only remarkable phenomenon is the Greekvocalization "Amman, "Ammanites instead of "Ammon, "Ammonites that onewould expect on the basis of the Masoretic Text. Against the MT,Greek "Amman thus sides with the vocalization ostensibly reflected byAkkadian am-ma-na and surviving until now in Arabic ( #Amman).

As the name is written without vowel letters in Ammonite epigraphy,it is hard to decide whether the native pronunciation was */ #amman/or / #ammôn/. The prevailing opinion (Aufrecht 1999b:172) is that theCanaanite shift from /a/ to /o/ had indeed affected the Ammonitelanguage and that MT #ammôn is correct; but the supporting evidence6 isvery thin, and the main reason for accepting the Canaanite shift is thegeneral agreement of Ammonite with the other Canaanite languages.

This position seems difficult to reconcile with data from Hellenistictimes. The so-called Zeno papyri from the reign of Ptolemy II Philadel-phus (285–246 BC) call the Ammonite territory "Ammanitis7 and its cap-

6 A royal name written Budu"ilu in Akkadian (see below); the name of the godMilkom.

7 A short for *"Ammanitis chora. "Ammanitis is indeed an adjective, the same used bythe Septuagint to translate the feminine #ammonît, applying to women like Na#amah,Rehoboam’s mother (1 Kgs 14:21).

ital Birta tes "Ammanitidos and Rabbatammana.8 In the latter part of the2nd century BC, Rabbatammana also appears in Polybius (V.71.4), and"Ammanitis in 2 Macc 4:26; 5:7. It thus appears that "Amman, "Ammanitesin the Septuagint (and in Josephus’ paraphrase) simply follow, and cor-roborates, contemporary Greek usage, and it is hard to explain thisvocalization with /a/ other than by a local tradition going back to theAmmonites of old. It seems therefore most likely that, in their ownreckoning, the Ammonites were in fact Ammanites.

The etymology of this word, or rather of #amman, is not entirelyclear. Gen 19:38 derives it from ben #ammî, “son of my kin,” obviouslyinvented to fit the story; but it is probably right in pointing to the word#am, “kinsman,” common in Semitic onomastics. One may construe#amman as a hypocoristicon of some name like “ #ammî-"el,” in whichhowever the divine element cannot be determined with certainty.9

The Ammonite Country

Approximative Delimitation

The Ammonite Territory According to the Literary SourcesThe literary sources are unsatisfactory; it is impossible to determinethe boundaries of the Ammonite country with real precision on theirbasis. The main indications are found in the Old Testament, and theyagree on a few important facts:10 the children of Ammon live north ofthe Moabites (Deut 2:17–19, 24), and east of the territories that Israelconquered from Sihon, king of Heshbon (Num 21:24); their land ismountainous and close to the Jabboq (Wadı az-Zarqa; Deut 2:37); theyare more or less contiguous to Aramaean territories (2 Sam 10); andthey are threatened on the east by those camel nomads that the Biblecalls “children of the east” (bny qdm; Ezek 25:4, 5, 10). Their politystands and falls with one particular town, rbh, “the great one” (2 Sam11:1), rbt bny #mwn, “the great one of the children of Ammon” (2 Sam12:26–30), “their city” (2 Sam 10:8).

This picture agrees with that implied by Assyrian inscriptions, fromTiglath-pileser III, who names Ammon before Moab in a list running

8 For references and discussion see Hübner 1992:220–21. Note the possible excep-tion quoted ibid. n. 287.

9 See Hübner 1992:243.10 I only refer to a few texts to illustrate these well-known facts, without any attempt

at being exhaustive.

roughly from north to south (summary inscription No. 7, reverse, line10'; Tadmor 1994:170), to Ashurbanipal, who names Ammon in hisrecord of operations against the Arabs throughout southern Syria andTransjordan (Prism A, col. VII, line 110; Timm 1989:394).

Thanks to its archaeological importance, a continuous tradition,11

and its agreement with the topographical pointers found in 2 Sam10–12, there is no doubt whatsoever that the Ammonite capital waslocated at present-day #Amman, more precisely, on the #Amman citadel.Unfortunately, of the few other biblical place names attributed to theAmmonites—Aro#er (Josh 13:25; Judg 11:33), Abel-keramim (Judg11:33), Ai (Jer 49:3), Minnith (Judg 11:33; Ezek 27:17; a real topo-nym??)—Rabbah, the capital (#Amman) is the only ancient toponymthat can be located with reasonable certainty (Hübner 1992:131–37).The well-known town of Heshbon is included in Jeremiah’s oracleagainst Ammon (Jer 49:3), but this reflects at best a late situation, since,after the demise of Sihon, Heshbon is usually ascribed to the Israelites,and sometimes to the Moabites as in Jeremiah’s foregoing oracle (48:2,34, 45).

Serious effort has been spent on locating Jazer, which may havelain at

˘Hirbat Jazzır, 4 km south of as-Sal.t (MacDonald 1999:34–

35). In modern translations, Num 21:24 presents Jazer as the borderbetween Sihon’s Amorite kingdom and the Ammonites (cf. vv. 26, 32).Unfortunately this is based on the Greek reading of Num 21:24; theHebrew text, which does not contain the word Jazer, suits the contexteven better, and does not show any trace of corruption. In any case, therest of the evidence presents Jazer not as Ammonite,12 but as Amoriteand then Israelite.

Archaeological Pointers to the Extent of the Ammonite Territory

Find Spots of Ammonite InscriptionsOne cannot claim for Ammonite every place where just any piece ofAmmonite writing, howsoever unimportant, has been found; a goodcase in point is an ostracon with a list of names found in Iraq (Nim-

11 In addition to the Hellenistic references given above, see the patristic evidencequoted in Schürer 1979:155 (texts of Eusebius, Jerome, Stephanus Byzantius).

12 1 Macc 5:8 states that Judas Maccabaeus took Jazer from Timotheos, the generalof the “children of Ammon.” But this text reflects a late situation, in which one onlyhas to cross the Jordan to confront the Ammonites (v. 7). It is interesting that Judas tookJazer rather than any town traditionally ascribed to that people.

rud), which current scholarly opinion considers Ammonite.13 Yet, thegeographical distribution of Ammonite epigraphs with certified archae-ological provenience14 is a valuable clue to the extent of the Ammoniteterritory, and most of the Ammonite inscriptions found so far actu-ally fall in line with the indications taken from the literary evidence.#Amman itself (with its suburb Umm U

¯dayna) is the most important

place of discovery, and most of the other inscriptions were discoveredwithin a radius of 20 km around the capital, at Sa .hab, Tall al-#Umayri,Tall Sıran, and

˘Hirbat Umm ad-Dananır.

There are important exceptions to this concentration around #Am-man. Ammonite text has been found at Tall al-Mazar in the Jor-dan Valley, slightly north of Dayr #Alla, and therefore of the Jabboq,reputedly the northern limit of the Ammonite kingdom. An ostraconfrom the early 6th century discovered at Tall al-Mazar (No. 3; Aufrecht1989:334–37) contains the remains of a short message in Ammonite;15

another one (Tall al-Mazar No. 7; Aufrecht 1989:340–42) is in Ara-maic script and goes back to the 5th century at the earliest. It containsa list of names, one of which is Ammonite (mlkmyt), another one Jewish,one Persian, and the others of nondescript Semitic origin. This mate-rial leaves little doubt about Ammonite presence at Tall al-Mazar inthe 6th-5th centuries. It may not be sufficient, however, to prove thatthe area was under Ammonite control, even during that period. Thedearth of traces of Ammonite culture in the Jordan Valley, and thedifferent language (a very marginal type of Aramaic) used in the so-called “Balaam Inscription” (ca. 800 BC) at neighbouring Dayr #Alla(Hoftijzer–Van der Kooij 1976), favour a rather minimalist interpre-tation of the Tall al-Mazar finds with regard to the extent of theAmmonite realm.16

Another exception is found at Tall .Hisban (biblical .Hesbôn). Severalostraca discovered there have been claimed by Cross ( e.g. 1986; seenow 2003) for Aramaic epigraphy. Although challenged by Hübner(1988), who argued that those ostraca were Moabite, Cross’s analysishas been followed by most. A couple fragments may go back to the

13 Baghdad, Iraq Museum, No. 73200. See Aufrecht 1989:118–24.14 Unfortunately many seals were acquired by private collectors from the antiquities

trade.15 Ostraca Nos. 4 and 5, apparently from the same period, have also been claimed

to be Ammonite but are too poorly preserved to be considered here.16 By the end of the Assyrian empire however, Dayr #Alla may have fallen into the

lap of the Ammonite kingdom; two Ammonite ostraca were found there, one of which

7th century, but the most important pieces, now labelled A1, A2, A3,A4, A5, and discussed in the past as Heshbon Ostraca IV, XI, XII, IIand I, range from ca. 600 to ca. 500. Ostraca A4 and A5 illustrate thegradual Ammonite adoption of the pervasive Aramaic script, and theadvent of a broader, international set of personal names; but through-out this series typical Ammonite names, and Canaanite forms such asbn for “son,” leave little doubt about the tradition here represented.This material concurs with Jer 49:3 in suggesting that Tall .Hisbancame under Ammonite control in the late 7th century and remainedAmmonite for a while.

Find Spots of Distinctive Aramaic ArtefactsThe geographical extent of the Ammonite settlement can also be in-ferred from the distribution of a few objects typical of Ammonite mate-rial culture. One can no longer depend on the clue once taken fromthe massive towers called rujm in Arabic, which were not exclusive toAmmonite territory, and, in many cases, not contemporary with theAmmonites (Hübner 1992:155; Bienkowski 2000:50); but two otherkinds of artefacts seem distinctive enough, and important enough, tobe useful in mapping the Ammonite area.

The first of these types of artefacts is the Ammonite stone statuary,with at its core limestone statues representing heads, or whole persons,of males wearing various adaptations of the Egyptian atef crown (AbouAssaf 1980). All the examples whose provenance is known were discov-ered in #Amman or its vicinity, at

˘Hirbat al- .Hajjar, Abu #Alanda, and

#Argan, within a radius even shorter than that of the main concentra-tion of Aramaic epigraphs.

Typical pottery, especially the black-burnished ware of Iron IIB–C,can also be considered diagnostic of Ammonite culture, and useful inidentifying Ammonite settlements. This pottery abounds in #Amman(Dornemann 1983:107–110), and occurs as well on sites like Meqaba-len (Dornemann 1983:109), Sa .hab (Dornemann 1983:108), Tall Jawa(Daviau 2001:59–60), and Tall al-#Umayri (London, Plint and Smith1991:437). To find significant samples of similar pottery, one has to

could be dated ca. 600 and the other some time in the 5th century (Van der Kooij andIbrahim 1989:69–70). In favour of a rather extensive Ammonite territory at the end ofthe Assyrian era, see, e.g. Lemaire (1994:19); for a maximalist view, Herr and Najjar(2001:335).

go to northernmost Syria, where some was found at Tall Ta#yinat(Dornemann 1983:110) and Tall Bassî.t.17

ConclusionsThe various criteria that I have reviewed indicate most clearly thatthe Ammonite country strongly gravitated around #Amman, but theyleave its outer limits shrouded in obscurity, and do not allow any neatborderline to be drawn around the realm. Clearly enough, Ammonitesettlements did not extend eastward into the Syrian desert, and veryfew indeed are found east of #Amman, itself dangerously close to thedesert; but one encounters greater difficulties when trying to determinethe other borders of the Ammonites.

In spite of the biblical hints that the Jabboq set a northern limitto Ammonite land, the dearth of archaeological sites in the northeastleaves an element of uncertainty about the exact situation that prevailedon the upper Jabboq. This is regrettable, for one would like to knowwhether Ammonite rule extended to the valuable iron ore deposits ofthe Mugarat al-Warde area, the most important source for this metal insouthern Syria-Palestine (Coughenour 1976). The iron jewellery fromthe Baq#ah shows that people of this region had access to the iron ofMugarat al-Warde at the end of the Late Bronze Age and during theearly Iron Age (McGovern 1995:31–33); but the situation that prevailedduring the classical times of the Ammonite kingdom remains obscure.

The find of Ammonite epigraphs at Tall al-Mazar poses the prob-lem of the relationship between the Ammonites and the Jordan Val-ley, and may hint at Ammonite expansion in that direction towardsthe end of the age of independence. In fact, the whole western frontof the Ammonite kingdom, and its southern limits as well, is open tomuch questioning. The biblical books—our only literary source in thismatter—make it clear that the Ammonite realm lay east of the regionsthat the Bible describes as Israelite (broadly speaking, “Gilead”), andnorth of Moab; but the boundaries of Gilead and of Moab were any-thing but sharp and stable (de Vaux 1978:571–72; Weippert 1997:19–28). Fortunately, recent archaeological work in what can be called,roughly speaking, northern Moab, from Madaba to the Mujib, is onthe verge of clarifying the Ammonite/Moabite border (Daviau 1997;Herr 1999:221). Mesha in his inscription claims that he re-possessed

17 Prof. Jacques Perreault, personal communication.

the “land of Madaba” (KAI 181 lines 7–9); but Ammonite pottery simi-lar to that of Tall Jawa and Tall al-#Umayri is found at Tall Jalul (east ofMadaba) and Rujm al-Heri (south); while Moabite pottery is present at

˘Hirbat al-Mudayna on the Wadı ath-Thamad (just 3 km south of Rujmal-Heri) and several adjacent defensive towers.

The problem of Heshbon, which certainly changed hands repeat-edly, is a sad illustration of this uncertainty as far as the southwest isconcerned. Further north, #Iraq al-Amır, down in the deep Wadı a.s- .Sîr,well below the Ammonite hill country, poses another problem, since itmay have been the private estate of feudal rulers who controlled theAmmonite country during much of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC and per-haps even earlier.

Finally, the position of the undoubtedly Ammonite sites of˘Hirbat

Umm ad-Dananır and Tall .Safu.t implies possession of the fertileBaq#ah; but, west of this depression, the massif of as-Sal.t may verywell have belonged to Gilead rather than to the Ammonite kingdom(Hübner 1992:145). Unfortunately, the archaeological investigation ofthis area, without which no certainty can be achieved, is still pending.

The Character of the Ammonite Country

If the northern iron mines lay outside Ammonite borders, this land-bound country, dry from May to September, and richer in stone andclay than in metal ores, was admittedly not predestined for materialprosperity. However, free from the unhealthy humidity of the deep val-leys, the Ammonite highlands receive more than the minimum 200mm of annual precipitation required for dry farming, and #Ammanitself is blessed with a long-term average of 500 mm. This chief city isalso well supplied in permanent water resources (Thompson:2000:482),with the potential to grow into a sizable demographic and economiccentre. Northwest of #Amman, the well-watered Baq#ah has particu-larly good agricultural land (largely terra rossa), where cereals can pros-per (McGovern 1986:1–6). The north has wooded areas, and typicalMediterranean plants such as the vine and the olive tree do well evenin the dryer or more rugged regions. Pasture for sheep and goats isavailable everywhere, and it is clear from innumerable finds of bones—unfortunately not yet tabulated—that animal husbandry was just asflourishing during the Iron Age as it is now.

Like the subordinate settlements of Tall Jawa and Sa .hab, the “GreatCity” (Rabbâ) of #Amman is located close to the most convenient north-

south caravan trail east of the Jordan, which links Arabia and its specialresources to Damascus and the rest of Syria.18 Staying close to theSyrian desert, this trail avoided deep wadies such as the Mujib andthe Zarqa. From it, one could also reach the Mediterranean harboursvia various turnoffs, such as Wadı Yabis, which led to the Beth-Sheandepression and a number of further options (Hübner 1992:233). Thisadvantageous geographical situation must account for much of therich grave goods found in the tombs of the Ammonite upper class. Itis indeed well known that ancient societies relatively poor in naturalresources but sitting on important international points of transit, wereable to derive considerable benefit from duties they levied on merchantsand travelers. Iron Age sources have little to say on this practice, butone can rely on the analogy of an incident that happened in semi-independent Su

˘hu, a state along the Euphrates east of the

˘Habur; a

ruler of Su˘hu ca. 770 BC tells at length in his inscriptions how he

waylaid and despoiled an Arabian caravan that had tried to ignore hisprivileges (Frame 1995:300).

Chronological Presentation

Late Bronze Age Background

Contrary to Nelson Glueck’s long prevalent opinion, the northern partof Transjordan, inclusive of the future Ammonite territory, was notdevoid of urban settlements during the Late Bronze Age (Sauer 1986).Besides #Amman itself, definite remains of LB occupation have beenfound at Sa .hab, Tall .Safu.t and Tall al-#Umayri, and a case has alsobeen presented for

˘Hirbat Umm ad-Dananır, largely on the basis of

the nearby cemeteries of Jabal al-Hawayah and Jabal al-Qe.sır (McGov-ern 1986:7–17; 336).19 The still incompletely inventoried and even lessfully published data suggest a settlement pattern not altogether differentfrom that of contemporary Cisjordan; but it has rightly been empha-sized that nothing like the great cities of Hazor or Megiddo has yet

18 I am deliberately avoiding the phrase “King’s Highway.” There is no proof thatIron Age Transjordan knew any organized and controlled highway anticipating theRoman via nova Traiana (Bienkowski 2000:49–50).

19 To say nothing of the curious, apparently isolated “Amman Airport Structure,”which contained considerable evidence of wealth, but on whose meaning scholarlyopinion remains divided (see, e.g., Campbell and Wright 1969; Herr 1983; Hübner1992:160–61).

surfaced in what was to become the kingdom of Ammon (LaBiancaand Younker 1995:409).

One cannot avoid the issue of the relationship between the seden-tary population revealed by those archaeological finds—and the prob-ably larger number of pastoralists who must have surrounded them—,and the “children of Ammon” of the Iron Age sources. Analogy sug-gests that in Transjordan as well as in Cisjordan, sizable Late BronzeAge urban settlements did not amount to any unified territorial king-dom but were essentially independent entities. Contemporary literarysources too remain silent until well into the Iron Age about the exis-tence of any such kingdom in the #Amman area, or in Transjordangenerally. Mesopotamian sources are indeed completely missing, andthe very few Transjordanian city states mentioned in sources relatedto Egypt’s Syrian empire are all located outside the future Ammoniteterritory; apart from Pahil (i.e., Pella in the Jordan Valley), the namesappearing in those sources refer to places located in the far north ofpresent-day Jordan, and—with less certainty—in the future lands ofMoab and Edom (Kitchen 1992:23–29). Thutmose III’s so-called Listof Asiatic Toponyms is the only Egyptian document from the LateBronze Age that possibly contains place names relevant to the futurekingdom of Ammon, especially Krmn that could perhaps be identifiedwith Tall al-#Umayri via the biblical Abel-Keramim (Redford 1982);20

but in the best of cases, these toponyms reveal a mere itinerary, whichdoes not say anything about the politics or demography of the land.

In light of the archaeological evidence now available, the silence ofEgyptian sources implies at best that the hill country of Transjordanwas quite marginal to imperial interests. This silence may even meanthat the future Ammon was still rather modest and unattractive tooutsiders during the Late Bronze Age; but there is no doubt thatsedentary life was present there long before any clear emergence of theAmmonite identity. As there is no destruction layer implying a generalcollapse of this modest urban establishment during the 12th century,and as pottery sequences indicate continuity in the development of thematerial culture (see here Chap. 10), it is not unreasonable to considerthe LBA inhabitants of the #Amman area as “proto-Ammonites.”

20 For a piercing critique see Timm (1989:53–56); for a more favourable appre-ciation, Kitchen (1992:23–25). Other identifications have been envisioned for Abel-Keramim (Hübner 1992:162; MacDonald 1999:34).

Emergence of the benê #Ammôn

The LaBianca-Younker HypothesisWhat is it that triggered the transition from a plurality of local patrio-tisms to the unified Ammonite identity (bn #mn, bît Am-ma-na-a-a) undermonarchic rule? As argued by LaBianca and Younker (1995:410), morethan one factor probably contributed to this process. The first twocauses put forward by these scholars are based on anthropologicalviews as well as on the archaeologically verified “collapse of the LateBronze Age city-state system” in Cisjordan and in much of Syria.

LaBianca and Younker first argue that this transformation of theeconomic environment pushed Transjordanian people to intensify theirown production in domains for which they used to rely in part onmore advanced sedentary cultures. This proposition almost sounds self-evident; but its working out could use more refinement. To illustrateTransjordan’s former dependence on international trade, LaBianca andYounker take all their examples from luxury items, such as “faienceamulets and scarabs from Egypt;” it remains to be shown how thedrying up of the usual sources for goods like those “led gradually tothe intensification of plough agriculture” (my emphasis).

The second factor posited by LaBianca and Younker is even morehypothetical. They posit that the collapse of the city-state organizationin Cisjordan brought refugees to Transjordan, and thereby new needs,new skills, new opportunities. Once again, there is a certain a priorilikelihood to this suggestion, but it is hard to substantiate in the currentstate of our information. The claim made in Judg 12:4 that the peopleof Gilead had migrated there from Ephraim is obviously polemical(Weippert 1997:27), and the early Iron Age chronological sequences inTransjordanian pottery and other artefacts are not yet firm enough toestablish definite conclusions with regard to innovations brought overfrom Cisjordan (see Chapter 12 in this volume).

More convincing is a third hypothesis: the domino effect of thePhilistines’ arrival in Palestine; but this factor is more relevant to theorigin of Ammonite kingship than to the germination of an Ammonitetribal identity. It is agreed that the danger represented by a powerfulnew ethnic group from the Aegean hastened the unification of Israelas a monarchy, and one can expect that Israel’s aggressive expansion,in turn, “precipitated the formation of supra-tribal polities in Ammonand Moab.” I will not discuss the advent of Israelite kingship, butonly the early relations between Ammon and Israel—the first events

of Ammonite history to be reflected in ancient sources, and the onlyones to be told with a minimum of details.21

The Jephthah NarrativeThe Jephthah narrative (Judg 11:1–12:7)22 is poorly connected to thedeuteronomistic presentation of pre-monarchic Israel by means of thelate and utterly unhistorical Judg 10:6–18, and by an end-formulatypical of the “Minor Judges” (12:7). Judg 11:1–12:7 contains severalstories, of unequal relevance to Ammonite origins. At the root of thetradition is the rather secular career of a crafty, calculating

˘Habiru

leader comparable to David (see above all Judg 11:1–11); but in thefinal form of the story, this character is disguised as a charismatic herolike Saul (Judg 11:29, 32), and the legend of a young girl’s tragic,untimely death (Judg 11:34–40)23 is amalgamated with it by meansof the reckless vow motif (Judg 11:30–31).24 The war story proper,focused on a Gileadite confrontation with the Ammonites, has twosecondary parts that can be disregarded in assessing its yield aboutAmmonite origins. One of those is an altercation between Jephthah andthe men of Ephraim, illustrative of the Ephraimites’ notorious claimto hegemony (Judg 12:1–6); the other, Judg 11:12–28, is an allegeddisputation between Jephthah and the king of the Ammonites—a late,unhistorical, composition that repeats the pentateuchal accounts ofMoses’ Transjordanian conquests, and mistakes the Moabite Chemoshfor the god of the Ammonites.

Place names do not allow us to follow the progress of the militaryoperations with any precision. Most important is Mizpah (Judg 11:11,29[bis], 34). V. 11 suggests that Mizpah had a YHWH shrine, and

21 There is no doubt that at all times the Ammonites had other aggressive neigh-bours beside the Israelites, and this above all on the desert front. Why should they nothave had to suffer from groups comparable to the Midianites and the Amaleqites, thatthe Bible portrays harassing the early Israelites? Enemies like those are most likely toaccount for the destructions detected by archaeologists in the Iron Age I strata of Tallal-#Umayri and Tall Jawa, relatively far from the heartlands both of the Moabites andthe Gileadites. Unfortunately, neither the Ammonites nor most of their neighbours lefthistorical records of their own, and one constantly turns to the better-known Israeliteswhen looking for explanations.

22 What follows is my own analysis, but it differs little from those of de Vaux(1978:685–86; 760–61; 819–22) and Hübner (1992:167–68).

23 An aetiological narrative, see Judg 11:39bâ–40.24 Warriors’ vows are found elsewhere in ancient Near Eastern literature, not only in

the Bible (e.g., 1 Sam 14:24—another reckless vow), but already in Ugaritic literature(Krt’s vow, I K col. iv lines 195–207).

in v. 29 this toponym is closely connected with Gilead in the phrasemi.spe(h) gil #ad. It seems reasonable to assume that Mizpah was a centralplace in Gilead, and to look for it at or near present-day

˘Hirbat

Jel#ad, south of the Jabboq (de Vaux 1978:820; Weippert 1997:25). Thetoponyms in the conquest account of Judg 11:33a—Aro#er, Minnith,Abel-Keramim—are obviously chosen to indicate a deep penetrationinto Ammonite territory; but none of these places can be located withcertainty (MacDonald 1999:33–34), and even the authenticity of thehalf-verse that contains them has been questioned (Mittmann 1969).

What emerges from this material is that the Ammonites tried toexpand westward, but suffered a serious defeat at the hands of thelocal people, united under an ad hoc military leader. This story reflectsconditions definitely older than the situation documented during IronAge II, when the kingdom of Israel repeatedly goes to war to assert itsclaims on Gilead (a Gilead now centered on Ramoth-Gilead, near thepresent-day Syrian border), and the children of Ammon are ruled bykings, each with a recorded name. In the biblical Jephthah complex, itis remarkable that the Gileadites do not even think of seeking help fromacross the river, and that the phrase “king of the children of Ammon”is only found in the late, secondary narrative of the diplomatic debatebetween Jephthah and the invaders (11:12, 14, 28). In the basic narra-tive, “children of Ammon” appears in almost every sentence, withoutany kind of leader ever being mentioned.

Were Gilead’s aggressors already called children of Ammon whenthis war took place? This is entirely possible. The eponym of thechildren of Ammon/bît Ammanaya may very well have been a patriarchlike the Aramaean #Adinu—definitely no dynasty founder—who, inthe 10th century at the very latest, left his name to the large tribe ofthe “children of #Adinu” (Bît #Adini), along the western bend of theEuphrates (Dion 1997:87–88, 229–30). If there is anything historicalto infer from the Yahwist’s account of Moabite and Ammonite origins(Gen 19:30–38), it is that whenever this narrative was written—orwhenever the underlying tradition took shape—the name of Ammonwas shrouded in enough obscurity for such a legendary “explanation”to be projected back to the hazy time of the remote ancestors; thiscould not have happened if Ammon, as David, Omri, Hazael andmany other eponyms, had been remembered as a ruler and dynastyfounder of the more recent past.

Saul’s Rescue of Jabesh-Gilead

In the days of Saul’s rescue of Jabesh-Gilead (1 Sam 11:1–11) thereremains something of the acephalous character of early Ammonitesociety, but several things have changed. The direction of the allegedAmmonite thrust has shifted from the west to the northwest, beyondtheir fabled northern border the Jabboq,25 and the name of Gileadtoo has clearly moved northward. The Gileadites, still entirely self-contained in the days of Jephthah, now appeal to Israel for rescue.Most interestingly for our purposes, the Ammonites are united underone leader, Nahash.

Much can be said in favour of the basic reliability of this story.As related passages of the books of Samuel (1 Sam 31:8–12; 2 Sam2:4–7; 21:12), it must be rooted in the heroic traditions of Jabesh.Bezeq (

˘Hirbat Ibzıq), on the east edge of the Israelite highlands almost

due west of Wadı Yabis, is a reasonable point of departure for Saul’sexpedition (v. 8); Nahash’s systematic eye gouging (v. 2) is paralleled incontemporary Assyrian war practices;26 and Saul’s recruiting method(v. 7) resembles that of an 18th century Mari official (Dossin 1941:No. 48). On the other hand, we only know this story in a relatively lateform, since it portrays Saul on the model of the charismatic “saviours”of Judg 1–8, and includes unlikely details (Hübner 1992:169), suchas a fantastic number of combatants (300,000 Israelites and 30,000Judahites in v. 8), and the suspension of arms granted to the peopleof Jabesh explicitly to allow them to get help (vv. 3, 10).

In view of this late reshaping of 1 Sam 11, it is all the more signifi-cant that it does not give the royal title to Nahash, the enemy leader;27

25 The exact location of Jabesh-Gilead is unknown, but its name is clearly relatedto that of the present-day Wadı Yabıs. The town has long been identified with TallMaqlub, but an alternate location, Tall Abu al-

˘Haraz, was recently submitted again,

tentatively, by Peter M. Fischer (see the web site of the Swedish Expedition to Jordan,http://www.lls.se/~fischer/id.htm).

26 Ashur-bel-kala (1073–1056 BC), see Grayson 1991:88; Ashurna.sirpal II (883–859BC), see Grayson 1991:220–21.

27 Typically, this title, which is not used in the Masoretic Text, is given to Nahash ina Qumrân manuscript (4QSama), whose “plus” vis-à-vis the Masoretic Text (it narratesa previous Ammonite conquest of Gad and Reuben, and the gouging of the men’s righteyes) has been accepted by many as original. As Rofé (1982), I consider this reading asa midrashic expansion. To Rofé’s arguments, one may add that 4QSama, like the LXX,inflates to 70,000 the number of Judahites who followed Saul (for Israelites the figure islost); and that it leaves one to wonder why the people of Yabesh were the first Gileaditesto send for help across the Jordan.

he is simply called “Nahash the Ammonite” (vv. 1, 2), or “Nahash” toutcourt (vv. 1, 10). Ammonite levies are now, more clearly than before,operating under single command, but apparently not under a king. Yet,irreversible steps may already have been taken in that direction for, ifwe accept the testimony of the deuteronomistic homily in 1 Sam 12:12and of the so-called Court History (2 Sam 10:1–2), Nahash did even-tually become “king of the children of Ammon.” This could have beenfacilitated by the co-operation with David alluded to in 2 Sam 10:2, orsimply brought about by the example of Israel, and by the continuouspressure that resulted from its very existence. It must be emphasizedhowever that those late witnesses are not absolutely compelling; con-ceivably, the children of Ammon may not have had any king of theirown until some time after the collapse of Israel’s “United Monarchy.”

Conclusions

In spite of the narrowness of the documentary basis, and of this uncer-tainty about the time when the full transition to kingship occurred, itseems that, among the Ammonites as in many other tribal societies(Sigrist 1979:97–98; cf. 204–17), the concentration of political power inthe hands of a single individual was precipitated by the needs of war.Israel had just followed the same path, and the same thing was hap-pening during the same time period among many Aramaean tribes,such as the already mentioned “children of #Adinu.” Assyrian refer-ences make it possible to track the development of this society from anacephalous situation through a period of ineffectual, piecemeal resis-tance to Assyrian inroads, to its unification under a powerful local/clanleader (A

˘huni), who fought Shalmaneser III most vigourously (Dion

1997:87–94). A˘huni’s final downfall in 855 does not diminish the repre-

sentative value of the process that brought him to kingship: state forma-tion followed the same course among the children of Israel, the childrenof #Adinu and the children of Ammon.

The persistently tribal character of the children of Ammon andmost probably, of the monarchy that they formed, is more evidentthan that of those comparable societies. The absolute predominanceof the expression “children of …” in referring to them, both in thelocal epigraphy and in the biblical tradition, is certainly significantin comparison to the phraseology referring to their immediate neigh-bours. The expressions “children of Israel” and “house of Israel” are

common in the Bible, but their relative frequency to designate Israel isfar less impressive than that of “children of Ammon” to designate theAmmonites. This is even more so if one considers Edom and Moab.28

Particularly striking is Jer 27:3, a text from the last decades of theAmmonite kingdom, where the prophet lists: “the king of Edom, theking of Moab, the king of the children of Ammon, the king of Tyre, andthe king of Sidon.”

In Assyrian references to the Ammonites, the key term is bıt(“house”), in contrast to Moab and Edom, who are never presentedas the House of Moab or the House of Edom. In Assyrian terminol-ogy, “House of So-and-so” is used mainly for kingdoms with a tribalorigin, like those of the Aramaeans and the Chaldaeans (on this wholequestion, see Dion 1997:225–32). Most of the “So-and-so” who givetheir names to those “houses” are known dynasty founders, but this isnot always the case; think, for instance, of bıt #Adini, which was cer-tainly a tribal entity, and whose eponym #Adinu is an absolutely hazyfigure, never clearly referred to as a historical character. It is certainlyto this second group, the “houses” whose eponym had not been a kingor chieftain of an organized political entity, that the “house of Ammon”belongs; if anyone had known who Ammon really was, how could alegend like Gen 19:30–38 have arisen and been circulated without theutmost ridicule?

As a result of this persistent recognition of a tribal character to theAmmonite people even once it had become a “kingdom,” one will haveto posit that lineages continued to play a serious role in its cohesionand administration, under the veneer of royal staff and administrationthat, as we will see, is reflected in the epigraphy. In view of this, Herr’sdescription of Ammon as a “city-state” (Herr 1999:222; Herr andNajjar 2001:336) only makes sense as a means to emphasize the strongpreponderance of the capital city at the top of Ammonite settlementhierarchy.

Israelite Domination?

Perhaps it was not just the fear of Israel and its example that turned theAmmonite tribe into a monarchy; it may have been a more intimateexperience of kingship, acquired under Israelite rule. If we accept the

28 The name of Moab was most probably geographical rather than ethnical, andwas treated as such by the Ancients (see Weippert 1994:318–19).

testimony of our single29 source on this subject, 2 Sam 10–12, David,who ruled Israel soon after Saul at the end of the 2nd millennium BC,did not only defeat the children of Ammon; he conquered their capitaland their territory, crowned himself king over them,30 despoiled themand exploited their manpower (2 Sam 12:26–31). Unfortunately, thehistorical reliability of this material is just as low as that of the restof the Court History (or “Succession Narrative;” very roughly, 2 Sam2 – 1 Kgs 2), a captivating but late and tendentious historical novel(Van Seters 1983:277–91). Confronted with uncorroborated events, thereader has good cause to be wary of the author’s amazing ability tospin plausible developments.

The author (henceforward, ACH) knew from oral tradition and from2 Sam 8:12 that David had successfully fought the children of Ammon;from 2 Sam 8:3–4, 7–831 he knew that David had also defeated Ara-maean forces headed by Hadadezer, king of Zobah. The lands ofMaacah and Tob (2 Sam 10:6–8) were still known to the deuterono-mistic historians (Josh 13:13; Judg 11:3, 5), and the “city of waters” of2 Sam 12:27 may still have been extant when he wrote (anything todo with the installations described by Herr and Najjar [2001:338]?).Tradition may even have had it that Solomon’s mother had first beenmarried to Uriah, an officer of David’s, who died in the siege of Rab-bah.32 Egged on by his hostility towards David and Solomon, could notACH invent all the rest, picking on the involvement of Bathsheba’s firsthusband in military action against the Ammonites, and drawing on his

29 2 Sam 8:11–12 states that the Ammonites were defeated, but it does not nec-essarily imply that their country was occupied. The children of Ammon are namedamong the nations that David conquered (kibbes), i.e., all the nations surrounding Israeland Judah except the Phoenicians, that David was believed to have befriended (1 Kgs5:1). The verb kibbes is strong, and goes beyond a mere defeat on the battlefield; butthe context is bombastic, and it includes defeated countries that were not occupied byDavid—such as Philistia, where Gath kept its own king (1 Kgs 2:39). One cannot baseon 2 Sam 8:11–12 alone the usurpation of Ammonite kingship that 2 Sam 12:26–31credits to David.

30 This is the self-evident meaning of 2 Sam 12:30 if one reads “the crown of theirking” (malkam) with the Masoretic Text. This sense remains possible if one reads “thecrown of Milkom (milkom),” i.e., of their chief god, with the LXX.

31 Vv. 5–6, about Damascus, break the continuity of the report and probably did notform part of the original account.

32 2 Sam 23:39 names “Uriah the Hittite” among David’s Thirty Heroes; but morethan thirty men are listed, and Uriah is the very last in the list. Is this good enoughevidence that Uriah had his place in Israel’s collective memory even before the CourtHistory was written?

usual crew of characters (Joab and Abishai)? He certainly had the skillto work those ingredients into a gripping and convincing narrative, inwhich an Ammonite campaign brought Bathsheba to David’s atten-tion, and allowed him to hide their adultery by sending her husband toa certain death.33

Yet, there are parts of 2 Sam 10–12 that cannot be accounted for inthis manner. David twice sends his men against the Ammonites (10:7;11:1); but the first of those campaigns, and the Aramaean wars con-nected with it, are irrelevant to David’s affair with Bathsheba. Thereare also details, such as the crown of Milcom (12:30), that are bothunnecessary to the vilification of David’s adultery and murder, andconcrete enough to come from sources (Rost 1965:184–89) rather thanfrom imagination alone. It seems therefore reasonable to grant a certainamount of historical substance to the wars narrated in 2 Sam 10–12.The Ammonites may have sought34 Aramaean support from northernTransjordan and southern Syria in their struggle against David, andthus succeeded in repelling a first Israelite attack; and David may verywell have finally conquered Rabbah, and proclaimed himself king overthe children of Ammon.

The Independent Ammonite Kingdom

When Did the Children of Ammon Recover Their Independence?The documents do not allow us to determine how long the Israelitedomination may have lasted. No Ammonite king is named in anyinscription written before Assyrian times,35 neither have archaeologistsbrought to light any material remains clearly pointing to the efforts of anative ruler. An impressive structure such as the cyclopean wall of TallJawa, a wondrous accomplishment if it was the work of such a smallcommunity all on its own, went up early in Iron Age II, but does it nec-

33 For my purposes in this context, it matters little if the report of a second con-frontation between Israel and Zobah (2 Sam 11:15–19), and Nathan’s intervention inchap. 12, originally formed part of the Court History.

34 More specifically, “hired,” following a practice common during the Iron Age. Thesame verb skr is used in the 9th century inscription of Kulamuwa, king of Sam"al (KAI24 lines 7–8). The relationship between this ruler of a small kingdom in northern Syriaand the mighty king of Assyria that he “hired” is comparable to that between the smallAmmonite kingdom and the kingdom of Zobah and its allies. From the 8th century, seealso 2 Kgs 7:6; 16:17–18.

35 I have argued above that the Baasha that the Kurkh Monolith mentions amonghis opponents at the battle of Qarqar was no king of Ammon.

essarily have to be credited to a strong central authority? If such was thecase, one could also quote the casemate wall at Tall al-#Umayri, whichgoes back to Iron Age I (Clark 1991:57–58), in favour of an earlier datefor Ammonite kingship than the written record can support.

A more consistent historical record would tell us when Israel lost itsgrip on the countries conquered by David; but the Old Testament doesnot. Reading on patiently, one eventually realizes that Amos 1:13–15addresses an independent kingdom of Ammon that was extant sometime in the 8th century, before the Assyrian takeover in Palestine andsouthern Syria;36 but one is never told how and when the Ammonitesregained their independence under a king of their own.

Perhaps the Ammonite liberation followed the weakening of Israel,which ensued from the separation of Israel and Judah ca. 931 BC, andwhich Shoshenq’s campaign made worse;37 but it may also have hadto wait until the weakening of the Omrides in the mid-9th century—the same time when, in Moab, Mesha the Dibonite threw the yoke ofIsrael. Ammonite independence can hardly have come much later, if,with most scholars, I correctly date and interpret the text known as the“Amman Citadel Inscription” (Aufrecht 1989:154; Hübner 1992:19).This monumental inscription, carved in stone in a script of the late 9th

century, is ill preserved and leaves many questions unanswered; but itseems designed as a divine oracle to a king, who is enjoined to buildentrances round about, and is heartened with the promise that hisenemies will be wiped out. This is a record from an independent ruler,not the representative of a foreign overlord. At whatever date Ammon’sliberation from Israel occurred, there is no reason to believe that it everfell back under Cisjordanian control.38

The question remains: if by any chance the Omrides dominatedAmmon as well as Moab, were they maintaining, or intensifying, a

36 Amos was a contemporary of Jeroboam II (ca. 783–743 BC). His oracle does notindicate how recent is the war crime that he condemns, and this crime may have beencommitted any time during the first half of the 8th century.

37 In 1 Kgs 14:25–28 Shoshenq’s campaign is reported from a most narrowlyJudahite standpoint, but it is clear from his own inscription that Israel was the maintarget. The Ammonite country apparently was not touched (Kitchen 1992:29; Hübner1992:180).

38 2 Chron 26:8 would have it that the Ammonites paid tribute to Uzziah, kingof Judah (ca. 781–740); but this is not reliable information; see Hübner (1992:188).Neither is it possible to grant any credibility to the 3–year domination of Ammon byYotam (ca. 740–36), which is asserted by the same source (2 Chron 27:5; see Hübner1992:190–91).

supremacy that went right back to the United Monarchy, or did theyhave to re-conquer Ammon after it enjoyed a period of freedom in thedays of Jeroboam I and his weak successors? A fresh conquest by theOmrides seems to have been the case as far as Moab is concerned (2Kgs 3:4–5; KAI 181 lines 4–5);39 but no such information is availableconcerning Ammon in the late 10th–early 9th century.

The Ammonites and Their Neighbours before the Assyrian TakeoverAmos 1:13–15 inveighs against the children of Ammon about a borderconflict with Gilead, showing that relations between Ammonites andIsraelites could go sour after David as well as before him; a time indeedwould come, when biblical law would exclude altogether (“even to thetenth generation”) the possibility for Ammonites to join the YHWHcommunity (Deut 23:3). Yet, there are also many signs, even in thebiblical text, that this prohibition does not reflect the conditions thatreally prevailed during Iron Age II, and that there were also peacefulexchanges between those neighbours, who shared very closely relatedlanguages and material cultures.

Even though Gen 19:30–38 assigns an incestuous origin to the Am-monites, this pericope consecrates at the same time their status aschildren of Lot, a man who had been closely related to Abraham, andwhom YHWH had taken special care to spare when he struck Sodom.According to the Court History (2 Sam 10:2), David had enjoyed somesort of compact with Nahash, apparently the same Ammonite leaderwho had fought his former lord Saul. His attempt to maintain goodrelations with Nahash’s successor had failed, but later on ACH namesShobi, another son of Nahash, at the head of the Transjordaniangrandees who supported David during his flight from Absalom (2 Sam18:27–29). This may not imply that Shobi served David—and ruledthe Ammonites—as a kind of viceroy, or even, vassal king, and that thecontinuity of Nahash’ royal line had somehow been affirmed by theconqueror; but clearly ACH did not see David’s conquest as kindling ageneral and permanent feud between Israelites and Ammonites.

Another, more reliable source does mention a child of Ammon whofound a niche in the very royal family of Judah—none other thanKing Rehoboam’s mother, “Naamah the Ammonitess” (1 Kgs 14:21,

39 According to the bombastic language of 2 Sam 8:11–12, Moab, like Ammon,had been conquered (kibbes) by David; but we know from Mesha’s own inscription (KAI181 lines 4–5) that his country, northern Moab, had been subdued by Omri—not by

31). This concrete example, the only one beside “Pharaoh’s daughter,”may be at the root of the deuteronomistic generalization concerningSolomon’s foreign wives in 1 Kgs 11:1–10, and it lends credibility towhat is said in the same passage (1 Kgs 11:7) about the bâmâ (“highplace”) that Solomon built to Molek (sic), the god of the Ammonites.

Apart from those meagre biblical allusions, we are completely with-out literary sources on the one or two centuries Ammonite indepen-dence lasted. Strong fortifications like the casemate walls of Tall Jawaand Tall al-#Umayri, and towers (rujm) that may go back as early asthe 8th century (Najjar 1999, esp. 105; Thompson 2000), concur withthe promise of divine help against enemies contained in the AmmanCitadel inscription, and make it clear that dangers beset this smallcountry. However, the enemies really to be feared perhaps boiled downto Israel or its Transjordanian affiliates (who had a will of their own40 aswell as strong cultural differences41 with Cisjordan), and the “childrenof the east” (Ezek 25:4, 5, 10).42 As for the other neighbours of Ammon,it is worth noting that there is no record whatsoever of hostilitiesbetween Ammonites and Moabites, nor between Ammonites and Ara-maeans. Aramaean people had long been present in northern Transjor-dan,43 and the Ammonites had looked up to them as their natural pro-tectors in the days of David’s aggression; there is no record that those

David. How serious had been David’s “conquest” of Moab? How long did its resultslast? It may be a mere fiction, seeking to attribute to David some of the exploits of laterrulers.

40 See, e.g., 2 Kgs 15:25.41 The Balaam inscription from Dayr #Alla and its strange dialect (Hoftijzer and Van

der Kooij 1991).42 Ezek 25 brings us down to the beginning of the 6th century; but the validity of the

Arab threat for earlier times is unquestionable. Arabs were already present at the battleof Qarqar in 853 (Grayson 1996:23 line 94), and repeatedly fought the Assyrians inthe Syrian desert in the 8th and 7th centuries, when, as we saw, Ashurbanipal explicitlynames Ammon as forming part of the war theatre.

43 As noted by de Vaux (1978:176–78), the logistics of the narrative of Jacob’s pursuitby the Aramaean Laban in Gen 31 presupposes a geographical point of departuremuch nearer than

˘Harran, and the heap of stones of Gilead is supposed to mark the

border between Jacob’s clan and Laban’s Aramaeans. It is remarkable that during theIron Age this became, instead, a border between “Israelites” and Ammonites. TheAmmonite settlement may have taken place on territory where Aramaeans had firstroamed freely as semi-nomads; when Jacob leaves for Laban’s place, he is said todepart for the land of the “children of the east” (Gen 29:1). I would not follow deVaux (1978:573), when he surmises that the people supposed, in Gen 31, to have madea compact with Laban were in fact Ammonites “who are included under the verygeneral term of Aramaeans.”

cordial relations later failed. There is no sign, archaeological or other-wise, that the Ammonite country was affected by Hazael’s conquests,44

whereas short Aramaic inscriptions from his time and apparently in thedialect used at Damascus have been found at nearby Dayr #Alla (Eph#aland Naveh 1993), in territory traditionally claimed by Israel.

The Ammonites’ peaceful relations with their southern and north-ern neighbours, as well as (perhaps most of the time) the Cisjorda-nian kingdoms, and their position on a convenient north-south lineof trade and communications from Arabia through the “Fertile Cres-cent” helped them to reach a fair degree of economic and culturaldevelopment45 even before their entry into the sphere of Assyria openedthem to a wider world and increased opportunities. Not only did theyshow remarkable ingenuity in creating a great variety of ceramics; spe-cialized craftsmen also produced a statuary (Abou-Assaf 1980; Dorne-mann 1983:154–63), whose abundance and quality so far has no par-allel south of the Phoenician cities and the large Aramaean kingdoms,and which owes little, if anything at all, to Assyrian models, but muchto Egyptian motifs (largely mediated by the Phoenicians) and to artistictraditions best represented in the northern part of Syria (e.g., the olderstatuary from Zencirli before the full impact of Assyria). North-Syrianand Phoenician affinities are also evident from the finding among themof types of luxury artefacts common in ancient Syria (and of course,admittedly represented more broadly in the ancient Near East), such ascosmetic palettes and decorated tridacna shells.

The Ammonites under Assyrian Overlordship

Sanipu, Servant of Tiglath-pileser IIIAssyrian kings have been aware of the Transjordanian countries per-haps as early as the end of the 9th century. In his summary inscriptionon a slab found at Nimrud, Adad-narari III (810–783 BC) names Edomamong conquered and tributary lands, strangely omitting the moreimportant kingdoms of Ammon and Moab (Grayson 1996:213 line 12).The “House of Ammon” itself does not appear in Assyrian documentsknown to us until the reign of Tiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC; textin Tadmor 1994:170), in a list of kings who paid tribute in 734. The

44 On 2 Kgs 10:32–33, and the questionable historical validity of v. 33, see Dion1997:199.

45 On what follows, see Hübner 1992:229–36.

name of the king mentioned by Tiglath-pileser could be read Sa-ni-puor Sa-ni-bu, as the name of one Snb or Snp, which figures as the grand-father of *Yar .h#azar, a probable royal personage, who dedicated a lime-stone statue found in #Amman (Aufrecht 1989:106; Hübner 1992:24,with an elaborate but inconclusive onomastic discussion in note 35).This identification would be compatible with the little that palaeogra-phy of this ill-preserved epigraph can tell, suggesting a date ca. 700.

The Ammonite king’s submission to Tiglath-pileser III was a reason-able, and in fact unavoidable decision, considering that the Assyrianarmy, bent on subduing the “Syro-Ephraimite” coalition, was operat-ing in the immediate vicinity of his kingdom. This practical arrange-ment was probably easy enough to enter peacefully, thanks to the factthat the children of Ammon had not been involved with Damascus andSamaria in their efforts to subvert the pro-Assyrian regime of Ahaz,king of Judah. *Sanip could also reason that the Assyrian control, onthe one hand, would bear less heavily on his Transjordanian state thanon those of Palestine (including of course Philistia), which lay on theroad to Egypt; and that, on the other hand, Assyrian protection couldbe helpful against the troublesome nomads who were a constant threatto his eastern border.

Assyrian Protection and Its PriceThese calculations were sound, and they were well rewarded in thecentury or so during which Assyrian domination remained effective inSyria-Palestine. During this whole period, we never hear of hostilitiesbetween Ammon and other kingdoms or provinces of the Empire, andarchaeology does not find any trace of military destruction, nor ofimportations of settlers from conquered nations like those that were socommon in countries that the Assyrian kings had annexed and turnedinto provinces. On the contrary, as noted in a previous paragraph, thereis evidence from Ashurbanipal’s inscriptions that Assyrian forces foughtand defeated the desert nomads who threatened the Ammonites andother subject peoples living on the west side of the Syrian desert.

Ammon of course had to pay the prize for peace and protection. Itskings had to deliver to their overlords not only the precious metals thatthe tribute required, but also manpower for the Assyrian kings’ buildingprojects and military contingents for their campaigns. Tribute usuallywas conveyed by the vassal kings to the Assyrian capital, unless amilitary expedition brought their overlord to their own neighbourhood,as during Sennacherib’s (704–681 BC) celebrated 3rd Campaign of 701

BC. On that occasion, “all the kings of the West” congregated aroundhim in Usû (the town that faces Tyre on the continent), bringing theirtribute; Pudu"ilu (*Peda"el)46 of the House of Ammon was among them(see ANET 287; Timm 1989:353). The same king is named againunder Esarhaddon (680–669 BC), in an undated document, listingtwelve “kings of the West” who had to help in the construction of theirlord’s arsenal in Nineveh (see ANET 291; Timm 1989:362). Later on,King Amminadab appears in an updated form of this list (ANET 294;Timm 1989:372), which ostensibly names the “kings of the West” whodelivered assistance to Ashurbanipal (668–627 BC) in his first Egyptiancampaign (668 BC). It is useful to open a parenthesis here, and to notethat the epigraph on the bronze bottle discovered at Tall Sıran in 1972(Aufrecht 1989:203) names, as current king of the children of Ammon,another Amminadab, son of H.sl"l and grandson of Amminadab—mostprobably the Amminadab who did his duty by Ashurbanipal in 668—who nearly completes the list of the Ammonite kings who ruled sincethe days of *Snp, ca. 734 BC47

The only document that allows us to put figures on the tributeimposed on the children of Ammon, a letter from the time of the Sar-gonids (ABL 632; Timm 1989:367–68), rates it at 2 minas (ca. 1.14 kg)of gold—twice as much gold as the sum Moab delivered at the sametime; the same document reports the delivery of 10 minas of silver fromJudah, a sum whose value was closer to the Moabite payment thanto that of the children of Ammon.48 There is not much that can beinferred from such thin evidence; but the disproportion between theAmmonite payment and those of the Moabites and Judahites is puz-zling; it would remain curious even if we took it as an indication thatthe Ammonite territory had been expanded north, west and south (as I

46 On this name see Cross 1974:494.47 To this list one may probably add the name of a Barak"el, to be dated somewhere

in the first half of the 7th century, on the basis of a seal impression from the privatecollection of Mr. S. Moussaieff. The seal bore the words lbrk"l hmlk, and therefore doesnot explicitly designate its owner as a king of the children of Ammon; but it was a verysmall seal, on which saving space was important; and the editor (Deutsch 1999:121,123) makes a strong case that both the script and the name are best explained asAmmonite.

48 Other texts illustrating practices related to the tribute mention wine deliveriesto envoys from Transjordan, among whom Deller (1985:328), in his reading of ND10078 (time of Sargon II, 721–705 BC), restores [ba-an am-ma-n]a-a-a. Another textfrom Sargon II’s reign (ADD 1110+) mentions token gifts to Pudu"ilu (*Peda"el), king ofthe Ammonites, and his retinue.

have speculated above, in discussing geographical boundaries), largelyat the expense of the defeated Israelites. Could this inequality imply,instead (or: also), that the Ammonites were being punished for someoffence, whose record has not yet been discovered? Or rather, that theyhad been more cunning or diligent than their larger southern neigh-bour in taking advantage of their position on international highways,and had amassed more wealth?

Ammonite Prosperity under Assyrian RuleThe archaeology of Ammon during this period yields considerable evi-dence of imported luxury, demonstrating both good taste and extensivecontacts with the rest of the ancient Near East, from Egypt to farawayeastern countries; interestingly, specifically Assyrian cultural influence,though real, was limited,49 on this side of the Jordan as on the other.The new prosperity and international outlook of the Ammonites isparticularly evident from the grave goods of the capital’s upper class(Hübner 1992:231–34); small altars and perforated cups show that theyalso shared the contemporary taste for incense and other aromatic sub-stances (Hübner 1992:234–35). To the Ammonites as to the better-known Judahites, integration into the Assyrian oikoumene meant accept-ing, or at least, experimenting with many values and models that hadnot yet been very familiar to the local clans. The children of Ammontook long strides towards conformity with a world that had grown muchbigger; but, protected by their land-locked situation and their hills, theymanaged to retain their national identity, their language and their alle-giance to the same major deities as in the past, El and Milkom,50 andthey developed distinctive styles in aspects of their culture like ceramicproduction.

The Ruling ClassAdoption of internationally accepted canons involved the development,somehow in superposition to the traditional elders of the clans orvillages, of an upper class of administrators or servants of the king (Iam deliberately avoiding the much-abused word “bureaucracy”), whobore titles like those we know from the epigraphy of the Phoenicians

49 It is mainly evident in pottery, as well as seal cutting and jewellery. See Bennett(1982); Hübner (1992:192); Daviau (2001).

50 Thanks to excellent treatments by Hübner (1992:247–82) and Aufrecht (1999a),there is no need here for a new presentation of Ammonite religion.

and of the Aramaean and Cisjordanian neighbours of Ammon.51 Nodoubt this process had begun earlier. During the days of Ammoniteindependence Amos 1:15 already mentioned sry bny #mn, who musthave represented the highest echelon of leadership under the king;52

but the written evidence for this class—essentially, seals adding titlesto the names of their owners—is mainly from Assyrian times. Titlesdenoting close dependence on the king or some high-placed individualinclude #bd (Aufrecht 1989:30, 40, 96, 261, 308)53 and n #r (Aufrecht1989:137, 139). A third title, nss (“standard bearer,” it seems) appearsonce or twice: certainly on the seal of Sw.hr (Aufrecht 1989:181), andpossibly on an ostracon of the late 7th century from the #Amman citadel(Koutsoukou et al. 1997:166). Interestingly, two women are designatedas the “maid-servant” (*"mh) of So-and-so (Aufrecht 1989:85, 112); wasthis possibly an official function? No ordinary maid-servant was likelyto own a seal. Other people, no doubt specialized craftsmen livingin the main centres, also had titles they could proudly put on theirseals: N.sr"l h.srp (“the goldsmith”; Aufrecht 1989:65); and .H.ty, the spr(“scribe”) of Adnur (or was it Ado[nı]nur?)(Aufrecht 1989:328); and"Elıram the spr (Deutsch and Heltzer 1997:56).

Aramaization and Its LimitsAnother important aspect of the Ammonites’ opening up to a widerworld was their increasing use of Aramaic.54 An Isaian legend plays onthe fact that, at the end of the 8th century, the political elite of Judah,

51 This upper class of royal servants is a prime candidate to the ownership of largeresidences like Tall Jawa House 800. The same could be said about those large roundor square towers (rujm) that some archaeologists now believe to have been meantto control and protect agricultural estates (Hübner 1992:155–57; Najjar 1999:105).Unfortunately, only larger finds of seals and other inscribed materials would make itpossible to verify this supposition.

52 From later times, see also Jer 49:3, and note how priests (khn, at least in JudahiteHebrew), who were also state officials, are mentioned in the same breath as the srym.The srym also appear in David’s “Court History” (2 Sam 10:3), but I am not sure thatthis story should be considered earlier that Amos 1 or even Jer 49.

53 On three of these four seals the word “servant” is followed by the name of aknown king. This is not true of n #r; in the first example the individual named after n #r isotherwise unknown; in the second example, the bearer of the seal is the n #r of Brk"l, whomight be a king (see Deutsch 1999). On the seal Aufrecht 1989:261, the phrase is #bdmlk; the absence of the article before “king” is curious; instead of a title, we may havethe proper name #bdmlk, as suggested by Aufrecht.

54 On this subject, the reader will find excellent orientation and bibliography inAufrecht 1999b:167–69.

if not the rank-and-file of the population, understood Aramaic (2 Kgs18:26). Similarly, and not much earlier, the epigraph on the statue ofthe exalted Ammonite personage *Yar .h#azar (Aufrecht 1989:106; Hüb-ner 1992:24) was written in Aramaic characters, and used the Ara-maic word bar for “son,” instead of the well-attested form ben, whichAmmonite shares with the other Canaanite languages. So much forhigh-class, and possibly international, communications in the late 8th

century; with regard to domestic consumption, on the other hand,Ammonite scribes writing in their own language had stopped followingthe trends favoured by Aramaean scribes, and were developing some-thing of a script of their own;55 this is visible in a number of inscrip-tions, from names on seals to the Tall Sıran bronze bottle (Aufrecht1989:203). However, with the relative trivialisation of borders that camewith Assyrian imperial rule, the pressure of the very widely used Ara-maic language and script increased and became irresistible. The Am-monites gradually adopted Aramaic as their written medium even forday-to-day matters. At the end of the Assyrian period, this transitionwas complete. Tall Jawa has yielded a good example, an ostraconabout wheat, written in Aramaic ca. 600 BC (Dion 2002). The imperialregimes of the Babylonians and the Persians only confirmed this faitaccompli (Lemaire 1994:20–21). At the end of the 6th century, traces ofthe traditional dialect and onomastics of the children of Ammon arestill perceptible; but the ostraca on which they are found are in Ara-maic script, and many of the proper names used in those texts are offoreign origin.56

The Ammonites and Babylon

“Baalis,” the Last King of the Ammonites“Baalis,” perhaps the best-documented king of the Ammonites, perhapsthe immediate successor of this Amminadab whose grandfather hadserved Ashurbanipal, was probably the last ruler of a semi-independentAmmonite kingdom. For a long time his name was only known to usfrom the Bible (Jer 40:14), which spelled it b #lys #. More recently, this

55 This position is followed by most and seems indeed to be correct; but one mustnote, with Aufrecht (1999b:167) that it is not universally accepted.

56 I am thinking here of the Heshbon ostraca traditionally classified as No. 2 (Auf-recht 1989:199) and No. 1 (Aufrecht 1989:174). Even in the Tall al-Mazar ostracon No.VII (Aufrecht 1989:340; Hübner 1992:33), traditional Ammonite names still emerge ina text more completely Aramaized.

name turned up twice in ancient inscriptions. It first appeared on aseal impression found on surface at Tall al-#Umayri in 1984 (Herr1985; Aufrecht 1989:308), which reads lmlkm"wr #bd b #lys #. The spellingof the royal name on this bulla is strikingly different from biblical b #lys;however, the identification of b #lys # to the king named in Jer 40:14 hasbeen fully vindicated by the more recent publication of a seal boughtfrom a Jordanian antiquities dealer (Deutsch and Heltzer 1999:53–56). On this seal, b #lys # bears the (largely restored) full title “king ofthe children of Ammon,” the same title as in Jer 40:14 and on thebottle from Tall Sıran. Most of the interpreters have recognized a verbequivalent to Hebrew yasa # as basic to this Ammonite royal name,and it is also recognized that the difference in the sibilants can beaccounted for by the fact that the original Semitic consonant /

¯t/,

which in Judahite Hebrew became /s/, had survived as a consonantdistinct from /s/ in the Ammonite dialect—a consonant that soundedto Judahite ears more or less like their own /s/ (samek).57

The Bible represents Baalis as an enemy of Babylon, who resistedNebukadnezzar at the same time as Zedekiah of Judah. To understandthe role he played and what happened to his kingdom, we must stepback and take a look at a larger context, namely the western part of theancient Near East during the second half of the 7th century.

Assyria Loses Its Grip on Palestine and TransjordanEspecially from 652 on, the reign of Ashurbanipal (668–627 BC) wasmade difficult by enormous problems on the south, the east and thenorth of Assyria, and he had less and less resources left to protecthis interests in Syria-Palestine. An Assyrian army still showed up nearPalestine when it went to Usû, the continental counterpart of Tyre(ANET 300), at a disputed date, perhaps 644/643. But effective controlof the western part of the empire was more and more left to thenew, allegedly loyal, 26th Dynasty, which Ashurbanipal had been justtoo happy to leave behind when he renounced further campaigningin Egypt in 663 BC. After the death of Ashurbanipal (627 B.C.),

57 In my opinion, this is not the full explanation. One cannot account for the loss ofthe final /#/ consonant of the Ammonite form if one posits that ys # represents the verbyasa #. The loss of the last consonant is best explained if ys # does not stand for the verbitself, but for a noun meaning “salvation,” like Hebrew yesa # whose underlying formwas yis #—presumably yi

¯t # in Ammonite—a noun in which the final cluster must have

made the /#/ practically imperceptible to Judahite ears, hence its absence from theirtranscription of the king’s name as “Baalis.”

Nabopolassar seized power in Babylon (625 BC) and the erosion ofthe Assyrian empire accelerated. In 616 BC (Grayson 1975:91) or evenbefore, Egypt sent expeditionary forces to hard-pressed Assyria, with aview on keeping it as a buffer against the new eastern giants, the Medesand the Babylonians, while actually repossessing the Syrian dominionsof the 18th Dynasty.

One cannot avoid wondering what this meant for the Transjorda-nian vassals of Assyria. Obviously, Egypt’s commercial and culturalinfluence could only benefit from its new rise as a world power. Onthe other hand, Egypt never had shown much interest in the con-quest and political domination of Transjordan, and there is no rea-son to believe that the situation was different in the latter part of the7th century. This presumable hands-off policy as well as the increasingpowerlessness of Assyria, must have left Ammon more exposed thanbefore to the inroads of the increasingly powerful and aggressive “chil-dren of the east,” among whom Qedarite Arabs were prominent.58 TheAmmonites now were probably less able than before to regulate andbenefit from the transit and traffic of the great commercial caravans,less able also to protect their settlements on the desert margin from theencroachments of the nomads. This must have been a thrilling periodfor the children of Ammon. They had lost the empire’s protection andthe benefits that came with it, but in compensation they sooner or laterstopped paying tribute to Assyria; they probably also expanded into theadjacent ex-“Israelite”—now, ex-Assyrian— regions, which no imperialgarrison defended any more—hence the signs of Ammonite presence,which archaeologists have detected to the south and to the west of theformer nucleus of the Ammonite kingdom. The children of Ammonwere getting a new taste of freedom and self-reliance.

Baalis Resists the Babylonian InvasionThe new ambitions demonstrated by Babylon—which at first couldhave been expected to simply re-conquer its independence from As-syria, with or without serious encroachments in areas lying betweentheir respective traditional cores—must have come as a shock to theAmmonites, when the Babylonians not only destroyed Nineveh in 612and booted the Egyptians out of northern Syria in 605 BC, but soonfollowed them all the way down to their own borders, where this

58 Most of Ashurbanipal’s Arab campaigns already had been directed against theQedarites (Eph#al 1984:147–69).

advance was severely checked by Neko ca. 600 BC (Grayson 1975:101).Would the Babylonians try and establish a lasting presence, as theAssyrians had done before? Would they be as indifferent to Transjordanas the pharaohs of the 26th Dynasty? Or would they claim as vast animperial domain, and as much submission (financially and otherwise)from its denizens, as the Assyrians used to do? How good were theirchances to fulfill their imperial ambitions? Were they so irresistible thatthe children of Ammon should renounce their new freedom without afight?

The Old Testament—our only source alas—has preserved somehints at the fluctuations of Ammonite policy. If we give credence to 2Kgs 24:2, Ammonite units joined units from other nations in harassingJehoiakim of Judah on behalf of Nebukadnezzar until his main armytook Jerusalem in 597 BC; as suggested by Lemaire (1994:12), whoquotes Babylonian Chronicle No. 5 (Grayson 1975:101), perhaps theywere grateful for Nebukadnezzar’s recent attack on the Arabs. Accord-ing to Jeremiah 27:3, on the other hand, Ammonite envoys met inJerusalem with Zedekiah, King of Judah, and envoys from Edom andMoab, Tyre and Sidon, to try and formulate a common policy in frontof the Babylonian threat. Undoubtedly, hopes for a prompt Babylo-nian retreat had been re-kindled by the accession of an energetic newpharaoh, young Psammetichus II. Nothing came out of this conference,but Psammetichus soon showed his mettle in a victorious Nubian cam-paign (592 BC), and an insolent tour of Palestine under pretence ofreligious devotion. This pharaoh died in 589, and his successor Hophrawas much less eager to confront Babylon; but apparently the dice hadalready been thrown. Baalis, the king of Ammon, found himself on thelosing side.

Our only precise information about actions taken by Baalis comesfrom the narrative portion of the book of Jeremiah. From chap. 32on, and especially from chap. 37 on, this book gives us an insider’sview of Jerusalem and the court, and a vivid impression of the atmo-sphere that prevailed during those feverish last days of independentJudah. With regard to Baalis, we learn that after the fall of Jerusalem inthe summer of 587 (or 586!), he gave asylum to a disgruntled mem-ber of the Judahite royal family, Ishmael.59 In the fall of the sameyear, Baalis sent Ishmael on a foray into captive Judea to eliminate

59 It seems that Zedekiah himself, the last king of Judah, had tried in vain to fleeinto Ammonite territory when the Babylonians broke through his rampart (2 Kgs 25:4–

the pro-Babylonian governor Gedaliah, with a view on de-stabilizingBabylonian rule in that conquered neighbouring state (Jer 40:13–41:3;41:15–18). It was probably this same Baalis who had been on thethrone of Ammon, already in defiance of Babylon, when Nebukad-nezzar marched against Jerusalem a couple years earlier: with poeticimagination, Ezekiel (21:23–28) depicts the king of Babylon holding amantic inquiry to decide whether Rabbah of the Ammonites should behis next target, or rather Jerusalem.

Nebukadnezzar Puts an End to the Ammonite KingdomThe immediate consequences of Ishmael’s terrorist activity and of Am-monite resistance to the Babylonian takeover are unknown. No authen-tic narrative whatsoever tells us anything more about the Ammonitekingdom. Josephus (Jewish Antiquities 10 §§181–82) puts the Babylonianconquest of Ammon and Moab five years later than that of Judah,i.e., in 582 or 581. He may have wanted to give a recorded fulfil-ment to Jeremiah’s doom oracles against those countries (Jer 44–49);but his date is both precise and likely enough, and one cannot simplybrush aside the suggestion that he drew this information from Berossos(Lemaire 1994:13). In any case, the complete lack of further documen-tary mentions or allusions certainly implies that the Ammonite king-dom went under in the days of Baalis, or soon after. Thus, the curtainfell on the Ammonite state at an uncertain date, early in the 6th century.

No doubt the Babylonian conquest involved some fighting, and the“rebellious” king of Ammon was probably removed; but Josephus’sshort report only speaks of “reducing” Ammon and Moab “to obe-dience,” not of destroying them, and the children of Ammon probablydemonstrated once again the realism that had kept them comfortableunder Assyrian suzerainty. It seems indeed that, perhaps under a nativeQuisling, they retained for a while some of the prosperity that hadaccrued to them during the 8th and 7th centuries. At Tall al-#Umayriand in its vicinity, Herr claims that there is good evidence of a reacti-vated economy, now focused on wine production on a large scale (Herr1999:227–32; Herr and Najjar 2001:336).

5). Lemaire (1994:19) quotes some evidence, biblical and epigraphic, that more Judeansfound their way to Ammonite territory; but this evidence is difficult to evaluate.

References

Abbreviations

ABL R. F. Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian Letters Belonging to the Koujunjik Collectionof the British Museum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1892–1914.

ADD C. F. W. Johns, Assyrian Deeds and Documents Recording the Transfer of Property.Cambridge: Deighton, Bell & Co., 1898–1923.

ANET J. B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd

ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1969.KAI H. Donner and W. Röllig, Kanaanäische und Aramäische Inschriften. 3rd ed.

Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1971–1976.ND Nimrud Document

List by Authors

Abou Assaf, A.1980 Untersuchungen zur ammonitischen Rundbildkunst. Ugarit-Forschungen 12:

7–102.Aufrecht, W. E.

1989 A Corpus of Ammonite Inscriptions. Ancient Near Eastern Texts & Studies 4.Lewiston, N.Y.: The Edwin Mellen Press.

1999a The Religion of the Ammonites. Pp. 152–62 in Ancient Ammon, eds. B. Mac-Donald and R. W. Younker. Studies in the History and Culture of theAncient Near East 17. Leiden: Brill.

1999b Ammonite Texts and Language. Pp. 163–88 in Ancient Ammon, eds. B. Mac-Donald and R. W. Younker. Studies in the History and Culture of theAncient Near East 17. Leiden: Brill.

Bennett, C.-M.1982 Neo-Assyrian Influences in Transjordan. Pp. 181–87 in Studies in the History

and Archaeology of Jordan I, ed. A. Hadidi. Amman: Department of Antiqui-ties of Jordan.

Bienkowski, P.2000 Transjordan and Assyria. Pp. 44–58 in The Archaeology of Jordan and Beyond.

Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer, eds. L. E. Stager, J. A. Greene, and M.D. Coogan. Harvard Semitic Museum Publications, Studies in the Archae-ology and History of the Levant 1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Campbell, E. F., Jr., and G. E. Wright1969 Tribal Leagues Shrines in Amman and Shechem. Biblical Archaeologist 32:

104–16.Clark, D. R.

1991 Field B. The Western Defense System. Pp. 53–86 in Madaba Plains Project 2:The 1987 Season of Excavations at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Stud-ies, edited by L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca, and R. T. Younker.Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Coughenour, R. A.1976 Preliminary Report on the Exploration and Excavation of Mugharat el-

Wardeh and Abu Thawab. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 21:71–78, 186–89.

Cross, F. M., Jr.1994 Leaves from an Epigraphist’s Notebook. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 36: 486–

94.

2003 Leaves from an Epigraphist’s Notebook, eds. J. A. Hackett and J. Huehnergard.Harvard Semitic Studies, 51. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.

Daviau, P. M. M.1997 Moab’s Northern Border: Khirbat al-Mudayna on the Wadi ath-Thamad.

Biblical Archaeologist 60: 222–28.2001 Assyrian Influence and Changing Technologies at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Pp.

214–38 in The Land That I Will Show You. Essays on the History and Archaeologyof the Ancient Near East in Honour of J. Maxwell Miller, eds. J. A. Dearmanand M. P. Graham. JSOT Supp 343. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

Deutsch, R.1999 A Royal Ammonite Seal Impression. Pp. 121–25 in Michael: Historical,

Epigraphical and Biblical Studies in Honor of Prof. Michael Heltzer, eds. Y. Avishurand R. Deutsch. Tel Aviv-Jaffa: Archaeological Center Publications.

Deutsch, R., and Heltzer, M.1997 Windows to the Past. Tel Aviv-Jaffa: Archaeological Center Publications.1999 West Semitic Epigraphic News of the 1st Millennium BCE. Tel Aviv: Archaeolog-

ical Center Publications.de Vaux, R.

1978 The Early History of Israel. Translated by David Smith. London: Darton,Longman and Todd.

Dion, P.-E.1997 Les Araméens à l’âge du fer. Histoire politique et structures sociales. Études Bibliques

N.S. 34. Paris: Gabalda.2002 The Ostracon from Building 800, pp. 268–75 in P. M. M. Daviau, Exca-

vations at Tall Jawa, Jordan 2, The Iron Age Artefacts. CHANE 11.2. Leiden:Brill.

Dornemann, R. H.1983 The Archaeology of the Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Milwaukee:

Milwaukee Public Museum.Dossin, G.

1941 Archives Royales de Mari. Vol. 2, Lettres. Paris: Geuthner.Eph#al, I.

1984 The Ancient Arabs: Nomads on the Borders of the Fertile Crescent 9th–5th CenturiesB.C. Jerusalem: Magnes Press.

Eph#al, I. and J. Naveh1993 The Jar of the Gate. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 289:

259–65.Frame, G.

1995 Rulers of Babylonia from the Second Dynasty of Isin to the End of the Assyrian Dom-ination (1152–612 B.C.). Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia, BabylonianPeriods 2. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Grayson, A. K.1975 Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles. Texts from Cuneiform Sources 5. Locust

Valley, N.Y.: J. J. Augustin.1996 Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC, II (858–745 BC). Royal

Inscriptions of Mesopotamia, Assyrian Periods 3. Toronto: University ofToronto Press.

Halpern, B.2001 David’s Secret Demons. Messiah-Murderer-Traitor-King. Grand Rapids: Eerd-

mans.

Herr, L. G.1983 The Amman Airport Structure and the Geopolitics of Ancient Transjor-

dan. Biblical Archaeologist 46: 223–29.1985 The Servant of Baalis. Biblical Archaeologist 48: 169–72.1992 Epigraphic Finds from Tell el-#Umeiri During the 1989 Season. Andrews

University Seminary Studies 30: 187–200.1999 The Ammonites in the Late Iron Age and Persian Period. Pp. 219–37

in Ancient Ammon, eds. B. MacDonald and R. W. Younker. Studies in theHistory and Culture of the Ancient Near East 17. Leiden: Brill.

Herr, L. G., and M. Najjar2001 The Iron Age. Pp. 323–45 in The Archaeology of Jordan, eds. B. MacDon-

ald, R. Adams, and P. Bienkowski. Levantine Archaeology 1. Sheffield:Sheffield Academic Press.

Hoftijzer, J., and G. van der Kooij1976 Aramaic Texts from Deir #Alla. Documenta et Monumenta Orientis Antiqui

19. Leiden: Brill.1991 The Balaam Text from Deir #Alla Re-Evaluated. Proceedings of the Symposium Held

in Leiden 21–24 August 1989. Leiden: Brill.Hübner, U.

1988 Die ersten moabitischen Ostraka. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins104: 68–73.

1992 Die Ammoniter. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte, Kultur und Religion eines transjor-danischen Volkes im 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Pa-lästina-Vereins 16. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Kitchen, K. A.1992 The Egyptian Evidence on Ancient Jordan, pp. 21–34 in Early Edom and

Moab: The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan, ed. P. Bienkowski.Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 7. Sheffield: J. R. Collis and theNational Museums and Galleries on Merseyside.

Koutsoukou, A., K. W. Russell, M. Najjar, A. Momani1997 The Great Temple of Amman: The Excavations. Amman: American Center of

Oriental Research.LaBianca, Ø., and R. W. Younker

1995 The Kingdoms of Ammon, Moab and Edom: The Archaeology of Societyin Late Bronze/Iron Age Transjordan (ca. 1400–500 BCE), pp. 399–413in The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land, ed. T. E. Levy. New York: Factson File.

Lemaire, A.1994 Les transformations politiques et culturelles de la Transjordanie au VIe

siècle av. J.-C. Transeuphratène 8:9–27.Lipinski, E.

2000 The Aramaeans: Their Ancient History, Culture, Religion. Orientalia LovaniensiaAnalecta 100. Leuven: Peeters.

London, G. A., H. Plint, and J. Smith1991 Preliminary Petrographic Analysis of Pottery from Tell el-#Umeiri and

Hinterland Sites, 1987. Pp. 429–39 in Madaba Plains Project: The 1987Season at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. G. Herr,L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca and R. W. Younker. Madaba Plains Project2. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

MacDonald, B.1999 Ammonite Territory and Sites. Pp. 30–56 in Ancient Ammon, eds. B. Mac-

Donald and R. W. Younker. Studies in the History and Culture of theAncient Near East 17. Leiden: Brill.

McGovern, P. E.1986 The Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages of Central Transjordan: The Baq #ah Valley

Project, 1977–1981. University Museum Monograph 65. Philadelphia: Uni-versity of Pennsylvania, The University Museum.

1995 Technological Innovation and Artistic Achievement in the Late Bronzeand Iron Ages of Central Transjordan. Pp. 29–37 in Studies in the Historyand Archaeology of Jordan. V: Art and Technology Throughout the Ages. Amman:Department of Antiquities of Jordan.

Mittmann, S.1969 Aroer, Minnith und Abel Keramim (Jdc 11, 33). Zeitschrift des Deutschen

Palästina-Vereins 85: 63–75.Najjar, M.

1999 “Ammonite” Monumental Architecture. Pp. 103–12 in The Archaeology ofJordan and Beyond. Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer, eds. L. E. Stager, J.A. Greene, and M. D. Coogan. Harvard Semitic Museum Publications,Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Levant 1. Winona Lake, IN:Eisenbrauns.

Redford, D. B.1982 A Bronze Age Itinerary in Transjordan (Nos. 89–101 of Thutmose III’s

List of Asiatic Toponyms). Journal of the Society for the Study of EgyptianAntiquities 12:55–74.

Rost, L.1965 Das kleine Credo und andere Studien zum Alten Testament. Heidelberg: Quelle &

Meyer.Sauer, J. A.

1986 Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages: A Critique of Glueck’s Synthe-sis. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 263:1–26.

Schürer, E.1979 The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135).

A New English Version Revised and Edited by G. Vermes, F. Millarand M. Black. Vol. 2. Edinburgh: Black.

Sigrist, C.1979 Regulierte Anarchie. Untersuchungen zum Fehlen und zur Entstehung politischer Herr-

schaft in segmentären Gesellschaften Afrikas. Frankfurt am Main: Syndikat. 2ded.

Thompson, H. O.2000 Some Towers in Jordan. Pp. 482–89 in The Archaeology of Jordan and Beyond.

Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer, eds. L. E. Stager, J. A. Greene, and M.D. Coogan. Harvard Semitic Museum Publications, Studies in the Archae-ology and History of the Levant 1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Timm, S.1989 Moab zwischen den Mächten. Studien zu historischen Denkmälern und Texten. Ägyp-

ten und Altes Testament 17. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Van der Kooij, G., and M. M. Ibrahim

1989 Picking up the Threads… A Continuing Review of the Excavations at Deir Alla,Jordan. Leiden: University of Leiden, Archaeological Centre.

Van Seters, J.1983 In Search of History. Historiography in the Ancient World and the Origins of Biblical

History. New Haven: Yale University Press.Weippert, M.

1994 Moab. Pp. 318–25 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäolo-gie, Vol. 8, ed. D. O. Edzard. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

1997 Israélites, Araméens et Assyriens dans la Transjordanie septentrionale.Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 113: 19–38.

PART FIVE

MULTIMEDIA PROGRAMME

THE TALL JAWA MULTIMEDIAINFORMATION SYSTEM

D H

Introduction

The documentation for the archaeological record of Tall Jawa is pre-served at Wilfrid Laurier University in the form of field notebooks,photographs, plans and section drawings, object, pottery and sampleregistration books.1 Like any excavation, the recording in the field pro-duces thousands of locus sheets, daily journal sheets and illustrations.Changes in publishing and in technology have made it possible to pub-lish much of this material on the world-wide web, but the final reportin book form can also contain a large, representative sample of thisdata, a sample that contains precise information related to the writtendescription of the stratigraphy and architecture of the major structuresat the site. In this volume, each chapter contains a grid plan of a givenfield, plans of the buildings in that field with their elevations, roomand wall numbers, and relevant locus numbers. In addition, there arephotographs of each major room and of certain special features, suchas ovens, hearths, boulder mortars, staircases and details of the archi-tecture. In order to present this information in a more complete for-mat, a locus list, locus sheets adapted from the Madaba Plains ProjectManual, and a multimedia programme containing ca. 400 colour andblack and white photographs and a linked database are included on aCD-ROM. Copies of the plans of the buildings in each field are alsoincluded in the multimedia programme.

1 The seasonal report, a set of contact sheets of all black and white photographs, aset of colour slides, and a complete copy of the object registration log are on file in theDepartment of Antiquities in #Amman.

The Locus Summaries

A complete locus summary list is included on CD in MS Word andin PDF formats. The standardized descriptions include identification,Munsell Colour Codes, composition and inclusions, ceramic count,pottery pail numbers and selected readings (all pottery is Iron Ageunless otherwise indicated). For certain loci, the total number of sherdsis not available; in these cases, the number of registered sherds and the+ sign are given. Stratigraphic position is indicated by Under, Over, Sealsagainst, Sealed against by, Abuts, etc. For those loci restricted to a givenroom, the room number is also included. A bottom elevation is givenfor most walls, although this represents the lowest excavated depth andnot necessarily the base of the wall. For detailed information, see therelevant discussion above. These lists can be searched or selected, inwhole or in part, copied, printed, and saved for future use.

Plans

The field plans of the wall system and of the major structures weredesigned as EPS files; they are included in the multimedia programmein the form of JPG files. Although the stratigraphy was relativelystraightforward and was restricted to only two or three principal debrislayers, a number of section drawings are also included. Section draw-ings of the elevations across the tell are presented in Chapter 1 (Fig.1.3).

The Multimedia System

The record fields in the Tall Jawa Iron Age database represent thecategories of information recorded for each photograph or drawing.While most of this information is not subject to modification, certaincategories, such as Room, and Feature may refer to only one element ina given photo in which other rooms or features are visible. The Captioncontains a fuller description of the elements in a given image. So too,information in the fields of Stratum and Chronology reflects the Iron Ageelements, and does not include reference to features that are part of alater building phase, for example the Umayyad reuse of Building 700in Field D.

Certain fields in the original database provided needed informationconcerning original file names, duplication, etc.; these working fieldsare not represented here, so that the presentation of data in its final

format is more useful for the reader. In the final version, each recordis accompanied by an image drawn from the photographic record.Certain loci were not photogenic, consisting primarily of collapsedwall stones and soil. Other loci, especially the architecture and floorsurfaces with pottery and artefacts in situ better illustrate the finds ineach building and are the foundation for our interpretation of roomarrangement and function. At the same time, an individual photo isnot necessarily complete, given the fact that the team did not live atthe site and therefore any material culture exposed on a given daycould not be left in the field overnight. Pottery, artefacts and sampleswere removed at the time of discovery, even though a floor surface hadonly been partially exposed. The information in the photographs istherefore supplemented by the data in the tables presented in the text.

Overview of the System

The information system is designed for researchers, lecturers and stu-dents in the classroom and in the field who make use of archaeologicalfield reports. This information system (IS) is suitable for users at thebeginner to intermediate level of computer literacy. Many researchersin archaeology work primarily in the PC platform, and at the presenttime Microsoft Access is one of the leading database programs forsmall-scale applications. The Access database and a linking programgenerated using Microsoft Visual Basic 6 are modelled on the multime-dia system used in Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Vol. II: The Iron AgeArtefacts. Visual Basic was chosen because of its multimedia capabilitiesand tight integration with Access as well as its cross program/platformsupport.

Table 14A. List of Fields in each Record of the Database

Field Name Content

Site-Yr Code for site (TJ) + year (89, 91–95)Field Letter (A-E, L, M, S, TJ)Square NumberLocus NumberPhoto_No Number of photo in programmeStratum Roman NumeralChronology Iron I, Iron II, Late Iron II, PersianCategory Excavation, Survey, Final Photo, General, etc.Building NumberRoom Number

Feature Building, Room, Wall, Oven, Section, Probe, etc.Caption Description of image

Although the IS could be placed on a network, it is primarily designedto be installed on an IBM PC compatible computer running Windows95, 98, ME, NT 2000 or Windows XP. It should also remain compat-ible with future Windows versions. At the time of installation, the userwill have to inform the program where the CD-ROM is located, so thataccess to the large number of images and the database are possible.It is the intention of this design that advanced statistical manipulationand analysis will be done in other programs, by importing the databasedirectly (e.g. OBDC link—see Microsoft website or Microsoft Accessmanual for more information).

Requirements

Windows 95, 98, ME, 2000, or Windows XP2

16 MB RAM (64 MB recommended especially for newer operatingsystems),

VGA 800×600 for best viewing,

10 MB of hard drive space for program,

CD-ROM drive.

Installation

To install the IronAge program insert the CD-ROM into the drive andrun the ‘setup.exe’ file (double click on the file from Windows Exploreror click start, run, then go to the CD-ROM drive and click setup.exe). Thiswill begin the installation process. The program was not designed withan “auto-install” function because the CD-ROM needs to be insertedto allow the program access to the database and the images. If the CD-ROM had this function it would ask to be installed each time it wasinserted into the drive. During the install process follow the instructions.Depending on what has been installed previously on the computer,the installation program may require rebooting of the computer. If theprogram finds installed components that are newer than those on theCD-ROM it will ask whether to keep the newer existing file or replace

2 This program has not been tested on NT 4, but should run if the latest NT servicepack has been installed.

it with its older version. It is recommended that the newer version bekept. If the installation program says that it needs to replace older fileswith up-to-date versions, it is recommended that they be replaced andupdated.

The setup program will ask for the location where you wish the pro-gram to be installed on your hard drive (default c:\program files\iron-age). The program will automatically create a program group andinsert the program icon. After installation, the program will search thecomputer for the CD-ROM and access the Tall Jawa images from the“images” subdirectory. Note: depending on your computer setup, certainfiles may already be installed (registered) on your system. Thus, if youget an error box indicating a file cannot be registered, just continue theinstallation.

Along with the “images” subdirectory, the CD-ROM has a subdirec-tory named “support”. This subdirectory contains the ironage program,the associated Tall Jawa Access database, and the support files neededfor installing and running the program. Generally the user will not haveto interact with the files in the “support” directory.

Figure 14.1. Main screen of the Tall Jawa information system.

The Tall Jawa Information System

The information system has a one-screen layout. From this screen(Figure 14.1), access to images, searches, and printing is controlled.This interface allows for easy and quick access to the information inthe database.

Main Menu

The main menu is located at the top left of the main screen (Fig. 14.1)and has two major pull down submenus, labelled “File” and “Copy toClipBoard”.

Figure 14.2. File submenu.

The “File” submenu allows the user four options (Figure 14.2). The“Print Page” option produces a snapshot of the screen and outputs theimage to the default printer. The user may want to change the defaultprinter (From the Microsoft Windows Start, Settings, Printer menu) todirect the output to a specific location.

The “Print Current Records” allows the user to print all the currentrecords as selected by the “Record Control” on the main screen. Therecords printed will in most cases be the result of a query and not thefull database.

The “Print Range” allows the user to print a range of the currentrecords (as selected by the “Record Control”). The “Print Range” menu hasa handy feature that allows user to advance through the records andclick on the “Use Current” button to enter the current record into thetext box, rather than typing. Presently, the “Print Range” command doesnot update the pictures for each record when printing. Hence all theprintouts will have the first image in the image box. If separate imagesare needed each page will have to be printed individually.

The “Exit” option exits the program. All query information will belost and the Tall Jawa database closed.

Figure 14.3. Copy to ClipBoard submenu.

The “Copy to ClipBoard” submenu is designed to move information fromthis program to other programs such as word processors or spread-sheets, such as Microsoft Excel.

The “Copy Page” option allows users to copy all the textual infor-mation on the screen to the clipboard. The information stored on theclipboard will be formatted with the field name, separated by two tabs,and then the record information. For example:

Site year: TJ89

The information was formatted with two tabs so that it can be pastedneatly into a spreadsheet’s columns or a word processor document.Note that the image is not copied.

The “Copy Range” option uses the same format as the “Copy Page,”and allows the user to copy a range (textual information) of the currentrecords into another program for presentation or further analysis. The“Copy Range” menu has a handy feature that allows user to advancethrough the records and click on the “Use Current” button to enter thecurrent record into the text box, rather than typing.

The “Copy Current Records” option uses the same format as the “CopyPage,” but copies all of the records currently selected by the “RecordControl” object. This allows the user to copy the result of a query or allthe records, into another program for presentation or further analysis.

The “Copy Image” option allows users to copy the current record’simage into a paint program (such as Microsoft Paint). This option islimited to programs that recognize image information and may notsupport importing directly into word processing programs. To do this,paste the image into a paint program and copy it from the paintprogram and paste it into the word processor.

Database Information

The database information system presents the fields in Table 14Afor each record. The fields are divided into three sections; the fieldinformation database fields (1–4 upper left), feature information fields

(6–11), and the caption field. There are three elements for each field(see field example, Fig. 14.4).

Figure 14.4. One field from the field information portion of the database.

On the left there is a check box, followed by the field name and thedata for the specific record. The check box allows the user to perform asearch for similar information. By selecting the check box and clickingon the “Perform Search” button in the lower right, the program willsearch for information similar to that in the selected field. The usermay select more than one check box to narrow a search. The programperforms an “AND” search with the selected fields.

Record Control

Figure 14.5. Record control object.

The program uses a standard record control object to allow users tomove through the records. The left and right arrows, allow you to moveforward and backwards though the dataset. The bounded left and rightarrows allow you to move to the beginning and end of the dataset. Thecentral textual area labelled “Record Control” indicates the current recordbeing used. A slider object is also available to allow the user to move toa point in the database quickly by moving the pointer left and right (leftmouse click on the pointer and while holding the button down, dragthe pointer left and right). Alternately, if a user wants to view a specificfeature, they can click on the “Enter Search” button and type into thefeature box the name of the desired item and click “Perform Search” (seesearching the database for further information).

The number of records will change if the user performs a search orloads a different database. In the case of a search, the text in the recordcontrol will reflect the number of records that match the search.

Field Images

Figure 14.6. Image control object.

With the popularity of the JPG format, it was decided to convert theimages into this file type. The images were then stored at the highestresolution with virtually no loss. On the CD-ROM all of the imagesare located in the image directory. For information on the numberingsystem for the images see the database field section in this chapter(Table 14A).

The images were scanned at a width ×height of 800× 600 pixels(24 bit colour), which matches the typical screen resolution of a VGAcomputer screen. A scale is visible in each image to give a perspectiveof image size. On the main screen a thumbnail image can be seenin the upper right corner of the screen. In order to speed movementthrough the database on slower computers, the user can deselect the“Auto-load picture” check box, located above the thumbnail image. Thiswill turn off the image display for future thumbnails. When the checkbox is deselected, a “Show Image” button will appear. This button allowsthe user to manually view the thumbnail.

Full Image Preview

The image can be seen in full screen mode simply by clicking on thethumbnail image. The image will be viewed in its native format of800× 600 pixels. If the image resolution is greater than this, scroll barsat the sides of the image, will appear to allow the user to scroll andview the image. To return to the main screen mode just click on the fullscreen image.

Searching the Database

Fig. 14.7. Search controls area.

Searching the database can be performed in two ways: simple searchesfor information that is similar to information in a particular field, anda complex user-defined search. The program uses an “AND” search forall multiple criteria searches.

Searches from the main screen allow the user to find informationthat is similar to that in a field(s) of the present record. This is doneby simply clicking on the check box adjacent to the field and thenclicking on the “Perform Search” in the search control area. Selectingthe appropriate check boxes can search matches for more than onefield. Note: the buttons in Fig. 14.7 will become available (visible) asneeded.

A more powerful search facility can be activated by clicking on the“Perform Search” button in the search control area, or by clicking on thetext box containing information for which the user wants to search.Activating the search screen brings up a second screen where the textboxes are yellow in colour. If this is the first time a search has beenactivated and the “Perform Search” button used, all the check boxeswill be cleared and the text boxes will be yellow. If the search wasentered by clicking on a text box instead, the current field will appearwith the current record information already entered in the field andthe associated check box checked. The user can click on this cell toenter information or click on the “Perform Search” button to find similarfeatures. If past searches have been performed, the search criterioninformation will be seen in the text box. If you do not want to includethese items in the present search, ensure that the unwanted check boxesare deselected. Once the search criteria have been entered, click on the“Perform Search” button and the program will return to the main screen

with the number of matches reflected in the “Record Control” object.Now the user can view the subset of chosen records by using the “RecordControl”.

After a search is completed, the “Clear Search” button will appear.Clicking on this button will reset all of the selected fields to their non-selected state thus returning the database to its original (all recordsbrowsable) state. This can also be accomplished by deselecting all ofthe check boxes that were involved in the search, and then clicking onthe “Perform Search” button.

If a search is unsuccessful and no matching records are found, amessage box will appear and a subsequent error box will be presentedgiving a technical definition of why the search failed. If a letter hasbeen entered into a numeric field, an error indicating that too fewparameters were entered will be seen (because in a numeric search allnon-numeric information is stripped off).

The user may decide to exit the search without performing a searchby pressing the “Exit Search” button. This will deselect all the checkboxes and reset the database to it original state. The full database isnow available for review.

Uninstalling the Program

As with other programs developed under the Microsoft Visual Devel-opment Suite, this program registers the information necessary to unin-stall itself in the “Windows Control Panel” under the “Add/Remove Pro-grams” utility. For each of the different versions preceding Windows2000 the procedure is virtually identical. The following illustrationswere captured from Windows 2000. To uninstall the program (see Fig.14.8) click on the “Start” icon, select “Settings”, and select “Control Panel”.The control panel will appear as seen in Figure 14.9.

Figure 14.8. Accessing the Control Panel.

Figure 14.9. Accessing Add/Remove Programs.

From the control panel select “Add/Remove Programs”. The “Add/RemovePrograms” window will appear as seen in Figure 14.10. On the leftside of the window the “Change/Remove” box (Install/Uninstall in Win-dows ME) must be selected (it usually is selected by default when the“Change/Remove Program” window loads). Select “Iron Age” and click onthe “Change/Remove: button (Add/Remove in Windows ME). The user willbe prompted to confirm that the program is to be removed and thenfinally clicks “OK” to complete the procedure.

Figure 14.10. Removing the Iron Age program.

It is hoped that the multimedia information system developed here willprovide researchers with a powerful tool for accessing and investigat-ing the features unearthed at Tall Jawa. It is also hoped that otherresearchers will see the utility and produce similar systems to aid in dis-semination of other archaeological findings. The authors can be con-tacted for further updates to the program or to report problems orsuggestions for enhancements.

WALL DESIGNATIONS

FIELD A (1000–1999)

Wall# Locus Brief Description

1001 A1:4 Retaining Wall, Stratum IX–VIII1002 A2:3=22 Outer South Wall, Stratum VIIIA1003 A2:20 Outer South Wall, Stratum VIIIB1004 A3:4 Inner Casemate Wall (W of Doorway H),

Stratum VIIIA1005 A4:5=B64:11 North Wall of R1041006 A4:6=A3:27 East Wall of B1021007 A3:11 Mud brick wall above W10121008 A4:15 North Wall of R1051009 A13:5 East Wall of R1031010 A13:7 Inner Casemate Wall (E of Doorway H),

Stratum VIIIA1011 A3:7=A4:11 South Wall of R104 in B102, =W20201012 A3:18 East Wall of R1021013 A14:13 South wall of R1081014 A14:8 West Wall of R1081015 A13:36 East-west wall, Stratum X1016 A13:37 North-south wall, Stratum X1017 A14:21 Partition Wall around bin1018 A15:2 Modern wall1019 NA1020 A13:42 Inner Casemate Wall (E of Doorway H),

Stratum VIIIB1021 NA1022 A5:8=15:9 South Wall of R1101023 A5:9 West Wall of R1101024 A15:4=5:23 North Wall of B102, =W20341025 A5:27 West Wall of R1111026 A15:6 East Wall of R1101027 B64:15 West Wall of R1041028 A15:42 East-west Wall; east of R1101030 B63:42 Inner Casemate Wall (W of Doorway H),

Stratum VIIIB1031 A23–A63 Modern stone pile above Inner Casemate Wall1032 A14:2=A24:2 Modern wall through Building 113

FIELD B (2000–2999)


2000 B24:28=34:13 Blocking wall, west frame of Doorway A2001 B24:3 East-west inner casemate wall; south of Drain

Channel 2182002 B24:5 Outer casemate wall, south of Passageway 2192003 B24:6 Inner casemate wall; north of drain2004 B24:13=34:12

=35:6North-south inner casemate wall; east wall of R215,South of Doorway B

2005 B34:3 South wall of R209; abuts W20042006 B34:8 North wall of Casemate Room 210, east of Doorway

A2007 B43:2=44:6

=53:4=63:3Inner casemate wall, later phase

2008 B43:3 Cross wall bonding with W20072009 B43:8=53:1

=63:18East-west, outer city wall, south of Room 210

2010 B43:11 Line of stones, abuts 2007 in earlier constructionphase

2011 B44:12 West wall of R2062012 B53:5 Cross wall perpendicular through W20072013 B53:16 Cross wall in casemate2014 B53:22=54:8 North-south interior wall2015 B54:6 Interior wall running e-w2016 B54:10 North-south interior cross wall. Abuts 2015 and 20072017 B63:9 Cross wall in R2012018 B63:21 North-south mud brick wall, west wall of R2022019 B63:28 Partition wall, west of Oven B63:30 and R2022020 B64:2 South wall of R204 in Building 102, =W10112021 B64:12 North-south interior wall2022 B34:11 East Wall of R2092023 B25:8+26:5 Outer west wall2024 B16:2 Tower2025 B65:5 South wall of Room 2142026 B65:8 East wall of Room 2142027 B24:2 South end of Wall 2023, under Drain B24:242028 B35:4 East-west wall, north wall of R2122029 B25:17=35:8 Inner casemate wall, east of R213, north of

Doorway B2030 B25:27 Partition wall between R213 and R2152031 B34:24 South wall of R2122032 B65:14 West wall of Building 1022033 B65:16 Blocked doorway in R2172034 B66:2 Outer North wall of B102,=W10242035 B65:13 Blocked doorway in R1092036 B24:38 Blocking wall in outer wall 2023, above W20272037 NA2038 B35:25 L-shaped partition wall at east end of platform

B35:282039 B35:30 L-shaped partition wall at east end of oven B34:54

2040 B34:35 East-west wall2041 B24:33 Retaining Wall2042 B34:2–B63:1 Modern wall2043 B25:1=B26:1 Modern wall

FIELD E (3000–3999)


3000 E44:3=54:2=E65:2=76:2

Inner Casemate Wall

3001 E44:8=53:30 North-south wall abutting 3000; west of R3033002 E44:10 North-south wall abutting 3000; west wall of R3043003 E54:16 North-south wall between R303 and R3023004 E54:20 South wall of R3033005 E55:22–E65:7 Stacked boulder wall; east wall of R3023006 E55:13=76:12 Outer Casemate Wall3007 E64:6, E64:30 North-south wall; east wall of R3073008 E64:7+32 East-west wall, north of Cistern E64:13; abutted by

W30093009 E64:8 North-south partition wall, abuts W30083010 E64:24 North-south L-shaped wall; abuts W30073011 E64:28=65:5 North-south perpendicular to W3000; east wall of

R3063012 E64:29 East-west wall south of Cistern; north of R3243013 E64:35 South wall of R302; abutted by 30073014 E65:10 Cancelled; north end of W30283015 E76:5 Inner casemate wall, east of Passageway3093016 E76:7 Corridor wall south of W3000; east wall of R3133017 E76:8 Corridor wall south of W3000; east wall of R3093018 E76:11 Outer casemate wall east of postern3019 E76:13 Corridor wall north of 3000 (west side)3020 E76:14 Corridor wall north of 3000 (east side)3021 E76:17 Partition wall between R310 and R3113022 E76:34 East-west wall along N side of Inner Wall 3000,

Stratum IX3023 E57:4 Retaining wall visible from road3024 E64:54 North-south wall, east wall of R305 and R3163025 E75:6 North-south wall between R312 and R3133026 E75:8 East-west wall between R313 and R3173027 E74:5 North-south wall between R314 and R3173028 3014=E74:6 North-south wall between R308 and R3143029 E74:11 North-south wall, west wall of R3233030 E65:20, 22 East-west wall between R306 and 3203031 E53:8+29 East-west wall, north wall of R3183032 E53:13 North-south wall, west wall of R3153033 E53:5 East-west wall, north wall of R3193034 E53:12 North-south wall, east wall of R3153035 E53:9, 22, 25 East-west Wall, stacked boulder pillars+connecting

units; W of Doorway G3036 E74:16 East-west wall, south wall of R314

3037 E53:10, 19; 54:8 East-west Wall, stacked boulder pillars+connectingunits; E of Doorway G

3038 E63:21 Partition wall south of Oven E63:103039 E63:19 East-west wall on south of R3073040 E53:33 East-west wall, south wall of R3193041 E65:50 North-south wall, west wall of R312B3042 E65:49 East-west wall on south of R3213043 E75:20 East-west wall on south of R3123044 E64:53 L-shaped Partition wall, west wall of R3253045 E74:25 East-west wall on south of R3273046 E64:65 Cancelled; threshold in Doorway E3047 E53:34 North-south wall on west of R319 and R3223048 E74:12 East-west wall, south wall of R3173049 E55:1=76:1 Modern wall3050 E13:1 North-south outer West Wall; =W2023.3051 E21–E24 Modern wall

FIELD D (6000–6999); (7000–7999)

Stratum VII Walls:


7010 D32:36 East-west wall, north wall of R7157015 D22:29 East-west wall, south wall of Room 7077017 D13:9 East-west interior Wall; North wall of R7147019 D13:27 East-west interior Wall; South wall of R714, north

wall of R712.7020=6020 D12:20=23:5 East support wall of Staircase D23:43, West side of

R7077021=6021 D13:20 West support wall of Staircase D23:43, east wall of

R7167023 D12:32 North-south interior wall, east wall of R7127024=7019 D12:26=21:21

=31:38East-west interior wall north of R612, R613

7025 D31:29 Outer East Wall, east wall of R6137026 D31:37 Outer South Wall, under W60057028 D21:28 North-south interior Wall; abuts outer Wall 7026;

forms Doorway C7029 D13:61 North-south interior Wall; runs north from W70197030 D14:2+23:6

+33:2Outer North wall of B700, under W6003

7031 D2:4+13:7+14:3 Outer West wall of B700, under W6004

FIELD C-WEST (8000–8999)

Wall # Locus Brief Description

8001 C5:2=C6:2 North-south wall8002 C6:6 East-west wall, outer casemate

8003 C6:9 North-south wall, east end of casemate R8018004 C7:3, 17 East-west inner casemate wall, final phase8005 C7:21 East-west inner casemate wall, earlier phase8006 C7:20 North-south wall west of Building 8008007 C6:12 East-west wall, east of casemate R8018008 C16:6 East-west wall in S. balk8009 C16:8 North-south wall in E. balk8010 C17:21, 39 West wall of B800 and R8028011 C17:2=27:23 South wall of Building 800 and of R802, R8038012 C17:7, 33 East wall of R802, includes stacked pillars (C17:34,

35, 56) and connecting units,=W80148013 C17:38 North wall of R8028014 C17:19, 13 East wall of R802, south end, boulder-and-chink,

=W80128015 C27:22, 35, 19 Pillared wall, north wall of R8038016 C27:2 North-south wall, east wall of R8038017 C27:4 East-west wall, south wall of R805, continuation of

80118018 C27:7 Support wall for upper Stairs C27:438019 C27:15 South wall of Stairs C27:438020 C27:41 North wall of Stairs C27:438021 C27:49 North-south wall, east wall of Building 8008022 C27:45 Pillar and North-south wall, east side of R804, N of

Stairs C27:438023 A93:2 South Wall of R8098024 A94:2=A84:2 Exterior north wall, bonds with W80288025 A83:4 North Wall of R807, continuation of W80308026 A83:3 East wall of R8078027 A83:8 South wall of R807, north support wall of Staircase

A83:198028 A83:11 Exterior West wall, continuation of 80338029 A93:11 South wall of R8088030 A93:20–A83:24 South wall of Corridor 810, continuation of W80258031 A93:41 East Wall of R8088032 A93:42 West wall of R8088033 A84:7 Exterior West wall, bonds with W80248034 C7:1–A93:4 Modern property wall8035 C3:1–C63:17 East-West wall on crest (same as W9000?)8036 C2:2–C72 Wall in scarp of bulldozer cut

FIELD C-EAST (9000–9999)

Wall # Locus Brief Description

9000 C43:3=C53:3 East-west wall on southern edge of terrace9001 C43:4=C44:5 North-south wall abuts W90009002 C43:14 North-south wall on East side of R9029003 C44:4=C54:11 East-west wall bonded to W9001; north wall of

R9029004 C44:8 East-west wall, north wall of R9059005 C53:10=C54:9 North-south wall, abuts W9000, east wall of R904

9006 C54:10 East-west wall, abuts W9005, north wall of R9049007 C61:3=C71:2 East-west wall north of Buttress 90089008 C61:16=C71:10 Buttress wall, sealed against by W90079009 C62:4=C72:2 Byzantine or modern wall9010 C62:8=C72:3 North-south wall, bonds with W90079011 C62:10 Buttress to 90109012 C63:6 Partially excavated wall in N. Balk9013 C63:12 North-south wall, east wall of R9019014 C63:17 Cancelled; East-west wall,=W90009015 C71:17 East-west wall below buttress wall W90089016 C54:3 East-west wall, north wall of R901, east of Doorway

A9017 C65:4 North-south wall, east side of B9009018 C64:6 East-west wall, south wall of R9089019 C64:3=65:2

=66:3West wall of B910

9020 C64:7 Tower(?) foundation9021 C64:6=65:10

=75:25North-south wall on east side of R917, R907+R908

9022 C66:5 Interior East-west wall, north of R, 917, R9079023 C65:7 Interior East-west wall, north of R9089024 C66:4=75:24 North-south Wall, on east side of R917, R916,

R906+9079025 C66:6 East-west wall, North wall of B9109026 C76:4 East-west wall, North wall of R9099027 C76:13 North-south wall stub, north of Doorway J9028 C75:22=76:3 East-west wall, west of Doorway G9029 C75:23=76:11 East-west wall, east of Doorway G9030 C75:3 East-west wall, south of R9109031 C75:11=85:2 North-south wall, north of Doorway K9032 C75:13=85:3 North-south wall, south of Doorway K9033 C86:4 North-south wall, east side of R9129034 C86:5 East-west wall, south side of R9129035 C75:6=86:2 North-south wall, East wall of R9099036 C74:8 North-south wall, east of roadway9037 C74:3 East-west wall, east of Doorway M9038 C74:16 East-west wall, west of Doorway M9039 C64:11=74:10 North-south wall, south of Tower 90209040 C86:3 East-west wall, north of R9129041 C53:28 Wall stub; south frame of Doorway D9042 C74:13 North-south wall line, west side of Roadway 9159043 C81–C86 Modern Wall9044 Blocking wall, south frame of Doorway F.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abel, F.-M.1967 Géographie de la Palestine. Vol II. Géographie Politique. Les Villes. 3rd ed. Paris:

Librairie Lecoffre.Aharoni, Y.

1973 Beer-sheba I. Excavations at Tel Beer-sheba, 1969–1971 Seasons. Tel Aviv: TelAviv University Institute of Archaeology.

Albright, W. F.1934 The Kyle Memorial Excavation at Bethel. Bulletin of the American Schools of

Oriental Research 56:2–15.1943 The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim, Vol. III. The Iron Age. Annual of the

American Schools of Oriental Research, 21–22. New Haven: AmericanSchools of Oriental Research.

Albright, W. F. and J. L. Kelso1968 The Excavation of Bethel (1934–1960). Annual of the American Schools of

Oriental Research 39. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of OrientalResearch.

Alexandre, Y.1995 The ‘Hippo’ Jar and Other Storage Jars at Hurvat Rosh Zayit. Tel Aviv

22:77–88.Alt, A.

1933 Das Institut im Jahre 1932. Palästina Jahrbuch 29: 26Artzy, M.

1987 On the Storage of Olive Oil in Antiquity. Pp. 1–4 in Olive Oil in Antiquity.eds. M. Heltzer and E. Eitam. 1987 Conference, Haifa. Haifa: Universityof Haifa, Israel Oil Industry Museum, Dagon Museum.

Aufrecht, W. E.1989 A Corpus of Ammonite Inscriptions. Ancient Near Eastern Texts and Studies 4.

Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen.1999 Ammonite Texts and Language. Pp. 163–188 in Ancient Ammon, eds. B.

MacDonald and R. W. Younker. Leiden: Brill.Aurenche, O.

1977 Dictionnaire illustré multilingue de l’architecture du Proche-Orient ancien. Collectionde la maison de l’Orient Méditerranéen ancien No. 3. Série archéologique,2. Lyons: Maison de l’Orient.

Barber, E. J. W.1991 Prehistoric Textiles: The Development of Cloth in Europe and the Near East with

Special Reference to the Aegean. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.1994 Women’s Work: The First 20,000 Years. Women, Cloth and Society in Early Times.

New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company.Battenfield, J. R.

In preparation Survey and Documentation in Field M; Survey and Documenta-tion in Fields S and L. Pp. xx-xx in Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Volume V:Survey and Ethnography, ed. P. M. M. Daviau. Culture and History of theAncient Near East 11/5, eds. B. Halpern, M. H. E. Weippert, Th. J. P.van den Hout, I. Winter. Leiden: Brill.

Beckmann, M.1994 Fraternizing with the Enemy: An Athenian Coin from Persian Palestine.

The Picus 28–38.Beebe, H. K.

1968 Ancient Palestinian Dwellings. Biblical Archaeologist 31:38–58.Bennett, C.-M. and P. Bienkowski

1995 Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan. British Academy Monographs inArchaeology, No. 8. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ben-Tor, A.; Portugali, Y. and M. Avissar1983 The Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavations at Tel Yoqne#am, 1979 and

1981. Israel Exploration Journal 33:30–54.Ben-Tor, A.; Portugali, Y. et al.

1987 Tell Qiri. A Village in the Jezreel Valley. Report of the Archaeological Excavations1975–1977. Qedem 24. Jerusalem: Hebrew University. Institute of Archae-ology.

Bienkowski, P.2000 Transjordan and Assyria. Pp. 44–58 in The Archaeology of Jordan and Beyond.

Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer, eds. L. E. Stager, J. A. Greene and M.D. Coogan. Harvard Semitic Publications: Studies in the archaeology andhistory of the Levant, 1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

2001 New Evidence on Edom in the Neo-Babylonian and Persian Periods.Pp. 198–213 in The Land that I Will Show You. Essays on the History andArchaeology of the Ancient Near East in Honour of J. Maxwell Miller, eds. J.A. Dearman and M. P. Graham. JSOT Supplement Series 343. Sheffield:Sheffield Academic Press.

2002 Busayra. Excavations by Crystal-M. Bennett 1971–1980. British AcademyMonographs in Archaeology, No. 13. Oxford: Council for British Researchin the Levant/Oxford University Press.

Biran, A.1981 Tel Dan. News and Notes. Israel Exploration Journal 31:103–105.1999 Two Bronze Plaques and the .Hu.s.sot of Dan. Israel Exploration Journal 49:43–

54.Blakely, J. A. and J. W. Hardin

2002 Southwestern Judah in the Late Eighth Century B.C.E. Bulletin of theAmerican Schools of Oriental Research 326:11–64.

Bloch-Smith, E. and B. A. Nakhai1999 A Landscape comes to Life: The Iron I Period. Near Eastern Archaeology

62:62–127.Böcking, E., ed.

1839–1853 Notitia dignitatum et administrationum omnium tam civilium quam militarium inpartibus Orientis et Occidentis. Bonn: A. Marcus.

Boling, R. G.1989 Site Survey in the Tell el-#Umeiri Region. Pp. 98–188 in Geraty, L. T.;

Herr, L. G.; LaBianca, Ø. S. and R. W. Younker, eds. Madaba PlainsProject I. The 1984 Season at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies.Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Brandfon, F. R.1984 The Pottery. Pp. 37–68 in Beer-sheba II. The Early Iron Age Settlements, by

Z. Herzog. Publications of the Institute of Archaeology 7. Tel Aviv: TelAviv University Institute of Archaeology.

Brünnow, R. E. and A. von Domaszewski1904–5 Die Provincia Arabia auf Grund zweier in den Jahren 1897 und 1898 unternommenen

Reisen und der Berichte früherer Reisender, I, II. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner.Buhl, M.-L. and S. Holm-Nielsen

1969 Shiloh: The Danish Excavations at Tall Sailun, Palestine, in 1926, 1929, 1932,and 1963. Publications of the National Museum. Archeological-HistoricalSeries I Vol. XII. Copenhagen: National Museum of Denmark.

Bunimovitz, S. and I. Finkelstein1993 Pottery. Pp. 81–196 in Shiloh: The Archaeology of a Biblical Site, ed. I. Finkel-

stein. Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, No. 10. Tel Aviv:Tel Aviv University.

Callaway, J. A.1970 The 1968–1969 #Ai (et-Tell) Excavations. Bulletin of the American Schools of

Oriental Research 198:7–31.1983 A Visit with Ahilud. Biblical Archaeology Review 9/5:42–53.

Callaway, J. A. and R. E. Cooley1971 A Salvage Excavation at Raddana, in Bireh. Bulletin of the American Schools of

Oriental Research 201:9–19.Callot, O.

1983 Une maison à Ugarit. Études d’architecture domestique. Ras Shamra-Ougarit I.Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations, Mémoire No. 28. Paris.

Cash, R. W. and W. C. Trenchard1991 Tell el-#Umeiri Field Locus Sheets. Pp. 441–600 in Madaba Plains Project

2: The 1987 Season of Excavations at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and SubsequentStudies. eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca, R. W. Younker.Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Chaaya, A.2000 L’évolution et le changement culturel à Tell #Aqra après l’invasion de Tig-

lath-Pileser III (Niveau 10–9). Pp. 213–222 in Proceedings of the FirstInternational Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East(Rome, May 18th–23rd 1998, eds. P. Matthiae, A. Enea, L. Peyronel, F. Pin-nock. Rome: Università di Roma “La Sapienza”.

Chadwick, R.; Daviau, P. M. M. and M. Steiner2000 Four Seasons of Excavations at Khirbat al-Mudayna on the Wadi ath-

Thamad, 1996–1999. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 44:257–270.

Chambon, A.1984 Tell el-Far #ah I. L’âge du fer. Mémoire no. 31. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur

les Civilisations.1993 Far#ah, Tell el-(North). Pp. 433–440 in The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological

Excavations in the Holy Land, eds. E. Stern, A. Lewinson-Gilboa, J. Aviram.New York: Simon & Schuster.

Clark, D. R.1994 The Iron 1 Western Defense System at Tell el-#Umeiri, Jordan. Biblical

Archaeologist 57:138–148.1996 Early Iron I Pillared Building at Tall al-#Umayri. Biblical Archaeologist

59:241.1997 Field B: The Western Defense System. Pp. 53–98 in Madaba Plains Project

3: The 1989 Season of Excavations at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and SubsequentStudies, eds. L.T. Geraty, L.G. Herr, Ø.S. laBianca, R.W. Younker. BerrienSprings, MI: Andrews University Press.

2000 Field B: The Western Defense System. Pp. 59–94 in Madaba Plains Project4: The 1992 Season of Excavations at Tall al- #Umayri and Subsequent Studies. eds.L. G. Herr, D. R. Clark, L. T. Geraty, R. W. Younker, Ø. S. LaBianca.Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Clark, V. A.1983 The Iron IIC/Persian Pottery from Rujm al-Henu. Annual of the Department

of Antiquities of Jordan 27:143–163.Clermont-Ganneau, Ch.

1901 La ville lévitique de Mêphaat. Recueil d’Archéologie Orientale 4:56–60.Cohen, R.

1994 The Fortresses at #En .Ha.seva. Biblical Archaeologist 57:203–214.Conder, C. R.

1889 The Survey of Eastern Palestine, I: The "Adwân Country. London: PalestineExploration Fund.

Cross, F. M., Jr.1986 An Unpublished Ammonite Ostracon from .Hesbân. Pp. 475–489 in The

Archaeology of Jordan and Other Studies presented to Siegfried H. Horn. eds. L.T. Geraty and L. G. Herr. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Cross, F. M., Jr. and L. T. Geraty1994 The Ammonite Ostraca from Tell Hesban. Pp. 169–174 in Hesban After

25 Years, eds. D Merling and L. T. Geraty. Berrien Springs, MI: AndrewsUniversity Press.

Daviau, P. M. M.1992a Excavations at Tell Jawa, Jordan (1989, 1991): Preliminary Report of

the Iron Age, Byzantine, and Early Islamic Remains. Echos du monde clas-sique/Classical Views 36 (=N.S. 11): 119–135.

1992b Preliminary Report of the Excavations at Tell Jawa in the Madaba Plains(1991). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 36:145–62.

1993a Houses and Their Furnishings in Bronze Age Palestine. Domestic Activity Areasand Artefact Distribution in the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. JSOT/ASORMonograph Series, 8. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

1993b Intrasite Distribution of Red Slipped and Black Burnished Wares at TellJawa, Jordan. Invited paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Amer-ican Schools of Oriental Research, Nov. 20, 1993, Washington, D.C.

1993c Preliminary Report of the Third Season of Excavations at Tell Jawa,Jordan (1992). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 37:325–40.

1994 Excavations at Tell Jawa, Jordan (1993). Preliminary Report. Annual of theDepartment of Antiquities of Jordan 38:173–193.

1995 Iron Age II Pithoi from Tall Jawa, Jordan: Construction Techniques andTypology. Pp. 607–616 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V.Amman: Department of Antiquities.

1996 The Fifth Season of Excavations at Tell Jawa (1994): Preliminary Report.Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 40:83–100.

1997a Moab’s Northern Border: Khirbat al-Mudayna on the Wadi ath-Thamad.Biblical Archaeologist 60:222–228.

1997b Technological Change and Assyrian Influence at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Bulletinof the Canadian Society of Mesopotamian Studies 32:23–32.

1997c Tell Jawa: A Case Study of Ammonite Urbanism during Iron Age II.Pp. 156–171 in Aspects of Urbanism in the Ancient Near East: From Mesopotamiato Crete. eds. W. E. Aufrecht, N. A. Mirau and S. W. Gauley. JSOT Supple-ment Series 244. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

1999 Domestic Architecture in Iron Age Ammon: Building Materials, Construc-tion Techniques, and Room Arrangement. Pp. 113–136 in Ancient Ammon,eds. B. MacDonald and R. W. Younker. Studies in the History and Cultureof the Ancient Near East, 27. Leiden: Brill.

2001a Assyrian Influence and Changing Technologies at Tall Jawa, Jordan.Pp. 214–238 in The Land that I Will Show You. Essays on the History and Archae-ology of the Ancient Near East in Honour of J. Maxwell Miller, eds. J. A. Dear-man and M. P. Graham. JSOT Supplement Series 343. Sheffield: SheffieldAcademic Press.

2001b Family Religion: Archaeological Evidence for the Paraphernalia of theDomestic Cult. Pp. 199–229 in The World of the Aramaeans II: Studies inHistory and Archaeology in Honour of Paul-Eugène Dion, eds. P. M. M. Daviau,J. W. Wevers, and M. Weigl. JSOT Supplement Series, 325. Sheffield:Sheffield Academic Press.

2002 Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Volume II: The Iron Age Artefacts. Cultureand History of the Ancient Near East 11/2, eds. B. Halpern, M. H.E. Weippert, Th. J. P. van den Hout, I. Winter. Leiden: Brill.

in preparation Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Volume III: The Iron Age Pottery. Cul-ture and History of the Ancient Near East 11/3, eds. B. Halpern, M. H.E. Weippert, Th. J. P. van den Hout, I. Winter. Leiden: Brill.

Daviau, P. M. M. and A. Tempestin preparation Excavations at Tall Jawa. Volume IV: The Early Islamic House. Culture

and History of the Ancient Near East 11/4, eds. B. Halpern, M. H.E. Weippert, Th. J. P. van den Hout, I. Winter. Leiden: Brill.

Daviau, P. M. M. and M. Beckmann2001 Umayyad Painted Pottery and Abbasid Period Lamps at Tell Jawa: A

Chronological Dilemma. Pp. 259–274 in La céramique byzantine et proto-islamique en Syrie-Jordanie (IVe-VIIIe siècles apr. J.-C.). Actes du colloque tenuà Amman les 3, 4 et 5 décembre 1994, eds. E. Villeneuve et P. Watson.Bibliothèque archéologique et historique, no. 159. Beyrouth: IFAPO.

Daviau, P. M. M. and P. E. Dion1994 El, the God of the Ammonites? The atef -crowned Head from Tell Jawa,

Jordan. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 110:158–167.2002 Economy-related Finds from Khirbat al-Mudayna (Wadi ath-Thamad,

Jordan). Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 328: 31-48.Dearman, J. A.

1989a Historical Reconstruction and the Mesha Inscription. Pp. 155–211 inStudies in the Mesha Inscription and Moab, ed. Andrew Dearman. Altanta:Scholars Press.

1989b The Levitical Cities of Reuben and Moabite Toponymy. Bulletin of theAmerican Schools of Oriental Research 276:55–66.

Dever, W. G.1993 Further Evidence on the date of the Outer Wall at Gezer. Bulletin of the

American Schools of Oriental Research 289:33–54.Dever, W. G., Lance, H. D., and Wright, G. E.

1970 Gezer I: Preliminary Report of the 1964–1966 Seasons. Annual of the HebrewUnion College Biblical and Archaeological School in Jerusalem, Vol. 1.Jerusalem.

Dever, W. G., et al.1974 Gezer II: Report of the 1967–1969 Seasons in Fields I and II. Annual of the

Hebrew Union College Biblical and Archaeological School in Jerusalem,Vol. 2. Jerusalem.

Dion, P.-E.2002 The Ostracon from Building 800. Pp. 268–275 in P. M. M. Daviau,

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Volume II: The Iron Age Artefacts. Cultureand History of the Ancient Near East 11/2, eds. B. Halpern, M. H.E. Weippert, Th. J. P. van den Hout, I. Winter. Leiden: Brill.

Dornemann, R. H.1981 The Late Bronze Age Pottery Tradition at Tell Hadidi, Syria. Bulletin of the

American Schools of Oriental Research 241:29–47.1983 The Archaeology of the Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Milwaukee:

Milwaukee Public Library.Elitzur, Y.

1989 The Identification of Mefa#at in View of the Discoveries from Kh. Ummer-Rasas. Israel Exploration Journal 39:267–277.

Esse, D. L.1992 The Collared Pithos at Megiddo: Ceramic Distribution and Ethnicity.

Journal of Near Eastern Studies 51:81–103.Finkelstein, I.

1986 #Izbet .Sar.tah. An Early Iron Age Site near Rosh Ha #ayin, Israel. BAR InternationalSeries 299. Oxford: B.A.R.

1992 Edom in the Iron I. Levant 24:159–166.1996 The Archaeology of the United Monarchy: an Alternative View. Levant

28:177–187.1999 State formation in Israel and Judah. A Contrast in Context, A Contrast in

Trajectory. Near Eastern Archaeology 62:35–52.Finkelstein, I. and I. Beit-Arieh

1999 Area E. Pp. 67–87 in I. Beit-Arieh, Tel #Ira. A Stronghold in the Biblical Negev.Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology, Monograph Series, 15.Tel Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology.

Finkelstein, I.; Bunimovitz, S. and Z. Lederman1993 Shiloh. The Archaeology of a Biblical Site. ed. I. Finkelstein. Monograph Series

of the Institute of Archaeology, No. 10. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.Franken, H. J.

1969 Excavations at Tell Deir #Alla I. A Stratigraphical and Analytical Study of the EarlyIron Age Pottery. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

1982 A Technological Study of Iron Age I Pottery from Tell Deir #Alla. Pp. 141–144 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan I, ed. A. Hadidi. Amman:Department of Antiquities.

1992 Excavations at Tell Deir #Alla. The Late Bronze Age Sanctuary. Louvain: PeetersPress.

Franken, H. J. and R. S. Abujaber1989 Yadoudeh: The History of a Land. Pp. 407–441 in Geraty, L. T.; Herr,

L. G.; LaBianca, Ø. S. and R. W. Younker, eds. Madaba Plains Project I. The1984 Season at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. BerrienSprings, MI: Andrews University Press.

Gal, Z. and Y. Alexandre2000 .Horbat Rosh Zayit. An Iron Age Storage Fort and Village. IAA Reports, No. 8.

Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.Gal, Z. and R. Frankel

1993 An Olive Oil Press Complex at .Hurbat Ros Zayit (Ras ez-Zetun) in LowerGalilee. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 109:128–140.

Geraty, L. T.; Herr, L. G.; LaBianca, Ø. S. and Younker, R. W. eds.1989 Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and

Subsequent Studies. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.Gibson, S. and G. Edelstein

1985 Investigating Jerusalem’s Rural Landscape. Levant 17:139–155.Gifford, J. A.; Rapp, Jr., G.; and C. L. Hill

1989 Site Geology. Pp. 209–18 in Excavations at Tell Michal, Israel, eds. Z. Herzog,G. Rapp, Jr., and O Negbi. Minneapolis: The University of MinnesotaPress.

Gilboa, A.2001 Early Iron Age Radiometric Dates from Tel Dor: Preliminary implications

for Phoenicia and Beyond. Near East Chronology: Archaeology and Envi-ronment. Radiocarbon 43: 1343–1351.

Gitin, S.1989 Tel Miqne-Ekron: A Type-Site for the Inner Coastal Plain in the Iron

Age II Period. Pp. 23–58 in Recent Excavations in Israel: Studies in Iron AgeArchaeology, ed. S. Gitin and W. G. Dever. Annual of the American Schoolsof Oriental Research 49. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.

1990 Ekron of the Philistines. Part II: Olive-Oil Suppliers to the World. BiblicalArchaeology Review, March/April 16/2:33–42, 59.

Glueck, N.1934 Explorations in Eastern Palestine I. Annual of the American Schools of Orien-

tal Research 14. Philadelphia: American Schools of Oriental Research.1937 Explorations in the Land of Ammon. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental

Research 68:13–21.Grant, E.

1932 Ain Shems Excavations. 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931. Part II. Biblical and KindredStudies, No. 4. Haverford, PA: Haverford College.

Grant, E. and G. E. Wright1939 Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine). Part V (Text). Biblical and Kindred Studies,

No. 8. Haverford, PA: Haverford College.Gunneweg, J.

1983 The Ovens of the First Campaign. Pp. 106–112 in Ergebnisse der Ausgrabun-gen auf der Hirbet el-Msas (Tel Masos) 1972–1975. 2 vols. Abhandlungen desDeutschen Palästinavereins, 6. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

Harding, G. L.1951 Two Iron-Age Tombs in Amman. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of

Jordan 1:37–40, Pl. XIV.Harding, G. L. and O. Tufnell

1953 The Tomb of Adoni Nur in Amman. Pp. 48–72, Figs. 21–23, Pls. VI–VII in Four Tomb Groups from Jordan. Palestine Exploration Fund Annual VI.London: Palestine Exploration Fund.

Helms, S. W.1973 Excavation at Jawa (A Preliminary Report). Annual of the Department of

Antiquities of Jordan 18: 41–44.Herr, L. G.

1989 Organization and Procedures of Excavation. Pp. 213–215 in Geraty, L.T.; Herr, L. G.; LaBianca, Ø. S.; and Younker, R. W. Madaba PlainsProject I. The 1984 Season at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies.Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

1993 The Madaba Plains Project, in Chronique archéoleogique. Syria 70:231–234.

1997 Epigraphic Finds from Tall al-#Umayri during the 1989 Season. Pp. 323–330 in Madaba Plains Project 3.The 1989 Season at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinityand Subsequent Studies. eds. L.T. Geraty, L. G. Herr, Ø. S. LaBianca, R.W. Younker. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

2000 The Settlement and Fortification of Tell al-#Umayri in Jordan during theLB/Iron I Transition. Pp. 167–179 in The Archaeology of Jordan and Beyond.Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer, eds. L. E. Stager, J. A. Greene and M.D. Coogan. Harvard Semitic Publications: Studies in the Archaeology andHistory of the Levant, 1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

2001 The History of the Collared Pithos at Tell el-#Umayri, Jordan. Pp. 237–250 in Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory ofDouglas L. Esse, ed. S. R. Wolff. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization,No. 59/ASOR Books, Vol. 5. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of theUniversity of Chicago/Atlanta: American Schools of Oriental Research.

Herr, L. G. and D. R. Clark2001 Excavating the Tribe of Reuben. Biblical Archaeology Review 27/2:36–47, 68.

Herr, L. G.; Geraty, L. T.; LaBianca, Ø. S. and R. W. Younker1991 Madaba Plains Project: The 1989 Excavations at Tell el-#Umeiri and

Vicinity. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 35:155–179.Herr, L. G. and M. Najjar

2001 The Iron Age. Pp. 323–345 in The Archaeology of Jordan, eds. B. MacDon-ald, R. Adams, and P. Bienkowski. Levantine Archaeology 1. Sheffield:Sheffield Academic Press.

Herrmann, G.1986 Ivories from Nimrud (1949–1963) 4. Ivories from Room SW 37 Fort Shalmaneser.

Commentary and Catalogue. London: British School of Archaeology in Iraq.Herzog, Z.

1984 Beer-sheba II: the Early Iron Age Settlements. Publications of the Institute ofArchaeology 7. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology.

1992 Settlement and Fortification Planning in the Iron Age. Pp. 231–74 in TheArchitecture of Ancient Israel from the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods, eds. A.Kempinski and R. Reich. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

1997 Archaeology of the City. Urban Planning in Ancient Israel and its Social Implications.Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University,No. 13. Tel Aviv: Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.

Herzog, Z.; Rapp, G., Jr. and O. Negbi, eds.1989 Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota

Press.Hogarth, D. G.

1914 Carchemish: Report on the Excavations at Djerabis on behalf of the British Museum.Vol. 1. London: The British Musem.

Holladay, Jr., J. S.1986 The Stables of Ancient Israel. Pp. 103–65 in The Archaeology of Jordan and

Other Studies presented to Siegfried H. Horn. eds. L. T. Geraty and L. G. Herr.Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Homès-Fredericq, D.1992 Late Bronze and Iron Age Evidence from Lehun in Moab. Pp. 187–202

in Early Edom and Moab. The Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan,ed. P. Bienkowski. Sheffield Archaeological Monographs, 7. Sheffield: J.R. Collis Publications.

1997 Lehun et la Voie royale. Les fouilles belges en Jordanie/Lehun en de Koningsweg. DeBegische opgravingen in Jordanië. Bruxelles: Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire.

2000 Excavating the First Pillar House at Lehun (Jordan). Pp. 180–195 in TheArchaeology of Jordan and Beyond. Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer, eds. L.E. Stager, J. A. Greene and M. D. Coogan. Harvard Semitic Publications:Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Levant, 1. Winona Lake,IN: Eisenbrauns.

Homès-Frederiq, D. and H. J. Franken1986 Pottery and Potters—Past and Present: 7,000 Years of Ceramic Art in Jordan. Tübin-

gen: Attempto Verlag.Hübner, U.

1992 Die Ammoniter. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte, Kultur und Religion eines transjor-danischen Volkes im 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Abhandlungen des Deutschen Paläs-tina-vereins 16. Weisbaden: Harrassowitz.

Humbert, J.-B. and F. Zayadine1992 Trois campagnes de fouilles à Amman (1988–1991). Troisième terrasse de

la Citadelle. Revue Biblique 99:214–260.Ibrahim, M. M.

1974 Second Season of Excavation at Sahab, 1973 (Preliminary Report). Annualof the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 19:55–61, Pls. XII–XXIII.

1978 The Collared-rim Jar of the Early Iron Age. Pp. 116–126 in Archaeologyin the Levant. Essays for Kathleen Kenyon. eds. R. Moorey and P. Parr.Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd.

1989 Sahab. Pp. 516–520 in Archaeology of Jordan, II/2. Field Reports, Sites L–Z, eds D. Homès-Fredericq and J. B. Hennessy. Akkadica Supplemen-tum VIII. Leuven: Peeters.

Jacobs, P. F.1993 Lahav Research Project. 1993 Season. Report Part I, Excavations in Field

IV. Unpublished field report.Jacobs, P. F. and O. Borowski

1992 Lahav Research Project. 1992 Season. Report Part I, Excavations in FieldIV. Unpublished report.

James, F. W. and P. E. McGovern1993 The Late Bronze Egyptian Garrison at Beth Shan: A Study of Levels VII and VIII.

University Museum Monograph 85. Philadelphia: The University Mu-seum.

Kallai, Z.1993 A Note on ‘Is Mefa#at to be Found at Tell Jawa (south)?’ by R. W. Younker

and P. M. Daviau. Israel Exploration Journal 43:249–251.Kelm, G. L. and A. Mazar

1982 Three Seasons of Excavations at Tel Batash—Biblical Timnah. Bulletin ofthe American Schools of Oriental Research 248:1–36.

1987 7th Century B.C.E. Oil Presses at Tel Batash, Biblical Timnah. Pp. 121–127 in Olive Oil in Antiquity. eds. M. Heltzer and E. Eitam. 1987 Con-ference, Haifa. Haifa: University of Haifa, Israel Oil Industry Museum,Dagon Museum.

Kenyon, K. M.1974 Digging up Jerusalem. London: Ernest Benn.

Khammash, A.1986 Notes on Village Architecture in Jordan. Lafayette, LA: University Art Museum.

Kleiner, F. S.1975 Greek and Roman Coins in the Athenian Agora. Picture Book #15. Princeton,

New Jersey: American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

Klostermann, E., ed.1966 Eusebius, Das Onomastikon der Biblischen Ortsnamen [1904]. Hildesheim:

Olms.Kochavi, M.

1993 The Land of Geshur Project, 1992. Israel Exploration Journal 43:185–190.1994 The Land of Geshur Project, 1993. Israel Exploration Journal 44:136–144.

Van der Kooij, G. and M. M. Ibrahim1989 Picking up the Threads…A Continuing Review of Excavations at Deir Alla, Jordan.

Leiden: University of Leiden, Archaeological Centre.LaBianca, Ø. S. et al.

1995 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report on the 1989 Season at Tellel-#Umeiri and Hinterland. Pp. 93–119 in Preliminary Excavation Reports:Sardis, Bir Umm Fawakhir, Tell el- #Umeiri, The Combined Caesarea Expeditions, andTell Dothan, ed. W. G. Dever. Annual of the American Schools of OrientalResearch, 52. Atlanta: The American Schools of Oriental Research.

Lamon, R. S. and G. M. Shipton1939 Megiddo I, Seasons of 1925–1934, Strata I–V. Oriental Institute Publications,

Vol. 42. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Lass, E. H. E.

1994 Quantitative Studies in Flotation at Ashkelon, 1986–1988. Bulletin of theAmerican Schools of Oriental Research 294:23–38.

Lapp, N. L.1976 Casemate Wall in Palestine and the Late Iron II Casemate at Tell el-Fûl

(Gibeah). Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 223:25–42.1981 The Third Campaign at Tell el-Fûl: The Excavations of 1964, ed. N. L. Lapp.

Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 45. Cambridge,MA: The American Schools of Oriental Research.

Lawlor, J. I.1991 Field A: The Ammonite Citadel. Pp. 15–52 in Madaba Plains Project 2: The

1987 Season of Excavations at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies.eds. L. G. Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca, R. W. Younker. BerrienSprings, MI: Andrews University Press.

2000 Field A: The Administrative Complex. Pp. 21–58 in Madaba Plains Project4: The 1992 Season of Excavations at Tall al- #Umayri and Subsequent Studies. eds.L. G. Herr, D. R. Clark, L. T. Geraty, R. W. Younker, Ø. S. LaBianca.Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Lemche, N. P.1985 Early Israel. Anthropological and Historical Studies on the Israelite Society Before the

Monarchy. Vetus Testamentum Supplements 37. Leiden: E. J. Brill.London, G. A.

1992 Reply to A. Zertal’s “The Wedge-shaped Decorated Bowl and the Originof the Samaritans”. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 286:89–90.

1999 Central Jordanian Ceramic Traditions. Pp. 57–102 in Ancient Ammon, eds.B. MacDonald and R. W. Younker. Leiden: Brill.

Loud, G.1948 Megiddo II, Seasons of 1935–1939. Oriental Institute Publications, Vol. 62.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Low, R. D.1991 Field F: The Eastern Shelf. Pp. 170–231 in Madaba Plains Project 2. The

1987 Season at Tell el- #Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. eds. L. G.Herr, L. T. Geraty, Ø. S. LaBianca and R. W. Younker. Berrien Springs,MI: Andrews University Press.

Lugenbeal E. N. and J. A. Sauer1972 Pottery from Hesban. Andrews University Seminary Studies 10:21–69, Pls. I–

XI.MacDonald, B.

2000 “East of the Jordan”: territories and sites of the Hebrew Scriptures. ASOR Books,Vol. 6, ed. V. Matthews. Boston, MA: American Schools of OrientalResearch.

MacKay, D. B.1995 Tel Miqne-Ekron. Report of the 1994 Spring Excavations Field IISW. The Olive Oil

Industrial Zone of the Late Iron Age II, ed. S. Gitin. Jerusalem: W. F. AlbrightInstitute of Archaeological Research.

Mazar, A.1997 Timnah (Tel Batash) I. Stratigraphy and Architecture. Qedem 37. Jerusalem:

Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.2001 Beth Shean during the Iron Age II: Stratigraphy, Chronology and Hebrew

Ostraca. Pp. 289–309 in Studies in the Archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel andJordan, ed. A. Mazar. JSOT Supplement Series 331: Sheffield: SheffieldAcademic Press.

Mazar, B.; Biran, A.; Dothan, M. and I. Dunayevsky1964 Ein Gev Excavations in 1961. Israel Exploration Journal 14:1–49.

Mazar, A. and J. Camp2000 Will Tel Rehov Save the United Monarchy? Biblical Archaeology Review

26/5:38–51, 75.McCown, C. C.

1945 The Long-room House at Tell en-Na.sbeh. Bulletin of the American Schools ofOriental Research 98:2–15.

1947 Tell en-Na.sbeh, 1: Archaeological and Historical Results. Berkeley: The PalestineInstitute of Pacific School of Religion and New Haven: American Schoolsof Oriental Research.

Meijer, D. J. W.1989 Ground plans and archaeologists: On similarities and comparisons. Pp.

221–236 in To the Euphrates and Beyond. Archaeological studies in honour ofMaurits N. van Loon. eds. O. M. C. Haex, H. H. Curvers and P. M. M.G. Akkermans. Rotterdam and Brookfield: A. A. Balkema.

Millard, A.1992 Assyrian Involvement in Edom. Pp. 35–39 in Early Edom and Moab. The

Beginning of the Iron Age in Southern Jordan. ed. P. Bienkowski. Sheffield Ar-chaeological Monographs, 7. Sheffield: J. R. Collis Publications.

Mitchell, C.1992 The “Four Room” House at Tell Jawa. A comparative study with known

examples from Palestine and Transjordan. Unpublished paper, WilfridLaurier University.

Mittmann, S.1995 Die Gebietsbeschreibung des Stammes Ruben in Josua 13, 15–23. Zeit-

schrift des Deutschen Palästina-vereins 111:1–27.

Muhly, J. D. and P. Muhly1989 Metal Artifacts. Pp. 267–313 in Excavations at Tell Michal, Israel, eds. Z.

Herzog.; G. Rapp, Jr. and O. Negbi. Minneapolis: The University ofMinnesota Press.

Musil, A.1907 Arabia Petraea I. Moab. Topographischer Reisebericht. Wien: Alfred Hölder.

Netzer, E.1992b Massive Structures: Processes in Construction and Deterioration. Pp. 17–

27 in The Architecture of Ancient Israel, eds. A. Kempinski and R. Reich.Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Oates, D.1965 The Excavations at Tell al-Rimah. Iraq 27:62–80.

Oates, J.1959 Late Assyrian Pottery from Fort Shalmaneser. Iraq 21:130–46, Pls. XXXV–

XXXIX.Ogden, J.

1995 The Gold Jewellery. Pp. 69–78 in Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan.British Academy Monographs in Archaeology, No. 8. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Olávarri, E.1983 La campagne de fouilles 1982 à Khirbet Medeinet al-Mu#arradjeh près de

Smakieh (Kerak). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 27:165–178.von Oppenheim, M. F.

1950 Tell Halaf. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.Palumbo, G., ed.

1994 Jordan Antiquities Database Information System. Amman: The Department ofAntiquities of Jordan and The American Center of Oriental Research.

Petrie, W. M. F.1974 Objects of Daily Life. (1927 rpt) Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd.

Piccirillo, M.1990 L’Identificazione Storica delle Rovine di Umm er-Rasas-Kastron Mefaa in

Giordania. Biblica 71:527–541.Pratico, G. D.

1993 Nelson Glueck’s 1938–1940 Excavations at Tell el-Kheleifeh. A Reappraisal. ASORArchaeological Reports, ed. L. G. Herr. Atlanta: Scholars Press.

Pritchard, J. B.1964 Winery, Defenses and Soundings at Gibeon. Museum Monographs, 26. Philadel-

phia: The University Museum.1985 Tell es-Sa #idiyeh. Excavations on the Tell, 1964–1966. University Museum

Monograph 60. Philadelphia: The University Museum.Rawson, P. S.

1954 Palace Wares from Nimrud—Technical Observations on Selected Exam-ples. Iraq 16:168–72. Pls. XL–XLII.

Redford, D. B.1982 A Bronze Age Itinerary in Transjordan. Journal of the Society for the Study of

Egyptian Antiquities 12:55–74.Reed, W.

1964 The Excavations at Dibon (Dhibân) in Moab, Part 2: The Second Campaign, 1952.Annual of American School of Oriental Research 36–37 for 1957–1958.New Haven: American School of Oriental Research.

1965 The History of Elealeh (#El-#Al) in Moab. The College of the Bible Quarterly42:12–16.

Reese, D. S.2002 Shells and Fossils from Tall Jawa, Jordan. Pp. 276–291 in P. M. M. Daviau,

Excavations at Tall Jawa, Jordan. Volume II: The Iron Age Artefacts. Cultureand History of the Ancient Near East 11/2, eds. B. Halpern, M. H.E. Weippert, Th. J. P. van den Hout, I. Winter. Leiden: Brill.

Reich, R.1992 Building Materials and Architectural Elements in Ancient Israel. Pp. 1–

16 in The Architecture of Ancient Israel, eds. A. Kempinski and R. Reich.Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Reich, R. and H. Katzenstein1992 Glossary of Architectural Terms. Pp. 311–322 in The Architecture of Ancient

Israel, eds. A. Kempinski and R. Reich. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Soci-ety.

Riis, P. J. and M.-L. Buhl.1990 Hama, Fouilles et Recherches 1931–1938. II.2. Les Objetss de la période dite Syro-

Hittite (âge du fer). Nationalmuseets Skrifter XIII. Copenhagen: National-museet.

Rogers, M. E.1862 Domestic Life in Palestine. London: Bell & Daldy.

Rose, D. G. and L. E. Toombs1978 Four Seasons of Excavation at Tell el-Hesi. A Preliminary Report. Pp.

106–149 in Preliminary Excavation Reports: Bab edh-Dhra, Sardis, Meiron, Tellel-Hesi, Carthage (Punic). The Annual of the American Schools of OrientalResearch 43. Cambridge, MA.

Routledge, B.2000 Seeing through Walls: Interpreting Iron Age I Architecture at Khirbat al-

Mudayna al-#Aliya. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 319:37–70.

Sauer, J. A.1986 Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages: A Critique of Glueck’s Synthe-

sis. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 263:1–26.1994 The Pottery at Hesban and Its Relationships to the History of Jordan: An

Interim Hesban Pottery Report, 1993. Pp. 225–281 in Hesban After 25 Years.Heshbon Expedition XXVth Anniversary: 1968–1993 Symposium (March20–21, 1993), eds. D. Merling and L. T. Geraty. Berrien Springs: Instituteof Archaeology, Andrews University.

Schick, R.1991 Christianity in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem in the Early Abbasid Period,

132–190/750–813. Pp. 51–69 in The Vth International Conference on the Historyof Bilad al-Sham: Bilad al-Sham in the Abbasid Period, 2: English Papers. Amman:University of Jordan Press.

Schiffer, M. B.1987 Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record. Albuquerque: University of

New Mexico Press.Sedman, L.

2002 The Small Finds. Pp. 351–406 in Busayra: Excavations of Crystal-M. Ben-nett 1971—1980, by P. Bienkowski. British Academy Monographs No. 13.Oxford: Oxford University Press/Council for British Research in the Lev-ant.

Shaw, M. C.1990 Late Minoan Hearths and Ovens at Kommos, Crete. Pp. 231–254 in

L’habitat égéen préhistorique. eds. P. Darcque et R. Treuil. Bulletin de Corre-spondance Hellénique. Supplement XIX. Athens: École Françaisd’Athènes.

Shiloh, Y.1984 Excavations at the City of David I. Qedem 19. Jerusalem: Hebrew University.

Institute of Archaeology.1992 Underground Water Systems in the Land of Israel in the Iron Age. Pp.

275–293 in The Architecture of Ancient Israel from the Prehistoric to the PersianPeriods, eds. A. Kempinski and R. Reich. Jerusalem: Israel ExplorationSociety.

Shiloh, Y. and A. Horowitz1975 Ashlar Quarries of the Iron Age in the Hill Country of Israel. Bulletin of the

American Schools of Oriental Research 217:37–48.Simons, J.

1959 The Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Singer-Avitz, L.

1989 Stone and Clay Objects. Pp. 350–360 in Excavations at Tell Michal, Israel,eds. Z. Herzog, G. Rapp, Jr., and O Negbi. Minneapolis: The Universityof Minnesota Press.

Steiner, M. L.2001 Excavations by Kathleen M. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961–1967, Vol. III. The Settle-

ment in the Bronze and Iron Ages. London: Sheffield Academic Press.Stronach, D.

1959 The Development of the Fibula in the Near East. Iraq 21:181–206.Treuil, R.; Darcque, P.; Poursat, J.-C. and G. Touchais

1989 Les civilisations égéennes du Néolithique et de l’Age du Bronze. Nouvelle Clio,L’histoire et ses problèmes. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Tufnell, O.1953 Lachish III. The Iron Age. New York: Oxford University Press.

Tushingham, A. D.1972 The Excavations at Dibon (Dhiban) in Moab. The Third Campaign 1952–53.

Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 40. Cambridge,MA: The American Schools of Oriental Research.

Ussishkin, D.1978 Excavations at Tel Lachish—1973–1977. Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv 5:1–

97.1983 Excavations at Tel Lachish—1978–1983. Second Preliminary Report. Tel

Aviv 10:97–185.Ussishkin, D. and J. Woodhead

1993 Excavations at Tel Jezreel 1992–1993: Second Preliminary Report. Levant26:1–48.

de Vaux, R.1951 La troisième campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far#ah, près Naplouse. Revue

Biblique 58:393–430, 566–90.1955 Les Fouilles de Tell el-Far#ah, près Naplouse. Revue Biblique 62:541–89.

Voigt, M. M.1983 Hajji Firuz Tepe, Iran: The Neolithic Settlement. Hasanlu Excavation Reports,

eds. R. H. Dyson, Jr. Univeristy Museum Monograph 50. Phila.: TheUniversity Museum, University of Pennsylvania.

Wampler, C. C.1947 Tell en-Na.sbeh, II: The Pottery. Berkeley: The Palestine Institute of Pacific

School of Religion and New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Re-search.

Warren, C.1870 Expedition to the East of Jordan, July and August, 1867. Palestine Exploration

Fund Quarterly Statement 2:284–306.Watson, P. J.

1979 Archaeological Ethnography in Western Iran. Viking Fund Publications in An-thropology 57. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Winnett, F. V.1964 The Excavations at Dibon (Dhıbân) in Moab, Part 1: The First Campaign, 1950–

1951. Annual of American School of Oriental Research 36–37 for 1957–1958. New Haven: American School of Oriental Research.

Worrell, J. E. and J. W. Betlyon1989 Phase One at Tell el-Hesi: A Season-by-Season Account. Pp. 97–124 in

Tell el-Hesi. The Site and the Expedition, eds. B. T. Dahlberg and K. G.O’Connell. The Joint Archaeological Expedition to Tell el-Hesi, Vol. 4.American Schools of Oriental Research Excavations Reports, ed. Eric M.Meyers. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Worschech, U.1989 Preliminary Report on the Second Campaign at the Ancient Site of el-

Balu# in 1987. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 34:111–121.1991 Eine keilalphabetische Inschrift von el-Balu#? Ugarit-Forschungen 23:395–

399.1992 Collared-Rim Jars aus Moab. Anmerkungen zur Entwicklung und Verbre-

itung der Kruge mit „Halswulst“. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins108: 149–155.

1995 City Planning and Architecture at the Iron Age Site of al-Balu# in CentralJordan. Pp. 145–59 in Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan V.Amman: Department of Antiquities.

Worschech, U. F. Ch. and F. Ninow1992 Preliminary Report on the Third Campaign at the Ancient Site of el-Balu#

in 1991. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 36:167–74 (=Annualof the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 38 [1994]:195–203).

Wright, G. R. H.1985 Ancient Building in South Syria and Palestine. 2 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

Yadin, Y.1963 The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands. 2 vols. New York: McGraw-Hill Book

Company, Inc.1972 Hazor. The Head of all those Kingdoms. The Schweich Lectures of the British

Academy, 1970. London: Oxford University Press/The British Academy.Yadin, Y. et al.

1958 Hazor I: An Account of the First Season of Excavations, 1955. Jerusalem: TheHebrew University.

1960 Hazor II. An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956. Jerusalem:Magnes Press, Hebrew University.

1989 Hazor III–IV: An account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavation, 1957–1958. Text, ed. A. Ben-Tor. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society/TheHebrew University.

Yassine, Kh. And J. Teixidor1986 Ammonite and Aramaic Inscriptions from Tell el-Mazar in Jordan. Bulletin

of the American Schools of Oriental Research 264:45–50.Yon, M.

1992 Ugarit: The Urban Habitat-The Present State of the Archaeological Pic-ture. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 286:19–34.

Yon, M.; Lombard, P.; and M. Renisio1987 L’organisation de l’habitat: les maisons A, B, et E. Pp. 11–128 in Le

centre de la ville, 38e–44e campagnes (1978–1984). M. Yon et al. Ras Shamra-Ougarit III. Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, Memoire No. 72.Paris.

Younker, R. W.1985 Israel, Judah, and Ammon and the Motifs on the Baalis Seal from Tell

el-#Umeiri. Biblical Archaeologist 48:173–180.1999 Review of Archaeological Research in Ammon. Pp. 1–19 in Ancient Ammon,

eds. B. MacDonald and R. W. Younker. Leiden: Brill.Younker, R. W. and P. M. M. Daviau

1993 Is Mefa#at to be Found at Tell Jawa (South)? Israel Exploration Journal 43:23–28.

Younker, R. W.; Geraty, L. T.; Herr, L. G. and Ø. S. LaBianca1990 A Preliminary Report of the 1989 Season, including the Regional Survey

and Excavations at el-Dreijat, Tell Jawa, and Tell el-#Umeiri (June 19–August 8, 1989). Andrews University Seminary Studies 28:45–52.

Younker, R. W.; Geraty, L. T.; Herr, L. G.; Ø. S. LaBianca and D. Clark1996 Preliminary Report of the 1994 Season of the Madaba Plains Project:

Regional Survey, Tall al-#Umayri, and Tall Jalul Excavations (June 15–July30, 1994). Andrews University Seminary Studies 34:65–92.

Zertal, A.1989 The Wedge-shaped Decorated Bowl and the Origin of the Samaritans.

Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 276:77–84.Zorn, J. R.

1993a Mesopotamian-style Ceramic “Bathtub” Coffins from Tell en-Nasbeh. TelAviv20:216–224.

1993b Tell en-Na.sbeh: A Re-evaluation of the Architecture and Stratigraphy of the EarlyBronze Age, Iron Age and Later Periods. Volume I: Introduction, Syntheses and SpecialStudies. Volume II: Catalogue and Analysis of Architectural Features. UnpublishedPh. D. dissertation. Berkeley: University of California at Berkeley.

Van Zyl, A.1960 The Moabites. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

SUBJECT INDEX

access, 56, 62, 69, 85, 86, 107, 135,178, 192, 194, 200, 239, 240, 244,277, 278, 282, 294, 299, 320, 326,330,360, 377, 378, 384–387, 395,397, 400, 452, 489, 512

activity, 4, 10, 11, 15, 16, 20, 42, 65,76, 93, 101–103, 109, 118, 131, 147,155, 164, 171, 176, 177, 187, 188,194, 197, 208, 220, 232, 254, 264,285, 309, 312, 342, 403, 408, 437,454, 513

animal, 11, 35, 73, 80, 111, 137,147–150, 163, 164, 169, 170, 175,196, 218–220, 223, 240–242, 247,253–255, 259, 277, 278, 310, 335,336, 370, 389, 411, 490

anvil, 199, 412, 448, 454ash, 73, 77, 98, 127,136, 137, 140, 148,

163, 165, 167–169, 172, 174, 175,185, 187, 188, 192, 196, 202, 218,223, 230, 231, 242, 247, 253, 259,260, 261, 265, 283, 309, 310, 319,324, 325, 338, 395, 396, 398, 399,409, 410

ashlar, 73, 106, 425, 427, 428, 430axis, 108, 112, 129, 233, 370, 415,

434

basalt, 82, 85, 102, 103, 110, 128,132–135, 138, 139, 147, 149, 153,155, 157–159, 163, 164, 166, 169,170, 172, 186, 189, 191–196, 198,199, 203, 204, 219, 223, 236, 238,239, 245, 246, 253, 254, 256, 259,262–266, 268, 269, 279, 280, 284,304, 305, 307, 309–311, 313–317,320–322, 324, 328–330, 334–336,338–341, 357–359, 361, 365, 390,393, 396, 400, 408, 411, 414, 443,446, 447

basement, 243, 327, 430, 437basin, 89, 175, 309, 317, 331, 332, 335,

336, 342, 365, 401, 426, 443, 444,450, 452

batter, 98, 99, 100, 107, 282

beam, 128, 131, 137, 189, 293, 297,327, 343, 406, 431, 437, 438, 440,445, 448

beaten earth, 83, 85, 91, 127, 132, 133,137, 140, 145–148, 153, 158, 159,162, 163, 167, 168, 173, 185, 190,196, 198, 202, 214, 218, 223, 227,230, 234, 239, 240, 244, 259, 261,277, 278, 279, 281, 284, 303, 310,312, 314, 319, 322, 332, 338, 356,365, 388, 392, 395, 398, 407, 410,411, 426, 440, 453

bedrock, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 21, 22, 41, 42,49, 50, 52–54, 56, 59, 62, 65, 97, 99,101, 125, 177, 205, 208, 215, 217,229–231, 239, 240, 241, 243, 244,246, 247, 249, 250, 270, 273, 274,275, 290, 300, 302, 309, 349, 351,354, 356, 358, 360, 361, 363–371,379, 380, 382, 404, 424, 425, 426,428, 430, 457

bench, 7, 9, 207, 222, 223, 224, 231,261, 264, 265, 266, 281, 371, 449,454

bin, 135, 158, 209, 240, 259, 277, 297,307, 413, 432, 433

black slip, 477bond, 49, 63, 66, 68–70, 77, 78, 85,

100, 125, 129, 152, 155, 169, 190,201, 215, 244, 281, 300, 302, 308,318, 331, 335, 350, 355, 358, 360,363, 364, 369, 381, 386, 391, 402,404, 407, 428, 430, 448

bottle, 274, 275, 333, 342, 408, 415,476, 483, 506, 509, 510

boulder mortar, 153, 224, 229, 230, 231,319, 320, 335, 420, 444, 453, 454

bowl, 6, 38, 40–42, 98, 102, 103, 127,128, 132, 138, 139, 149, 153, 159,163, 164, 203, 204, 207, 218, 219,224, 227, 232, 235–237, 239, 244,246, 249, 250, 253, 254, 256, 262,263, 266–269, 279, 280, 283–286,302, 304, 305, 309–312, 314, 316,321, 322, 326, 327, 328, 332–336,

340–342, 363, 390–395, 400, 411,414, 415, 453, 467, 471–479

bulla, 438, 510burial, 17, 48, 93, 108, 110, 111, 112,

119, 380, 390, 415, 416, 418, 379,380

burnish, 19, 41, 43, 98, 102, 132, 138,141, 149, 162, 163, 174, 204, 221,224, 236, 237, 244, 254, 263, 280,304–310, 312, 314, 322, 327, 333,334, 340–342, 363, 414, 415, 471,472, 476, 478, 488

buttress, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 302, 426

carinated, 98, 237, 304, 312, 390, 414,472, 475

cave, 6, 7, 10, 11, 24, 205, 271, 273,425, 426

ceiling, 30, 34, 36, 41, 72, 84, 92,117, 128, 130, 131, 136, 137, 140,149–151, 157, 164, 174, 184, 189,191–199, 214, 215, 220, 222, 225,226, 233, 238, 241, 245–249, 253,255, 259–270, 272, 273, 279, 280,286, 293, 302, 306–310, 312, 316–320, 327–329, 333, 340, 343, 353,357, 359, 369, 370, 389, 390, 392,396, 406, 429, 431–434, 438, 439,448, 474

cemetery, 98, 100, 112, 287, 289, 373,375, 414

chalk, 23, 24, 53, 100, 168, 424channel, 11, 76, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 86,

87, 88, 170, 181, 182, 192, 195, 196,204, 241, 242, 274, 275, 365, 366,382, 407

chert, 9, 21, 23, 24, 65, 67, 73, 74, 77,80, 89, 97, 98, 104, 132, 136, 137,138, 147, 149, 153, 155, 157, 159,163, 164, 166, 170, 175, 177, 187,189, 191, 193, 194, 196, 198, 199,212, 219, 225, 233, 241, 243, 246,248, 250, 254, 256, 260, 262–264,266, 269, 273, 284, 304, 305, 315,317, 322, 335, 339, 340, 350, 358,362, 370, 381, 389, 390, 400, 408,411, 412, 414, 424, 425, 427, 429

chronology, 14, 47, 102, 127, 140, 175,178, 204, 220, 225, 280, 372, 465,468, 479

cistern, 6, 9, 10, 11, 56, 62, 81, 85, 209,210, 211, 212, 214, 215, 239, 240,

250, 251, 264, 266, 267, 269, 270,271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277,278, 279, 280, 281, 284, 285, 286,344, 345, 365, 370, 371, 372, 425,426, 274

cobble, 18, 32, 35, 41, 49, 53, 56, 58,63, 71, 76, 80, 81, 88, 89, 93, 98–101, 108, 129, 135, 137, 138, 140,144, 148, 152–159, 168, 169, 173,182, 184, 186–188, 202, 212, 213,217, 220, 222, 227, 229, 232–234,238–242, 249, 258, 259, 263, 265,269, 274, 276, 277, 279, 281, 282,297, 302, 318, 319, 330, 333–337,358, 368, 369, 382, 386, 388–390,395–403, 406, 408, 409, 411, 413,415, 427, 431–434, 436, 447, 449,453

collared–rim, 117, 127, 468, 479complex, 66, 70, 89, 101, 151, 178, 200,

204, 205, 207, 211, 215, 216, 226cooking pot, 7, 38, 41, 73, 98, 128,

134, 147, 149, 153, 155, 163, 164,168–173, 188, 191–193, 203, 204,218, 223, 224, 232, 235, 246, 247,253–256, 259–266, 269, 280, 283,284, 302, 309–310, 312, 314, 326,327, 340, 342, 361, 399, 475, 477

corridor, 71, 211, 216, 240, 247, 251,259–264, 277, 279, 282, 284, 290,292, 300, 306, 308, 313, 318, 345–348, 352, 404, 405, 410–414, 447

courtyard, 227, 239–242, 243, 248, 249,282

cross wall, 66, 68, 72, 85, 88, 89, 92,128, 137, 158, 181, 209, 282, 301,375, 378, 381, 386, 428

date, 5–8, 11, 29, 33, 37, 38, 42, 43, 56,71, 73, 81, 93, 101, 109, 112, 140,143, 163, 173, 177, 188, 205, 214,220–224, 226, 269, 285, 345, 346,379, 380, 443, 445, 454, 468, 469,474, 482, 501, 510, 513

door frame, 294, 426doorjamb, 210–211, 349, 362, 363drain, 21, 48, 52, 61, 73–78, 80–83,

87–89, 93, 178, 181, 182, 192, 195,196, 204, 239, 240, 271–273, 279,331, 332, 343, 365, 382, 427, 450,451, 472

drum, 431, 434

dry laid, 49, 63, 65, 427, 436dynasty, 459, 463, 495, 498, 510–512

epigraphic source, 482erosion, 24, 56, 72, 89, 105, 296, 335,

336, 340, 382, 414, 424, 510

flagstone, 41, 72, 76, 77, 85, 86, 91, 100,126, 188, 251, 294, 304, 306, 312,316, 332–335, 348, 356, 364, 384,389–392, 395–398, 426

flake, 164, 175, 218, 244flue, 156, 165, 170–173, 188food preparation, 35, 41, 145, 148–151,

155, 160, 163, 164, 171, 188, 192,203, 204, 232, 247, 259, 262, 311,316, 326, 328, 339, 341, 361, 373,403, 411, 449

fortification, 6, 10, 16, 17, 19, 30,42–108, 122, 141, 147, 174–179,191, 197, 205–208, 213, 287–290,373, 374, 423–428, 436, 437, 457,471, 475, 503

foundation, 32, 34, 41, 45, 49, 50, 60,74, 89, 90, 98, 103, 137, 144, 148,154, 161, 164, 165, 175, 176, 186,199, 200, 226, 253, 255, 282, 300,323, 332, 350, 353, 358, 368, 375,382, 424–427, 434–437, 482

foundation trench, 41, 90, 164, 165,176, 368

gate, 16, 17, 41, 45, 62, 101, 102, 154,129, 298, 342, 373, 380, 384–386,394, 400–403, 446, 447, 474, 475

glacis, 48, 53, 61, 63, 65, 76, 101, 206granary, 259grater, 102, 478grave, 93, 94, 108, 111–113, 285, 415,

491, 507grinder, 85, 128, 132, 134, 138, 139,

147, 149, 153, 155, 157–159, 164,170, 189, 193–199, 203, 219, 225,227, 233, 236, 239, 245, 246, 249,250, 253–256, 262, 263, 266, 268,284, 308–311, 313, 314, 317, 320,322, 329, 330, 334, 335, 340, 341,357–359, 365, 393, 396, 408, 411,413–416, 453

hall, 290–352 passim, 360, 365, 367, 447header, 60, 363, 367, 395, 435

hearth, 137, 148, 149, 162, 168–170,196, 218, 229–231, 308–312, 320,399, 409, 454

hemispherical, 138, 153, 155, 164, 227,237, 253, 280, 440, 453, 472, 475

hippo, 154, 168, 220, 471, 475, 477holemouth, 218, 235, 246, 263, 269,

304, 340, 342, 372, 471horseshoe, 187

inner wall, 45–109 passim, 120, 141–152,162, 169–175, 190, 196, 200–212,285, 287, 397, 402, 428

inscription, 482–505, 509inset, 45, 48–58, 61–63, 66–69, 75, 85,

95, 103, 104, 290, 382, 403, 428,468–471

installation, 6, 11, 17, 20, 108, 134–138,157, 158, 166–170, 184, 188, 205,224, 230, 231, 238, 245, 246, 261,278, 294, 309–312, 319–320, 329,332, 336, 348, 357, 396–401, 409,412, 413, 424, 426, 444, 450, 499

jug, 40, 41, 244, 255, 264, 320–321,415, 467

juglet, 141, 148, 153, 254, 309–310,325, 357, 473

king, 482–513krater, 38, 41, 128, 132, 138, 153, 154,

174, 194, 204, 218, 224, 232, 235,239, 244, 246, 256, 266, 269, 309,311, 314, 316, 327, 340, 342, 359,361, 363, 372, 411, 473, 477

Kurkh Monolith, 482, 500

landing, 298, 359, 369, 439legend, 482, 494, 495, 498, 508lens, 80, 140, 191, 196, 218, 247, 250,

253, 396, 399lime, 20, 99, 101, 168, 302, 315–317,

426, 436, 437, 460–463lintel, 348, 349, 357, 358, 363, 369, 370,

426, 431, 433, 439, 444, 445, 448lithic, 20, 163, 164, 218, 233, 245, 246,

314, 340, 396loom weight, 132, 191–193, 224, 225,

245, 266, 279, 280, 315, 317, 320,322, 326, 336, 339, 340, 361, 362,389, 392, 396

long room, 121, 135, 233, 343

marl, 23, 24Masoretic Text, 484midden, 241, 248, 255, 264monarchy, 483, 493, 497, 498, 501monolithic pillar, 131, 184, 249, 289,

431–435mortar, 102, 103, 108, 132, 134, 139,

159, 166, 170, 173, 174, 188,189, 193–195, 198, 199, 203, 218,220, 225, 227, 236, 238, 245–247,251, 253, 256, 259, 262–269, 279,280, 283, 284, 300, 304, 305, 313,315, 317, 320–321, 329, 336–342,345, 357, 359, 390, 395, 396,400, 408, 411–416, 426, 436, 450,478

mud brick, 32–35, 41, 45, 53, 54, 69,74, 80, 81, 104, 105, 128, 131–137,140, 144, 148, 151, 162, 165, 166,169, 172, 176, 190–193, 222, 247,253, 424–427, 435, 469

nari, 23, 63, 101, 127, 164, 174, 223,227, 236, 242, 243, 247, 250, 252,278, 284, 310, 316, 357, 362, 382,390, 396, 424

niche, 112, 318, 326, 433, 502

offset, 45, 48–58, 61–63, 68, 83, 95,103, 104, 106, 298, 389, 390, 395,403, 428, 468–471

onomastics, 485, 509origin, 23, 73, 178, 250, 260, 481, 487,

493–495, 498, 502, 510outer wall, 45–107 passim, 119, 120,

125, 130, 146, 148, 151, 175, 178,179, 186, 190, 207, 208, 290, 296–303, 307, 310, 312, 313, 316, 318,329, 331, 344, 348- 351, 354–359,369, 373, 380, 385, 387, 395, 420,428, 429, 435, 439, 448

oven, 42, 49, 91, 117, 137, 148, 155–157, 162–174, 178, 184–196, 223,260–262, 310, 319–320, 329, 338,339, 396, 398, 408–411, 454

Palace Ware, 476, 477partition, 66, 81, 92, 167, 170, 173, 180,

184, 188, 190, 212, 214, 227, 234,238–240, 244, 250, 253, 260, 264,273, 275–278, 281, 378, 386, 388,392, 431–434, 438

party wall, 136, 154, 200, 214, 226, 279,283

passage, 51, 55–87, 133, 182, 207, 209,215, 246, 248–251, 282, 384, 395,405, 447, 496, 503

pastoralist, 492pavement, 41, 42, 55, 61, 69–71, 79,

100, 101, 159, 282, 315, 332, 333,335, 358, 364, 384, 392, 400, 401,426

pebble, 18, 58, 59, 65, 99, 101, 135, 188,189, 202, 217, 218, 227, 240, 241,302, 333, 361, 384, 390. 396, 428

pecking stone, 198, 199, 250, 262, 314pier, 152, 294–297, 301, 302, 305, 308,

337, 348, 362–367, 370pillar, 29, 120 ,122, 126–132, 135, 137,

139, 144, 152, 155, 157, 182, 184,211, 212, 213, 220, 223, 227, 234,239, 249, 251, 253, 258–262, 269,276, 287, 289, 294, 297, 318–319,323–327, 334, 337–339, 388, 425,426, 431–437, 444, 448, 450, 454

pillar base, 135, 144, 152, 155, 157,222, 388, 434, 437, 444, 448, 454

pithos, 41, 42, 127, 133, 141, 155, 156,168–175, 185, 186, 193, 194, 204,224, 232, 235–239, 244–247, 259–263, 266, 269, 284, 293, 302–305,314, 316, 319–321, 333, 337, 342,343, 372, 409, 470–471, 475, 477,479

plaster, 20, 34, 53, 58–93, 99, 101, 107,124, 128, 132–148, 155, 164, 168–174, 186–192, 196, 201, 202, 220,221, 227, 232–234, 239, 241, 245,247, 250, 253, 258–270, 273, 277–279, 281–283, 302, 309–310, 318–319, 324, 325, 332–338, 370, 371,384, 385, 390, 392, 398, 401, 403,409, 424, 426, 436, 437, 457–461

platform, 104, 303, 398postern, 56, 61pounder, 132, 139, 147, 149, 153,

155, 159, 163, 189, 193, 196, 199,219, 225, 233, 246, 254, 256, 260,263–266, 269, 283, 284, 304, 305,315–317, 320–322, 326, 335, 339,340, 389, 396, 400, 408, 411–414,416, 453

quarry, 7, 11, 177, 424, 425

recess, see insetreligious, 16, 455, 512reservoir, 11, 82, 425retaining wall, 10, 42, 46, 48, 53, 54,

63–65, 96–98, 177, 188, 205, 426,436

roadway, 102, 375–378, 380–386, 394,398, 400, 402

robber trench, 250, 260roof, 7, 29, 69, 70, 81, 86, 92, 132–134,

137, 157, 158, 193–199, 213–214,226, 238, 245, 248, 254, 263, 267,269, 274, 280, 289, 293, 294, 317,328, 348, 362, 370, 388, 389, 393,396, 400, 431, 437–441, 448, 455,475

roof roller, 92, 157, 198, 235–237, 305,332–334, 426, 439–444, 457, 458,460, 462

room size, 104, 122, 180, 200, 210, 292,347, 377, 385, 404, 437

rubble, 107, 272, 300, 406, 428

salient, see offsetsaucer, 102, 155, 218, 236, 244, 253,

269, 279, 280, 302, 304, 332–334,340, 341, 395, 414, 474, 475

Septuagint, 485screen, 431, 432shelf, 188, 207, 224, 231, 261, 264, 265,

270, 277, 281, 408, 411, 449shell, 110, 153, 193, 194, 225, 227, 231,

233, 236, 263, 278, 311, 316, 320,321, 333–335, 340, 342, 345, 357,504

skeleton, 93, 112, 249, 415socket, 56, 102, 246, 251, 293, 300, 306,

313, 382, 390, 396, 424–447, 453,454

stacked–boulder, 122, 126, 129, 135,137, 139, 182, 184, 211, 214, 220,222, 223, 227, 249, 258, 262, 265,279, 297, 318, 337, 349, 370, 431,434, 437

staircase, 70, 226, 289–299, 308, 312,316–320, 324, 327–330, 333, 336,346, 351, 352, 359, 364–369, 381,382, 404, 405, 425, 430, 436–439,454, 475

storejar, 29, 40, 91, 108, 127, 147, 154,159, 168–170, 218–220, 224, 232,235, 244, 247, 259, 266, 277, 311,

314, 316, 321, 327, 330, 332, 340,342, 380, 389, 471, 477

stable, 450, 489strategy, 13–16, 30, 46, 47, 120,

206–207, 287, 289superstructure, 34, 35, 45, 53, 54, 69,

73, 74, 92, 100, 103, 104, 140, 144,151, 154, 162, 174, 175, 190–193,213, 226, 238, 247, 310, 382, 424,426, 427, 435

terrace, 16, 47, 94, 95–102, 238, 285–289, 294, 296, 373, 375, 379–382,385, 400, 403–405, 414, 415, 439,474, 475

threshold, 71, 79, 86, 234, 255, 258,259, 307, 314, 319, 335, 338, 349,361, 369, 395, 396, 412, 424, 426,444, 447, 448

tower, 3, 17, 45–48, 59–65, 73, 81,82, 87, 89, 98, 100, 199, 200, 204,375, 381, 382, 400, 401, 426, 427,436–438, 488, 490, 503, 517

traffic pattern, 249, 282, 359, 375, 395,403, 405, 406, 414, 438

tribe, 495–498tribute, 504–506, 511trough, 11, 155, 189, 278, 279, 331,

426, 444, 450–452

upper storey, 69, 70, 74, 104, 107, 120,123, 127, 128, 130, 134, 135, 141,149, 150, 165, 174, 184, 189, 191,193–196, 199, 200, 213, 243, 245,246, 250, 260, 263, 267, 294, 295,297, 298, 302, 304–306, 310–312,314–316, 327–329, 333–336, 340,341, 345, 346, 348, 350, 353, 354,357, 359, 362–364, 367, 388–392,396, 400, 406, 414, 429, 433–438,445, 446

wall plaster, 92, 221, 302, 457, 458wall thickness, 63, 124, 144, 181, 201,

212, 295, 349, 350, 379, 406, 435weaving, 327, 362, 396windbreak, 173, 188, 265, 284, 338, 409wooden, 189, 213, 253, 343, 434,

437–441, 444, 448work area, 117–120, 141, 150, 159, 170,

173, 175, 182, 198–200, 204, 207,208, 248, 251, 277, 284, 289

GEOGRAPHIC AND ETHNIC NAME INDEX

Abel-keramim, 486, 492#Abdun, 3Abu #Alanda, 488Ajlun, 21, 24Akkadian, 482, 484#Amman, 3, 5–7, 16, 22–24, 34, 98,

105, 128, 207, 236, 237, 255, 270,291, 292, 304, 423, 429, 441, 454,467, 468, 483–485, 491, 495, 501,503

Ammon, 3–5, 16, 29, 104, 207, 237,375, 438, 467, 481–486, 492,493–513

Ammonite, 4, 5, 8, 14, 16, 20, 31, 105,113, 120, 206, 268, 357, 428, 429,438, 454, 455, 474, 481–513

Arabic, 6, 7, 484, 488Arad, 105, 275#Ara#ir, 428Aramaean, 485, 495–500, 503, 504,

508, 509Aramaic, 483, 487, 488, 504, 508, 509Arnon, 7Ashkelon, 328Assyria, 4, 5, 117, 257, 311, 475, 476–

479, 482–485, 487, 488, 496–513#Ataruz, 455

Babylon, 478, 479, 509–513Balqa, 3, 13, 21, 24Balu#, 29, 107, 296, 349, 382, 429, 430,

434, 455, 479Baq#ah, 314, 489, 490Beer-sheba, 9, 79, 103–105, 178, 289,

300, 305, 326, 477benê #Ammôn, 29, 479Bethel, 8, 9, 37, 75, 434Beth Shan, 37, 112, 254Beth Shemesh, 8, 9, 104Bît Adini, 495, 498Bît Ammana, 5Busayra, 302, 425, 431, 437, 438, 444

Canaanite, 484, 488, 509Castron Mefaa, 5, 7

Cisjordan, 9, 78, 103, 171, 323, 384,385, 430, 475, 491–493, 501–504,508

Damascus, 491, 499, 504, 505Dayr#Alla, 9, 38, 224, 231, 255, 304,

478, 487, 503, 504Dhıbân, 107, 271, 274, 436Dibon, 7, 9, 501, see also Dhıbânal-Drayjat, 13

Edom, 38, 492, 498, 504, 512Edomite, 481Egyptian, 327, 482, 488, 492, 504, 506,

511#En Gev, 107, 108#En .Ha.seva, 107Ephraim, 493, 494, 504Euphrates, 491, 495

Fuhais, 24

Gath, 499Gebel es-Sarqi, 482Gilead, 489, 490, 493–496, 502, 503Greek, 484–486

Hama, 237Hazor, 42, 50–52, 62, 66, 69, 71, 78,

81, 82, 91, 103–106, 153, 171, 190,220, 224, 275, 289, 292, 323, 351,378, 385, 436, 440, 443, 455, 474,491

Hebrew, 481, 482, 484, 486, 508, 510.Hesban, 4, 13, 37, 40, 274, 486

˘Hirbat al- .Hajjar, 488

˘Hirbat Jel#ad, 495.Horvat Rosh Zayit, 220

Hummar, 24

#Iraq al-Amır, 490Israel, 14, 38, 105, 107, 112, 113,

384, 454, 467, 474, 485, 486, 489,493–506, 511

#Izbet .Sar.tah, 43

Jabal al-Hawayah, 491Jabal al-Qe.sır, 491Jabboq, 485, 487, 489, 495, 496, see

also Wadı az-ZarqaJabesh-Gilead, 496Jalul, 206, 423, 429, 454, 468Jazer, 486Jerusalem, 425, 429, 439, 474, 512, 513Jewish, 487, 513Jordan Valley, 4, 304, 487, 489, 492Judah, 38, 104, 454, 455, 467, 474, 477,

496, 499, 501–513, 561

Khirbat al-Hiri, 428, see also Rujmal-Heri

Khirbat al-Mudayna (Thamad), 15, 59,106, 150, 285, 322, 339, 378, 384,428, 429, 455, 490

Khirbat al-Mudayna al-#Aliya, 107, 291,349, 429, 433, 475

Khirbat al-Mudayna al-Ma#arradjeh,107

Khirbat Nefa#a, 5, 7Khirbat as-Suq, 3Khirbet ed-Dawwara, 431Khirbet Raddana, 273, 274, 431, 432Khirbet er-Ras, 300Kommos, 310Kurnub, 24

Lachish, 42, 43, 81, 93, 103, 113, 385Lahav, 9, 305, see also Tel HalifLebanon, 440, 482Lehun, 9, 107, 291, 437, 455

Ma#acah, 499Madaba, 7, 153, 304, 415, 477, 489,

490Madaba Plains, 3, 4, 8, 13–21, 24, 62,

118, 165, 169, 455Majdel Anjar, 440Mari, 496Mefaath, 6Megiddo, 52, 66, 81, 103–105, 289,

332, 385, 443, 447, 452, 491Mesopotamia, 478, 492Mizpah, 494, 495Moab, 29, 291, 296, 339, 384, 428, 454,

455, 467, 485, 489, 492, 493, 498,501–506, 512, 513

Moabite, 7, 455, 481, 485–490, 494,495, 503, 506

Muwaqqar, 24

Naur, 5, 24Negev, 106Nimrud, 257, 478, 482, 486, 504

Orontes, 482

Pella, 492Persian, 32, 48, 93, 94, 108, 111–113,

119, 144, 182, 216, 257, 310, 351,380, 443, 483, 487, 479, 509

Petra, 440, 477Philistia, 499, 505Phoenicia, 467, 474, 499, 504, 507

Qasr er-Ruheibeh, 106Qarqar, 482, 500, 503al-Qas.tal, 5

Raachine, 440Rabbath-Ammon, 3, 5Ramoth-Gilead, 495Re .hov, 107Reuben, 5, 496Rujm al-Heri, 490, see also Khirbat

al-HiriRujm al-Henu, 314

Safut, 9, 34, 292Sa .hab, 3, 29, 291 ,429, 444, 445,

467–471, 477Sal.t, 440Samaria, 43, 104–106, 505Shechem, 104, 105Shiloh, 37, 220, 234, 275, 290, 425,

427, 429, 433Sidon, 498, 512Subeihi, 24Su

˘hu, 491

Syria, 122, 154, 423 ,424 ,439, 467,478, 482, 484, 486, 489, 491–495,500, 501, 503–505, 510, 511

Tall Abu al-˘Haraz, 496

Tall al Mazar, 4, 9, 112Tall ar-Rufaisa, 3Tall as-Sa#idiyya, 221, 323, 326, 364,

479Tall Sıran, 483, 484, 506, 509, 510Tall .Safu.t, see SafutTall al-#Umayri, 4, 8–15, 19, 29, 37–43,

53, 66, 104, 106, 186, 237, 292,298, 302, 304, 310, 336, 378, 423,427, 428, 432, 438, 439, 440, 454,467–471, 476, 479, 483, 487–492,494, 501, 503, 509, 513

Tawilan, 257, 444Tel Batash, 89, 232, 327, 332, 438, 443,

448Tel Dan, 45, 260Tel Dor, 474Tel Halif, 9, 305, 328, 438, 454, see

LahavTel Jezreel, 438Tel Michal, 93, 257, 443Tel Miqne, 332, 452Tell #Arqa, 478Tell Beit Mirsim, 9, 43, 66, 105, 179,

300, 327, 432, 434, 436, 443, 447Tell el-Far#ah (N), 102, 122, 137, 190,

224, 274, 292, 302, 429, 430, 435,438, 455

Tell el-Fûl, 65, 66, 102, 104, 105Tell el-Hesi, 14, 15, 17, 45, 100, 112,

113, 328, 427Tell el-Kheleifeh, 45, 103–106Tell en-Na.sbeh, 8, 9, 45, 102, 104, 224,

274, 275, 336, 369, 351, 426, 429,431, 432, 432, 435, 443, 447, 455

Tell el-#Oreme, 443, 447Tell Halaf, 82Tell Qiri, 431, 435, 437Tob, 499Tyre, 498, 506, 510, 512

Ugarit, 365, 423, 439, 440, 442, 447,494

Um el Ghudran, 24Umm ad-Dananır, 489–491Umm ar-Rasas, 7Umm U .dayna, 487

Wadi al-Ghudran, 22, 23Wadi al-Hinu, 21Wadi Hinu al-Marashida, 21Wadi Mujib, 7, 428, 491Wadi Sir, 22–24Wadi ath-Thamad, 15, 106, 206, 428,

429, 455Wadi Um al-Kudsh, 21Wadı az-Zarqa, 485, 491, see Jabboq

al-Yadudah, 3, 5Yoqne#am, 82, 107

Zencirli, 504Zobah, 499, 500