Golding-Meir, N. and Iserlis, M. 2012. Petrographic Examination of Ceramics. In: Avrutis, V.W. Late...

257

C H A P T E R T H I R T E E N

PETROGRAPHIC EXAMINATION OF CERAMICSNissim Golding-Meir And Mark Iserlis

13.1. IntroductIon

Hundred-and-eighteen ceramic vessels found in Late Chalcolithic (LC) and late Early Bronze I (EB I) contexts in the excavations at Nesher-Ramla Quarry between the years 2008 and 2012, were sampled for analysis.1 Sixty-two samples derive from Chalcolithic levels, and fifty-six samples from late EB I deposits. The method chosen for the analysis of these vessels was thin-section petrography. This technique is used by geologists to identify minerals and to describe and categorize rocks, soils and sands. Here it was used to identify and describe the minerals and rock fragments found in the paste of the sampled vessels, as constituents of both the silt-sized clay matrix and added, sand-sized temper. The mineralogical content of the thin-sections was then compared to the various possible mineral compositions using geological maps of the suggested regions of origin, and evaluated with comparative data from additional ceramic vessels originating from these areas.

The vessels analyzed here were divided into nine petrographic groups. These groups are defined in terms of the chemical and physical properties of their fabrics without reference to chronology, typology or context. This method has the advantage of allowing an independent geological analysis that may illuminate geographical location of the clay and temper sources used, and hence provide valuable evidence for the provenance of the analyzed vessels (Goren et al. 2004:4-22; Cohen-Weinberger and Goren 2004:3). Therefore, unless there were specific reasons (as in the case of group B, see below), the groups described here were not differentiated into Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age sub-sets.

13.2. the PetrograPhIc grouPs

Groups A, B and C all have a similar fabric and, therefore, must all three have been manufactured from the same natural resources, in this case (Taqiye marl) located on and in the near-vicinity of the Nesher-Ramla archaeological site. They are therefore considered local to the site or its immediate surrounding. These three groups together comprise over 95% of the sampled Chalcolithic assemblage and almost 80% of the EB assemblage analyzed. The remainder is comprised in Groups D-I.

Groups A-CThe differentiation between Groups A, B and C is based on technological differences amongst them. The fabric of all three groups is characterized by calcareous marl containing foraminifers and iron oxides. This conclusion corroborates the results of the earlier analyses of vessels from Nesher-Ramla Quarry carried out by Tsatskin (2010). Fine carbonate crystals are abundant in the matrix, sometimes exhibiting weak optical orientation.

Based on literature (Goren 2004: 51; Goren et al. 2004: 256-258; Goren 1991:101; Goren 1996a:48; Goren 1996b:150; Cohen-Weinberger 2004a:18) and on the comparative data-base from the LCMAI (henceforth LCMAI), this fabric is identified as originating from marl belonging to the Taqiye formation of Paleocene age.

The Taqiye formation is extremely widespread along the entire southern and eastern shore of the Mediterranean, as far west as Morocco (Bentor 1966:73). The exposures of Taqiye marl nearest to the present site are found near Ben-Shemen and Gezer, only several kilometers east of Nesher-

pottery assemblage and was found only in the late EB I assemblage. The inclusion of grog as a temper has been used since Neolithic periods, and is found in ceramic vessels from the nearby site of Nevé Yaraq, Lod (Goren 2004:53). Grog was probably added to the paste in order to reduce the expansion of the vessel that would result from thermal shock when fired to high temperatures, since its expansion coefficient is identical to that of the clay (Porat 1989b: 48). Grog is not uncommon in EB assemblages, especially in those deriving from the southern parts of Israel, and is found in many sites (Porat 1989a:178; 1989b:fig.8.4; Goren 1991; Cohen-Weinberger 2003:53-54; 2004b:101-103; 2010:113).

This group is represented by twenty-two samples from the late EB I assemblage and includes bowls, juglets, amphoriskoi, a jug, and jars, including pillar-spout jars.

13.2.3. Group C– Taqiye marl with crushed calcite added as temper The fabric of this group is the same as that of Groups A and B. The temper of this group is comprised mainly of extremely angular, coarse calcite crystals; they are clear, exhibit typical twinning and zoning and are split along their cleavage planes, indicating that they were crushed by the potter prior to being added to the clay’s paste. The calcite had to be mined from naturally occurring veins in limestone at the Nesher-Ramla site. The addition of this particular temper was probably dictated by specific technical requirements in order to increase thermal shock resistance of the vessel since the expansion rates of calcite and clay are rather similar (Arnold 1985:24). Crushed calcite as the main tempering material of cooking-pots and holemouth jars is very common from the EB I period to the end of the Iron Age when it is replaced by other inclusions (Porat 1989a:177-178; Goren 1991; Cohen-Weinberger 2003:53-54; 2004b:103). This specific temper therefore, might be expected to be found foremost in cooking vessels.

Group C is represented by two sampled holemouth jars deriving from the LC pottery assemblage and by six samples from the late EB I assemblage, including one juglet and five storage jars.

Ramla Quarry (Bullard 1970). The nearby site of Nevé Yaraq, Lod shows evidence of the use of this marl group, the only clay formation in this area, already in the Neolithic period (Goren 2004:51-53). Therefore all three groups, their technological differences notwithstanding, are considered, as already noted above, local to the site or its immediate surrounding.

13.2.1. Group A –Taqiye marl with calcareous inclusionsThis group was divided into two sub-groups. As stated above the fabric is the same as in Groups B and C. The temper in both sub-groups is comprised mainly of calcareous rock fragments, such as chalk, nari (the local name for a hard whitish crust covering limestone and chalk in areas where the perspiration is between 300 to 700 mm per year) and limestone. Chert is also found in some of the samples. Sub-group A1 differs from the rest of the group in that it contains a small amount (varying between 2-10%) of fine (up to 0.3 mm), rounded to sub-angular quartz grains.

This group is derived from the Taqiye marl or from clays of this formation that were washed down the wadis. The addition of the quartz grains in this sub-group A1 is evidence for the collection of reworked marl from the wadi banks. The marl is not pure but is mixed with quartz grains and calcareous inclusions (Goren 2004: 51).

Group A is represented by fifty-eight samples taken from the LC assemblage (of which 19 belong to sub-group A1), comprising all attested types of vessels including small, ‘V-shaped’ bowls and cornets, medium and large-sized bowls, kraters, holemouth jars, storage jars, large pithoi churns, and ossuaries (cf. Chapter 3). Thirteen samples (of which 6 belong to sub-group A1) derive from late EB I contexts. This group includes bowls, juglets, amphoriskoi, a ‘teapot’, and storage jars (cf. Chapter 4).

13.2.2. Group B – Taqiye marl with grog added as temperThis group resembles Group A in fabric and temper with the extra addition of grog (crushed pottery). Notably this group is absent from the Chalcolithic

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

258

13.2.6. Group F – Hamra with coastal sand added as temper The fabric of this group is characterized by ferruginous fine clay, slightly silty (2-5%). It is rich in small opaque bodies of iron minerals, and originates from hamra soil. The temper of this group consists mainly of well-sorted, rounded to sub-angular quartz grains (10-20%). Rarely, accessory minerals including mainly minerals of the feldspar, amphibole and pyroxene groups appear, while zircon is also occasionally found.

Hamra soil is spread along the Coastal Plain of Israel from the Ashdod area northwards (Dan et al. 1975; Singer 2007:210). The quartz grains found in the temper come from coastal sands originating from the Nile River. The proportion of quartz relative to other sediments diminishes as one goes north. From Akko northwards, quartz virtually disappears and the sediment becomes increasingly calcareous (Nir 1989:12).

The hamra soil in the southern parts of Israel is rich in silty quartz of Aeolian origin, and therefore the southern coast can be excluded as a potential candidate for the provenance of this group. In a recent study of modern coastal sands, it is noted that from the coast of Shefayim northward the sands are already richer in Mediterranean bioclasts and products of inland erosion than quartz sand (Golding-Meir 2010:31-40). There are problems with the comparison of modern coastal sands and ancient ones (ibid.:34-35), but when comparing the inclusions of ancient pottery originating from the Carmel Coast with pottery originating from sites further south on the coast of Israel, we find that the quartz diminishes as one goes north. Therefore Group F is assigned to the central coast of Israel north of Ashdod and south of Shefayim.

This group is represented by one holemouth jar from the LC assemblage and by one bowl and one amphoriskos from the late EB I assemblage.

13.2.7. Group G – alluvial Nile clayThe fabric of this group is characterized by a matrix rich in silt-sized quartz and mica flakes. The temper of this group consists mainly of sand-sized quartz. The sand is characterized by poor

13.2.4. Group D – Moza clay with dolomitic sand added as temper The fabric of this group is characterized by fine clay, somewhat calcareous, containing iron oxides. This group’s temper is easily identified by the presence of homogenous, densely spread, well-sorted, fine sand of idiomorphic, rhomboid crystals of dolomite. Some of the sampled vessels also contain grog.

Based on a large amount of publications (Porat 1989b:48; Goren 1991:98-100; 1995:291; 1996a:38; 2006:374-375) and comparative data from the LCMAI, this group is identified as originating from clays of the upper member of the Moza formation and dolomitic sand quarried from the overlaid Aminadav formation.

The Moza and Aminadav formations are exposed in the Cenomanian section of the Judean Mountains (Sneh et al. 1998). Therefore the origin of this group is assigned to the vicinity of the Judean hills, especially around Jerusalem.

This group is represented by one bowl from the LC assemblage and by two amphoriskoi, two bowls and one juglet from the late EB I assemblage.

13.2.5. Group E – Moza fine dolomitic marlThe fabric of this group is characterized by marl rich in tiny (below 50 μ) rhombohedral dolomitic crystals. Tiny nodules of ore minerals are also present. The temper of this group consists mainly of calcareous sand.

Based on a large amount of publications (Goren 1995:291; Goren 1996b:149; Goren 2006:375-376; Goren et al. 2004: 262-264; Cohen-Weinberger 2004a:18) and the comparative data-base from the LCMAI, this group is identified as belonging to the Moza marl group.

The Moza formation is exposed in the Cenomanian section of the Judean Mountains (Sneh et al. 1998). The Moza marl contains about 18% of carbonate minerals compared to about 4% in the upper clay unit (see Group D) of this formation (Bentor 1966: 48). Therefore this group is assigned the same provenance as Group D, that is from the vicinity of the Judaean hills, especially around Jerusalem.

This group is represented by only one sample of an EB I juglet.

PETROGRAPHIC EXAMINATION OF CERAMICS

259

Based on a large body of published data, the group is identified as terra rossa soil. Since terra rossa occurs widely in the Judean-Samarian Hills, Mount Carmel and the Galilee the exact provenance of pots belonging to this group cannot always be determined.

The use of terra rossa as clay for ceramic vessels is known from assemblages belonging to the central hill country of the Shephelah. The terra rossa group is dominant in the pottery assemblages of Lachish, Beth Shemesh and Tel Batash (Goren and Halperin 2004:2555-2556). In most cases, pottery belonging to this group can be identified on typological grounds as deriving from the Judah or the upper Shephelah.

This group is represented by only one sample of a late EB I bowl.

13.2.10. UndeterminedThe provenance of two samples, viz. samples 76 and 118, could not be determined.

Sample 76 is characterized by calcareous marl with a temper containing grains of chalk, quartz, calcite and very sparse dolomite. Also present are large (> 2 mm) iron oxides. Its provenance is uncertain but it might be from a local wadi bank.

Sample 118 is characterized by calcareous marl with silt containing few opaque particles. The clay is untempered. Its provenance cannot be certified.

13.2.11. SummaryGroups A, B and C are local to the site and comprise of Taqiye marl with different tempers. Group D and E are made of the Moza marl and Moza clay and originated from the Judean Mountains. Group F originated from the coast of Israel between Ashdod and Shefayim. Group G originates from the Nile Valley and Group H originates from the Jezreel Valley.

13.3. dIscussIon

Most of the pottery assemblage sampled by the authors both from LC levels (60 samples, 96.8%) and from late EB I contexts (41 samples, 78.8%) was locally produced. An additional eleven

sorting and the presence of feldspars and heavy minerals. The quartz grains are sub-rounded, and their size varies as a continuum into the silt-sized quartz, none of them larger than 0.2 mm.

Based on a large amount of publications (Porat 1986/87:115; Bourriau et al. 2000; Goren 2006:378) and the comparative data-base from the LCMAI, this group is identified as originating from Nile mud. Therefore the provenance of this group should be looked for somewhere in the Nile Valley.

This group is represented by two imported juglets from the late EB I assemblage.

13.2.8. Group H – Jezreel ValleyThe fabric of this group is characterized by calcareous marl containing foraminifers and grains of iddingsite. The temper of this group consists mainly of grains of alkali-olivine basalt, with the olivine mostly altered into iddingsite, and limestone. The basalt grains are rounded to sub-rounded, indicating the use of sieved river sand.

Based on published data (Goren and Zuckerman 2000:169-170) and the comparative data-base from the LCMAI, this group is identified with the area of the Jezreel Valley. Paleocene marl and shales of the Taqiye formation are exposed in Wadi ‘Ara to the west of the Jezreel Valley and in the Nazareth area to the north (Sneh et al. 1998). Exposures of late Miocene basalts are found to the east and west of Megiddo and to the east and north of Afula (ibid.). Therefore, the Jezreel Valley is the most probable origin of this group.

It is represented by only one sample of a late EB I amphoriskos.

13.2.9. Group I – Terra rossa soil The fabric of this group is characterized by its dark reddish-brown color. The matrix is silty, non-calcareous, ferruginous and optically oriented. The silt (>15%) contains mainly quartz, accompanied by iron oxides, very rare hornblende and rare calcite particles. The most common component in the non-plastic assemblage (>5%) is rounded quartz up to 90-100 μm (3%) and sub-rounded quartz up to 350 μm (>1%). Quartz grains are accompanied by rare weathered and decomposed limestone grains up to 140-260 (<1%).

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

260

We would like to express our thanks to Prof. Yuval Goren from the LCMAI, for the use of the extensive data-base of ceramic thin-sections.

1 Twenty-five late EB I ceramicsamples collected during the years 2006 and 2007 were petrographically examined and published earlier by A. Tsatskin (2010). We would like to express our thanks to Prof. Yuval Goren from the LCMAI, for the use of the

is far too small to be conclusive about why crushed calcite had been added in this case.

The addition of grog to the local paste was found at Nesher-Ramla only in the EB assemblage and not in any of the Chalcolithic samples. There is no observable correlation between the types of vessels made with grog compared to vessels without grog. Relevant samples include those of bowls, juglets, amphoriskoi, storage jars and ‘pillar-spout’ jars. Grog was probably added as part of the potter’s tradition and not necessarily for any functional reason (Gosselain 1989; Iserlis 2009).

Only two sampled Chalcolithic vessels were found to have been imported to the Nesher-Ramla site, one deriving from the Coastal Plain, the other from the Judean Mountains.

The EB assemblage on the other hand includes significantly more imports. The area to the east of the Judean Mountains was represented by more vessels than the coastal area to the west. The imported vessels from the Judean Mountains include juglets, bowls and amphoriskoi but not a single jar. Coastal examples include a bowl and an amphoriskos.

Two additional samples originating from the coast were also noted by Tsatskin (2010:56, Tab. 1), viz. a jar and bowl. Vessels originating from more distant areas do not appear in the Chalcolithic assemblage. Two EB I vessels did originate from areas further away, viz. an amphoriskos originating from the Jezreel Valley and a juglet originating from the Nile Valley. An additional jar, analyzed by Tsatskin (ibid.: 55-56, Fig. 4.25), also originated from the Nile Valley.

samples deriving from EB I levels were identified by Tsatskin (2010) as made from the local Taqiye marl. In the LC assemblage it was noticed that large vessels and ossuaries tend to contain coarse wadi sand (mainly quartz grains). ‘V-shaped’ bowls were mostly made of Group A fabric not containing any wadi sand. Eleven out of fourteen of these sampled bowls belong to the main group while only three were made of the fabric of sub-group A1. The four cornets that were sampled were all made of sub-group A1 containing wadi sand and could have all been made from one and the same paste. The cornets were all found in the same locus thus further strengthening this assumption.

Intentionally mixed, crushed calcite was found both in the LC and EB samples. Two Chalcolithic holemouth jars were made with this mixture. Six late EB I samples were made of this paste, including a juglet and five storage jars. The inclusion of crushed calcite, in the case of the EB vessels, was probably related to making closed and relatively complicated vessels and, in this case, was not related to the production of heat-resistant cooking vessels. The reason for using crushed calcite paste in the EB juglet is unknown. Out of seven juglets sampled, three were imported to the Nesher-Ramla site: one belongs to Group D (Table 2; no. 107), another to Group E (Table 2; no. 108). Both are assigned to the Judean hills. The third one belongs to Group G (Table 2; no. 75) and is assigned to the Nile Valley. Two of the local juglets contain grog (Group B) (Table 2; nos. 73, 109), one contains wadi sand (sub-group A1) (Table 2; no. 72) and one has crushed calcite in it (Group C; Table 2; no. 74). The sample

acKnoWLedgeMents notes


261

Goren, Y. 1995. Shrines and Ceramics in Chalcolithic Israel: The View through the Petrographic Microscope. Archaeometry 37: 287-305.

Goren, Y. 1996a. The Southern Levant in the Early Bronze Age IV: The Petrographic Perspective. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 303: 33-72.

Goren, Y. 1996b. Petrographic Study of the Pottery Assemblage. Pp. 147-154 in A. Gopher (ed.), The Nahal Qanah Cave, Earliest Gold in the Southern Levant. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

Goren, Y. 2004. Technological Study of the Ceramic Assemblage from Nevé Yaraq, Lod. ‘Atiqot 47: 51-55.

Goren, Y. 2006. The Technology of the Gilat Pottery Assemblage: A Reassessment. Pp. 369-393 in T.E. Levy and D. Alon (eds), Archaeology and Cult: The Sanctuary at Gilat. Ann Arbor.

Goren, Y., Finkelstein, I. and Na‘aman, N. 2004. Inscribed in Clay, Provenance Study of the Amarna Tablets and Other Near Eastern Texts. Emery and Clair Yass Publications in Archaeology. Tel Aviv.

Goren, Y. and Halperin, N. 2004. Section B: Selected Petrographic Analyses. Pp. 2553-2568 in D. Ussishkin (ed.), The Renewed Archaeological Excavations at Lachish (1973–1994) (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 22). Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

Goren Y. and Zuckermann S. 2000. An Overview of the Typology, Provenance and Technology of the Early Bronze Age I “Gray Burnished Ware”. Pp. 165-182 in G. Philip and D. Baird (eds.), Breaking the Past: Ceramics and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Sheffield.

Gosselain, O. 1998. Social and Technical Identity in a Clay Crystal Ball. Pp. 78-106 in M.T. Stark (ed.), The Archaeology of Social Boundaries. Washington and London.

Arnold, D. E. 1985. Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Bentor, Y. K. 1966. The Clays of Israel. Jerusalem: Israel Program for Scientific Translations.

Bourriau, J.D., Smith, L.M.V. and Nicholson, P.T. 2000. New Kingdom Pottery Fabrics, Nile Clay and Mixed Nile/Marl Clay Fabrics from Memphis and Amarna. The Egypt Exploration Society.

Bullard, R. 1970. Geological Studies in Field Archaeology. Biblical Archaeologist 33: 98-132.

Cohen-Weinberger, A. 2003. Petrographic Results of Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Ib Pottery from Horbat Hani (West). ‘Atiqot 44: 53-58.

Cohen-Weinberger, A. 2004a. Petrographic Results of Selected Fabrics of the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age I from Tel Batash. Qedem 45: 16-17.

Cohen-Weinberger, A. 2004b. A Petrographic Study of the Early Bronze Age Pottery from Ashqelon, Afridar – Area E. ‘Atiqot 45: 101-104.

Cohen-Weinberger, A. 2010. Petrographic Analysis of Pottery from the Early Bronze Age Tomb 80 in the ‘En Esur Cemetery. ‘Atiqot 64: 113-114.

Cohen-Weinberger, A. and Goren, Y. 2004. Levantine - Egyptian Interactions: Preliminary Results of the Petrographic Study of the Canaanite Pottery from Tell el-Dab’a. Äegypten und Levante 14: 69-100.

Dan, Y., Raz Z., Yaalon, D.H. and Koyumdjisky, H. 1975. Soil Map of Israel 1:500,000. Ministry of Agriculture.

Golding-Meir, N. 2010. Marine and Overland Interactions in the Eastern Mediterranean Area during the Late Bronze Age. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Tel-Aviv University.

Goren, Y. 1991. The Beginnings of Pottery Production in Israel, Technology and Typology of Proto-Historic Ceramic Assemblages in Eretz-Israel (6th-4th Millennia B.C.E). Ph.D. diss., The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew).

reFerences

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

262

Porat, N. 1989b. Composition of Pottery – Application to the Study of the Interrelations between Canaan and Egypt during the 3rd millennium B.C. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem.

Singer, A. 2007. The Soils of Israel. Springer. Berlin.

Sneh, A., Bartov, Y., Weissbrod, T. and Rosensaft, M. 1998. Geological Map of Israel, 1:200,000. Israel Geological Survey (4 sheets).

Tsatskin, A. 2010. Petrographic Examination of Ceramics from Burial Cave F-55 and Burial F-257. Pp. 43-57 in S. Kol-Ya‘akov, Salvage Excavations at Nesher-Ramla Quarry. Haifa.

Iserlis, M. 2009. Khirbet Kerak Ware at Bet Yerah: Segregation and Integration through Technology. Tel Aviv: 181-195. Tel Aviv.

Nir, Y. 1989. Sedimentological Aspects of the Israel and Sinai Mediterranean Coasts. Jerusalem.

Porat, N. 1986/87. Local Industry of Egyptian Pottery in Southern Palestine during the Early Bronze I Period. Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar 8: 109-129.

Porat, N. 1989a. Petrography of Pottery from Southern Israel and Sinai. Pp.169-188 in P. de Miroschedji (ed.), L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du Bronze ancient: bilan et perspectives des recherchés actuelles: actes du colloque d’Emmaus (20-24 octobre 1986). Oxford.


263

aPPendIX 1

PETROGRAPHIC SLIDESAll figures were taken under XPL with a magnification of X40. The scale of the photographs is 0.05 mm.

Fig 13.2 Sub-Group A1 (sample 11)

Fig 13.3 Group B (sample 66)

Fig 13.1 Group A (sample 3) Fig 13.4 Group C (sample 28)

Fig 13.5 Group D (sample 85)

Fig 13.6 Group E (sample 108)

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

264

Fig 13.7 Group F (sample 63) Fig 13.9 Group H (sample 82)

Fig 13.8 Group G (sample 75) Fig 13.10 Undetermined (sample 76)


265

table 13. 1. Summary of the sampled LC assemblage.

No Cave Locus Reg. No. Type Group Provenance Plate no.

1 F-370 R81 N539 Churn A Local Taqiye marl 2:19

3 F-370 R81 N727/1 Holemouth jar A Local Taqiye marl 1:11

4 F-370 R81 P164 Holemouth jar A Local Taqiye marl 1:15

6 F-370 R81 N496 Bowl A Local Taqiye marl 1:2

7 F-352 Q90 N369/6 Bodysherd with ‘potmark’

A Local Taqiye marl 4:15

8 F-352 Q90 N892 Krater A Local Taqiye marl 3:8

9 F-352 Q90 N373 Holemouth jar A Local Taqiye marl 4:7

17 F-477 Y96 R132 Pithos A Local Taqiye marl 10:9

18 F-355 T85 P579 Jar A Local Taqiye marl 9:4

19 F-355 V42 P814 Holemouth jar A Local Taqiye marl 7:14

21 F-355 V42 Q123 Jar A Local Taqiye marl 8:8, 9

25 F-355 V42 Q297/3 Bowl A Local Taqiye marl 6:12

27 F-355 R14 Q399/1 Small jar A Local Taqiye marl 8:6


35 F-355 R14 Q520/1 Large handle A Local Taqiye marl 8:7

36 F-380 T83 Q646 ‘V-shaped’ bowl A Local Taqiye marl 19:2



40 F-380 T83 Q948/1 ‘V-shaped’ bowl A Local Taqiye marl 18:14

41 F-380 S15 N944/5 Holemouth jar with ‘potmark’


42 F-380 T83 Q945 ‘V-shaped’ bowl with potmark


43 F-380 T83 Q483 Vessel A Local Taqiye marl 21:4

44 F-380 T83 Q860 Holemouth jar A Local Taqiye marl 22:7

45 F-380 T83 Q917/1 Jar A Local Taqiye marl 22:8

46 F-380 T83 Q981/1 Bowl A Local Taqiye marl 21:2

47 F-380 T83 Q606/1 Bodysherd with ‘potmark’


48 F-380 T83 Q953 Object A Local Taqiye marl 22:13

49 F-380 T83 P846 Small ‘V-shaped’ bowl A Local Taqiye marl 18:3

50 F-380 T83 Q605 Small ‘V-shaped’ bowl A Local Taqiye marl 18:1

51 F-380 T83 Q943 Small ‘V-shaped’ bowl A Local Taqiye marl 18:2

52 F-380 T83 Q917/2 Bodysherd with potmark


53 F-380 Y76 R204 Small ‘V-shaped’ bowl A Local Taqiye marl 17:1

56 F-380 Y76 R207/2 Bodysherd A Local Taqiye marl 17:20

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

266

No Cave Locus Reg. No. Type Group Provenance Plate no.

57 F-380 Y76 R207/3 Holemouth jar A Local Taqiye marl 17:17

58 F-380 Y76 Q965 ‘V-shaped’ bowl A Local Taqiye marl 17:10

59 F-380 Y76 R206 ‘V-shaped’ bowl A Local Taqiye marl 17:8

60 F-380 Y76 R205 Krater A Local Taqiye marl 17:15

61 F-380 Y76 R208/2 Jar A Local Taqiye marl 17:21

62 F-380 Y76 R214 Jar A Local Taqiye marl 17:22

5 F-370 R81 N963 Holemouth jar A1 Local Taqiye marl 1:19

10 F410 S67 P175 Ossuary jar A1 Local Taqiye marl 5:1

11 F-477 Y96 R146 Ossuary A1 Local Taqiye marl 11:1

12 F-477 Y96 R145/2 Ossuary jar A1 Local Taqiye marl 11:2

13 F-477 Y96 R184/1 Ossuary jar A1 Local Taqiye marl 1:3

14 F-477 Y96 R182/2 Bowl A1 Local Taqiye marl 10:1

16 F-477 Y96 R184/3 Jar A1 Local Taqiye marl 10:6

20 F-355 V42 P990 Churn A1 Local Taqiye marl 8:15

22 F-355 V42 P816/2 Holemouth jar A1 Local Taqiye marl 7:3

23 F-355 V42 P997/1 Bowl A1 Local Taqiye marl 6:14

24 F-355 V42 P997/2 Bowl A1 Local Taqiye marl 6:11

29 F-355 V42 P909/1 Ossuary A1 Local Taqiye marl 8:17

30 F-355 R14 N644/1 Cornet A1 Local Taqiye marl 6:21

31 F-355 R14 N644/2 Cornet A1 Local Taqiye marl . 6:27

32 F-355 R14 N644/4 Cornet A1 Local Taqiye marl 6:20

33 F-355 R14 P559/3 Cornet A1 Local Taqiye marl 6:26

39 F-380 T83 Q859 ‘V-shaped’ bowl with ‘potmark’

A1 Local Taqiye marl 20:1

54 F-380 Y76 R217 Small ‘V-shaped’ bowl A1 Local Taqiye marl 17:3

55 F-380 Y76 R207/1 ‘V-shaped’ bowl A1 Local Taqiye marl 17:11

15 F-477 Y96 R133 Holemouth jar C Crushed calcite in local Taqiye marl

10:5

28 F-355 R14 N878 Holemouth jar C Crushed calcite in local Taqiye marl

7:16

26 F-355 V42 Q297/4 Bowl D Judean hills 6:5

2 F-370 R81 N727/2 Small holemouth jar F Coast of Israel Ashdod to Shefayim

1:18


267

table 13.2. Summary of the sampled late EB I assemblage.

No Cave Locus Reg. No. Type Group Provenance Appear in



79 F-355 R14 N861 Amphoriskos A Local Taqiye marl 24:11

81 F-355 R14 Q119 Amphoriskos A Local Taqiye marl 24:16

86 F-355 R14 Q393 Amphoriskos A Local Taqiye marl 25:6

90 F-355 R14 N430 Teapot A Local Taqiye marl 26:1

112 F-380 Z45 R248 Amphoriskos A Local Taqiye marl 40:21

72 F-355 R14 N437 Juglet A1 Local Taqiye marl 24:6

88 F-355 R14 Q345 Amphoriskos A1 Local Taqiye marl 25:5

89 F-355 R14 Q468 Jar A1 Local Taqiye marl 25:11

99 F-355 R14 N443 Storage jar A1 Local Taqiye marl 26:5

102 F-380 Z45 R237 Bowl A1 Local Taqiye marl 40:7

116 F-565 10390 S914 Juglet A1 Local Taqiye marl 32:7

65 F-355 R14 N638 Bowl B Local Taqiye marl with grog 23:21




73 F-355 R14 N518 Juglet B Local Taqiye marl with grog 24:5

77 F-355 R14 Q120 Jug B Local Taqiye marl with grog 24:18

78 F-355 R14 Q181 Amphoriskos B Local Taqiye marl with grog 24:10

80 F-355 R14 N569 Amphoriskos B Local Taqiye marl with grog 24:9

83 F-355 R14 N342 Amphoriskos B Local Taqiye marl with grog 24:14

84 F-355 R14 Q351 Amphoriskos B Local Taqiye marl with grog 25:4

91 F-355 R14 N338 Storage jar B Local Taqiye marl with grog 26:2

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

268


92 F-355 R14 N430 Pillar-spout jar B Local Taqiye marl with grog 26:3

93 F-355 R14 N375 Storage jar B Local Taqiye marl with grog 26:4

100 F-380 S15 P794 Bowl B Local Taqiye marl with grog 40:9

103 F-380 Z15 R395 Bowl B Local Taqiye marl with grog 40:12

104 F-380 S15 N916 Bowl B Local Taqiye marl with grog 40:13

106 F-380 Z45 R255 Bowl B Local Taqiye marl with grog 40:14

109 F-380 Z45 R236 Juglet B Local Taqiye marl with grog 40:17

111 F-380 Z45 R303 Amphoriskos B Local Taqiye marl with grog 40:22

113 F-380 Z13 R141 Pillar-spout jar B Local Taqiye marl with grog 41:3

114 F-380 Z15 R152 Pillar-spout jar B Local Taqiye marl with grog 41:2

74 F-355 R14 N633 Juglet C Crushed calcite in local Taqiye marl

24:3

94 F-355 R14 Q467 Storage jar C Crushed calcite in local Taqiye marl

26:7


27:3


27:4


28:1


28:2

85 F-355 R14 Q402/4 Amphoriskos D Judean hills 25:9

87 F-355 R14 Q344 Amphoriskos D Judean hills 25:2

101 F-380 S15 P793 Bowl D Judean hills 40:11

105 F-380 Z15 R396 Bowl D Judean hills 40:10

107 F-380 S15 N961 Juglet D Judean hills 40:15

108 F-380 Z45 R238 Juglet E Judean hills 40:16


269


63 F-355 R14 N475 Bowl F Coast of Israel Ashdod to Shefayim

23:7

110 F-380 T83 Q972 Amphoriskos F Coast of Israel Ashdod to Shefayim

40:18

75 F-355 R14 N860 Juglet G Nile Valley 24:7

117 F-565 10457 T235 Juglet G Nile Valley 32:20

82 F-355 R14 N367 Amphoriskos H Jezreel Valley 24:12

115 F-565 10390 T502 Bowl I Terra rosa 30:1

76 F-355 R14 N699 Miniature jar Undetermined Undetermined 20:8

118 F-565 10390 T160 Pendant Undetermined Undetermined 56:12

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

270

Golding-Meir, N. and Iserlis, M. 2012. Petrographic Examination of Ceramics. In: Avrutis, V.W. Late...

Documents

Transcript of Golding-Meir, N. and Iserlis, M. 2012. Petrographic Examination of Ceramics. In: Avrutis, V.W. Late...