The Pottery from the Achzib Defence System, Area D: 1963 and 1964 SeasonsAuthor(s): E. D. ORENReviewed work(s):Source: Israel Exploration Journal, Vol. 25, No. 4 (1975), pp. 211-225Published by: Israel Exploration SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27925534 .Accessed: 26/11/2011 14:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Israel Exploration Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to IsraelExploration Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

The Pottery from the Achzib Defence

System, Area D: 1963 and 1964 Seasons* E. D. OREN

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

Before an attempt is made to date the Achzib defence system, it should be pointed out that the limited area exposed in the 1963 and 1964 seasons, and the fact that even this section was only partly excavated, make the proposed dating tentative and

subject to alterations as work on the site is resumed. The excavations did not produce evidence, structural or other (such as walls, floors or graves broken into by the

fortifications), for establishing the relative chronology of construction. In fact the

only evidence at hand is a collection of sherds which were encountered in part in

the fill material of the complex, as well as sherds from above the fortifications. A

fill of this nature may obviously contain remains of all periods up to the date of

construction, and only the latest sherds are significant insofar as they provide a

terminus post quern for the building operation. As for the date when the fortifications became obsolete, the only incontestable piece of evidence at our disposal is the

remains of a building in area D in square C, the foundation trenches of which were

cut from above into the brick core (A) and earth glacis (B) (see Fig. 3, above, p. 206). This is likewise of little help, since the walls, of advanced Iron Age date, substantially

post-date the abandonment of the fortifications. Similarly, the material from the

soil over the glacis can hardly be considered for chronological purposes, since it had

in all probability washed down from the top of the mound and included pottery from the Middle Bronze Age to the late Islamic period. One is thus left with fill

material from the various parts of the fortification complex (excluding the stone

revetment, which has not yet been excavated) for postulating the dates of initial

construction and subsequent structural alterations. It should be stated that the

sherd collection is sufficiently large and proportionately well distributed in the different

groups to permit a detailed typological analysis and consequently a relative and

absolute dating for the Achzib defence system. The ceramic evidence is grouped here in accordance with its relation to the various

architectural elements recognized in the section (Fig. 3, above, p. 206) (see distribution

table, p. 222).

* The author would like to express his gratitude to Dr. M. Prausnitz, the excavator of Achzib

(see above, pp. 202-210), for putting at his disposal all materials connected with this study and for

giving him much of his time for discussion of the subject.

212 E. D. OREN

Group A. Sherds from the brick core.

Group B. Sherds from the earth glacis, including pottery from foundation trenches of wall 2002.

Group C. Sherds from the stone packing on the glacis. Group D. Selected sherds from the soil packing over the stone revetment.

Group E. Selected sherds from fill above what appears to be the fosse.

TYPOLOGY AND COMPARATIVE MATERIAL

Plain bowls (types 1-18: Fig. 1). Small to medium in size with straight or slightly curved walls and usually with plain or inverted rims. Some rims grooved (type 3), bevelled (type 6), flat-topped and projecting inside and outside (type 11). Base forms

range from rounded to disc, concave (type 15) and spreading ring base (type 18). Clay usually coarse, fired reddish-brown to pink; baked soft to medium hard with

grey core and mixed with large white, brown or black particles. Some specimens show evidence of close wheel combing on outer surfaces (types 4, 17-18). Most of the bowls under review find their counterparts in MB IIB contexts with

possible extensions into MB IIA and MB IIC. Types 3, 10, 15 and 17 are paralleled in strata G-F at Tell Beit-Mirsim and in the fill below the MB IIC revetment of the same site,1 in the Duweir embankment, for which a date of about 1700 B.C. has been established,2 and in early MB II tombs at Megiddo.3 Of the foregoing types, 10 and 15 are matched in early MB II contexts at Megiddo, but are equally represented in the MB IIC temple of Nahariya as well as in groups II-V of the Jericho cemetery.4

The evidence from Megiddo, Jericho and the 'Ajjul courtyard cemetery suggests, on the other hand, that other bowl types in our series, 6 and 11, are more charac teristic of the early MB II period, and disappear completely before the MB IIC

phase.5

Burnished bowls (types 19-26: Fig. 1). Like the foregoing, straight-sided or with

slightly curved walls and plain or inverted rims. Types 24-25 grooved on top of rim,

1 W.F. Albright: The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim in Palestine, I: The Pottery of the First Three Campaigns, AASOR 12 (1932) (hereafter TBM, I), PI. 13:47, 52-56; idem, The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim, IA: The Pottery of the Fourth Campaign, AASOR 13 (1933) (hereafter TBM, IA), Pis. 5:5, 10:6. 2 Olga Tufnell: Lachich, IV, Oxford, 1958 (hereafter Lachish, IV), p. 55, Fig. 3:135, 144. 3 G. Loud: Megiddo, II, Chicago, 1948 (hereafter Megiddo, II), PI. 14:3. 4 I. Ben-Dor: A Middle Bronze Age Temple at Nahariya, QDAP 14 (1950) (hereafter Nahariya), Figs. 39:f, 40:a; Megiddo, II, PI. 14:1; Kathleen Kenyon: Excavations at Jericho, I, The Tombs

Excavated in 1952-4, Jerusalem, 1960 (hereafter Jericho, I), Fig. 175:4. 5

Megiddo, II, Pis. 14:8, 19:2; Jericho, I, Figs. 112:1, 205:3; Kathleen Kenyon: Excavations at

Jericho, II, The Tombs Excavated in 1955-8, London, 1965 (hereafter Jericho, II), Figs. 129:2,

152:19; Olga Tufnell: The Courtyard Cemetery at Tell el-'Ajjul, Palestine, Bulletin of the Institute

of Archaeology of the University of London 3 (1962), Figs. 10:12, 11:22.

POTTERY FROM THE ACHZIB DEFENCE SYSTEM 213

~7

7

=7

Fig. 1

214 E. D. OREN

and 26 bevelled and grooved below lip. Clay coarse, tempered with small to medium

grits; fired reddish-brown to light brown or pink with grey core and baked medium hard. Closely burnished red to purple slip on interior and exterior or on outside rim

only.

The pottery sequence of strata G-D at Tell Beit-Mirsim indicates that slip and burnish became less common before the close of the MB IIB phase, disappearing entirely in the late MB II period.6 Bowl types 24 and 26 are matched in the MB II fill at Duweir, where only a few sherds actually exhibit the red slip or burnish,7 in the Nahariya temple8 and in early MB II residential and funeral deposits at Megiddo.9 Identical bowls were also encountered side by side with Tell el-Yehudiyeh pottery at R?s el-'Ain.10 The foregoing parallels, and especially the grouping of these bowl

types with Tell el-Yehudiyeh ware, clearly indicate that the collection of burnished

bowls as a whole belongs to the early part of the MB II period and apparently went

out of use well before the end of the Middle Bronze Age.11

Flaring carinated bowl (type 27: Fig. 2). Deep, flaring carinated bowl with marked

shoulder. Fine clay fired pinkish-brown with grey core, mixed with small white and

brown grits and baked soft to medium hard.

The flaring carinated bowl is a well-documented MB IIB type which is rarely, if at all, found in late MB II assemblages. In the large Middle Bronze Age cemetery at Jericho, for example, this type is usually recorded in groups II-IV.12 Similarly, identical shapes are found in undisturbed loci and tombs of strata XIII-XI at Me

giddo13 as well as the embankment fill at Duweir.14

Angular carinated bowls (types 28-30: Fig. 2). Deep, sharply angular walls with thickened outcurved rim. Very finely levigated body, tempered with minute white and brown particles; fired light brown to pink and baked medium hard. Thin bur

nished dark red slip outside or on rim. Bowl 29 shows signs of wheel combing. The evidence from well-placed contexts in Syria and Palestine shows that the

angular carinated bowl is a type fossil of the early MB II inventory.15 Similar speci mens with slip and burnish are registered in tombs and on floors of strata XIV-XIII

6 TBM, I, Nos. 20, 33; Lachish, IV, p. 45.

7 Lachish, IV, Fig. 3:139. 8 Nahariya, Fig. 39 :b. ? Megiddo, II, Pis. 14:11, 19:2, 22:4-5. 10 J. Ory: Excavations at Ras el 'Ain, QDAP 5 (1936) (hereafter Ras el 'Ain, I), type 3. 11 For the grouping of MB IIC pottery and the lower limit of Tell el-Yehudiyeh pottery see E.D.

Oren: Cypriot Imports in the Palestinian Late Bronze I Context, Opuscula Atheniensia 9 (1969),

pp. 127-150. 12 Jericho, II, Fig. 116:27. 13 Megiddo, II, PI. 21:12. 14 Lachish, IV, p. 55, Fig. 3:119. is

Ibid., p. 179.

POTTERY FROM THE ACHZIB DEFENCE SYSTEM 215

cf 4*

9

Si

*6

SZ

S3 .

I C*t

Fig. 2

216 E.D. OREN

at Megiddo, while in strata XII-XI they usually occur without burnish, becoming almost extinct in the MB IIC phase, stratum X.16 Similarly, the angular bowl is a

characteristic feature of strata G-F at Tell Beit-Mirsim as well as early MB II deposits at Nahariya and Ras el-'Ain.17 It is worth noting that the same type, although without

slip or burnish, is common in groups I?III at Jericho, and that the only parallel from the Duweir fill is not slipped or burnished.18

Burnished chalices (types 31-35: Fig. 2). Barrel-shaped, straight-sided or slightly outcurved walls with plain or thickened rims; grooved on interior or exterior below

lip. Very finely levigated clay mixed with minute white and brown grits; fired reddish

brown, light brown or pinkish-buff and baked medium hard. Thin, closely burnished

orange to dark red slip outside and on rim inside.

This graceful shape apparently developed from the Syrian Caliciform pottery tradition and seems to have been more at home in coastal and inland Syria than in

Palestine.19 Identical parallels are recorded in early MB II contexts at Ras el-'Ain, and some examples of a roughly similar outline, although without slip or burnish, came from stratum G at Tell Beit-Mirsim.20 A number of identical chalices have

recently been unearthed at Kabri together with red burnished carinated bowls

(Achzib types 28-30), burnished jugs (Achzib types 40-43), early types of Tell el Yehudiyeh juglets and Cypriote White Painted ware.21 The Kabri assemblage seems

fairly homogeneous and dates from the transition period MB A-B at the latest.

Finally, the Achzib chalices are closely matched in the Royal Tombs, especially T.

II-IV, at Byblos, which are generally assigned to the MB IIA period.22

Dipper juglets (types 36-39: Fig. 2). Fragments of elongated, pointed-based juglets with narrow neck, saucer-like mouth, and handle round in section, springing from

shoulder(?) to below rim. The heavy, thick-walled juglet, type 39, is coarse; brown

clay with grey core and mixed with large grits; shallow, close wheel combing outside and pronounced ribbing inside. Type 36 has finely levigated brownish-buff clay,

tempered with minute brown grits. Types 37-38 have very finely levigated clay mixed

with small grits. Thin dark red slip, burnished vertically to the pointed bottom.

16 Megiddo, II, Pl. 14:39. 17 TBM, I, Nos. 20, 33, Pis. 6:35-43, 13:41-44, 41:3; TBM, IA, Pl. 4:1-5, 10; R?s el 'Ain, I, p. 122,

No. 1; J. Ory: Excavations at R?s el 'Ain, II, QDAP 6 (1936) (hereafter R?s el 'Ain, II), p. 110, No. 27, Pl. XXX:14; Nahariya, Fig. 35:b-c. 18 Lachish, IV, p. 55, Fig. 3:128. 19 Ruth Amiran: Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land, Jerusalem, 1969, p. 120. 20 R?s el 'Ain, I, p. 117, No. 34, p. 125, No. 76; R?s el 'Ain, II, type 5; TBM, I, PI. 41:5; TBM, IA, PI. 10:1. 21 Unpublished. I am grateful to Dr. M. Prausnitz for permitting me to refer to this material. 22 p. Montet: Byblos et V?gypte, Paris, 1928, Pis. CXVI, upper photograph, CXVII:815, CXVIII: 802. See also J.G. Duncan: Corpus of Palestinian Pottery, London, 1930, last plate, Nos. 3-4.

POTTERY FROM THE ACHZIB DEFENCE SYSTEM 217

The surface treatment of type 39 favours an MB IIB date for this specimen in

accordance with the distribution of close wheel combing technique on storage-jars.

Type 36 is paralleled in the Nahariya temple.23 Burnished dipper juglets with pointed bottoms are characteristic of the advanced MB II pottery repertoire since they are

present in the revetment fill of Duweir or indeed in any homogeneous advanced MB II

context. Moreover, this type is not found prior to stratum XII at Megiddo or stratum

F at Tell Beit-Mirsim, thus excluding an MB IIA date for this feature. In the MB II

type sites quoted in our discussion, types 37-38 are most common in strata XII-XI at Megiddo, in the fill below the revetment at Tell Beit-Mirsim and strata F-E of

the same site, as well as in the Nahariya temple and together with Tell el-Yehudiyeh pottery at Ras el-'Ain.24

Red burnished jugs (types 40-43: Fig. 2). Flat and disc bases of handled jugs with

fragments of a twin handle. Finely levigated clay, tempered with small white particles, fired pink to light brown and baked medium hard. Thin orange to dark red slip on

exterior; burnished vertically. Type 42 shows pronounced wheel ribbing inside. The evidence from well-placed contexts in Palestine, especially in undisturbed

loci in strata XIV-XIII at Megiddo, points to an early MB II date for the burnished

jug type with flat or disc base.25 Similar specimens have recently been encountered

in transitional MB A-B or early MB IIB deposits at Kabri.26

Kraters, cooking-pots and hole-mouthed jars (types 44-56: Figs. 2-3). All three

categories are grouped here together, as it is not always possible to decide on the

original shape by the rim only. Rims vary from everted (type 49) to outcurved

(types 45-47), grooved (type 56), folded over (type 48), ledged (type 50), profiled (type 51) and compressed (type 54). All types are of coarse clay; they are fired pink to dark grey with grey core, heavily gritted with large particles and baked medium

hard. Some specimens show close wheel combing on exterior and one, type 54, is

cross-hatched on top of rim.

Most types under review are matched in MB A-B contexts elsewhere. Type 49

is paralleled at R?s el-'Ain, strata G-F at Tell Beit-Mirsim, and the Nahariya temple.27

Type 54, with compressed rim, is found in the sites just mentioned as well as in the

fill of the Duweir embankment and in a sealed locus of stratum XIII at Megiddo.28

23 Nahariya, Pl. IX:20. 24 TBM, I, No. 44, Pis. 6:6-7, 30-31, 13:50, 41:2; Megiddo, II, Pis. 25:20, 33:25-26; R?s el 'Ain,

II, type 15; Nahariya, Fig. 24:b, Pl. . 8. 25 Megiddo, II, Pl. 16:1; Amiran, op. cit. (above, . 19), pp. 132-133, Pl. 33. 26 See above, . 21. 27 R?s el 'Ain, I, p. 123, No. 33; TBM, IA, PL 21:33a-b; Nahariya, Fig. 27:g. 28 TBM, IA, PL 5:2-3; Nahariya, Fig. 23:a; ?ac/to/?, IV, p. 55, Fig. 3:121, 155; Megiddo, II, PL 21:4.

218 E. D. OREN

/ /

//

5k

55

57

6G e: 69

70

7

5*5

1 .6/

54

57

7 ? 7/

55

55

5?

7 FF1 65

55

if 7? 0 IO

_ _ _ ? ? cm.

73

Fig. 3

POTTERY FROM THE ACHZIB DEFENCE SYSTEM 219

The cooking-pots with bevelled rims, type 47, have close parallels in stratum E of

Tell Beit-Mirsim and types 48, 50, 53 and 56 are equally distributed in the Duweir fill and Nahariya temple.29

Storage-jars (types 57-82: Figs. 3-4). Rim forms include ridged types (types 60-62),

flaring (type 65), folded over (type 76) and profiled (types 77-78). The coarse clay is fired pinkish-red to brown with grey core, mixed with large particles and baked

medium to hard. Type 61 is grooved below rim and shows traces of red paint in

grooves. This collection is characterized by the use of close wheel combing on outer

surface or by horizontal and wavy combed bands (type 79) or punctured design on

neck (type 81). Type 80 has parallel combing and punctured design arranged in

parallel rows, and type 82 is decorated with a raised cross-hatched band.

The collection of rims exhibits the standard variety of storage-jars in MB II as

semblages. The surface treatment of close wheel combing, wavy and horizontal

combed bands and raised bands with hatched design is commonly found throughout the MB II strata (G-D) and fill below the revetment at Tell Beit-Mirsim, and is

particularly frequent on sherds from the temple at Nahariya, which is only 4 km.

south of Achzib; it is of some interest that one sherd with raised bands was discovered

in the embankment of Duweir, and that this feature was widely used for decorating the incense burners at Nahariya.30 Some of the shapes under review, types 59, 71

and 74, can be safely assigned to the early MB II phase as they were found in early MB II contexts at Tell Beit-Mirsim and Jericho.31 Most other types, however, includ

ing 60, 62-64, 66, 70, 75-76 and especially 77-78, were noted equally in advanced

MB II deposits elsewhere, and their presence in the later groups of the Jericho ceme

tery as well as the last phase of the Nahariya temple indicates their survival well into

the late MB II period.32

Lamp (type 83: Fig. 4). Saucer type with plain rim and round base. Hand-made.

Coarse greyish-brown clay with black core; heavily gritted and hard baked. Traces

of sooty substance on rim.

Baking trays (types 84-85: Fig. 4). Profiled ring foot, grooved around and cross

hatched underneath. Coarse, heavily gritted clay, fired brownish-grey and extremely hard baked. Hatched pattern, identical with that on type 54.

29 TBM, IA, Pl. 7:1; Lachish, IV, p. 55, Fig. 3:116, 122; Nahariya, Figs. 23:g, 27:f-h. 30 TBM, I, No. 44, Pis. 7:11-33, 9:1, 13:39-40; TBM, IA, No. 28; Nahariya, p. 29, Fig. 10, Pis.

VII, XL7-16; Lachish, IV, p. 55, Fig. 3:124. 31 TBM, IA, Pis. 6:1-2, 7:5; Jericho, II, Fig. 226:8. 32

Nahariya, Figs. 19:a-c (Achzib 63), h-i (Ac. 76), 20:a-c (Ac. 77-78), 21:a-d (Ac. 60, 62, 64, 66), 21 :g (Ac. 75); Megiddo, II, Pis. 18:1 (Ac. 62), 27:1, 6 (Ac. 60, 75), 34:17 (Ac. 70), 35:3 (Ac. 62); Jericho, I, Figs. 124:2 (Ac. 77-78), 206:1 (Ac. 77-78), 213 (Ac. 62); Jericho, II, Figs. 127:1 (Ac. 64), 149:2-4, 178:2, 197:3 (Ac. 77-78); TBM, IA, PI. 21:44 (Ac. 77-78).

220 E. D. OREN

Fl < -

--*? ??T~~f

?Fnr v-n f

? '

Uni T>

a/

? . . . . y *?

Fig. 4

POTTERY FROM THE ACHZIB DEFENCE SYSTEM 221

Similar trays (usually illustrated upside-down) are common in the Middle Bronze

Age pottery inventory, surviving without much change into the Late Bronze Age.33

Cypriote imports (types 86-90: Fig. 4). The classification of type 86, with plain rim

and almost horizontal loop handle set below its rim, is not certain as both surfaces are completely worn off. The fabric may be classified either as Red Slip, Red-on

Black, Red-on-Red or more probably Red Polished IV.34 Bowl 87 is Red Polished

IV with slightly inturned, plain rim and handle like that of type 86 or perhaps the

string-hole type.35 Sherd 88 is from a Red Polished IV bowl with cut-away spout,36 and type 89 is a Red Polished IV bowl with angular inturned rim.37 The fabric of

these specimens is typically Middle Cypriote II?III. Fragments 86-89 are hand-made

of finely levigated clay, fired pink to light brown; baked soft to medium hard and

tempered with minute and larger white grits and grog. Exterior and interior surfaces are applied with burnished, thin dark red slip.

Red Polished IV pottery is common in Middle Cypriote II sites and reached its

peak of popularity in the Middle Cypriote III phase, about 1700-1600/1575 B.C.38

The present writer has analysed elsewhere in detail the Palestinian assemblages which

contained the Red Polished IV ware as well as other allied Middle Cypriote classes,

including Red-on-Black, Red-on-Red and Red Slip, and demonstrated that contacts

with the Levant in general and Palestine in particular were strongest in the late

Middle Cypriote II and Middle Cypriote III. On Palestinian evidence it seems that

the classes under discussion can by no means date from the early MB II period but

must belong to the MB IIB or even the MB IIC periods.39

Type 90 is a shoulder fragment of a hand-made White Painted vessel. Finely

levigated pinkish-yellow body, baked medium hard and painted with reddish-purple bands. The sherd is too small to allow an accurate classification, but the fabric may be classified as White Painted IV ware.40

33 Cf. Nahariya, Figs. 44-45; Y. Yadin et al: Hazor, I, Jerusalem, 1958, Pl. CIII:3-4; idem,

Hazor, III-IV, Jerusalem, 1961 (hereafter Hazor, III-IV), PL CC:7; Megiddo, II, Pis. 53:21-22, 61:22. 34 p. ?str?m: The Middle Cypriote Bronze Age, Lund, 1957 (hereafter MCBA), Fig. XIX:9;

V. Karageorghis: Nouveaux Documents pour ?tude du Bronze R?cent ? Chypre, Paris, 1965, Fig.

7:15; . Hennessy: Stephania, A Cemetery in Cyprus, London, 1963, Pl. XLVII:12 (all examples are

Red Polished). 35 MCBA, Fig. XIX:3; Karageorghis, op. cit. (above, . 34), Fig. 8:23 (both Red Polished). 36 MCBA, Fig. XIX:14 (Red Polished). 37 MCBA, Fig. XXXI:7 (Red-on-Black). 38 MCBA, pp. 276-278; H.W. Catling: Cyprus in the Middle Bronze Age, Cambridge Ancient

History, II, Cambridge, 1961 (revised edition), Chap. IV (c), p. 36. 39 Oren, op. cit. (above, n. 11), pp. 127-150, esp. pp. 137-140. See also the Hazor sequence, where

most of the MB II?III imports are recorded in the MB IIC Stratum 3 ? Y. Yadin et al: Hazor,

II, Jerusalem, 1960, PL CXV:7-14; Hazor, III-IV, PL CCLXXXVII:23-24. 40 For White Painted IV pottery in the embankment fill at Duweir see Lachish, IV, p. 55, Fig. 3:174.

222 E. D. OREN

A tentative examination of the architectural elements which form the Achzib defence

system suggests that the construction of the brick core (A) and earth glacis (B) must

have taken place first and that the two are complementary and contemporary, i.e. the brick core served as a solid backbone against which the enormous mass of earth was piled up. At a later stage the stone revetment (F) and fosse (E) were added farther down the slope, cutting partly into the glacis, and stones were packed against the north-west face of the revetment and over part of the glacis (C). Finally, the revetment was faced with layers of hardened soil (D).

TABLE 1

Distribution of Pottery Types

Group ABCDE ABCDE ABCDE

Type Type Type

1 4- 31 + + 61 + 2 + + 32 + + + 62 + 3 + + 33 + 63 +

4 + 34 + 64 + 5 + 35 + 65 +

6 + 36 + 66 + 7 + 37 + 67 + 8 + 38 + + 68 + 9 + 39 + 69 + 10 + + 40 + 70 + + 11 + 41 + + 71 +

12 + 42 + + + + 72 + 13 + 43 + + 73 + + 14 + 44 + 74 + + + 15 + + 45 + 75 + + 16 + + 46 + 76 + 17 + + 47 + 77 + +

18 + 48 + 78 + + 19 + + 49 + 79 + + 20 + 50 + 80 + + 21 +51 +81 + 22 + 52 + 82 +

23 + 53 + 83 + 24 + + 54 + 84 + 25 + + 55 + 85 + 26 + 56 + 86 + 27 + + 57 + 87 +

28 + 58 + + 88 + 29 + 59 + + 89 +

30 + + 60 + 90 +

POTTERY FROM THE ACHZIB DEFENCE SYSTEM 223

The distribution table of pottery types (Table 1) shows that some types from the

brick core (A), i.e. 1, 8, 11, 40, 50, 61, 65-66, 69 and 85, are not matched elsewhere

in the complex. Types 15, 32 and 58, on the other hand, are paralleled in the glacis

(B), while the remaining forms, 24, 41, 59, 70, 74 and 78, are distributed equally in

the brick core (A) and stone packing over the glacis (C). Since no ceramic evidence

is available from inside the stone revetment (F), one is consequently left with material

from A, and C, D for ascertaining the relative position of the two stages of con

struction suggested above. Of the sherds represented in group A, including those

duplicated in B, C and D, 11, 24, 32 and 66 find their counterparts in early MB II

contexts such as Ras el-'Ain, Tell Beit-Mirsim G and strata XIV-XIII of Megiddo. The bulk of types, however, is characteristic of the advanced MB II inventory at

Tell Beit-Mirsim F-E, Megiddo XII-XI, the Nahariya temple and Jericho cemetery. The latest types, 50, 59, and especially 70, 74, 78 and 85, are common in the Nahariya

temple, Megiddo XI and stratum E at Tell Beit-Mirsim, but are not represented in

the MB IIC repertoire of these sites, thus furnishing an MB IIB date for the construc

tion of the defence system. This is further supported by the parallels with the pottery

assemblage in the MB II fill of the Duweir embankment, for which a date of c. 1700

B.C. has been convincingly established.

The sherd collection registered in the earth glacis (B) exhibits essentially the same

characteristics found in the make-up of the brick core, including typical early MB II

red burnished chalices and jugs, bowls and water jars which are duplicated, among other sites, at the Ras el-'Ain cemetery, stratum G at Tell Beit-Mirsim and the Royal Tombs of Byblos. The remaining forms are equally represented in advanced MB II

contexts but rarely, if at all, in late MB II sites. This grouping therefore supports the

assumption, based on architectural considerations, that the earth glacis (B) and

brick core (A) must be contemporary. For dating the second major architectural undertaking

? the stone revetment and

fosse (the former not yet excavated) ? one can make use of the material from the

stone packing (C) and especially from the layer of hardened soil over the revetment

(D). The largest collection of sherds came from the stone packing (C) and here, too, the ceramic evidence points to an MB ILA-B horizon but definitely not later. The

last and perhaps most important piece of evidence to be considered here is the collec

tion of sherds from the layer of hardened soil (D) over the stone revetment. The

nature of this architectural element indicates that it was added only in the final stage of construction and in order to consolidate the revetment (apparently with a plaster

coating on top). Apart from the MB A-B pottery types which are matched else

where in the complex, particularly in A and (i.e. types 10,16,17,19,27,38 and 42),

group D also included Middle Cypriote imports (types 86-89) which are not matched

elsewhere in the complex. Since these sherds cannot possibly belong to MB IIA but

are manifestly of advanced MB II date, one may safely postulate an MB IIB horizon

for the completion of the defence system. It is worthy of note that of the three sherds

from E, the red burnished chalice, type 33, is unmistakably of MB IIA date, while

224 E. D. OREN

the burnished jug, type 42, and water jar, type 72, may be assigned to MB IIA or

early MB IIB but certainly not later. The comparative material for the sherds from

C and D suggests therefore that the construction of the stone revetment and fosse cannot be later than the MB IIB phase and that the latter was constructed perhaps somewhat later than the brick core and glacis, though most certainly within the

MB IIB period. To sum up our discussion, it seems that the fill material from the various parts of

the defensive complex at Achzib is to be assigned with a degree of certainty to the

MB A-B period. Although some of the specimens, particularly plain bowls and

certain jar types, are known to have lingered on until the end of the MB II period, the occurrence of a relatively large collection of burnished pottery on the one hand, and the absence of characteristic MB IIC features on the other, make it clear that

the Achzib assemblage, as a whole, is by no means later than the MB IIB period. This assumption is further supported by the fact that the Middle Cypriote imports which are usually reported in advanced Middle Bronze Age deposits in Palestine, are found only in the soil packing over the stone revetment (D) but are conspicuously

missing from the fill of A, B, C and E. In order to define more accurately the chrono

logical limits of the Achzib pottery collection we may consult again the fill material

from the Duweir embankment which provides an early seventeenth-century date

for the construction of the fortification. Indeed, the analysis of pottery types has

shown that numerous types from Achzib were duplicated at Duweir, yet only a

few sherds from the latter actually exhibit the characteristic early MB II features of

slip and burnish.41 This would therefore imply a somewhat earlier date for the con

struction of the Achzib fortification. Similarly, the synchronism with the pottery sequence at Megiddo and Tell Beit-Mirsim in particular indicates that the bulk of

Achzib material is contemporary with Megiddo XIV-XII and Tell Beit-Mirsim G-F, thus providing a date c. 1750-1700 B.C. for the construction of the Achzib defence

system. As for the construction of the stone revetment (and fosse), the similarity of

pottery from all parts of the complex can by no means support a much later date

for the second stage of construction, but points with all likelihood to a date still

within the range of the MB IIB period. The imported Cypriote pottery from D may somewhat lower the upper limit of construction to c. 1700 B.C. in accordance with

the synchronism of the Middle Bronze Age in Palestine and Cyprus.42

Since the completion of this paper in April 1972, a number of studies bearing on the

Achzib material have appeared in print. The ceramic evidence from the Middle

Bronze Age fortification at Tel Poleg furnishes some good parallels for the Achzib

41 / a, . 45. 42 For a fresh study of the Middle Bronze Age materials of some of the sites mentioned above, as

well as remarks on the chronology of the period under review, see E.D. Oren: A Middle Bronze Age I Warrior Tomb at Beth-Shan, ZDPVW (1971), pp. 109-139, esp. pp. 135-139.

POTTERY FROM THE ACHZIB DEFENCE SYSTEM 225

repertoire.43 These examples indeed belong to the MB IIA period, but can only testify to the early extension of the Achzib sherd collection and not to the date of

the defence system. A similar grouping of MB A-B pottery types is represented in strata 10 and 9B-A (general strata XXI-XX) at Gezer, which are assigned to late MB A-B and late MB IIB respectively.44 The authors of the Gezer report suggest that stratum 10 should be dated to 1750-1700 B.C. and stratum 9 to 1700 1650 B.C.45 It should be noted that the glacis fills at Gezer yielded, likewise, an

assortment of MB A-B pottery, including one late Middle Cypriote White Painted IV sherd.46 The latest forms in the Gezer glacis point to a late Middle Bronze Age date for the erection of this construction. In the light of the above evidence there seems to be no reason for altering the late Middle Bronze Age date suggested for the construction of the Achzib defence system.

43 R. Gophna: The Middle Bronze Age II Fortifications at Tel Poleg, El 11 (1973), pp. 111-119, esp. p. 116, Fig. 5:1-3, PL 21:3-6 (Hebrew). 44 W.G. Dever et al.: Gezer II, Report of the 1967-70 Seasons in Fields I and II, Annual of the

Hebrew Union College/Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology, Jerusalem, 1974, Pis. 11-14. ? Ibid., pp. 28-32. 46

Ibid., Pis. 20-21.